1: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
3: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
4: \hoffset=-0.7truecm
5: \voffset=-0.1in
6: \documentstyle[12pt,psfig,epsfig]{article}
7: %\documentstyle[twocolumn,12pt]{article}
8: \renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{1.2}
9: \newcommand{\resection}[1]{\setcounter{equation}{0}\section{#1}}
10: \newcommand{\appsection}{\addtocounter{section}{1} \setcounter{equation}{0}
11: \section*{Appendix \Alph{section}}}
12: %\newcommand{\appsection}{\setcounter{equation}{0} \section*{Appendix}}
13: \renewcommand{\theequation}{\thesection.\arabic{equation}}
14: \textwidth 160mm
15: \textheight 230mm
16: \newcommand{\EQ}{\begin{equation}}
17: \newcommand{\EN}{\end{equation}}
18: \newcommand{\bea}{\begin{eqnarray}}
19: \newcommand{\eea}{\end{eqnarray}}
20: \newcommand{\nn}{\nonumber}
21: \newcommand{\no}{\noindent}
22: \newcommand{\hs}{\hspace{0.1cm}}
23: \newcommand{\spz}{\hspace{0.7cm}}
24: \newcommand{\virg}{\spz ,\spz}
25: \newcommand{\pvirg}{\spz ; \spz}
26: \newcommand{\st}{\stackrel}
27: \newcommand{\eps}{\epsilon}
28: \newcommand{\veps}{\varepsilon}
29: \newcommand{\th}{\theta}
30: \newcommand{\al}{\alpha}
31: \newcommand{\s}{\sigma}
32: \newcommand{\de}{\delta}
33: \newcommand{\D}{\Delta}
34: \newcommand{\goto}{\rightarrow}
35: \newcommand{\lab}{\label}
36: \newcommand{\be}{\beta}
37: \newcommand{\zb}{\bar{z}}
38: \newcommand{\k}{\kappa}
39: \newcommand{\vp}{\varphi}
40: \newcommand{\ra}{\rangle}
41: \newcommand{\la}{\langle}
42: \newcommand{\Ga}{\Gamma}
43: \newcommand{\ap}{\approx}
44: \newcommand{\cA}{{\cal A}}
45: \newcommand{\cB}{{\cal B}}
46: \newcommand{\cC}{{\cal C}}
47: \newcommand{\cD}{{\cal D}}
48: \newcommand{\cE}{{\cal E}}
49: \newcommand{\cF}{{\cal F}}
50: \newcommand{\cG}{{\cal G}}
51: \newcommand{\cH}{{\cal H}}
52: \newcommand{\cI}{{\cal I}}
53: \newcommand{\cJ}{{\cal J}}
54: \newcommand{\cK}{{\cal K}}
55: \newcommand{\cL}{{\cal L}}
56: \newcommand{\cM}{{\cal M}}
57: \newcommand{\cN}{{\cal N}}
58: \newcommand{\cO}{{\cal O}}
59: \newcommand{\cP}{{\cal P}}
60: \newcommand{\cQ}{{\cal Q}}
61: \newcommand{\cR}{{\cal R}}
62: \newcommand{\cS}{{\cal S}}
63: \newcommand{\cT}{{\cal T}}
64: \newcommand{\cU}{{\cal U}}
65: \newcommand{\cV}{{\cal V}}
66: \newcommand{\cW}{{\cal W}}
67: \newcommand{\cX}{{\cal X}}
68: \newcommand{\cY}{{\cal Y}}
69: \newcommand{\cZ}{{\cal Z}}
70:
71:
72: % generation of set of numbers symbols
73:
74: \newfont{\twelvemsb}{msbm10 scaled\magstep1}
75: \newfont{\eightmsb}{msbm8}
76: \newfam\msbfam
77: \textfont\msbfam=\twelvemsb
78: \scriptfont\msbfam=\eightmsb
79: \catcode`\@=11
80: \def\Bbb{\ifmmode\let\next\Bbb@\else
81: \def\next{\errmessage{Use \string\Bbb\space only in math mode}}\fi\next}
82: \def\Bbb@#1{{\fam\msbfam{{#1}}}}
83:
84:
85:
86: % bold letters in math
87:
88: \newcommand{\bC}{{\Bbb C}}
89: \newcommand{\bL}{{\Bbb L}}
90: \newcommand{\bM}{{\Bbb M}}
91: \newcommand{\bN}{{\Bbb N}}
92: \newcommand{\bR}{{\Bbb R}}
93: \newcommand{\bT}{{\Bbb T}}
94: \newcommand{\bZ}{{\Bbb Z}}
95: \newcommand{\buno}{\mbox{\bf 1}}
96:
97:
98:
99:
100: \begin{document}
101: \setcounter{page}{0}
102: \topmargin 0pt
103: \oddsidemargin 5mm
104: \renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\arabic{footnote}}
105: \newpage
106: \setcounter{page}{0}
107: \begin{titlepage}
108: \begin{flushright}
109: ISAS/EP/2000/80
110: \end{flushright}
111: \vspace{0.5cm}
112: \begin{center}
113: {\large {\bf Universal Amplitude Ratios of
114: The Renormalization Group: \\
115: Two--Dimensional Tricritical Ising Model}} \\
116: \vspace{1.8cm}
117: {\large D. Fioravanti$^{a,b}$, G. Mussardo$^{b,c}$ and P. Simon$^{a,b}$} \\
118: \vspace{0.5cm}
119: {\em $^{a}$International School for Advanced Studies, Trieste, Italy}\\
120: \vspace{0.3cm}
121: {\em $^{b}$Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare, Sezione di Trieste}\\
122: \vspace{0.3cm}
123: {\em $^{c}$Dipartimento di Fisica, Universit\`a dell'Insubria, Como, Italy}
124: \end{center}
125: \vspace{1.2cm}
126:
127: \renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\arabic{footnote}}
128: \setcounter{footnote}{0}
129:
130: \begin{abstract}
131: \noindent
132: The scaling form of the free--energy near a critical point
133: allows for the definition of various thermodynamical amplitudes and
134: the determination of their dependence on the microscopic non--universal
135: scales. Universal quantities can be obtained by considering
136: special combinations of the amplitudes. Together with the critical
137: exponents they characterize the universality classes and may be
138: useful quantities for their experimental identification. We compute
139: the universal amplitude ratios for the Tricritical Ising Model in
140: two dimensions by using several theoretical methods from
141: Perturbed Conformal Field Theory and Scattering Integrable Quantum
142: Field Theory. The theoretical approaches are further supported and
143: integrated by results coming from a numerical determination of the
144: energy eigenvalues and eigenvectors of the off--critical systems in
145: an infinite cylinder.
146: \end{abstract}
147:
148: \vspace{.5cm}
149:
150: \hspace{5mm} PACS numbers: 64.60.Fr, 05.50+q,75.10Hk
151: \end{titlepage}
152:
153: \newpage
154: \noindent
155: \resection{Introduction}
156:
157: One of the most powerful and fascinating concepts in the
158: investigation of critical phenomena -- which has successfully
159: passed the scrutiny of both experimental and theoretical tests
160: during the last decades -- goes under the name of {\em universality}
161: \cite{universality}. According to this principle two statistical
162: models, which share the same symmetry of the order parameters
163: and the dimensionality of the space of their definition, show
164: an identical critical behavior although they may greatly differ
165: in their microscopic realizations: near the phase transition,
166: when the correlation length is much larger than any other
167: microscopic scale, they appear as two representatives
168: of the same universality class. The first characteristic of
169: a given universality class consists of a set of critical
170: exponents. Their values are generally given in terms of
171: algebraic expressions of the anomalous dimensions of the
172: relevant operators present at the critical point. In two
173: dimensions, by the powerful methods of Conformal Field Theory
174: (CFT) \cite{BPZ,FQS1,DiFMS,DF} one can ascertain both the values
175: of the critical exponents, the Operator Product Expansions
176: (OPE) and the multi--point correlators of the relative fields.
177:
178: However, a complete analysis of the class of universality
179: should also include the description of the structure of
180: the Renormalization Group trajectories near the critical
181: point. The most ambitious goal would be the determination of
182: both the scaling function which fixes the equation of state
183: and the off--critical correlators of the various order
184: parameters\footnote{Near the critical point all quantities
185: relative to different models of the same class of
186: universality become identical provided an opportune
187: rescaling of the order parameters, the external fields and
188: the correlation length of the models is made.}. Although
189: the exact determination of the equation of state of a
190: given universality class may often be a difficult task,
191: the scaling property alone of the free--energy is nevertheless
192: sufficient to extract numerous predictions on universal
193: combinations of critical amplitudes. As it will become clear
194: in section 3, these universal combinations are pure
195: numbers which can be extremely useful for the identification
196: of the universality classes. In fact, the amplitude ratios
197: are numbers which typically present significant variations
198: between different classes of universality, whereas the critical
199: exponents usually assume small values which only vary by a small
200: percent by changing the universality classes. Hence the universal
201: ratios may be ideal experimental marks of the critical scaling
202: regime \cite{Privman,SFW}.
203:
204: In recent years, due to the theoretical progress achieved in the
205: study of two--dimensional models, some universal ratios and other
206: universal quantities have been computed for a large variety of
207: bidimensional systems, such as the self--avoiding walks
208: \cite{CMpol}, the Ising model [9--14]
209: %\cite{Zam1,DMIMMF,DSIMMF,DelfinoIsing,sokal,GM3}
210: or the q--state Potts
211: model \cite{JLC,DelfinoCardy,Caselle2}, to name few. In this paper
212: we will concentrate our attention on the determination of the
213: amplest possible set of universal amplitude ratios relative to
214: the class of universality of the two--dimensional Tricritical
215: Ising Model (TIM). Preliminary results relative to some off--critical
216: phases of this class of universality have been presented in our
217: previous publication \cite{prl} and the aim of this paper is twofold.
218: First of all, to complete the list of universal amplitude ratios of the
219: TIM presented in \cite{prl} and to perform an exhaustive analysis of
220: all its possible phases. Secondly, to illustrate in full detail
221: the theoretical methods which have been employed in such determination:
222: in view of their successful applications, these techniques may be
223: useful to analyze and to obtain similar results for other statistical
224: models, in such a way to bridge a closer contact between theoretical
225: and experimental results in two--dimensional physics.
226:
227: Introducing the Tricritical Ising Model, from a field
228: theoretical point of view this model may be regarded as a
229: Landau--Ginzburg (LG) $\Phi^6$--theory near its tricritical
230: point \cite{ZamLG}. The LG terminology allows a qualitative
231: understanding of the phase--structure of the model effortlessly.
232: However the LG approach is often too elementary for the
233: understanding of some remarkable symmetries present in
234: the 2-D TIM. As a matter of fact, the bidimensional TIM
235: is an unique example of critical phenomena: it is still
236: sufficiently simple to be solved but at the same time it
237: presents an extremely rich and fascinating structure of
238: excitations which can attract the curiosity of a theorist.
239: Depending on the direction in the phase space in which the
240: system is moved away from criticality, one can observe,
241: for instance, a behavior ruled by the exceptional root system
242: $E_7$ \cite{EY,MC,FZ} or by supersymmetry
243: \cite{Kastor,Zammassless,DMSmassless,Zamthree} (in its exact
244: or broken phase realization) or by an asymmetrical pair of
245: kinks \cite{LMC,Smirnov12,CKM}. In addition, the description
246: of its low--temperature phase is easily obtained from the one of
247: its high--temperature phase because of the self--duality of
248: the model. From the experimental point of view, a number of physical
249: systems exhibit a tricritical Ising behavior, among them fluid mixtures
250: or metamagnets\footnote{The interest reader may find ample review
251: of this topics in ref.\,\cite{Lawrie}.}. Hence, there is an obvious
252: interest in computing the ampler set of data for this class of
253: universality and in testing the theoretical predictions
254: versus their experimental determination. Our calculation of the
255: universal ratios of the TIM will be performed by a combined use of
256: results coming from Perturbed Conformal Field Theory, from the
257: integrable structure of some of the deformations of the critical
258: point action and also from some numerical approaches.
259:
260: The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 we briefly
261: describe the universality class of the TIM and the symmetry
262: properties of the theories resulting from the deformations of
263: the critical point action made of each of the four relevant
264: fields. Section 3 is devoted to the discussion of the scaling
265: behavior of the singular part of the free--energy and the
266: definition of the universal ratios obtained by considering
267: some particular combinations of the thermodynamical amplitudes.
268: In Section 4 we discuss the Quantum Field Theory approach to
269: the computation of the universal ratios. The numerical method
270: based on the diagonalization of the off--critical hamiltonian
271: obtained by truncating the Hilbert space of the conformal
272: space is discussed in Section 5. A thorough analysis of
273: each relevant perturbation of the TIM is performed in
274: Section 6. Finally our conclusions are presented in
275: Section 7. Several appendices, relative to some technical
276: aspects of our calculations, are included at the end of
277: the paper.
278:
279: \resection{The Class of Universality of the Tricritical Ising Model}
280:
281: In this section we will briefly outline the main properties of
282: the universality class of the two--dimensional Tricritical
283: Ising model, whereby the detailed discussion of its physical
284: properties relative to each of its perturbations is contained
285: in Section 6.
286:
287: A possible lattice realization of the Tricritical Ising model
288: is provided by the so--called Blume--Capel model \cite{Blume}.
289: This involves two statistical variables at each lattice site,
290: $s_k$ -- the spin variable -- which assumes values $\pm 1$ and
291: $t_k$ -- the vacancy variable -- with values $0$ or $1$, which
292: specifies therefore if the site is empty or occupied. It is
293: characterized by the most general Hamiltonian with nearest
294: neighbor pair interaction
295: \EQ
296: {\cal H} = -J \sum_{\langle i,j\rangle}^N
297: s_i s_j t_i t_j + \Delta \sum_{i=1}^N t_i -
298: H \sum_{i=1}^N s_i t_i -H_3 \sum_{\langle i,j\rangle}^N
299: (s_i t_i t_j + s_j t_j t_i) - K \sum_{\langle i,j\rangle}^N
300: t_i t_j \,\,\, .
301: \label{BlumeCapel}
302: \EN
303: The parameter $H$ represents an external magnetic field,
304: $H_3$ an additional subleading magnetic source, $J$ the
305: coupling between two nearest occupied sites, $\Delta$
306: the chemical potential coupled to the vacancies and $K$
307: an additional subleading energy term between them. Another
308: possible two--dimensional lattice realization of this class of
309: universality is provided by the so--called dilute $A_L$ models,
310: discussed in \cite{dilute}.
311:
312: By adopting a field theoretical point of view, a convenient
313: way to analyze the universality behavior of the TIM consists
314: in considering a Landau--Ginzburg formulation based on a scalar
315: field $\Phi(x)$ \cite{ZamLG}. The main advantage of this approach
316: is an account of the $Z_2$ symmetry properties of each order
317: parameter which provides an easy way of understanding the phase
318: structure of the model, at least qualitatively. In this formulation,
319: the class of universality of the TIM is associated to the Euclidean
320: action
321: \EQ
322: {\cal A} = \int d^Dx \left[\frac{1}{2} (\partial_{\mu} \Phi)^2 +
323: g_1 \Phi + g_2 \Phi^2 + g_3 \Phi^3 + g_4 \Phi^4 +
324: \Phi^6 \right]\,\,\, ,
325: \label{LG}
326: \EN
327: with the tricritical point identified by the bare conditions
328: $g_1=g_2=g_3=g_4=0$. In a close comparison with the Blume--Capel
329: lattice formulation of the model, the statistical interpretation of
330: the coupling constants is as follows: $g_1$ plays the role of
331: an external magnetic field $h$, $g_2$ measures the displacement
332: of the temperature from its critical value $(T-T_c)$, $g_3$
333: may be regarded as a staggered magnetic field $h'$ and finally
334: $g_4$ may be thought as a chemical potential for the vacancy
335: density.
336:
337: A dimensional analysis shows that the upper critical dimension of the
338: above LG model is $D=3$, where the tricritical exponents are expected
339: to take their classical values, excluding logarithmic corrections. The mean
340: field solution of the model easily shows that the LG action (\ref{LG})
341: has a tricritical point, {\it i.e.} a critical point where a line of a
342: second order phase transition meets a line of a first order phase transition.
343: Consider in fact the case where all the $Z_2$ odd couplings are equally
344: set to zero. The potential in this subspace is given by
345: \EQ
346: V(\Phi) = g_2 \Phi^2 + g_4 \Phi^4 + \Phi^6 \,\,\, .
347: \label{evenLG}
348: \EN
349: The line of a second order phase transition is identified by
350: the condition
351: \EQ
352: g_2 = 0 \,\,\,\,\, ,
353: \,\,\,\,\, g_4 > 0 \,\,\, ,
354: \label{second}
355: \EN
356: whereas the line of a first order phase transition (where
357: three degenerate vacua coexist) is obtained by the condition
358: \EQ
359: g_2 > 0 \,\,\,\,,\,\,\,\,\,
360: g_4 = -2 \sqrt{g_2} \,\,\,.
361: \label{first}
362: \EN
363: Hence the point $g_1= g_2 = g_3 = g_4 = 0$ is indeed a tricritical
364: point.
365:
366: In two dimensions -- the case which will mostly concern us -- there
367: are strong fluctuations of the order parameters and therefore the
368: exponents and the amplitudes extracted by its mean field solution
369: cannot be trusted. However, in this case one can take advantage
370: of the powerful methods of Conformal Field Theory to obtain
371: an exact solution of this model at criticality. In fact, the
372: bidimensional TIM is described by the second representative
373: of the unitary series of minimal models of CFT \cite{BPZ,FQS1,DiFMS}:
374: its central charge is equal to $c = \frac{7}{10}$ and the Kac-table
375: of the exact conformal weights of the scaling fields
376: \EQ
377: \Delta_{l,k} = \frac{(5 l - 4 k)^2 -1}{80} \,\,\,\,\,\,\,,
378: \,\,\,\,\,
379: \begin{array}{c}
380: 1 \leq l \leq 3 \\
381: 1 \leq k \leq 4
382: \end{array}
383: \label{Kactable}
384: \EN
385: is given in Table 1. There are six primary scalar fields
386: $\phi_{\Delta,\overline\Delta}$, which close an algebra under
387: the Operator Product Expansion
388: \EQ
389: \phi_i(z_1,\overline z_1) \,
390: \phi_j(z_2,\overline z_2) \,
391: \sim \,
392: \sum_k \, c_{ijk} \mid z_1 - z_2
393: \mid^{-2 (\Delta_i + \Delta_j - \Delta_k)} \phi_k(z_2,\overline z_2)
394: \,\,\,.
395: \EN
396: The skeleton form of this OPE algebra and the relative structure
397: constants of the Fusion Rules of the TIM are in Table 2.
398: The six primary fields can be identified with the normal ordered
399: composite LG fields \cite{ZamLG} (see Table 3). With respect to
400: their properties under the $Z_2$ spin--reversal transformation
401: $Q: \Phi \rightarrow - \Phi$ we have:
402: \begin{enumerate}
403: \item two odd fields: the leading magnetization operator
404: $\sigma = \phi_{\frac{3}{80},\frac{3}{80}} \equiv \Phi$
405: and the subleading magnetization operator $\sigma' =
406: \phi_{\frac{7}{16},\frac{7}{16}} \equiv : \Phi^3:$
407: \item four even fields: the identity operator $1 = \phi_{0,0}$,
408: the leading energy density $\varepsilon = \phi_{\frac{1}{10},
409: \frac{1}{10}} \equiv :\Phi^2:$, the subleading energy density
410: $t = \phi_{\frac{6}{10},\frac{6}{10}} \equiv :\Phi^4: $,
411: which in metamagnets assumes the meaning of the density of the
412: annealed vacancies, and the field $\varepsilon" = \phi_{\frac{3}{2},
413: \frac{3}{2}}$. The OPE of the even fields form a subalgebra of
414: the Fusion Rules.
415: \end{enumerate}
416: In the TIM there is another $Z_2$ transformation -- the
417: Kramers--Wannier duality $ D$ -- under which the fields
418: transform as follows:
419: \begin{itemize}
420: \item
421: the order magnetization operators are mapped onto their
422: corresponding disorder operators
423: \EQ
424: \mu = D^{-1} \sigma D = \tilde\phi_{\frac{3}{80},
425: \frac{3}{80}}
426: \,\,\,\,\, ,
427: \,\,\,\,\,
428: \mu' = D^{-1} \sigma' D =
429: \tilde\phi_{\frac{7}{16},\frac{7}{16}}
430: \,\,\,.
431: \label{sigmadual}
432: \EN
433: \item
434: the even fields are mapped onto themselves,
435: \EQ
436: D^{-1} \varepsilon D =-\varepsilon \hspace{3mm},
437: \hspace{3mm}
438: D^{-1} t D = t \hspace{3mm}, \hspace{3mm}
439: D^{-1} \varepsilon" D = - \varepsilon" ,
440: \EN
441: {\it i.e.} $\varepsilon$ and $\varepsilon"$ are odd under this
442: transformation whereas $t$ is even.
443: \end{itemize}
444:
445: Interestingly enough, at criticality the TIM also provides a
446: concrete realization of a supersymmetric theory since it is
447: the first representative of the superconformal minimal models
448: \cite{FQS2,Qiu,MSS}: the even fields can be grouped into a
449: superfield of the Neveu--Schwartz sector
450: \EQ
451: {\cal N}(z,\bar z,\theta,\bar {\theta})=
452: \varepsilon(z,\bar z)+
453: \bar {\theta}\hspace{1mm}
454: \psi(z,\bar z)+
455: \theta\hspace{1mm}\bar{\psi}(z,\bar z)+
456: \theta\bar {\theta}\hspace{1mm}
457: t(z,\bar z)\hs ,
458: \label{superfield}
459: \EN
460: (where $\theta$ and $\bar{\theta}$ are Grassman variables) while the
461: magnetic fields give rise to two irreducible representations
462: in the Ramond sector\footnote{The disorder fields $\mu$, $\mu'$ and
463: the fermionic fields $\psi$, $\overline\psi$ enter the partition
464: function of the model on a torus with twisted boundary conditions,
465: see for instance \cite{LMC} where the relative Fusion Rules are
466: also presented.}. The critical superconformal LG action is
467: given by
468: \EQ
469: {\cal A} = \int d^2x \, d^2\theta \,
470: \left[ \frac{1}{2} {\cal D} {\cal N} \,
471: {\bar {\cal D}} {\cal N}
472: + {\cal N}^3 \right]\,\,\, ,
473: \label{super}
474: \EN
475: with the covariant derivatives defined as
476: \EQ
477: {\cal D} = \frac{\partial}{\partial \theta} - \theta
478: \frac{\partial}{\partial z}
479: \,\,\,\,\, ,
480: \,\,\,\,\,
481: \overline{{\cal D}} = \frac{\partial}{\partial \overline{\theta}} -
482: \overline{\theta} \frac{\partial}{\partial \overline{z}}
483: \,\,\,.
484: \EN
485:
486: \vspace{3mm}
487:
488: At the critical point, the TIM can be also realized in terms of
489: a coset construction of a Wess-Zumino-Witten model on the group
490: $G/H$ given by $(E_7)_1 \otimes (E_7)_1/(E_7)_2$ (for a general
491: discussion on the coset model see, for instance \cite{DiFMS}).
492: For the central charge $c = c_G - c_H$ we have in fact
493: $c = 2 \times 133 \left(\frac{1}{19} - \frac{1}{20}\right) =
494: \frac{7}{10}$. Concerning the irreducible representations, for
495: the WZW based on $(E_7)_1$ we have $\{{\bf I},{\bf \Pi}_6\}_1$
496: with conformal dimensions $\{0,\frac{3}{4}\}$, whereas for
497: the WZW model $(E_7)_2$ we have $\{{\bf I},{\bf \Pi}_1,
498: {\bf \Pi}_5,{\bf \Pi}_6,{\bf \Pi}_2\}_2$ with conformal dimensions
499: $\{0,\frac{9}{10},\frac{7}{5},\frac{57}{80},\frac{21}{16}\}$.
500: Therefore, the conformal fields of the TIM emerge from the
501: decomposition
502: \begin{eqnarray}
503: && ({\bf I})_1 \times ({\bf I})_1 =
504: (I)_{TIM} \otimes ({\bf I})_2 +
505: \left(\frac{1}{10}\right)_{TIM} \otimes
506: ({\bf \Pi}_1)_2 + \left(\frac{6}{10}\right)_{TIM} \otimes
507: ({\bf \Pi}_5)_2 \nonumber \\
508: && ({\bf I})_1 \times ({\bf \Pi}_6)_1 =
509: \left(\frac{7}{16}\right)_{TIM} \otimes
510: ({\bf \Pi}_7)_2 + \left(\frac{3}{80}\right)_{TIM} \otimes
511: ({\bf \Pi}_6)_2 \label{E7WZWM} \\
512: && ({\bf \Pi}_6)_1 \times ({\bf \Pi}_6)_1 =
513: \left(\frac{3}{2}\right)_{TIM} \times ({\bf I})_2 \nonumber
514: \end{eqnarray}
515:
516: As will be discussed later, the above symmetries present at
517: the critical point of the TIM are also useful for the
518: investigation of some off--critical phases of the model.
519: The four fields $\sigma$, $\varepsilon$, $\sigma'$ and $t$
520: of increasing anomalous dimensions are, from a Renormalization
521: Group point of view, all relevant operators (i.e. their
522: conformal weight satisfies $\Delta < 1$) and therefore
523: they can be used to move the TIM away from criticality.
524: To simplify the formulae below, it is convenient
525: to adopt the compact notation $\varphi_i$ $(i=1,2,3,4)$ to
526: denote collectively all these fields, so that $\varphi_1
527: = \sigma$ , $\varphi_2 = \varepsilon$, $\varphi_3=\sigma'$
528: and $\varphi_4=t$. In the vicinity of the critical point
529: the partition function of the model can be expressed by
530: the path integral
531: \EQ
532: Z[g_1,g_2,g_3,g_4] =
533: \int {\cal D}\phi \,e^{- \left[{\cal A}_{CFT} +
534: \sum_{i=1}^4 g_i \int \varphi_i(x)\, d^2x \right]}
535: \, \equiv e^{-\hat f(g_1,g_2,g_3,g_4)} \,\,\,.
536: \label{partitionfunction}
537: \EN
538: We use the notation $Z_1[g_1] = Z[g_1,0,0,0]$,
539: $Z_2[g_2] = Z[0,g_2,0,0]$, etc. for the partition functions
540: corresponding to the individual deformations of the conformal
541: action. An immediate result for the off--critical phases can
542: be drawn from the symmetry properties of the fields $\varphi_i$.
543: In fact, since the fields $\varphi_1$ and $\varphi_3$ are odd
544: under the spin--reversal $Z_2$ symmetry, a change of the sign
545: of the corresponding coupling constants gives rise to identical
546: physical situations, {\it i.e.} $Z_1[g_1] = Z_1[-g_1]$ and
547: $Z_3[g_3] = Z_3[-g_3]$. The operator $\phi_2$ is odd under
548: the $Z_2$ duality transformation and therefore the physical
549: situations which originate from a change of sign of this
550: coupling constant will be related by a duality transformation.
551: Finally the operator $\phi_4$ is even under both $Z_2$ symmetries
552: and therefore the changing of the sign of the corresponding
553: coupling constant will produce two distinct physical situations.
554:
555: At this stage it is also useful to anticipate the nature of
556: Quantum Field Theories which originate from each individual
557: deformation, postponing their detailed discussion in Section 6.
558: The QFT associated to the deformation of the field $\varphi_1$
559: alone is not integrable: numerical indications of this fact
560: were discussed in \cite{LMC}. The QFT which originates from
561: the deformation of $\varphi_2$ is instead integrable and the
562: pattern of its bound states and the scattering amplitudes are
563: related to the hidden $E_7$ algebraic structure of the model
564: \cite{MC,FZ}. The deformation of the critical action by means of
565: the field $\varphi_3$ produces an integrable field theory made of
566: kinks, which interpolate between two asymmetric vacua
567: \cite{Smirnov12,CKM}. Finally, the $\varphi_4$ deformation made
568: with a positive value of the relative coupling constant corresponds
569: to an integrable massless RG flow between the TIM and the standard
570: Ising model \cite{Zammassless,DMSmassless} whereas the $\varphi_4$
571: deformation with a negative value of $g_4$ gives rise to an integrable
572: massive QFT with kink excitations interpolating between three
573: degenerate vacua \cite{Zamthree}. Both these last QFT's give
574: explicit realizations of a supersymmetric system in its broken
575: and unbroken phase respectively. A useful summary of the
576: theories resulting from each deformation can be found in Table 4.
577: In conclusion, excluding the magnetic $\varphi_1$ deformation, all the
578: others gives rise to integrable QFT. This fact will be quite
579: important for our future considerations.
580:
581: \resection{Scaling Form of the Free--Energy and Universal Ratios}
582:
583: The scaling property of the relevant fields which span the
584: scaling region of the TIM near its critical point allows
585: the derivation of a large set of universal quantities which
586: are of experimental interest. For their derivation we will consider
587: the general case of the Tricritical Ising Model defined in a
588: $D$ dimensional space, even though our final attention will be
589: focalized on the two--dimensional system. At this stage of the
590: discussion we do not take into account the eventual logarithmic
591: corrections explicitly present in the $3$--dimensional version of
592: this model\footnote{On this issue the interested reader may
593: consult for instance \cite{Lawrie} and references therein.}
594: and the possible ultraviolet renormalization effects. These,
595: however, will be considered within the context of Sections 4
596: and 6.
597:
598: The scaling property of the order parameters is encoded into
599: the asymptotic form of their two--point functions\footnote{This
600: notation is not standard for a generic $D$ dimensional system but
601: it has the advantage of an easy comparison with formulae which are
602: valid in 2-D systems.}
603: \EQ
604: \langle \varphi_i (x) \varphi_i(0) \rangle
605: \simeq \frac{{\cal A}_i}{\hspace{1mm}|x|^{4 \Delta_i}} \,\,\,\,\,,
606: \,\,\,\,\, |x|\rightarrow 0
607: \,\,\,,
608: \label{shortdistance}
609: \EN
610: which therefore identifies the parameters $\Delta_i$ as the conformal
611: dimensions of the fields. The standard conformal normalization
612: of the fields is obtained by the choice ${\cal A}_i =1$. From the
613: power law behavior of (\ref{shortdistance}) it follows
614: that the coupling constants $g_i$ behave as
615: \EQ
616: g_i \sim \Lambda ^{D - 2 \Delta_i} \,\,\, ,
617: \label{coupling}
618: \EN
619: where $\Lambda$ is a mass scale. Therefore, moving the system
620: away from criticality by means of one of the relevant field
621: $\varphi_i$, there will be generally a finite correlation
622: length $\xi$ which in the thermodynamical limit scales as
623: \EQ
624: \xi \sim a \,(K_i g_i)^{-\frac{1}{D - 2 \Delta_i}} \,\,\,,
625: \label{xi}
626: \EN
627: where $a \sim \Lambda^{-1}$ may be regarded as a microscopic
628: length scale. The terms $K_i$ are metric, non--universal factors
629: which depend on the unit chosen for measuring the external sources
630: $g_i$, alias on the particular realization selected for representing
631: the universality class. In the presence of several deformations of
632: the conformal action, the most general expression for the scaling
633: form of the correlation length may be written as
634: \EQ
635: \xi =\xi_i \equiv a \,(K_i g_i)^
636: {-\frac{1}{D -2 \Delta_i}}\,
637: {\cal L}_i\left(\frac{K_j g_j}{(K_i g_i)^{\phi_{ji}}}\right) \,\,\,,
638: \label{xii}
639: \EN
640: where
641: \EQ
642: \phi_{ji} \equiv \frac{D-2 \Delta_j}{D-2 \Delta_i}
643: \label{phiji}
644: \EN
645: are the so--called {\em crossover exponents} whereas ${\cal L}_i$
646: are universal homogeneous scaling functions of the ratios
647: $\frac{K_j g_j}{(K_i g_i)^{\phi_{ji}}}$. There are of course
648: several (but equivalent) ways of writing these scaling forms,
649: depending on which coupling constant is selected as a prefactor.
650: In the limit where $g_l \rightarrow 0$ ($l \neq i$) but
651: $g_i \neq 0$, equation (\ref{xii}) becomes
652: \EQ
653: \xi_i = a \,\xi_i^0 \,g_i
654: ^{-\frac{1}{D -2 \Delta_i}}
655: \,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,,
656: \,\,\,\,\,\,\,
657: \xi_i^0 \sim K_i^{-\frac{1}{D -2 \Delta_i}} \,\,\,.
658: \label{xio}
659: \EN
660:
661: Consider now the free--energy $\hat f[g_1,\ldots,g_4]$. This is
662: a dimensionless quantity defined by
663: \EQ
664: Z[g_1,g_2,g_3,g_4] =
665: \int {\cal D}\phi \, e^{- \left[{\cal A}_{CFT} +
666: \sum_{i=1}^4 g_i \int \varphi_i(x) d^2x \right]}
667: \, \equiv e^{-\hat f(g_1,g_2,g_3,g_4)} \,\,\,.
668: \label{free}
669: \EN
670: Assuming the validity of the hyperscaling hypothesis, in the
671: thermodynamical limit its singular part (per unit of volume)
672: will be proportional to the $D$ power of the correlation length.
673: Let us denote the singular part of the free--energy for unit
674: volume by $f[g_1,\ldots,g_4]$. Depending on which scaling form
675: is adopted for the correlation length, we have correspondingly
676: several (but equivalent) ways of parameterizing this quantity
677: \EQ
678: f[g_1,\ldots,g_4] = f_i[g_1,\ldots,g_4] \equiv
679: \left(K_i g_i\right)^{\frac{D}{D-2\Delta_i}} \,
680: {\cal F}_i\left(\frac{K_j g_j}{(K_i g_i)^{\phi_{ji}}}\right)
681: \,\,\,.
682: \label{scalingfree}
683: \EN
684: The functions ${\cal F}_i$ are universal homogeneous scaling
685: functions of the ratios $\frac{K_j g_j}{(K_i g_i)^{\phi_{ji}}}$.
686: As it will soon become clear, there is an obvious advantage in
687: dealing with different but equivalent expressions for the
688: free--energy: in fact, since we will be mostly concerned with
689: the physical situations which originate from pure deformations
690: ({\it i.e.} those obtained by keeping only one coupling constant
691: finally different from zero), the choice of which one has
692: to be selected naturally follows from the particular deformation
693: which is considered.
694:
695: Let us discuss now the definition of the thermodynamical quantities
696: related to the various derivatives of the free--energy. We will
697: adopt the notation $\langle ... \rangle_i$ to denote expectation
698: values computed in the off--critical theory obtained by keeping
699: (at the end) only the coupling constant $g_i$ different from zero.
700: The first quantities to consider are the vacuum expectation values
701: (VEV) of the fields $\varphi_j$ which can be parameterized as
702: \EQ
703: \langle \varphi_j \rangle_i = -\left.\frac{\partial f_i}{\partial g_j}
704: \right|_{g_l=0} \equiv B_{ji}
705: g_i^{\frac{2 \Delta_j}{D-2 \Delta_i}} \,\,\,,
706: \label{vacuumji}
707: \EN
708: with
709: \EQ
710: B_{ji} \sim K_j K_i^{\frac{2 \Delta_j}{D-2 \Delta_i}} \,\,\,.
711: \label{bji}
712: \EN
713: The above relations can be equivalently expressed as
714: \EQ
715: g_i = D_{ij} \left(\langle \varphi_j\rangle_i\right)^
716: {\frac{D-2 \Delta_i}{2 \Delta_j}} \,\,\,,
717: \label{magn}
718: \EN
719: with
720: \EQ
721: D_{ij} \sim \frac{1}{K_i K_j^{\frac{D-2 \Delta_i}{2 \Delta_j}}}
722: \,\,\,.
723: \label{dij}
724: \EN
725: The generalized susceptibilities of the model are defined by
726: \EQ
727: \hat \Gamma_{jk}^i =
728: \frac{\partial}{\partial g_k} \langle \varphi_j\rangle_i =\left.
729: -\frac{\partial^2 f_i}{\partial g_k \partial g_j}\right|_{g_l=0}
730: \,\,\,.
731: \label{susc}
732: \EN
733: They are obviously symmetrical in the two lower indices. By
734: extracting their dependence on the coupling constant $g_i$,
735: they can be expressed as
736: \EQ
737: \hat \Gamma_{jk}^i = \Gamma_{jk}^i \,g_i^
738: {\frac{2 \Delta_j + 2 \Delta_k - D}
739: {D - 2 \Delta_i}} \,\,\, ,
740: \label{hatgammajki}
741: \EN
742: with
743: \EQ
744: \Gamma_{jk}^i \sim K_j K_k K_i^{\frac{2 \Delta_j + 2 \Delta_k - D}
745: {D - 2 \Delta_i}} \,\,\, .
746: \label{gammajki}
747: \EN
748: Some of the above quantities have, of course, a very familiar
749: meaning. For instance $\langle \varphi_1\rangle_i$ is nothing
750: but the mean value of the magnetization in the off--critical
751: theory defined by the $i$--th deformation while $\hat \Gamma^{i}_{11}$
752: is the associated magnetic susceptibility. Similarly, $\langle
753: \varphi_2\rangle_i$ is the mean value of the energy along the
754: $i$--th deformation of the critical theory and $\hat \Gamma^{i}_{22}$
755: the specific heat.
756:
757: As easily seen from the above formulae, the various quantities
758: obtained by taking the derivatives of the free--energy contain
759: metric factors (the quantities $K_i$) which make their values
760: not universal. However, it is always possible to consider special
761: combinations thereof in such a way that all metric factors cancel
762: out. Here we propose the consideration of the following universal
763: ratios
764: \EQ
765: (R_c)^i_{jk} = \frac{\Gamma_{ii}^i \Gamma_{jk}^i}{B_{ji} B_{ki}}
766: \,\,\, ;
767: \label{Rc}
768: \EN
769: \EQ
770: (R_{\chi})^i_j = \Gamma_{jj}^i D_{jj} B_{ji}^
771: {\frac{D-4 \Delta_j}{2 \Delta_j}}
772: \,\,\,;
773: \label{Rchi}
774: \EN
775: \EQ
776: R^i_{\xi} = \left(\Gamma_{ii}^i\right)^{1/D} \xi_i^0 \,\,\,;
777: \label{Rxi}
778: \EN
779: \EQ
780: (R_A)^i_j = \Gamma_{jj}^i \, D_{ii}^
781: {\frac{4 \Delta_j + 2 \Delta_i - 2 D}{D-2 \Delta_i}} \,
782: B_{ij}^{\frac{2\Delta_j -D}{\Delta_i}} \,\,\, ;
783: \label{RA}
784: \EN
785: \EQ
786: (Q_2)^i_{jk} = \frac{\Gamma^i_{jj}}{\Gamma^k_{jj}}
787: \left(\frac{\xi_k^0}{\xi_j^0}\right)^{D-4 \Delta_j} \,\,\,.
788: \label{Q2}
789: \EN
790: These quantities are pure numbers which therefore characterize
791: the universality class of the model. Their definitions closely
792: follow and generalize the ones relative to the familiar
793: Ising model (see, for instance \cite{Privman,DelfinoIsing}).
794: Other universal ratios may be defined as well and in fact some
795: of them will be considered in Section 6 devoted to the
796: analysis of each deformation of the critical point action.
797: Since we will individually compute all the important quantities
798: involved ($B_{ij}$, $\Gamma^i_{jk}$, etc.), there is really
799: no problem in considering other universal combinations, if
800: one wishes to do so. It is worth emphasizing that, from an
801: experimental point of view, it should be simpler to measure
802: universal amplitude ratios rather than critical exponents: in
803: fact to determine the former quantities one needs to perform
804: several measurements at a single, fixed value of the coupling
805: which drives the system away from criticality whereas to determine
806: the latter, one needs to make measurements over several decades
807: along the axes of the off--critical couplings. Moreover, although
808: not all of them are independent, the universal ratios are a
809: larger set of numbers than the critical exponents and therefore
810: permit a more precise determination of the class of universality.
811:
812: \resection{Quantum Field Theory Approach}
813:
814: Essential quantities of the universal amplitude
815: ratios (\ref{Rc}) -- (\ref{Q2}) are the correlation length
816: prefactor $\xi_i^0$, the VEV amplitudes $B_{ji}$ and
817: the generalized susceptibilities $\Gamma_{jk}^i$. With
818: the aim of determining these quantities, in this section
819: we will discuss some useful results relative to the
820: two--dimensional Quantum Field Theories (QFT) associated
821: to the Renormalization Group flows originating by relevant
822: deformations of the conformal action. These QFT are, after
823: all, particular representatives of the universality class
824: of the model and from now on we will only focalise on them
825: for the study of the off--critical dynamics. The advantages
826: of adopting this approach will soon become evident.
827:
828: In the following we assume the fields to be normalized
829: according to the conformal normalization, {\it i.e.}
830: \EQ
831: \lim_{x\rightarrow 0} |x|^{4 \Delta_i} \,
832: \langle \varphi_i (x) \varphi_i(0)\rangle \, = \, 1 \,\,\,,
833: \label{CFTnorm}
834: \EN
835: and we denote by ${\cal M}_i^{\pm}$ the QFT associated to
836: the action
837: \EQ
838: {\cal A} = {\cal A}_{CFT} \pm g_i \int \varphi_i(x) \,
839: d^2 x \,\,\,\, ,\,\,\,\,\, g_i>0 \,\,\,.
840: \label{perturbedaction}
841: \EN
842: The coupling constant $g_i$ is a dimensional quantity which
843: can be related to the lowest mass--gap $m_i = \xi_i^{-1}$ of
844: the theory according to the formula
845: \EQ
846: g_i = \tilde{\cal C}_i \,m_i^{2 - 2 \Delta_i} \,\,\, ,
847: \label{gm}
848: \EN
849: or, equivalently
850: \EQ
851: m_i = {\cal C}_i \,g_i^{\frac{1}{2-2 \Delta_i}} \,\,\,\,\,\,\, ,
852: \label{mg}
853: \EN
854: with ${\cal C}_i = \tilde{\cal C}_i^{-\frac{1}{2- 2 \Delta_i}}$.
855: When the QFT associated to the action (\ref{perturbedaction})
856: is integrable, the pure number ${\cal C}_i$ can be exactly
857: determined by means of the Thermodynamical Bethe Ansatz
858: \cite{TBA,fateev}. When the theory is not integrable (this is
859: the case for the magnetic deformation of the TIM), the constant
860: ${\cal C}_i$ can be nevertheless determined by a numerical method,
861: based on the so--called Truncated Conformal Space Approach
862: \cite{YZ}, which will be discussed in Section 5. In conclusion,
863: for all individual deformations of the TIM we are able to completely
864: set the relationship which links the coupling constant to the mass--gap
865: of the theory and therefore we are able to switch freely between
866: these two variables.
867:
868: Another set of quantities which can be fixed by QFT are the matrix
869: elements of the order parameters, the simplest ones being the vacuum
870: expectation values. In this case we have
871: \EQ
872: \langle \varphi_j \rangle_i = \tilde B_{ji} \,m_i^{2 \Delta_j} \,\,\,,
873: \EN
874: {\it i.e.}
875: \EQ
876: \langle \varphi_j \rangle_i = B_{ji} \,g_i^{\frac{\Delta_j}
877: {1- \Delta_i}}
878: \,\,\,\,\,\,\,,
879: \,\,\,\,\,\,\,
880: B_{ji} = \tilde B_{ji} \,{\cal C}_i^{2 \Delta_j} \,\,\,.
881: \label{VEVg}
882: \EN
883: When the theory is integrable, the constant $\tilde B_{ji}$ can
884: be fixed exactly, thanks to the results of a remarkable series of
885: papers \cite{russian1,russian2}. When it is not integrable, the
886: constant $\tilde B_{ji}$ can be nevertheless estimated by means
887: of a numerical approach, first proposed in \cite{GM1}, which will
888: be reviewed in Section 5. Hence, also in this case, we are able
889: to determine completely these quantities. Let us present the
890: exact expressions of the VEV for the three integrable deformations
891: of the TIM, which are obtained by specializing the formulae of
892: ref.\,\cite{russian2}. In the expressions below, the fields are
893: labelled by their position $(l,k)$ in the Kac table of the model
894: (see eq.\,(\ref{Kactable}) and Table 1) and the lowest mass--gap
895: of the different theories is simply denoted by $m$
896: \begin{itemize}
897: \item For the $\varphi_2$ energy deformation we have
898: \EQ
899: \langle 0_s \mid \Phi_{l,k} \mid 0_s\rangle =
900: \frac
901: {\sin\left(\frac{\pi s}{4} \mid 5 l - 4 k\mid\right)}
902: {\sin\frac{\pi s}{4}} \,
903: \left[
904: \frac{5 \,m \,\pi \Gamma\left(\frac{5}{9}\right)}
905: {2^{\frac{2}{3}} \sqrt{3} \Gamma\left(\frac{1}{3}\right)
906: \Gamma\left(\frac{2}{9}\right)} \right]^{2 \Delta_{l,k}} \,
907: {\cal Q}_{1,2}(5 l - 4 k) \,\,\,,
908: \label{VEVepsilon}
909: \EN
910: where, for $\mid Re \,\eta \mid < 4$, ${\cal Q}_{1,2}(\eta)$
911: is given by the integral
912: \begin{eqnarray}
913: && {\cal Q}_{1,2}(\eta) = \exp\left\{
914: \int_0^{\infty} \frac{dt}{t} \left(
915: \frac{\sinh 6 t \,\sinh(t (\eta-1)) \,\sinh(t (\eta+1))}
916: {\sinh 15 t \,\sinh 10 t \,\sinh 4 t} \times \right. \right.
917: \nonumber \\ & & \left.\left.\left(\cosh 18 t + \cosh 8 t -
918: \cosh 16 t + \cosh 4 t + 1 \right)
919: - \frac{(\eta^2 -1)}{40} e^{-4 t}\right)\right\}
920: \,\,\, ,
921: \label{Qepsilon}
922: \end{eqnarray}
923: and is defined by its analytic continuation outside that domain.
924: The index $s$ labels the various vacua and takes different values
925: depending on the sign of the coupling constant $g_2$: for $g_2<0$ the
926: spin symmetry $\sigma\rightarrow -\sigma$ is spontaneously broken and
927: there are two vacua identified by $s =1,3$; for $g_2 > 0$ there is a
928: unique ground state, associated to $s = 2$.
929: \item For the $\varphi_3$ sub--leading magnetic deformation we have
930: \EQ
931: \langle 0_s \mid \Phi_{l,k} \mid 0_s\rangle =
932: \frac
933: {\sin\left(\frac{\pi s}{5} \mid 5 l - 4 k\mid\right)}
934: {\sin\frac{\pi s}{5}} \,
935: \left[
936: \frac{4 \,m \,\pi \Gamma\left(\frac{8}{9}\right)}
937: {2^{\frac{2}{3}} \sqrt{3} \Gamma\left(\frac{1}{3}\right)
938: \Gamma\left(\frac{5}{9}\right)} \right]^{2 \Delta_{l,k}} \,
939: {\cal Q}_{2,1}(5 l - 4 k) \,\,\,,
940: \label{VEVsigma'}
941: \EN
942: where, for $\mid Re \,\eta \mid < 5$, ${\cal Q}_{2,1}(\eta)$
943: is given by the integral
944: \begin{eqnarray}
945: && {\cal Q}_{2,1}(\eta) = \exp\left\{
946: \int_0^{\infty} \frac{dt}{t} \left(
947: \frac{\sinh 3 t \,\sinh(t (\eta-1)) \,\sinh(t (\eta+1))}
948: {\sinh 9 t \,\sinh 5 t \,\sinh 8 t} \times \right. \right. \nonumber \\
949: & & \left.\left.\left(\cosh 9 t + \cosh t - \cosh 11 t + \cosh 5 t +1 \right) -
950: \frac{(\eta^2 -1)}{40} e^{-4 t}\right)\right\}
951: \,\,\, ,
952: \label{Qsigma'}
953: \end{eqnarray}
954: and is defined by its analytic continuation outside that domain. For
955: this deformation there are two vacua associated to the values $s = 2,
956: 4$.
957: \item For the $\varphi_4$ vacancy density deformation, in its
958: massive phase we have
959: \EQ
960: \langle 0_s \mid \Phi_{l,k} \mid 0_s\rangle =
961: \frac
962: {\sin\left(\frac{\pi s}{5} \mid 5 l - 4 k\mid\right)}
963: {\sin\frac{\pi s}{5}} \,
964: \left[
965: \frac{m \,\sqrt{\pi} \Gamma\left(\frac{7}{2}\right)}
966: {2} \right]^{2 \Delta_{l,k}} \,
967: {\cal Q}_{1,3}(5 l - 4 k) \,\,\,,
968: \label{VEVepsilon'}
969: \EN
970: where, for $\mid Re \,\eta \mid < 4$, ${\cal Q}_{1,3}(\eta)$
971: is given by the integral
972: \EQ
973: {\cal Q}_{1,3}(\eta) = \exp\left\{
974: \int_0^{\infty} \frac{dt}{t} \left(
975: \frac{\cosh 2 t \,\sinh(t (\eta-1)) \,\sinh(t (\eta+1))}
976: {2 \cosh t \,\sinh 4 t \,\sinh 5 t} - \frac{(\eta^2 -1)}{40}
977: e^{-4 t}\right)\right\} \nonumber
978: \label{Qepsilon'}
979: \EN
980: and is defined by its analytic continuation outside that domain.
981: For the massive phase of this deformation we have three vacua labelled
982: by $s = 1, 2, 3$.
983: \end{itemize}
984:
985: As discussed in Section 5, in addition to the above vacuum
986: expectation values, a generalization of the numerical
987: approach of ref.\,\cite{GM1} often leads to a reasonable
988: estimation of the matrix elements of the order parameters between
989: the vacuum states and some of the excited states, as for instance
990: $
991: \langle 0 | \varphi_j | A_k \rangle_i
992: $
993: where $A_k$ is a one--particle state of mass $M_k$. These
994: quantities will be useful for obtaining sensible approximation
995: of the large--distance behavior of several correlators.
996:
997: Another useful piece of information on the off--critical dynamics
998: can be obtained by exploiting the properties of the stress--energy
999: tensor $T_{\mu \nu}(x)$. In the presence of the perturbing field
1000: $\varphi_i$, the trace of the stress--energy tensor is different
1001: from zero and can be expressed as
1002: \EQ
1003: \Theta(x) = 2 \pi g_i (2 - 2 \Delta_i) \,\varphi_i \,\,\,.
1004: \label{trace}
1005: \EN
1006: The vacuum expectation value of $\Theta(x)$ is given by
1007: \EQ
1008: \langle \Theta \rangle = \tilde w_i \,m_i^2 = w_i\,
1009: g_i^{\frac{1}{1- \Delta_i}}
1010: \,\,\,,
1011: \label{vacuumtheta}
1012: \EN
1013: with $w_i =\tilde w_i \,{\cal C}_i^2$. As before, when the theory is
1014: integrable the constant $\tilde w_i$ can be determined exactly,
1015: otherwise it can be computed numerically\footnote{Obviously this
1016: number can be also obtained in terms of the VEV of the field
1017: $\varphi_i$ and the expression of $\Theta$ given in eq.\,(\ref{trace}).}.
1018: The trace of the stress--energy tensor enters two useful sum rules
1019: which link conformal data of the ultraviolet fixed point to
1020: off--critical quantities. The first of them -- called the $c$--theorem
1021: sum rule \cite{Zamcth} -- relates the central charge $c$ of the
1022: ultraviolet theory to the second moment of the two-point
1023: connected correlation function of $\Theta$
1024: \EQ
1025: c = \frac{3}{4\pi} \int d^2x \,|x|^2 \langle \Theta(x)\,
1026: \Theta(0) \rangle_c
1027: \,\,\, .
1028: \label{ctheorem}
1029: \EN
1030: For all relevant deformations, it is easy to check that the above
1031: integral is always convergent. The second sum rule -- called the
1032: $\Delta$--theorem sum rule \cite{DSC} -- reads
1033: \EQ
1034: \Delta_j = -\frac{1}{4 \pi \langle \varphi_j \rangle_i}
1035: \, \int d^2x \,\langle \Theta(x) \,\varphi_j(0) \rangle_i^c
1036: \,\,\,,
1037: \label{Deltath}
1038: \EN
1039: {\it i.e.} it relates the conformal dimension $\Delta_j$ of the
1040: field $\varphi_j$ to its VEV and to the integral of its connected
1041: off--critical correlator with $\Theta(x)$. This time the above
1042: integral is not always convergent (the detailed analysis of
1043: its convergence may be found in the original paper \cite{DSC}).
1044: Notice, however, that the $\Delta$--theorem also involves the
1045: VEV of the field $\varphi_j$ and it is easy to see that the
1046: divergence/convergence of the integral is always accompanied
1047: by the divergence/convergence of the VEV in such a way that
1048: the sum--rule always mantains its validity. The proof of this
1049: statement is simple: by taking the derivative of the VEV
1050: (\ref{VEVg}) with respect to $g_i$ we have in fact
1051: \EQ
1052: \frac{\partial}{\partial g_i} \langle \varphi_j\rangle_i =
1053: \frac{\Delta_j}{g_i (1-\Delta_i)} \,\langle \varphi_j\rangle_i
1054: \,\,\,.
1055: \label{derVEV}
1056: \EN
1057: On the other hand, the above quantity can also be computed by
1058: means of the fluctuation--dissipation theorem and is given
1059: by
1060: \EQ
1061: \frac{\partial}{\partial g_i} \langle \varphi_j\rangle_i =
1062: - \int d^2 x \langle \varphi_i(x) \varphi_j(0) \rangle_c^i \,\,\,.
1063: \label{derflu}
1064: \EN
1065: By using eq.\,(\ref{trace}) and comparing the two expressions,
1066: the divergent/convergent nature of the integral is therefore
1067: directly linked to the divergent/convergent nature of the
1068: constant $B_{ji}$ entering the VEV of the field $\varphi_j$.
1069: These considerations suggest that the quantity $\Delta_j$
1070: on the left hand side of (\ref{Deltath}) is in any case
1071: obtained, also when the integral of the two--point function
1072: $\langle \Theta(x) \varphi_j(0)\rangle_c^i$ diverges. In this
1073: case one needs to perform a simultaneous analytic continuation
1074: of both the integral and the corresponding VEV.
1075:
1076: Basic quantities in the universal ratios are
1077: the generalized susceptibilities $\Gamma_{jk}^i$. By
1078: using equations.\,(\ref{free}) and (\ref{hatgammajki}), the
1079: fluctuation--dissipation theorem provides the relation
1080: between $\hat\Gamma_{jk}^i$ and the integral of the
1081: connected correlator
1082: \EQ
1083: \hat\Gamma_{jk}^i = \int d^2 x \langle \varphi_j(x)
1084: \varphi_k(0)\rangle_{c}^i
1085: \,\,\,.
1086: \label{fluctdis}
1087: \EN
1088: The dependence on the coupling constant $g_i$ of these
1089: quantities can be easily extracted. In fact, the connected
1090: correlator can be parameterized as
1091: \EQ
1092: \langle \varphi_j(x) \varphi_k(0)\rangle_c^i =
1093: \frac{1}{r^{2 \Delta_j + 2 \Delta_k}} Q_{jk}^i(m \,r)
1094: \,\,\,.
1095: \EN
1096: ($r = \mid x \mid$). Its dependence on $m$ is obtained
1097: with a change of variable and by using the relation
1098: ({\ref{mg}), we finally have $\hat \Gamma_{jk}^i =
1099: \Gamma_{jk}^i\, g_i^{\frac{\Delta_j + \Delta_k-1}{1-\Delta_i}}$
1100: with
1101: \EQ
1102: \Gamma_{jk}^i = {\cal C}_i^{2 \Delta_j+2\Delta_k-2}
1103: \int d\tau \frac{1}{\tau^{2\Delta_j+2\Delta_k}} Q_{jk}(\tau)
1104: \,\,\,.
1105: \label{finalgamma}
1106: \EN
1107: Some of the above susceptibilities can be determined exactly, such
1108: as the components $\Gamma_{ik}^i$, whose values are
1109: provided by the $\Delta$--theorem sum rule
1110: \EQ
1111: \Gamma_{ik}^i = - \frac{\Delta_k}{1-\Delta_k} B_{ki} \,\,\,.
1112: \label{gammachiusa}
1113: \EN
1114: In all other cases, when an exact formula is not available,
1115: our strategy to evaluate the generalized susceptibilities
1116: will rely on two different representations of the correlators.
1117: These representations have the advantage to converge
1118: very fast in two distinct regions: the first representation is
1119: based on Conformal Perturbation Theory and allows a
1120: very efficient estimation of the correlation function in its
1121: short distance regime, while the second representation is based
1122: on the Form Factors and allows an efficient control of its large
1123: distance behavior. Due to the fast convergent nature of the two
1124: series in their respective domains, they are efficiently approximated
1125: by their lowest terms, which therefore can be evaluated with a
1126: relatively little analytical effort. These considerations obviously
1127: lead to the estimation of the integral (\ref{fluctdis}) according
1128: to the following steps:
1129: \begin{enumerate}
1130: \item Express the integral in polar coordinates as
1131: \EQ
1132: \hat\Gamma_{jk}^i = 2\pi \int_0^{+\infty}
1133: d r \,r \,\langle\varphi_j(r)
1134: \varphi_k(0)\rangle_c^i \,\,\, ,
1135: \EN
1136: and split the radial integral into two pieces as
1137: \begin{eqnarray}
1138: I = \int_0^{+\infty}
1139: d r \,r\,\langle\varphi_j(r)
1140: \varphi_k(0)\rangle_c^i & = &
1141: \int_0^{R}
1142: d r \,r\,\langle\varphi_j(r)
1143: \varphi_k(0)\rangle_c^i +
1144: \int_R^{+\infty}
1145: d r \,r\,\langle\varphi_j(r)
1146: \varphi_k(0)\rangle_c^i \nonumber \\
1147: & & \equiv I_1(R) + I_2(R) \,\,\,.
1148: \label{I1I2}
1149: \end{eqnarray}
1150: \item
1151: Use the best available short--distance representation of the
1152: correlator to evaluate $I_1(R)$ as well as the best available
1153: estimate of its large--distance representation to evaluate
1154: $I_2(R)$.
1155: \item Optimize the choice of the parameter $R$ in such a
1156: way to obtain the best evaluation of the whole integral.
1157: In practice, this means looking at that value of $R$
1158: for which a plateau is obtained for the sum of $I_1(R)$
1159: and $I_2(R)$.
1160: \end{enumerate}
1161: In order to proceed in the above program it is useful to
1162: briefly recall the main features of the short--distance and
1163: long--distance expansions of the two--point correlation
1164: functions.
1165:
1166: \subsection{Short--Distance Expansion}
1167:
1168: A clear discussion on the perturbative ultraviolet
1169: renormalization of the fields and on the short--distance
1170: expansion of the two--point functions can be found in the
1171: references \cite{DSC,ZamYL}. Here we will briefly review
1172: the main results useful for our purposes.
1173:
1174: First of all, there is a one--to--one correspondence between
1175: the fields {\em at} and {\em away} from criticality. However,
1176: renormalization effects induced by ultraviolet divergences
1177: can have the effect of expressing the off--critical fields in
1178: terms of a combination of the critical ones. Let us denote
1179: by $\tilde\Phi_i(x)$ and $\Phi_i(x)$ the conformal and the
1180: off--critical fields respectively. Consider the off--critical action
1181: obtained by a perturbation of a relevant (scalar) conformal
1182: field ($\Delta_{\tilde\Phi} < 1$)
1183: \EQ
1184: {\cal A} ={\cal A}_{CFT} + g \int d^2x \,\tilde{\Phi}(x) \,\,\,.
1185: \EN
1186: In a conformal perturbative evaluation of the correlators
1187: which involves one of the field $\Phi_i(0)$ we have
1188: \EQ
1189: \langle ... \Phi_i(0)\rangle =
1190: \langle ... \tilde\Phi_i(0)\rangle_{CFT} +
1191: g \int_{\epsilon <\mid x\mid < R}
1192: d^2 x \langle ... \tilde\Phi_i(0) \tilde\Phi(x)\rangle_{CFT}
1193: + \ldots
1194: \label{CFTexpan}
1195: \EN
1196: where $\epsilon$ and $R$ are the ultraviolet and the infrared
1197: cutoffs. Let us analyze first the ultraviolet behavior of
1198: the above integral. This is controlled by the OPE of the
1199: two conformal fields
1200: \EQ
1201: \tilde\Phi(x) \tilde\Phi_i(0) = \sum_k C_{\tilde\Phi
1202: \tilde\varphi}^k \mid x\mid^{2(\Delta_k-\Delta_{\Phi} -
1203: \Delta_{\Phi_i})} \tilde A_k(0)
1204: \,\,\,,
1205: \label{CFTOPE}
1206: \EN
1207: and therefore the integral in (\ref{CFTexpan}) is divergent
1208: if in the above expansion there are fields $\tilde A_k(x)$ whose
1209: conformal dimensions satisfy the condition
1210: \EQ
1211: \gamma_k \equiv \Delta_k - \Delta_{\tilde\Phi} - \Delta_{\tilde\Phi_i}
1212: + 1 \leq 0 \,\,\,.
1213: \label{Gescond}
1214: \EN
1215: If this is the case, the off--critical renormalized field which
1216: has a finite correlator at the lowest order in $g$ is defined by
1217: \EQ
1218: \Phi_i = \tilde\Phi_i - g \pi\, \sum_k \frac{C_{\Phi \Phi_i}^k}
1219: {\gamma_k} \,\epsilon^{2\gamma_k}\,\tilde A_k + {\cal O}(g^2) \,\,\,.
1220: \EN
1221: Hence, due to the ultraviolet divergences there may be a mixing
1222: of the initial conformal operators with a finite numbers of fields
1223: of lower conformal dimensions.
1224:
1225: The conformal perturbation series for the correlation functions
1226: also suffers from infrared divergences. These divergences, however,
1227: cannot be absorbed into a redefinition of the local fields and,
1228: as a result, we have a non--analytic dependence on the coupling
1229: constant $g$. This non--analytic behavior is essentially due to
1230: the non--adiabatic change of the vacuum state in passing from
1231: the Conformal Field Theory of the fixed point to the generic
1232: massive theory of the off--critical system. To overcome
1233: this difficulty, one can adopt the strategy of considering the
1234: {\em off-critical} OPE
1235: \EQ
1236: \varphi_i(x) \varphi_j(0) =
1237: \sum_p C_{ij}^p(g;x) A_p(0)\,\,\,,
1238: \label{ope}
1239: \EN
1240: where the $A_p(x)$ belongs to a complete set of local fields
1241: of the theory ({\it i.e.} the perturbed version of the conformal
1242: fields $\tilde{A}_p(x)$) whereas the structure constants
1243: $C_{ij}^p(g;x)$ are analytic in $g$ (as expected by their
1244: local nature). In this way all the non--analytic behavior
1245: of the correlation function
1246: \EQ
1247: \langle\varphi_i(x) \varphi_j(0)\rangle =
1248: \sum_i C_{ij}^p(g;x) \langle A_p(0)\rangle \,\,\,
1249: \label{correlator}
1250: \EN
1251: is completely encoded inside the non--perturbative VEV's
1252: $\langle A_p(0)\rangle = {\cal A}_p \,g^{\frac{\Delta_p}
1253: {1-\Delta_{\Phi}}}$. Concerning the structure constants
1254: $C_{jk}^p(g;x)$, by dimensional reasons they admit the
1255: expansion
1256: \EQ
1257: C_{ij}^p(g;x)= r^{2(\D_p-\D_i-\D_j)} \,
1258: \sum_{n=0}^{\infty}C_{i,j}^{p(n)}(gr^{2-2\Delta_{\Phi}})^n
1259: \,\,\, ,
1260: \label{Cexpansion}
1261: \EN
1262: where $r=\mid x\mid$ and they can be computed
1263: perturbatively\footnote{The above formula has to be
1264: opportunely corrected when there is a resonance phenomenon
1265: among the fields of the conformal families.} in $g$. Their
1266: first order contribution is given by \cite{ZamYL}
1267: \EQ
1268: C_{i,j}^{p(1)} = -\int ' d^2w \,\langle \tilde{A}^p(\infty)
1269: \tilde{\Phi}(w)\tilde{\varphi}_i(1)\tilde{\varphi}_j(0)\rangle_{CFT}
1270: \,\,\,,
1271: \label{firstorderc}
1272: \EN
1273: where the prime indicates a suitable infrared (large distance)
1274: regularization of the integral. It can be calculated by means of
1275: different approaches (as, for instance, a minimal subtraction
1276: scheme based on the OPE \cite{ZamYL} or an analytic prolongation
1277: in the parameters of the integrand of (\ref{firstorderc}), {\it i.e.}
1278: the conformal weights). As shown in \cite{GM3}, an efficient way to
1279: extract the finite part of the integral is provided by the Mellin
1280: transformation, discussed in Appendix A. This is the approach which
1281: we have mostly used in our calculations.
1282:
1283: In conclusion, by using the VEV of the fields and the first
1284: approximation of the structure constants of the OPE, we can
1285: obtain a reasonable approximation for the short--distance
1286: behavior of the connected two--point functions entering the
1287: definition of the susceptibilities in terms of the expression
1288: \begin{eqnarray}
1289: \langle\varphi_i(x) \varphi_j(0)\rangle^c_k \, &=&
1290: \sum_p \sum_{n=0}^{\infty} \frac{\langle A_p(0)\rangle_k}
1291: {r^{2 (\Delta_p-\Delta_i-\Delta_j)}} C_{ij}^{p(n)}
1292: (g r^{2-2 \Delta_{k}})^n + \nonumber \\
1293: & & - \langle \varphi_i\rangle_k \,
1294: \langle \varphi_j\rangle_k \,\,\,.
1295: \label{correl}
1296: \end{eqnarray}
1297: The index $k$ indicates which perturbation is considered.
1298: Since the short--distance representation (\ref{correlator})
1299: is an expansion in the parameter $\left(\frac{r}{\xi}
1300: \right)$, a truncated form of the series (\ref{correl})
1301: is expected to be sufficiently accurate for $r \ll \xi$.
1302: However, the convergence of the truncated series is often
1303: much better and results being sufficiently accurate also for
1304: $r \sim \xi$, as confirmed in several examples (see, for instance
1305: \cite{DSIMMF,GM3,GM2,ZamYL,DMM35}). Hence, the above truncated
1306: form (\ref{correl}) can be confidently used for the evaluation
1307: of the integral $I_1(R)$ in eq.\,(\ref{I1I2}). Finally, notice
1308: that the short--distance expansion of the correlators can be
1309: implemented independently on the integrable or non--integrable
1310: nature of the off--critical theory.
1311:
1312:
1313: \subsection{Large Distance Expansion}
1314:
1315: An efficient way to control the behavior of the correlators
1316: in the opposite regime $\left(\frac{r}{\xi}\right) \gg 1$ is
1317: provided by their spectral representation expansions. In this
1318: approach, one makes use of the knowledge of the off--critical
1319: mass spectrum of the theory to express the correlators
1320: as\footnote{The expression (\ref{spectral}) has to be suitably
1321: modified in presence of kink excitations or massless particles.}
1322: \EQ
1323: \langle\varphi_i(x) \varphi_j(0)\rangle = \sum_{n=0}^{\infty}
1324: g_n(r) \,\,\,,
1325: \label{g_n}
1326: \EN
1327: where
1328: \begin{eqnarray}
1329: \label{defff}
1330: g_n(r) & = & \int_{\th_1 >\th_2 \ldots>\th_n}
1331: \frac{d\th_1}{2\pi} \dots \frac{d\th_n}{2\pi}\,
1332: \langle 0|\varphi_i(0)|A_{a_1}(\th_1) \dots A_{a_n}(\th_n)
1333: \rangle \times \label{spectral} \\
1334: & & \,\,\,\,\,\, \times
1335: \langle A_{a_1}(\th_1) \dots A_{a_n}(\th_n)|
1336: \varphi_j(0)|0 \rangle \,e^{-r \sum_{k=1}^n m_k \cosh\th_k}
1337: \,\,\,.
1338: \nonumber
1339: \end{eqnarray}
1340: $|A_{a_1}(\theta_1) \dots A_{a_n}(\theta_n)\rangle$ are the
1341: multi--particle states relative to the excitations of mass
1342: $m_k$, with relativistic dispersion relations given by $E
1343: = m_k \cosh \theta$, $p = m_k \sinh\theta$, where $\theta$
1344: is the rapidity variable. The spectral representation
1345: (\ref{spectral}) is obviously an expansion in the parameter
1346: $e^{-\frac{r}{\xi}}$, where $\xi^{-1} = m_1$ is the lowest
1347: mass--gap.
1348:
1349: Basic quantities of the large distance approach are the Form
1350: Factors (FF), {\it i.e.} the matrix elements of the operators
1351: $\varphi_i$ on the physical asymptotic states
1352: \EQ
1353: F^{\varphi_i}_{a_1,\ldots ,a_n}(\th_1,\ldots,\th_n) \,=
1354: \, \langle 0| \varphi_i(0)|A_{a_1}(\th_1),\ldots,A_{a_n}
1355: (\th_n) \rangle \,\,\,.
1356: \label{form}
1357: \EN
1358: It is worth emphasizing that the above quantities are unaffected
1359: by renormalization effects since physical excitations are employed
1360: in their definitions. For scalar operators, relativistic invariance
1361: requires that the FF only depend on the rapidity differences $\th_i
1362: - \th_j$. Postponing a more detailed analysis of the analytic
1363: properties of the FF, let us first discuss the behavior of the
1364: series (\ref{spectral}) for the purpose of evaluating the integral
1365: $I_2(R)$ in eq.\,(\ref{I1I2}).
1366:
1367: First of all, it is convenient to order the multi--particle states
1368: entering the sum (\ref{spectral}) according to the increasing values
1369: of the total sum of their masses $E_n^{a_1,\cdots,a_n} = \sum_{k=1}^n
1370: m_k$ so that, for $r \gg \xi$, the functions $g_n(r)$ behave
1371: as the decreasing sequence $g_n(r) \sim e^{-r E_n^{a_1,\cdots,a_n}}$.
1372: Apart from $g_0 = \langle 0 | \varphi_i(0) | 0 \rangle \langle 0 |
1373: \varphi_j(0) | 0 \rangle$ relative to the VEV of the fields
1374: (which however does not enter the connected correlator), the
1375: first approximation of the correlator is given by the first
1376: term of the expansion (\ref{spectral})
1377: \begin{eqnarray}
1378: \langle \varphi_i(x) \varphi_j(0)\rangle & \simeq & g_1(r)
1379: = F^{\varphi_i}_1 \, F^{\varphi_j}_1 \,
1380: \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty}
1381: \frac{d\theta}{2 \pi} e^{-m_1 r \cosh\theta} =
1382: \nonumber \\
1383: & = &
1384: F^{\varphi_i}_1 \, F^{\varphi_j}_1 \,\frac{1}{\pi} \,
1385: K_0(m_1 r) \,\,\, ,
1386: \label{Bessel}
1387: \end{eqnarray}
1388: where $K_0(x)$ is the modified Bessel function. Sometimes it may
1389: occur that the one--particle FF of the fields are zero for
1390: symmetrical reasons and, in this case, the leading approximation of the
1391: connected correlator is given by the function $g_2(r)$, expressed
1392: in terms of the two--particle Form Factors $F^{\varphi_i}_{a_1,a_2}
1393: (\theta_1-\theta_2)$. Since (\ref{spectral}) is an exact expansion
1394: in $e^{-\frac{r}{\xi}}$, its truncated series to the lowest terms
1395: is expected to provide an accurate approximation of the correlators
1396: in the interval $r \gg \xi$. However, the convergence property of
1397: the truncated series is much better \cite{CMpol} and as a matter of
1398: fact it neatly approximates the correlator up to the region $r \sim \xi$,
1399: as has been checked in several examples (see, for instance
1400: \cite{DMIMMF,DSIMMF,GM3,ZamYL,DMM35,AMV}). Therefore the truncated
1401: spectral series is assumed to estimate the integral $I_2(R)$
1402: in eq.\,(\ref{I1I2}) with a reasonable confidence: obviously, the
1403: more terms included in the series (\ref{spectral}) results in a
1404: better evaluation of the integral $I_2(R)$. The problem is
1405: then to determine how efficiently we can assess the matrix elements
1406: of the order parameters on the asymptotic states. Let us discuss
1407: separately the cases when the off--critical theory corresponds to a
1408: non--integrable QFT or to an integrable one.
1409:
1410: For a non--integrable QFT (as, for instance, the QFT resulting from
1411: the magnetic deformation of the TIM), unfortunately it is difficult
1412: to go beyond the one--particle Form Factors of the lowest particle
1413: states, $\langle 0 |\varphi_i(0) | A_k \rangle$. In fact, due to
1414: creation and annihilation events in the scattering processes of
1415: these theories, {\it i.e.} to the non--elastic nature of its
1416: $S$--matrix, the FF satisfy the infinite coupled set of Watson's
1417: equations \cite{Watson}
1418: \begin{eqnarray}
1419: & & F^{\varphi}_{{\rm in}}(\theta_1),\ldots,\theta_n) =
1420: \langle 0 |\varphi(0) | A(\theta_1) \ldots A(\theta_n) \rangle_{{\rm in}} =
1421: \\
1422: & & \sum_{m=0}^{\infty} \int \frac{d\theta_1'}{2\pi}
1423: \cdots
1424: \frac{d\theta_m'}{2\pi}
1425: \langle 0 |\varphi(0) | A(\theta_1') \ldots A(\theta_m')
1426: \rangle_{{\rm out}} \langle A(\theta_1') \ldots A(\theta_m')
1427: | A(\theta_1) \ldots A(\theta_n)\rangle_{{\rm in}} =
1428: \nonumber \\
1429: & & \sum_{m=0}^{\infty} \int \frac{d\theta_1'}{2\pi}
1430: \cdots
1431: \frac{d\theta_m'}{2\pi} F^{\varphi}_{{\rm out}}(\theta_1',\ldots
1432: \theta_m') \, S^{n\rightarrow m}(\theta_1,\ldots,\theta_n|
1433: \theta_1',\ldots,\theta_m') \,\,\, , \nonumber
1434: \end{eqnarray}
1435: obtained by inserting the unitary sum on the out--states in the
1436: definition of the original Form Factor. Consequently, higher--particle
1437: FF have a non--trivial analytic behavior -- with branch cuts at all
1438: production thresholds -- which in practice precludes their exact
1439: determination. Hence, for non--integrable theories the best we can do
1440: is to estimate the large--distance expansion of the correlators
1441: only in terms of the lowest one--particle states. Moreover,
1442: the one--particle FF of these theories $\langle 0 | \varphi_i(0)
1443: | A_k\rangle$ cannot be determined by first principles and for
1444: their evaluation we have to rely on some numerical determinations,
1445: as discussed in next section. Although this situation may
1446: appear disappointing from a theoretical point of view, it is
1447: worth stressing that for all practical purposes, one can reach
1448: a reasonable estimate of the integral $I_2(R)$ also in the
1449: non--integrable case. This can be checked, for instance,
1450: by comparing the values of the integrals -- obtained by approximating
1451: the correlators by the lowest Form Factors -- with their exact
1452: values obtained by the $\Delta$--theorem, when the latter applies.
1453:
1454: For an integrable QFT, the situation is much better since, in principle,
1455: there is the possibility of determining exactly {\em all} Form Factors
1456: of the theory. For a detailed discussion of the calculation of the
1457: Form Factors in an integrable QFT, we refer the reader to the original
1458: literature \cite{DMIMMF,ZamYL,KW,Smirnov}. Here we simply recall
1459: the basic equations of the two--particle FF \cite{DMIMMF} since,
1460: based on the fast convergence property expected for the spectral
1461: series \cite{CMpol}, they will be the only terms employed in the
1462: following for approximating the correlators in their large--distance
1463: expansions (in addition, of course, to the one--particle ones).
1464:
1465: Assume, for simplicity, that the spectrum of the integrable QFT is
1466: made of the scalar particles $A_i$. Let $S_{ab}(\theta)$ be the
1467: elastic scattering matrix of the particles $A_a$ and $A_b$. In
1468: this case, the two--particle Form Factor $F^{\varphi}_{ab}(\theta)$
1469: is a meromorphic function of the rapidity difference $\theta$
1470: satisfying the equations
1471: \EQ
1472: F^{\varphi}_{ab}(\th)=S_{ab}(\th)\,F^{\varphi}_{ab}(-\th)\,\,,
1473: \lab{w1}
1474: \EN
1475: \EQ
1476: F^{\varphi}_{ab}(i\pi+\th) = F^{\varphi}_{ab}(i\pi-\th)\,\,\,.
1477: \lab{w2}
1478: \EN
1479: Let $F^{\it min}_{ab}(\th)$ be a solution of eqs.\,(\ref{w1}) and
1480: (\ref{w2}), free of poles and zeros in the strip ${\rm Im} \,\theta
1481: \in (0,\pi)$. By requiring asymptotic power limitation in momenta,
1482: $F^{\varphi}_{ab}(\th)$ must be equal to $F^{\it min}_{ab}(\th)$
1483: times a rational function of $\cosh\th$, with the poles thereof
1484: fixed by the singularity structure of the scattering amplitude
1485: $S_{ab}(\th)$. A simple pole in $F^{\varphi}_{ab}(\th)$, like
1486: the one in Figure 1 induced by the simple pole of
1487: $S_{ab}(\th)$ with a positive residue, gives rise to the equation
1488: \EQ
1489: F^{\varphi}_{ab}(\th\simeq
1490: iu_{ab}^c)\simeq\frac{i \gamma_{ab}^c}{\th-iu_{ab}^c} \,
1491: F^{\varphi}_c\,\,\,,
1492: \lab{pole}
1493: \EN
1494: where $\gamma_{ab}^c$ is the on--shell three--particle coupling,
1495: also determined by the $S$--matrix. A more detailed analysis is, in general,
1496: required when the $S$--matrix presents higher order poles (see the
1497: discussion in \cite{DMIMMF} and Appendix D). The FF may also have
1498: kinematical poles which however do not appear at the two-particle
1499: level if the operator ${\varphi}(x)$ is local with respect to the
1500: fields which create the particles. In conclusion,
1501: the two-particle FF can be expressed as \cite{DMIMMF}
1502: \EQ
1503: F^{\varphi}_{ab}(\th)=\frac{{\cal Q}^{\varphi}_{ab}(\th)}{D_{ab}(\th)}
1504: F^{min}_{ab}(\th)\,\,,
1505: \lab{param}
1506: \EN
1507: where $D_{ab}(\th)$ and ${\cal Q}^{\varphi}_{ab}(\th)$ are
1508: polynomials in $\cosh\th$: the former is fixed by the singularity
1509: structure of $S_{ab}(\th)$ while the latter depends on the
1510: operator ${\varphi}(x)$. An upper bound on the order of the
1511: polynomial $Q_{ab}^{\varphi}(\th)$ is given in terms of the
1512: conformal dimension $\Delta_{\varphi}$. In fact
1513: \EQ
1514: \lim_{|\th|\goto\infty}
1515: F^{\varphi}(\th) \sim \,
1516: e^{y_{\varphi}|\th|}\,\,\,,
1517: \lab{bound}
1518: \EN
1519: with \cite{DMIMMF}
1520: \EQ
1521: y_{\varphi}\,\leq\,\Delta_\varphi\,\,\,.
1522: \lab{bbb}
1523: \EN
1524: Further equations on the polynomial ${\cal Q}_{ab}^{\varphi}(\th)$
1525: can be obtained when the field $\varphi(x)$ is proportional
1526: to the trace of the stress--energy tensor $T_{\mu\nu}(x)$.
1527: In fact, as a consequence of the conservation law $\partial_
1528: \mu T^{\mu\nu}=0$, the FF of $\Theta(x)$ for two different
1529: particles $A_a$ and $A_b$ must contain a term proportional
1530: to the Mandelstam variable $s = (p_a+p_b)^2$ of this state
1531: \cite{DMIMMF,ZamYL}, so that it can be factorized as
1532: \EQ
1533: {\cal Q}^\Theta_{ab}(\th) = \left(\cosh\th +
1534: \frac{m_a^2+m_b^2}{2m_am_b}\right)^{1-\delta_{ab}}
1535: P_{ab}(\th)\,\,\,.
1536: \EN
1537: Moreover, in this case we have the normalization conditions
1538: for $F^\Theta_{aa}$ which reads
1539: \EQ
1540: F_{aa}^\Theta(i\pi)
1541: = \langle A_a(\th_a)|\Theta(0)|A_a(\th_a)\rangle = 2\pi m^2_a\,\,\,.
1542: \label{ipi}
1543: \EN
1544:
1545: The above discussion relative to the FF (and their generalization
1546: in the case of kink excitations) will be useful in Section 6 for
1547: the determination of the generalized susceptibilities for the
1548: integrable deformations of the TIM.
1549:
1550: \resection{Numerical Methods: Truncated Conformal Space Approach}
1551:
1552: The Truncated Conformal Space Approach (TCSA) has been introduced
1553: by Yurov and Zamolodchikov \cite{YZ} for a numerical evaluation of
1554: the non--perturbative effects relative to the off--critical models.
1555: It consists in studying the numerical spectrum of the off-critical
1556: Hamiltonian on a infinite cylinder of circumference $R$, acting
1557: on the Hilbert space of the conformal states. Once a truncation
1558: at a suitable number of states is made, the problem reduces to
1559: perform a numerical diagonalization of a finite dimensional
1560: Hamiltonian.
1561:
1562: For the off--critical Hamiltonian we have
1563: \EQ
1564: \hat{H} = \hat{H}_0 + \hat{V} \,\,\, ,
1565: \label{pert}
1566: \EN
1567: where $\hat{H}_0$ is the Hamiltonian of the conformal fixed point
1568: on the cylinder and $\hat{V} = g_i \int\limits_0^R dv \,\hat
1569: {\varphi}_i(w)$ where $\varphi_i(x)$ is one of the relevant
1570: perturbation (with $w=u+iv$ is the coordinate along the cylinder
1571: and the tilde indicates quantities defined on the cylinder). By
1572: using the conformal transformation $z=e^{{2\pi\over R}w}$, the
1573: conformal theory on the cylinder is mapped onto a plane and
1574: therefore $\hat{H}_0$ can be expressed in terms of the usual
1575: conformal generators $L_0,\bar{L_0}$ and the central charge
1576: $c$ \cite{cardy86}:
1577: \bea
1578: \hat{H}_0 &=& {2\pi\over R}(L_0+\bar{L_0}-{c\over 12}) \,\,\,;\\
1579: \hat{\varphi}_i &=& \left|{2\pi \over R}\right|^{2\D_i}\varphi_i
1580: \,\,\,.
1581: \eea
1582: The spectrum of $\hat{H}$ depends on the dimensionless parameter
1583: $g_iR^{2-2\D_i}$ and the value of $g_i$ can be fixed\footnote{
1584: By using this normalization, we were able to determine, in particular,
1585: the constant ${\cal C}_1$ entering the relation between the coupling
1586: and the mass in the magnetic $\vp_1$ deformation (see eq.\,(\ref{mg})).}
1587: such that the mass gap is equal to $1$. Let $b^{-1}_{ml}$ be the
1588: inverse of the matrix $b_{ml} = \langle m | l \rangle$ introduced
1589: to account for the nonorthogonality of the conformal basis. Denoting
1590: by $H_{mn} \equiv b^{-1}_{ml} \, \langle l| H |n\rangle$ the matrix
1591: elements of the perturbed Hamiltonian, we have
1592: \EQ
1593: H_{mn}={2 \pi\over R} \left[ (2\Delta_m -c/12) \delta_{mn} +
1594: 2 \pi g_i \left({R\over 2 \pi}\right)^{2(1-\Delta_i)} b^{-1}_{ml}
1595: \langle l|\varphi_i |n\rangle \right] \,\,\,.
1596: \label{htrunc}
1597: \EN
1598: The matrix elements $\langle l|\varphi_i| n \rangle$ can be computed
1599: in terms of the structure constants of the OPE and the action of the
1600: conformal generators $L_n$ on the states. For the perturbation of
1601: the minimal models of CFT a numerical algorithm has been designed
1602: to compute the above matrix elements and to perform the diagonalization
1603: of the off--critical Hamiltonian by including the conformal states
1604: and their descendants up to the fifth level of the Verma module
1605: \cite{LM}. In the case of the TIM this is equivalent to truncate
1606: the number of states $N$ to 228. Once the Hamiltonian $H$ has been
1607: diagonalized for different values of $R$, one can extract the
1608: spectrum as a function of $R$, in particular the low energy
1609: eigenvalues (see, for instance Figure 2) and
1610: also their associated eigenvectors. In this way, it is possible
1611: to determine the masses of the lowest particles, several vacuum
1612: expectation values, some of the one--particle Form Factors and
1613: also some of the generalized susceptibilities. There are however
1614: certain limitations of the method, one of them due to the truncation
1615: performed in the number $N$ of the conformal states employed in
1616: the algorithm (see the discussion in \cite{LMC}). In fact, all the
1617: quantities of interest are infrared data, {\it i.e.} relative to
1618: the dynamics of the system on the cylinder in the limit $R
1619: \rightarrow \infty$, which is however dominated by truncation
1620: effects. This means that in order to extract reliable infrared
1621: data one has to look at the spectrum within an interval of $R$
1622: sufficiently large but still unaffected by truncation errors.
1623: This interval will be called the ``physical window''. Another
1624: limitation of the TCSA occurs when the conformal dimension
1625: $\Delta$ of the perturbing operator is such that $\Delta
1626: \geq \frac{1}{2}$. In this case, in fact, the renormalization of
1627: the operator prevents to reach a proper scaling behavior of the
1628: energy levels and the only quantities which can be extracted
1629: with reasonable confidence are the energy differences
1630: $\Delta E_n(R) = E_n(R) - E_0(R)$.
1631:
1632:
1633: \subsection{Vacuum Expectation Values by TCSA}
1634:
1635: As shown in ref.\,\cite{GM1}, the knowledge of the eigenvectors
1636: in the Truncated Conformal Space Approach allows a numerical
1637: estimation of the Vacuum Expectation Values of several order
1638: parameters. These quantities are defined by the limit
1639: \EQ
1640: B_{ji} = \lim_{R\to \infty}\langle \tilde{0}|\hat{\varphi}_j|
1641: \tilde{0} \rangle_i \,|g_i|^{-{\D_j\over 1-\D_i}} \,\,\, ,
1642: \label{IRlimit}
1643: \EN
1644: where $|\tilde{0}\rangle_i$ is the vacuum (on the cylinder)
1645: relative to the off--critical theory along the $i$--th
1646: deformation. On the other hand
1647: \EQ
1648: \label{numvev}
1649: \langle \tilde{0}|\hat{\varphi}_j|\tilde{0}\rangle_i
1650: = \left({2\pi\over R}\right)^{2\D_j} \langle\tilde{0}|
1651: \varphi_j| \tilde{0} \rangle_i = \left({2\pi\over
1652: R}\right)^{2\D_j}{\psi_m^0
1653: \langle m|\varphi_j| n \rangle_i \psi_n^0\over
1654: \psi_m^0 b_{mn} \psi_n^0}\,\,\,,
1655: \EN
1656: where $\psi_m^0$ designs the $m^{th}$ component of the ground state
1657: vector expressed in terms of the conformal basis. Due to the truncation
1658: effects discussed above, the limit $R \rightarrow \infty$ in
1659: eq.\,(\ref{IRlimit}) in practice means that one has to consider
1660: $R$ large enough such that the VEV reaches a saturation
1661: plateau. This saturation can be numerically controlled by requiring
1662: that $\langle 0|\varphi_j|0\rangle_i\sim R^{2\D_j}$, {\it i.e.}
1663: \EQ
1664: {1\over 2\D_j}{d\ln\langle 0|\varphi_j|0\rangle_i\over d\ln~R}=1.
1665: \EN
1666: By using this procedure, several VEV for different deformations of
1667: the TIM were determined in \cite{GM1}. We have reproduced and
1668: confirmed the results of \cite{GM1} for the two most relevant
1669: perturbations $\sigma$ and $\epsilon$ of the model (see Table
1670: \ref{tvev}). In Table \ref{tvev}, we have also included
1671: the exact VEV extracted from ref.\,\cite{russian2} of the TIM
1672: perturbed by the thermal operator (for both high and low temperature
1673: phases) in order to test the feasibility of the numerical approach.
1674: As evident from this table, lower the dimension of the operator,
1675: better the accuracy of the method. This is easy to understand since
1676: the computation of the VEV on the cylinder is equivalent to compute
1677: the VEV at a finite--temperature, a situation analyzed in \cite{LeCMus}.
1678: The numerical determinations of the VEV's relative to the $\varphi_3$
1679: and $\varphi_4$ deformations turn out to be quite inaccurate for
1680: the renormalization reasons discussed above ($\Delta_3 \sim
1681: \frac{1}{2}$ and $\Delta_4 > \frac{1}{2}$) but their exact
1682: values can be nevertheless extracted from the results of
1683: ref.\,\cite{russian2}.
1684:
1685: \subsection{Numerical Determination of the One--Particle
1686: Form Factors}
1687:
1688: As discussed in Section 4, once the Form Factors of
1689: an operator are known, its correlation functions can be
1690: written as an infinite series over multi-particle states,
1691: eqs.\,(\ref{g_n}), (\ref{spectral}), and the restriction
1692: of these series to the first one--particle states
1693: already provides a reasonable approximation of their long
1694: distance behavior. These one--particle matrix elements
1695: $\langle 0\mid\varphi_i(0)\mid A_k\rangle$ can be numerically
1696: determined along the lines followed for estimating the VEV of
1697: the various operators. Namely, one has to replace the infinite
1698: volume vacuum state $\langle 0 \mid$ with its components relative
1699: to the eigenvector of the truncated Hamiltonian, analogously for
1700: the vector relative to the one--particle state, and then use the
1701: matrix elements of the field $\varphi_i$ in the truncated basis.
1702: The resulting quantity finally needs to be multiplied by $\sqrt{m_k R}$
1703: because the normalization of the one--particle states on a finite
1704: volume differs precisely for this factor from the one in the
1705: infinite volume. The quantity so determined, plotted versus the
1706: radius $R$ of the cylinder, presents in many cases a plateau in
1707: the region of the physical window which therefore provides its
1708: numerical estimation. As an example of such determination see
1709: Figure 3 where the matrix element
1710: $\langle 0\mid\varphi_1(0)\mid A_1\rangle_1$ is plotted
1711: as a function of $R$ in the case of the leading magnetic
1712: deformation of the TIM. A plateau is clearly reached for
1713: $R\ap 12$. We have performed this numerical calculation for
1714: all excited states under the two--particle threshold relative
1715: to the lowest mass gap for the first three deformations. The
1716: results are in Tables \ref{tff1}, \ref{tff2}, \ref{tff2m} and
1717: \ref{tff3}, in units of the opportune power of the coupling
1718: constants. As for the numerical determination of the VEV's,
1719: also in this case the lower the dimension of the operator,
1720: the accuracy of the method improves. Moreover, the numerical
1721: errors are usually larger for those matrix elements involving
1722: states which are closest to the threshold.
1723:
1724: Let us conclude this section with a general remark on the
1725: one--particle Form Factors. We have already discussed that
1726: for the non--integrable deformations the knowledge of these
1727: matrix elements is crucial in obtaining at least a
1728: non--trivial estimate of the correlators and their determination
1729: necessarily passes through a numerical approach. However, even
1730: in the more favorable case of integrable theories, it may
1731: occur that the determination of the one--particle FF can be only
1732: obtained by a numerical approach. Despite the existence
1733: of a manageable set of recursive equations which link the various
1734: $n$--particle Form Factors in the integrable models, the solutions of
1735: these recursive equations need an initial input which cannot be
1736: often obtained even by employing the cluster property of the Form Factors
1737: \cite{DSC,cluster,AMVcluster}. Under this circumstance one has to
1738: necessarily resort to other methods for obtaining the one--particle
1739: FF's and the TCSA may help in this respect. An explicit example of the
1740: situation discussed above is provided for instance by the Form
1741: Factors of the operators $\varphi_1$ in the thermal deformation,
1742: as discussed in the Appendix \ref{ff}.
1743:
1744:
1745: \subsection{Numerical Computation of the Susceptibilities}
1746:
1747: The TCSA also allows a direct numerical estimation
1748: of the susceptibilities. Since they are defined as
1749: \EQ
1750: \hat \Gamma_{jk}^i =
1751: \frac{\partial}{\partial g_k} \langle \varphi_j\rangle_i =
1752: \left. -\frac{\partial^2 f_i}{\partial g_k \partial g_j}\right|_{g_l=0} =
1753: \Gamma_{jk}^i \,g_i^
1754: {\frac{ \Delta_j + \Delta_k - 1}
1755: {1 - \Delta_i}} \,\,\, ,
1756: \label{susc1}
1757: \EN
1758: one needs to numerically evaluate the derivatives of the VEV's
1759: with respect to the different couplings. Hence, a small perturbation
1760: $g_k\int \limits_0^R dv \hat{\varphi}_k(w)$ is initially added
1761: to the Hamiltonian (\ref{pert}), with the values of the coupling
1762: constant $g_k$ chosen in such a way to alter the spectrum of the
1763: unperturbed theory only of small percent. To express the final result
1764: in unit of $|g_i|^{{ \Delta_j + \Delta_k - 1\over 1
1765: - \Delta_i}}$, it is convenient to write the coupling constant
1766: $g_k$ as
1767: \EQ
1768: g_k=a_{ki}g_i^{{1-\Delta_j\over 1-\Delta_i}} \,\,\,.
1769: \EN
1770: The next step consists in computing the expectation value of
1771: $\langle \hat{\varphi}_j\rangle_{i+k}$ as in eq.\,(\ref{numvev})
1772: by varying $a_{ki}$. As our typical sampling, we have considered
1773: $5-10$ different values of $a_{ki}$ and then we have extracted the
1774: numerical estimates of various susceptibilities by a linear fit of
1775: the data in the physical window of the $R$ axis where the VEV
1776: presents a plateau. The data relative to the two strongest
1777: relevant deformations are in Tables \ref{tchi1}, \ref{tchi2} and
1778: \ref{tchi2m}. Their values are reasonably close to the ones
1779: obtained by the fluctuation--dissipation theorem or to their
1780: exact values, when available from the $\Delta$--theorem sum rule.
1781: The only exceptions are those relative to the susceptibilities
1782: relative to the $\varphi_4$ operator, where there is a $10\%$
1783: mismatch. A non trivial and internal check of our estimates is
1784: given by the symmetrical relation $\Gamma_{jk}^i = \Gamma_{kj}^i$
1785: shown by the data. As for similar calculations discussed above,
1786: this method seems however to be inappropriate for the higher
1787: dimension perturbations relative to the fields $\vp_3$ and $\vp_4$.
1788:
1789: \resection{The Four Relevant Perturbations of the TIM}
1790:
1791: In this section, we will discuss in some details the field
1792: theories relative to each individual relevant deformation of
1793: the TIM, i.e. those associated to the actions
1794: \EQ
1795: {\cal A}_i^{\pm} = {\cal A}_{CFT} \pm g_i \int d^2 x~ \vp_i(x)
1796: \,\,\,\,\, , \,\,\,\, i=1,\ldots,4
1797: \label{action0}
1798: \EN
1799: The qualitative form of the effective potential relative to
1800: the different off--critical deformations of the TIM is shown
1801: in figure 4. In addition to the spectrum of the off--critical
1802: excitations, for each field theory we will present the main
1803: formulae involved in our estimation of the universal amplitude
1804: ratios of this model. Some aspects of the calculations of the
1805: correlation functions and the VEV are also discussed, refering
1806: to the appendices for all technical details. Here it is worth
1807: to comment on an interesting feature of the Conformal Perturbation
1808: Theory common to all deformations, i.e. the appearance of
1809: logarithmic terms both in some VEV and in the calculation of
1810: some susceptibilities. The origin of some of these term can be
1811: traced back to the existence of some peculiar resonance conditions
1812: involving the anomalous dimensions of this model. The first
1813: of them is given by
1814: \EQ
1815: \Delta_1 = \Delta_3 + \Delta_4 -1 \,\,\,,
1816: \label{resonance1}
1817: \EN
1818: which is equivalent to say that the scale dimensionality of the
1819: coupling $g_1$ equals the product of $g_3$ and $g_4$, namely
1820: $g_1 \sim g_3 g_4$. It is easy to see that this resonance
1821: condition may influence the calculation of some susceptibilities.
1822: In fact, even though each individual off--critical field theory
1823: is defined by the one--coupling action (\ref{action0}), nevertheless
1824: the calculation of the susceptibilities $\hat\Gamma^i_{jk}$ requires
1825: to consider initially the multi--coupling action
1826: \EQ
1827: {\cal A} = {\cal A}_i^{\pm} +
1828: g_j \int d^2 x~ \vp_j(x)
1829: + g_k \int d^2 x~ \vp_k(x) \,\,\,,
1830: \label{multi-action}
1831: \EN
1832: and to take the limit $g_j = g_k =0$ only at the end of the
1833: calculation. Hence, the resonance condition $g_1 \sim g_3 g_4$
1834: may spoil the naive form of the above action (\ref{multi-action})
1835: with the presence of additional terms. Explicit examples of
1836: this phenomenon are commented in the next sections. Another
1837: resonance condition which also influence some of the calculations
1838: is given by
1839: \EQ
1840: \Delta_6 = 1 + \Delta_4 - \Delta_2 \,\,\,,
1841: \label{resonance2}
1842: \EN
1843: where $\Delta_6 = \frac{3}{2}$ is the anomalous dimension
1844: of the irrelevant field $\varepsilon"$.
1845:
1846: \subsection{The Magnetic $\varphi_1$ Deformation}
1847:
1848: This is the most relevant deformation of the TIM and the only
1849: non--integrable one. Hence, most of the results relative to this
1850: deformation are obtained by the help of the numerical approach.
1851: The numerical analysis of the spectrum, first performed in
1852: \cite{LMC}, shows that there are two different one--particle
1853: states with mass ratio $m_2/m_1 \sim 1.61$ (see Figure 2).
1854: By setting the value of the first mass to be 1, its relationship
1855: with the coupling constant $g_1$ is numerically determined to be
1856: \EQ
1857: m_1 = {\cal C}_1 \,
1858: g_1^{{40\over 77}} \,
1859: \approx 3.242...\,
1860: g_1^{{40\over 77}} \,\,\,.
1861: \EN
1862: The VEV of the different fields have been numerically computed
1863: and their values are in Table \ref{tvevphi1}. By applying
1864: eq.\,(\ref{Gescond}), it is easy to check that there is no
1865: UV mixing of the operators for this deformation and therefore
1866: no need for their UV renormalization. In order to compute the
1867: various susceptibilities, we have decomposed
1868: $\int d^2 x ~\la \vp_i(x) \vp_j(0) \ra_1$ into
1869: the two integrals $I_1(R)$ and $I_2(R)$, as discussed in Section 4.
1870: The UV part of the correlator has been approximated by the short
1871: range expansion (\ref{correl}) with the employed values of
1872: $(C_{ij}^p)^{(1)}_1$ reported in Table \ref{tc1}. They were
1873: computed as explained in appendix B. For the IR part
1874: of the correlator, the non--integrable nature of this deformation
1875: forces us to truncate the spectral expansion to the one--particle
1876: contributions only
1877: \EQ
1878: \la \vp_i(x)\vp_j(0)\ra \,\approx\,
1879: \sum\limits_{l=1}^2 F_l^{\vp_i} F_l^{\vp_j} K_0(m_l|x|) \,\,\,.
1880: \label{correlir}
1881: \EN
1882: The numerical estimation of the one--particle Form Factors $F_l$,
1883: expressed in opportune units of $g_1$, can be found in Table \ref{tff1}.
1884:
1885: As a concrete example of the above procedure, let us consider
1886: the correlator $\la\vp_2(x)\vp_2(0)\ra_1$. Its UV expansion reads:
1887: \bea
1888: \la \vp_2(r)\vp_2(0)\ra & = & r^{-4\D_2} \left[ 1+c_1 B_{41}
1889: \left({m_1r\over {\cal C}_1}\right)^2 + (C_{22}^1)^{(1)}_1
1890: B_{11} \left({m_1r\over {\cal C}_1}\right)^{2}\right.\nn + \\
1891: &&+ \left. (C_{22}^3)^{(1)}_1 B_{31}
1892: \left({m_1r\over {\cal C}_1}\right)^{{14\over 5}} +
1893: {\cal O}((m_1r)^3) -(B_{21})^2
1894: \left({mr\over {\cal C}_1}\right)^{4\D_2} \right]~.
1895: \eea
1896: The above expression is expected to provide an accurate approximation
1897: of the correlator up to $m_1r \sim 1$. Indeed, in a plot
1898: of the UV and the IR approximations of this correlator (Figure 5),
1899: a satisfactory overlap between the two curves is observed around
1900: $m_1 r \sim 1$: this makes us confident on the estimation of the
1901: susceptibility extracted by integrating the above correlator.
1902: The same situation occurs for the other susceptibilities and the
1903: final results are in good agreement with those extracted by the
1904: $\Delta$--theorem sum rule or their direct numerical estimation
1905: by TCSA. All these data are reported in Table \ref{tchi1}.
1906: The only exceptions consist in the calculation of the
1907: susceptibilities $\Gamma_{34}^1$ and $\Gamma_{44}^1$ for
1908: which some care is required due to the anomalous dimensions
1909: of the fields involved and to some subtleties in the
1910: conformal perturbation expansion of $C_{ij}^p(g;x)$.
1911: In these case, for instance, the naive numerical
1912: integration of the corresponding correlators cannot
1913: be performed because of their divergences at $r\to 0$.
1914: Let us first consider $\Gamma_{44}^1$. A natural way to
1915: regularise the integral $\int d^2 x ~\la \vp_4(x) \vp_4(0)
1916: \ra_1$ which near $r \to 0$ goes as $2\pi \int dr r^{-7/5}$,
1917: consists in introducing a UV cut-off $a$ so that its UV
1918: divergence is easily extracted
1919: \EQ
1920: \Gamma_{44}^1 = {5\pi\over a^{{2\over 5}} } +
1921: \makebox{\rm finite \,part}\,\,\,.
1922: \EN
1923: Once this divergence is subtracted, the finite part of the integral,
1924: being cut-off independent, may be regarded as the {\it actual}
1925: regularized susceptibility. For the magnetic deformation its value is
1926: in Table \ref{tchi1} with $5-10\%$ of approximation and
1927: this quantity can be used later on in the evaluation of the universal
1928: ratios. The same strategy has been also adopted for the evaluation
1929: of the susceptibilities $\Gamma_{44}^i$ relative to the other
1930: deformations of the TIM since the divergence of the integral is
1931: simply due to the conformal properties of the field $\varphi_4(x)$
1932: and does not depend on the particular deformation considered.
1933:
1934: The situation is different for $\Gamma_{34}^1$. In this
1935: case, by using the operator product expansion, it is easy to
1936: see that the integral $\int d^2 x ~\la \vp_3(x) \vp_4(0) \ra_1$
1937: behaves in the UV region as
1938: \EQ
1939: \int_a^R \frac{dr}{r} \,\,\, ,
1940: \EN
1941: and therefore it presents a logarithmic divergence
1942: \bea
1943: \Gamma_{34}^1 & = & {3\pi\over 2} \,B_{11} \ln\left(
1944: {\Lambda\over a}\right) + G\nn \\
1945: & = & -{3\pi\over 2(2-2\D_1)} \,B_{11}
1946: \ln\left({g_1\over g_1^0}\right) + G \,\,\, ,
1947: \label{gamma34}
1948: \eea
1949: where $G$ is the finite part. When $B_{11}$ is different from $0$,
1950: $G$ is not uniquely defined since it varies by changing the value
1951: of $g_1^0$. Hence, contrary to the previous case, the finite part of
1952: the integral cannot be used to define universal ratios although
1953: the amplitude in front of the logarithmic term is an unambiguous
1954: quantity in QFT which may enter universal combinations. It is worth
1955: pointing out that this situation is not peculiar of the TIM
1956: but it is already familiar in the context of studying the specific
1957: heat dependence in the standard two--dimensional Ising model (see, for
1958: instance \cite{DelfinoIsing}). Obviously the above considerations apply
1959: for all the susceptibilities $\Gamma_{34}^i$ relative to the
1960: other deformations of the TIM.
1961:
1962:
1963: \subsection{The Thermal $\vp_2$ Deformation}
1964: \label{vp2pert}
1965: This is an integrable deformation of the TIM \cite{MC,FZ}. When
1966: $g_2 > 0$, the coupling to the thermal field moves the TIM in
1967: its high--temperature phase, where a unique $Z_2$ symmetric
1968: vacuum state is present. When $g_2 < 0$, we reach the
1969: low--temperature phase of the model, where there is a
1970: spontaneously breaking of the $Z_2$ spin symmetry and
1971: therefore two degenerate symmetric vacua. In the high--temperature
1972: phase there are ordinary massive particle excitations whereas
1973: in the low--temperature phase there are kink excitations and bound
1974: states thereof. The two phases are related each to the other by
1975: a duality transformation. The off--critical model possesses
1976: higher conserved charges whose spins are $s=1,5,7,9,11,13,17$
1977: (module $18$), i.e. the Coxeter exponents of the exceptional
1978: algebra $E_7$. The integrable structure of this deformation
1979: originates from the conformal decomposition (\ref{E7WZWM}) together
1980: with the pairing of the energy operator $\epsilon(x)$ with the
1981: adjoint representation of the WZW model on $(E_7)_2$ \cite{EY}.
1982: The existence of an infinite number of conservation laws
1983: implies the elasticity and factorization of the scattering amplitudes.
1984: These amplitudes have been computed in \cite{MC,FZ} and their
1985: concise expressions can be found in Table 2 of ref.\,\cite{AMV}.
1986: The exact mass spectrum of the excitations can
1987: be extracted from the pole structure of the $S$ matrices (see
1988: Table \ref{tspectrum}). With respect to the $Z_2$ spin symmetry
1989: of the model, in the high--temperature phase there are three
1990: $Z_2$ odd particle states (the ones relative to the masses
1991: $m_1$, $m_3$ and $m_6$) and four $Z_2$ even (those relative
1992: to the masses $m_2$, $m_4$, $m_5$ and $m_7$). In the
1993: low--temperature phase, the three $Z_2$ odd particle
1994: states become kink excitations interpolating between
1995: the two degenerate ground states whereas the four $Z_2$
1996: even ones play the role of breather states. This leads, in
1997: particular, to an interesting prediction on the universal
1998: ratio of the correlation lengths {\em above} and {\em below}
1999: the critical temperature. In fact, if the correlation length
2000: is defined according to the leading exponential falling off
2001: of the spin--spin connected correlation function in the
2002: limit $\mid x\mid \gg \xi^{\pm}$
2003: \EQ
2004: \langle 0 \mid \vp_1(x) \vp_1(0) \mid 0\rangle_c^{\pm}
2005: \sim \exp\left(-\frac{\mid x\mid}{\xi^{\pm}}\right)
2006: \,\,\, ,
2007: \label{falling}
2008: \EN
2009: (where the indices $\pm$ refer to the high and low temperature
2010: phases respectively), from the $Z_2$ symmetry property of the
2011: $\sigma$ field, the self--duality of the model and the
2012: spectral representation of the above correlator we have
2013: \EQ
2014: \frac{\xi^+}{\xi^-} = \frac{m_2}{m_1} = 2 \cos\frac{5\pi}{18} =
2015: 1.28557...
2016: \label{xiuniv}
2017: \EN
2018:
2019: For this deformation the relationship between the mass--gap $m_1$
2020: and the coupling constant $g_2$ is given by $m_1 = {\cal C}_2\,
2021: g_2^{{5\over 9}}$ where \cite{fateev}
2022: \bea {\cal C}_2 &=&
2023: \left({2{\Gamma({2\over9})}\over{\Gamma({2\over3})}
2024: {\Gamma({5\over9})}}\right)
2025: \left({4\pi^2\Gamma({2\over5}){\Gamma({4\over5})}^3
2026: \over{\Gamma({1\over 5})}^3{\Gamma({3\over 5})} }
2027: \right)^{5/18} = 3.7453728362 \dots
2028: \eea
2029: The VEV's of all relevant operators, both in the high or in the low
2030: temperature phases, have been computed in \cite{russian2} and their
2031: values successfully compared with their numerical determination
2032: \cite{GM1}: the expressions of the expectation values of the
2033: operators $\sigma$ and $\epsilon$ are finite, whereas those of
2034: the operators $\sigma'$ and $\epsilon'$ are {\it naively} divergent
2035: (see eq.\,(\ref{VEVepsilon})) and need therefore a regularization
2036: (see Appendix C). They are presented in Table \ref{tvev}, in opportune
2037: units of the associate power of the coupling constant. Concerning the
2038: UV properties of the fields, eq.\,(\ref{Gescond}) predicts that there
2039: is no UV mixing of the operators for this deformation and therefore
2040: no need to implement their UV renormalization.
2041:
2042: Let us now turn the attention to the computation of the various
2043: susceptibilities by following the strategy explained in Section
2044: 4. The values of the coefficients $(C_{ij}^{p})^{(1)}_2$ entering
2045: the UV expansion of the correlators are in Table \ref{tc2}. As
2046: a concrete example of these calculations, let us discuss the
2047: susceptibility amplitude $\Gamma_{11}^2$ relative to the correlator
2048: $\la \vp_1(x)\vp_1(0)\ra_2$. Its UV expansion reads:
2049: \bea
2050: \la \vp_1(r)\vp_1(0)\ra_2 & = & r^{-4\D_1} \left[ 1 + c_5 B_{22}
2051: \left({mr\over {\cal C}_2}\right)^{{1\over 5}}
2052: +c_7 B_{42} \left({mr\over {\cal C}_2}\right)^{{6\over 5}}+
2053: (C_{11}^{0})^{(1)}_2
2054: \left({mr\over {\cal C}_2}\right)^{{9\over 5}}\right.\nn\\
2055: &&+ \left. (C_{11}^{2})^{(1)}_1 B_{22} \left({mr\over {\cal C}_2}
2056: \right)^{2}
2057: -(B_{12})^2 \left({mr\over {\cal C}_2}\right)^{4\D_1} +
2058: {\cal O}((mr)^3)\right]\,\,\,.
2059: \eea
2060:
2061: \no The IR part of the correlator is approximated by taking initially
2062: into account the first four one--particle states of the spectral
2063: expansion of the correlator (see eq. (\ref{spectral}))
2064: \EQ
2065: \la \vp_i(x)\vp_j(0)\ra \approx \sum\limits_{l=1}^4
2066: F_l^{\vp_i} F_l^{\vp_j} K_0(m_l|x|) \,\,\,.
2067: \EN
2068: The numerical values of the needed one--particle Form Factors are
2069: in Tables \ref{tff2} and \ref{tff2m}, relative to the high and low
2070: temperature phases respectively. Although these matrix elements are
2071: already able to reproduce with a reasonable accuracy the infrared part
2072: of the correlator, due to integrability of this deformation some
2073: two--particle Form Factors are also available and therefore they can
2074: be used to improve the estimation of the correlators. Their calculations,
2075: together with some subtleties which occur in this case, are discussed
2076: in Appendix D. The Form Factors of the operator $\epsilon(x)$, which
2077: plays the role of the trace of the stress--energy tensor for this
2078: deformation, were computed in ref.\,\cite{AMV}.
2079:
2080: The above strategy has been applied for the estimation of all
2081: the correlators. An overlap between the UV and IR approximations
2082: of the correlators has been usually observed in the region $m_1 r
2083: \sim 1$, which may be regarded as a consistent check of our
2084: approach. Such overlap is shown in Figure 6 for
2085: the correlator $\la\vp_1(x)\vp_1(0)\ra_2$.
2086:
2087: In closing this subsection, some comments are in order for
2088: Table \ref{tc2} which collects the values of the first corrections
2089: to the structure constants in the thermal deformation. Three of
2090: these coefficients contain some logarithmic dependence which
2091: however do not particularly influence the numerical approximation of
2092: the short--distance of the correlators since these are
2093: higher--order corrections. The presence of these logarithms
2094: are due to a resonance phenomenon between the conformal families,
2095: i.e. it occurs when the conformal dimensions of two operators differ
2096: for an integer number of times $1-\Delta$, where $\Delta$ is
2097: the dimension of the perturbing operator. This situation is
2098: encountered here because $$\D_{6}-\D_{4} = (1-\D_{2}).$$ Hence,
2099: we have for instance $(C_{11}^4)^{(1)}_2(mr) = a_1(\ln(mr)+b_1(m))$
2100: with the coefficient $a_1$ that can be computed by using the methods
2101: explained in Appendix 2. Since its algebraic expression is rather
2102: cumbersome, we prefer to report here just its numerical value
2103: $a_1 = -0.1510653\dots$. While $a_1$ is an unambigous quantity in
2104: QFT, the other term $b_1(m)$, on the contrary, is a scale dependent
2105: quantity. Similar resonance phenomena are also encountered in
2106: the sub--leading magnetic deformation of the TIM, which is the
2107: subject of the next subsection, where they play a more important
2108: role since they contribute to the lower orders in the UV expansion.
2109:
2110: \subsection{The Sub--leading Magnetic $\vp_3$ Deformation}
2111: \label{vp3pert}
2112:
2113: This is an integrable perturbation \cite{Smirnov12,CKM}.
2114: It is generated by the less relevant magnetic field and
2115: obviously breaks the $Z_2$ spin symmetry of the critical
2116: point since the field $\vp_3$ is a $Z_2$ odd operator.
2117: The resulting massive theory presents some interesting
2118: features, as first outlined in ref.\,\cite{LMC}. The theory
2119: presents two degenerate albeit asymmetrical vacua (denoted
2120: by $|0_2\ra$ and $|0_4\ra$). There are two massive kink
2121: excitations of mass $m$ and one breather bound state thereof with
2122: the same mass. The exact $S$--matrix of this theory has been
2123: computed and analyzed in \cite{CKM}. The relationship between the
2124: coupling constant $g_3$ and the mass gap of the theory is provided
2125: by $m = {\cal C}_3 g_3^{{8\over 9}}$ with the constant ${\cal C}_3$
2126: given by \cite{fateev}
2127: \bea
2128: {\cal C}_3 & = &{ \sqrt3\,\Gamma\big({1\over 3}\big)\,
2129: \Gamma\big({5\over 9}\big) \over \pi\, \Gamma\big(
2130: {8\over 9}\big)}\ \biggl[\, {\pi^2\, \Gamma^2\big({11 \over 16}
2131: \big)\, \Gamma\big({1\over 4}\big) \over \Gamma^2\big({5\over 16}
2132: \big)\, \Gamma\big({3\over 4}\big) }\, \biggr]^{{4\over 9}} =
2133: 4.92779064\dots
2134: \eea
2135: The VEV's of relevant operators $\vp_1$, $\vp_2$, $\vp_3$ have been
2136: exactly computed in \cite{russian2}. The expression of the VEV's
2137: $\la 0_s| \vp_4|0_s\ra$, $s=2,4$ given by eq.\,(\ref{VEVsigma'})
2138: are {\it a priori} divergent and need to be regularized. As shown
2139: in Appendix C and also discussed below, they present a logarithmic
2140: dependence on the coupling constant $g_3$. The complete set of VEV,
2141: expressed in unit of the appropriate power of the coupling constant,
2142: are in Table \ref{tvev3}. Notice that, according to the formula
2143: (\ref{Gescond}), the only field which requires an ultraviolet
2144: renormalization is precisely the field $\vp_4(x)$ which mixes
2145: (logarithmically) with the field $\vp_1(x)$ under perturbation
2146: theory.
2147:
2148: The application of the $\Delta$--theorem sum rule allows the
2149: exact determination of the four susceptibilities $\Gamma_{3j}^3$
2150: (as already discussed in Section 6.1, the susceptibility $\Gamma_{34}^3$
2151: contains a logarithmic dependence on the coupling constant $g_3$).
2152: Also for this deformation we have followed the general strategy
2153: explained in Section 4, i.e. we have first pursued the matching
2154: between the UV and the IR expansions of the correlators and then
2155: we have performed their integration for extracting the susceptibilities.
2156: Let us discuss the correlator $\langle\vp_1(r)\vp_1(0)\rangle_3$
2157: to exemplify some new difficulties arising in the perturbative
2158: evaluation. Its UV expansion is given by
2159: \bea
2160: \langle\vp_1(r)\vp_1(0)\rangle_3 &=&r^{-4\Delta_{1}} \left(
2161: 1+c_5 B_{23} \left({mr\over {\cal C}_3}\right)^{{1\over 5}}
2162: +c_7 B_{43} \left({mr\over {\cal C}_3}\right)^{{6\over 5}}
2163: +(C_{11}^1)^{(1)}_3 B_{13} \left({mr\over {\cal C}_3}\right)^{{6\over 5}}
2164: \right. \nn\\
2165: &+& \left. (C_{11}^{3})^{(1)}_3(r) B_{33} \left({mr\over
2166: {\cal C}_3}\right)^{2} + \dots
2167: -(B_{13})^2 \left({mr\over {\cal C}_3}\right)^{4\Delta_{1}}
2168: \right) \,\,\,.
2169: \eea
2170: There are two different sources of problems in this expansion.
2171: First of all, the VEV $ \la \vp_4 \ra_3$ contains a logarithm
2172: dependence on the coupling and a UV regularization is needed.
2173: By using eq.\,(\ref{gamma34}) and the $\Delta$--theorem
2174: sum rule
2175: \EQ
2176: B_{43}=-{(1-\Delta_{3})\over \D_{4}}\,\Ga_{34}^3~,
2177: \EN
2178: it can be easily shown that
2179: \EQ
2180: B_{43} = -{3\pi(1-\D_3)\over 2 \D_4} B_{13}
2181: \left(\ln{\Lambda\over \epsilon} + G_3 \left({\Lambda\over \epsilon}\right)~\right)
2182: = {3\pi\over 4 \D_4} B_{13} \left(\ln{g_3\over g_3^0} +
2183: \tilde{G}_3 \left(
2184: {g_3\over g_3^0}\right)~\right) \,\,\, ,
2185: \EN
2186: where $\epsilon$ is some arbitrary UV cut-off and $\Lambda\sim \xi_3^0$.
2187: Secondly, the coefficient $(C_{11}^1)^{(1)}_3$ contains some logarithmic
2188: divergences due to resonance problems already encountered in the
2189: thermal perturbation and cannot be calculated by using the Mellin
2190: transformation method in the usual manner. However, the Mellin
2191: transformation method can be properly generalized to obtain the
2192: correct logarithmic term, as we show in the following.
2193: $(C_{11}^1)^{(1)}_3(r)$ is defined as usual by the regularized integral
2194: (notice that we have restored the dependence on $r$)
2195: \EQ
2196: (C_{11}^1)^{(1)}_3(r)=-\int' d^2 z \la
2197: \vp_1(\infty)\vp_1(r) \vp_3(z)\vp_1(0)\ra \,\,\,.
2198: \EN
2199: Using notation of Appendix A, $(C_{11}^1)^{(1)}_3(r)$ may be regarded
2200: as the {\it regularized} limit $s\rightarrow 0$ of
2201: \bea
2202: \tilde{G}(2-s;r)&=&\int d^2z \,|z|^{-s}\,\la \vp_1(\infty)\vp_1(r)
2203: \vp_3(z)\vp_1(0)\ra \nonumber \\
2204: &=&r^{-s}\int \int d^2z d^2u |u|^{2a}|u-1|^{2b}
2205: |u-z|^{2c}|z|^{2d-s}|z-1|^{2e}
2206: \label{tildeGr}
2207: \eea
2208: where the coefficients $a,b,c,d,e$ are expressed in terms of the
2209: weights by the Coulomb gas formalism and $s$ is the Mellin transformation
2210: parameter. After putting $r=1$ in the previous equation, we have
2211: \EQ
2212: \tilde{G}(2-s;1)=-\frac{{3\pi\over 8} c_1}{s} +{\cal O}(1) \,\,\,,
2213: \EN
2214: i.e. there is a first order pole which does not allow us to calculate
2215: $(C_{11}^1)^{(1)}_3$ in the usual manner. However, by multiplying the
2216: previous expression with the expansion (see
2217: (\ref{expcorrectionexp}))
2218: \EQ
2219: r^{-s} = m^s(mr)^{-s} = [1-s\ln mr + {\cal O}(s^2)] \,\,\,,
2220: \EN
2221: where m is an arbitrary mass scale, we obtain the expansion in $s$
2222: \EQ
2223: \tilde{G}(2-s;r)=-\frac{{3\pi\over 8} c_1}{s} + {3\pi\over 8} c_1
2224: \ln mr + {\cal O}(1) \,\,\,.
2225: \EN
2226: Hence, $(C_{11}^1)^{(1)}_3(r)$ may be taken as the regularized version
2227: of the previous expression, i.e. the one obtained by discarding the
2228: simple pole divergence
2229: \EQ
2230: (C_{11}^1)^{(1)}_3(r) = {3\pi\over 8} c_1 (\ln (mr)+ \makebox{\rm const})
2231: \,\,\, ,
2232: \EN
2233: where the constant term clearly depends on the scale $m$. By looking
2234: at eq.\,(\ref{tildeGr}) and by taking into account the dependence of
2235: $a,b,c,d,e$ on the weights of the primary fields, it is easy to see
2236: that a shift of the parameter $\xi$, defined in eq.\,(\ref{xieta}),
2237: $\xi=\frac{p}{p'-p}\rightarrow \xi+\epsilon$ would have
2238: led to the same result, with $\epsilon$ playing the r\^ole of $s$.
2239: The two terms in $\left({mr\over {\cal C}_3}\right)^{{6\over 5}}$ lead
2240: in the correlator to
2241: \EQ
2242: {3\pi\over 8} c_1 B_{13}\left({mr\over {\cal C}_3}\right)^{{6\over 5}}
2243: (\ln(mr) + A(m)) \,\,\,,
2244: \EN
2245: where $A$ is a cut-off dependent quantity which can be determined
2246: by requiring the matching between the infrared expansion of the
2247: correlator with its UV part. The infrared part is approximated by the
2248: one--particle Form Factors of the magnetic and thermal operators
2249: (which are reported in Table \ref{tff3}). There is a non-trivial
2250: consistency check of the above procedure. Indeed, the correlation
2251: function can be computed in the two different vacua $|0_2\ra$
2252: and $|0_4\ra$. Once the quantity $A$ has been fixed by computing
2253: the correlator $\la 0_2|\vp_1(r)\vp_1(0)|0_2\ra$, the same $A$
2254: should also work for the other correlator $\la 0_4|\vp_1(r)
2255: \vp_1(0)|0_4\ra$, as it is indeed the case.
2256:
2257: The above procedure has been also employed for the correlators
2258: $\la\vp_2(r)\vp_2(0)\ra_3$ and for $\la\vp_1(r)\vp_2(0)\ra_3$. For
2259: this deformation, however, we were unable to reach any definite
2260: result on those correlators involving the $\vp_4$ operator because
2261: its one--particle FF were completely inaccurate, thus preventing a
2262: reliable evaluation of the infrared part of the correlators. The results
2263: for all the susceptibilities we were able to compute for this deformation
2264: are in Table \ref{tchi3}.
2265:
2266: \subsection{The Vacancy Density $\vp_4$ Deformation}
2267: \label{vp4pert}
2268:
2269: The field theories originated by the perturbation $t(x) =\vp_4(x)$
2270: with $g_4 > 0$ and $g_4 < 0$ are both integrable \cite{Zamthree}.
2271: The most elegant way to get an insight on these quantum field
2272: theories is to use the supersymmetric formulation of the TIM
2273: \cite{ZamLG,Kastor,Zamthree}. Since the field $t(x)$ is the top
2274: component of the superfield (\ref{superfield}), the off--critical
2275: dynamics may be described by the action
2276: \EQ
2277: {\cal A} = \int d^2x \, d^2\theta \,
2278: \left[ \frac{1}{2} {\cal D} {\cal N} \,
2279: {\bar {\cal D}} {\cal N}
2280: + {\cal N}^3 + g_4 \,{\cal N} \right]\,\,\, .
2281: \label{offsuper}
2282: \EN
2283: After eliminating $t(x)$ by its algebraic equation of motion,
2284: the interaction terms of the above lagrangian are given by
2285: \EQ
2286: \overline\psi \psi \,\epsilon + \frac{1}{2} \left(
2287: \frac{1}{2} \epsilon^2 + g_4\right)^2 \,\,\,.
2288: \label{interaction}
2289: \EN
2290: Hence, for $g_4 > 0$ the ground state energy is nonzero and
2291: supersymmetry is spontaneously broken: the scalar field acquires
2292: a mass whereas the fermionic field remains massless and plays
2293: the role of goldstino. This is nothing but the Majorana
2294: fermionic field of the familiar two--dimensional Ising model
2295: which is in fact the ending point of the massless Renormalization
2296: Group flow originating from the $g_4 > 0$ deformation \cite{Kastor}.
2297: On the massless Majorana fermion of the Ising model supersymmetry is
2298: implemented non--linearly. The exact massless $S$--matrix has
2299: been computed in \cite{Zammassless} and the related massless
2300: Form Factors in \cite{DMSmassless}. The crossover phenomena,
2301: where the exponents characterizing the leading singularity
2302: of an observable change from its tricritical to its critical
2303: value, have been studied in \cite{DMSmassless}. Along this
2304: flow, the conformal dimension of the magnetization field
2305: changes from its tricritical value $\frac{3}{80}$ to
2306: $\frac{1}{16}$ of the Ising fixed point, the conformal
2307: dimension of the energy operator varies from $\frac{1}{10}$
2308: to $\frac{1}{2}$ and finally the conformal dimension of the
2309: vacancy density operator changes from $\frac{6}{10}$ to $2$,
2310: since this operator becomes -- at the end of the Renormalization
2311: Group flow -- a descendent of the Identity operator. The
2312: sub--leading magnetization operator also becomes at the end
2313: of the RG flow a descendent of the magnetization field of the
2314: Ising model. For the massless nature of this theory we will
2315: not compute the relative universal amplitude ratios.
2316:
2317: For $g_4 < 0$ the ground state energy vanishes therefore
2318: supersymmetry is unbroken and both the scalar and the
2319: fermion fields become massive. As argued in \cite{Zamthree},
2320: to describe the dynamics of the system it is more convenient
2321: to adopt the usual Landau--Ginzburg potential in terms of the
2322: order parameter $\sigma(x)$. This potential presents three--fold
2323: degenerate vacua, labelled by $|0_{-1}\ra, ~|0_0\ra, ~|0_{+1}\ra$,
2324: where $|0_0\ra$ corresponds to the disordered vacuum and
2325: $|0_{\pm 1}\ra$ to the two disordered vacua, symmetrically placed
2326: with respect to the origin (see Figure 4). The elementary
2327: excitations in this phase are massive kinks, which interpolate
2328: between the ordered vacuum and the disordered vacua and are
2329: denoted by $K_{0\pm 1}$ or $K_{\pm 1 0}$. The associated scattering
2330: theory has been discussed in \cite{Zamthree,delfino99}.
2331:
2332: Let us consider the amplitude ratios for this deformation. The VEV
2333: of $\la \vp_1\ra_4$ and $\la \vp_2\ra_4$ can be directly computed by
2334: using eq.\,(\ref{VEVepsilon'}), since the integral converges. The
2335: VEV's of $\vp_3$ contains a logarithm divergence and is calculated
2336: in Appendix C. This is the mirror situation encountered in Section
2337: \ref{vp3pert} for the VEV's $\la \vp_4\ra_3$ and therefore it can
2338: be fixed as in the previous subsection:
2339: \EQ
2340: \la \vp_3 \ra_4 = {3\pi\over 4 \D_3} B_{14} \left(
2341: \ln{g_4\over g_4^0} + \makebox{\rm const} \right)~.
2342: \EN
2343: Finally, by supersymmetry we expect $\la \vp_4\ra_4 = 0$, because
2344: the field $\vp_4(x)$ plays the role of the trace of the stress--energy
2345: tensor for this deformation and indeed this is in agreement with
2346: formula (\ref{VEVepsilon'}). The values of the VEV may be found
2347: in Table \ref{tvev4}.
2348:
2349: Concerning the UV properties of the theory, there are two
2350: fields which need renormalization. The first is the sub--leading
2351: magnetization $\sigma'(x)$, which mixes logarithmically
2352: with the magnetization field $\sigma(x)$. The second is
2353: the vacancy density field $t(x)$, which mixes with the
2354: energy density $\epsilon(x)$. To avoid the difficulties
2355: related to the mixing induced by renormalization, for
2356: this deformation it is convenient to rely only on the
2357: Form Factor expansion for estimating the correlation functions.
2358: In fact, all fields, except the sub--leading magnetization
2359: $\sigma'(x)$, turn out to be uniquely identified by
2360: their symmetry properties. Moreover, the spectral series
2361: based on the Form Factor are also able in this case
2362: to capture successfully the ultraviolet behavior of the
2363: correlators \cite{delfino99}. Hence, for this deformation
2364: the integrals (\ref{I1I2}) will be estimated only in terms of
2365: $I_2(0)$, i.e. $I \simeq I_2(0)$. The two--particle matrix
2366: elements on the kink states for the operators $\vp_1, ~\vp_2$
2367: and $\vp_4$ have been calculated in \cite{delfino99} by using
2368: a mapping of the TIM onto the dilute q-state Potts model,
2369: with $q=2$. All these operators are coupled to states with
2370: zero topological charge, i.e. to those multi--kink states
2371: which begin and end to the the same vacuum. There are two
2372: types of such two--kink Form Factors, depending whether
2373: the vacuum\footnote{Note that we use a different notation
2374: for the vacua compared to the one used in \cite{russian2}.
2375: These notations enable us to specify more clearly the disorder
2376: vacuum $|0_0\ra$ (with zero magnetization) and the two ordered
2377: vacua $|0_{\pm 1}\ra$ (with $\pm 1$ magnetization).}
2378: is $|0_0\ra$ or $|0_{\pm 1}
2379: \ra$
2380: \bea
2381: F_{0\pm 1}^{\vp_i}(\theta_1-\theta_2) &\equiv&\la 0_0|\vp_i|
2382: K_{0\pm 1}(\theta_1)K_{\pm 1 0}(\theta_2)|0_0\ra \,\,\,;\\
2383: F_{\pm 1 0}^{\vp_i}(\theta_1-\theta_2) &\equiv&\la 0_{\pm 1}|
2384: \vp_i|K_{\pm 10}(\theta_1)K_{0\pm 1}(\theta_2)|0_{\pm 1}\ra
2385: \,\,\,,
2386: \eea
2387: where $\vp_i$ designs the operator under consideration.
2388: The Form Factors can be conveniently parameterized as
2389: \bea
2390: &&F^{\vp_i}_{0\pm 1}(\th)=F^{\vp_i}_-(\th)\,\,,\hspace{1cm} i=2,4 \\
2391: &&F^{\vp_i}_{\pm 10}(\th)=F^{\vp_i}_+(\th)\,\,,\hspace{1cm} i=2,4\\
2392: &&F^{\vp_1}_{0\pm 1}(\th)=\pm F^{\vp_1}_-(\th)\,\,,\\
2393: &&F^{\vp_1}_{\pm 10}(\th)=\pm F^{\vp_1}_+(\th)\,\,\,,
2394: \eea
2395: and their expressions are given by \cite{delfino99}
2396: \bea
2397: && F^{\vp_4}_{\pm}(\th)=-i\pi m^2e^{\pm\frac{\gamma}{2}(\pi+i\th)}\,
2398: \frac{\cosh\frac{\th}{2}}{\sinh\frac{1}{4}(\th-i\pi)}\,F_0(\th)\,\,,
2399: \\
2400: && F^{\vp_2}_{\pm}(\th)=\pm i(\la 0_{\pm 1}|\vp_2|0_{\pm 1}
2401: \ra-\la 0_{0}|\vp_2|0_{0}\ra )\,
2402: \frac{e^{\pm\frac{\gamma}{2}(\pi+i\th)}}
2403: {4\sinh\frac{1}{4}(\th-i\pi)}\, F_0(\th)\,\,,\\
2404: && F^{\vp_1}_{\pm}(\th)=\mp\frac{\la 0_{+ 1}|\vp_1|0_{+1}\ra}
2405: {2\Upsilon_+(i\pi)}\,
2406: \frac{e^{\pm\frac{\gamma}{2}(\pi+i\th)}}{\cosh\frac{\th}{2}}\,
2407: \Upsilon_\pm(\th)F_0(\th)\,\,,
2408: \eea
2409: with
2410: \[
2411: F_0(\th)=-i\sinh\frac{\th}{2}\,\exp\left\{\int_0^\infty-\frac{dx}{x}\,
2412: \frac{ \sinh(\frac{3x}{2})}{\sinh 2x\cosh\frac{x}{2}}\,
2413: \frac{\sin^2(i\pi-\th)\frac{x}{2\pi}}{\sinh x}\right\}\,\,,
2414: \]
2415: \[
2416: \Upsilon_+(\th)=\exp\left\{2\int_0^\infty\frac{dx}{x}\,
2417: \frac{\sinh(\frac{p}{2}-1)x}{\sinh\frac{px}{2}}\,
2418: \frac{\sin^2(2i\pi-\th)\frac{x}{2\pi}}{\sinh 2x}\right\}\,\,,
2419: \]
2420: \[
2421: \Upsilon_-(\th)=\Upsilon_+(\th+2i\pi)\,\,,
2422: \]
2423: \[
2424: \gamma={1\over 2\pi}\ln 2\,\,\,.
2425: \]
2426: With the knowledge of the first Form Factors, the spectral
2427: representations of the correlation functions involving
2428: the fields $\vp_1(x)$, $\vp_2(x)$ and $\vp_4(x)$ are
2429: approximated by
2430: \bea
2431: \langle 0_0|\vp_i(x)\vp_j(0)|0_0\rangle \simeq \sum_{k=\pm}
2432: \int_{\th_1>\th_2}\frac{d\th_1}{2\pi}\frac{d\th_2}{2\pi}
2433: F^{\vp_i}_{0\pm 1}(\th_1-\th_2)F^{\vp_j}_{0\pm 1}(\th_2-\th_1)
2434: \,e^{-|x|E_2}
2435: \,\,\, ; \label{approx1}\\
2436: \langle 0_{\pm 1}|\vp_i(x)\vp_j(0)|0_{\pm 1}\rangle \simeq
2437: \int_{\th_1>\th_2}\frac{d\th_1}{2\pi}\frac{d\th_2}{2\pi}
2438: F^{\vp_i}_{\pm 10}(\th_1-\th_2)F^{\vp_j}_{\pm 10}(\th_2-\th_1)\,
2439: e^{-|x|E_2}
2440: \,\,\,,\label{approx2}
2441: \eea
2442: where $i,j=1,2,4$ and $E_2=m(\cosh\th_1+\cosh\th_2)$ is the
2443: energy of the two-kink asymptotic state. By integrating the
2444: above expressions, one can obtain the associated amplitudes.
2445: The convergence of the above spectral series has been successfully
2446: checked against the $\Delta$--theorem sum rule (when this applies)
2447: \cite{delfino99}. Our results for the amplitudes are in Table
2448: \ref{tchi4}.
2449:
2450: \resection{Conclusions}
2451:
2452:
2453: In this paper we have exploited some powerful techniques of
2454: Quantum Field Theory in order to compute an ample set of universal
2455: amplitude ratios for the scaling region of the two--dimensional
2456: Tricritical Ising Model. The determination of the thermodynamical
2457: amplitudes entering the universal ratios has been obtained
2458: by combining exact non-perturbative results coming from CFT (UV
2459: theory) and from Scattering Theory (IR theory). More specifically,
2460: we have used the ultraviolet data provided by CFT for setting up
2461: an Operator Product Expansion (and computing the first order
2462: approximation to the structure constants), and for finding
2463: eigenvalues and eigenvectors of the off-critical hamiltonian
2464: by a numerical approach. In addition, we have used non--perturbative
2465: approaches related to the integrability of several deformations
2466: of the model to obtain important infrared data, as for instance
2467: the exact values of the Vacuum Expectation Values of the order
2468: parameters, the exact spectra of the massive excitations and the
2469: first Form Factors. A judicious use of the ultraviolet and
2470: infrared properties of the various fields which span the scaling
2471: region of the model have allowed us to reduce significantly
2472: the analytic efforts necessary to compute the universal ratios.
2473: Some of these quantities can be found in Tables 22--26\footnote{
2474: In the calculation of the universal ratios, we have used
2475: the exact values of the susceptibilities when available
2476: from the $\Delta$--theorem sum rule, otherwise we have
2477: used the arithmetic mean of their determinations obtained
2478: by the fluctuation--dissipation theorem and the numerical
2479: TCSA.}. As already pointed out in the text, this large set
2480: of quantities may be quite useful for an experimental
2481: investigation of the critical properties of this class of
2482: universality and we hope that the results presented in this
2483: paper may stimulate such experimental activity. It would be equally
2484: interesting to extend the theoretical approach discussed here to
2485: other two--dimensional models in order to reach a full control
2486: of the classes of universalities of low--dimensional systems.
2487:
2488:
2489: \vspace{5mm}{\em Acknowledgements}. We are pleased to thank
2490: Michele Caselle, Alexander and Alexei Zamolodchikov for useful
2491: discussions. This work has been done under partial support of the
2492: EC TMR Programme ERBFMRXCT960012 {\em Integrability,
2493: non-per\-turba\-tive effects and symmetry in
2494: Quantum Field Theories}. D.F. would like to thank I.N.F.N.
2495: for a fellowship and S.I.S.S.A. for hospitality.
2496:
2497:
2498: \newpage
2499:
2500:
2501: \appendix
2502:
2503:
2504: \section{Mellin regularization scheme}
2505: The aim of this appendix is to discuss a regularization of
2506: the integrals (\ref{firstorderc}). They can be written as
2507: \EQ
2508: C_{ij}^{p(1)} = -\int ' d^2w \, g(w,\bar{w}) \,\,\,,
2509: \label{analytic}
2510: \EN
2511: with
2512: \EQ
2513: g(w,\bar{w}) \equiv \langle \tilde{A}^p(\infty)
2514: \tilde{\Phi}(w) \tilde{\varphi}_i(1) \tilde{\varphi}_j(0)
2515: \rangle_{CFT}.
2516: \EN
2517: A regularized version of the divergent integrals (\ref{firstorderc})
2518: is provided by the following function of the large distance cut-off
2519: $R \equiv 1/a$
2520: \EQ
2521: I(a) = -\int d^2w \,\Theta(a|w|) \,g(w,\bar{w}) \,\,\,,
2522: \label{regularization}
2523: \EN
2524: where the cut--off function $\Theta(t)$ has a fast
2525: decreasing behavior at $t\rightarrow +\infty$ to make
2526: the integral convergent and is equal to $1$ for $t\rightarrow
2527: 0^+$. Of course $I(a)$ diverges for $a\rightarrow 0^+$ in
2528: a way that depends on the particular choice of $\Theta(t)$,
2529: but it converges to a finite value for $a\rightarrow +\infty$
2530: thanks to the fast decreasing behavior of the cut--off function.
2531: The finite part of the integral (\ref{regularization}) is independent
2532: of the parameter $a$ and furnishes its natural regularization.
2533: It coincides with the analytic continuation of the integral
2534: (\ref{analytic}) from those regions of the conformal weights for
2535: which it converges. The finite part of the integral can be explicitly
2536: calculated by means of the Mellin transform of the complex function
2537: $I(a)$ defined by
2538: \EQ
2539: \tilde{I}(s) = \int_0^\infty\frac{da}{a} a^s I(a) \,\,\,.
2540: \EN
2541: In fact, when the Mellin transform have simple poles, it
2542: provides the asymptotic expansion in powers of $a$ of the
2543: function $I(a)$ according to the formula
2544: \EQ
2545: I(a) = \sum_i {\makebox {\rm Res}} [a^{-s}\tilde{I}(s)]_{s=s_i} \,\,\,,
2546: \EN
2547: where the sum runs over the poles. In our cases the above
2548: sum is finite since the theory presents only a finite number
2549: of IR divergent terms. The finite part of $I(a)$ is therefore
2550: given by
2551: \EQ
2552: I_0 = {\makebox {\rm Res}} [\tilde{I}(s)]_{s=0} =
2553: \lim_{s\rightarrow 0}s\tilde{I}(s) \,\,\,.
2554: \EN
2555: Finally, we also need the following theorem on convolution:
2556: if the function $I(a)$ has the form of a convolution (as in
2557: equation (\ref{regularization})), then its Mellin transform
2558: is given by
2559: \EQ
2560: \tilde{I}(s) = -\tilde{\Theta}(s) \, \tilde{G}(2-s) \,\,\, ,
2561: \EN
2562: where $\tilde{\Theta}(s)$ is the Mellin transform of $\Theta(t)$ and
2563: $\tilde{G}(s)$ may be considered as the Mellin transform
2564: of the angular integral of $g(|w|,arg(w))$ with respect to the radial
2565: coordinate $|w|$
2566: \EQ
2567: \tilde{G}(2-s) = \int d^2w \,|w|^{-s}\,g(w,\bar{w})\,\,\,.
2568: \label{tildeG}
2569: \EN
2570: In our calculation we have used for $\Theta(t)$ the function
2571: \EQ
2572: \Theta(t) = e^{-t} \,\,\, ,
2573: \EN
2574: whose Mellin transformation is the Gamma function
2575: \EQ
2576: \tilde{\Theta}(s) = \Gamma(s)\,\,\,.
2577: \EN
2578: For the calculation of $\tilde{G}(2-s)$ we refer the reader
2579: to the next appendix.
2580:
2581: \section{ Calculation of the $(C_{ij}^{p(1)})_k$}
2582:
2583: In this appendix, we show how to compute the first correction to
2584: the structure constants, i.e. the finite part of
2585: \EQ
2586: (C_{ij}^p)^{(1)}_k= \int\limits^{'} \la
2587: \vp_p(\infty) \Phi_k(w)\vp_j(1)\vp_i(0)\ra \,d^2w\,\,\,.
2588: \EN
2589: The conformal four--point correlation functions
2590: entering the integral may be computed by means of the
2591: modified Coulomb Gas methods \cite{DF}. In this approach
2592: the central charge $c$ is parameterized by
2593: \bea
2594: c = 1-24\alpha_0^2~~
2595: &;&~~\alpha_{\pm}=\alpha_0\pm\sqrt{\alpha_0^2+1};\\
2596: \alpha_+\alpha_- &=&-1 \,\,\,.\nonumber
2597: \eea
2598: The vertex operators are defined by $V_{nm}(x) =
2599: :e^{i\alpha_{nm}\Phi(x)}:$ where $\Phi(x)$ is a free scalar
2600: field and the charges $\alpha_{nm}$ defined by
2601: \EQ
2602: \alpha_{nm} = {1\over 2}(1-n)\alpha_-+{1\over 2}(1-m)\alpha_+~.
2603: \EN
2604: The conformal dimension of the operator $V_{nm}(x)$ is given by
2605: $
2606: \Delta_{nm} = -\overline{\alpha_{nm}}\alpha_{nm}$
2607: with
2608: \EQ
2609: \overline{\alpha_{nm}} = 2\alpha_0-\alpha_{nm} =
2610: {1\over 2}(1+n)\alpha_-+{1\over 2}(1+m)\alpha_+~.
2611: \EN
2612: The integrals encountered in the our computation
2613: were of two types.
2614:
2615: In the first case, no screening charge is needed, therefore they
2616: can be computed in a straightforward way. For instance, this is
2617: the case of the integral of the $4$-point correlation function
2618: $\la\vp_1(x_1)\vp_2(x_2)\vp_2(x_3)\vp_3(x_4)\ra$. As an example,
2619: we provide the calculation of $(C_{22}^3)^{(1)}_1$
2620: in the magnetic deformation of the TIM:
2621: $$
2622: (C_{22}^{3(1)})_1 = -\int\limits^{'}\la
2623: \vp_3(\infty)\vp_2(1)\vp_1(z)\vp_2(0)\ra~. $$
2624: Since $2\alpha_{12}+\alpha_{22}+\alpha_{21}=2\alpha_0$,
2625: no screening charge is needed.
2626: Therefore,
2627: \EQ
2628: (C_{22}^{3(1)})_1 = N\int d^2 z~ |z|^{-{1\over 5}}|z-1|^{-{1\over 5}}
2629: \,\,\,,
2630: \EN
2631: where $N$ is a normalization factor which is fixed by the operator
2632: algebra and the structure constants (see Table 2):
2633: $$
2634: N=c_4 c_5 = {1\over 2}\sqrt{ { \Gamma({4\over 5})\Gamma^{3}({4\over 5})
2635: \over \Gamma({1\over 5})\Gamma^{3}({3\over 5}) } } \,\,\,.
2636: $$
2637: Using
2638: $$
2639: \int d^2 z~ |z|^{2a} |z-1|^{2b} = -S(b) \,B(1+a,1+b)\,
2640: B(1+b,-1-a-b)~,
2641: $$
2642: with
2643: \[
2644: B(\alpha,\beta) = { \Gamma(\alpha)\Gamma(\beta)\over
2645: \Gamma(\alpha+\beta) }
2646: \,\,\,\,\,\,\,,
2647: \,\,\,\,\,\,\,
2648: S(x) \equiv \sin\pi x\,\,\,,
2649: \]
2650: we find:
2651: \EQ
2652: (C_{22}^{3(1)})_1 = - {25\over 32} { S^2({1 \over 10})
2653: S^{{1\over 2}}({1\over 5}) \over S^{{3\over 2}}({2 \over 5}) }
2654: { \Gamma^4({9\over 10})\Gamma({1\over 5}) \over \Gamma^3({3\over 5}) }
2655: \,\,\,.
2656: \EN
2657:
2658: In the second case, one screening operator is needed and the integral
2659: takes the following form:
2660: \EQ
2661: Z(a,b,c,d,e) = \int d^2w\int d^2 z
2662: |z|^{2a}|1-z|^{2b}|w-z|^{2c}|w|^{2d}|1-w|^{2e} \,\,\,.
2663: \EN
2664: The exponents $a,b,c,d,e$ are computed in the Coulomb gas formalism
2665: \cite{DF}. Notice that the exponent $d$ is in fact $d'-s/2$, where
2666: $s$ comes from the Mellin regularization scheme (see Appendix A).
2667: It can be shown using transformations in the complex plane
2668: that \cite{DF}
2669: \bea
2670: Z(a,b,c,d,e)&= &
2671: S(a+c)^{-1}\int d^2w |w|^{2d} |1-w|^{2e}\times \nn\\
2672: & &
2673: \left[S(a+b+c)S(b)|I_1(a,b,c;w)|^2+S(a)S(c)|I_2(a,b,c;w)|^2\right]
2674: \,\,\,,
2675: \nn
2676: \eea
2677: where
2678: \bea
2679: I_1(a,b,c;\eta)&\equiv&
2680: {\Gamma(-a-b-c-1)\Gamma(b+1)\over\Gamma(-a-c)}
2681: {}_2F_1(-c,-a-b-c-1;-a-c;\eta)\nn\\
2682: I_2(a,b,c;\eta)&\equiv&
2683: \eta^{1+a+c}
2684: {\Gamma(a+1)\Gamma(c+1)\over\Gamma(a+c+2)}
2685: {}_2F_1(-b,a+1;a+c+2;\eta)
2686: \,\,\,.\eea
2687: The generalized hypergeometric functions are defined by
2688: $${}_pF_q(a_1,\cdots,a_p;b_1,,\cdots,b_q;z)
2689: \equiv\sum_{k=0}^{\infty} {(a_1)_k\cdots (a_p)_k\over k!
2690: (b_1)_k \cdots (b_q)_k} z^k \,\,\,,$$
2691: with $(a)_k\equiv\Gamma(a+k)/\Gamma(a)$.
2692:
2693:
2694: There are several ways to compute $Z(a,b,c,d,e)$. We have used
2695: two equivalent methods in order to have a non-trivial check. Let
2696: us explain briefly them for completeness.
2697:
2698: $\bullet$ The first method is the one considered in \cite{GM2}.
2699: Using monodromy properties of the integral,
2700: we can write $Z$ as :
2701: $$Z=z_{11}J_1^2+z_{22}J_2^2+z_{12}J_1J_2~,$$
2702: with
2703: \bea
2704: J_1 &\equiv& \int\limits_0^1 z^d(1-z)^eI_1(a,b,c,z) =
2705: B(b+1,-a-b-c-1) \, B(d+1,e+1) \nn\\
2706: & &\,\,\,\times
2707: {}_3F_{2}(-c,-a-b-c-1,d+1;-a-c,2+d+e;1) \,\,\, ,
2708: \eea
2709: and
2710: \bea
2711: J_2 &\equiv& \int\limits_0^1 z^d(1-z)^eI_2(a,b,c,z) =
2712: B(a+1,c+1) \, B(2+a+c+d,e+1) \nn \\
2713: & & \,\,\, \times {}_3F_{2}(-b,a+1,2+a+c+d;a+c+2,3+a+c+d+e;1)\,\,\, .
2714: \eea
2715: In these formulae the $z_{ij}$ are defined by:
2716: \bea
2717: z_{11}& =&
2718: -{1\over 4} S(a+c)^{-2} S^{-1}(c + d + e)S^{-1}(a + b + c + d + e)
2719: \times\nn\\
2720: & &
2721: S(b)S(a + b + c)S(d) \times\nn\\
2722: & &
2723: ( S(b - c - d) - S(b + c - d) + S(b + c + d) -
2724: S(2 a + b + c + d) \nn\\
2725: & &
2726: - S(b + c + d + 2 e) +
2727: S(2 a + b + 3 c + d + 2 e)) \\
2728: z_{22} &=& {1\over 4} S(a+c)^{-2}
2729: S^{-1}(c + d + e)S^{-1}(a + b + c + d + e)\times\nn\\
2730: & &
2731: S(a)S(c)S(a + c + d)\times\nn\\
2732: & &
2733: (S(a + b - d) + S(a - b + d) - S(a + b + d) +
2734: S(a + b + 2 c + d) \nn\\
2735: & &
2736: - S(a - b - d - 2 e) -
2737: S(a + b + 2 c + d + 2 e)) \\
2738: z_{12} & =& 2 S(a+c)^{-2}
2739: S^{-1}(c + d + e)S^{-1}(a + b + c + d + e)
2740: \times \nn\\
2741: & &
2742: S(a)S(b)S(c)S(a + b + c)S(d) S(a + c + d)
2743: \eea
2744:
2745: $\bullet$ The second method is the one considered in \cite{DPP}.
2746: It consists in decomposing $Z$ into its holomorphic and
2747: antiholomorphic parts:
2748: \EQ
2749: \label{int}
2750: I = s(b) s(e) \left[ J_1^+ J_1^- + J_2^+ J_2^-\right]
2751: + s(b) s(e+c) J_1^+ J_2^- + s(b+c) s(e) J_2^+ J_1^- \,\,\,,
2752: \EN
2753: where
2754: \bea
2755: \label{jis}
2756: J_1^+ &=& J(a,b,c,d,e)~;~J_2^+ = J(b,a,c,e,d)\,\,\,; \nn \\
2757: J_1^- &=& J(b,-2-a-b-c,c,e,-2-d-e-c) \,\,\,;\\
2758: J_2^- &=& J(-2-a-b-c,b,c,-2-d-e-c,e) \,\,\,,\nn
2759: \eea
2760: with the notation
2761: \begin{eqnarray*}
2762: \label{hyp}
2763: && J(a,b,c,d,e) =
2764: \int\limits_{0}^{1} du \int\limits_{0}^{1} dv~
2765: u^{a+d+c+1} (1-u)^b v^{d}(1-v)^{c} (1-uv)^{e} = B(1+c,1+d) \times\\
2766: && \times B(2+a+d+c,1+b) {}_3F_2(-e,2+c+d,1+d,3+a+b+c+d,2+c+d;1)\nn.
2767: \end{eqnarray*}
2768: The $J$ integrals appearing in (\ref{int}) are not independent.
2769: Using a contour deformation it can be shown that they are
2770: related as
2771: \EQ
2772: \label{rel1}
2773: S(a+b+c)J_1^- + S(a+b)J_2^- = {S(a)\over S(c+d+e)}
2774: \left( S(d) J_1^+ + S(c+d)J_2^+ \right) \,\,\,;
2775: \EN
2776: \EQ
2777: \label{rel}
2778: S(c+d+e)J_2^- + S(d+e)J_1^- = {S(d)\over S(a+b+c)}
2779: \left( S(a) J_2^+ + S(a+c)J_1^+ \right) \,\,\,.
2780: \EN
2781: This has the advantage that some of the $J_i^{\pm}$
2782: can be computed in an easier way than others.
2783:
2784: In most cases, we were able to compute exactly these types of
2785: integrals in terms of a product of Gamma functions
2786: by using some known relations of hypergeometric functions at argument
2787: $z=1$ \cite{Prud}. Given their cumbersome expressions, the results
2788: are not reported here. When no close forms were available, the integrals
2789: were determined numerically (using the two different representations
2790: above) by directly calculating the hypergeometric functions ${}_3F_2(z)$
2791: at $z=1$. In this case, we used fast convergent expressions of the
2792: hypergeometric functions in order to reach rather accurate results
2793: (with approximately 0.5 \% of confidence).
2794:
2795: We have performed the above set of calculations for the magnetic,
2796: thermal and submagnetic perturbations. The results are in Tables
2797: \ref{tc1}, \ref{tc2} and \ref{tc3}. We did not pursue this calculation
2798: for the vacancy density perturbation for the UV difficulties explained
2799: in the text and also because in this case Form Factors were expected
2800: to provide a reasonable approximation of the correlators in all
2801: range of $r$.
2802:
2803:
2804:
2805: \section{Regularization of the VEV's.}
2806: The VEV's of primary operators $\Phi_{l,k}$ in the minimal models
2807: $\cM_{p,p'}$ perturbed by an integrable relevant operator
2808: $\phi_i$ have been conjectured in \cite{russian2}. They can
2809: be written as
2810: \EQ
2811: \langle0_s|\Phi_{l,k}|0_s\rangle = B_{(l,k),i,s}(\xi,\eta) \,
2812: g^{\frac{\Delta_{l,k}}{1-\Delta_i}} \,\,\,,
2813: \label{VEVg1}
2814: \EN
2815: where $s$ labels the different vacua. The prefactor
2816: $B_{(l,k),i,s}(\xi,\eta)$ can be further decomposed
2817: as
2818: \EQ
2819: B_{(l,k),i,s}(\xi,\eta) = b_{(l,k),i,s}(\xi) \, Q_i(\xi,\eta)
2820: \,\,\,,
2821: \EN
2822: where $b_{(l,k),i,s}(\xi)$ is a simple function for any perturbation
2823: $\phi_i$ and any vacuum $|0_s\rangle$ whereas $Q_i(\xi,\eta)$ can
2824: be expressed as
2825: \EQ
2826: Q_i(\xi,\eta) = e^{I_i(\xi,\eta)} \virg I_i(\xi,\eta)=\int_0^{+\infty} dt
2827: F_i(t;\xi,\eta)\,\,\,.
2828: \label{I_i}
2829: \EN
2830: In Section 4 we have presented the explicit formulae for the three
2831: integrable deformations of the TIM. The above integral may diverge for
2832: some values of the two parameters
2833: \EQ
2834: \xi = \frac{p}{p'-p} \virg \eta=(\xi +1)l-\xi k \,\,\,.
2835: \label{xieta}
2836: \EN
2837: In fact, due to the asymptotic behavior of $F_i(t;\xi,\eta)$
2838: \EQ
2839: F_i(t;\xi,\eta)\sim e^{-a_i(\xi,\eta)t}
2840: \virg t\rightarrow +\infty \,\,\,,
2841: \label{F_i}
2842: \EN
2843: this occurs when $a_i(\xi,\eta)\leq 0$. In this case,
2844: the integral $I_i(\xi,\eta)$ needs to be regularized in order to extract
2845: its physical value. Its regularization may be performed in a number
2846: of equivalent ways, for instance by means of an analytic prolongation
2847: in $\xi$ (from values for which $Q_i(\xi,\eta)$ converges), possibly
2848: also using a sufficient number of times the reflection equations
2849: satisfied by the VEV. Here we present another simple method of controlling
2850: the divergences of $I_i(\xi,\eta)$, specializing our discussion to the
2851: VEV $\langle \Phi_{2,1}\rangle_4$ of the sub-leading magnetization
2852: operator of the TIM in the massive phase reached by the perturbation
2853: of the vacancy operator $\phi_{1,3} \equiv t\equiv \vp_4$, with $g_4 < 0$.
2854: This example, somehow, presents all possible types of divergences of
2855: the above integrals. Let us consider initially the general expression
2856: of the function $F$ in the case of $\phi_{1,3}$ perturbation \cite{russian2}
2857: \EQ
2858: F_{1,3}(t;\xi,\eta)=\frac{1}{t}\left(
2859: \frac{\cosh2t\, \sinh(\eta-1)t}{2\cosh t \,
2860: \sinh(\xi t) \sinh(\xi+1)t}-\frac{\eta^2-1}{2\xi(\xi+1)}
2861: e^{-4t}\right) \,\,\,.
2862: \label{F_{1,3}}
2863: \EN
2864: In our example $\xi=4$ and $\eta=6$, hence
2865: \EQ
2866: I_{4}(4,6) = \int_0^{+\infty} dt \,F_{4}(t;4,6) \virg
2867: F_{4}(t;4,6) = \frac{1}{t}\left(\frac{\cosh2t\, \sinh7t}
2868: {2\cosh t \,\sinh4t}-\frac{7}{8}
2869: e^{-4t}\right) \,\,\,,
2870: \label{divergentintegral}
2871: \EN
2872: and the asymptotic behavior
2873: \EQ
2874: F_{4}(t;4,6) \sim e^{4t}
2875: \virg t\rightarrow +\infty
2876: \label{F_{epsilon'}}
2877: \EN
2878: leads to the divergence of the above integral.
2879: The complete VEV under investigation can be expressed as
2880: \EQ
2881: \langle0_s|\sigma'|0_s\rangle = \frac{\sin\frac{3}{2}\pi s}
2882: {\sin\frac{\pi}{4}s}\,
2883: \left(\frac{5}{2}\right)^{\frac{7}{8}}\,
2884: \left[\pi\frac{21}{25}|g_4|\sqrt{\frac{\Gamma(\frac{1}{5})
2885: \Gamma(-\frac{7}{5})}{\Gamma(\frac{4}{5})
2886: \Gamma(\frac{12}{5})}}\right]^{\frac{35}{32}}\,Q_{4}(4,6)\,\,\,,
2887: \label{sigma'VEV}
2888: \EN
2889: where $s = 1,2,3$ labels the three different vacua. Assuming a
2890: regularization of $Q_{4}(4,6)$, notice that for $s=2$
2891: the first term in (\ref{sigma'VEV}) implies
2892: \EQ
2893: \langle0_s|\sigma'|0_s\rangle = 0 \,\,\,.
2894: \EN
2895: To compute $I_4(4,6)$, let us break the integral as
2896: \EQ
2897: I_{4}(4,6) = \int_0^1 dt \,F_{4}(t;4,6) + \int_1^{+\infty} dt\,
2898: F_{4}(t;4,6) \,\,\,.
2899: \EN
2900: The first integral is always convergent since, in general
2901: \EQ
2902: \lim_{t\rightarrow 0} F_{1,3}(t;\xi,\eta) = \makebox{\rm const} \,\,\,,
2903: \EN
2904: thanks to a compensation between the two terms in (\ref{F_{1,3}}).
2905: Hence it is sufficient to make an analytic prolongation of the
2906: second integral by subtracting its divergent part. This can be
2907: done by expressing initially the second integral as
2908: \EQ
2909: \int_1^{+\infty} dt F_{4}(t;4,6) = \int_1^{+\infty}
2910: \left( F_{4}(t;4,6) - \frac{e^{4t}}{2t} + \frac{e^{2t}}{2t}\right)
2911: \,dt + Y(-4)- Y(-2) \,\,\,,
2912: \label{analyticprolongation}
2913: \EN
2914: and then by making an analytic prolongation of the function
2915: \EQ
2916: Y(a) = \int_1^{+\infty} \frac{dt}{t} e^{-at} \virg \Re e(a) > 0
2917: \,\,\,,
2918: \label{Y}
2919: \EN
2920: to the domain $\Re e(a)\leq 0$. Notice that although the analytic
2921: extension of the function $Y(a)$ is not monodromic ($a=0$ is in
2922: fact a branch--cut point), its exponential $e^{Y(a)}$ is however
2923: uniquely defined and this is precisely the expression which enters
2924: the formula (\ref{sigma'VEV}) for the VEV. In the punctured complex
2925: plane $a \in \bC -\{0\}$ we have
2926: \EQ
2927: e^{Y(a)} = \frac{e^\gamma}{a} e^{-f(a)} \,\,\,,
2928: \label{e^Y}
2929: \EN
2930: where $\gamma=0.577216\dots$ is the Euler-Mascheroni constant and the
2931: holomorphic function $f(a)$ is defined by the power series
2932: \EQ
2933: f(a) = \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} (-1)^n \,\frac{a^n}{n! \,n} \virg a\in\bC
2934: \,\,\,.
2935: \label{f}
2936: \EN
2937: The last series is fastly convergent and allows good numerical
2938: estimations.
2939:
2940: The divergences which appear in the expression of the VEV
2941: proposed in ref.\,\cite{russian2} can be generally tamed as in
2942: eq.\,(\ref{analyticprolongation}) above, i.e. by subtracting the
2943: leading (and subleading) exponential terms and then performing
2944: the analytic continuation of $Y(a)$. However, sometimes
2945: the first term in the r.h.s. of (\ref{analyticprolongation}),
2946: i.e. the integral accompanied by the subtractions, is still
2947: logarithmically divergent. This is in particular the case of
2948: our example of $\langle \varphi_3 \rangle_4$. When this happens,
2949: the pure power law behavior in the coupling constant $g_i$ of the VEV
2950: (\ref{VEVg1}) gets modified. To face this situation, one may
2951: perform an extra regularization of the integral by making a
2952: shift of the parameter $\xi$ which characterizes the minimal models
2953: \EQ
2954: \xi \rightarrow \xi+\epsilon,
2955: \label{shift}
2956: \EN
2957: and then carefully taking the limit $\epsilon\rightarrow 0$. In
2958: our example this results in shifting $4 \rightarrow
2959: 4 + \epsilon$, $6 \rightarrow 6 + \epsilon$ and considering the
2960: expression
2961: \EQ
2962: \int_1^{+\infty}
2963: \left(F_{4}(t;4+\epsilon,6+\epsilon)
2964: - \frac{e^{4t}}{2t} + \frac{e^{2t}}{2t} - \frac{e^{-\epsilon t}}{t}\right)
2965: \, dt + Y(-4) - Y(-2) + Y(\epsilon) \,\,\,.
2966: \label{shiftedformula}
2967: \EN
2968: The limit $\epsilon\rightarrow 0$ of the first integral in the previous
2969: equation is obtained by putting $\epsilon=0$ and hence it can be
2970: calculated by performing a numerical integration. Concerning the
2971: last term, once used to evaluate the VEV, we have
2972: \EQ
2973: e^{Y(\epsilon)} = \frac{e^\gamma}{\epsilon} + {\cal O}(1) \,\,\,.
2974: \label{e^Y(epsilon)}
2975: \EN
2976: Let us consider now the dependence of the VEV on the coupling
2977: constant $g\equiv -g_4$ once the shift (\ref{shift}) has been
2978: performed. We have
2979: \EQ
2980: g^{\frac{35}{32}} \rightarrow g^{\frac{35}{32} +
2981: \frac{13}{128} \epsilon} \,\,\,,
2982: \label{expcorrection}
2983: \EN
2984: since the conformal weights depend on $\xi$. By expanding this
2985: formula in powers of $\epsilon$ we have
2986: \EQ
2987: g^{\frac{35}{32}+ \frac{13}{128}
2988: \epsilon} = (g_0)^{\frac{13}{128}\epsilon} g^{\frac{35}{32}}
2989: \left(\frac{g}{g_0}\right)^{\frac{13}{128}\epsilon} =
2990: g^{\frac{35}{32}}\left[ 1 + \frac{13}{128} \epsilon \,\ln\frac{g}{g_0}
2991: + {\cal O}(\epsilon^2)\right],
2992: \label{expcorrectionexp}
2993: \EN
2994: where we have introduced an arbitrary value of the coupling constant
2995: $g_0$ for taking the logarithm of the adimensional quantity $\frac{g}{g_0}$.
2996: Once this expression is multiplied with eq.\,(\ref{e^Y(epsilon)}),
2997: it gives rise to
2998: \EQ
2999: g^{\frac{35}{32}} \left(
3000: \frac{e^\gamma}{\epsilon} + \frac{13}{128} e^\gamma
3001: \,\ln\frac{g}{g_0} +
3002: {\cal O}(1) \right) \,\,\,.
3003: \EN
3004: In conclusion, in the example of the VEV (\ref{sigma'VEV}),
3005: apart from a divergence $\frac{1}{\epsilon}$ which can be
3006: discarded, it presents a logarithmic part and a
3007: power-law term:
3008: \EQ
3009: \langle0_s|\sigma'|0_s\rangle =
3010: B_{(2,1),4,s}\, g^{\frac{35}{32}}\,\ln\frac{g}{g_0} +
3011: C_{(2,1),4,s} \,g^{\frac{35}{32}}.
3012: \label{logVEV}
3013: \EN
3014: It is important to notice that in the previous expression the constant
3015: $B_{(2,1),4,s}$ is uniquely determined by this procedure and is not
3016: affected by a change of the reference coupling constant $g_0$. Instead,
3017: the second constant $C_{(2,1),4,s}$ may be freely modified by rescaling
3018: the arbitrary value of the reference coupling constant $g_0$.
3019: In this sense, the constant $B_{(2,1),4,s}$ possesses a precise
3020: physical value in QFT and it may enter the definitions of amplitude
3021: ratios as $B$ prefactor.
3022:
3023:
3024:
3025:
3026:
3027: \section{Form Factors in the thermal sector}
3028: \label{ff}
3029:
3030: In this appendix, we will discuss some features of the Form Factors
3031: in the thermal deformation of the TIM. In particular, we will show
3032: that it is necessary to determine independently (for instance by a numerical
3033: method) the one--particle Form Factors of the $\varphi_1$ in order to compute
3034: its higher particle Form Factors. We will discuss these matrix elements
3035: in the high--temperature phase of the model with the mass spectrum and
3036: the $Z_2$ quantum number of the particles given in Table \ref{tspectrum}.
3037: Let
3038: \EQ
3039: F_{\al_1,...,\al_n}(\th_1,...,\th_n) = \langle
3040: 0|\sigma(0)|A_{\al_1}(\th_1...A_{\al_n}(\th_n)\rangle \,\,\,.
3041: \EN
3042: Since $\sigma(x)$ is a $Z_2$ odd operator, the non--vanishing
3043: matrix elements will be those on $Z_2$ odd multi--particle states.
3044: Hence, the matrix elements which contribute to the summation (\ref{defff})
3045: are, in increasing order of total energy of the corresponding states:
3046: $F_1$, $F_3$, $F_{12}$, $F_6$, $F_{14}$, $F_{111}$, $F_{23}$, $F_{15},\dots$.
3047: According to the analysis of ref.\,\cite{DMIMMF,AMV}, the two--particle Form
3048: Factors can be conveniently written as
3049: \EQ
3050: \label{ff2}
3051: F_{ab}^{\sigma}(\th) = F_{ab}^{min}(\th) \,
3052: {{\cal Q}_{ab}^{\sigma}
3053: \over D_{ab}} \,\,\, ,
3054: \EN
3055: where $F_{ab}^{min}$ is the minimal solution of the set of
3056: Watson equations which has neither poles neither zero and
3057: ${\cal Q}_{ab}^{\sigma}$ and $D_{ab}$ are polynomials in
3058: $\cosh\th$. The latter takes into account the pole structure
3059: of this matrix element (independent of the field) whereas
3060: the former depends on the field under consideration, in this case
3061: $\sigma(x)$. To determine the above quantities we need initially
3062: the expression of the elastic two--particle $S$--matrix of the
3063: model \cite{MC,FZ} that can be expressed as
3064: \begin{equation}
3065: \label{smat}
3066: S_{ab}(\theta)=\prod_{\alpha\in {\cal A}_{ab}}
3067: f_{\alpha}(\theta)^{p_{\alpha}}\,\,\,,
3068: \end{equation}
3069: where
3070: \EQ
3071: \label{falpha}
3072: f_{\alpha}(\theta) \equiv
3073: \frac{\tanh\frac{1}{2}(\theta+i\pi\alpha)}
3074: {\tanh\frac{1}{2}(\theta-i\pi\alpha)}\,\,\,.
3075: \EN
3076: The different amplitudes can be found in Table 2 of
3077: ref.\,\cite{AMV} and are not reported here.
3078: The exponents $p_{\alpha}$ denote the multiplicities of the
3079: corresponding poles (located at $\th=i\pi\alpha$ and
3080: $\th=i\pi(1-\alpha)$) identified by the indices $\alpha$.
3081: Correspondingly, $F_{ab}^{\em min}$ is parameterized by:
3082: \EQ
3083: \label{fmin}
3084: F_{ab}^{min}(\th) = \left(-i\sinh\frac{\th}{2}\right)^{\delta_{a,b}}
3085: \prod_{\alpha\in {\cal A}_{ab}} g_{\alpha}(\theta)^{p_{\alpha}} \,\,\, ,
3086: \EN
3087: where $g_{\alpha}(\theta)$ is given by the integral representation
3088: \EQ
3089: \label{gmin}
3090: g_{\alpha}(\theta) =
3091: \exp\left[2\int_0^{\infty}\frac{d t}{t}
3092: \frac{\cosh\left[(\alpha-1/2)t\right]}{\cosh t/2 \sinh t}
3093: \sin^2(\hat{\th}t/2\pi)\right]\,\,\, ,
3094: \EN
3095: with $\hat{\th} = i\pi-\th$. The polynomials $D_{ab}(\th)$ are
3096: entirely determined from the poles of the $S$--matrix. According
3097: to \cite{DMIMMF}, they are given by
3098: \EQ
3099: D_{ab}(\th)=\prod_{\alpha\in {\cal
3100: A}_{ab}} \Bigl({\cal P}_\alpha(\th)\Bigr)^{i_\alpha}
3101: \Bigl({\cal P}_{1-\alpha}(\th)\Bigr)^{j_\alpha} \,\,\,,
3102: \label{dab}
3103: \EN
3104: \EQ
3105: \begin{array}{lll}
3106: i_{\alpha} = n+1\,\,\, , & j_{\alpha} = n \,\,\, , &
3107: \mbox{\rm if} \hspace{1cm} p_\alpha=2n+1\,\,\,; \\
3108: i_{\alpha} = n \,\,\, , & j_{\alpha} = n \,\,\, , &
3109: \mbox{\rm if} \hspace{1cm} p_\alpha=2n\,\,\, ,
3110: \end{array}
3111: \EN
3112: where ${\cal A}_{ab}$ and $p_\alpha$ are defined in eq.
3113: (\ref{smat}) and can be read from Table 2 of ref.\,\cite{AMV}.
3114: The functions
3115: \EQ
3116: \label{pmin}
3117: {\cal P}_{\alpha}(\th) \equiv \frac{\cos\pi\alpha - \cosh\th}
3118: {2 \cos^2\frac{\pi\alpha}{2}}\,\,\, ,
3119: \EN
3120: give a suitable parameterization of the pole of the FF at
3121: $\th=i\pi\alpha$. The asymptotic behavior of $g_{\alpha}(\th)$
3122: and ${\cal P}_{\alpha}(\th)$ is given by
3123: \EQ
3124: g_{\alpha}(\th) \sim e^{{|\th|\over 2}}~~~~;~~~~
3125: {\cal P}_{\alpha}(\th)\sim e^{|\th|}~~~~~~~{\rm for}~~\th\to
3126: \infty \,\,\,.
3127: \EN
3128: An upper bound on the maximal degree of the polynomial
3129: ${\cal Q}_{ab}^{\sigma}$ can be fixed by the constraint
3130: \cite{DMIMMF}
3131: \EQ
3132: \label{asscond}
3133: y \leq \D_{\sigma},
3134: \EN
3135: where $y$ is defined by
3136: \EQ
3137: \label{assbe}
3138: \lim_{|\th_i|\to \infty} ~F_{a_1,...,a_n}(\th_1,...,\th_n)
3139: \sim e^{y |\th_i|} \,\,\,.
3140: \EN
3141: Collecting all the above results, let us consider
3142: the two--particle Form Factor $F_{12}^{\sigma}(\th)$:
3143: \EQ
3144: F_{12}^{\sigma}(\th) = F_{12}^{min}(\th)
3145: {{\cal Q}_{12}^{\sigma} \over
3146: D_{12}(\th)} \,\,\,.
3147: \EN
3148: By using eqs.\,(\ref{asscond}) and (\ref{assbe}), for the degree
3149: $\delta$ of ${\cal Q}_{12}$ we have $\delta \leq 1$. The residue
3150: equations (\ref{pole}) at the simple order poles corresponding to
3151: the bound states supply us with two equations, namely
3152: \EQ
3153: \label{spole}
3154: -i\lim_{\th \rightarrow iu_{ab}^{c}}(\th -iu_{ab}^{c})
3155: F^{\sigma}_{ab}(\th) =
3156: \gamma_{ab}^{c}
3157: F^{\sigma}_{c} \,\, ,
3158: \EN
3159: with $a=1,~b=2,~c=1,3$ and $\gamma_{ab}^{c}$ is given by
3160: \EQ
3161: -i\lim_{\th \rightarrow iu_{ab}^{c}}(\th -iu_{ab}^{c})
3162: S_{ab}(\th)=
3163: \left(\gamma_{ab}^{c}\right)^2~.
3164: \EN
3165: These two equations are able to fix unambiguously $F_{12}^{\sigma}$
3166: provided $F_{1}^{\s}$ and $F_{3}^{\s}$ are known. However, there is
3167: no way to determine these one--particle Form Factors in the bootstrap
3168: program. Notice, in fact, that the above equations are also
3169: satisfied by the two--particle FF of the subleading magnetization
3170: $\sigma'(x)$. Therefore, one needs to extract the one--particle
3171: FF of $\sigma(x)$ and $\sigma'(x)$ by means of some other
3172: independent method, as for instance the one provided by the numerical
3173: Truncated Conformal Space Approach, discussed in Section 5.
3174:
3175: \newpage
3176:
3177: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
3178: \bibitem{universality} M.E. Fisher, {\em Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bf 66}
3179: (1966), 11; R.B. Griffith, {\em Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bf 24} (1970), 1479.
3180: \bibitem{BPZ} A.A. Belavin, A.M. Polyakov, A.B. Zamolodchikov,
3181: {\em Nucl.Phys.} {\bf B 241} (1984), 333
3182: \bibitem{FQS1}D. Friedan, Z. Qiu, S. Shenker, {\em Phys. Rev. Lett.}
3183: {\bf 52} (1984), 1575
3184: \bibitem{DiFMS} P. Di Francesco, P. Mathieu and D. Senechal,
3185: {\em Conformal Field Theory}, Springer--Verlag (New York) 1997.
3186: \bibitem{DF} Vl.S. Dotsenko and V.A. Fateev, {\em Nucl. Phys.}
3187: {\bf B 240 [FS 12]} (1984), 312; {\em Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B 251}, 691 (1985).
3188: \bibitem{Privman} V. Privman, P.C. Hohenberg and A. Aharony,
3189: {\em Universal Critical--Point Amplitude Relations}, in
3190: Phase Transitions and Critical Phenomena, edited by C. Domb and
3191: J.L. Lebowitz (Academic Press Limited, London, 1991), Vol. 14.
3192: \bibitem{SFW} C. Bervillier, {\em Phys. Rev.} {\bf B 14} (1976), 4964;
3193: D. Stauffer, M. Ferer and M. Wortis, {\em Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bf 29}
3194: (1972), 345.
3195: \bibitem{CMpol} J.L. Cardy and G. Mussardo, {\em Nucl. Phys.}
3196: {\bf B 410} (1993), 451.
3197: \bibitem{Zam1} A.B. Zamolodchikov, {\em Int. J. Mod. Phys.} {\bf A 3}
3198: (1988), 743.
3199: \bibitem{DMIMMF} G. Delfino and G. Mussardo,
3200: {\em Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B 455} (1995), 724.
3201: \bibitem{DSIMMF} G. Delfino and P. Simonetti
3202: {\em Phys. Lett.} {\bf B 383} (1996), 450; M. Caselle and
3203: M. Hasenbusch, {\em Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B 579} (2000);
3204: M. Caselle, P. Grinza and N. Magnoli,
3205: {\em Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B 579} (2000), 635.
3206: \bibitem{DelfinoIsing} G. Delfino, {\em Phys. Lett.} {\bf B 419}
3207: (1998), 291.
3208: \bibitem{sokal} J. Salas and A.D. Sokal, {\em J. Stat. Phys.}
3209: {\bf 98} (2000).
3210: \bibitem{GM3} R. Guida and N. Magnoli,
3211: {\em Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B 483} (1997), 563.
3212: \bibitem{JLC} J.L. Cardy, {\em Journ. Phys.} {\bf A 25} (1992), L201.
3213: \bibitem{DelfinoCardy} G. Delfino and J.L. Cardy, {\em Nucl. Phys.}
3214: {\bf B 519} (1998), 551; G. Delfino, G.T. Barkema, J.L. Cardy,
3215: {\em Nucl.Phys.} {\bf B 565} (2000) 521; G. Delfino and J. Cardy,
3216: {\em Phys. Lett.} {\bf B 483} (2000), 303.
3217: \bibitem{Caselle2} M. Caselle, R. Tateo and S. Vinti,
3218: {\em Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B 562} (1999), 549.
3219: \bibitem{prl} D. Fioravanti, G. Mussardo and P. Simon,
3220: {\em Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bf 85} (2000), 126.
3221: \bibitem{ZamLG} A.B. Zamolodchikov, {\em Sov. J. Nucl. Phys.}
3222: {\bf 44} (1986), 529.
3223: \bibitem{EY} T. Eguchi and S.K. Yang, {\em Phys. Lett.} {\bf B 224}
3224: (1989), 373.
3225: \bibitem{MC} P. Christe, G. Mussardo, {\em Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B 330}
3226: (1990), 465.
3227: \bibitem{FZ} V.A. Fateev, A.B. Zamolodchikov,
3228: {\em Int. J. Mod. Phys.} {\bf A 5} (1990), 1025.
3229: \bibitem{Kastor} D.A. Kastor, E.J. Martinec, S.H. Shenker,
3230: {\em Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B 316} (1989), 590
3231: \bibitem{Zammassless} Al.B. Zamolodchikov, {\em Nucl. Phys.}
3232: {\bf B 358} (1991), 524.
3233: \bibitem{DMSmassless} G. Delfino, G. Mussardo and P. Simonetti,
3234: {\em Phys. Rev.} {\bf D 51} (1995), 6620.
3235: \bibitem{Zamthree} A.B. Zamolodchikov, in {\em Beijing 1989, Proceedings
3236: Fields, strings and quantum gravity} 349.
3237: Al.B. Zamolodchikov, {\em Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B 358} (1991), 497.
3238: \bibitem{LMC} M. L\"{a}ssig, G. Mussardo and J.L. Cardy,
3239: {\em Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B 348} (1991), 591.
3240: \bibitem{Smirnov12} F.A. Smirnov, {\em Int. J. Mod. Phys.}
3241: {\bf A 6} (1991), 1407.
3242: \bibitem{CKM} F. Colomo, A. Koubek and G. Mussardo,
3243: {\em Int. J. Mod. Phys.} {\bf A 7} (1992), 5281.
3244: \bibitem{Lawrie} I.D. Lawrie, S. Sarbach, in {\em Phase Transitions and
3245: Critical Phenomena}, vol. 9, C. Domb and J. Lebowitz (Eds.), New York
3246: (Academic Press 1984)
3247: \bibitem{Blume} M. Blume, {\em Phys. Rev.} {\bf 141} (1966), 517;
3248: H.W. Capel, {\em Physica} {\bf 32} (1966), 866; R.B. Griffiths, {\em Physica}
3249: {\bf 33} (1967), 689; M. Blume, V.J. Emery, R.B. Griffiths, {\em
3250: Phys. Rev.} {\bf A 4} (1971), 1071; M.J.Tejwani, O. Ferreira, O.E. Vilches,
3251: {\em Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bf 44} (1980), 152
3252: \bibitem{dilute} S.O. Warnaar, B. Nienhuis and K.A. Seaton,
3253: {\em Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bf 69} (1992), 710; S.O. Warnaar and P.A. Pearce,
3254: {\em Int. J. Mod. Phys.} {\bf A 11} (1996), 291; M.T. Batchelor and
3255: K.A. Seaton, {\em Eur. Phys. J.} {\bf B 5} (1998), 719; J. Suzuki,
3256: hep-th/9911216.
3257: \bibitem{FQS2}D. Friedan, Z. Qiu, S. Shenker, {\em Phys. Lett.}
3258: {\bf B 151 } (1984), 1575
3259: \bibitem{Qiu} Z. Qiu, {\em Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B 270} (1986), 205.
3260: \bibitem{MSS} G. Mussardo, G. Sotkov and M. Stanishkov
3261: {\em Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B 305} (1988), 69.
3262: \bibitem{TBA} Al.B. Zamolodchikov, {\em Nucl. Phys.}
3263: {\bf B 342} (1990), 695.
3264: \bibitem{fateev} V.A. Fateev, {\em Phys. Lett.} {\bf B 324} (1994), 45.
3265: \bibitem{YZ} V.P. Yurov and Al.B. Zamolodchikov,
3266: {\em Int. J. Mod. Phys.} {\bf A 6} (1991), 4557.
3267: \bibitem{russian1} S.Lukyanov and A.B. Zamolodchikov,
3268: {\em Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B 493} (1997), 571.
3269: \bibitem{russian2} V. Fateev, S. Lukyanov, A.B.
3270: Zamolodchikov, Al.B. Zamolodchikov,
3271: {\em Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B 516} (1998), 652.
3272: \bibitem{GM1} R. Guida and N. Magnoli, {\em Phys.Lett.} {\bf B 411}
3273: (1997) 127.
3274: \bibitem{Zamcth} A.B. Zamolodchikov, {\em JEPT Lett.} {\bf 43} (1986), 730;
3275: J.L. Cardy, {\em Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bf 60}
3276: (1988), 2709.
3277: \bibitem{DSC} G. Delfino, P. Simonetti and J.L. Cardy,
3278: {\em Phys. Lett.} {\bf B 387} (1996), 327.
3279: \bibitem{GM2} R. Guida and N. Magnoli,
3280: {\em Int. J. Mod. Phys.} {\bf A 13} (1998), 1145.
3281: \bibitem{ZamYL} Al.B. Zamolodchikov, {\em Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B 348}
3282: (1991), 619.
3283: \bibitem{DMM35} G. Delfino and G. Mussardo,
3284: {\em Phys. Lett.} {\bf B 324} (1994) 40.
3285: \bibitem{AMV} C. Acerbi, G. Mussardo and A. Valleriani,
3286: {\em Int. J. Mod. Phys.} {\bf A 11} (1996) 5327.
3287: \bibitem{Watson} K.M. Watson, {\em Phys. Rev.} {\bf 95} (1954), 228.
3288: \bibitem{KW} M. Karowski, P. Weisz, {\em Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B 139}
3289: (1978), 445.
3290: \bibitem{Smirnov} F.A. Smirnov, Form Factors in Completely Integrable
3291: Models of Quantum Field Theory (World Scientific), 1992
3292: and references therein.
3293: \bibitem{cardy86} J. L. Cardy, {\em Nucl. Phys. } {\bf B 270} [FS16]
3294: (1986) 186; {\em Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B 275} [FS17] (1986) 200.
3295: \bibitem{LM} M. L\"assig and G. Mussardo, {\em Comp. Phys. Comm.}
3296: {\bf 66} (1991) 71.
3297: \bibitem{LeCMus} A. LeClair and G. Mussardo, {\em Nucl. Phys.}
3298: {\bf B 552} (1999), 624.
3299: \bibitem{cluster} A. Koubek and G. Mussardo, {\em Phys. Lett.}
3300: {\bf B 311} (1993), 193.
3301: \bibitem{AMVcluster} C. Acerbi, G. Mussardo and
3302: A. Valleriani, {\em J. Phys.} {\bf A 30} (1997), 2895.
3303: \bibitem{delfino99} G. Delfino, {\em Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B 554} (1999) 537.
3304: \bibitem{DPP} Vl. S. Dotsenko, M. Picco and P. Pujol,
3305: {\em Nucl. Phys.} {\bf B 455}, (1995), 701.
3306: \bibitem{Prud} A. P. Prudnikov, Yu. A. Brychov, O. I. Marichev,
3307: {\it Integral and Series} Vol. 3, Gordon Breach Science Publishers, 1990.
3308: \end{thebibliography}
3309:
3310:
3311: \newpage
3312:
3313: {\bf Table Caption}
3314:
3315: \vspace{3mm}
3316: \begin{description}
3317: \item [Table 1]. Kac table of the Tricritical Ising Model.
3318: \item [Table 2]. Fusion Rules and structure constants of the
3319: TIM for the scalar fields.
3320: \item [Table 3]. Operator content and LG fields.
3321: \item [Table 4]. Nature of QFT's for each
3322: individual deformation of the TIM.
3323: \item [Table 5]. Numerical VEV $B_{ij}$ of the four relevant
3324: operators of the TIM perturbed by the magnetic ($\varphi_1$) operator.
3325: \item [Table 6]. Numerical estimation of the
3326: one--FF in the magnetic deformation in units of
3327: $g_1^{\frac{\Delta_i}{1-\Delta_1}}$.
3328: \item [Table 7]. Numerical values of the first correction of
3329: the structure constants $(C_{ij}^k)^{(1)}_1=-\int ' d^2 z~\la
3330: \vp_k(\infty)\vp_j(1)\vp_1(z)\vp_i(0)\ra$ where $ 1\leq i,j\leq 4$
3331: and $0\leq k\leq 4$ (with the definition $\vp_0\equiv I$, $I$ the
3332: identity operator). The note `2 screening ops.' means that the
3333: calculation would have required two screening operators in
3334: the Coulomb gas integral.
3335: \item [Table 8]. Estimated amplitudes in the magnetic
3336: deformation. The number with $^{\dagger}$ refers to the amplitude
3337: in front of the logarithm. The number with $^*$ refers to
3338: the finite part of the susceptibility.
3339: \item [Table 9]. Mass spectrum in the high--temperature
3340: phase.
3341: \item [Table 10]. Numerical and exact (when available) VEV
3342: $B_{i2}$ of the four relevant operators of the TIM perturbed by
3343: the thermal ($\varphi_2$) operator.
3344: \item [Table 11]. Numerical estimation of the first four
3345: one--particle FF in the high temperature phase in units of
3346: $g_2^{\frac{\Delta_i}{1-\Delta_2}}$. Some of them vanish
3347: in virtue of the $Z_2$ spin reversal symmetry.
3348: \item [Table 12]. Numerical estimation of the
3349: first two one--particle FF in the low
3350: temperature phase in units of $\mid g_2
3351: \mid^{\frac{\Delta_i}{1-\Delta_2}}$.
3352: \item [Table 13]. Numerical values of the first correction
3353: of the structure constants $(C_{ij}^k)^{(1)}_2=-\int ' d^2 z~\la
3354: \vp_k(\infty)\vp_j(1)\vp_2(z)\vp_i(0)\ra$ where $
3355: 1\leq i,j\leq 4$ and $0\leq k\leq 4$ (with the definition
3356: $\vp_0\equiv I$, $I$ the identity operator).
3357: \item [Table 14]. Estimated amplitudes in the high temperature
3358: phase. The number with $^*$ refers to the finite part of the
3359: susceptibility.
3360: \item [Table 15]. Estimated amplitudes in the low temperature phase.
3361: The number with $^{\dagger}$ refers to the exact amplitude in front of the
3362: logarithm. The number with $^*$ refers to the finite part of the
3363: susceptibility.
3364: \item [Table 16]. Exact VEV of the four relevant operators in
3365: $\sigma'$ deformation (from \cite{russian2}). The numbers with
3366: $^\dag$ refer to the amplitudes in front of the logarithm.
3367: \item [Table 17]. Numerical estimation of some one--particle
3368: FF in the subleading magnetic perturbation in units of
3369: $g_3^{\frac{\Delta_i}{1-\Delta_3}}$. Those relative to
3370: $\vp_3$ and $\vp_4$ are not accessible.
3371: \item [Table 18]. Numerical values of the first correction of
3372: some structure constants
3373: $(C_{ij}^k)_3^{(1)}$ with $1\leq i,j\leq 4 $ and $0\leq k\leq 4$.
3374: \item [Table 19]. Estimated amplitudes in the subleading
3375: magnetization deformation for both vacua (the subscripts $a$ and $b$
3376: are respectively for $|0_2\ra$ and $|0_4\ra$) obtained by the integral
3377: of the correlators and some exact sum rules results. The number
3378: with $^{\dagger}$ refers to the amplitude in front of the logarithm.
3379: \item [Table 20]. Exact VEV of the four relevant operators
3380: in $\vp_4\equiv t$ perturbation for $g_4 < 0$ (from \cite{russian2}).
3381: The numbers with $^\dag$ refer to the amplitudes
3382: in front of the logarithm.
3383: \item [Table 21]. Estimated amplitudes in the vacancy density
3384: deformation for the three vacua. The number with $^{\dagger}$ refers
3385: to the amplitude in front of the logarithm.
3386: \item [Table 22]. Amplitude ratios $R^2_{jk}
3387: = {\Gamma_{jk}^{2+}\over \Gamma_{jk}^{2-}}$. The subscripts $2\pm$ indicate
3388: the high or low temperature phases.
3389: \item [Table 23]. Universal ratios $(Q_2)^i_{jk}$ for
3390: $i,j,k=1,2^+,2^-$.
3391: \item [Table 24]. Universal ratios $(R_c)_{jk}^{1}$, $(R_c)_{jk}^{2-}$,
3392: $(R_c)_{jk}^{3a}$ and $(R_c)_{jk}^{3b}$ where $2-$ indicates the
3393: low temperature phase and $3a,3b$ are used to label the two
3394: different vacua $|0_2\ra$ and $|0_4\ra$ in the $g_3\vp_3$
3395: deformation. The other ratios
3396: are provided by the sum rule: $(R_c)^j_{ji}={\D_j \D_i\over (1-\D_j)^2}$.
3397: \item [Table 25]. Universal ratios $R_{\xi}^i$ and
3398: $(R_A)_{j}^{i}$ for $i,j=1,2^-,2^+$.
3399: \item [Table 26]. Universal ratio $(R_{\chi})_{j}^{i}$ for $i,j=1,2,3$.
3400: We also have $(R_{\chi})_{j}^{j}=-{\D_j\over (1-\D_j)}$ according to
3401: the sum rules and $(R_{\chi})_{4}^{j}=0$ because $B_{44}=0.$
3402: \end{description}
3403:
3404:
3405: \newpage
3406: \vspace{3mm}
3407: \begin{table}[t]
3408: \begin{center}
3409: \begin{tabular}{|ccccc|}\hline
3410: \hspace{1mm} &$3 \over 2$ & $7 \over 16$ & $0$ &\hspace{1mm} \\
3411: \hspace{1mm} & $6 \over 10$ & $3 \over 80$ & $1 \over 10$
3412: &\hspace{1mm} \\
3413: \hspace{1mm} &$1 \over 10$ & $3 \over 80$ & $6 \over 10$
3414: &\hspace{1mm} \\
3415: \hspace{1mm} &$0$ & $7 \over 16 $ & $3 \over 2$ &\hspace{1mm} \\
3416: \hline
3417: \end{tabular}
3418: \end{center}
3419: \caption{ \label{tkac}}
3420: \end{table}
3421:
3422:
3423: %{\bf Table 2:} Fusion Rules and structure constants of the Tricritical Ising
3424: %Model for the scalar fields.
3425: \vspace*{1cm }
3426: \begin{table}[h]
3427: \begin{center}
3428: \begin{tabular}{|clc|clc|}\hline
3429: \hspace{1mm} & {\em even} $*$ {\em even} &\hs & \hs & \hs &\hs \\
3430: \hs &$\epsilon*\epsilon=[1]+c_1 \hs [t]$
3431: &\hs &\hs & \hs &\hs \\
3432: \hs & $t * t=[1] +c_2 \hs [t]$ &\hs & \hs
3433: & \hs & \hs\\
3434: \hs &$\epsilon * t =c_1\hs [\epsilon] +c_3\hs [\varepsilon'']$
3435: &\hs &\hs & $c_1=\frac{2}{3}\sqrt{\frac{\Gamma(\frac{4}{5})
3436: \Gamma^3(\frac{2}{5})}{\Gamma(\frac{1}{5})
3437: \Gamma^3(\frac{3}{5})}} $ &\hs\\
3438: \hs &\hs &\hs &\hs &$c_2=c_1$ & \hs \\
3439: \cline{1-3}
3440: \hs & {\em even} $*$ {\em odd} &\hs & \hs & $c_3 ={3\over 7}$ &\hs \\
3441: \hs &
3442: $\epsilon *\sigma'=c_4 \hs [\sigma]$
3443: &\hs &\hs & $c_4={1\over 2} $ &\hs \\
3444: \hs & $\epsilon * \sigma=c_4 \hs [\sigma'] +c_5 \hs [\sigma]$ &\hs
3445: & \hs & $c_5 = {3\over 2}c_1$ &\hs \\
3446: \hs& $t * \sigma'=c_6 \hs [\sigma]$ &\hs &
3447: \hs & $c_6={3\over 4}$ &\hs \\
3448: \hs & $t *\sigma=c_6 \hs [\sigma']+c_7 \hs [\sigma]$
3449: &\hs & \hs & $c_7 = {1\over 4}c_1$ &\hs \\
3450: \hs &\hs &\hs &\hs & $c_8 = {7\over 8}$ &\hs \\
3451: \cline{1-3}
3452: \hs & {\em odd} $*$ {\em odd} &\hs & \hs &
3453: $c_9 = {1\over 56}$ &\hs \\
3454: \hs &
3455: $\sigma'*\sigma' = [1] + c_8 \hs [\varepsilon'']$
3456: &\hs &\hs & \hs &\hs \\
3457: \hs & $\sigma'*\sigma=c_4 \hs [\epsilon] +c_6 \hs [t]$
3458: &\hs
3459: & \hs & \hs &\hs \\
3460: \hs &$\sigma*\sigma=[1]+c_5 \hs [\epsilon]+
3461: c_7 \hs [t]+c_9\hs [\varepsilon'']$
3462: &\hs & \hs & \hs & \hs \\
3463: \hs & \hs & \hs & \hs & \hs &\hs\\
3464: \hline
3465: \end{tabular}
3466: \end{center}
3467: \caption{ \label{tfusion}}
3468: \vspace{1cm}
3469: \end{table}
3470:
3471: \newpage
3472:
3473:
3474:
3475:
3476: \begin{table}[t]
3477: \begin{center}
3478: \begin{tabular}{|ccclcccl|}\hline
3479: \hspace{1mm} & $\sigma$ & = & $[{3 \over 80},{3 \over 80}]$ &=& $
3480: \Phi$ & & magnetization\\
3481: \hspace{1mm} & $\epsilon $ & = & $[{1 \over 10},{1 \over 10}]$ &=&
3482: $\Phi^2$ & &
3483: energy\\
3484: \hspace{1mm} & $\sigma'$ & = & $[{7 \over 16},{7 \over 16}]$ &=&$
3485: \Phi^3$ & & sub-magnetization\\
3486: \hspace{1mm}& $t$ & = & $[{6 \over 10},{6 \over 10}]$ &=&
3487: $ \Phi^4$ & &
3488: vacancy density \\
3489: \hspace{1mm}& $\varepsilon''$ & = & $[{3 \over 2},{3 \over 2}]$ &=&
3490: $ \Phi^6 $
3491: & & irrelevant\\
3492: \hline
3493: \end{tabular}
3494: \end{center}
3495: \caption { \label{tope}}
3496: \vspace{15mm}
3497: \end{table}
3498:
3499: \vspace{3mm}
3500: \begin{table}[h]
3501: %\begin{center}
3502: \begin{tabular}{|c|c||c|c||c||c|c||}\hline
3503: & $g_1$ & $g_2^+$ & $g_2^-$ & $g_3$ & $g_4^+$ & $g_4^-$ \\
3504: \hline
3505: & & & & & & \\
3506: QFT & \mbox{Non-} & \mbox{integrable} &
3507: \mbox{integrable} & integrable & integrable & integrable \\
3508: &\mbox{Integrable} & $E_7$ &
3509: $E_7$ & (kinks) & (massless & (Susy \\
3510: & &(high-temp) &(low-temp) && flow) &kinks) \\
3511: \hline
3512: \end{tabular}
3513: %\end{center}
3514: \vspace{3mm}
3515: \caption {\label{tqft}}
3516: %\end{center}
3517: \vspace{3mm}
3518: \end{table}
3519:
3520:
3521:
3522: %{\bf Table 6}
3523: \begin{table}[h]
3524: \begin{center}
3525: \begin{tabular}{|c || c| c| c| c||}
3526: \hline
3527: ~ & $B_{11}$& $B_{21}$ &$B_{31}$ &$B_{41}$ \\
3528: \hline
3529: %item
3530: \hline
3531: $g_1>0$ (num)& $-1.539(6)$ & $1.35(6)$ & $-1.5(5)$ &$1.9(2)$ \\
3532: \hline
3533: \hline
3534: \end{tabular}
3535: \end{center}
3536: \vspace{3mm}
3537: \caption{\label{tvevphi1}}
3538: \vspace{15mm}
3539: \end{table}
3540:
3541: \newpage
3542:
3543: %{\bf Table 9}
3544: \begin{table}[t]
3545: \vspace{5mm}
3546: \centering
3547: \begin{tabular}{|c || c| c| c| c||}
3548: \hline
3549: ~ & $\varphi_1$& $\varphi_2$ &$\varphi_3$ &$\varphi_4$ \\
3550: \hline
3551: %item
3552: \hline
3553: $\langle0|\varphi|1\rangle_1$ & $- 0.52(0)$ & $1.1(7)$
3554: & $- 4.(9)$ &$7.(4)$ \\
3555: \hline
3556: $\langle0|\varphi|2\rangle_1$& $- 0.2(1)$ & $0.5(6)$
3557: & $- 3.(3)$&$ 5.(8)$ \\
3558: \hline
3559: \end{tabular}
3560: \vspace{3mm}
3561: \caption{\label{tff1}}
3562: \vspace{5mm}
3563: \end{table}
3564:
3565:
3566: \begin{table}[h]
3567: \vspace{3mm}
3568: \begin{center}
3569: \begin{tabular}{|c c c||c c c|}
3570: \hline
3571: $(C_{11}^1)^{(1)}_1$ & = & $2$ screening ops. & $(C_{11}^3)^{(1)}_1$
3572: & = & $-0.018583...$
3573: \\ \hline
3574: $(C_{13}^1)^{(1)}_1$ &$\ap$ & $ -0.482(1)$ & $(C_{13}^3)^{(1)}_1$ &
3575: $\ap$ & $ 0.395(0)$
3576: \\ \hline
3577: $(C_{33}^1)^{(1)}_1$ & = & $ -0.214849...$ & $(C_{33}^3)^{(1)}_1$ &
3578: = & $ 0 $
3579: \\ \hline
3580: $(C_{12}^0)^{(1)}_1$ &= & $-0.112093...$ & $(C_{12}^2)^{(1)}_1$ &
3581: $\ap$ & $ 0.517(2)$
3582: \\ \hline
3583: $(C_{12}^4)^{(1)}_1$ &$\ap$ & $-0.015(0)$ & $(C_{14}^0)^{(1)}_1$ & =
3584: & $-2.548155... $
3585: \\ \hline
3586: $(C_{14}^2)^{(1)}_1$ &$\ap$ & $0.260(1)$ & $(C_{14}^4)^{(1)}_1$ & =
3587: & $2$ screening ops.
3588: \\ \hline
3589: $(C_{23}^0)^{(1)}_1$ &$=$ & $-2.816773...$ & $(C_{23}^2)^{(1)}_1$
3590: & = &$0.683830...$
3591: \\ \hline
3592: $(C_{23}^4)^{(1)}_1$ &$=$ & $0.3787045...$ & $(C_{34}^0)^{(1)}_1$
3593: & = &$-0.922183...$
3594: \\ \hline
3595: $(C_{34}^2)^{(1)}_1$ &$=$ & $0.259270...$ & $(C_{34}^4)^{(1)}_1$
3596: & = &$-0.665160...$
3597: \\ \hline
3598: $(C_{22}^1)^{(1)}_1$ &$\ap$ & $0.266(0)$ & $(C_{22}^3)^{(1)}_1$
3599: & = &$-2.215418...$
3600: \\ \hline
3601: $(C_{24}^1)^{(1)}_1$ &$\ap$ & $-1.54(9)$ & $(C_{24}^3)^{(1)}_1$
3602: & = &$0.504471...$
3603: \\ \hline
3604: $(C_{44}^1)^{(1)}_1$ &= & $2$ screening ops. & $(C_{44}^3)^{(1)}_1$ & = &$0$
3605: \\ \hline
3606: \end{tabular}
3607: \end{center}
3608: \caption{\label{tc1}}
3609: \vspace{15mm}
3610: \end{table}
3611:
3612: %\pagebreak
3613:
3614: %\newpage
3615:
3616: \begin{table}[t]
3617: \begin{center}
3618: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
3619: \hline
3620: \hspace{-10pt}
3621: \begin{tabular}{c}Susceptibilities \end{tabular}
3622: \hspace{-10pt}
3623: &
3624: \begin{tabular}{c} Integration \end{tabular}
3625: \hspace{-10pt}
3626: &
3627: \begin{tabular}{c} TCSA \end{tabular}
3628: \hspace{-10pt}
3629: &
3630: \begin{tabular}{c} Sum Rule\end{tabular}
3631: \hspace{-10pt}
3632: \\
3633: \hline
3634: $\Gamma_{11}^1$&0.05(7) &0.059(6)&0.06
3635: \hspace{-10pt}
3636: \\
3637: \hline
3638: $\Gamma_{12}^1$&-0.13(6) &-0.139(7)&-0.1396
3639: \hspace{-10pt}
3640: \\
3641: \hline
3642: $\Gamma_{13}^1$ &0.69(6)&0.68(7) &0.70
3643: \hspace{-10pt}
3644: \\
3645: \hline
3646: $\Gamma_{14}^1$ &-1.2(1)&-1.1(4) &-1.2(0)
3647: \hspace{-10pt}
3648: \\
3649: \hline
3650: $\Gamma_{22}^1$ &0.31(7)&0.32(7) &
3651: \hspace{-10pt}
3652: \\
3653: \hline
3654: $\Gamma_{23}^1$ &-1.7(3)&-1.6(7) &
3655: \hspace{-10pt}
3656: \\
3657: \hline
3658: $\Gamma_{24}^1$ &3.(0)&2.(8)&
3659: \hspace{-10pt}
3660: \\
3661: \hline
3662: $\Gamma_{33}^1$ &15.(3)& &
3663: \hspace{-10pt}
3664: \\
3665: \hline
3666: $\Gamma_{34}^1$ &$3.76(9)^{\dagger}$ & &
3667: \hspace{-10pt}
3668: \\
3669: \hline
3670: $\Gamma_{44}^1$ &$-15.(5)^*$ & &
3671: \hspace{-10pt}
3672: \\
3673: \hline
3674: \end{tabular}
3675: \end{center}
3676: \caption{\label{tchi1}}
3677: \vspace{3mm}
3678: \end{table}
3679:
3680:
3681:
3682: %\vspace{3mm}
3683: \begin{table}[h]
3684: \vspace{3mm}
3685: \begin{center}
3686: \begin{tabular}{|cclc|l|l|} \hline
3687: $m_1$ &=& $M$ & & 1 & \hspace{1mm} odd \\
3688: $m_2$ &=& $2 M \cos({5\pi \over 18})$ & & 1.28557 & \hspace{1mm} even \\
3689: $m_3$ &=& $2 M \cos({\pi \over 9})$ & & 1.87938 & \hspace{1mm} odd \\
3690: $m_4$ &=& $2 M \cos({\pi \over 18})$ & & 1.96961 & \hspace{1mm} even \\
3691: $m_5$ &=& $4 M \cos({\pi \over 18}) \cos({\pi \over 9})$ & & 2.53208 &
3692: \hspace{1mm} even \\
3693: $m_6$ &=& $4 M \cos({2\pi\over 9})\cos({\pi \over 9}) $ & & 2.87938 &
3694: \hspace{1mm} odd \\
3695: $m_7$ &=& $4 M \cos({\pi \over 18}) \cos({\pi \over 9})$ & & 3.70166 &
3696: \hspace{3mm} even\\
3697: \hline
3698: \end{tabular}
3699: \end{center}
3700: \caption{\label{tspectrum}}
3701: \vspace{3mm}
3702: \end{table}
3703:
3704: \newpage
3705:
3706: %\begin{table}[h]
3707: %\begin{center}
3708: %\begin{tabular}{|c|c|}\hline
3709: %$a$ \,\, $b$ &
3710: %$S_{ab}$ \\ \hline \hline
3711: %\rule[-2mm]{0mm}{10mm}1 \,\, 1 &
3712: %$ - \st{\bf 2}{(10)} \, \st{\bf 4}{(2)} $\\ \hline
3713: %\rule[-2mm]{0mm}{10mm}1 \,\, 2 &
3714: %$ \st{\bf 1}{(13)} \, \st{\bf 3}{(7)} $\\ \hline
3715: %\rule[-2mm]{0mm}{10mm}1 \,\, 3 &
3716: %$ - \st{\bf 2}{(14)} \, \st{\bf 4}{(10)} \, \st{\bf 5}{(6)} $
3717: %\\ \hline
3718: %\rule[-2mm]{0mm}{10mm}1 \,\, 4 &
3719: %$ \st{\bf 1}{(17)} \, \st{\bf 3}{(11)} \, \st{\bf 6}{(3)} \, (9) $
3720: %\\ \hline
3721: %\rule[-2mm]{0mm}{10mm}1 \,\, 5 &
3722: %$ \st{\bf 3}{(14)} \, \st{\bf 6}{(8)} \, (6)^2 $ \\ \hline
3723: %\rule[-2mm]{0mm}{10mm}1 \,\, 6 &
3724: %$ - \st{\bf 4}{(16)} \, \st{\bf 5}{(12)} \, \st{\bf 7}{(4)} \,
3725: %(10)^2 $ \\ \hline
3726: %\rule[-2mm]{0mm}{10mm}1 \,\, 7 &
3727: %$ \st{\bf 6}{(15)} (9) \, (5)^2 \, (7)^2 $ \\ \hline
3728: %\rule[-2mm]{0mm}{10mm}2 \,\, 2 &
3729: %$ \st{\bf 2}{(12)} \, \st{\bf 4}{(8)} \, \st{\bf 5}{(2)} $ \\ \hline
3730: %\rule[-2mm]{0mm}{10mm}2 \,\, 3 &
3731: %$ \st{\bf 1}{(15)} \, \st{\bf 3}{(11)} \, \st{\bf 6}{(5)} \, (9) $ \\
3732: %\hline
3733: %\rule[-2mm]{0mm}{10mm}2 \,\, 4 &
3734: %$ \st{\bf 2}{(14)} \, \st{\bf 5}{(8)} \, (6)^2 $ \\ \hline
3735: %\rule[-2mm]{0mm}{10mm}2 \,\, 5 &
3736: %$ \st{\bf 2}{(17)} \, \st{\bf 4}{(13)} \, \st{\bf 7}{(3)}\, (7)^2
3737: %\, (9) $ \\ \hline
3738: %\rule[-2mm]{0mm}{10mm}2 \,\, 6 &
3739: %$ \st{\bf 3}{(15)} \, (7)^2 \,(5)^2 \, (9) $ \\ \hline
3740: %\rule[-2mm]{0mm}{10mm}2 \,\, 7 &
3741: %$ \st{\bf 5}{(16)} \, \st{\bf 7}{(10)^3} \, (4)^2 \,(6)^2 $ \\ \hline
3742: %\rule[-2mm]{0mm}{10mm}3 \,\, 3 &
3743: %$ - \st{\bf 2}{(14)} \, \st{\bf 7}{(2)} \, (8)^2 \,(12)^2 $ \\ \hline
3744: %\rule[-2mm]{0mm}{10mm}3 \,\, 4 &
3745: %$ \st{\bf 1}{(15)} \, (5)^2 \,(7)^2 \,(9) $ \\ \hline
3746: %\rule[-2mm]{0mm}{10mm}3 \,\, 5 &
3747: %$ \st{\bf 1}{(16)} \, \st{\bf 6}{(10)^3} \, (4)^2 \,(6)^2 $ \\ \hline
3748: %\rule[-2mm]{0mm}{10mm}3 \,\, 6 &
3749: %$ - \st{\bf 2}{(16)} \, \st{\bf 5}{(12)^3}\, \st{\bf 7}{(8)^3} \, (4)^2
3750: % $ \\ \hline
3751: %\rule[-2mm]{0mm}{10mm}3 \,\, 7 &
3752: %$ \st{\bf 3}{(17)} \, \st{\bf 6}{(13)^3} \, (3)^2 \, (7)^4 \, (9)^2
3753: % $ \\ \hline
3754: %\end{tabular}
3755: %\end{center}
3756: %\nonumber
3757: %\begin{center}
3758: % (Continued)
3759: %\end{center}
3760: %\end{table}
3761: %\newpage
3762: %\begin{table}[t]
3763: %\begin{center}
3764: %\begin{tabular}{|c|c|}
3765: %\hline
3766: %$a$ \,\, $b$ &
3767: %$S_{ab}$ \\ \hline \hline
3768: %\rule[-2mm]{0mm}{10mm}4 \,\, 4 &
3769: %$ \st{\bf 4}{(12)} \, \st{\bf 5}{(10)^3} \,\st{\bf 4}{(7)}
3770: %\, (2)^2 $ \\ \hline
3771: %\rule[-2mm]{0mm}{10mm}4 \,\, 5 &
3772: %$ \st{\bf 2}{(15)} \, \st{\bf 4}{(13)^3} \,\st{\bf 7}{(7)^3}
3773: %\, (9) $ \\ \hline
3774: %\rule[-2mm]{0mm}{10mm}4 \,\, 6 &
3775: %$ \st{\bf 1}{(17)} \, \st{\bf 6}{(11)^3} \, (3)^2 \, (5)^2 \,
3776: %(9)^2 $ \\ \hline
3777: %\rule[-2mm]{0mm}{10mm}4 \,\, 7 &
3778: %$ \st{\bf 4}{(16)} \, \st{\bf 5}{(14)^3} \, (6)^4 \, (8)^4
3779: %$ \\ \hline
3780: %\rule[-2mm]{0mm}{10mm}5 \,\, 5 &
3781: %$ \st{\bf 5}{(12)^3} \, (2)^2 \, (4)^2 \, (8)^4 $ \\ \hline
3782: %\rule[-2mm]{0mm}{10mm}5 \,\, 6 &
3783: %$ \st{\bf 1}{(16)}\, \st{\bf 3}{(14)^3} \, (6)^4 \, (8)^4 $ \\
3784: %\hline
3785: %\rule[-2mm]{0mm}{10mm}5 \,\, 7 &
3786: %$ \st{\bf 2}{(17)}\, \st{\bf 4}{(15)^3} \,\st{\bf 7}{(11)^5} \, (5)^4
3787: %\, (9)^3 $ \\ \hline
3788: %\rule[-2mm]{0mm}{10mm}6 \,\, 6 &
3789: %$ - \st{\bf 4}{(14)^3} \,\st{\bf 7}{(10)^5} \, (12)^4 \, (16)^2
3790: %$ \\ \hline
3791: %\rule[-2mm]{0mm}{10mm}6 \,\, 7 &
3792: %$ \st{\bf 1}{(17)}\, \st{\bf 3}{(15)^3} \,\st{\bf 6}{(13)^5} \,
3793: %(5)^6 \, (9)^3 $ \\ \hline
3794: %\rule[-2mm]{0mm}{10mm}7 \,\, 7 &
3795: %$ \st{\bf 2}{(16)^3}\, \st{\bf 5}{(14)^5} \,\st{\bf 7}{(12)^7} \,
3796: %(8)^8 $ \\ \hline
3797: %\end{tabular}
3798: %\end{center}
3799: %\vspace{3mm}
3800: %\caption{\label{tsmat}}
3801: %\vspace{5cm}
3802: %\end{table}
3803:
3804:
3805: %\newpage
3806:
3807:
3808: %LEGENDA: When a number is given with a
3809: %figure between parenthesis, this means that the error on the number is
3810: %$\frac{1}{2}$ times the digit in front the figure.
3811: \newpage
3812: %{\bf Table 6}
3813: \begin{table}[t]
3814: \begin{center}
3815: \begin{tabular}{|c || c| c| c| c||}
3816: \hline
3817: ~ & $B_{12}$& $B_{22}$ &$B_{32}$ &$B_{42}$ \\
3818: \hline
3819: %item
3820: \hline
3821: $g_2>0$ (num)& $0$ & $-1.46(6)$ & $0$ &$3.(4)$ \\
3822: \hline
3823: $g_2>0$ (exact)& $0$ & $-1.46839\dots$ & $0$ &$3.70708\dots$ \\
3824: \hline
3825: $g_2<0$ (num)& $\pm 1.59(0)$ & $1.46(6)$ & $\pm 2.3(8)$ &$3.(5)$ \\
3826: \hline
3827: $g_2<0$ (exact)& $\pm 1.59427\dots$ & $1.46839$ & $\pm 2.45205
3828: \dots$ &$3.70708\dots$ \\
3829: \hline
3830: \end{tabular}
3831: \end{center}
3832: \vspace{3mm}
3833: \caption{\label{tvev}}
3834: %\vspace{3mm}
3835: \end{table}
3836:
3837:
3838: %{\bf Table 10}
3839: \begin{table}[h]
3840: \centering
3841: \begin{tabular}{|c || c| c| c| c||}
3842: \hline
3843: ~ & $\varphi_1$& $\varphi_2$ &$\varphi_3$ &$\varphi_4$ \\
3844: \hline
3845: %item
3846: \hline
3847: $\langle0|\varphi_i|1\rangle_{2+}$ & $ 0.78(2)$ & $0$ & $- 6.(4)$ &$0$ \\
3848: \hline
3849: $\langle0|\varphi_i|2\rangle_{2+}$ & $0$ & $ 1.1(9)$ & 0 &$- 11.(1)$ \\
3850: \hline
3851: $\langle0|\varphi_i|3\rangle_{2+}$ & $ 0.2(4)$ & $0$ & $- 4.(3)$ &$0$ \\
3852: \hline
3853: $\langle0|\varphi_i|4\rangle_{2+}$ & $0$ & $ 0.5(9)$ & $0$ &$- 8.(7)$ \\
3854: \hline
3855: \end{tabular}
3856: \vspace{3mm}
3857: \caption{\label{tff2}}
3858: \vspace{3mm}
3859: \end{table}
3860:
3861: \newpage
3862:
3863: %\vspace*{1cm}
3864: %{\bf Table 11}
3865: \begin{table}[t]
3866: \centering
3867: \begin{tabular}{|c || c| c| c| c||}
3868: \hline
3869: ~ & $\varphi_1$& $\varphi_2$ &$\varphi_3$ &$\varphi_4$ \\
3870: \hline
3871: %item
3872: \hline
3873: $\langle0|\varphi_i|1\rangle_{2-}$ & $0.50(5) $ & $ 1.1(9)$ &$6.3(5)$ &$ 11.(1)$ \\
3874: \hline
3875: $\langle0|\varphi_i|2\rangle_{2-}$ & $0$ & $ 0.5(9)$ &$0$ &$ 8.(7)$ \\
3876: \hline
3877: \end{tabular}
3878: \vspace{3mm}
3879: \caption{\label{tff2m}}
3880: \vspace{3mm}
3881: \end{table}
3882:
3883:
3884: %\newpage
3885:
3886: %Table 14
3887: \vspace*{5mm}
3888: \begin{table}[h]
3889: \begin{center}
3890: \begin{tabular}{|c c c||c c c|}
3891: \hline
3892: $(C_{11}^0)^{(1)}_2$ & = &$0.223579...$ & $(C_{11}^2)^{(1)}_2$
3893: & = & $0.266530...$
3894: \\ \hline
3895: $(C_{11}^4)^{(1)}_2(mr)$ & $\ap$ & $0.1510..(\ln(mr)+b_1(m))$
3896: & $(C_{13}^0)^{(1)}_2$ & $=$ & $-2.007437$
3897: \\ \hline
3898: $(C_{13}^2)^{(1)}_2$ & = & $ 0.677665\dots$ & $(C_{13}^4)^{(1)}_2$
3899: & = & $ 0.181313\dots$
3900: \\ \hline
3901: $(C_{33}^0)^{(1)}_2$ &= & $0$ & $(C_{33}^2)^{(1)}_2$ & $=$ & $ 0$
3902: \\ \hline
3903: $(C_{33}^4)^{(1)}_2(mr)$ &$=$ & $2.3561..(\ln(mr)+b_2(m)) $
3904: & $(C_{12}^1)^{(1)}_2$ &$\ap$ & $0.230(2) $
3905: \\ \hline
3906: $(C_{12}^3)^{(1)}_2$ &$=$ & $0.109817...$ & $(C_{23}^1)^{(1)}_2$ &
3907: = &$-3.766576...$
3908: \\ \hline
3909: $(C_{23}^3)^{(1)}_2$ &$=$ & $1.840967...$ & $(C_{14}^1)^{(1)}_2$
3910: &$\ap$& -3.79(9)
3911: \\ \hline
3912: $(C_{14}^3)^{(1)}_2$ &$=$ & $1.029533...$ & $(C_{34}^1)^{(1)}_2$
3913: & = &$-1.412466...$
3914: \\ \hline
3915: $(C_{34}^4)^{(1)}_2$ &$=$ & $0.545471...$ & $(C_{22}^2)^{(1)}_2$
3916: & = &$1.008826...$
3917: \\ \hline
3918: $(C_{22}^4)^{(1)}_2$ &$=$ & $0$ & $(C_{24}^0)^{(1)}_2$ & $\ap$ & $-4.19(0)$
3919: \\ \hline
3920: $(C_{24}^2)^{(1)}_2$ &$=$ & $0$ & $(C_{24}^4)^{(1)}_2(mr)$ & $\ap$
3921: & $2.84(0)(\ln(mr)+b_3(m))$
3922: \\ \hline
3923: $(C_{44}^2)^{(1)}_2$ &$\ap$ & $0.222(1)$ & $(C_{44}^4)^{(1)}_2$ & = &$0$
3924: \\ \hline
3925: \end{tabular}
3926: \end{center}
3927: \caption{\label{tc2}}
3928: \vspace{3mm}
3929: \end{table}
3930:
3931:
3932: %{\bf Table 17}
3933: \begin{table}[h]
3934: \begin{center}
3935: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
3936: \hline
3937: \hspace{-10pt}
3938: \begin{tabular}{c}Susceptibilities \end{tabular}
3939: \hspace{-10pt}
3940: &
3941: \begin{tabular}{c} Integration \end{tabular}
3942: \hspace{-10pt}
3943: &
3944: \begin{tabular}{c} TCSA \end{tabular}
3945: \hspace{-10pt}
3946: &
3947: \begin{tabular}{c} Sum Rule\end{tabular}
3948: \hspace{-10pt}
3949: \\
3950: \hline
3951: $\Gamma_{11}^{2+}$&0.093(9) &0.093(7)&
3952: \hspace{-10pt}
3953: \\
3954: \hline
3955: $\Gamma_{12}^{2+}$&0 &0&0
3956: \hspace{-10pt}
3957: \\
3958: \hline
3959: $\Gamma_{13}^{2+}$ &-0.8(9)&-0.8(8) &
3960: \hspace{-10pt}
3961: \\
3962: \hline
3963: $\Gamma_{14}^{2+}$ &0&0&0
3964: \hspace{-10pt}
3965: \\
3966: \hline
3967: $\Gamma_{22}^{2+}$ &0.15(8)&0.16(0) &0.16315...
3968: \hspace{-10pt}
3969: \\
3970: \hline
3971: $\Gamma_{23}^{2+}$ &0&0 &0
3972: \hspace{-10pt}
3973: \\
3974: \hline
3975: $\Gamma_{24}^{2+}$ &-2.(2)&-2.(1)&-2.466...
3976: \hspace{-10pt}
3977: \\
3978: \hline
3979: $\Gamma_{33}^{2+}$ &16.(5)& &
3980: \hspace{-10pt}
3981: \\
3982: \hline
3983: $\Gamma_{34}^{2+}$ &0&0 &0
3984: \hspace{-10pt}
3985: \\
3986: \hline
3987: $\Gamma_{44}^{2+}$ &$-17.(5)^*$ & &
3988: \hspace{-10pt}
3989: \\
3990: \hline
3991: \end{tabular}
3992: \end{center}
3993: \vspace{3mm}
3994: \caption{\label{tchi2}}
3995: \vspace{3mm}
3996: \end{table}
3997:
3998:
3999:
4000: %\newpage
4001:
4002: %{\bf Table 18}
4003: \begin{table}[h]
4004: \begin{center}
4005: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
4006: \hline
4007: \hspace{-10pt}
4008: \begin{tabular}{c}Susceptibilities \end{tabular}
4009: \hspace{-10pt}
4010: &
4011: \begin{tabular}{c}Integration \end{tabular}
4012: \hspace{-10pt}
4013: &
4014: \begin{tabular}{c} TCSA \end{tabular}
4015: \hspace{-10pt}
4016: &
4017: \begin{tabular}{c}Sum Rule\end{tabular}
4018: \hspace{-10pt}
4019: \\
4020: \hline
4021: $\Gamma_{11}^{2-}$&0.026(2)&0.026(7)&
4022: \hspace{-10pt}
4023: \\
4024: \hline
4025: $\Gamma_{12}^{2-}$ &$\pm$0.06(3) &$\pm$0.06(6)&$\pm$0.0662...
4026: \hspace{-10pt}
4027: \\
4028: \hline
4029: $\Gamma_{13}^{2-}$ &0.4(4)&0.4(2) &
4030: \hspace{-10pt}
4031: \\
4032: \hline
4033: $\Gamma_{14}^{2-}$ &$\pm$0.8(8)&$\pm$0.8(1) &
4034: \hspace{-10pt}
4035: \\
4036: \hline
4037: $\Gamma_{22}^{2-}$ &0.15(8)&0.16(1)&0.16315...
4038: \hspace{-10pt}
4039: \\
4040: \hline
4041: $\Gamma_{23}^{2-}$ &$\pm$1.1(2)&$\pm$1.1(0) &$\pm$1.1145...
4042: \hspace{-10pt}
4043: \\
4044: \hline
4045: $\Gamma_{24}^{2-}$ &2.(2)&2.(1)&2.466...
4046: \hspace{-10pt}
4047: \\
4048: \hline
4049: $\Gamma_{33}^{2-}$ &12.(6)& &
4050: \hspace{-10pt}
4051: \\
4052: \hline
4053: $\Gamma_{34}^{2-}$ &$\pm 4.17378...^{\dagger}$ & &
4054: \hspace{-10pt}
4055: \\
4056: \hline
4057: $\Gamma_{44}^{2-}$ &$-17.(5)^*$ & &
4058: \hspace{-10pt}
4059: \\
4060: \hline
4061: \end{tabular}
4062: \end{center}
4063: \vspace{3mm}
4064: \caption{\label{tchi2m}}
4065: \vspace{5mm}
4066: \end{table}
4067:
4068: %\newpage
4069:
4070: %.
4071: %\vspace*{3cm}
4072: %{\bf Table 7}
4073: \begin{table}[h]
4074: \centering
4075: \begin{tabular}{|c||c|c|}
4076: \hline
4077: &$B_{i3}$ for $|0\ra=|0_2\ra$ & $B_{i3}$ for $|0\ra=|0_4\ra$ \\ \hline
4078: \hline
4079: $i=1$& $0.68656\dots$ & $-1.79745\dots$ \\ \hline
4080: $i=2$& $-0.78093\dots$ & $2.04451\dots$ \\ \hline
4081: $i=3$& $-17.941605\dots$ & $-17.941605\dots$ \\ \hline
4082: $i=4$& $2.69611\dots^\dag$ & $-7.05856\dots^\dag$ \\ \hline
4083: \end{tabular}
4084: \vspace{3mm}
4085: \caption{\label{tvev3}}
4086: \vspace{8mm}
4087: \end{table}
4088:
4089:
4090: \newpage
4091:
4092:
4093: \begin{table}[t]
4094: \vspace{3mm}
4095: \centering
4096: \begin{tabular}{|c || c|c ||}
4097: \hline
4098: ~ & $\varphi_1$& $\varphi_2$ \\
4099: \hline
4100: %item
4101: \hline
4102: $\langle0_2|\varphi_i|1\rangle_{3}$ & $- 0.42(5) $ & $ 0.9(4)$ \\
4103: \hline
4104: $\langle 0_4|\varphi_i|2\rangle_{3}$ & $ 0.87(2)$ & $ 1.8(3)$ \\
4105: \hline
4106: \end{tabular}
4107: \vspace{3mm}
4108: \caption{\label{tff3}}
4109: \vspace{3mm}
4110: \end{table}
4111:
4112:
4113: %Table 15
4114: \begin{table}[h]
4115: \begin{center}
4116: \begin{tabular}{|c c c||c c c|}
4117: \hline
4118: $(C_{11}^1)^{(1)}_3(mr)$ & = & $0.7189..(\ln(mr)+C_1(m))
4119: $ & $(C_{11}^3)^{(1)}_3$ &$\ap$ & $-0.040(1)$
4120: \\ \hline
4121: $(C_{12}^0)^{(1)}_3$ & $=$ & $8.79920$ & $(C_{12}^2)^{(1)}_3$ &
4122: $=$ & $-0.6571$
4123: \\ \hline
4124: $(C_{12}^4)^{(1)}_3$ & = &0.149171 & $(C_{22}^1)^{(1)}_3(mr)$
4125: &$=$ & $ 2.8759..\ln(mr+C_2(m)) $
4126: \\ \hline
4127: $(C_{22}^3)^{(1)}_3$ &= & $0$ & $(C_{14}^0)^{(1)}_3(mr)$ &
4128: $=$ & $-4.7123..(\ln(mr)+C_3(m)) $
4129: \\ \hline
4130: \end{tabular}
4131: \end{center}
4132: \vspace{3mm}
4133: \caption{\label{tc3}}
4134: \vspace{1mm}
4135: \end{table}
4136:
4137:
4138: %{\bf Table 19}
4139: \begin{table}[h]
4140: \begin{center}
4141: \begin{tabular}{|c c c||c c c|}\hline
4142: & $\Ga_{ij}^{3a}$& & &$\Ga_{ij}^{3b}$ &\\ \hline
4143: $\Ga_{11}^{3a}$&$=$&$0.014(3)$ & $\Ga_{11}^{3b}$&$
4144: =$&$0.063(4)$ \\ \hline
4145: $\Ga_{12}^{3a}$&$=$&$-0.03(2)$ & $\Ga_{11}^{3b}$&$
4146: =$&$0.13(7)$\\ \hline
4147: $\Ga_{22}^{3a}$&$=$&$0.076(5)$ & $\Ga_{22}^{3b}$&$
4148: =$&$0.29(0)$\\ \hline
4149: $\Ga_{13}^{3a}$&=&$-0.045770...$ & $\Ga_{13}^{3b}$&=&
4150: $0.11983...$\\ \hline
4151: $\Ga_{23}^{3a}$&=&$0.138832...$ & $\Ga_{23}^{3b}$&=&
4152: $-0.36346...$\\ \hline
4153: $\Ga_{33}^{3a}$&=&$13.954582...$ & $\Ga_{33}^{3b}$&=&
4154: $13.954582...$\\ \hline
4155: $\Ga_{34}^{3a}$&=&$-2.875855...^{\dagger}$ & $\Ga_{34}^{3b}
4156: $&=&$7.52914...^{\dagger}$\\ \hline
4157: \end{tabular}
4158: \end{center}
4159: \vspace{3mm}
4160: \caption{\label{tchi3}}
4161: \vspace{3mm}
4162: \end{table}
4163:
4164: \newpage
4165:
4166: %{\bf Table 8}
4167: \begin{table}[h]
4168: \centering
4169: \begin{tabular}{|c||c|c|c|}
4170: \hline
4171: &$ B_{i4}$ for $|0\ra=|0_{-1}\ra$ &$ B_{i4}$ for $|0\ra=|0_{0}\ra$
4172: &$ B_{i4}$ for $|0\ra=|0_{+1}\ra$ \\
4173: \hline \hline
4174: $i=1$& $-1.975669\dots$ & $0$& $1.975669\dots$ \\ \hline
4175: $i=2$& $2.668319\dots$ & $-2.668319\dots$ & $2.668319\dots$ \\ \hline
4176: $i=3$& $-10.640138\dots^\dag$ & $0$ & $10.640138\dots^\dag$ \\ \hline
4177: $i=4$& $0$ & $0$ & $0$ \\ \hline
4178: \end{tabular}
4179: \vspace{3mm}
4180: \caption{\label{tvev4}}
4181: \vspace{8mm}
4182: \end{table}
4183:
4184: \newpage
4185:
4186: %{\bf Table 20}
4187: \begin{table}[t]
4188: \vspace{5mm}
4189: \begin{center}
4190: \begin{tabular}{|c c c||c c c|}\hline
4191: & $(\Ga_{ij}^{4-})_0$& & &$(\Ga_{ij}^{4-})_{\pm 1}$ &\\ \hline
4192: $(\Ga_{11}^{4-})_0$&$=$&$0.00(5)$ & $(\Ga_{11}^{4-})_{\pm 1}$&$=$&
4193: $0.00(5)$ \\ \hline
4194: $(\Ga_{12}^{4-})_0$&$=$&$0$ & $(\Ga_{12}^{4-})_{\pm 1}$&$=$&$0.16(0)$
4195: \\ \hline
4196: $(\Ga_{22}^{4-})_0$&$=$&$4.4(9)~10^{-3}$ & $(\Ga_{22}^{4-})_{\pm 1}
4197: $&$=$&$4.4(9)~10^{-3}$\\ \hline
4198: $(\Ga_{14}^{4-})_0$&=&$0$ & $(\Ga_{14}^{4-})_{\pm 1}$&=&
4199: $\mp0.1852198\dots$\\ \hline
4200: $(\Ga_{24}^{4-})_0$&=&$0.6670799...$ & $\Ga_{24}^{4-})_{\pm 1}
4201: $&=&$-0.6670799...$\\ \hline
4202: $(\Ga_{34}^{4-})_0$&=&$0$ & $(\Ga_{34}^{4-})_{\pm 1}$&=&$
4203: \mp 11.637651\dots^{\dagger}$\\ \hline
4204: $(\Ga_{44}^{4-})_0$&=&$0$ & $(\Ga_{44}^{4-})_{\pm 1}$&=&$0$\\ \hline
4205: \end{tabular}
4206: \end{center}
4207: \vspace{3mm}
4208: \caption{\label{tchi4}}
4209: \vspace{18mm}
4210: \end{table}
4211:
4212: \newpage
4213:
4214:
4215: \begin{table}[t]
4216: \begin{center}
4217: \begin{tabular}{|ccc||ccc|}
4218: \hline
4219: $R^2_{11} $ & = &$3.5(4)$ &
4220: $R^2_{13} $ & = &$-2.0(6)$ \\
4221: \hline
4222: $R_{22}^2 $ & = &$1$ &
4223: $R_{24}^2 $ & = &$-1$ \\
4224: \hline
4225: $R_{33}^2 $ & = &$ 1.3(0)$ &
4226: $R_{44}^2$ & = &$1$ \\
4227: \hline
4228: \end{tabular}
4229: \end{center}
4230: \vspace{3mm}
4231: \caption{\label{tr2}}
4232: %\vspace{3mm}
4233: \end{table}
4234:
4235: \begin{table}[h]
4236: \begin{center}
4237: \begin{tabular}{|ccl||ccl|} \hline
4238: $(Q_2)^1_{2^+1}$ & = & $ 1.26(0)$ & $(Q_2)^1_{2^-1}$
4239: & = & $1.88(4)$ \\
4240: \hline
4241: $(Q_2)^1_{2^+2^+}$ & = & $ 1.97(3)$ & $(Q_2)^1_{2^+2^-}$
4242: & = & $1.32(0)$ \\
4243: \hline
4244: $(Q_2)^{2+}_{11}$ & = & $ 1.5(6) $ & $(Q_2)^{2-}_{11}$
4245: & = & $0.44(2)$ \\
4246: \hline
4247: $(Q_2)^{2+}_{12^-}$ & = & $ 1.7(0)$ & & & \\
4248: \hline
4249: \end{tabular}
4250: \end{center}
4251: %\vspace{3mm}
4252: \caption{\label{trq2}}
4253: %\vspace{1mm}
4254: \end{table}
4255:
4256: \begin{table}[t]
4257: \begin{center}
4258: \begin{tabular}{|ccl||ccl|} \hline
4259: $(R_c)_{22}^1$ & = & $ 1.0(5)~10^{-2}$ & $(R_c)_{23}^1$
4260: & = & $4.8(5)~10^{-2}$ \\
4261: \hline
4262: $(R_c)_{24}^1$ & = & $ 6.(7)~10^{-2} $ & $(R_c)_{33}^1$
4263: & = & $3.(8)~10^{-1} $ \\
4264: \hline
4265: $(R_c)_{34}^1$ & = & $ -7.(6)~10^{-2} $ & $(R_c)_{44}^1$
4266: & = & $-2.(5)~10^{-1} $ \\
4267: \hline \hline
4268: $(R_c)_{11}^{2-}$ & = &$ 1.7(0)~10^{-3}$ & $(R_c)_{14}^{2-}$ & = &
4269: $2.3(3)~10^{-2}$ \\
4270: \hline
4271: $(R_c)_{13}^{2-}$ & = &$ 1.7(9)~10^{-2}$ & $(R_c)_{33}^{2-}$ & = &
4272: $3.(4)~10^{-1}$ \\
4273: \hline
4274: $(R_c)_{34}^{2-}$ & = &$ 7.4912...~10^{-2}$ & $(R_c)_{44}^{2-}$ & = &
4275: $-2.(0)~10^{-1}$ \\
4276: \hline \hline
4277: $(R_c)_{11}^{3a}$ & = &$ 4.2(3)~10^{-1}$ & $(R_c)_{11}^{3b}$ & = &
4278: $2.7(3)~10^{-1}$ \\
4279: \hline
4280: $(R_c)_{12}^{3a}$ & = &$ 8.3(2)~10^{-1}$ & $(R_c)_{12}^{3b}$ & = &
4281: $5.2(0)~10^{-1}$ \\
4282: \hline
4283: $(R_c)_{22}^{3a}$ & = &$ 1.7(5)$ & $(R_c)_{22}^{3b}$ & = &
4284: $9.6(8)~10^{-1}$ \\
4285: \hline
4286: \end{tabular}
4287: \end{center}
4288: \vspace{3mm}
4289: \caption{\label{trc}}
4290: %\vspace{1mm}
4291: \end{table}
4292:
4293: %\newpage
4294:
4295:
4296: \newpage
4297: \begin{table}[t]
4298: \begin{center}
4299: \begin{tabular}{|ccl||ccl|} \hline
4300: $R_{\xi}^1$ & = & $ 7.55(7)~10^{-2}$ & & & \\
4301: \hline
4302: $R_{\xi}^{2+}$ & = & $ 1.07(8)~10^{-1} $ & $R_{\xi}^{2-}$
4303: & = & $8.38(9)~10^{-2} $ \\
4304: \hline \hline
4305: $(R_A)_{2+}^{1}$ & = & $0 $ & $(R_A)_{2-}^{1}$ & = &
4306: $3.91(8)~10^{-2}$ \\
4307: \hline
4308: $(R_A)^{2+}_{1}$ & = & $ 2.95(8)~10^{-1}$ & $(R_A)^{2-}_{1}$ & = &
4309: $8.26(0)~10^{-1}$ \\
4310: \hline
4311: \end{tabular}
4312: \end{center}
4313: \vspace{3mm}
4314: \caption{\label{trxi}}
4315: %\vspace{3mm}
4316: \end{table}
4317:
4318:
4319:
4320: %{\bf Table 23}
4321: \begin{table}[t]
4322: \begin{center}
4323: \begin{tabular}{|ccl||ccl|} \hline
4324: $(R_{\chi})_{2}^1$ & = & $1.1(9)~10^{-1}$ & $(R_{\chi})_3^{1}
4325: $ & = & $4.2(5)~10^{-1}$ \\
4326: \hline
4327: $(R_{\chi})_{1}^{2-}$ & = & $4.(0)~10^{-2}$ & $(R_{\chi})_{3}^{2-}
4328: $ & = & $4.(0)~10^{-1}$ \\
4329: \hline
4330: $(R_{\chi})_{1}^{3a}$ & = & $ 2.(0)~10^{-11}$ & $(R_{\chi})_{1}^{3b}
4331: $ & = & $1.8(7)$ \\
4332: \hline
4333: $(R_{\chi})_{2}^{3a}$ & = & $ 3.(3)~10^{-4}$ & $(R_{\chi})_{2}^{3b}
4334: $ & = & $2.7(8)$ \\
4335: \hline
4336: \end{tabular}
4337: \end{center}
4338: \vspace{3mm}
4339: \caption{\label{tchi}}
4340: %\vspace{1mm}
4341: \end{table}
4342:
4343: \end{document}
4344:
4345:
4346: \newpage
4347:
4348:
4349:
4350:
4351: \vspace*{5cm}
4352: \begin{figure}[t]
4353: \hspace{3cm} \psfig{figure=pole.ps,height=12cm,width=10cm}
4354: \caption{
4355: Diagram responsible for a single-pole in the two--particle
4356: Form Factors}
4357: \label{fpole}
4358: \vspace{3cm}
4359: \end{figure}
4360:
4361: \pagebreak
4362:
4363: \newpage
4364: \begin{figure}[h]
4365: \psfig{figure=spectrum51.ps,height=15cm,width=12cm,angle=-90}
4366: \caption{The first 5 energy levels of the TIM perturbed by the
4367: magnetic field as a function of $MR$.}
4368: \label{spectrumtrunc}
4369: \vspace{5cm}
4370: \end{figure}
4371:
4372: \pagebreak
4373:
4374:
4375:
4376: \newpage
4377: \begin{figure}[h]
4378: \begin{center}
4379: \psfig{figure=formfac21.ps,height=15cm,width=12cm,angle=-90}
4380: \caption{
4381: One--particle FF $\la 0|\vp_2(0)|A_1\ra_1$ as a function of $MR$
4382: for the magnetic perturbation of the TIM.}
4383: \label{ff21}
4384: \vspace{3cm}
4385: \end{center}
4386: \end{figure}
4387:
4388: \pagebreak
4389:
4390: \newpage
4391:
4392: \begin{figure}[h]
4393: \begin{center}
4394: \begin{eqnarray}
4395: \psfig{figure=courbe1.ps,width=5cm,height=5cm}
4396: &
4397: \psfig{figure=courbe2.ps,width=5cm,height=5cm}
4398: &
4399: \psfig{figure=courbe3.ps,width=5cm,height=5cm}
4400: \nonumber \\
4401: \psfig{figure=courbe4.ps,width=5cm,height=5cm}
4402: &
4403: \psfig{figure=courbe5.ps,width=5cm,height=5cm}
4404: &
4405: \psfig{figure=courbe6.ps,width=5cm,height=5cm}
4406: \nonumber \\
4407: \psfig{figure=courbe7.ps,width=5cm,height=5cm}
4408: &
4409: &
4410: \nonumber
4411: \end{eqnarray}
4412: \end{center}
4413: \vspace{3mm}
4414: \caption{
4415: Effective LG potentials associated to the $\Phi^6$ theory:
4416: (a) at the tricritical point and perturbed by (b) the leading magnetic
4417: field ($g_1\ne 0)$, (c) the sub-leading magnetic field $g_3>0$,
4418: the leading energy density with (d) $g_2>0$ or (e) $g_2<0$,
4419: the vacancy density with (f) $g_4>0$ or (g) $g_4<0$.
4420: }
4421: \label{fvacua}
4422: \end{figure}
4423:
4424: \pagebreak
4425:
4426:
4427: \newpage
4428:
4429:
4430: \begin{figure}[h]
4431: \hspace{1cm} \psfig{figure=cor221.ps,height=10cm,width=15cm}
4432: \vspace{3mm}
4433: \caption{
4434: The continuous line gives the UV approximation
4435: of the correlator $\la \vp_2(x) \vp_2(0)\ra_1$ whereas the dashed line
4436: depicts the IR approximation. An overlap of the two curves is
4437: observed around $mr\sim 1$.
4438: }
4439: \label{cor221}
4440: \end{figure}
4441:
4442: \pagebreak
4443:
4444: \newpage
4445:
4446: \begin{figure}[h]
4447: \hspace{1cm} \psfig{figure=cor112.ps,height=10cm,width=15cm}
4448: \caption{
4449: The UV approximation of the correlator $\la \vp_1(x) \vp_1(0)\ra_2$
4450: is given by the continuous line
4451: whereas its IR approximation is given
4452: by the dashed line. An overlap of the curves is observed
4453: around $mr\sim 1$.
4454: }
4455: \label{cor112}
4456: \end{figure}
4457:
4458:
4459:
4460:
4461:
4462:
4463:
4464:
4465:
4466:
4467:
4468:
4469:
4470: