cond-mat0206400/s.tex
1: \documentclass[twocolumn,showpacs,a4paper,pre]{revtex4}
2: \usepackage{graphicx}
3: \usepackage{amsmath}
4: \usepackage{amssymb}
5: 
6: \begin{document}
7: 
8: \title{Star-graph expansions for bond-diluted Potts models}
9: \date{\today}
10: 
11: \author{Meik Hellmund}
12: \email{Meik.Hellmund@itp.uni-leipzig.de}
13: \homepage{http://www.physik.uni-leipzig.de/~hellmund}
14: \author{Wolfhard Janke}
15: \email{Wolfhard.Janke@itp.uni-leipzig.de}
16: \affiliation{Institut f{\"u}r Theoretische Physik, Universit{\"a}t Leipzig,
17: Augustusplatz 10/11, D-04109 Leipzig, Germany}
18: 
19: \begin{abstract}
20: We derive high-temperature series expansions for the free energy and the
21: susceptibility of random-bond $q$-state Potts models on hypercubic lattices
22: using a star-graph expansion technique. This method enables the exact
23: calculation of quenched disorder averages for arbitrary uncorrelated coupling
24: distributions. Moreover, we can keep the disorder strength $p$ as well as the
25: dimension $d$ as symbolic parameters. By applying several series analysis
26: techniques to the new series expansions,
27: one can scan large regions of
28: the $(p,d)$ parameter space for any value of $q$. For the bond-diluted
29:  4-state
30: Potts model in three dimensions, which exhibits a rather
31: strong first-order phase transition in the undiluted case, we present
32:  results for the transition 
33: temperature and the effective critical exponent $\gamma$
34: as a function of $p$ as obtained from the analysis of
35: susceptibility series up to order 18. A comparison with recent Monte Carlo
36: data (Chatelain {\em et al.}, Phys.~Rev.~E64, 036120(2001)) 
37:  shows signals for the softening to a second-order transition
38: at finite disorder strength.
39: \end{abstract}
40: \pacs{\\
41: 05.50.+q Lattice theory and statistics (Ising, Potts, etc.) \\
42: 64.60.Cn Order-disorder transformations; statistical mechanics
43:           of model systems\\
44: 64.60.Fr Equilibrium properties near critical points, critical  exponents
45: }
46: 
47: 
48: \maketitle
49: 
50: \section{Introduction}
51: 
52: Systematic series expansions for statistical models defined on a lattice are a
53: well-known method to study phase transitions and critical phenomena
54: \cite{domb3}. They provide an useful complement to large-scale numerical
55: simulations, in particular for quenched, disordered systems where the
56: average over many different disorder realizations is numerically very
57: time consuming and only some points in the vast parameter space of the systems
58: can be sampled with realistic effort.
59: 
60: Using high-temperature series expansions, on the other hand, one can obtain
61: for many quantities results which are
62:  exact up to a certain order in the inverse
63: temperature. Here the infinite-volume limit can be taken without problems and
64: the quenched disorder is treated exactly.
65: Moreover, one can keep the disorder strength $p$ as well as the
66: dimension $d$ as symbolic parameters and therefore analyse much larger regions
67: of the parameter space of disordered systems.
68:  To this end we developed further the method of
69: ``star-graph expansion'' which allows us to take the disorder average on
70: the level of individual graphs exactly and apply it to $q$-state 
71: Potts models with a
72: bimodal quenched distribution of ferromagnetic couplings.
73: Using optimized cluster algorithms for the exact calculation of spin-spin
74: correlators on graphs with arbitrary inhomogeneous couplings,
75: we obtained series up to order 18 in the inverse temperature
76: for the susceptibility and the free energy of bond-diluted
77: Potts models in two, three and four dimensions.  
78: 
79: Depending on the dimension $d$ and the number of states $q$, pure Potts
80: models show first- or second-order phase transitions. According to the Harris
81: criterion~\cite{harris}
82: one expects in the second-order case either the appearance of a new
83: random fixed point ($d=2$, $q=3,4$ and $d=3$, $q=2$) or
84: logarithmic corrections
85: to the pure fixed point ($d=2$, $q=2$).
86: At first-order transitions, randomness softens the transitions. For $d=2$ even
87: infinitesimal disorder induces a continuous transition~\cite{aiz}, whereas for
88: $d=3$, $q>2$ a tricritical point at a finite disorder strength is
89: expected~\cite{card97}.
90: This  softening to a second-order phase transition
91: beyond a tricritical point at some finite disorder strength has recently been
92: verified in Monte Carlo (MC) simulations
93: of the three-dimensional {\em site\/}-diluted 3-state~\cite{balles00}
94: and {\em bond\/}-diluted 4-state~\cite{chat01a} Potts model.
95: 
96: The critical part of the series expansion methods
97:  lies in the extrapolation techniques which are used
98: in order to obtain information on the critical singularity from
99: a finite number of known coefficients of the high-temperature series.
100: One can question the use of these extrapolation techniques in disordered
101: systems, where the complete singularity structure of the function may be very
102: complicated, involving Griffiths-type singularities or logarithmic
103: corrections~\cite{card99}.
104: 
105: Anyhow, we  are able to determine  the transition temperature
106: for the bond-diluted 4-state Potts model in three dimensions
107: reliably up to the vicinity of the geometrical percolation point and in good
108: agreement with analytic estimates~\cite{turb} and MC
109: results~\cite{chat01a}.
110: 
111: The critical exponent $\gamma$ extracted from our analysis appears to be dependent
112: on the disorder strength which is caused by  crossover effects and the
113: complicated singularity structure. Using  sophisticated analysis methods,
114: we find a range of the disorder strength where 
115: $\gamma_{\rm eff}=1$, indicating critical behavior
116: governed by a tricritical point.
117: 
118: The rest of the paper is organized as follows.
119: In Sect.~\ref{sec:m} we briefly recall the model.
120: In Sect.~\ref{sec:s} we describe the
121: methods used for generating the series, and Sect.~\ref{sec:a}
122: is devoted to a representation  of the analysis techniques used
123: and their application to the study of the  bond-diluted 4-state Potts model
124: in three dimensions.
125: 
126: \section{Model}
127: \label{sec:m}
128: The $q$-state Potts model on the hypercubic lattice $\mathbb{Z}^d$, or more
129: generally on any
130: graph $G$ with arbitrary coupling
131: constants $J_{ij}$ assigned to the links $\langle ij\rangle$
132: of $G$, is defined by its partition function
133: %
134: \begin{equation}
135:   \label{eq:1}
136:   Z = \sum_{\{S_i\}} \exp \left(\beta \sum_{\langle ij\rangle }  J_{ij} \delta(S_i, S_j)\right),
137: \end{equation}
138: %
139: where $\beta=1/k_B T$ is the inverse temperature, $S_i=1,\ldots,q$ and
140: $\delta(.,.)$ is the Kronecker symbol.
141: In our series expansion the combination
142: \begin{equation}
143:   \label{eq:v2}
144:  v_{ij} = \frac{e^{\beta J_{ij}}-1}{e^{\beta J_{ij}}-1+q}
145: \end{equation}
146: will be the relevant expansion parameter.
147: In the symmetric high-temperature phase, the
148: susceptibility corresponding to the coupling to an external field $h_i$,
149: $\sum_i h_i \left(\frac{q \delta(S_i,1) -1}{q-1}\right)$,
150: is given for a  graph with $N$ spins  by
151: %
152: \begin{equation}
153:   \label{eq:s1}
154:   \chi = \frac{1}{N} \sum_i \sum_j \left[ \left\langle \frac{q \delta(S_i, S_j)
155:         -1}{q-1}\right\rangle \right].
156: \end{equation}
157: %
158: Quenched disorder averages $[\ldots]$ are taken
159: over an uncorrelated bimodal distribution of the form
160: %
161: \begin{equation}
162:   \label{eq:bi}
163:   P(J_{ij}) = (1-p) \delta(J_{ij}-J_0) + p \delta(J_{ij}- RJ_0),
164: \end{equation}
165: %
166: which can include spin glasses ($R=-1, p=1/2$),
167: random-bond ferromagnets ($0<R<1$) and
168: bond dilution ($R=0$)
169: as special cases. Other distributions can,
170: in principle, also be considered with our method.
171: 
172: 
173: \section{Series generation}
174: \label{sec:s}
175: 
176: \subsection{Basic notations from graph theory}
177: A  graph of order $E$  consists of $E$ links connecting $N$ vertices.
178: We consider only connected, undirected  graphs that are simple:
179:  no link starts and ends at the
180: same vertex and two vertices are never connected by more than one link.
181: Subgraphs are defined by the deletion of links. In this process, isolated
182: vertices can be dropped. A graph of order $E$ has $2^E$
183: (not necessarily non-isomorphic) subgraphs
184:  since each link may be present or absent.
185: These subgraphs may consist of several  connected components
186: and are called clusters.
187: 
188: An articulation point is a vertex the deletion of which renders the graph
189: disconnected. A graph without articulation points is called ``star graph''.
190: 
191: A graph is bipartite if the vertices can be separated into red and black
192: vertices so that no link connects two vertices of the same
193: color. Equivalently, all closed paths in the graph consist of an even number
194: of links.
195: 
196: \subsection{Star-graph expansion method}
197: 
198: There are two well-established methods \cite{domb3} for the systematic
199: generation of high-temperature series expansions,
200: the linked cluster and the star-graph
201: method. The longest known series (up to order $\beta^{25}$)
202: for classical spin models without disorder
203: are produced by linked cluster expansions \cite{butera02}. This technique
204: allows one to obtain series for observables (such as the second moment of the
205: spin-spin correlation function) which have no star-graph
206: expansion. Furthermore, it works with free embeddings of graphs into the
207: lattice which can be counted orders of magnitude faster than the weak
208: embedding numbers used by the star-graph technique. Nonetheless, this method
209: has not yet been applied to problems with quenched disorder.
210: 
211: The star-graph method can be adopted to systems involving quenched disorder
212: \cite{rap1,singh87} since it allows one to take the disorder average
213: on the level of individual graphs.
214: The basic idea is to assemble the  value of some extensive thermodynamic
215: quantity $F$ on a large or even infinite graph from its values on subgraphs:
216: Graphs constitute a partially ordered set under the ``subgraph'' relation.
217: Therefore, for every function  $F(G)$ defined on the set of graphs
218: exists another function $W_F(G)$ such that for all graphs $G$
219: \begin{equation}
220:   \label{eq:2}
221:    F(G) = \sum_{g \subseteq  G} W_F(g),
222: \end{equation}
223: and this function can be calculated recursively via
224: \begin{equation}
225:   \label{eq:3}
226:   W_F(G) = F(G) -  \sum_{g \subset   G} W_F(g).
227: \end{equation}
228: This gives for an infinite (e.g. hypercubic) lattice
229: \begin{equation}
230:   \label{eq:4}
231:   F(\mathbb{Z}^d) = \sum_G (G:\mathbb{Z}^d)\, W_F(G),
232: \end{equation}
233: where $(G:\mathbb{Z}^d)$ denotes the weak
234: embedding number of the graph $G$ in the given
235: lattice structure~\cite{martin74}.
236: 
237: The following observation makes this a useful method:
238: Let $G$ be  a  graph with an articulation vertex
239: where two star subgraphs $G_{1,2}$ are glued together.
240: Then $W_F(G)$ vanishes if
241: \begin{equation}
242:   \label{eq:sg}
243: F(G) = F(G_1) + F(G_2).
244: \end{equation}
245: An observable $F$ for which Eq.~(\ref{eq:sg}) is true on arbitrary graphs
246: with articulation points allows a star-graph expansion. All non-star graphs
247: have zero weight $W_F$ in the sum Eq.~(\ref{eq:4}).
248: 
249: It is easy to see that the (properly normalized) free energy $\log Z$
250: has this property and it can be proved~\cite{singh87} that the inverse
251: susceptibility $1/\chi$ has it, too, even for arbitrary inhomogeneous couplings
252: $J_{ij}$. This restricts the sum in Eq.~(\ref{eq:4}) to a sum over star graphs.
253: The linearity of Eqs.~(\ref{eq:2})-(\ref{eq:4}) enables the calculation of
254: quenched averages over the coupling distribution on the level of individual
255: graphs.
256: 
257: The resulting recipe for the susceptibility series is:
258: 
259: \begin{itemize}
260: \item Graph generation and  embedding number counting.
261: \item Calculation of $Z(G)$ and the correlation matrix\\
262: $M_{nm}(G) = \mathrm{Tr}\, (q\delta(S_n,S_m)-1) e^{-\beta H(\{J_{ij}\})}$\\
263: for all graphs as polynomials in $E$ variables $v_{ij}$.
264: \item Inversion of the $Z$ polynomial as a series up to the desired order.
265: \item Averaging over quenched disorder,\\
266: $N_{nm}(G) = \left[ M_{nm}/Z \right]_{P(J)},$\\
267:   resulting in a matrix of polynomials in $(p,v)$.
268: \item Inversion of the matrix $N_{nm}$  and subgraph subtraction,\\
269:  $W_\chi (G) = \sum_{n,m} (N^{-1})_{nm} - \sum_{g\subset G} W_\chi(g)$.
270: \item Collecting the results from all graphs,\\
271: $1/\chi = \sum_G (G: \mathbb{Z}^d)\; W_\chi(G)$.
272: \end{itemize}
273: 
274: 
275: 
276: \subsection{Generation of star graphs and calculation of embedding numbers}
277: 
278: The most complicated part in every attempt to
279: generate lists of graphs  by recursively adding nodes and edges
280: to a smaller list
281: is the isomorphism test, i.e., the decision whether two
282: given  adjacency lists or adjacency matrices describe the same graph modulo
283: relabelling and reordering of edges and nodes. We used the \texttt{nauty}
284: package by
285: McKay \cite{mckay81} which makes very fast  isomorphism tests by
286: calculating a canonical representation of the
287: automorphism group of the graphs.
288: 
289: {\squeezetable
290: \begin{table}
291: \caption{\label{tab:1}Number of star graphs with $E$ links and
292: non-vanishing embedding numbers on $\mathbb{Z}^d$.}
293: \begin{ruledtabular}
294:   \begin{tabular}{l|*{15}{r|}r}
295:     order $E$&1 &4&6&7&8&9&10&11&12&13&14&15&16&17&18&19\\
296:     \hline
297:     $\#$  &1&1&1&1&2&3&8&9&29&51&142&330&951&2561&7688&23078\\
298:   \end{tabular}
299: \end{ruledtabular}
300: \end{table}
301: }
302: 
303: Since we are only interested in star graphs with non-vanishing
304: weak embedding numbers in $\mathbb{Z}^d$,  the following simple observations are
305: helpful:
306: \begin{itemize}
307: \item Only bipartite graphs occur since $\mathbb{Z}^d$  is bipartite.
308: \item A generic $k$-dimensional embedding  (i.e. one which really needs all
309:    $k$ dimensions)  contributes in $d>k$
310:   dimensions with degeneracy  $\binom{d}{k}$.
311: \item A biconnected graph of odd order $E=2n+1$ has generic embeddings only up
312:   to dimension $n$ since it must have at least two edges in each dimension.
313: \item The only biconnected graph of even order $E=2n$ which has generic
314:   embeddings of dimension $n$ is the cycle of length $2n$. All the other
315:   graphs will use at most $n-1$ dimensions.
316: \end{itemize}
317: 
318: For the embedding count we implemented 
319:  a refined version of the backtracing algorithm by
320: Martin \cite{martin74}.  We did extensive tests to find the optimal algorithm
321: for the ``innermost'' loop, the test for collisions in the embedding, and ended
322: up using optimized hash tables.
323: 
324: \begin{figure}
325: \unitlength6mm
326: \begin{center}
327:   \begin{picture}(8,1)
328: \thicklines
329: \put(0,0){\line(1,0){8}}
330: \put(0,0){\line(0,1){1}}
331: \put(0,1){\line(1,0){8}}
332: \put(8,0){\line(0,1){1}}
333: \put(3,0){\line(0,1){1}}
334: \put(0,0){\circle*{.24}}
335: \put(1,0){\circle*{.24}}
336: \put(2,0){\circle*{.24}}
337: \put(3,0){\circle*{.24}}
338: \put(4,0){\circle*{.24}}
339: \put(5,0){\circle*{.24}}
340: \put(6,0){\circle*{.24}}
341: \put(7,0){\circle*{.24}}
342: \put(8,0){\circle*{.24}}
343: \put(0,1){\circle*{.24}}
344: \put(1,1){\circle*{.24}}
345: \put(2,1){\circle*{.24}}
346: \put(3,1){\circle*{.24}}
347: \put(4,1){\circle*{.24}}
348: \put(5,1){\circle*{.24}}
349: \put(6,1){\circle*{.24}}
350: \put(7,1){\circle*{.24}}
351: \put(8,1){\circle*{.24}}
352: \end{picture}
353: \end{center}
354: \small
355: \begin{eqnarray*}
356:    & 7620 \binom{d}{2} +  76851600    \binom{d}{3}+ 14650620864 \binom{d}{4}\\
357:  &+\; 404500471680\binom{d}{5}+ 3355519311360   \binom{d}{6}
358: \end{eqnarray*}
359: 
360: 
361: \begin{center}
362:   \begin{picture}(6,3)
363: \thicklines
364: \put(0,0){\line(1,0){3.9}}
365: \put(1,1){\line(1,0){3.9}}
366: \put(0,0){\line(1,1){1}}
367: \put(3.9,0){\line(1,1){1}}
368: \put(4.9,1){\line(0,1){1.3}}
369: \put(2.6,0){\line(0,1){1.3}}
370: \put(1.3,1.3){\line(1,0){2.6}}
371: \put(2.3,2.3){\line(1,0){2.6}}
372: \put(1.3,1.3){\line(1,1){1}}
373: \put(2.6,1.3){\line(1,1){1}}
374: \put(3.9,1.3){\line(1,1){1}}
375: \put(0,0){\circle*{.24}}
376: \put(1,1){\circle*{.24}}
377: \put(1.3,0){\circle*{.24}}
378: \put(2.6,0){\circle*{.24}}
379: \put(3.9,0){\circle*{.24}}
380: \put(2.3,1){\circle*{.24}}
381: \put(3.6,1){\circle*{.24}}
382: \put(4.9,1){\circle*{.24}}
383: \put(1.3,1.3){\circle*{.24}}
384: \put(2.6,1.3){\circle*{.24}}
385: \put(3.9,1.3){\circle*{.24}}
386: \put(2.3,2.3){\circle*{.24}}
387: \put(3.6,2.3){\circle*{.24}}
388: \put(4.9,2.3){\circle*{.24}}
389: \end{picture}
390: \end{center}
391: \small
392: \begin{eqnarray*}
393:    &12048 \binom{d}{3}+  396672\binom{d}{4} +  2127360\binom{d}{5}+
394: 2488320\binom{d}{6}
395: \end{eqnarray*}
396: 
397: 
398:   \caption{Two star graphs of order 17 and 19
399: and their weak embedding numbers up to 6 dimensions.}
400:   \label{fig:emb}
401: \end{figure}
402: 
403: By this means, we
404: classified for the first time all star graphs up to order 19 which can be
405: embedded in hypercubic lattices (see Table~\ref{tab:1}) and
406: calculated their (weak) embedding numbers for $d$-dimensional hypercubic
407: lattices (up to order 17 for arbitrary $d$,  order 18 and 19 for
408: dimensions $\leq4$), see Fig.~\ref{fig:emb} for  typical results.
409: 
410: \subsection{Cluster representation}
411: 
412: The partition function and the matrix  of
413: correlations $M_{nm}$ for each graph are calculated
414: with arbitrary symbolic couplings $J_{ij}$ using the cluster representation
415: %
416: \begin{eqnarray}
417:   \label{eq:cl1}
418:   Z &=& q^{N-E} \prod_{\langle ij\rangle} (e^{\beta J_{ij}}-1+q) \; {\mathcal Z},  \\
419:   {\mathcal Z} &=& q^{-N} \mathrm{Tr} \prod_{\langle ij\rangle}\left[1-v_{ij} +v_{ij} q \delta(S_i,S_j)
420:     \right]
421: \label {eq:cl3}\\
422:    &=&\!\sum_{C}  q^{e+c-N}\!\! \left(\prod_{\langle ij\rangle \in C}
423:  v_{ij}\!\right)\!\!\left( \prod_{\langle ij\rangle \notin C} (1-v_{ij})\! \right)\!.\label{eq:cl2}
424: \end{eqnarray}
425: %
426: Here  the sum goes
427: over all clusters $C \subseteq G$, $E$ is the number of links ($=$ order) of the
428: graph $G$, $e$  is the number of links of
429: the cluster and $c$ the number of connected components of $C$.
430: ${\mathcal Z}$ is normalized such that $\log \mathcal Z$ has a star-graph
431: expansion.  This essentially reduces the partition sum from a sum over $q^N$
432: states to a sum over $2^E$ clusters.
433: In the Ising case $q=2$ another huge
434: simplification takes place
435:  since only clusters where all vertices are of even degree contribute
436: to the cluster sum.
437: 
438: 
439: The $2^E$ clusters belonging to a graph
440: are enumerated by Gray codes~\cite{numrec}
441: such that two consecutive clusters in the sum (\ref{eq:cl2}) differ by exactly
442: one (added or deleted) link. Gray codes are a reordering of the binary
443: representation of numbers such that the difference to the successor is in
444: exactly one bit position. For example, for $E=4$  the sequence is
445: 0000, 0001, 0011, 0010, 0110, 0111, 0101, 0100, 1100, 1101,
446: 1111, 1110, 1010, 1011, 1001, 1000 where zeros denote the deleted links.
447: This allows to speed up the calculation
448: considerably by re-using every term in the sum for the calculation of the next
449: one.
450: 
451: The calculation of the susceptibility involves the matrix of correlations
452: $M_{nm}$. The effect of inserting
453: $\frac{q \delta(S_i, S_j) - 1}{q-1}$ into the trace of
454: Eq.~(\ref{eq:cl3})  can easily be seen: we get one if the vertices $n$ and $m$
455:  belong to the same connected component of the cluster and zero otherwise.
456: Therefore,
457: \begin{equation}
458:   \label{eq:clu}
459: M_{nm} \propto  \sum_{C_{nm}} q^{e+c-N} \left( \prod_{\langle ij\rangle \in C}
460:  v_{ij} \right)\left( \prod_{\langle ij\rangle \notin C} (1-v_{ij})\right),
461: \end{equation}
462: where the sum is restricted to all  clusters $C_{nm}\subseteq G$ in
463: which the vertices $n$ and $m$ are connected.
464: 
465: 
466: For the symbolic calculations
467: we developed a C\raise2pt\hbox{\tiny++}
468: template library using an expanded degree-sparse
469: representation of polynomials and series in many variables.
470:  The open source library GMP is used  for the
471: arbitrary-precision arithmetics.
472: 
473: Our longest series, up to order 18, are obtained for the case of bond dilution
474: where (\ref{eq:bi}) simplifies to
475: \begin{equation}
476:   \label{eq:dil}
477:     P(J_{ij}) = (1-p) \delta(J_{ij}-J_0) + p \delta(J_{ij}),
478: \end{equation}
479: since in this case the disorder average for a series is most easily done
480: via
481: \begin{equation}
482:   \label{eq:bd}
483:  [v_1^{n_1}\ldots v_k^{n_k}]_{P(J)} = (1-p)^k v_0^{n_1+\ldots+n_k}.
484: \end{equation}
485: 
486: 
487: 
488: 
489: \section{Series analysis: techniques and results}
490: \label{sec:a}
491: 
492: In the following we shall illustrate the analysis using the
493:   bond-diluted 4-state Potts model
494: in three dimensions as our primary  example.
495: This model
496:  exhibits in the pure case a strong
497: first-order transition which is expected to stay first order up to some
498: finite disorder strength, before it gets softened to a second-order transition
499: governed by a disordered fixed point.
500: 
501: In the latter case we
502:  are interested in locating power-law divergences in the susceptibility
503: series of the form
504: \begin{equation}
505:   \label{eq:div}
506:   \chi (v) = A (v_c-v)^{-\gamma} + \ldots
507: \end{equation}
508: For such a critical behavior 
509: many different series analysis techniques have been
510: discussed in the literature 
511: which all have their merits and drawbacks~\cite{guttmann89}.
512: 
513: To localize a first-order transition point, however,
514: a high-temperature series alone is not sufficient since there  
515:  the correlation length remains finite and no critical singularity occurs. 
516: In analysing series by ratio, Pad{\'e} or differential approximants, the
517: approximant will
518: provide an analytic continuation  of the thermodynamic quantities beyond the
519: transition point into a metastable region on a pseudo-spinodal line
520: with a singularity $T^*_c < T_c$ and effective ``critical exponents''
521: at $T^*_c$.
522: 
523: Employing the techniques described above 
524: we obtained the high-temperature series expansions for the susceptibility up
525: to order~18
526: with coefficients given as polynomials in the disorder strength $p$,
527: as listed in the Appendix for general dimensions $d\leq4$. For
528: such a series in two variables, the method of partial differential
529: approximants~\cite{pda80}
530:  should be well suited. Up to date, however, the only application
531: of this method to a tricritical point \cite{adler97} used a test series of
532: order 50 generated from an exactly solvable model. In our case, it was unable
533: to give conclusive results. Therefore, we confined ourselves to the analysis of
534: single-parameter series for selected values of $p$.
535: 
536: 
537: %
538: \begin{figure}
539: \includegraphics[scale=.33,angle=-90]{fig2.ps}
540:    \caption{Ratio approximants for different dilutions $p$ vs.\ $1/n$.}
541:     \label{fig:1}
542: \end{figure}
543: %
544: The ratio method is the least sophisticated method of series analysis,
545: but usually it is quite robust and
546:  gives  a good first estimate of the series behavior.
547: It  assumes that the expected singularity of the form~(\ref{eq:div})
548: is the closest to the origin. Then the
549: consecutive ratios of series coefficients behave asymptotically as
550: %
551: \begin{equation}
552:   \label{eq:rat}
553:   r_n = \frac{a_n}{a_{n-1}} = v_c^{-1} \left(1+\frac{\gamma-1}{n}\right).
554: \end{equation}
555: %
556: Figure~\ref{fig:1} shows these ratios for different values of $p$.
557: In order to
558: make them visually comparable, they are normalized by their respective
559: critical couplings $v_c$.
560: For small $p$ they show the typical oscillations related to the existence
561: of an antiferromagnetic singularity at $-v_c$. Near the percolation threshold
562: at $p=0.751\,188$~\cite{lorenz98}
563: (where $T_c$ goes to 0) the series is clearly ill-behaved,
564: related to the $\exp(1/T)$ singularity expected there. Besides that, 
565: we observe that the slope
566: ($\propto \gamma-1$) is increasing with $p$, changing from $\gamma<1$ to
567: $\gamma>1$ around $p=0.5$.
568: 
569: The widely used DLog-Pad{\'e} method consists in calculating Pad{\'e}
570: approximants to the logarithmic derivative of $\chi(v)$. The smallest real
571: pole of the approximant is an estimation of $v_c$ and its residue gives
572: $\gamma$.
573: %
574: \begin{figure}
575: \includegraphics[scale=.33,angle=-90]{a.ps}
576:     \caption{Critical temperature for different dilution $p$ as obtained from
577:     MC simulations \cite{chat01a} and DLog-Pad{\'e} series analyses.
578:     The inset shows the difference between the two estimates.}
579:     \label{fig:2}
580: \end{figure}
581: %
582: Figure~\ref{fig:2} compares the critical temperature, estimated from an
583: average of 25-30 Pad{\'e} approximants for each value of $p$~\footnote{%
584: Notice that ``$p$'' in the present notation corresponds to ``$1-p$'' in
585: Ref.~\cite{chat01a}.},
586: with the results  of recent MC simulations \cite{chat01a}.
587: For small $p$, in the first-order region, the series underestimates the
588: critical temperature. As explained above, this is an estimate not of $T_c$
589: but of $T^*_c$. Between $p=0.3$ and $p=0.5$, the estimates confirm,
590: within errors, the MC results, indicating that now both methods see
591: the same second-order transition. Beyond $p=0.5$, the scatter of different
592: Pad{\'e} approximants increases rapidly, related to the crossover to the
593: percolation point.
594: 
595: \begin{figure}
596: \includegraphics[scale=.33,angle=-90]{figq4p04.ps}
597:     \caption{Scattering of different Pad{\'e} approximants at a dilution $p=0.4$:
598: critical exponent $\gamma$ against critical coupling $v_c$.}
599:     \label{fig:3}
600: \end{figure}
601: 
602: 
603: 
604: The situation is more complicated with respect to the critical exponent $\gamma$.
605: A DLog-Pad{\'e} analysis gives inconclusive results due to a large scattering
606: between different Pad{\'e} approximants, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:3}. One
607: possible reason for this failure is the existence of confluent singularities:
608: The dots in Eq.~(\ref{eq:div}) indicate correction terms which can be
609: parametrized as follows:
610: \begin{equation}
611:   \label{eq:div2}
612:   \chi (v) = A (v_c-v)^{-\gamma} [1 + A_1(v_c-v)^{\Delta_1} + A_2 (v_c-v)^{\Delta_2} + \ldots],
613: \end{equation}
614: where $\Delta_i$ are the confluent correction exponents.
615: We used  different
616: more sophisticated analysis methods,
617: such as inhomogeneous differential approximants~\cite{guttmann89}
618: and the methods M1 and M2~\cite{adler91},
619:  especially tailored to deal with
620:  confluent singularities. In the case at hand,
621: the Baker-Hunter method~\cite{bakerhunter} appeared to be quite successful,
622: giving consistent results at larger dilutions $p>0.35$ where the DLog-Pad{\'e}
623: analysis failed.
624:  Assume the function under investigation has confluent singularities
625:  \begin{equation}
626:    \label{eq:b1}
627:    F(z) = \sum_{i=1}^N A_i \left(1-\frac{z}{z_c}\right)^{-\lambda_i} = \sum_{n=0} a_n z^n .
628:  \end{equation}
629: This can be transformed into an auxiliary function $g(t)$ which is
630: meromorphic and therefore suitable for Pad{\'e} approximation. After the
631: substitution $z = z_c(1-e^{-t})$ we expand $F(z(t)) = \sum_n c_n t^n $
632: and construct the  new series
633: \begin{equation}
634:   \label{eq:b2}
635: g(t) = \sum_{n=0} n!\;c_n\; t^n = \sum_{i=1}^N \frac{A_i}{1-\lambda_it}.
636: \end{equation}
637: We see that Pad{\'e} approximants to $g(t)$ have poles at $t=1/\lambda_i$, with
638: residues at the poles of $-A_i/\lambda_i$.
639: This method is applied by plotting these poles and residues for different
640: Pad{\'e} approximants to $g(t)$ as functions of $z_c$. The optimal set of values
641: for the parameters is determined visually from the best clustering of
642: different Pad{\'e} approximants, as demonstrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:4}.
643: 
644: \begin{figure}
645: \includegraphics[scale=.33,angle=-90]{bh1.ps}
646: \includegraphics[scale=.33,angle=-90]{bh2.ps}
647: 
648: 
649:     \caption{Values for the critical exponent $\gamma$ and  amplitude $A$
650: at $p=0.4$ as function of trial $v_c$ estimates from the Baker-Hunter analysis.
651: From the clustering of different Pad{\'e} approximants in both pictures
652: we estimate  $v_c=0.3217,$ $\gamma=0.966,$ and $A = 1.21$.}
653:     \label{fig:4}
654: \end{figure}
655: 
656: Using this method, our results for the critical exponent $\gamma$ are plotted in
657: Fig.~\ref{fig:6}. They show an effective exponent monotonically increasing
658: with $p$ but reaching a
659: plateau at $\gamma=1$ for dilutions between
660: $p=0.42$ and $p=0.46$. The following sharp increase is to be interpreted as
661: due to the crossover to the percolation fixed point $p_c=0.751\,188$, $T_c=0$,
662: where a $\chi \sim \exp(1/T)$ behavior is expected.
663: 
664: 
665: \begin{figure}
666: \includegraphics[scale=.33,angle=-90]{gam_p.ps}
667: 
668: \caption{Effective critical exponent  $\gamma$ as function of the dilution $p$
669: from Baker-Hunter analyses.}
670:   \label{fig:6}
671: \end{figure}
672: 
673: It is well known (see, e.g., Ref.~\cite{barma85}) 
674: that series analysis in crossover
675: situations is extremely difficult. If the parameter $p$ interpolates between 
676: regions governed by different fixed points, the  exponent obtained from a
677:  finite number of terms of a series expansion must cross somehow 
678: between its  universal values, and does this usually quite slowly. 
679: Therefore it does not come as a
680:  surprise that the MC simulations quoted above see 
681: the onset of a second order phase transition already for smaller values of 
682: the disorder strength $p$.     
683:  The mere existence of a plateau in $\gamma_{\rm eff}(p)$, however,  
684: is an indication that here  truly critical behavior is seen. 
685: It is  governed by a 
686: fixed point for which we obtain  $\gamma=1.00(3)$. 
687: Here, as always in series analyses, the error estimates the
688: scattering of different approximants. 
689: 
690: \section{Conclusions}
691: \label{sec:c}
692: 
693: We have implemented a comprehensive toolbox for generating and enumerating
694: star graphs as required for high-temperature series expansions of quenched,
695: disordered systems.
696: Monte Carlo simulations of systems with quenched disorder require an enormous
697: amount of computing time because many realizations have to be simulated for
698: the quenched average. For this reason it is hardly possible to scan a whole
699: parameter range. Using high-temperature series expansions, on the other hand,
700: one can obtain this average exactly. Since the relevant parameters (degree
701: of disorder $p$, spatial dimension $d$, number of states $q$, etc.)
702: can be kept
703: as symbolic variables, the number of potential applications is very large.
704: 
705: Here we  presented an analysis of the three-dimensional bond-diluted 4-state
706: Potts model. The phase diagram confirms recent Monte Carlo results and, by
707: comparing with the numerical data, we also see signals for the onset of a
708: second-order transition at a finite disorder strength.
709: 
710: \begin{acknowledgments}
711:     Support by  DFG grant No.~JA 483/17-1 and partial support from the
712:   German-Israel-Foundation under
713:           grant No.~I-653-181.14/1999 is gratefully acknowledged.
714: \end{acknowledgments}
715: 
716: 
717: \newpage
718: \onecolumngrid
719: 
720: 
721: \appendix*
722: \section{}
723: %\begin{widetext}
724: As an example, we publish here the inverse
725: susceptibility for the bond-diluted 4-state Potts model in $d\leq4 $
726: dimensions up to order $v^{18}$ ($P=1-p$): \\
727: 
728: \small
729: 
730: $\chi^{-1}(P,v,d) =
731:  1 - 2\,P\,v\,{d} + 2\,P^2\,v^2\,{d} -
732:   2\,P^3\,v^3\,{d} +
733:    \left[ 2\,P^4\,{d} - 16\,P^4\,{d\choose 2} \right]\,v^4   +
734:   \left[ -2\,P^5\,{d} + \left(24\,P^4 +
735:      72\,P^5\right){d\choose 2} \right]\,v^5  \\[.2cm] +
736:    \left[ 2\,P^6\,{d} + \left(24\,P^4 -
737:      96\,P^5 - 248\,P^6\right){d\choose 2} - 768\,P^6\,{d\choose 3}
738:  \right]\,v^6 \\[.2cm] +
739:   \left[ -2\,P^7\,{d} + \left( 24\,P^4 -
740:      96\,P^5 + 264\,P^6 +
741:      640\,P^7\right) {d\choose 2} + \left(576\,P^6 +
742:      3264\,P^7\right){d\choose 3} \right]\,v^7 \\[.2cm] +
743:   \left[ 2\,P^8\,{d} + \left(72\,P^4 -
744:      96\,P^5 + 264\,P^6-
745:      216\,P^7 - 1384\,P^8\right) {d\choose 2} +
746:      \left(576\,P^6 - 144\,P^7 -
747:      22704\,P^8\right) {d\choose 3} 
748:   - 62208\,P^8\,{d\choose 4} \right]\,v^8 \\[.2cm] +
749:   \left[ -2\,P^9\,{d} + \left(-72\,P^4 -
750:      288\,P^5 + 264\,P^6 -
751:      312\,P^7 - 1416\,P^8 +
752:      1888\,P^9\right) {d\choose 2} \right.\\ \left.\;\;\;  + \left(576\,P^6  -
753:      720\,P^7  + 720\,P^8 +
754:      66944\,P^9\right) {d\choose 3} + \left(31104\,P^8 +
755:      221312\,P^9\right) {d\choose 4} \right]\,v^9 \\[.2cm] +
756:   \left[ 2\,P^{10}\,{d} +\left(- 72\,P^4 +
757:      288\,P^5 + 648\,P^6 +
758:      384\,P^7 - 144\,P^8 +
759:      9336\,P^9 - 296\,P^{10}\right) {d\choose 2} \right.\\ \left.\;\;\;+
760:      \left(576\,P^6  + 3456\,P^7 +
761:      19296\,P^8 + 75456\,P^9 -
762:      387168\,P^{10}\right){d\choose 3} + \left(31104\,P^8 +
763:      109440\,P^9 - 4000512\,P^{10}\right){d\choose 4} \right]\,v^{10}
764:    \\[.2cm] +
765:   \left[ -2\,P^{11}\,{d} +\left(- 72\,P^4 +
766:      288\,P^5 - 504\,P^6 -
767:      1008\,P^7 - 3024\,P^8 +
768:      3144\,P^9 - 33336\,P^{10} -
769:      9616\,P^{11}\right){d\choose 2} \right.\\ \left. \;\;\; + \left(576\,P^6 -
770:      1440\,P^7 - 8352\,P^8 -
771:      31248\,P^9 - 309744\,P^{10} +
772:      781824\,P^{11}\right){d\choose 3} \right.\\ \left.\;\;\;
773:     + \left( 31104\,P^8 +
774:      11520\,P^9 + 635520\,P^{10} +
775:      10415872\,P^{11}\right){d\choose 4} \right] \, v^{11} \\[.2cm] +
776:   \left[ 2\,P^{12}\,{d} +\left(- 216\,P^4 +
777:      288\,P^5 - 216\,P^6 -
778:      4272\,P^7 + 240\,P^8 +
779:      11856\,P^9 - 4968\,P^{10}  +
780:      81744\,P^{11} + 37320\,P^{12}\right){d\choose 2} \right.\\ \left.\;\;\; +
781:      \left(2880\,P^6 - 31392\,P^7 +
782:      14112\,P^8 + 169200\,P^9 +
783:      489024\,P^{10}
784:      + 2692800\,P^{11} -
785:      5811664\,P^{12}\right){d\choose 3} \right.\\ \left. \;\;\;
786: + \left(31104\,P^8 +
787:      273024\,P^9 + 3204864\,P^{10} +
788:      16037760\,P^{11}   - 179275648\,P^{12}\right){d\choose 4} 
789: \right] \, v^{12}\\[.2cm] +
790:  \left[ -2\,P^{13}\,{d} +
791:      \left(216\,P^4 + 864\,P^5 -
792:      792\,P^6 - 3912\,P^7 +
793:      29736\,P^8 + 5952\,P^9 -
794:      20736\,P^{10} + 23088\,P^{11} \right.\right. \\ \left.\left.\;\;\; -
795:      144624\,P^{12} - 96160\,P^{13}\right){d\choose 2} \right. \\ \left. \;\;\; +
796:      \left(-1728\,P^6 - 31536\,P^7 +
797:      162288\,P^8 + 15408\,P^9 -
798:      223344\,P^{10} - 113760\,P^{11} -
799:      8412192\,P^{12} + 5990784\,P^{13}\right){d\choose 3} \right. \\
800:   \left. \;\;\; + 
801:      \left(31104\,P^8 + 67968\,P^9 +
802:      1022976\,P^{10} - 693504\,P^{11} -
803:      16255872\,P^{12} + 304010112\,P^{13}\right){d\choose 4} 
804: \right]\,v^{13} \\[.2cm] +
805:   \left[ 2\,P^{14}\,{d} +
806:      \left(216\,P^4 - 864\,P^5 -
807:      1944\,P^6 - 8616\,P^7 +
808:      18360\,P^8 - 99600\,P^9 -
809:      65544\,P^{10} + 33936\,P^{11} \right.\right.  \\ \left.   \left. \;\;\; -
810:      86952\,P^{12} + 73704\,P^{13} +
811:      169400\,P^{14}\right){d\choose 2} \right. \\ \left. \;\;\;
812:     + \left( - 1728\,P^6 -
813:      55152\,P^7 + 67248\,P^8  -
814:      894240\,P^9 - 918000\,P^{10} +
815:      2799648\,P^{11} + 8589744\,P^{12} \right.\right. \\ \left.\left.\;\;\; +
816:      58983984\,P^{13}  - 98045424\,P^{14}\right){d\choose 3}
817: \right.\\ \left.\;\;\;  +
818:      \left(31104\,P^8 - 1057536\,P^9 +
819:      17280\,P^{10} + 24870528\,P^{11} +
820:      179980416\,P^{12} + 1095494784\,P^{13}  -
821:      7487817088\,P^{14}\right) {d\choose 4} \right]\, v^{14}\\[.2cm] +
822:  \left[ -2\,P^{15}\,{d} + \left(216\,P^4 -
823:      864\,P^5 + 1512\,P^6 -
824:      4536\,P^7 + 44568\,P^8 -
825:      55200\,P^9 + 168480\,P^{10}  +
826:      363072\,P^{11}  - 11832\,P^{12} \right.\right.  \\ \left.   \left. \;\;\;
827:      +    530040\,P^{13} + 501600\,P^{14} -
828:      145632\,P^{15}\right){d\choose 2} \right.\\ \left.\;\;\; 
829: + \left(- 1728\,P^6 -
830:      41040\,P^7  + 209232\,P^8 -
831:      609984\,P^9 + 1319328\,P^{10} +
832:      7874208\,P^{11} + 5670048\,P^{12} +
833:      24319296\,P^{13} \right.\right.  \\ \left.   \left. \;\;\; 
834:    - 141840288\,P^{14} -
835:      14817536\,P^{15}\right) {d\choose 3} \right.\\ \left.\;\;\; + 
836: \left(31104\,P^8 -
837:      740736\,P^9 + 131328\,P^{10} +
838:      22334976\,P^{11} + 66366720\,P^{12} +
839:      188319744\,P^{13} \right.\right.  \\ \left.   \left. \;\;\;
840: - 1467511296\,P^{14} +
841:      5362518016\,P^{15}\right){d\choose 4} \right]\, v^{15}\\[.2cm] +
842:   \left[ 2\,P^{16}\,{d} + \left(648\,P^4 -
843:      864\,P^5 + 1512\,P^6 +
844:      24336\,P^7 + 38496\,P^8 -
845:      148008\,P^9 + 1656\,P^{10}   +
846:      117024\,P^{11} - 1325376\,P^{12} \right.\right.  \\ \left.
847:    \left. \;\;\; +
848:      7200\,P^{13} - 1644000\,P^{14} -
849:      2926176\,P^{15} - 373984\,P^{16}\right) {d\choose 2} 
850: \right.\\ \left.\;\;\; + \left(
851: - 1728\,P^6 + 163296\,P^7 +
852:      105984\,P^8 - 2305728\,P^9 -
853:      1857888\,P^{10} - 6620544\,P^{11} -
854:      48148992\,P^{12}  + 18163728\,P^{13} \right.\right.  \\ \left.
855:    \left. \;\;\;
856: +  118520640\,P^{14} + 1144225008\,P^{15} -
857:      1918717248\,P^{16}\right){d\choose 3} \right.\\ \left.\;\;\;
858: + \left(217728\,P^8 -
859:      3438720\,P^9 - 7119360\,P^{10} -
860:      64137600\,P^{11} - 149601024\,P^{12} +
861:      1152714240\,P^{13} + 8368094208\,P^{14} \right.\right.  \\ \left.  
862:  \left. \;\;\;+
863:      58294742400\,P^{15} - 317165909504\,P^{16}\right) {d\choose 4} 
864: \right] \, v^{16} \\[.2cm] +
865:  \left[ -2\,P^{17}\,{d} + \left(-
866:      648\,P^4 - 2592\,P^5 +
867:      1512\,P^6 + 15408\,P^7 -
868:      161712\,P^8 - 123384\,P^9 +  66792\,P^{10}
869:  + 39264\,P^{11} \right.\right. \\ \left.\left.\;\;\; -
870:      1976760\,P^{12} + 3413424\,P^{13} +
871:      848256\,P^{14} + 4241568\,P^{15}  +
872:      8541960\,P^{16}  + 2398960\,P^{17}\right){d\choose 2} \right. \\ 
873:   \left. \;\;\; + \left( 
874:      - 1728\,P^6 + 109728\,P^7 -
875:      984096\,P^8 - 1584432\,P^9 +
876:      413424\,P^{10}  - 11287296\,P^{11} -
877:      32069376\,P^{12} + 206240976\,P^{13}  \right.\right. \\ \left.\left.\;\;\; +
878:      380730960\,P^{14} + 1087235856\,P^{15}  -
879:      1859056704\,P^{16} - 2643006384\,P^{17}\right){d\choose 3} 
880:  \right. \\ \left. \;\;\; + \left(
881:     - 93312\,P^8 - 2522880\,P^9 -
882:      4468608\,P^{10} - 63930240\,P^{11} -
883:      127255680\,P^{12} + 1693209600\,P^{13} +
884:      6161021568\,P^{14} \right.\right. \\ \left.\left.\;\;\; + 23385824256\,P^{15} -
885:      50368269312\,P^{16} - 105383991680\,P^{17}\right) {d\choose 4} 
886: \right]\, v^{17}\\[.2cm] +
887:   \left[ 2\,P^{18}\,{d} + \left(- 648\,P^4 +
888:      2592\,P^5 + 4104\,P^6 +
889:      83520\,P^7 - 82080\,P^8 +
890:      465984\,P^9 + 586080\,P^{10}  +
891:      605064\,P^{11} - 166248\,P^{12}   \right.\right. \\ \left.\left.\;\;\; +
892:      8121312\,P^{13} - 4714536\,P^{14} -
893:      2886168\,P^{15} - 3604536\,P^{16}  -
894:      20651832\,P^{17}- 7297424\,P^{18}\right){d\choose 2} 
895: \right.\\ \left.\;\;\; + \left(
896:    -8640\,P^6 + 518400\,P^7 -
897:      492480\,P^8 + 3752592\,P^9  +
898:      12513744\,P^{10} - 23522256\,P^{11} -
899:      66704640\,P^{12} - 53106912\,P^{13}  \right.\right. \\ \left.\left.\;\;\;
900:      -  884626272\,P^{14} - 122168448\,P^{15} +
901:      2205877392\,P^{16} + 22700601216\,P^{17}  -
902:      42014019168\,P^{18}\right){d\choose 3} \right.\\ \left.\;\;\; 
903:  + \left(- 93312\,P^8 +
904:      657024\,P^9 + 23180544\,P^{10} -
905:      169350912\,P^{11} - 762268032\,P^{12} -
906:      3977024256\,P^{13} - 10126195200\,P^{14} \right.\right. \\
907:  \left.\left.\;\;\;
908: +     47139877632\,P^{15} +
909:      379559824128\,P^{16} +
910:      2866361546496\,P^{17} +
911:      3747410465664\,P^{18}\right){d\choose 4} \right]\, v^{18}
912: $
913: %\end{widetext}
914: \twocolumngrid
915: %\bibliography{star}
916: %\bibliographystyle{apsrev}
917: \begin{thebibliography}{21}
918: \expandafter\ifx\csname natexlab\endcsname\relax\def\natexlab#1{#1}\fi
919: \expandafter\ifx\csname bibnamefont\endcsname\relax
920:   \def\bibnamefont#1{#1}\fi
921: \expandafter\ifx\csname bibfnamefont\endcsname\relax
922:   \def\bibfnamefont#1{#1}\fi
923: \expandafter\ifx\csname citenamefont\endcsname\relax
924:   \def\citenamefont#1{#1}\fi
925: \expandafter\ifx\csname url\endcsname\relax
926:   \def\url#1{\texttt{#1}}\fi
927: \expandafter\ifx\csname urlprefix\endcsname\relax\def\urlprefix{URL }\fi
928: \providecommand{\bibinfo}[2]{#2}
929: \providecommand{\eprint}[2][]{\url{#2}}
930: 
931: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Domb and Green}(1974)}]{domb3}
932: \bibinfo{editor}{\bibfnamefont{C.}~\bibnamefont{Domb}} \bibnamefont{and}
933:   \bibinfo{editor}{\bibfnamefont{M.~S.} \bibnamefont{Green}}, eds.,
934:   \emph{\bibinfo{title}{Series Expansions for Lattice Models}},
935:   vol.~\bibinfo{volume}{3} of \emph{\bibinfo{series}{Phase Transitions and
936:   Critical Phenomena}} (\bibinfo{publisher}{Academic Press},
937: \bibinfo{address}{New York},  \bibinfo{year}{1974}).
938: 
939: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Harris}(1974)}]{harris}
940: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{A.~B.} \bibnamefont{Harris}},
941:   \bibinfo{journal}{Journal of Physics C: Solid State Physics}
942:   \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{7}}, \bibinfo{pages}{1671} (\bibinfo{year}{1974}).
943: 
944: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Aizenman and Wehr}(1989)}]{aiz}
945: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{M.}~\bibnamefont{Aizenman}} \bibnamefont{and}
946:   \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{J.}~\bibnamefont{Wehr}},
947:   \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Rev. Lett.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{62}},
948:   \bibinfo{pages}{2503} (\bibinfo{year}{1989}).
949: 
950: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Cardy and Jacobsen}(1997)}]{card97}
951: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{J.}~\bibnamefont{Cardy}} \bibnamefont{and}
952:   \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{J.~L.} \bibnamefont{Jacobsen}},
953:   \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Rev. Lett.} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{79}},
954:   \bibinfo{pages}{4063} (\bibinfo{year}{1997}).
955: 
956: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Ballesteros et~al.}(2000)\citenamefont{Ballesteros,
957:   Fern{\'a}ndez, Mart{\'\i}n-Mayor, Mu{\~n}oz~Sudupe, Parisi, and
958:   Ruiz-Lorenzo}}]{balles00}
959: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{H.~G.} \bibnamefont{Ballesteros}},
960:   \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{L.~A.} \bibnamefont{Fern{\'a}ndez}},
961:   \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{V.}~\bibnamefont{Mart{\'\i}n-Mayor}},
962:   \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{A.}~\bibnamefont{Mu{\~n}oz~Sudupe}},
963:   \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{G.}~\bibnamefont{Parisi}}, \bibnamefont{and}
964:   \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{J.~J.} \bibnamefont{Ruiz-Lorenzo}},
965:   \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Rev. B} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{61}},
966:   \bibinfo{pages}{3215} (\bibinfo{year}{2000}).
967: 
968: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Chatelain et~al.}(2001)\citenamefont{Chatelain, Berche,
969:   Janke, and Berche}}]{chat01a}
970: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{C.}~\bibnamefont{Chatelain}},
971:   \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{B.}~\bibnamefont{Berche}},
972:   \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{W.}~\bibnamefont{Janke}}, \bibnamefont{and}
973:   \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{P.~E.} \bibnamefont{Berche}},
974:   \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Rev. E} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{64}},
975:   \bibinfo{pages}{036120} (\bibinfo{year}{2001}).
976: 
977: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Cardy}(1999)}]{card99}
978: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{J.}~\bibnamefont{Cardy}},
979:   preprint \eprint{cond-mat/9911024}.
980: 
981: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Turban}(1980)}]{turb}
982: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{L.}~\bibnamefont{Turban}},
983:   \bibinfo{journal}{Journal of Physics C: Solid State Physics}
984:   \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{13}}, \bibinfo{pages}{L13} (\bibinfo{year}{1980}).
985: 
986: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Butera and Comi}()}]{butera02}
987: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{P.}~\bibnamefont{Butera}} \bibnamefont{and}
988:   \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{M.}~\bibnamefont{Comi}},
989:   preprint \eprint{hep-lat/0204007}.
990: 
991: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Singh and Chakravarty}(1987)}]{singh87}
992: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{R.~R.~P.} \bibnamefont{Singh}} \bibnamefont{and}
993:   \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{S.}~\bibnamefont{Chakravarty}},
994:   \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Rev. B} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{36}},
995:   \bibinfo{pages}{546} (\bibinfo{year}{1987}).
996: 
997: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Rapaport}(1972{\natexlab{a}})}]{rap1}
998: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{D.~C.} \bibnamefont{Rapaport}},
999:   \bibinfo{journal}{Journal of Physics C: Solid State Physics}
1000:   \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{5}}, \bibinfo{pages}{1830, 2813}
1001:   (\bibinfo{year}{1972}{\natexlab{a}}).
1002: 
1003: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Martin}(1974)}]{martin74}
1004: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{J.~L.} \bibnamefont{Martin}}, in  \cite{domb3},
1005:   pp. \bibinfo{pages}{97--112}.
1006: 
1007: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{McKay}(1981)}]{mckay81}
1008: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{B.~D.} \bibnamefont{McKay}},
1009:   \bibinfo{journal}{Congressus Numerantium} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{30}},
1010:   \bibinfo{pages}{45} (\bibinfo{year}{1981}),
1011:   \bibinfo{note}{http://cs.anu.edu.au/{$\sim$}bdm/nauty/}.
1012: 
1013: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Press et~al.}(1992)\citenamefont{Press, Teukolsky,
1014:   Vetterling, and Flannery}}]{numrec}
1015: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{W.~H.} \bibnamefont{Press}},
1016:   \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{S.~A.} \bibnamefont{Teukolsky}},
1017:   \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{W.~T.} \bibnamefont{Vetterling}},
1018:   \bibnamefont{and} \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{B.~P.}
1019:   \bibnamefont{Flannery}}, \emph{\bibinfo{title}{Numerical Recipes in C}}
1020:   (\bibinfo{publisher}{Cambridge University Press}, 
1021: \bibinfo{address}{Cambridge},
1022: \bibinfo{year}{1992}).
1023: 
1024: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Guttmann}(1989)}]{guttmann89}
1025: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{A.~J.} \bibnamefont{Guttmann}}, in
1026:  vol.~\bibinfo{volume}{13} of
1027:   \emph{\bibinfo{series}{Phase Transitions and Critical Phenomena}}, 
1028: edited by
1029: \bibinfo{editor}{\bibfnamefont{C.}~\bibnamefont{Domb}} \bibnamefont{and}
1030:   \bibinfo{editor}{\bibfnamefont{J.~L.} \bibnamefont{Lebowitz}}, 
1031:   (\bibinfo{publisher}{Academic Press}, \bibinfo{address}{New York},
1032:   \bibinfo{year}{1989}), pp. \bibinfo{pages}{1--234}.
1033: 
1034: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Fisher and Chen}(1982)}]{pda80}
1035: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{M.~E.} \bibnamefont{Fisher}} \bibnamefont{and}
1036:   \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{J.-H.} \bibnamefont{Chen}}, in
1037:   \emph{\bibinfo{booktitle}{Phase Transitions: Carg{\`e}se 1980}}, edited by
1038:   \bibinfo{editor}{\bibfnamefont{M.}~\bibnamefont{L{\'e}vy}},
1039:   \bibinfo{editor}{\bibfnamefont{J.~C.} \bibnamefont{Le~Guillou}},
1040:   \bibnamefont{and}
1041:   \bibinfo{editor}{\bibfnamefont{J.}~\bibnamefont{Zinn-Justin}}
1042:   (\bibinfo{publisher}{Plenum}, \bibinfo{address}{New York},
1043:   \bibinfo{year}{1982}), pp. \bibinfo{pages}{169--216}.
1044: 
1045: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Salman and Adler}(1997)}]{adler97}
1046: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{Z.}~\bibnamefont{Salman}} \bibnamefont{and}
1047:   \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{J.}~\bibnamefont{Adler}},
1048:   \bibinfo{journal}{Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General}
1049:   \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{30}}, \bibinfo{pages}{1979} (\bibinfo{year}{1997}).
1050: 
1051: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Lorenz and Ziff}(1998)}]{lorenz98}
1052: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{C.~D.} \bibnamefont{Lorenz}} \bibnamefont{and}
1053:   \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{R.~M.} \bibnamefont{Ziff}},
1054:   \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Rev. E} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{57}},
1055:   \bibinfo{pages}{230} (\bibinfo{year}{1998}).
1056: 
1057: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Adler et~al.}(1991)\citenamefont{Adler, Aharony,
1058:   Harris, Klein, and Meir}}]{adler91}
1059: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{L.}~\bibnamefont{Klein}},
1060: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{J.}~\bibnamefont{Adler}},
1061:   \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{A.}~\bibnamefont{Aharony}},
1062:   \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{A.~B.} \bibnamefont{Harris}},
1063:    \bibnamefont{and}
1064:   \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{Y.}~\bibnamefont{Meir}},
1065:   \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Rev. B} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{43}},
1066:   \bibinfo{pages}{11249} (\bibinfo{year}{1991}).
1067: 
1068: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{George A.~Baker and Hunter}(1973)}]{bakerhunter}
1069: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{G.~A.}~\bibnamefont{Baker}}
1070:   \bibnamefont{and} \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{D.~L.}
1071:   \bibnamefont{Hunter}}, \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Rev. B}
1072:   \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{7}}, \bibinfo{pages}{3377} (\bibinfo{year}{1973}).
1073: 
1074: \bibitem[{\citenamefont{Barma and Fisher}(1985)}]{barma85}
1075: \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{M.}~\bibnamefont{Barma}} \bibnamefont{and}
1076:   \bibinfo{author}{\bibfnamefont{M.~E.} \bibnamefont{Fisher}},
1077:   \bibinfo{journal}{Phys. Rev. B} \textbf{\bibinfo{volume}{31}},
1078:   \bibinfo{pages}{5954} (\bibinfo{year}{1985}).
1079: 
1080: \end{thebibliography}
1081: 
1082: \end{document}
1083: