1: \documentclass[12pt,a4paper]{article} %
2: \usepackage{feynman} % Feynman graph
3: \usepackage{graphicx} %
4: \def\baselinestretch{1.5}
5: \oddsidemargin 0cm
6: \topmargin -2cm
7: \textwidth 16cm
8: \textheight 24.5cm
9: \begin{document}
10: \begin{center}
11: {\large \bf Critical behavior of disordered systems with replica symmetry breaking}
12: \vspace{0.5cm}
13:
14: {\bf P. V. Prudnikov, V. V. Prudnikov \\
15: Omsk State University, \\
16: Omsk, 644077 Russia}
17: \end{center}
18:
19: \begin{abstract}
20: A field-theoretic description of the critical behavior of weakly disordered systems with
21: a $p$-component order parameter is given. For systems of an arbitrary dimension in the
22: range from three to four, a renormalization group analysis of the effective replica
23: Hamiltonian of the model with an interaction potential without replica symmetry is given
24: in the two-loop approximation. For the case of the one-step replica symmetry breaking,
25: fixed points of the renormalization group equations are found using the Pade-Borel
26: summing technique. For every value $p$, the threshold dimensions of the system that
27: separate the regions of different types of the critical behavior are found by analyzing
28: those fixed points. Specific features of the critical behavior determined by the replica
29: symmetry breaking are described. The results are compared with those obtained by the
30: $\varepsilon$-expansion and the scope of the method applicability is determined.
31: \end{abstract}
32:
33: \section{Introduction}
34:
35: When the renormalization group approach is
36: applied to describe the critical behavior of disordered
37: systems with quenched disorder, the method of replicas
38: \cite{1,2,3} is used to restore the translation symmetry of the
39: effective Hamiltonian describing the interaction of fluctuations.
40: However, in the studies \cite{4,5,6}, it was conjectured
41: that the replica symmetry could be broken in systems
42: with quenched disorder. In \cite{4,5,6}, the physical
43: concept of the occurrence of numerous local energy
44: minima in disordered systems with random transition
45: temperature was used to give a renormalization group
46: description of the $\phi^4$ model with the interaction potential
47: characterized by the broken replica symmetry. For
48: this purpose, the $\epsilon$-expansion technique was used in the
49: lower order of the theory. For systems in which the
50: number of components of the order parameter $p$ is less
51: than four, it was discovered that the breaking of replica
52: symmetry is the crucial factor in the critical behavior. It
53: was shown that, for $p$ in the range from one through
54: four, two modes of the system behavior are possible.
55: The first one determines a nonuniversal critical behavior,
56: which depends on seed values of the model parameters
57: and, ultimately, on the concentration of impurities
58: in the system. The second mode is characterized by the
59: absence of a stable critical behavior, as also is the most
60: interesting case of Ising ($p=1$) systems. Even though
61: the implications of these studies are very interesting,
62: the results of a field-theoretic description of certain
63: homogeneous and disordered systems in the two-loop
64: and higher order approximations based on the asymptotic
65: series summation techniques \cite{7} showed that the
66: stability analysis of various types of critical behavior
67: that uses the first-order terms of the
68: $\epsilon$-expansion can be
69: considered only as a coarse estimate, especially for
70: multivertex statistical models \cite{8}. For this reason, the
71: results of investigation of the replica symmetry breaking
72: (RSB) effects obtained in \cite{4,5,6} require revaluation
73: from the viewpoint of a more accurate approach.
74:
75: To this end, we proposed in \cite{9,10}, in the framework of the field-theoretic
76: approach, a renormalization group description of the model of weakly disordered three-
77: and two-dimensional systems with the fourth-order interaction potential with respect to
78: the order parameter fluctuations, which determines the replica symmetry breaking. An
79: analysis of solutions to the renormalization group equations carried out in the two-loop
80: approximation with the sequential application of the summation technique for Pade-Borel
81: series showed that the critical behavior of three- and two-dimensional systems is stable
82: with respect to the relative influence of the RSB effects, and the former scenario of the
83: quenched disorder influence on the critical behavior is realized \cite{11}.
84:
85: However, the scope of the results obtained in \cite{4,5}
86: remains unclear. In particular, it is interesting to establish
87: the threshold dimensions of the disordered system,
88: $d_c(p)$, that separate the domain of influence of RSB
89: effects from the critical behavior domains in which
90: these effects are insignificant. It is also interesting to
91: apply the renormalization group approach to analyze
92: the behavior of systems with replica symmetry breaking
93: in which no stable critical behavior exists and the
94: strong coupling mode occurs (see \cite{4,5}). A theoretical
95: analysis of this phenomenon is especially important
96: from the viewpoint of the possible manifestation of
97: RSB effects in strongly disordered systems and their
98: observation in computer models of the critical behavior
99: under the impurity concentration exceeding the impurity
100: percolation threshold when extended impurity
101: structures are formed in the system \cite{12}.
102:
103: This paper is devoted to the consideration of the
104: above-mentioned problems. For weakly disordered
105: systems of an arbitrary dimension in the range from
106: three to four, an analysis of the critical behavior of the
107: model with an RSB potential is carried out based on the
108: renormalization group approach in the two-loop
109: approximation with the use of summation techniques.
110: Our analysis does not rely on the $\varepsilon$-expansion technique.
111:
112: \section{Definition of the model
113: and the calculation procedure}
114:
115: The model Ginsburg-Landau Hamiltonian, which
116: describes the behavior of a $p$-component spin system
117: with weakly quenched disorder near the critical point
118: has the form
119: \begin{eqnarray}
120: \label{H}
121: H=\int d^dx\{\frac{1}{2}\sum_{i=1}^{p}[\nabla{\phi}_{i}(x)]^{2}+
122: \frac{1}{2}[\tau-\delta\tau(x)]\sum_{i=1}^{p}{\phi}_{i}^{2}(x)+
123: \frac{1}{4}g\sum_{i,j=1}^{p}{\phi}_{i}^{2}(x){\phi}_{j}^{2}(x)\}
124: \end{eqnarray}
125: where the random phase transition temperature has the
126: Gaussian distribution
127: $\delta\tau(x)$ with the variance $<<(\delta\tau(x))^{2}>>\sim u$,
128: which is determined by a positive constant $u$
129: and is proportional to the concentration of the
130: structure defects. The application of the conventional
131: replica method (see, for example, \cite{6}) makes it possible
132: to average over the temperature fluctuations $\delta\tau(x)$
133: and reduce the problem of the statistical description of a
134: weakly disordered system to the problem of the statistical
135: description of a homogeneous system with the
136: effective Hamiltonian
137: \begin{eqnarray}
138: \label{Hrepl}
139: H_n=\int d^dx\{\frac{1}{2}\sum_{i=1}^{p}\sum_{a=1}^{n}[\nabla{\phi}_{i}^{a}(x)]^{2}+
140: \frac{1}{2}\tau\sum_{i=1}^{p}\sum_{a=1}^{n}[{\phi}_{i}^{a}(x)]^{2}+
141: \frac{1}{4}\sum_{i,j=1}^{p}\sum_{a,b=1}^{n}g_{ab}[{\phi}_{i}^{a}(x)]^{2}[{\phi}_{j}^{b}(x)]^{2}\},
142: \end{eqnarray}
143: Here, the index $a$ enumerates replicas (images) of the original homogeneous component in Hamiltonian
144: (\ref{H}); and the additional vertex $u$, which occurs in the interaction
145: matrix $g_{ab}=g\delta_{ab}-u$, , specifies the effective interaction
146: of fluctuations of the ($n\times{p}$) -component order
147: parameter through ground state of the system with the
148: configuration $\phi(x)=0$ ( at $T\geq T_c$), is performed at the
149: scale of the correlation length, which turns to infinity
150: the defect field. This statistical model is thermodynamically
151: equivalent to the original disordered model in the
152: limit $n\rightarrow 0$.
153:
154:
155: The subsequent renormalization group procedure, which statistically takes into account the
156: contribution of long-wave fluctuations of the order
157: parameter relative to the at the transition temperature
158: $T_c$. This procedure makes it possible to analyze possible
159: types of the critical behavior and conditions of their
160: realization and calculate the critical indexes.
161:
162: However, it was shown in \cite{4,5,6} that a macroscopically
163: large number of spatial regions with $\phi(x) \neq 0$
164: appears in the system due to fluctuations of the random
165: transition temperature at $[\tau - \delta\tau(x)]<0$. These regions
166: are separated from the ground state by potential barriers.
167: To describe the statistical properties of systems
168: with multiple local energy minima, the replica symmetry
169: breaking formalism (suggested by Parisi) was used
170: in \cite{4,5,6} by analogy with spin glasses \cite{9}. According to
171: the reasoning presented in \cite{4,5,6}, the statistical calculation
172: of the contribution of nonperturbation degrees of
173: freedom associated with the order parameter fluctuations
174: relative to the configurations of the field $\phi(x)$ at the
175: local energy minima results (when the replica procedure
176: is applied for the weak disorder) in the appearance
177: of additional interactions of the form in $\sum_{a,b}g_{ab}{\phi}_{a}^{2}{\phi}_{b}^{2}$
178: the effective replica Hamiltonian. Here, the final matrix
179: $g_{ab}$ is no longer replica symmetric with $g_{ab}=g\delta_{ab}-u$, but
180: rather has the RSB Parisi replica structure \cite{13}.
181: According to \cite{4,5,6,13}, the matrix $g_{ab}$ with the RSB
182: structure is parameterized (in the limit $n\rightarrow 0$ ) in
183: terms of its diagonal elements $\tilde{g}$ and the off-diagonal
184: function $g(x)$, which is defined on the interval $0 < x < 1$:
185: $g_{ab}\rightarrow (\tilde{g},g(x))$. Here, operations with the matrices
186: $g_{ab}$ are defined by the rules
187:
188: \begin{eqnarray}
189: \label{mrule}
190: g_{ab}^{k}\rightarrow (\tilde{g}^{k};g^{k}(x)), \ \
191: (\hat{g}^{2})_{ab}=\sum_{c=1}^{n}g_{ac}g_{cb}\rightarrow (\tilde{c};c(x)), \ \
192: (\hat{g}^{3})_{ab}=\sum_{c,d=1}^{n}g_{ac}g_{cd}g_{db}\rightarrow (\tilde{d};d(x)),
193: \end{eqnarray}
194: where
195: \begin{eqnarray}
196: \label{mrule2}
197: \tilde{c}&=& \tilde{g}^{2} - \int_{0}^{1}dx g^{2}(x), \ \
198: c(x) = 2 [\tilde{g} - \int_{0}^{1}dy g(y)]g(x) - \int_{0}^{x}dy [g(x) - g(y)]^2, \\ \nonumber
199: \tilde{d}&=& \tilde{c}\tilde{g} - \int_{0}^{1}dx c(x)g(x), \ \
200: d(x) = [\tilde{g} - \int_{0}^{1}dy g(y)]c(x) + [\tilde{c} - \int_{0}^{1}dy c(y)]g(x) -\\
201: &-& \int_{0}^{x}dy [g(x) - g(y)][c(x) - c(y)]. \nonumber
202: \end{eqnarray}
203: The replica symmetric situation corresponds to $g(x) = {\rm const}$,
204: which is independent of $x$.
205:
206: The renormalization group description of the model
207: specified by the replica Hamiltonian (\ref{Hrepl}) was carried out
208: in the framework of the field-theoretic approach in the
209: two-loop approximation for systems of an arbitrary
210: dimension in the range from three to four. Possible
211: types of critical behavior and their stability in the fluctuation
212: domain are determined by the renormalization
213: group equation for the coefficients of the matrix $g_{ab}$.
214: They were determined by the conventional method
215: based on the Feynman diagram technique for the vertex
216: parts of the irreducible Grin functions and the renormalization
217: procedure. For example, in the two-loop
218: approximation, the two-point vertex function $\Gamma^{(2)}$, the
219: four-point vertex functions $\Gamma^{(4)}_{ab}$, and the two-point
220: function $\Gamma^{(2,1)}_{aa}$ with the insertion $({\phi}_{i}^{a})^{2}$ have the form
221: \begin{eqnarray}
222: \left.\frac{\partial\Gamma^{(2)}}{\partial k^2}\right|_{k^2=0}&=&
223: 1+4fg_{aa}^2+2pf\sum\limits_{c=1}^{n}g_{ac}g_{ca}, \\
224: \left.\Gamma^{(4)}_{ab}\right|_{k_i=0}&=&g_{ab}-p\sum\limits_{c=1}^{n}g_{ac}g_{cb}
225: -4g_{aa}g_{ab}-4g_{ab}^2+(8+16h)g_{ab}^3+(24+8h)g_{aa}^2g_{ab}+ \nonumber\\
226: &+&48hg_{aa}g_{ab}^2+4g_{aa}g_{bb}g_{ab}
227: +8ph\sum\limits_{c=1}^{n}g_{ac}g_{cb}^2
228: +8phg_{ab}\sum\limits_{c=1}^{n}g_{ac}g_{cb}
229: +4phg_{ab}\sum\limits_{c=1}^{n}g_{ac}^2+ \nonumber \\
230: &+&2p\sum\limits_{c=1}^{n}g_{ac}g_{cc}g_{cb}
231: +4pg_{aa}\sum\limits_{c=1}^{n}g_{ac}g_{cb}
232: +p^2\sum\limits_{c,d=1}^{n}g_{ac}g_{cd}g_{db}, \\ \nonumber
233: \left.\Gamma^{(2,1)}_{aa}\right|_{k_i=0}&=&1-p\sum\limits_{c=1}^{n}g_{ca}
234: -2g_{aa}+2pg_{aa}\sum\limits_{c=1}^{n}g_{ca}+(4+12h)g_{aa}^2+ \\
235: &+&6ph\sum\limits_{c=1}^{n}g_{ca}^2+p\sum\limits_{c=1}^{n}g_{cc}g_{ca}
236: +p^2\sum\limits_{c,d=1}^{n}g_{dc}g_{ca}, \\ \nonumber
237: \end{eqnarray}
238: where the notation
239: \begin{eqnarray}
240: &&\left. f(d)=-\frac{1}{J^2}\frac{\partial}{\partial k^2}\int
241: \frac{d^{d}k_1d^{d}k_2}{(k_1^2+1)(k_2^2+1)((k_1+k_2+k)^2+1)}\right|_{k^2=0}, \\ \nonumber
242: &&h(d)=\frac{1}{J^2}\int
243: \frac{d^{d}k_1d^{d}k_2}{(k_1^2+1)^2(k_2^2+1)((k_1+k_2)^2+1)}, \ \
244: J = \int d^{d}k/(k^2+1)^2, \\ \nonumber
245: \end{eqnarray}
246: is used, and the redefinition $g_{ab}\rightarrow g_{ab}/J$ is carried out.
247: The diagram representation of the corresponding contributions
248: to $\Gamma^{(2)}$, $\Gamma^{(4)}_{ab}$ and
249: $\Gamma^{(2,1)}_{aa}$ is shown in \ref{RSBfig}.
250:
251: \begin{figure}[p]
252: \Linewidth{1.2pt}
253: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
254: \Lengthunit=1cm
255: \Nhalfperiods=7
256: \vbox{
257: \vbox{
258:
259: \hbox{ % begin 1 string
260: \GRAPH(hsize=1) % sign Gamma
261: {}
262:
263: %\GRAPH(hsize=3) % Diag G1
264: %{
265: %}
266: \GRAPH(hsize=1) % sign ( = )
267: {}
268:
269: \GRAPH(hsize=3) % Diag G1.1 ( #.$ #- string, $- Diag. )
270: {
271: \mov(1.2,0.6){\LARGE a}
272: }
273: \GRAPH(hsize=1) % sign ( + )
274: {}
275:
276: \GRAPH(hsize=3) % Diag G1.2
277: {
278: \mov(0,0.5){\large$4$}
279: \mov(0.4,0.6){\lin(2.5,0)}
280: \mov(0.4,0.6){\wavearcto(1.5,0)[+1.6]}
281: \mov(0.95,0.6){\wavearcto(1.5,0)[-1.6]}
282: \mov(0.2,0.2){$g_{aa}$}
283: \mov(1.7,0.9){$g_{aa}$}
284: }
285: \GRAPH(hsize=1) % sign ( + )
286: {}
287:
288: \GRAPH(hsize=3) % Diag G1.3
289: {
290: \mov(-0.2,0.5){\large$2p$}
291: \mov(0.4,0.6){\lin(2.2,0)}
292: \Nhalfperiods=12
293: \mov(0.7,1.1){\arcto(1.2,0)[+0.5]\arcto(1.2,0)[-0.5]\wavelin(0,-0.5)}
294: \mov(1.7,1.1){\wavelin(0,-0.5)}
295: \mov(-0.2,1.1){$g_{ac}$}
296: \mov(1.6,1.1){$g_{ac}$}
297: \Nhalfperiods=7
298: }
299: } % end G1 string
300: \vspace{0.3cm}
301: }
302: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
303: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
304: \Lengthunit=1cm
305: \Nhalfperiods=7
306: \vbox{
307:
308: \hbox{ % begin 1 string
309: \GRAPH(hsize=1) % sign Gamma
310: {}
311:
312: %\GRAPH(hsize=3) % Diag 2G
313: %{
314: %}
315: \GRAPH(hsize=1) % sign ( = )
316: {}
317:
318: \GRAPH(hsize=3) % Diag 2G1.1 ( #.$ #- string, $- Diag. )
319: {
320: \mov(1.2,0.6){\LARGE b}
321: }
322: \GRAPH(hsize=1) % sign ( + )
323: {}
324:
325: \GRAPH(hsize=3) % Diag 2G1.2
326: {
327: \Nhalfperiods=10
328: \mov(-1.1,0.5){\large$-p$}
329: \mov(0.4,0.6){\wavelin(0.5,0)\lin(-0.5,0.5)\lin(-0.5,-0.5)}
330: \mov(1.3,0.6){\Circle(1)}
331: \mov(2.15,0.6){\wavelin(-0.5,0)\lin(0.5,0.5)\lin(0.5,-0.5)}
332: \mov(0,1){$g_{ac}$}
333: \mov(1.5,1){$g_{cb}$}
334: \mov(-1.1,0){$a$}
335: \mov(-1.2,1){$a$}
336: \mov(2.05,0){$b$}
337: \mov(1.95,1){$b$}
338: \Nhalfperiods=7
339: }
340: \GRAPH(hsize=1) % sign ( + )
341: {}
342:
343: \GRAPH(hsize=3) % Diag 2G1.3
344: {
345: \mov(-0.5,0.5){\large$-4$}
346: \Nhalfperiods=10
347: \mov(0.7,0.6){\wavelin(0.5,0)\lin(-0.5,0.5)\lin(-0.5,-0.5)}
348: \mov(1.05,0.6){\arcto(0.9,0.5)[+0.5]\arcto(0.9,-0.5)[-0.5]}
349: \mov(1.8,1.1){\wavelin(0,-1)\lin(0.5,0)}
350: \mov(1.65,0.1){\lin(0.5,0)}
351: \mov(1.7,0.6){$g_{aa}$}
352: \mov(-0.8,0){$b$}
353: \mov(-0.9,1){$b$}
354: \mov(1.75,0){$a$}
355: \mov(1.65,1){$a$}
356: \mov(-0.55,0.8){$g_{ab}$}
357: \Nhalfperiods=7
358: }
359: } % end 2G1 string
360: \vspace{0.3cm}
361:
362: \hbox{ % begin 2G2 string
363:
364: \GRAPH(hsize=1){}
365:
366: %\GRAPH(hsize=3){} % Tab
367:
368: \GRAPH(hsize=1) % sign ( + )
369: {}
370:
371: \GRAPH(hsize=3) % Diag 2G2.1
372: {
373: \Nhalfperiods=10
374: \mov(-0.5,0.5){\large$-4$}
375: \mov(0.37,1.1){\lin(2.0,0)}
376: \mov(0.8,1.1){\wavelin(0,-1)}
377: \mov(1.6,1.1){\wavelin(0,-1)}
378: \mov(0,0.1){\lin(2.0,0)}
379: \mov(-0.4,0.6){$g_{ab}$}
380: \mov(1.5,0.6){$g_{ab}$}
381: \mov(-0.4,-0.35){$b$}
382: \mov(-0.5,1.3){$a$}
383: \mov(1.15,-0.35){$b$}
384: \mov(0.95,1.3){$a$}
385: }
386: \GRAPH(hsize=1) % sign ( + )
387: {}
388:
389: \GRAPH(hsize=3) % Diag 2G2.2
390: {
391: \Nhalfperiods=10
392: \mov(-0.3,0.5){\large$8$}
393: \mov(0.4,1.1){\lin(2.5,0)}
394: \mov(0.6,1.1){\wavelin(0,-1)}
395: \mov(1.4,1.1){\wavelin(0,-1)}
396: \mov(2.2,1.1){\wavelin(0,-1)}
397: \mov(-0.2,0.1){\lin(2.5,0)}
398: \mov(-0.6,0.6){$g_{ab}$}
399: \mov(0.2,0.6){$g_{ab}$}
400: \mov(1.0,0.6){$g_{ab}$}
401: \mov(-0.4,-0.35){$b$}
402: \mov(-0.5,1.3){$a$}
403: \mov(1.15,-0.35){$b$}
404: \mov(0.95,1.3){$a$}
405: }
406: \GRAPH(hsize=1) % sign ( + )
407: {}
408:
409: \GRAPH(hsize=3) % Diag 2G2.3
410: {
411: \Nhalfperiods=10
412: \mov(-0.4,0.5){\large$16$}
413: \mov(0.4,1.1){\lin(2.5,0)}
414: \mov(0.8,1.1){\wavelin(0.8,-1)}
415: \mov(1.5,1.1){\wavelin(-0.8,-1)}
416: \mov(2.2,1.1){\wavelin(0,-1)}
417: \mov(-0.2,0.1){\lin(2.5,0)}
418: \mov(-0.2,0.6){$g_{ab}$}
419: \mov(1.1,0.6){$g_{ab}$}
420: \mov(1.9,0.6){$g_{ab}$}
421: \mov(-0.4,-0.35){$b$}
422: \mov(-0.5,1.3){$a$}
423: \mov(1.15,-0.35){$b$}
424: \mov(0.95,1.3){$a$}
425: }
426: } % end 2G2 string
427: \vspace{0.3cm}
428:
429: \hbox{ % begin 2G3 string
430:
431: \GRAPH(hsize=1){}
432:
433: %\GRAPH(hsize=3){} % Tab
434:
435: \GRAPH(hsize=1) % sign ( + )
436: {}
437:
438: \GRAPH(hsize=3) % Diag 2G3.1
439: {
440: \Nhalfperiods=10
441: \mov(-0.4,0.5){\large$4$}
442: \mov(1.2,0.6){\arcto(-0.8,0.5)[-0.5]\arcto(-0.8,-0.5)[+0.5]\wavelin(0.5,0)}
443: \mov(0.25,1.1){\lin(-0.5,0)\wavelin(0,-1)}
444: \mov(0.1,0.1){\lin(-0.5,0)}
445: \mov(1.3,0.6){\arcto(0.8,0.5)[+0.5]\arcto(0.8,-0.5)[-0.5]}
446: \mov(1.95,1.1){\lin(0.5,0)\wavelin(0,-1)}
447: \mov(1.8,0.1){\lin(0.5,0)}
448: \mov(-0.3,0.6){$g_{aa}$}
449: \mov(0.3,0.9){$g_{ab}$}
450: \mov(1.55,0.6){$g_{bb}$}
451: \mov(-1.4,-0.25){$a$}
452: \mov(-1.5,1.25){$a$}
453: \mov(1.35,-0.3){$b$}
454: \mov(1.15,1.25){$b$}
455: }
456: \GRAPH(hsize=1) % sign ( + )
457: {}
458:
459: \GRAPH(hsize=3) % Diag 2G3.2
460: {
461: \Nhalfperiods=10
462: \mov(-0.3,0.5){\large$16$}
463: \mov(0.4,1.1){\lin(1,0)}
464: \mov(0.6,1.1){\wavelin(0,-1)}
465: \mov(1.15,1.1){\lin(0,-1)}
466: \mov(0,0.1){\lin(1,0)}
467: \mov(0.9,1.1){\wavelin(0.7,0)}
468: \mov(0.75,0.1){\wavelin(0.7,0)}
469: \mov(1.35,1.1){\lin(0,-1)\lin(0.7,0)}
470: \mov(1.2,0.1){\lin(0.7,0)}
471: \mov(-0.25,0.6){$g_{aa}$}
472: \mov(0.3,1.3){$g_{ab}$}
473: \mov(0.2,-0.2){$g_{ab}$}
474: \mov(-0.9,-0.25){$a$}
475: \mov(-1.0,1.25){$a$}
476: \mov(0.9,-0.3){$b$}
477: \mov(0.7,1.2){$b$}
478: }
479: \GRAPH(hsize=1) % sign ( + )
480: {}
481:
482: \GRAPH(hsize=3) % Diag 2G3.3
483: {
484: \Nhalfperiods=10
485: \mov(-0.3,0.5){\large$32$}
486: \mov(0.4,1.1){\lin(1,0)}
487: \mov(0.65,1.1){\wavelin(0,-1)}
488: \mov(0.1,0.1){\lin(2.4,0)}
489: \mov(1.0,1.1){\wavelin(0.7,0)\lin(0.35,-0.5)}
490: \mov(1.55,1.1){\lin(-0.35,-0.5)\lin(0.7,0)}
491: \mov(1.05,0.6){\wavelin(0,-0.5)}
492: \mov(0.1,0.6){$g_{aa}$}
493: \mov(0.6,1.3){$g_{ab}$}
494: \mov(0.8,0.3){$g_{ab}$}
495: \mov(-0.8,-0.25){$a$}
496: \mov(-0.9,1.25){$a$}
497: \mov(1.0,-0.3){$b$}
498: \mov(0.8,1.2){$b$}
499: }
500: } % end 2G3 string
501: \vspace{0.3cm}
502:
503: \hbox{ % begin 2G4 string
504:
505: \GRAPH(hsize=1){}
506:
507: %\GRAPH(hsize=3){} % Tab
508:
509: \GRAPH(hsize=1) % sign ( + )
510: {}
511:
512: \GRAPH(hsize=3) % Diag 2G4.1
513: {
514: \Nhalfperiods=10
515: \mov(-0.4,0.5){\large$8$}
516: \mov(0.7,0.6){\wavelin(0.5,0)\lin(-0.5,0.5)\lin(-0.5,-0.5)}
517: \mov(1.05,0.6){\arcto(0.9,0.5)[+0.5]\arcto(0.9,-0.5)[-0.5]}
518: \mov(1.8,1.1){\lin(0.5,0)\wavelin(0,-1)}
519: \mov(1.65,0.1){\lin(0.5,0)}
520: \mov(2.05,1.1){\lin(0.5,0)\wavelin(0,-1)}
521: \mov(1.9,0.1){\lin(0.5,0)}
522: \mov(0.6,0.6){$g_{aa}$}
523: \mov(1.75,0.6){$g_{aa}$}
524: \mov(-0.4,0.9){$g_{ab}$}
525: \mov(-1.3,0){$b$}
526: \mov(-1.4,1){$b$}
527: \mov(1.7,0){$a$}
528: \mov(1.6,1){$a$}
529: }
530: \GRAPH(hsize=1) % sign ( + )
531: {}
532:
533: \GRAPH(hsize=3) % Diag 2G4.2
534: {
535: \Nhalfperiods=10
536: \mov(-0.4,0.5){\large$8$}
537: \mov(0.7,0.6){\wavelin(0.5,0)\lin(-0.5,0.5)\lin(-0.5,-0.5)}
538: \mov(1.05,0.6){\arcto(0.9,0.5)[+0.5]\arcto(0.9,-0.5)[-0.5]}
539: \mov(1.8,1.1){\lin(0.5,0)\wavelin(0.5,-1)}
540: \mov(1.65,0.1){\lin(0.5,0)}
541: \mov(2.05,1.1){\lin(0.5,0)\wavelin(-0.5,-1)}
542: \mov(1.9,0.1){\lin(0.5,0)}
543: \mov(0.7,0.6){$g_{aa}$}
544: \mov(1.65,0.6){$g_{aa}$}
545: \mov(-0.4,0.9){$g_{ab}$}
546: \mov(-1.3,0){$b$}
547: \mov(-1.4,1){$b$}
548: \mov(1.7,0){$a$}
549: \mov(1.6,1){$a$}
550: }
551: \GRAPH(hsize=1) % sign ( + )
552: {}
553:
554: \GRAPH(hsize=3) % Diag 2G4.3
555: {
556: \Nhalfperiods=10
557: \mov(-0.4,0.5){\large$16$}
558: \mov(0.7,0.6){\wavelin(0.5,0)\lin(-0.5,0.5)\lin(-0.5,-0.5)}
559: \mov(1.05,0.6){\arcto(0.9,0.5)[+0.5]\arcto(0.9,-0.5)[-0.5]}
560: \mov(1.8,1.1){\wavelin(0.5,0)\lin(0.25,-0.5)}
561: \mov(1.65,0.1){\lin(0.5,0)}
562: \mov(2.05,1.1){\lin(0.5,0)\lin(-0.25,-0.5)}\mov(1.77,0.6){\wavelin(0,-0.5)}
563: \mov(1.89,0.1){\lin(0.5,0)}
564: \mov(0.7,0.6){$g_{aa}$}
565: \mov(1.65,0.6){$g_{aa}$}
566: \mov(-0.4,0.9){$g_{ab}$}
567: \mov(-1.3,0){$b$}
568: \mov(-1.4,1){$b$}
569: \mov(1.7,0){$a$}
570: \mov(1.6,1){$a$}
571: }
572: } % end 2G4 string
573: \vspace{0.3cm}
574:
575: \hbox{ % begin 2G5 string
576:
577: \GRAPH(hsize=1){}
578:
579: %\GRAPH(hsize=3){} % Tab
580:
581: \GRAPH(hsize=1) % sign ( + )
582: {}
583:
584: \GRAPH(hsize=3) % Diag 2G5.1
585: {
586: \Nhalfperiods=10
587: \mov(-0.5,0.5){\large$8p$}
588: \mov(0.7,0.6){\wavelin(0.5,0)\lin(-0.5,0.5)\lin(-0.5,-0.5)}
589: \mov(1.05,0.6){\lin(0.9,0.5)\lin(0.9,-0.5)}
590: \mov(1.8,1.1){\wavelin(0.5,0)\lin(0,-1)}
591: \mov(1.65,0.1){\wavelin(0.5,0)}
592: \mov(2.05,1.1){\lin(0.5,0)\lin(0,-1)}
593: \mov(1.9,0.1){\lin(0.5,0)}
594: \mov(1.3,-0.2){$g_{cb}$}
595: \mov(1.2,1.3){$g_{cb}$}
596: \mov(-0.4,0.9){$g_{ac}$}
597: \mov(-1.3,0){$a$}
598: \mov(-1.4,1){$a$}
599: \mov(1.7,0){$b$}
600: \mov(1.6,1){$b$}
601: }
602: \GRAPH(hsize=1) % sign ( + )
603: {}
604:
605: \GRAPH(hsize=3) % Diag 2G5.2
606: {
607: \Nhalfperiods=10
608: \mov(-0.1,0.5){\large$8p$}
609: \mov(0.8,1.1){\lin(2.0,0)}
610: \mov(1.2,1.1){\wavelin(0,-1)}
611: \mov(2.0,1.1){\wavelin(0,-0.3)}
612: \mov(1.85,0.6){\Circle(0.4)}
613: \mov(1.7,0.4){\wavelin(0,-0.3)}
614: \mov(0.1,0.1){\lin(2.0,0)}
615: \mov(-0.1,0.6){$g_{ab}$}
616: \mov(1.55,0.85){$g_{ac}$}
617: \mov(1.4,0.3){$g_{ac}$}
618: \mov(-0.4,-0.35){$b$}
619: \mov(-0.5,1.3){$a$}
620: \mov(1.15,-0.35){$b$}
621: \mov(0.95,1.3){$a$}
622: }
623: \GRAPH(hsize=1) % sign ( + )
624: {}
625:
626: \GRAPH(hsize=3) % Diag 2G5.3
627: {
628: \Nhalfperiods=10
629: \mov(-0.3,0.5){\large$4p$}
630: \Nhalfperiods=10
631: \mov(1.1,0.6){\wavelin(0.5,0)\lin(-0.5,0.5)\lin(-0.5,-0.5)}
632: \mov(1.45,0.6){\arcto(0.9,0.5)[+0.5]\arcto(0.9,-0.5)[-0.5]}
633: \mov(2.2,1.1){\lin(0.5,0)}
634: \mov(2.0,1.1){\wavelin(0,-0.3)}
635: \mov(1.85,0.6){\Circle(0.4)}
636: \mov(1.7,0.4){\wavelin(0,-0.3)}
637: \mov(1.65,0.1){\lin(0.5,0)}
638: \mov(1.65,0.85){$g_{ac}$}
639: \mov(1.5,0.3){$g_{ac}$}
640: \mov(-0.9,0){$b$}
641: \mov(-1.0,1){$b$}
642: \mov(1.55,0){$a$}
643: \mov(1.45,1){$a$}
644: \mov(-0.65,0.8){$g_{ab}$}
645: }
646: } % end 2G5 string
647: \vspace{0.3cm}
648:
649: \hbox{ % begin 2G6 string
650:
651: \GRAPH(hsize=1){}
652:
653: %\GRAPH(hsize=3){} % Tab
654:
655: \GRAPH(hsize=1) % sign ( + )
656: {}
657:
658: \GRAPH(hsize=3) % Diag 2G6.1
659: {
660: \Nhalfperiods=10
661: \mov(-0.6,0.5){\large$2p$}
662: \mov(0.4,0.6){\wavelin(0.5,0)\lin(-0.5,0.5)\lin(-0.5,-0.5)}
663: \mov(1.3,0.6){\Circle(1)\wavelin(0,0.5)\wavelin(0,-0.5)}
664: \mov(2.15,0.6){\wavelin(-0.5,0)\lin(0.5,0.5)\lin(0.5,-0.5)}
665: \mov(0,1){$g_{ac}$}
666: \mov(1.5,1){$g_{cb}$}
667: \mov(-1.1,0){$a$}
668: \mov(-1.2,1){$a$}
669: \mov(2.05,0){$b$}
670: \mov(1.95,1){$b$}
671: \mov(0,-0.2){$g_{cc}$}
672: }
673: \GRAPH(hsize=1) % sign ( + )
674: {}
675:
676: \GRAPH(hsize=3) % Diag 2G6.2
677: {
678: \Nhalfperiods=10
679: \mov(-0.4,0.5){\large$4p$}
680: \mov(0.6,0.6){\wavelin(0.5,0)\lin(-0.5,0.5)\lin(-0.5,-0.5)}
681: \mov(1.3,0.6){\Circle(0.6)}
682: \mov(1.95,0.6){\wavelin(-0.5,0)\arcto(0.8,0.5)[+0.5]\arcto(0.8,-0.5)[-0.5]}
683: \mov(2.3,1){\wavelin(0,-0.85)}
684: \mov(0.1,0.85){$g_{bc}$}
685: \mov(1.1,0.85){$g_{ac}$}
686: \mov(2.0,0.6){$g_{aa}$}
687: \mov(-1.15,0){$b$}
688: \mov(-1.25,1){$b$}
689: \mov(1.85,0){$a$}
690: \mov(1.75,1){$a$}
691: }
692: \GRAPH(hsize=1) % sign ( + )
693: {}
694:
695: \GRAPH(hsize=3) % Diag 2G6.3
696: {
697: \Nhalfperiods=10
698: \mov(-0.4,0.5){\large$p^2$}
699: \mov(0.6,0.6){\wavelin(0.5,0)\lin(-0.5,0.5)\lin(-0.5,-0.5)}
700: \mov(1.25,0.6){\Circle(0.6)}
701: \mov(1.4,0.6){\wavelin(0.35,0)}
702: \mov(1.9,0.6){\Circle(0.6)}
703: \mov(2.55,0.6){\wavelin(-0.5,0)\lin(0.5,0.5)\lin(0.5,-0.5)}
704: \mov(-0.1,0.85){$g_{ac}$}
705: \mov(1.85,0.85){$g_{db}$}
706: \mov(0.65,0.15){$g_{cd}$}
707: \mov(-1.25,0){$a$}
708: \mov(-1.38,1){$a$}
709: \mov(2.27,0){$b$}
710: \mov(2.13,1){$b$}
711: }
712: } % end 2G6 string
713: \vspace{0.7cm}
714: }
715: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
716: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
717: \Lengthunit=1cm
718: \Nhalfperiods=7
719: \vbox{
720:
721: \hbox{ % begin 1 string
722: \GRAPH(hsize=1) % sign Gamma
723: {}
724:
725: %\GRAPH(hsize=3) % Diag 2G
726: {
727: }
728: \GRAPH(hsize=1) % sign ( = )
729: {}
730:
731: \GRAPH(hsize=3) % Diag 2G1.1 ( #.$ #- string, $- Diag. )
732: {
733: \mov(1.2,0.6){\LARGE c}
734: }
735: \GRAPH(hsize=1) % sign ( + )
736: {}
737:
738: \GRAPH(hsize=3) % Diag 2G1.2
739: {
740: \Nhalfperiods=10
741: \mov(-0.4,0.5){\large$-p$}
742: \Linewidth{4pt}
743: \mov(0.17,0.6){\lin(0.5,0)}
744: \Linewidth{1.2pt}
745: \mov(0.9,0.6){\Circle(1)}
746: \mov(1.75,0.6){\wavelin(-0.5,0)\lin(0.5,0.5)\lin(0.5,-0.5)}
747: \mov(1.2,0.9){$g_{ca}$}
748: \Nhalfperiods=7
749: }
750: \GRAPH(hsize=1) % sign ( + )
751: {}
752:
753: \GRAPH(hsize=3) % Diag 2G1.3
754: {
755: \mov(-0.2,0.5){\large$-2$}
756: \Nhalfperiods=10
757: \Linewidth{4pt}
758: \mov(0.47,0.6){\lin(0.5,0)}
759: \Linewidth{1.2pt}
760: \mov(0.65,0.6){\arcto(0.9,0.5)[+0.5]\arcto(0.9,-0.5)[-0.5]}
761: \mov(1.4,1.1){\wavelin(0,-1)\lin(0.5,0)}
762: \mov(1.25,0.1){\lin(0.5,0)}
763: \mov(1.3,0.6){$g_{aa}$}
764: \Nhalfperiods=7
765: }
766: } % end 2G1 string
767: \vspace{0.3cm}
768:
769: \hbox{ % begin 2G2 string
770:
771: \GRAPH(hsize=1){}
772:
773: %\GRAPH(hsize=3){} % Tab
774:
775: \GRAPH(hsize=1) % sign ( + )
776: {}
777:
778: \GRAPH(hsize=3) % Diag 2G2.1
779: {
780: \Nhalfperiods=10
781: \mov(-0.7,0.5){\large$2p$}
782: \Nhalfperiods=10
783: \Linewidth{4pt}
784: \mov(-0.2,0.6){\lin(0.5,0)}
785: \Linewidth{1.2pt}
786: \mov(0.5,0.6){\Circle(1.0)}
787: \mov(0.85,0.6){\wavelin(0.4,0)}
788: \mov(1.1,0.6){\arcto(0.9,0.5)[+0.5]\arcto(0.9,-0.5)[-0.5]}
789: \mov(1.85,1.1){\wavelin(0,-1)\lin(0.5,0)}
790: \mov(1.7,0.1){\lin(0.5,0)}
791: \mov(1.75,0.6){$g_{aa}$}
792: \mov(0.2,0.95){$g_{ca}$}
793: \Nhalfperiods=7
794: }
795: \GRAPH(hsize=1) % sign ( + )
796: {}
797:
798: \GRAPH(hsize=3) % Diag 2G2.2
799: {
800: \Nhalfperiods=10
801: \mov(0.0,0.5){\large$4$}
802: \Linewidth{4pt}
803: \mov(0.3,0.6){\lin(0.5,0)}\Linewidth{1.2pt}
804: \mov(0.65,0.6){\arcto(0.9,0.5)[+0.5]\arcto(0.9,-0.5)[-0.5]}
805: \mov(1.4,1.1){\lin(0.5,0)\wavelin(0,-1)}
806: \mov(1.25,0.1){\lin(0.5,0)}
807: \mov(1.63,1.1){\lin(0.5,0)\wavelin(0,-1)}
808: \mov(1.48,0.1){\lin(0.5,0)}
809: \mov(0.2,0.6){$g_{aa}$}
810: \mov(1.35,0.6){$g_{aa}$}
811: }
812: \GRAPH(hsize=1) % sign ( + )
813: {}
814:
815: \GRAPH(hsize=3) % Diag 2G2.3
816: {
817: \Nhalfperiods=10
818: \mov(0.0,0.5){\large$4$}
819: \Linewidth{4pt}
820: \mov(0.3,0.6){\lin(0.5,0)}\Linewidth{1.2pt}
821: \mov(0.65,0.6){\arcto(0.9,0.5)[+0.5]\arcto(0.9,-0.5)[-0.5]}
822: \mov(1.4,1.1){\lin(0.5,0)\wavelin(0.5,-1)}
823: \mov(1.25,0.1){\lin(0.5,0)}
824: \mov(1.63,1.1){\lin(0.5,0)\wavelin(-0.5,-1)}
825: \mov(1.47,0.1){\lin(0.5,0)}
826: \mov(0.3,0.6){$g_{aa}$}
827: \mov(1.25,0.6){$g_{aa}$}
828: }
829: } % end 2G2 string
830: \vspace{0.3cm}
831:
832: \hbox{ % begin 2G3 string
833:
834: \GRAPH(hsize=1){}
835:
836: %\GRAPH(hsize=3){} % Tab
837:
838: \GRAPH(hsize=1) % sign ( + )
839: {}
840:
841: \GRAPH(hsize=3) % Diag 2G3.1
842: {
843: \Nhalfperiods=10
844: \mov(-0.2,0.5){\large$8$}
845: \Linewidth{4pt}\mov(0.5,0.6){\lin(0.5,0)}\Linewidth{1.2pt}
846: \mov(0.85,0.6){\arcto(0.9,0.5)[+0.5]\arcto(0.9,-0.5)[-0.5]}
847: \mov(1.6,1.1){\wavelin(0.5,0)\lin(0.25,-0.5)}
848: \mov(1.45,0.1){\lin(0.5,0)}
849: \mov(1.85,1.1){\lin(0.5,0)\lin(-0.25,-0.5)}\mov(1.57,0.6){\wavelin(0,-0.5)}
850: \mov(1.69,0.1){\lin(0.5,0)}
851: \mov(0.5,0.6){$g_{aa}$}
852: \mov(1.45,0.6){$g_{aa}$}
853: }
854: \GRAPH(hsize=1) % sign ( + )
855: {}
856:
857: \GRAPH(hsize=3) % Diag 2G3.2
858: {
859: \Nhalfperiods=10
860: \mov(-0.5,0.5){\large$4p$}
861: \Linewidth{4pt}\mov(0.5,0.6){\lin(0.5,0)}\Linewidth{1.2pt}
862: \mov(0.85,0.6){\arcto(0.9,0.5)[+0.5]\arcto(0.9,-0.5)[-0.5]}
863: \mov(1.6,1.1){\wavelin(0.5,0)\lin(0,-1)}
864: \mov(1.45,0.1){\wavelin(0.5,0)}
865: \mov(1.85,1.1){\lin(0.5,0)\lin(0,-1)}
866: \mov(1.7,0.1){\lin(0.5,0)}
867: \mov(1.1,-0.2){$g_{ca}$}
868: \mov(1.0,1.3){$g_{ca}$}
869: }
870: \GRAPH(hsize=1) % sign ( + )
871: {}
872:
873: \GRAPH(hsize=3) % Diag 2G3.3
874: {
875: \Nhalfperiods=10
876: \mov(-0.3,0.5){\large$4p$}
877: \Nhalfperiods=10
878: \Linewidth{4pt}\mov(0.5,0.6){\lin(0.5,0)}\Linewidth{1.2pt}
879: \mov(0.85,0.6){\arcto(1.1,0.7)[+0.5]\arcto(1.1,-0.7)[-0.5]}
880: \mov(1.8,1.3){\lin(0.7,0)}
881: \mov(1.65,1.27){\wavelin(0,-0.4)}
882: \mov(1.5,0.6){\Circle(0.5)}
883: \mov(1.35,0.35){\wavelin(0,-0.4)}
884: \mov(1.25,-0.1){\lin(0.7,0)}
885: \mov(1.25,1.0){$g_{ac}$}
886: \mov(1.1,0.15){$g_{ac}$}
887: }
888: } % end 2G3 string
889: \vspace{0.3cm}
890:
891: \hbox{ % begin 2G4 string
892:
893: \GRAPH(hsize=1){}
894:
895: %\GRAPH(hsize=3){} % Tab
896:
897: \GRAPH(hsize=1) % sign ( + )
898: {}
899:
900: \GRAPH(hsize=3) % Diag 2G4.1
901: {
902: \Nhalfperiods=10
903: \mov(-0.3,0.5){\large$p$}
904: \Linewidth{4pt}\mov(0.4,0.6){\lin(0.5,0)}\Linewidth{1.2pt}
905: \mov(1.28,0.6){\Circle(1)\wavelin(0,0.5)\wavelin(0,-0.5)}
906: \mov(2.15,0.6){\wavelin(-0.5,0)\lin(0.5,0.5)\lin(0.5,-0.5)}
907: \mov(1.6,0.8){$g_{ca}$}
908: \mov(0.6,-0.2){$g_{cc}$}
909: }
910: \GRAPH(hsize=1) % sign ( + )
911: {}
912:
913: \GRAPH(hsize=3) % Diag 2G4.2
914: {
915: \Nhalfperiods=10
916: \mov(-0.4,0.5){\large$p^2$}
917: \Linewidth{4pt}\mov(0.37,0.6){\lin(0.5,0)}\Linewidth{1.2pt}
918: \mov(1.25,0.6){\Circle(1.0)}
919: \mov(1.6,0.6){\wavelin(0.55,0)}
920: \mov(2.5,0.6){\Circle(1.0)}
921: \mov(3.35,0.6){\wavelin(-0.5,0)\lin(0.5,0.5)\lin(0.5,-0.5)}
922: \mov(2.8,0.85){$g_{ca}$}
923: \mov(1.1,0.2){$g_{dc}$}
924: }
925: } % end 2G4 string
926: %\vspace{0.3cm}
927: }
928: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
929: }
930: \label{RSBfig}
931: \caption{
932: The diagram representation of contributions to the two-point $\Gamma^{(2)}$ (a),
933: four-point $\Gamma^{(2,1)}_{aa}$ (b), and with the inclusion $({\phi}_{i}^{a})^{2}$
934: (c) vertex functions in the one- and two-loop approximations with the corresponding weighting coefficients.
935: }
936: \end{figure}
937:
938: However, the subsequent renormalization procedure
939: for the vertex functions and the calculation of the $\beta$ and $\gamma$
940: functions, which determine the renormalization group
941: transformations for the interaction constants, are difficult
942: due to the complicated structure of relations (\ref{mrule}) and
943: (\ref{mrule2}) defining operations with matrices $g_{ab}$. The step-like
944: structure of the function $g(x)$ established in \cite{4,5,6}
945: makes it possible to implement the renormalization
946: procedure. In this paper, we restrict ourselves to the
947: consideration of the one-step function $g(x)$:
948: \begin{equation}
949: g(x)= \left\{ \begin{array}{c}
950: g_0, 0 \leq x < x_0, \\ \displaystyle
951: g_1, x_0 < x \leq 1,
952: \end{array} \right.
953: \end{equation}
954: where the coordinate of the step $0\leq x_0 \leq 1$ is an arbitrary
955: parameter that does not evolve under scale transformations
956: and remains the same as in the seed function
957: $g_0(x)$. As a result, the renormalization group transformations
958: of the replica Hamiltonian with RSB are determined
959: by the three parameters $\tilde{g}, g_0, g_1$.
960:
961: The critical properties of the model can be revealed by analyzing the coefficients
962: $\beta_i(\tilde{g}, g_0, g_1)$ $(i=1,2,3)$, $\gamma_{\phi}(\tilde{g}, g_0, g_1)$, and
963: $\gamma_{\phi^2}(\tilde{g}, g_0, g_1)$ of the renormalization group Callan-Symanzik
964: equation \cite{14}. We obtained the following expressions for the $\beta$- and $\gamma$
965: functions in the two-loop approximation in the form of series in the renormalized
966: parameters $\tilde{g}$,$g_0$ and $g_1$:
967: \begin{eqnarray} \label{beta}
968: \displaystyle \beta_1&=&-\tilde{g}+\left (8+p\right ){\tilde{g}}^{2}
969: -p{\it x_0}\,{g_0}^{2}-p\left (1-{\it x_0}\right ){g_1}^{2}+[(8\,f
970: -40\,h+20)p \nonumber \\
971: \displaystyle &+&16\,f-176\,h+88]{\tilde{g}}^{3}+\left (24\,h-8\,f-12
972: \right ){\it x_0}\,p\tilde{g}{g_0}^{2}+(24\,h-8\,f \nonumber \\
973: \displaystyle &-&12)\left (1-{\it x_0}\right )p\tilde{g}{g_1}^{2}-\left (16\,h-8\right )
974: {\it x_0}\,p{g_0}^{3}-\left (16\,h-8\right )\left (1-{\it x_0}
975: \right )p{g_1}^{3}, \nonumber \\
976: \displaystyle\beta_2&=&-g_0+\left (4+2\,p\right )\tilde{g}g_0+
977: \left (2\,p{\it x_0}-4\right ){g_0}^{2}+2\,\left (1-{\it x_0}\right )pg_0g_1 \nonumber \\
978: \displaystyle &+&[(8\,f-48\,h+28)p+16\,f-48\,h+24]{\tilde{g}}^{2}g_0
979: -[((32\,h-16){\it x_0} \\
980: \displaystyle &+&8-32\,h )p+48-96\,h ]\tilde{g}{g_0}^{2}
981: -\left (32\,h-16\right)\left (1-{\it x_0}\right )p\tilde{g}g_0g_1 \nonumber \\
982: \displaystyle &+&[\left (48\,h-8\,f-20\right ){\it x_0}\,p
983: -32\,h+16]{g_0}^{3}+\left (32\,h-8\right )\left (1-{\it x_0}\right )p{g_0}^{2}g_1 \nonumber \\
984: \displaystyle &+&\left (16\,h-12-8\,f\right )\left (1-{\it x_0}\right )pg_0{g_1}^{2}, \nonumber \\
985: \displaystyle\beta_3&=&-g_1+p{\it x_0}\,{g_0}^{2}-\left [p\left
986: ({\it x_0}-2\right )+4\right ]{g_1}^{2}+\left (4+2\,p\right )\tilde{g}g_1
987: +[(8\,f-48\,h \nonumber \\
988: \displaystyle &+&28 )p+16\,f-48\,h+24]g_1{\tilde{g}}^{2}-\left (16\,h-8\right )
989: {\it x_0}\,p\tilde{g}{g_0}^{2}-[ (\left (8-16\,h\right ) {\it x_0} \nonumber \\
990: \displaystyle &-&8 )p+48-96\,h]u_{{0
991: }}{g_1}^{2}+\left (16\,h-8\right ){\it x_0}\,p{g_0}^{3}+\left
992: (8\,h-8\,f-4\right ){\it x_0}\,pg_1{g_0}^{2}\nonumber \\
993: \displaystyle &+&\left [\left (8\,f-24\,h+12\right ){\it x_0}\,p+\left (48\,h-8\,f
994: -20\right )p+16-32\,h\right ]{g_1}^{3}, \nonumber \\
995: \displaystyle\gamma_{\phi}&=&4(4-d)\,f(d)\left [ (p+2){\tilde{g}}^{2}
996: -p{\it x_0}{g_0}^{2}-p(1-{\it x_0}){g_1}^{2}\right ], \nonumber \\
997: \displaystyle\gamma_{{\phi}^{2}}&=&-(4-d)\left [ (p+2)\tilde{g}+p{\it x_0}{g_0}
998: +p(1-{\it x_0})g_1-2(6\,h-2\,f-3\right )\left ((p+2\right ){\tilde{g}}^{2}\nonumber \\
999: \displaystyle&-&p{\it x_0}{g_0}^{2}-p\left (1-{\it x_0}){g_1}^{2}) \right ]. \nonumber
1000: \end{eqnarray}
1001: In order to compare the results of this paper with those
1002: obtained in \cite{4,5,6}, we reversed, by analogy with \cite{4,5,6},
1003: the signs of the off-diagonal elements in the matrix:
1004: $g_{a\neq b}\rightarrow - g_{a\neq b}$. As a result, $g_0$ and $g_1$ became positive
1005: definite. The integrals $f(d)$ and $h(d)$ were calculated
1006: numerically for $3\leq d <4 $.
1007:
1008: It is well known that the series used in perturbation theory are asymptotic, and vertices
1009: of the interaction of the order parameter fluctuations in the fluctuation domain $\tau
1010: \rightarrow 0$ are sufficiently large to directly apply expressions (\ref{beta}). For
1011: this reason, in order to extract the physical information from those expressions, we use
1012: the generalized (for the three-parameter case) Pade-Borel method for summing asymptotic
1013: series. The direct and inverse Borel transformations have the form
1014: \begin{equation}
1015: \begin{array}{rl}
1016: & f(\tilde{g},g_0,g_1)=\sum\limits_{i,j,k}c_{ijk}\tilde{g}^i g_0^j g_1^k=\int\limits_{0}^{\infty}e^{-t}F(\tilde{g}t,g_0t,g_1t)dt, \\
1017: & F(\tilde{g},g_0,g_1)=\sum\limits_{i,j,k}\frac{c_{ijk}}{(i+j+k)!}\tilde{g}^i g_0^j g_1^k.
1018: \end{array}
1019: \end{equation}
1020: In order to find the analytic continuation of the Borel
1021: image of a function, we use the following series in the
1022: auxiliary variable $\theta$
1023: \begin{equation}
1024: {\tilde{F}}(\tilde{g},g_0,g_1,\theta)=\sum\limits_{k=0}^{\infty}\theta^k\sum\limits_{i=0}^{k}\sum\limits_{j=0}^{k-i}\frac{c_{i,j,k-i-j}}{k!}\tilde{g}^i g_0^j g_1^{k-i-j},
1025: \end{equation}
1026: The Pade approximation [L/M] is applied to this
1027: series at the point $\theta=1$. This technique was
1028: successfully used in \cite{8} to describe the critical behavior of certain
1029: systems characterized by several interaction vertices
1030: of the order parameter fluctuations. The symmetry
1031: conservation property of a system when applying a
1032: Pade approximant in the variable . becomes essential
1033: in the description of multivertex models. In this paper,
1034: we used the [2/1] approximant for the calculation of
1035: $\beta$-functions in the two-loop approximation.
1036:
1037: \section{Calculation results}
1038:
1039: It is well known that the nature of the critical behavior
1040: is determined by the existence of a stable fixed point
1041: satisfying the system of equations
1042: \begin{equation}
1043: \label{beta_sys}
1044: \beta_{i}(\tilde{g}^*,g_0^*,g_1^*)=0\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ (i=1,2,3).
1045: \end{equation}
1046:
1047: By numerically solving system (\ref{beta_sys}) for functions
1048: found by the Pade Borel summation technique (for
1049: $p=1,2,3$ ), three types of nontrivial fixed points
1050: were found in the physically interesting domain of
1051: parameters $\tilde{g}^*,g_0^*,g_1^* \geq 0$ (see Tables 1-3). The firsttype
1052: fixed point with $\tilde{g}^*\neq 0, g_0^* = g_1^* = 0$ corresponds
1053: to the critical behavior of the homogeneous system;
1054: the second-type fixed point with $\tilde{g}^*\neq 0$ and $g_0^* = g_1^* \neq 0$
1055: corresponds to the critical behavior of the disordered
1056: system with replica symmetry; and the thirdtype
1057: fixed point with $\tilde{g}^*\neq 0, g_0^* = 0$ and $g_1^* \neq 0$ corresponds
1058: to the critical behavior of the disordered system
1059: with RSB. The values of and at the fixed point
1060: with RSB depend on the coordinate of the step $x_0$.
1061: Tables 1-3 present the values of and for $0\leq x_0 \leq 1$
1062: with the step $\Delta x_0 =0,1$
1063: The possibility to realize one or another type of the
1064: critical behavior for each $p$ depends on the stability of
1065: the corresponding fixed point. The stability criterion of
1066: a fixed point reduces to a condition that the eigenvalues
1067: $\lambda_i$ of the matrix
1068: \begin{equation}
1069: B_{i,j}=\frac{\partial\beta_i(\tilde{g}^*,g_0^*,g_1^*)}{\partial{g_j}}
1070: \end{equation}
1071: belong to the complex right half-plane.
1072:
1073: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%1%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1074: %\newpage
1075: \begin{table}[p]
1076: \hspace{127mm} {\bf Table 1}
1077: \vspace{-6mm}
1078: \begin{center}
1079: {Coordinates of the FPs and eigenvalues of the stability matrix for $p=1$: \\
1080: \vspace{-2mm} a) dimension $d=3.0$ \vspace{2mm}}
1081: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|} \hline
1082: Type&$x_0$& $\tilde{g}^*$ & $g_{0}^*$ & $g_{1}^*$ & $\lambda_1$\hspace{1cm} $\lambda_2$ & $\lambda_3$ \\ \hline
1083: 1 & & 0.1774 & 0 & 0 & 0.6536 \hspace{5mm} $-0.1692$ & $-0.1692$ \\ \hline
1084: 2 & & 0.1844 & $0.0812$ & $0.0812$ & $0.5253\pm0.0893i$ & 0.2112 \\ \hline
1085: 3 & 0.0 & 0.1844 & 0 & $0.0812$ & $0.5253\pm0.0893i$ & $-0.0392$ \\
1086: & 0.1 & 0.1840 & 0 & $0.0829$ & $0.5352\pm0.0983i$ & $-0.0492$ \\
1087: & 0.2 & 0.1835 & 0 & $0.0846$ & $0.5471\pm0.1067i$ & $-0.0599$ \\
1088: & 0.3 & 0.1830 & 0 & $0.0863$ & $0.5607\pm0.1133i$ & $-0.0712$ \\
1089: & 0.4 & 0.1824 & 0 & $0.0880$ & $0.5765\pm0.1180i$ & $-0.0832$ \\
1090: & 0.5 & 0.1817 & 0 & $0.0895$ & $0.5951\pm0.1203i$ & $-0.0959$ \\
1091: & 0.6 & 0.1810 & 0 & $0.0910$ & $0.6172\pm0.1189i$ & $-0.1093$ \\
1092: & 0.7 & 0.1802 & 0 & $0.0924$ & $0.6439\pm0.1114i$ & $-0.1234$ \\
1093: & 0.8 & 0.1793 & 0 & $0.0936$ & $0.6760\pm0.0921i$ & $-0.1381$ \\
1094: & 0.9 & 0.1784 & 0 & $0.0947$ & $0.7135\pm0.0353i$ & $-0.1534$ \\
1095: & 1.0 & 0.1774 & 0 & $0.0957$ & 0.8573 \hspace{5mm} 0.6536 & $-0.1692$ \\ \hline
1096: \end{tabular} \end{center}
1097: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1098: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1099: \begin{center}
1100: {\vspace{-2mm} b) dimension $d=3.985$ \\ \vspace{2mm}}
1101: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|} \hline
1102: Type&$x_0$& $\tilde{g}^*$ & $g_{0}^*$ & $g_{1}^*$ & $\lambda_1$\hspace{1cm}$\lambda_2$ & $\lambda_3$ \\ \hline
1103: 1 & & $0.0917 $ & 0 & 0 & $0.6315$\hspace{5mm} $-0.4163$ & $-0.4163$ \\ \hline
1104: 2 & & $0.1231 $ & $0.1090$ & $0.1090$ & $0.6986\pm0.1311i$ & $ 0.0022$ \\ \hline
1105: 3 & 0.0 & $0.1231 $ & 0 & $0.1090$ & $0.7047\pm0.1069i$ & $-0.0363$ \\ \hline
1106: \end{tabular} \end{center}
1107: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1108: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1109: \begin{center}
1110: {\vspace{-2mm} c) dimension $d=3.986$ \\ \vspace{2mm}}
1111: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|} \hline
1112: Type&$x_0$& $\tilde{g}^*$ & $g_{0}^*$ & $g_{1}^*$ & $\lambda_1$\hspace{1cm} $\lambda_2$ & $\lambda_3$ \\ \hline
1113: 1 & & $0.0916 $ & 0 & 0 & $0.6318$\hspace{5mm} $-0.4165$ & $-0.4165$ \\ \hline
1114: 2 & & $0.1230 $ & $0.1092$ & $0.1092$ & $0.6895\pm0.1453i$ & $-0.0076$ \\ \hline
1115: 3 & 0.0 & $0.1230 $ & 0 & $0.1092$ & $0.7018\pm0.0935i$ & $-0.0359$ \\ \hline
1116: \end{tabular} \end{center}
1117: \end{table}
1118: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1119: %\newpage
1120: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1121: \begin{table}[p]
1122: \hspace{127mm} {\bf Table 2}
1123: \vspace{-6mm}
1124: \begin{center}
1125: { Coordinates of the FPs and eigenvalues of the stability matrix for $p=2$:\\
1126: \vspace{-2mm} a) dimension $d=3.0$ \vspace{2mm}}
1127: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|} \hline
1128: Type&$x_0$& $\tilde{g}^*$ & $g_{0}^*$ & $g_{1}^*$ &$\lambda_1$ & $\lambda_2$ & $\lambda_3$ \\ \hline
1129: 1 & & 0.155830 & 0 & 0 & 0.667315 & $-0.001672$ & $-0.001672$ \\ \hline
1130: 2 & & 0.155831 & $0.000584$ & $0.000584$ & 0.667312 & 0.001682 & $0.000004$ \\ \hline
1131: 3 & 0.0 & 0.155831 & 0 & $0.000584$ & 0.667313 & 0.001683 & $-0.000001$ \\
1132: & 0.1 & 0.155831 & 0 & $0.000614$ & 0.667313 & 0.001684 & $-0.000088$ \\
1133: & 0.2 & 0.155831 & 0 & $0.000648$ & 0.667313 & 0.001685 & $-0.000186$ \\
1134: & 0.3 & 0.155831 & 0 & $0.000686$ & 0.667313 & 0.001686 & $-0.000296$ \\
1135: & 0.4 & 0.155831 & 0 & $0.000729$ & 0.667313 & 0.001687 & $-0.000419$ \\
1136: & 0.5 & 0.155831 & 0 & $0.000778$ & 0.667313 & 0.001687 & $-0.000559$ \\
1137: & 0.6 & 0.155831 & 0 & $0.000833$ & 0.667313 & 0.001688 & $-0.000717$ \\
1138: & 0.7 & 0.155831 & 0 & $0.000896$ & 0.667314 & 0.001690 & $-0.000901$ \\
1139: & 0.8 & 0.155831 & 0 & $0.000971$ & 0.667314 & 0.001692 & $-0.001116$ \\
1140: & 0.9 & 0.155831 & 0 & $0.001058$ & 0.667315 & 0.001694 & $-0.001369$ \\
1141: & 1.0 & 0.155830 & 0 & $0.001163$ & 0.667316 & 0.001696 & $-0.001672$ \\ \hline
1142: \end{tabular} \end{center}
1143: \begin{center}
1144: { \vspace{-2mm} b) dimension $d=3.10$ \\ \vspace{2mm}}
1145: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|} \hline
1146: Type&$x_0$&$\tilde{g}^*$& $g_{0}^*$ & $g_{1}^*$ & $\lambda_1$ & $\lambda_2$ & $\lambda_3$ \\ \hline
1147: 1 & & $0.1499955$ & 0 & 0 & $ 0.689608$ & $-0.009539$ & $-0.009539$ \\ \hline
1148: 2 & & $0.1500170$ & $0.00325$& $0.00325$ & $ 0.689535$ & $ 0.009887$ & $-0.000003$ \\ \hline
1149: 3 & 0.0 & $0.1500170$ & 0 & $0.00325$ & $ 0.689535$ & $ 0.009887$ & $ 0.000109$ \\
1150: & 0.1 & $0.1500169$ & 0 & $0.00341$ & $ 0.689535$ & $ 0.009899$ & $-0.000401$ \\
1151: & 0.2 & $0.1500167$ & 0 & $0.00360$ & $ 0.689536$ & $ 0.009926$ & $-0.000961$ \\ \hline
1152: \end{tabular}\end{center}
1153: \begin{center}
1154: { \vspace{-2mm} c) dimension $d=3.999$ \\ \vspace{2mm}}
1155: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|} \hline
1156: Type&$x_0$&$\tilde{g}^*$& $g_{0}^*$ & $g_{1}^*$ & $\lambda_1$ & $\lambda_2$ & $\lambda_3$ \\ \hline
1157: 1 & & $0.089762$ & 0 & 0 & $1.119442$ & $-0.133591$ & $-0.133591$ \\ \hline
1158: 2 & & $0.092307$ & $0.036991$& $0.036991$ & $1.103421$ & $ 0.227335$ & $-0.025378$ \\ \hline
1159: 3 & 0.0 & $0.092307$ & 0 & $0.036991$ & $1.103421$ & $0.227335$ & $0.030783 $ \\
1160: & 0.1 & $0.092270$ & 0 & $0.038723$ & $1.102142$ & $0.235506$ & $0.021563 $ \\
1161: & 0.2 & $0.092205$ & 0 & $0.040559$ & $1.100913$ & $0.244667$ & $0.011135 $ \\
1162: & 0.3 & $0.092108$ & 0 & $0.042500$ & $1.099845$ & $0.254810$ & $-0.000648$ \\
1163: & 0.4 & $0.091970$ & 0 & $0.044547$ & $1.099106$ & $0.265820$ & $-0.013939$ \\ \hline
1164: \end{tabular} \end{center} \end{table}
1165: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1166: %\newpage
1167: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1168: \begin{table}[p]
1169: \hspace{127mm} {\bf Table 3}
1170: \vspace{-6mm}
1171: \begin{center}
1172: {Coordinates of the FPs and eigenvalues of the stability matrix for $p=3$:\\
1173: \vspace{-2mm} a) dimension $d=3.0$ \vspace{2mm}}
1174: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|} \hline
1175: Type &$x_0$& $\tilde{g}^*$ & $g_{0}^*$ & $g_{1}^*$ & $\lambda_1$ & $\lambda_2$ & $\lambda_3$ \\ \hline
1176: 1 & & 0.1383 & 0 & 0 & 0.6814 & 0.1315 & 0.1315 \\ \hline
1177: 2 & & 0.1419 & $-0.0359$ & $-0.0359$ & 0.6727 & $-0.0891$ & $-0.1450$ \\ \hline
1178: 3 & 0.0 & 0.1419 & 0 & $-0.0359$ & 0.6727 & $-0.0891$ & $-0.0058$ \\
1179: & 0.1 & 0.1420 & 0 & $-0.0382$ & 0.6727 & $-0.0865$ & 0.0011 \\
1180: & 0.2 & 0.1420 & 0 & $-0.0408$ & 0.6728 & $-0.0836$ & 0.0088 \\
1181: & 0.3 & 0.1421 & 0 & $-0.0439$ & 0.6730 & $-0.0802$ & 0.0175 \\
1182: & 0.4 & 0.1420 & 0 & $-0.0474$ & 0.6734 & $-0.0764$ & 0.0273 \\
1183: & 0.5 & 0.1420 & 0 & $-0.0516$ & 0.6738 & $-0.0719$ & 0.0385 \\
1184: & 0.6 & 0.1418 & 0 & $-0.0565$ & 0.6745 & $-0.0668$ & 0.0515 \\
1185: & 0.7 & 0.1415 & 0 & $-0.0625$ & 0.6755 & $-0.0606$ & 0.0667 \\
1186: & 0.8 & 0.1409 & 0 & $-0.0699$ & 0.6768 & $-0.0533$ & 0.0845 \\
1187: & 0.9 & 0.1400 & 0 & $-0.0793$ & 0.6787 & $-0.0443$ & 0.1058 \\
1188: & 1.0 & 0.1383 & 0 & $-0.0915$ & 0.6814 & $-0.0331$ & 0.1315 \\ \hline
1189: \end{tabular} \end{center}
1190: \begin{center}
1191: {\vspace{-2mm} b) dimension $d=3.999$ \\ \vspace{2mm}}
1192: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|} \hline
1193: Type &$x_0$& $\tilde{g}^*$ & $g_{0}^*$ & $g_{1}^*$ & $\lambda_1$ & $\lambda_2$ & $\lambda_3$ \\ \hline
1194: 1 & & $0.081989$ & 0 & 0 & $ 1.113633$ & $-0.000820$ & $-0.000820$ \\ \hline
1195: 2 & & $0.081989$ & $0.000171$ & $0.000171$ & $1.113633$ & $0.000822$ & $-0.000228$ \\ \hline
1196: 3 & 0.0 & $0.081989$ & 0 & $0.000171$ & $1.113633$ & $0.000822$ & $0.000228 $ \\
1197: & 0.1 & $0.081989$ & 0 & $0.000183$ & $1.113633$ & $0.000822$ & $0.000188 $ \\
1198: & 0.2 & $0.081989$ & 0 & $0.000196$ & $1.113633$ & $0.000823$ & $0.000142 $ \\
1199: & 0.3 & $0.081989$ & 0 & $0.000212$ & $1.113633$ & $0.000823$ & $0.000088 $ \\
1200: & 0.4 & $0.081989$ & 0 & $0.000230$ & $1.113633$ & $0.000823$ & $0.000025 $ \\
1201: & 0.5 & $0.081989$ & 0 & $0.000251$ & $1.113633$ & $0.000823$ & $-0.000050$ \\
1202: & 0.6 & $0.081989$ & 0 & $0.000277$ & $1.113633$ & $0.000824$ & $-0.000140$ \\
1203: & 0.7 & $0.081989$ & 0 & $0.000309$ & $1.113633$ & $0.000824$ & $-0.000251$ \\
1204: & 0.8 & $0.081989$ & 0 & $0.000350$ & $1.113633$ & $0.000825$ & $-0.000391$ \\
1205: & 0.9 & $0.081989$ & 0 & $0.000402$ & $1.113633$ & $0.000826$ & $-0.000574$ \\
1206: & 1.0 & $0.081989$ & 0 & $0.000473$ & $1.113633$ & $0.000828$ & $-0.000820$ \\ \hline
1207: \end{tabular} \end{center}\end{table}
1208: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1209:
1210: An analysis of
1211: $\lambda_i$ for every type of the fixed point (see Tables 1-3) provides
1212: the following conclusions.
1213:
1214: 1) For the three-dimensional Ising model ($p = 1$),
1215: the second-type fixed point is stable (Table 1(a)). The
1216: complex values $\lambda_1$ and $\lambda_2$ for positive
1217: $|\lambda_1|,|\lambda_2|$ and $\lambda_3$,
1218: show that the second-type fixed point, in contrast to the
1219: third-type one, is a stable focus in the parametric space
1220: $(\tilde{g},g_0,g_1)$, and the renormalization group flows
1221: approach the second-type fixed point by a spiral curve.
1222: At the threshold dimension $d_c = 3.986$ (see Table 1(b),
1223: (c)), the second-type fixed point looses stability ($\lambda_3$
1224: changes sign). Since all other fixed points remain unstable
1225: in the entire range of the dimension variation $3\leq d<4$,
1226: no critical behavior is realized in the system at
1227: $3.986\leq d$ due to the replica symmetry breaking. The
1228: analysis of the behavior of renormalization group flows
1229: at $3.986\leq d$ provides the following results.
1230:
1231:
1232: 2) For the three-dimensional XY model ($p = 2$),
1233: small values of $\lambda_i$ (see Table 2(a)) indicate that the second-
1234: type replica symmetric fixed point is weakly stable.
1235: However, already for the dimension $d_c=3.1$ (see
1236: Table 2(b), (c)), the third-type fixed point with RSB
1237: effects becomes stable. However, the critical behavior
1238: determined by this point is nonuniversal and depends
1239: on the parameter $x_0$ and, therefore, on the concentration
1240: of impurities. A stability analysis of the third-type fixed
1241: point reveals that it is stable only in the interval $0\leq x_0\leq x_c(d)$,
1242: where $x_c$ is a threshold value of the parameter,
1243: which depends on the dimension of the system. For
1244: example, for $d=3.1$ $x_c=0.1$; and, for $d=3.999$ $x_c=0.3$
1245: In the interval $x_c(d) < x_0 < 1$, all fixed points are
1246: unstable.
1247:
1248: 3) For the isotropic three-dimensional Heisenberg
1249: model ($p = 3$), the first-type fixed point becomes stable
1250: (Table 3(a)), while at the other fixed points the constants
1251: $g_0^*$ and $g_1^*$ take physically senseless negative
1252: values. Only at $d_c = 3.999$, $g_0^*$ and $g_1^*$ take physically
1253: meaningful values for the third-type point, and this
1254: point becomes stable in the interval $0\leq x_0\leq 0.4$
1255: (Table 3(b), (c)). In the interval $0.4< x_0 <1$, all fixed
1256: points are unstable.
1257:
1258:
1259: Note that although the calculations indicate the stability
1260: of the impurity replica symmetric second-type
1261: fixed point, there is reason to believe that, in the higher
1262: order approximations (as is the case for disordered systems
1263: considered without taking into account RSB
1264: effects \cite{11}), the first-type fixed point, which corresponds
1265: to the critical behavior of the homogeneous system,
1266: will become stable. On the one hand, this is indicated
1267: by the very weak stability ($\lambda_3 = 0.000004$) of the
1268: second-type fixed point and by the fact that the threshold
1269: value of the order parameter $p_c = 2.0114$ found in
1270: the two-loop approximation, which separates the critical
1271: behavior domains determined by the first- ($p > p_c$)
1272: and second-type ($p < p_c$) fixed points, is very close to
1273: $p = 2$. This explains a very slow variation of the eigenvalues
1274: $\lambda_i$ of the stability matrix for the disordered XY
1275: model with the variation of the system dimension
1276: (Table 2). On the other hand, the negative value of the
1277: critical heat capacity coefficient $\alpha$ of the XY model also
1278: suggests, according to the Harris criterion, that the critical
1279: behavior of the model is stable with respect to the
1280: influence of the quenched disorder and, therefore, it can
1281: be expected that $p_c < 2$ in the higher order approximations.
1282: For example, the value $p_c = 1.912(4)$ was found
1283: in \cite{15} on the basis of the six-loop approximation with
1284: the use of the pseudo $\varepsilon$-expansion and the Pade Borel
1285: Leroy summation technique with a thoroughly chosen
1286: fitting parameter.
1287:
1288: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1289: \begin{table}[t]
1290: \hspace{127mm} {\bf Table 4} \vspace{-6mm}
1291: \begin{center}
1292: {Critical exponents of the 3D models for RS FP's}
1293: \begin{tabular}{|lllccccc|} \hline
1294: Model & FP & & $\eta$ & $\nu$ & $\gamma$ & $\beta$ & $\alpha$ \\ \hline
1295: Ising & RS1 & this work & 0.028 & 0.631 & 1.244 & 0.324 & 0.107 \\
1296: & & Ref.~\protect{\cite{16}}& 0.031(4) & 0.630(2) & 1.241(2) & 0.325(2) & 0.110(5) \\
1297: & RS2 & this work & 0.028 & 0.672 & 1.329 & 0.345 & $-$0.015 \\
1298: & & Ref.~\protect{\cite{17}}& 0.030(3) & 0.678(10) & 1.330(17) & 0.349(5) & $-$0.034(30) \\ \hline
1299: XY & RS1 & this work & 0.029 & 0.667 & 1.318 & 0.343 & $-$0.001 \\
1300: & & Ref.~\protect{\cite{16}}& 0.034(3) & 0.669(1) & 1.316(1) & 0.346(1) & $-$0.007(6) \\ \hline
1301: Heisenberg & RS1 & this work & 0.028 & 0.697 & 1.379 & 0.369 & $-$0.092 \\
1302: & & Ref.~\protect{\cite{16}}& 0.034(3) & 0.705(1) & 1.387(1) & 0.364(1) & $-$0.115(9) \\ \hline
1303: \end{tabular} \end{center}
1304: \end{table}
1305: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1306:
1307: Because $p_c$ is very close to $p = 2$ for the XY model, one can expect that
1308: the calculations based on higher order approximations will substantially
1309: change the threshold dimension $d_c(p = 2)$, although for the Ising and
1310: Heisenberg models, the changes of $d_c(p)$ should be small. This assumption
1311: is supported by the calculation of critical indexes for three-dimensional
1312: homogeneous models with $p = 1, 2, 3$ and the disordered Ising model. We
1313: performed these calculations in the two-loop approximation with the use of
1314: the Pade Borel summation technique (Table 4). The comparison of these
1315: results with the corresponding indexes reported in \cite{16,17}, where the
1316: all-time accurate calculations for threedimensional models were performed in
1317: the six-loop approximation, shows that the difference in the values of
1318: critical indexes does not exceed $0.02$.
1319:
1320: The values of the threshold dimensions $d_c(p)$, which separate the domain
1321: of critical behavior with RSB effects $d_c(p) < d < 4$ from the domain where
1322: these effects are inessential, can be considered as threshold dimensions
1323: that restrict the scope of the $\varepsilon$-expansion method as applied to
1324: the three-vertex model of the weakly disordered system and the corresponding
1325: results reported in \cite{4,5,6}. Our analysis also shows that the results
1326: of application of the $\varepsilon$-expansion technique to multivertex
1327: statistical models are unreliable independently of the approximation order.
1328: This is explained by the competition between different types of fixed points
1329: in the parametric space of multivertex models, which usually does not allow
1330: one to pass to the limit as $\varepsilon \rightarrow 1$ without crossing the
1331: marginal dimensions $3\leq d_c<4$ separating the stability domains of
1332: different fixed points.
1333:
1334: \begin{figure}[t]
1335: \centering \includegraphics[height=10cm]{figure2.eps}
1336: %
1337: \caption{The picture of renormalization group flows in the parametric space
1338: ($\tilde{g},g_0,g_1$) for the Ising model with the system dimension d =
1339: 3.99.}
1340: \end{figure}
1341:
1342: To reveal the character of the behavior of a disordered
1343: system with RSB effects in the domain without
1344: stable critical states, we analyzed the phase portrait of
1345: the model based on the system of equations
1346: \begin{equation}
1347: r\frac{\partial g_i}{\partial r} = \beta_i( \tilde{g},g_0,g_1),
1348: \end{equation}
1349: which specifies phase trajectories in the space of vertices ($\tilde{g},g_0,g_1$). An
1350: analysis shows (see Fig. 2) that, for the Ising model with $d_c = 3.986$ at $d \geq
1351: 3.986$, where none of the fixed points is stable, the strong coupling regime with the
1352: renormalization group flows determined by ($\tilde{g},g_0,g_1$)$\rightarrow$($\infty
1353: ,0,0$) is realized if $\tilde{g} > \tilde{g}^*$. At the same time, at $\tilde{g} <
1354: \tilde{g}^*$, the flows with ($\tilde{g},g_0,g_1$)$\rightarrow$($0,0,0$) are realized,
1355: which asymptotically approach the Gauss fixed point $(0, 0, 0)$ and then also tend to
1356: infinity along the axes $\tilde{g},g_0,g_1$. Such a behavior of the flows at $\tilde{g} <
1357: \tilde{g}^*$ is caused by the closeness of the system dimension $d$ to four when the
1358: effect of fluctuations is negligibly small and the Gauss fixed point becomes an
1359: attractor.
1360:
1361: \section{Conclusions}
1362:
1363: The renormalization group analysis of weakly disordered
1364: systems of an arbitrary dimension in the range
1365: from three to four conducted in the two-loop approximation
1366: showed that the critical behavior of threedimensional
1367: systems is stable with respect to the effect
1368: of the replica symmetry breaking. In systems with a
1369: one-component order parameter, the critical behavior
1370: determined by the structural disorder with a replica
1371: symmetric fixed point is realized. The presence of weak
1372: disorder does not affect the critical behavior of multicomponent
1373: systems, although the proof of this fact for
1374: systems with $p = 2$ requires calculations with higher
1375: order approximations.
1376:
1377: Effects of the replica symmetry breaking manifest
1378: themselves only in disordered systems with the dimension
1379: greater than three, and the threshold dimensions $d_c$
1380: depend on the number of components of the order
1381: parameter $p$ and the value of the parameter $x_0$. The predicted
1382: picture of the influence of replica symmetry
1383: breaking on the critical behavior of disordered systems
1384: with a dimension $d > d_c$ qualitatively agrees with the
1385: results reported in \cite{4,5,6}. The latter results were
1386: obtained on the basis of the $\varepsilon$-expansion technique. For
1387: systems with $p = 1$, RSB effects destroy the stable critical
1388: behavior, and the strong coupling regime is realized;
1389: for systems with $p = 2$ and $3$, a domain of nonuniversal
1390: critical behavior occurs at $0 \leq x_0 \leq x_c(d)$. For $x_0$
1391: outside this interval, the system exhibits no critical
1392: behavior, as is the case at $p = 1$.
1393:
1394: The values of threshold dimensions $d_c(p)$: $d_c(p = 1) =
1395: 3.986$, $d_c(p = 2) = 3.10$, and $d_c(p = 3) = 3.999$ which
1396: separate the domain of critical behavior with RSB
1397: effects $d_c(p) < d < 4$) from the domain where these
1398: effects are insignificant, simultaneously specify the
1399: lower bound of the domain where the results obtained
1400: by $\varepsilon$-expansion are applicable to the description of the
1401: model of weakly disordered systems with RSB effects
1402: \cite{4,5,6}. It is noted that calculations carried out in higher
1403: order approximations of the theory can significantly
1404: change the threshold dimension dc for the XY model.
1405: On the other hand, changes in $d_c(p)$ for the Ising and
1406: Heisenberg models are expected to be small, which
1407: leaves the scope of the results obtained by the $\varepsilon$-expansion
1408: technique close to dimension four.
1409:
1410: As the concentration of defects increases, one can expect a decrease of the threshold
1411: values $d_c$ down to $d_c < 3$ beginning with a certain threshold concentration. In this
1412: case, the influence of replica symmetry breaking effects can be significant. Due to
1413: specific features of the manifestation of RSB effects, the concentration ns corresponding
1414: to the spin percolation threshold can play the role of the threshold concentration of
1415: defects for the Ising model, so that no stable critical behavior is observed at $n >
1416: n_s$. For the XY and Heisenberg models, this role can be played by the concentration of
1417: defects corresponding to the impurity percolation threshold $n_{imp} = 1 - n_s$ with a
1418: nonuniversal critical behavior for $n_{imp} < n < n_s$ and the absence of a stable
1419: critical behavior at $n > n_s$.
1420:
1421: \begin{center}
1422: \bf Acknowledgmets
1423: \end{center}
1424: This work was supported in part by the Ministry of Education of the
1425: Russian Federation through Grants No. UR.01.01.052 and No. E02-3.2-196. \clearpage
1426: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%Lit%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1427: %{\small
1428: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
1429: \bibitem{1}
1430: S.F.~Edwards, P.W.~Anderson. J.Phys. {\bf F5}, 965 (1975).
1431: \bibitem{2}
1432: J.~Emery. Phys. Rev. {\bf B11}, 239 (1975).
1433: \bibitem{3}
1434: G.~Grinstein, A.~Luther. Phys. Rev. {\bf B13}, 1329 (1976).
1435: \bibitem{4}
1436: Vik.S.Dotsenko, A.B.Harris, D.Sherrington, R.B.Stinchcombe.
1437: J.Phys.{\bf A28}, 3093 (1995).
1438: \bibitem{5}
1439: Vik.S.~Dotsenko, D.E.~Feldman. J.Phys. {\bf A28}, 5183 (1995).
1440: \bibitem{6}
1441: Vik.~S.~Dotsenko, Uspekhi Fizicheskikh Nauk, {\bf 165}, 481 (1995).
1442: \bibitem{7}
1443: V.~V.~Prudnikov, A.~V.~Ivanov, A.~A.~Fedorenko,
1444: Sov. Phys. JETP Lett. {\bf 66} 835 (1997);
1445: V.~V.~Prudnikov, S.~V.~Belim, A.~V.~Ivanov, E.~V.~Osintsev,
1446: A.~A.~Fedorenko, Sov. Phys. JETP {\bf 87} 527 (1998);
1447: V.~V.~Prudnikov, P.~V.~Prudnikov, A.~A.~Fedorenko,
1448: Sov. Phys. JETP Lett. {\bf 68} 950 (1998);
1449: Phys.Rev. B {\bf 62}, 8777 (2000).
1450: \bibitem{8}
1451: S.~A.~Antonenko, A.~I.~Sokolov, Phys.Rev. B {\bf 49}, 15901 (1994);
1452: A.I.~Sokolov, K.B.~Varnashev, A.I.~Mudrov. Int. J. Mod. Phys. B
1453: {\bf 12}, 1365 (1998);
1454: A.I.~Sokolov, K.B.~Varnashev, Phys.Rev. B {\bf 59}, 8363 (1999).
1455: \bibitem{9}
1456: V.~V.~Prudnikov, P.~V.~Prudnikov, A.~A.~Fedorenko,
1457: Sov. Phys. JETP Lett. {\bf 73},153 (2001).
1458: \bibitem{10}
1459: V.V.~Prudnikov, P.V.~Prudnikov, A.A.~Fedorenko. Phys.Rev. {\bf B63},
1460: 184201 (2001).
1461: \bibitem{11}
1462: A.~Pelissetto, E.~Vicari. Phys.Rev. {\bf B62}, 6393 (2000).
1463: \bibitem{12}
1464: V.~V.~Prudnikov, A.~N.~Vakilov, Sov. Phys. JETP {\bf 103}, 962 (1993).
1465: \bibitem{13}
1466: G.~Parisi. J.Phys. {\bf A13}, 1101 (1980);
1467: G.~Parisi. J.Phys. {\bf A13}, L115 (1980);
1468: G.~Parisi. J.Phys. {\bf A13}, 1887 (1980);
1469: M.~Mezard, G.~Parisi, M.~Virasoro. {\it Spin-Glass Theory and Beyond},
1470: Singapore: World Scientific, 1987;
1471: Vik.~S.~Dotsenko, Uspekhi Fizicheskikh Nauk {\bf 163}, 1 (1993).
1472: \bibitem{14}
1473: J.~Zinn-Justin. {\it Quantum Field Theory and Critical Phenomena}, Clarendon,
1474: Oxford, 1996.
1475: \bibitem{15}
1476: M.~Dudka, Yu.~Holovatch, T.~Yavorskii. J.Phys.Stud. {\bf 5}, 233 (2001).
1477: \bibitem{16}
1478: J.C.~LeGuillou, J.~Zinn-Justin. Phys. Rev. {\bf B21}, 3976 (1980).
1479: \bibitem{17}
1480: A.~Pelissetto, E.~Vicari, e-print cond-mat/0002402.
1481: \end{thebibliography}
1482: %}
1483:
1484: \end{document}
1485: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1486: