1: %Lviv,16.08.99--31.08.99
2: \documentstyle[twoside,fancyhea,multicol,pra,aps,epsf,amssymb,jps]{revtex}
3: \draft
4: \setlength{\headrulewidth}{0pt}
5: \pagestyle{fancyplain}
6: \frenchspacing
7:
8: \def\figurename{Fig.}
9:
10: \lhead[]{}
11: \chead[\fancyplain{}{YU. HOLOVATCH, M. DUDKA, T. YAVORS'KII}]
12: {\fancyplain{} {\small MARGINAL DIMENSION OF A WEAKLY
13: DILUTED QUENCHED $m$-VECTOR MODEL}}
14: \rhead[\fancyplain{{\footnotesize JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL STUDIES} \\
15: {\footnotesize v. 5, No. 3/4 (2001) p. 233--239}}{}]
16: {\fancyplain{{\footnotesize JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL STUDIES}
17: \\ {\footnotesize v. 5, No. 3/4 (2001) p. 233--239}}{}}
18:
19: \lfoot[\thepage]{}
20: \cfoot{}
21: \rfoot[]{\thepage}
22:
23: \title{A MARGINAL DIMENSION OF A WEAKLY DILUTED\\ QUENCHED $m$-VECTOR MODEL}
24:
25: \author{Yu.~Holovatch$^{1,2}$, M.~Dudka$^1$, T.~Yavors'kii$^2$}
26:
27: \address{$^1$Institute for Condensed Matter Physics of the National Academy
28: of Sciences of Ukraine\\
29: 1 Svientsitskii Str., Lviv, UA--79011, Ukraine\\
30: $^2$Ivan Franko National University of Lviv,
31: Department for Theoretical Physics\\
32: 12 Drahomanov Str., Lviv, UA--79005, Ukraine}
33:
34: \date{Received August 31, 2001}
35:
36: \begin{document}
37:
38: \setlength{\jot}{1em}
39: \setlength{\abovedisplayskip}{1.5em}
40: \setlength{\belowdisplayskip}{1.5em}
41: \renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{1}
42: \renewcommand{\theequation}{\arabic{equation}}
43:
44: \setcounter{page}{233}
45:
46: \maketitle
47:
48: \begin{abstract}
49: We calculate a marginal order parameter dimension $m_c$
50: which in a weakly diluted quenched $m$-vector model controls
51: the crossover from a universality
52: class of a ``pure'' model ($m>m_c$) to a new universality class ($m<m_c$).
53: Exploiting the Harris criterion and the field-theoretical renormalization group
54: approach allows us to obtain $m_c$ as a five-loop $\varepsilon$-expansion as
55: well as
56: a six-loop pseudo-$\varepsilon$ expansion. In order to estimate the numerical
57: value of $m_c$ we process the series by precisely adjusted
58: Pad\'e--Borel--Leroy resummation procedures. Our final result
59: $m_c=1.912\pm0.004<2$ stems from the longer and more reliable
60: pseudo-$\varepsilon$ expansion, suggesting that a weak quenched disorder
61: does not change the values of $xy$-model critical exponents as it
62: follows from the experiments on critical properties of
63: ${\rm He}^4$ in porous media.
64:
65: {\bf Key words:} quenched disorder, $m$-vector model, renormalization
66: group.
67: \end{abstract}
68:
69: \pacs{PACS number(s): 05.50.+q, 64.60.Ak, 75.10.Hk}
70:
71:
72:
73: \medskip
74:
75: \bgtwocol
76:
77: \section{Introduction}
78: \label{I}
79: Along with the space dimension $d$, the order parameter dimension $m$
80: is relevant for the universal properties of a model at criticality
81: \cite{Amit89}. In the
82: presence of disorder the value of $m$ determines also whether a
83: disordered model possesses novel universal properties in comparison with a
84: pure model. A typical example of this feature is presented by
85: a critical behaviour of a weakly diluted quenched
86: $m$-vector model \cite{Stanley68}. The model
87: is defined by a Hamiltonian
88: \begin{equation}
89: \label{ham}
90: H=-\frac{1}{2}\sum_{i,j}J(|{{\bf R}_i}-{{\bf R}_j}|)
91: \vec{S}_{{\bf R}_i}\vec{S}_{{\bf R}_j}c_{{\bf R}_i}c_{{\bf R}_j},
92: \end{equation}
93: where ${\bf R}_i$ span over the sites of a simple cubic lattice and
94: $\vec{S}_{{\bf R}_i}$ denote the
95: $m$-component spins interacting via a translationally invariant
96: short-range isotropic interaction $J(|{\bf R}_i - {\bf R}_j|)$.
97: The weak disorder is introduced by stochastic uncorrelated
98: occupation numbers $c_{{\bf R}_i}$ equal to $1$ in the case when
99: a site is occupied by a magnetic atom and $0$ otherwise
100: (see Fig.~1). The concentration of occupied sites is
101: considered to be above the percolation threshold.
102: The quenched disorder implies
103: that vacancies $c_{{\bf R}_i}=0$ are fixed and require configurational
104: averaging of observables \cite{note1}.
105:
106: The crucial dependence of the
107: universality class of model (\ref{ham})
108: on the order parameter dimension $m$ can be
109: established by the Harris criterion \cite{Harris74}. It states that a
110: disorder changes the universal critical properties of a ``pure'' model only
111: if heat capacity critical exponent of a pure model is positive.
112: Within the hierarchy of the physical realizations of the $m$-vector model only
113: the Ising model $m=1$ is characterised by $\alpha=0.109 \pm 0.004 >0 $,
114: while $xy$- ($m=2$) and Heisenberg ($m=3$) models' heat capacity does not
115: exhibit divergency at criticality: the corresponding critical exponents
116: remain negative $\alpha=-0.011 \pm 0.004$, $\alpha=-0.122 \pm 0.009$
117: \cite{Guida98}. Therefore one can expect that only weakly diluted quenched
118: Ising model belongs to a new universality class.
119:
120: Indeed, experimental studies confirm the theoretical prediction. The bulk of
121: evidence collected in a recent review \cite{Folk01}
122: demonstrate a novel critical behaviour of the magnetic systems
123: described by model (\ref{ham}) at $m=1$.
124: The experimental value of the heat capacity
125: critical exponent at the $\lambda$-transition in He-4
126: \cite{Lipa96} corroborated that the system belongs to the $xy$-model
127: universality class with no divergency of the heat capacity at the phase
128: transition point.
129: Subsequently, experiments on the critical behaviour of He-4 in porous media
130: \cite{He4dil} confirmed the irrelevancy of a weak quenched disorder in this
131: case.
132:
133:
134: \begin{figure}[htbp]
135: \vspace{4mm}
136: \label{lattice}
137: \begin{picture}(60,160)
138: \setlength{\unitlength}{1mm}
139: \epsfxsize=50mm
140: \put(13,3){\epsffile[77 528 337 780]{lattice.eps}}
141: \end{picture}
142: \vspace{5mm}
143: \caption {The weakly diluted quenched $m$-vector model describes a system of
144: randomly distributed $m$-component vectors which are fixed on sites of a
145: three-dimensional cubic lattice and interact via a short-range
146: translationally-invariant force.}
147: \end{figure}
148: \vspace{5mm}
149:
150: A natural question arises: can a marginal value of $m$
151: be obtained such that for $m>m_c$ the critical exponents of a
152: weakly diluted quenched $m$-vector model coincide with the corresponding values
153: of
154: a ``pure''model, but for $m<m_c$ they split to new values. Note,
155: that while the values of the critical exponents both
156: for pure \cite{Guida98} and diluted $m$-vector \cite{Pelissetto00} models
157: are calculated precisely, the crossover between two universality classes
158: has not been the
159: subject of extended theoretical calculations. One can mention only
160: the results for $m_c$ on the basis of two- \cite{Holovatch92} and
161: three-loop renormalization
162: group studies \cite{Holovatch97} of a weakly diluted $d$-dimensional
163: $m$-vector model. The obtained values $m_c=2.01$ and $m_c=2.12$ contradict
164: both experimental data \cite{He4dil} and the Harris criterion \cite{Harris74}.
165: In contrast, an alternative estimate on the base of a refined by conformal
166: mapping resummation of the six-loop renormalization group
167: functions of the $m$-vector model explicitly yielded $m_c=1.942\pm0.026$
168: \cite{Bervillier86}.
169: In this study we want to solve the inconsistency of the theoretical results
170: \cite{Holovatch92,Holovatch97,Bervillier86} and to perform an
171: independent determination of $m_c$.
172:
173: Relying on the Harris criterion one can determine $m_c$ from the
174: requirement of vanishing the heat capacity critical exponent $\alpha$
175: of the $m$-vector model. We will make use of this condition appealing
176: to a well-established field-theoretical renormalization group (RG)
177: approach \cite{Amit89} which allows perturbative calculating of the marginal
178: order parameter dimension $m_c$. In the next Section we obtain
179: $m_c$ as $\varepsilon$- and pseudo-$\varepsilon$ expansions which
180: follow from the alternative minimal subtraction and massive schemes of
181: field-theoretical renormalization group approach. In order
182: to cope with the divergencies of the expansions and
183: to obtain reliable numerical values based on them we process
184: the expansions by appropriate resummation procedures.
185: The resummation procedures are also
186: analyzed and adjusted in the next Section. The outcomes of the study are
187: presented
188: in the concluding Section \ref{III}.
189:
190: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
191: %%%%%%%%%%%{Procedure of estimation}
192: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
193: \section{The expansions and the resummation}\label{II}
194:
195: As mentioned above,
196: the marginal dimension $m_c$ of a weakly diluted $m$-vector
197: model can be reconstituted from the critical properties of a ``pure''
198: $m$-vector model.
199: Considering the heat capacity critical exponent $\alpha$ of
200: a ``pure'' model as a function of the order parameter component number $m$, one
201: can write the master equation for determining $m_c$ as follows:
202: \begin{equation}
203: \label{alpha}
204: \alpha(m_c)=0.
205: \end{equation}
206: The treatment of Eq. (\ref{alpha}) by means of the field-theoretical
207: RG approach can be performed in various schemes. Two of them are
208: most widely used in the theory of critical phenomena. The dimensional
209: regularisation with the minimal subtraction \cite{tHooft72}
210: allows obtaining quantities of interest by familiar $\varepsilon$-expansions
211: \cite{Fisher72} with $\varepsilon=4-d$.
212: As a starting point to obtain the $\varepsilon$-expansion for $m_c$
213: serves the
214: $\varepsilon$-expansion for the critical exponent $\alpha$ of the $m$-vector
215: model, which is known in the five-loop the approximation \cite{Kleinert91}.
216: By keeping the coefficients of the expansions as functions of $m$
217: and reexpanding equation (\ref{alpha}) in $\varepsilon$ we
218: obtain $m_c$ in the form:
219: \begin{eqnarray}
220: \label{epexp}
221: m_c&=&4- 4\varepsilon+ 4.707199{\varepsilon}^{2}-
222: 8.727517{\varepsilon}^{3} \nonumber\\&&+20.878373{\varepsilon}^{4}.
223: \end{eqnarray}
224: Formally, the numerical value of $m_c$ at $d=3$ can be calculated from the
225: expansion (\ref{epexp}) by the substitution $\varepsilon=1$.
226:
227: The renormalization conditions of the RG massive scheme \cite{Parisi80}
228: provide another possibility to obtain the critical properties
229: directly at $d=3$. The traditional calculation of the critical
230: exponents in the massive field theoretical RG scheme implies a numerical
231: analysis of the RG functions. However, the most accurate estimates of the
232: critical exponents of a three-dimensional $m$-vector model
233: \cite{Guida98,Guillou80} are based on a
234: pseudo-$\varepsilon$ expansion technique
235: \cite{Nickel}.
236: This technique avoids intrinsic errors accumulation typical
237: for the numerical processing of the massive RG functions
238: and results in a self-consistent collection of
239: contributions from the different steps of calculations \cite{Guillou80}.
240: On the
241: other hand, introducting the auxiliary pseudo-$\varepsilon$ parameter
242: $\tau$ which mimics the role of the ordinary $\varepsilon$ parameter of the
243: minimal subtraction RG scheme allows to analyse the series by
244: methods well-established for the $\varepsilon$-expansion.
245:
246: In order to obtain a pseudo-$\varepsilon$ expansion for $m_c$ we start from
247: the expansions of RG functions of $m$-vector model which
248: within the massive scheme have been calculated in the six-loop approximation
249: \cite{Sokolov95}.
250: Introducing into functions \cite{Sokolov95}
251: the parameter $\tau$ (see \cite{Guillou80} for details)
252: we obtain the
253: pseudo-$\varepsilon$ expansion for $m_c$ at $d=3$ as follows:
254: \begin{eqnarray}\label{masexp}
255: m_c&=&4-8/3\tau+ 0.766489{\tau}^{2}-
256: 0.293632{\tau}^{3} \nonumber\\
257: &&+0.193141{\tau}^{4}-0.192714{\tau}^{5}.
258: \end{eqnarray}
259: Again, the resulting numerical value of $m_c$ can be obtained from
260: expansion (\ref{masexp}) by the final substitution $\tau=1$.
261:
262: The explicit form of expansions (\ref{epexp}) and (\ref{masexp})
263: is sufficient in principle to estimate the numerical value of
264: $m_c$. However, the series for RG functions are known to be of
265: asymptotic nature \cite{Lipatov77,Guillou77,Brezin78} and
266: must be resummed before the final substitutions
267: $\varepsilon=1$ ($\tau=1$). An explicit form of the asymptotic
268: of series (\ref{epexp})--(\ref{masexp}) has not
269: been obtained, contrary to $\varepsilon$-expansions for the $m$-vector model
270: critical exponents. Consequently, the applicability of resummation procedures to
271: the series of $m_c$ is only conjectured.
272:
273: A resummation procedure, which in different modifications is
274: commonly used in the studies of asymptotic series, is the
275: integral Borel transformation \cite{Hardy48}. However, this technique
276: implies explicit knowledge of the general term of a series and thus cannot
277: be applied here, where only truncated sums of the series are known.
278: On the other hand neither can we use the resummation procedures based on
279: the conformal mapping technique
280: \cite{Guillou80} since even estimates on large-order order
281: behaviour of expansions terms are unavailable. In the case of the series
282: (\ref{epexp})--(\ref{masexp}) we are restricted to the simplest procedures
283: which do not imply such estimates.
284:
285: Let us start the analysis by representing series (\ref{epexp})
286: by means of Pad\'e approximants
287: $\left[ M/N \right](x)=\sum_{i=0}^M a_i x^i/\sum_{j=0}^N b_j x^j$
288: in the variable $x=\varepsilon$ \cite{Baker81}.
289: The result for $m_c$ is shown in the form of a Pad\'e table (\ref{Pademin}),
290: where the number of the row, $M$, and that of the column, $N$, correspond to the
291: order of the numerator and that of the denominator of the Pad\'e approximant
292: $\left[
293: M/N\right]$ respectively. Subsequently,
294: ${\it o}$ denotes approximants which can not be constructed
295: within the considered approximation, while small numbers in (\ref{Pademin})
296: indicate that approximants have poles (at $\varepsilon=6.52$
297: and $\varepsilon=1.11$ for $\left[0/2\right]$
298: and $\left[0/4\right]$ respectively) and thus are unreliable.
299: \begin{equation}
300: \label{Pademin}
301: \left [\begin {array}{ccccc} 4& 2& ^{2.1939}& 1.5086& ^{6.1528}
302: \\\noalign{\medskip} 0& 2.1624& 2.0316& 1.9365&{\it o}
303: \\\noalign{\medskip} 4.7072& 1.6493& 1.9208&{\it o}&{\it
304: o}\\\noalign{\medskip}- 4.0203& 2.1344&{\it o}&{\it
305: o}&{\it o}\\\noalign{\medskip} 16.858&{\it o}&{\it
306: o}&{\it o}&{\it o}\end {array}\right ].
307: \end{equation}
308: The first column of table (\ref{Pademin}) represents a
309: straightforward summation of series (\ref{epexp}) terms
310: and obviously shows the divergence of results with the increase of
311: the approximation order. Conversely,
312: the convergence of numbers is observed along the main and next to main
313: diagonals of the table. For instance, the expected
314: inequality $m_c<2$ can be obtained already within the fourth and the fifth
315: order of the $\varepsilon$-expansion (\ref{epexp}).
316:
317: The results of Pad\'e-analysis of the pseudo-$\varepsilon$ expansion
318: (\ref{masexp}) are presented in table (\ref{Pademas}) in the
319: same notations as in table (\ref{Pademin}).
320: \begin{equation}
321: \label{Pademas}
322: \left [\begin {array}{cccccc} 4& 2.4& 2.0839& 1.9669& 1.9398
323: & 1.9106\\\noalign{\medskip} 1.3333& 1.9287& ^{1.8799}& 1.9311&
324: ^{2.2425}&{\it o}\\\noalign{\medskip} 2.0998& 1.8875& 1.9084&
325: 1.9085&{\it o}&{\it o}\\\noalign{\medskip} 1.8062&
326: 1.9227& 1.9085&{\it o}&{\it o}&{\it o}
327: \\\noalign{\medskip} 1.9993& 1.9029&{\it o}&{\it o}&{
328: \it o}&{\it o}\\\noalign{\medskip} 1.8066&{\it o}&{
329: \it o}&{\it o}&{\it o}&{\it o}\end {array}
330: \right ].
331: \end{equation}
332: Again, small numbers correspond to unreliable
333: approximants with the poles at $\tau=7.29$ and
334: $\tau=0.907$ for $\left[1/2\right]$
335: and $\left[1/4\right]$ respectively.
336: The distinguishing property of table (\ref{Pademin})
337: is a convergence of the results on the basis of
338: a mere summation of the pseudo-$\varepsilon$ expansion terms
339: (\ref{masexp}) (the first column of table (\ref{Pademas})).
340: Contrary to the $\varepsilon$-expansion analysis (\ref{Pademin}), the
341: inequality $m_c<2$ is observed already in a four-loop
342: approximation and remains valid in the five- and the six-loop approximations.
343: However, the best convergence is noticed for the approximants parallel
344: to the main diagonal of table (\ref{Pademas}). For instance,
345: the six-loop approximants [3/2] and [2/3] as well as the five-loop
346: approximant [2/2] yield practically the same value
347: of $m_c$ within the fourth digit leading
348: to the estimate $m_c=1.9085$. This number is not yet
349: considered as the most accurate estimate of $m_c$ that one can obtain from
350: expansion (\ref{masexp}).
351:
352: By assuming the factorial divergence of the coefficients of expansions
353: (\ref{epexp}), (\ref{masexp}), one can apply to their analysis a refined
354: Pad\'e--Borel--Leroy resummation procedure which has been successfully used
355: in various tasks of theory of critical phenomena \cite{Pade}. The procedure
356: is based on the integral Borel transformation
357: \cite{Hardy48}, however it
358: uses as an intermediate step an extrapolation by means of a Pad\'e-approximant
359: \cite{Baker81}.
360: More precisely, the procedure is defined by the following algorithm:
361: \begin{itemize}
362: \item
363: starting from the initial sum $S$ of $L$ terms one constructs its
364: Borel--Leroy image
365: \begin{equation}
366: \label{BLimage}
367: S(x)=\sum_{i=0}^La_i x^i\quad\Rightarrow\quad
368: S^{\rm B}(xt)=\sum_{i=0}^L\frac{a_i(x t)^i}{(i+b)!},
369: \end{equation}
370: where $b$ is an arbitrary non-negative number;
371: \item
372: subsequently one extrapolates the Borel--Leroy image
373: (\ref{BLimage}) by a rational
374: Pad\'e approximant
375: $$S^{\rm B}(xt)\quad\Rightarrow\quad\left[ M/N \right] (x t);$$
376: \item
377: the resummed function $S^{\rm Res}$ is finally obtained in the following form:
378: \begin{equation}
379: \label{res}
380: S^{\rm Res}(x)=\int_0^\infty\, dt \exp (-t)t^b
381: \left[ M/N \right] (x t).
382: \end{equation}
383: \end{itemize}
384:
385: Similar to the Pad\'e-analysis, within the
386: Pad\'e--Borel--Leroy resummation procedure,
387: various final estimates of a resummed series can be obtained depending on the
388: type of
389: the Pad\'e approximants chosen. In addition the fit parameter $b$ can be
390: used for adjusting the resummation procedure to provide a self-consistent
391: convergence
392: of the results. In Fig.~\ref{eps} we present the result of the
393: $\varepsilon$-expansion processing by means of the resummation
394: procedure (\ref{BLimage})--(\ref{res}).
395: Here, the estimates of $m_c$ on the basis of the higher three-, four- and
396: five-loop
397: $\varepsilon$-expansion are depicted depending on
398: the approximant type as well as on the fit parameter $b$.
399: Among all the possibilities we chose the approximants
400: close to the main diagonal, namely [1/1], [0/2] in three-,
401: [2/1], [1/2] in four and [3/1], [2/2], [1/3] in the five-loop approximation.
402: Notably, approximants having poles on the real positive semiaxis are
403: considered as unreliable.
404: For instance, Fig.~\ref{eps} displays the real part of values
405: with imaginary parts smaller than $10^{-7}$.
406:
407: Since no information is available on the large-order behaviour
408: of series (\ref{epexp}),
409: all the values of $b$ can be considered as equally suitable.
410: An evident property of all the curves in Fig.~\ref{eps}
411: is a saturation of the value of $m_c$ for large values of $b$.
412: In order to exclude the values on the basis of large $b$ and taking into
413: account that in similar tasks of critical phenomena $b$ accounts for several
414: units, we restrict ourselves only to the values of $b$ within the interval
415: $0\leq b\leq 5$. We neither take into account the approximant
416: $[1/2]$ since it provides only two values within the interval.
417:
418: \vspace{5mm}
419: \begin{figure}[htbp]
420: \begin{picture}(80,230)
421: \setlength{\unitlength}{1mm}
422: \epsfxsize=85mm
423: \epsfysize=75mm
424: \put(-5,4){\epsffile[34 93 531 674]{eps1.eps}}
425: \end{picture}
426: \vspace{5mm}
427: \caption {\label{eps}
428: The estimate of the marginal order parameter dimension $m_c$ obtained
429: on the basis of Pad\'e--Borel--Leroy resummation of the
430: $\varepsilon$-expansion (\protect{\ref{epexp}}) for
431: different values of the fit parameter $b$.
432: The following symbols show the results
433: based on different Pad\'e approximants:
434: $\blacksquare$ and $\bullet$ mean the [1/1], [0/2]
435: approximants,
436: $\blacktriangle$ and $\blacktriangledown$ show [2/1] and [1/2] approximants,
437: while $\blacklozenge$, $+$ and $\times$ denote the [3/1], [2/2] and [1/3]
438: approximants respectively.
439: }
440: \end{figure}
441: \vspace{7mm}
442:
443: To obtain a confidence interval for $m_c$ we
444: analyse the data of Fig.~\ref{eps} in the following manner.
445: As a first step we obtain the central value of $m_c$ on falling look on the data
446: on
447: each approximant separately.
448: To this end we average all the values on the basis of each approximant over
449: $b$, $0\leq b\leq 5$. The corresponding error bars are then determined
450: by a half of the difference between the maximal and minimal values of $m_c$
451: within the
452: considered interval of $b$. The resulting estimates of $m_c$
453: in the successive number of loops are presented in Fig.~\ref{er_eps}, a,
454: where the result on the basis of each working approximant is shown by its
455: central value (black circles) and the error bars.
456: For instance, in the three-loop approximation two confidence intervals
457: correspond to [1/1] (a smaller central value) and [0/2] (a larger central
458: value) approximants; the four-loop approximation contributes by a
459: single estimate on the basis of [2/1] approximant, while the five-loop
460: approximation yields three confidence intervals from the [1/3] (the
461: largest central value), [3/1] (the middle central value) and [2/2]
462: approximants.
463:
464: In order to get a final estimate of $m_c$ within each order of
465: perturbation theory we take up the values on the basis of different
466: approximants of the same order as independent.
467: Doing so allows us to consider their average as
468: an overall estimate of $m_c$ within a given number of loops.
469: The overall estimates of $m_c$ obtained in this way
470: depend on the loop order oscillatively, which permits to suppose that
471: a successive central value lies between two preceding central values.
472: Thus we average the overall estimate on the basis of the
473: approximation order with a corresponding overall estimate from
474: the preceding order, choosing the error bars as a half of a difference
475: between maximal and minimal values from these pairs.
476: Finally, we obtain a sequence of confidence intervals of $m_c$
477: such that error bars of a higher result lie
478: completely within error bars of the previous one.
479:
480: Based on the analysis described above
481: we obtain the following estimates of $m_c$ from the
482: $\varepsilon$-expansion (\ref{epexp}):
483: \begin{eqnarray}
484: \nonumber&{\rm 4LA:}\quad m_c=1.996\pm0.104,&\\
485: &{\rm 5LA:}\quad m_c=1.923\pm0.051.&\label{epsres}
486: \end{eqnarray}
487:
488: One can note from estimates (\ref{epsres}) that only the five-loop
489: $\varepsilon$-expansion excludes the values $m_c\ge2$, and therefore
490: brings about a weakly quenched disorder irrelevancy for the
491: $xy$-model universality class.
492:
493: \begin{figure}
494: \vspace{2mm}
495: \begin{picture}(80,230)
496: \setlength{\unitlength}{1mm}
497: \epsfxsize=85mm
498: \epsfysize=75mm
499: \put(-5,4){\epsffile[28 97 531 679]{mas1.eps}}
500: \end{picture}
501: \vspace{2mm}
502: \caption{\label{mas}
503: The estimate of the marginal order parameter dimension $m_c$ obtained
504: on the basis of Pad\'e--Borel--Leroy resummation of the
505: pseudo-$\varepsilon$ expansion (\protect{\ref{masexp}}) for
506: different values of the fit parameter $b$.
507: The following symbols show the results
508: based on different Pad\'e approximants:
509: $\blacksquare$, $\blacktriangle$, $\blacktriangledown$ denote the results
510: on the base of [1/1], [2/1], [1/2] approximants,
511: $\blacklozenge$, $+$ and $\times$ show the [3/1], [1/3], [2/2] approximants,
512: while $\ast$ and $-$ correspond to [2/3] and [3/2] approximants
513: respectively.
514: }
515: \vspace{2mm}
516: \end{figure}
517:
518: Let us turn now to the Pad\'e--Borel--Leroy analysis of the
519: pseudo-$\varepsilon$ expansion (\protect{\ref{masexp}}).
520: The dependencies of the estimates of $m_c$ on the basis of the
521: pseudo-$\varepsilon$ expansion
522: on the fit parameter $b$ are shown for different approximants types
523: increasing number of loops from three to six
524: in Fig.~\ref{mas}.
525: Since the pseudo-$\varepsilon$ expansion is one order longer,
526: in addition to the approximants of Fig.~\ref{eps}
527: we use here the approximants of the
528: six-loop order, namely
529: the near-diagonal approximants [3/2] and [2/3]. The values
530: of $m_c$ obtained on the basis of the approximant
531: [0/2] do not fit Fig.~\ref{mas} and thus are not presented,
532: though they will be taken into account in the final calculations.
533:
534: Applying the procedure identical to the $\varepsilon$-expansion
535: we obtain the resulting estimates of $m_c$ depending on the
536: type of the approximant as presented in Fig.~\ref{er_eps}, b.
537: For instance, in the three-loop approximation two confidence intervals
538: correspond to [1/1] (smaller central value) and [0/2] (larger central value)
539: approximants; the four-loop approximation contributes by
540: two almost identical estimates on the basis of [1/2]
541: and [2/1] approximants, while the five-loop
542: and the six-loop approximations yield
543: three and two confidence intervals respectively.
544: Subsequently, averaging the overall estimate on the basis of a given
545: loop order with the corresponding overall estimate from
546: a preceding order, one obtains a sequence of convergent confidence intervals
547: for $m_c$:
548: \begin{eqnarray}\nonumber
549: &{\rm 4LA:}\quad m_c=1.976\pm0.117,&\\
550: \label{psepsres} \nonumber
551: &{\rm 5LA:}\quad m_c=1.904\pm0.013,\\
552: &{\rm 6LA:}\quad m_c=1.912\pm0.004.&
553: \end{eqnarray}
554: The sequence of results (\ref{psepsres}) obtained on the basis of the
555: pseudo-$\varepsilon$
556: expansion (\ref{masexp}) shows evidently better convergence properties than the
557: corresponding results (\ref{epsres}) obtained on the basis of the
558: $\varepsilon$-expansion (\ref{epexp}). For instance, the error bar of the
559: five-loop $\varepsilon$-expansion estimate is four times larger than the
560: corresponding estimate on the basis of pseudo-$\varepsilon$.
561:
562:
563:
564: \edtwocol
565: \vspace{5mm}
566: \begin{figure}[htbp]
567: \begin{picture}(180,200)
568: \epsfxsize=65mm
569: \epsfysize=70mm
570: \put(20,4){\epsffile[42 91 501 734]{er_eps.eps}}
571: \epsfxsize=65mm
572: \epsfysize=70mm
573: \put(270,4){\epsffile[81 96 501 729]{er_mas.eps}}
574: \end{picture}
575: \vspace{9mm}
576: \caption{\label{er_eps}
577: The confidence intervals for the marginal order parameter dimension $m_c$
578: of a weakly diluted $m$-vector model as functions of the order of approximation.
579: The left picture presents the result of the Pad\'e--Borel--Leroy resummation of
580: the $\varepsilon$-expansion (\protect{\ref{epexp}}), the right-hand picture
581: corresponds to the analysis of the pseudo-$\varepsilon$ expansion
582: (\protect{\ref{masexp}}).
583: See the text for the whole description.}
584: \end{figure}
585:
586: \vspace{3mm}
587:
588: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
589: \bgtwocol
590: \section{Conclusions}
591: \label{III}
592: In the theory of critical phenomena the values of critical exponents
593: and critical amplitudes ratios have attracted considerable interest of
594: researchers.
595: This study, however, has calculated another important quantity, which
596: is responsible for a crossover phenomenon in the weakly diluted quenched
597: $m$-vector model. Based on the Harris criterion as well as on the
598: field-theoretical renormalization group approach we
599: determined the marginal order parameter dimension $m_c$ of the model.
600: Before our work only one reliable numerical estimate
601: of $m_c$ was obtained \cite{Bervillier86}. The result $m_c=1.942\pm0.026$
602: \cite{Bervillier86} stemmed from the application of a conformal mapping
603: resummation technique to the massive six-loop RG functions at $d=3$.
604: We completed this study with two more results from two different RG schemes.
605: Within the minimal subtraction
606: scheme $m_c$ is obtained as an $\varepsilon$-expansion
607: (\ref{epexp}), while within
608: the massive scheme $m_c$ is calculated as a pseudo-$\varepsilon$
609: expansion
610: (\ref{masexp}). Both series allow to estimate a numerical value
611: of $m_c$ after their analysis by Pad\'e--Borel--Leroy
612: resummation procedure, however the final estimate of the paper
613: $m_c=1.912\pm0.004$ is based on the pseudo-$\varepsilon$
614: expansion. This is explained not only by a longer series
615: calculated for the expansion, but also by its
616: better convergent properties in comparison with the $\varepsilon$-expansion.
617: Such a situation has been already observed for a calculation of a
618: marginal dimension of a cubic model \cite{Folk00b}.
619:
620: Though the obtained value of $m_c$ is very close to the integer value 2,
621: our estimate evidently shows that within the error bars
622: it is slightly smaller than 2.
623: This result implies that universal properties of the
624: $xy$-model are not affected by a weakly quenched disorder at criticality.
625: This conclusion is confirmed by recent experimental studies on the
626: critical behaviour of the superfluid He$^4$ in porous media \cite{He4dil}.
627:
628: We thank Claude Bervillier for useful discussions and Ted Knoy for a
629: thorough reading of the manuscript.
630: \edtwocol
631:
632: \bigskip
633:
634: \begin{referen}
635:
636: \bibitem{Amit89}
637: See, e.~g. D.~J.~Amit {\it Field Theory, the Renormalization Group, and Critical
638: Phenomena} (World Scientist, Singapore, 1989).
639:
640: \bibitem{Stanley68}
641: H.~E.~Stanley,
642: Phys. Rev. Lett {\bf 20}, 589 (1968).
643:
644: \bibitem{note1}
645: R.~Brout, Phys. Rev. {\bf 115}, 824 (1959).
646:
647: \bibitem{Harris74}
648: A.~B.~Harris, J. Phys. C {\bf 7}, 1671 (1974).
649:
650: \bibitem{Guida98}
651: R.~Guida, J.~Zinn-Justin,
652: J. Phys. A {\bf 31}, 8103 (1998).
653:
654: \bibitem{Folk01}
655: R.~Folk, Yu.~Holovatch, T.~Yavors'kii, preprint
656: cond-mat/0106468 (2001), to appear
657: in: Physics Uspekhi (2002).
658:
659: \bibitem{Lipa96}
660: The original result $\alpha=-0.01285 \pm 0.00038$ presented in Ref.
661: [J.~A.~Lipa, D.~R.~Swanson, J.~A.~Nissen,
662: T.~C.~P.~Chui, U.~E.~Israelsson, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 76}, 944 (1996)]
663: is incorrect. However, a new estimate reported in Ref.
664: [J.~A.~Lipa {\em et al.}, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 84}, 4894, (2000)]
665: also yields a negative value of the exponent: $\alpha=-0.01056\pm0.00038$.
666:
667: \bibitem{He4dil}
668: J.~Yoon, M.~H.~W.~Chan,
669: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 78}, 4801 (1997);
670: G.~M.~Zassenhaus, J.~D.~Reppy, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 83}, 4800 (1999).
671:
672: \bibitem{Pelissetto00}
673: A.~Pelissetto, E.~Vicari,
674: Phys. Rev. B {\bf 62} 6393 (2000).
675:
676: \bibitem{Holovatch92}
677: J. Jug, Phys. Rev B {\bf 27}, 609 (1983);
678: Yu.~Holovatch, M.~Shpot, J. Stat. Phys. {\bf 66}, 867 (1992).
679:
680: \bibitem{Holovatch97}
681: Yu.~Holovatch, T.~Yavors'kii,
682: Cond. Mat. Phys. {\bf 11}, 87 (1997);
683: Yu.~Holovatch, T.~Yavors'kii, J. Stat. Phys. {\bf 92}, 785 (1998).
684:
685: \bibitem{Bervillier86}
686: C.~Bervillier, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 34}, 8141 (1986).
687:
688: \bibitem{tHooft72}
689: G.'t Hooft, M.~Veltman,
690: Nucl. Phys. B {\bf 44}, 189 (1972);
691: G.'t Hooft, Nucl. Phys. B {\bf 61}, 455 (1973).
692:
693: \bibitem{Fisher72}
694: K.~G.~Wilson, M.~E.~Fisher,
695: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 28}, 240 (1972).
696:
697: \bibitem{Kleinert91}
698: H.~Kleinert, J.~Neu, V.~Schul\-te-Froh\-lin\-de, K.~G.~Che\-tyr\-kin,
699: S.~A.~Larin,
700: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 272}, 39 (1991); Erratum:
701: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 319}, 545 (1993).
702:
703: \bibitem{Parisi80}
704: G.~Parisi (1973), unpublished;
705: G.~Parisi, J. Stat. Phys. {\bf 23}, 49 (1980).
706:
707: \bibitem{Guillou80}
708: J.~C.~Le Guillou, J.~Zinn-Justin, Phys. Rev. B {\bf 21}, 3976 (1980).
709:
710: \bibitem{Nickel}
711: The pseudo-$\varepsilon$ expansion was introduced by B.~G.~Nickel,
712: see citation 19 in Ref. \cite{Guillou80}.
713:
714: \bibitem{Sokolov95}
715: S.~A.~Antonenko, A.~I.~Sokolov,
716: Phys. Rev. E {\bf 51}, 1894 (1995).
717:
718: \bibitem{Lipatov77}
719: L.~Lipatov,
720: Sov. Phys. JETP {\bf 45}, 216 (1977).
721:
722: \bibitem{Guillou77}
723: E.~Br\'ezin, J.~Le Guillou, J.~Zinn-Justin,
724: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 15}, 1544 (1977).
725:
726: \bibitem{Brezin78}
727: E.~Br\'ezin, G.~Parisi,
728: J. Stat. Phys. {\bf 19}, 269 (1978).
729:
730: \bibitem{Hardy48}
731: G.~H.~Hardy,
732: {\it Divergent Series} (Oxford, 1948).
733:
734: \bibitem{Baker81}
735: G.~A.~Baker, Jn, P.~Graves-Morris,
736: {\it Pad\'e Approximants} (Addison-Wesley: Reading, MA, 1981).
737:
738: \bibitem{Pade}
739: G.~A.~Baker, B.~G.~Nickel, M.~S.~Green, D.~I.~Meiron,
740: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 36}, 1351 (1976);
741: G.~A.~Baker, B.~G.~Nickel, D.~I.~Meiron,
742: Phys. Rev. B {\bf 17} 1365 (1978).
743:
744: \bibitem{Folk00b}
745: R.~Folk, Yu.~Holovatch, T.~Yavors'kii Phys. Rev. B {\bf 62}, 12 195
746: (2000); Erratum: Phys. Rev. B {\bf 63}, 189 901 (2001)
747: \end{referen}
748: \end{document}
749:
750: