cond-mat0604301/mct8.tex
1: \documentclass[aps,prl,showpacs,twocolumn]{revtex4}
2: 
3: \usepackage{amsmath} 
4: \usepackage{amssymb} 
5: \usepackage{graphicx}
6: \usepackage{xspace}
7: 
8: \newcommand{\p}{\partial} 
9: \newcommand{\bx}{{\bf x}}
10: \newcommand{\bv}{{\bf v}}
11: \newcommand{\bq}{{\bf q}}
12: %\newcommand{\citcor}{\cite{frey99}\xspace}
13: 
14: \newcommand{\mct}{MC\xspace}
15: \newcommand{\nequ}{non-equilibrium\xspace}
16: \newcommand{\npt}{non-perturbative\xspace}
17: \def\nbR{\ensuremath{\mathrm{I\!R}}} % IR
18: %\parindent 4mm
19: \tolerance = 10000
20: \begin{document}
21: \draft
22: \preprint{XXXX}
23: %
24: \title{Universality classes of  the Kardar-Parisi-Zhang equation }
25: %
26: \author{L. Canet,$\,^1$ and  M. A. Moore$\,^2$}
27: \affiliation{$\,^1$Service de Physique de l'\'Etat Condens\'e,  CEA Saclay, 91191 Gif-sur-Yvette, France\\
28: %\\ Laboratoire de Physique et Mod\'elisation des Milieux Condens\'es,  CNRS,
29: %BP 166 - 38042  Grenoble Cedex, France\\
30:  $\,^2$School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester,
31: Manchester, M13 9PL, UK}
32: 
33: 
34: \begin{abstract}
35: 
36:  We re-examine mode-coupling  theory for the Kardar-Parisi-Zhang (KPZ)
37:  equation in the strong coupling  limit and show that there exists two
38:  branches of solutions. One branch (or universality class) only exists
39:  for  dimensionalities $d<d_c=2$  and is  similar to  that found  by a
40:  variety of  analytic approaches, including  replica symmetry breaking
41:  and Flory-Imry-Ma  arguments. The second branch exists  up to $d_c=4$
42:  and gives values  for the dynamical exponent $z$  similar to those of
43:  numerical studies for $d\ge2$.
44: 
45: 
46: \end{abstract}
47: %
48: \pacs{05.40.-a, 64.60.Ht, 05.70.Ln, 68.35.Fx}
49: %
50: 
51: 
52: \maketitle
53: 
54: The celebrated Kardar-Parisi-Zhang  (KPZ) equation \cite{kardar86} was
55:  initially derived as a model  to describe the kinetic roughening of a
56:  growing  interface and  has been  the subject  of a  great  number of
57:  theoretical  studies \cite{halpin95}.  This  is because  the original
58:  growth problem  has turned  out to be  equivalent to  other important
59:  physical  phenomena,  such as  the  randomly  stirred fluid  (Burgers
60:  equation) \cite{forster77}, directed  polymers in random media (DPRM)
61:  \cite{kardar87}, dissipative transport \cite{beijeren85,janssen86} or
62:  magnetic  flux  lines   in  superconductors  \cite{hwa92}.   The  KPZ
63:  equation  has thus  emerged  as one  of  the fundamental  theoretical
64:  models  for  the  study  of  universality classes  in  \nequ  scaling
65:  phenomena and phase transitions \cite{halpin95}.
66:  
67:  
68:  It   is  a   non-linear   Langevin  equation   which  describes   the
69:  large-distance, long-time dynamics of the growth process specified by
70:  a  single-valued  height  function  $h(\bx,t)$ on  a  $d$-dimensional
71:  substrate $\bx \in \nbR^d$:
72: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%5
73: \begin{equation}
74: \p_t h(\bx,t)  = \nu\,\nabla^2 h(\bx,t)  \, + \,\lambda/2\,\big(\nabla
75: h(\bx,t)\big)^2 \,+\,\eta(\bx,t),
76: \label{eqkpz}
77: \end{equation}
78: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
79: where $\eta(\bx,t)$  is a zero  mean uncorrelated noise  with variance
80: $\langle       \eta(\bx,t)\eta(\bx',t')\rangle       =       2       D
81: \delta^d(\bx-\bx')\,\delta(t-t')$.    This   equation   reflects   the
82: competition between  the surface tension  smoothing force $\nu\nabla^2
83: h$,  the preferential  growth along  the local  normal to  the surface
84: represented by the non-linear term and the Langevin noise $\eta$ which
85: tends to roughen the interface and mimics the stochastic nature of the
86: growth.
87: 
88: The stationary interface is characterized by the two-point correlation
89: function    $C(|\bx-\bx'|,t-t')    \equiv    \langle    [h(\bx,t)    -
90: h(\bx',t')]^2\rangle$ and,  in particular, its  large-scale properties
91: where  $C$  is  expected  to  assume the  scaling  form  $C(d,\tau)  =
92: d^{2\chi}\,f(\frac{\tau}{d^z})$, where $d=|\bx -\bx'|$ , $\tau=|t-t'|$
93: and  $\chi$  and  $z$   are  the  roughness  and  dynamical  exponents
94: respectively.   These  two exponents  are  not  independent since  the
95: Galilean   symmetry  \cite{forster77}  ---   the  invariance   of  Eq.
96: (\ref{eqkpz})  under an  infinitesimal  tilting of  the interface  ---
97: enforces the  scaling relation $z+\chi  = 2$ for  solutions associated
98: with any fixed point at which $\lambda$ is non-zero.
99: 
100: 
101: While some  exact results are available in  $d=1$, yielding $\chi=1/2$
102:   and $z=3/2$ \cite{kardar87,hwa91,halpin95},
103: the complete  theoretical understanding of the KPZ  equation in higher
104: dimensions  is  still  lacking.
105:  For  $d>2$,  there  exists  a  phase
106: transition  between two  different  regimes, separated  by a  critical
107: value      $\lambda_c$     of      the      non-linear     coefficient
108: \cite{kardar86,forster77}.   In the  weak-coupling regime  ($\lambda <
109: \lambda_c$), the behavior is governed  by the $\lambda= 0$ fixed point
110: --- corresponding    to   the   linear    Edwards-Wilkinson   equation
111: \cite{halpin95} --- with exponents $\chi  = (2-d)/d$ and $z=2$. In the
112: strong-coupling   (rough)   regime   ($\lambda  >   \lambda_c$),   the
113: non-linearity becomes  relevant and despite  considerable efforts, the
114: statistical properties  of the  strong-coupling (rough) regime  for $d
115: \ge 2$ remain controversial. 
116: 
117: The existence of a finite upper critical dimension $d_c$ at
118:  which the dynamical exponent 
119: $z$ of the 
120: strong-coupling phase becomes 2
121:    is also  much  debated.   Most  of  the
122:  analytical approaches  support a finite $d_c$,  but their predictions
123:  are  varied:  one of the solutions of the mode-coupling  (MC) equations 
124:  and  other  arguments
125:  indicate $d_c\simeq 4$ \cite{bouchaud93,halpin89,colaiori01, colaiori01b},
126:  whereas
127:  functional   renormalization  group   to   two-loop  order   suggests
128:  $d_c\simeq  2.5$ \cite{ledoussal03}. A set of 
129:   related theories such as  replica  symmetry
130:   breaking  \cite{MP},   variational  studies  \cite{GO}  and
131:   Flory-Imry-Ma arguments  \cite{MG}  give $d_c=2$.
132:  On the  other  hand, numerical
133:  simulations and real space calculations find no evidence at all for a
134:  finite $d_c$ \cite{tang92,marinari00,castellano98}!
135:  
136:  We re-examine  in this  paper \mct theory.   It is  a self-consistent
137:  approximation \cite{beijeren85,janssen86},  where in the diagrammatic
138:  expansion for  the correlation  and response functions  only diagrams
139:  which  do  not  renormalize  the  three-point  vertex  $\lambda$  are
140:  retained.    The   \mct  approximation   has   been  widely   studied
141:  \cite{hwa91,frey96,bouchaud93,doherty94,colaiori01}.  Furthermore the
142:  \mct equations  are exact  for the large  $N$-limit of  a generalised
143:  $N$-component KPZ  \cite{doherty94}. This  allows in principle  for a
144:  systematic expansion in $1/N$.
145:  We shall  show that  within the \mct  approximation there  exists two
146:   solutions,  one of which had  been previously
147:   overlooked.  The new solution (universality class)
148:  only  exists when $d<2$ and seems
149:   similar to the  solution found in the analytical  studies which give
150:   $d_c=2$ \cite{MP, GO, MG}.   The other \mct solution exists 
151:  on the whole range $0<d<4$ and has $d_c=4$.  This previously known
152:   solution gives in $d=2$ a value for $z$ 
153:   close  to that from numerical work, e.g.   \cite{marinari00}.
154: 
155: The correlation and response functions are defined in Fourier space by
156:  $C({ k},\omega)=\langle h({ k},\omega)  h^{*}({ k},\omega)
157: \rangle$
158:  and  $G({ k},\omega)\delta^{d}({  k}-{ k'})\delta
159:   (\omega-\omega')=\Big\langle \displaystyle\frac{\partial   h({   k},\omega)}
160:  {\partial  \eta({ k'},\omega')} \Big\rangle$,
161: where $\langle  \cdot \rangle$ indicates  an average over  $\eta$.
162: In  the  MC   approximation,  the  correlation  and  response
163: functions are the solutions of two coupled equations,
164: \begin{eqnarray}
165: G^{-1}({     k},\omega)&=&    G^{-1}_0({    k},\omega)+\lambda^2
166: \displaystyle\int       \displaystyle       \frac{d\Omega}{2      \pi}
167: \displaystyle\int   \displaystyle   \frac{d^dq}{(2  \pi)^d}\, {  q}\cdot
168:   ({ k}-{  q}) \nonumber\\
169: &\times &\left({  q}
170: \cdot  { k}\right)  G({ k}-{  q},\omega  - \Omega)\, C({ q},\Omega) 
171: \label{mc1}
172: \\    C({     k},\omega)&=&    C_0({    k},\omega)+\displaystyle
173: \frac{\lambda^2}{2}  \big| G({  k},\omega)\big|^2 \displaystyle\int
174: \displaystyle  \frac{d\Omega}{2  \pi} \displaystyle\int  \displaystyle
175: \frac{d^dq}{(2 \pi)^d}\nonumber\\  &\times &\left({ q}  \cdot ({
176: k}-{  q})\right)^2 C({  k}-{  q},\omega -  \Omega)\, C({ q},\Omega) 
177: \label{mc2}
178: \end{eqnarray}
179: \noindent
180: where  $G_0({ k},\omega)=(\nu  k^2 -  i \omega)^{-1}$  is  the bare
181: response   function,   and   $C_0({   k},\omega)=2   D   |   G({
182: k},\omega)|^2$  \cite{bouchaud93}.   In  the  scaling  limit,  $G({
183: k},\omega)$ and $C({ k},\omega)$ take the  forms
184:  $G({ k},\omega)= k^{-z}g\left( \omega/k^{z}\right)$ 
185: and $C({ k},\omega)= k^{-(2  \chi+d+z)}n\left( \omega/k^{z}\right)$
186:  and Eqs. (\ref{mc1}) and  (\ref{mc2}) translate into coupled equations
187: for the scaling functions $n(x)$ and $g(x)$:
188: \begin{eqnarray}
189: g^{-1}(x)&=& -i x +I_{1}(x) \,,
190: \label{g}
191: \\ n(x)&=& | g(x)|^{2}I_{2}(x) \,,
192: \label{n}
193: \end{eqnarray}
194: where $x=\omega/k^z$ 
195: and $I_1(x)$ and $I_2(x)$ are given by \cite{bouchaud93}
196: \begin{eqnarray}
197: I_1(x)&=&     P\displaystyle\int_{0}^{\pi}d\theta     \sin^{d-2}\theta
198: \displaystyle\int_{0}^{\infty}dq\cos\theta    (\cos\theta-q)\nonumber\\
199: &&\times     q^{2z-3}r^{-z}     \displaystyle\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}dy
200: \,g\left(\displaystyle \frac{x-q^{z}y}{r^{z}}\right)n(y), \nonumber \\
201: I_2(x)  &=&\displaystyle \frac{P}{2}\displaystyle\int_{0}^{\pi}d\theta
202: \sin^{d-2}\theta       \displaystyle\int_{0}^{\infty}dq(\cos\theta-q)^2
203: \nonumber\\                &&\times               q^{2z-3}r^{-(d+4-z)}
204: \displaystyle\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}dy           \,n\left(\displaystyle
205: \frac{x-q^{z}y}{r^{z}}\right)n(y), \nonumber
206: \end{eqnarray}
207: \noindent
208: with         $P\!=\!\lambda^2/(2^d\Gamma(\frac{d-1}{2})\pi^{(d+3)/2})$,
209: $r^2=1+q^2-2q\cos\theta$.   Notice that  the  ``bare term''  $C_0({
210: k},\omega)$ has been dropped from  these equations as it is negligible
211: in the {\em scaling} limit provided $2 \chi+d+z > 2z$, i.e.  $4+d> 3z$.
212: 
213: All  the  (necessarily  approximate)  solutions of  the  MC  equations
214: involve  an ansatz on  the form  of the  scaling functions  $n(x)$ and
215: $g(x)$. The  relation $z=z(d)$ is then  obtained requiring consistency
216: of  Eqs.   (\ref{g})  and  (\ref{n})  on matching  both  sides  at  an
217: arbitrarily  chosen  value  of   $x$.   Due  to  the  non-locality  of
218: Eqs. (\ref{g})  and (\ref{n}), the  matching condition depends  on the
219: form of the functions $n$ and $g$  for all $x$, so the ansatz needs to
220: be  reliable for  all $x$,  and in  particular satisfy  the  large $x$
221: asymptotic forms
222:  $n(x)\sim     x^{-1-\beta/z}$,  $g_R(x)\sim    x^{-1-2/z}$
223:  and $g_I(x)\rightarrow x^{-1}$
224:  where $\beta=d+4-2z$ and $g(x)=g_R(x)+ig_I(x)$.
225: Colaiori and  Moore \cite{colaiori01,colaiori01b} proposed  an ansatz
226:  which satisfies these large  $x$ constraints. It
227:   enabled the authors to provide numerical estimates of $z$ when
228:  $d=2,3$ in reasonable  agreement with exponents  obtained from
229:  simulations  \cite{marinari00,tang92}.  It  also  yielded an  integer
230:  finite upper critical dimension $d_c=4$ \cite{colaiori01}.  Moreover,
231:  it led in $d=1$ to the discovery of a stretched exponential behavior
232:  for the two-point  correlation function \cite{colaiori01b}   similar to
233:   that found in the exact solution \cite{PS04}.
234: 
235:  Using a similar  ansatz, we next show  that  Eqs.  (\ref{g})  and
236:  (\ref{n}) have an additional solution with $d_c=2$, before discussing
237:  its significance. The advocated ansatz is most
238:  conveniently expressed in Fourier space,
239: \begin{eqnarray}
240: \widehat{g}(p) &= &\theta(p) \,\exp(- | p|^{2/z}) \,,
241: \label{gansatz}\\
242:   \widehat{n}(p)&=&A\exp(-
243: \displaystyle\big|B p\big|^{\beta/z}) \,,
244: \label{nansatz}
245: \end{eqnarray} 
246: where  $\widehat{n}$ and  $\widehat{g}$ are  the Fourier  transform of
247:  $n(x)$   and   $g(x)$   respectively,   $A$ is a (nonzero) parameter
248:  and $B\equiv B(d,z)$ an arbitrary function
249:  \cite{colaiori01}.   Requiring  the matching  of  Eqs. (\ref{g})  and
250:  (\ref{n}) at large  $x$ then yields:% the following equations:
251: \begin{eqnarray}
252: {C_d\,A}\,{B}^{-1}& =&  {d\,(2-z)}/{(z^2\,I(B,d,z))} \label{eq1}\\
253: {C_d\,A}\,{B^{-2}} & =& (\beta/z)^2\,(\beta-z)\,{2^{\frac{2z-\beta}{\beta}}}/{\Gamma\big( \frac{2z-\beta}{\beta}\big)}\label{eq2}
254: \end{eqnarray}
255: where $C_d =  \lambda^2\,\Gamma((d-1)/2)/(4\,\pi^{\frac{d+1}{2}}\,\Gamma(d-1))$ and
256: %\begin{equation}
257: $  I(B,d,z)\!=\!\displaystyle\int_{0}^{\infty}\!ds  \,  B\,  (1-2s^2)s^{2z-3}
258: \exp\big(-B^{\beta/z}s^{\beta}-s^2\big)$.
259: %\nonumber
260: %\end{equation}
261: Combining  (\ref{eq1}) and (\ref{eq2}) then gives an implicit equation for the curve $z(d)$ depending
262: on $B$ only:
263: \begin{equation}
264: \beta^2\,(\beta-z)\,\frac{2^{(2z-\beta)/\beta}}{\Gamma\big(\frac{2z-\beta}{\beta}\big) }\,I(B,d,z) = \frac{d\,(2-z)}{B}.
265: \label{eqmct}
266: \end{equation}
267:  Eq. (\ref{eqmct})  can be solved numerically once $B(d,z)$ has been fixed.
268:  Prior to  discussing  the choice of $B$, 
269:   we stress the ($B$-independent)  
270:  intrinsic properties of the  solutions $S_{d,z}$.
271: First, as $z\to 2$,  $I(B,d,2)$ is finite for any  $B>0$.
272: One can then infer from  Eq. (\ref{eqmct}) that $S_{2,2}$ and $S_{4,2}$
273: are always solutions independent of $B$ (provided $B^{-1}$ is finite).
274: This  singles out the two  dimensions $d_c = 2$ and $d_c=4$ as critical ones
275:   since $z\to 2$ for $d\to d_c$.
276:  Second, as $d\to 0$,  $I(B,0,z)$ is non-zero for any
277:    $B>0$, and  Eq. (\ref{eqmct}) yields the two
278:  solutions $S_{0,4/3}$ and $S_{0,1}$  (provided again
279:  $B^{-1}$ is finite).
280: Lastly, as the MC equations satisfy  the fluctuation-dissipation theorem (FDT)
281:  that exists in $d=1$ \cite{frey96} yielding the exact result $z=3/2$,
282:   we expect the ansatz to preserve this property,
283:   which is fulfilled for
284:  $B(1,3/2)=1$ as can be checked on Eqs. (\ref{gansatz}) and (\ref{nansatz}).
285:  It follows that  $S_{1,3/2}$ is  solution of  (\ref{eqmct}).
286:  To summarize, Eq. (\ref{eqmct}) has  five  intrinsic solutions
287:   $S_{d,z}$ which do not depend on the choice of $B$
288:    (provided  $B^{-1}<\infty$  and $B(1,3/2)~=~1$).
289: 
290: 
291:  Furthermore,   Eq. (\ref{eq1})  provides  additional  constraints on  $B(d,z)$
292:   in the two limits  $z\to 2$ and $d\to 0$.
293: As $I(B,d,2)$ is finite as $z\to 2$,
294:   the right-hand side of (\ref{eq1}) vanishes identically,
295:  which forces $B^{-1}\sim(2-z)$ on the left-hand side.
296:  One can then derive  the  expansions of two solutions, labelled $z_{\rm S}$ and $z_{\rm F}$,
297:   about  their critical  dimensions:
298: \begin{eqnarray}
299: z_{\rm F} &=& 2 - (4-d)/4 + {\cal O}((4-d)^2) \label{eps4} \\
300: z_{\rm S} &=& 2 - (2-d)/3 + {\cal O}((2-d)^2). \label{eps2}
301: \end{eqnarray}
302:  The arguments of Ref.  \cite{colaiori01} can be used to show
303:  that these expansions are  very robust and more general
304:  than  the particular ansatz of  Eqs.  (\ref{gansatz}) and
305: (\ref{nansatz}).
306: Similarly, 
307:  as $I(B,0,z)$ is finite for $d\to 0$ and $z>1$, Eq. (\ref{eq1})
308:   imposes  $B^{-1}\sim d$.
309:  The  expansions  of the two solutions about $d=0$ can also  be worked out: 
310: $z_{\rm F} = 4/3+d/3 + {\cal O}(d^2)$ and 
311: $z_{\rm S} = 1 + d/4 + {\cal O}(d^2)$.
312: 
313:  We emphasize that all these  
314:  features 
315:  do not depend on the choice of $B$.
316:   Any ansatz would lead
317:   to the same qualitative picture as Fig. \ref{z} provided  $B\sim (d(2-z))^{-1}$. 
318:  The specific one  used here further exploits 
319:  the {\it uniqueness} of the solution in $d=1$ which imposes additional
320: constraints on $B$ \footnote{ Uniqueness
321:  of 
322:  the solution in $d=1$  requires $S_{1,3/2}$ to be an extremum of
323:  the implicit curve $z(d)$, which in turn yields:
324: $ \alpha_d\equiv\frac{\partial B}{\partial d}(1,3/2)= \frac{1}{56} (-60+21 \gamma +7 \log (512))$
325:  and $\alpha_z\equiv\frac{\partial B}{\partial z}(1,3/2)= -\frac{3}{28} (-36+7 \gamma +21 \log (2))$.
326:  Our final ansatz for $B(d,z)$ then reads
327: $B(d,z) = (1 + (\alpha_d+1)(d-1)+(\alpha_z-2)(z-3/2))/(2\,d\,(2-z)).$
328: }.
329:  With this choice, we have solved Eq. (\ref{eqmct})  numerically in 
330:  $0<d<4$
331:   and found that there  exists two branches
332:  of solutions  $z_{\rm S}(d)$  and $z_{\rm F}(d)$
333:  lying  in the  interval  $d\in  (0,2)$ but  only  one solution,  the
334:  continuation of $z_{\rm  F}$, in the interval $d\in  (2,4)$.
335: % 
336: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
337: \begin{figure}[ht]
338: \includegraphics[height=80mm,angle=-90]{diag2.ps}
339: \caption{The two  solutions $z_{\rm S}(d)$  and $z_{\rm F}(d)$  of the
340:  \mct  equations   found  in   this  work,  compared   with  numerical
341:  \cite{marinari00} results for $d=2,3,4$ and the exact results in $d=0,1$,
342:  all represented by squares.}
343: \label{z}
344: \end{figure}
345: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
346: %
347: 
348: 
349: The  branch $z_{\rm F}$, referred  to as the F  solution as it
350:  exists over  the \textit{full}  dimensionality range $d\in  (0,4)$, is 
351:   similar to the 
352:  solution  analyzed in  \cite{colaiori01} \footnote{Note that in  \cite{colaiori01}
353:  $B=(2(2-z))^{-1}$ is used instead of [26]. Most features
354:   of  the F and S solutions 
355:  with both choices are very similar; the $z_F(d)$ curves
356:  lie within less than $1\%$ for $d\ge 2$. However, only the latter
357:    leads to continuous solutions
358:  on either side of $d=1$.}. 
359:    It lies  fairly close  to
360:  typical numerical  results \cite{marinari00} with  $z=1.632$ for $d= 2$ and $z=1.787$ for
361:  $d=3$, reproduces the exact results 
362:  in  $d=0$ and $d=1$ (see Fig.  \ref{z})  and reaches $z=2$ at $d_c=4$,  which defines the
363:  upper critical dimension  of this solution.
364:          The  other branch,  denoted  S as  it  is associated  with the 
365:  \textit{shorter}
366:  dimensionality interval  $d\in (0,2)$, embodies a new universality class
367:  with  $z_{\rm S} \neq z_{\rm F}$  for $d\neq 1$. 
368:   For  this solution,  $z=2$ at  $d_c=2$ and it does  not exist
369:  for $d\ge 2$, so that there
370:  remains a single strong-coupling solution in and above two dimensions
371:  -- the F solution.
372:  We emphasise that both the F and S solutions are non-perturbative since
373:  no (stable) perturbative fixed point can be found
374:  for $d<2$ within the standard perturbative expansion 
375:  in  the coupling constant  $g={2\lambda^2D}/{\nu^3}$, even to all orders
376:   \cite{Wiese}.  \mct  theory involves  resumming an  infinite
377:  set of diagrams and  so is capable of going beyond standard RG techniques.
378:  
379: 
380:  We now comment on our findings. 
381:  According to MC theory,  for $d < 2$ there are two possible
382:  strong-coupling universality  classes,  F and S. 
383: It is clear that for  a given set  of initial conditions and
384:  bare correlators, the time evolution would unambiguously steer the system
385:  towards one or other  of the two solutions.  
386: Equivalently, in the mapping to  the DPRM,
387: the solution with  lowest free energy would  be selected as the physical one.
388:  The  apparent  freedom  to  choose a  solution  arises  
389:  because we have considered the scaling regime in which the bare 
390:  correlators have been dropped as  irrelevant, so we have lost track
391:  of their role. However, a clue as to the form of bare correlator 
392:  needed for the S solution to emerge can be obtained by inspecting the zero-dimensional case.
393:  In $d=0$, the  DPRM analogue  is a  directed walk  along a  chain of
394: length  $L$ on which  the  site  energies  are random.   A  dynamical
395: exponent $z=1$  would correspond to free energy  fluctuations of order
396: $L^{2/z-1}=L$  which  is  larger  than the  $\sqrt{L}$  (for
397: $z=4/3$) expected  for independent  random site energies.  
398: with $z=1$  could only exist with long-range  correlations between the
399: site energies  and is therefore not the  natural solution  for the short-range problem in  $d=0$. We suspect
400: that the $z_{\rm S}$ branch in the whole range $0<d<2$ would only be realized
401:  if  there were some  long-range correlations in the noise for  the KPZ
402: problem or between the site energies for the DPRM analogue.
403: 
404: To investigate this possibility further,
405:  suppose  instead   of  starting  out  with   noise  with  short-range
406:   correlations, one introduces  some long-ranged correlated noise, of
407:   the form  $\langle \eta({ x},t)\eta({  x'},t')\rangle = 2 R({
408:   x}-{  x'})\delta(t-t')$ with some power law distribution $R({  x}) \propto  x^{2\rho-d}$, or
409:   equivalently   in  Fourier   space  $R({   k}) =   D  (1+w
410:   k^{-2\rho})$. The MC equations would formally be the same with 
411:   $D$ replaced by  the  `generalized' noise correlator
412:  $R({ k})$ \cite{frey96}.
413:   These long-range bare noise correlations will not affect
414:   the  scaling  behavior  of  the  system  as  long  as  they  decay
415:   sufficiently  quickly,  so  that  they  become irrelevant after  some
416:   transient regime. The condition for this to happen can be worked out
417:   by substituting  the scaling forms for $G$  and $C$ into
418:   Eq. (\ref{mc2}). The initial correlations decay as
419: %\begin{equation}
420: $C_0({ k},\omega)=2  R({ k})|G({
421: k},\omega)|^2 \sim k^{-2(z+\rho)}$
422: %\end{equation}
423:  whereas  the long-time correlation function is expected to behave
424:  as $C({ k},\omega)\sim
425:  k^{-(2\chi +d+z)}\equiv k^{-(d+4-z)}$ using the identity $z+\chi=2$.
426:  Comparing these two expressions, one infers that the long-range correlations
427:  will  destabilize a short-range  solution with dynamical exponent $z$ when
428: \begin{equation}
429: \rho > \frac{d+4-3z}{2},
430: \label{cond}
431: \end{equation}
432: which is identical to the  criterion obtained in \cite{frey99} from RG
433:  arguments.  The condition of Eq. (\ref{cond})   determines the
434:  phase  boundary  $\rho(d,z)$  between  the short-range  and  long-range
435:  stability  domains for  each  of  the two  \mct  solutions $z_{\rm F}$  and
436:  $z_{\rm S}$. In the long-range noise dominated region
437: $z_{\rm LR}=\frac{d+4-2\rho}{3}$ \cite{frey99}. The solutions F and 
438: S are stable against  noise of range $\rho$ if their associated $z$ satisfies $z<z_{\rm LR}$. 
439:  For all $0<d<2$, we believe that 
440: the S solution requires for its {\em existence}
441: the addition of  long-range noise of infinitesimal amplitude with
442:  $\rho_S= \frac{d+4-3z_{\rm S}}{2}$, as in the case $d=0$ (where $z=1$ would correspond
443:  to long-range noise with $\rho=0.5^{-}$). For $0<d<1$, the S solution  lies at the stability limit
444: of the long-range solution and in the interval
445: $1<d<2$, it  will be the solution to the KPZ problem  in the presence of
446: infinitesimal amounts of such correlated noise if (say) the associated free energy
447: in the DPRM analogue is lower than that of the F solution (with the same correlated noise).
448:  This S solution could hence possibly be brought out by tuning the  parameters.
449:  We believe that
450: in the absence of  some long-range correlation, the F solution will be the appropriate solution
451:  or universality class
452:  for  $0<d<4$.
453: 
454: Our S solution might  appear to be of academic interest as  it only exists
455: when $d<2$ and coincides with the F one in $d=1$. However,
456:  it turns out to be strikingly  similar to the solution found in several theoretical studies.
457: We focus  on three of them: the replica  symmetry breaking (RSB)
458:   calculation   of  M\'{e}zard   and  Parisi   \cite{MP},   a  Gaussian
459:   variational calculation  \cite{GO} and Flory-Imry-Ma  (FIM) arguments
460:  \cite{MG}.  All  three   approaches  result  in  a  strong-coupling
461:   solution  with   $d_c  =2$.  The  RSB
462:    treatment yields a dynamical exponent equivalent to the FIM
463:  result \cite{MP}: 
464:  $z_{\rm FIM}=(4+d)/3   \simeq  2-(2-d)/3   +  {\cal
465: O}((2-d)^2)$,
466:  which is  identical to (\ref{eps2}) and  suggests that the \mct  solution S and
467:  the  RSB --  FIM   solution are indeed
468:  different approximations to the same underlying  universality class. 
469: It is not apparent how the long-range correlations needed for the
470: S solution to exist enter  these analytical approaches. However, it has been observed long ago
471:   that by the addition of a type of long-range force,  the Flory formula in the
472: conventional self-avoiding polymer problem  becomes exact \cite{MB}.  
473:  
474: 
475: To summarize, we have found a new \mct solution, S, which has an upper
476: critical dimension $d_c=2$, in addition to the usual one, F, which has
477: $d_c=4$. This  new solution seems   similar to  that
478:  found  by  analytical  treatments  such  as  RSB
479:    and  FIM  arguments, but we believe will only exist in the
480: presence of appropriate long-range correlated noise.
481:   We  acknowledge  that  the
482: numerical  value for  $z$  shown in  Fig.  \ref{z} when  $d=4$ is  not
483: apparently consistent with the upper critical dimension $d_c=4$ of the
484: F  solution, but  we  attribute  that to  the  inability of  numerical
485: studies in high dimensions to access the scaling regime.
486: 
487: \begin{acknowledgments}
488: The authors wish  to thank A. Bray, B. Derrida,  T. Garel, C. Monthus,
489: H.  Orland,  U.C.  T\"auber  and  K.  Wiese  for  useful  discussions.
490: Financial  support   by  the  European   Community's  Human  Potential
491: Programme   under    contract   HPRN-CT-2002-00307,   DYGLAGEMEM,   is
492: acknowledged. One of  us (MAM) would like to thank  CEA Saclay for its
493: hospitality.
494: \end{acknowledgments}
495: 
496: %\begin{references}
497: %%%%
498: %\bibliography{bibkpz}
499: %\bibliographystyle{prsty}
500: \begin{thebibliography}{10}
501: 
502: \bibitem{kardar86}   M.   Kardar,   G.   Parisi,  and   Y.-C.   Zhang,
503: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 56}, 889 (1986).
504: 
505: \bibitem{halpin95} T. Halpin-Healy and Y. Zhang, Phys. Rep. {\bf 245},
506: 218 (1995), J. Krug, Adv. Phys. {\bf 46}, 139 (1997).
507: 
508: \bibitem{forster77}  D.  Forster,  D.~R.  Nelson, and  M.~J.  Stephen,
509: Phys. Rev. A {\bf 16}, 732 (1977).
510: 
511: \bibitem{kardar87} M. Kardar, Nucl. Phys. B {\bf 290}, 582 (1987).
512: 
513: \bibitem{beijeren85}  H.  van  Beijeren,  R.  Kutner,  and  H.  Spohn,
514: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 54}, 2026 (1985).
515: 
516: \bibitem{janssen86} H.~K. Janssen and  B. Schmittmann, Z. Phys. B {\bf
517: 63}, 517 (1986).
518: 
519: \bibitem{hwa92} T. Hwa, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 69}, 1552 (1992).
520: 
521: \bibitem{hwa91}  T. Hwa  and E.  Frey, Phys.  Rev. A  {\bf  44}, R7873
522: (1991).
523: 
524: 
525: \bibitem{bouchaud93} M.~A.  Moore {\it et~al.}, Phys.  Rev. Lett. {\bf
526: 74}, 4257  (1995), J.-P. Bouchaud and  M.~E. Cates, Phys.  Rev. E {\bf
527: 47}, R1455 (1993)
528: 
529: \bibitem{halpin89}  T. Halpin-Healy,  Phys. Rev.  Lett. {\bf  62}, 442
530: (1989), H.~C. Fogedby, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 94}, 195702 (2005).
531: 
532: \bibitem{colaiori01}     F.      Colaiori     and     M.~A.     Moore,
533: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 86}, 3946 (2001).
534: 
535: \bibitem{colaiori01b} F.  Colaiori and M.~A. Moore, Phys.  Rev. E {\bf
536: 63}, 057103 (2001), Phys. Rev. E {\bf 65}, 017105 (2001).
537: 
538: \bibitem{ledoussal03} P.  {Le~Doussal} and  K.~J. Wiese, Phys.  Rev. B
539: {\bf 68}, 174202 (2003), Phys. Rev. E {\bf 72}, 035101(R) (2005).
540: 
541: \bibitem{MP}  M. M\'{e}zard  and G.  Parisi, J.  Phys. I,{\bf  1}, 809
542: (1991).
543: 
544: \bibitem{GO}  T. Garel  and  H. Orland,  Phys.  Rev. B  {\bf 55},  226
545: (1997).
546: 
547: \bibitem{MG} C.  Monthus and T. Garel,  Phys. Rev. E  {\bf 69}, 061112
548: (2004).
549: 
550: 
551: \bibitem{tang92}   L.-H.  Tang,   B.~M.  Forrest,   and   D.~E.  Wolf,
552: Phys.  Rev.  A  {\bf  45},  7162 (1992),  T.  Ala-Nissila,  T.  Hjelt,
553: J.~M. Kosterlitz, and O. Ven\"al\"ainen, J. Stat.  Phys. {\bf 72}, 207
554: (1993),  E.   Marinari,  A.  Pagnani,   G.  Parisi,  and   Z.  R\'acz,
555: Phys. Rev. E {\bf 65}, 026136/1 (2002).
556: 
557: \bibitem{marinari00}   E.  Marinari,  A.   Pagnani,  and   G.  Parisi,
558: J. Phys. A {\bf 33}, 8181 (2000).
559: 
560: \bibitem{castellano98} C.  Castellano, M. Marsili,  and L. Pietronero,
561: Phys. Rev.  Lett. {\bf  80}, 3527 (1998),  C. Castellano,  M. Marsili,
562: M.~A.  Mu{\~n}oz, and  L.  Pietronero,  Phys. Rev.  E  {\bf 59},  6460
563: (1999).
564: 
565: \bibitem{doherty94}  J.~P.  Doherty,  M.~A.  Moore,  J.  M.  Kim,  and
566: A.~J. Bray, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 72}, 2041 (1994).
567: 
568: \bibitem{frey96} E.  Frey, U.~C.  T\"auber, and T.  Hwa, Phys.  Rev. E
569: {\bf 53}, 4424 (1996).
570: 
571: \bibitem{PS04}  M. Pr\"{a}hofer and H. Spohn, J. Stat. Phys. {\bf 115}, 255 (2004).
572: 
573: \bibitem{Wiese}
574: K. J. Wiese, J. Stat. Phys. {\bf 93}, 143 (1998).
575: 
576: \bibitem{frey99}
577:  {E. Frey,  U. C. T\"auber, and H. K. Janssen},  {Europhys. Lett. 47}, 14,
578:    1999.
579: 
580: \bibitem{MB}
581: M.~A. Moore and A.~J. Bray, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. {\bf 11}, 1353 (1978), Y. Chen
582: and R.~A. Guyer J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. {\bf 21}, 4173 (1988).
583: 
584: 
585:  
586: 
587: \end{thebibliography}
588: \end{document}
589: 
590: 
591: We remarked earlier that by modifying (say) the bare correlator it might be 
592: possible to change the physical solution of the \mct
593: equations from the S solution to the F solution. This can be done by including
594:   long-range correlations in the noise,
595:    in the spirit of \cite{medina89,frey99}.
596: Suppose  instead   of  starting  out  with   noise  with  short-range
597: correlations, one  starts with  some long-ranged correlated  noise, of
598: the  form $\langle  \eta({\bf x},t)\eta({\bf  x'},t')\rangle  = R({\bf
599: x}-{\bf  x'})\delta(t-t')$  with $R({\bf  x})\sim  D x^{2\rho-d}$,  or
600: equivalently in Fourier space $R({\bf k}) \propto D (1+w k^{-2\rho})$.
601: These long-range  initial correlations  will not affect  the long-time
602: behavior of the system as  long as they decay sufficiently quickly, so
603: that they are  washed out after some transient  regime.  The condition
604: for this to happen can be worked out by substituting the scaling forms
605: (\ref{scg})  and  (\ref{scc})  into  Eq.   (\ref{mc2}).   The  initial
606: correlations decay as
607: %\begin{equation}
608: $C_0({\bf   k},\omega)=2  D   R({\bf  k})|G({\bf   k},\omega)|^2  \sim
609: k^{-2(z+\rho)}$
610: %\end{equation}
611:  whereas the  long-time correlation function is expected  to behave as
612:  $C({\bf  k},\omega)\sim k^{-(2\chi  +d+z)}\equiv  k^{-(d+4-z)}$ using
613:  the identity $z+\chi=2$.  Comparing these two expressions, one infers
614:  that  the  long-range  correlations  will destabilize  a  short-range
615:  solution with dynamical exponent $z$ when
616: \begin{equation}
617: \rho > \frac{d+4-3z}{2},
618: \label{cond}
619: \end{equation}
620: which is identical to the  criterion obtained in \cite{frey99} from RG
621:  arguments.  One  can use the condition (\ref{cond})  to determine the
622:  phase  boundary  $\rho(d)$  between  the short-range  and  long-range
623:  stability domains for each of the two \mct solutions $z_{\rm F}$ and
624:  $z_{\rm  F}$.    The  ensuing   phase  diagram  is   represented  in
625:  Fig. \ref{diag}.
626: % 
627: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
628: \begin{figure}[ht]
629: \includegraphics[height=76mm,angle=-90]{phase.ps}
630: \caption{Phase diagram  of the KPZ equation in  presence of long-range
631:  noise;  F  and S  are  both  short-range  phases. The  dashed  line
632:  represents the  lower critical dimension, above  which the transition
633:  occurs and delimits the  smooth Edwards-Wilkinson (EW) phase from the
634:  F phase \cite{frey99}.  Above $d_c$,  both the EW and F solutions can
635:  occur,  depending upon  whether  $\lambda <\lambda_c$  or $\lambda  >
636:  \lambda_c$.   In the  LR (long-range)  phase, $z=\frac{d+4-2\rho}{3}$
637:  \cite{frey99}.}
638: % from a stability analysis of the LR and SR FPs (lower line).} 
639: \label{diag}
640: \end{figure}
641: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
642: We  now comment on  the interplay  between the  S and  F solutions.
643:  These two solutions are identical in $d=1$. As $d$  increases, their 
644: associated values of $z$ separate
645:   and  the stability domain of  S narrows, such  that near two
646:  dimensions   it  becomes  unstable   against  any   small  long-range
647:  perturbation. The  system is  then driven to  the F  solution, which
648:  conversely  remains stable for  larger value  of $\rho$.  
649: 
650: \bibitem{medina89}
651: E. Medina, T. Hwa, M. Kardar, and Y.-C. Zhang, Phys. Rev. A {\bf 39},  3053
652:   (1989).
653: 
654: \bibitem{frey99}
655: E. Frey, U.~C. T\"auber, and H.~K. Janssen, Europhys. Lett. {\bf 47},  14
656:   (1999),
657: H.~K. Janssen, U.~C. T\"auber, and E. Frey, Eur. Phys. J. B {\bf 9},  491
658:   (1999).
659: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
660: \begin{figure}[ht]
661: \includegraphics[height=76mm,angle=-90]{phase2.ps}
662: \caption{Phase diagram  of the KPZ equation in  presence of long-range
663:  noise.  The  dashed  line
664:  represents the  lower critical dimension, above  which the transition
665:  occurs and delimits the  smooth Edwards-Wilkinson (EW) phase from the
666:  F one  \cite{frey99}. Above  $d_c$, both the  EW and F  solutions can
667:  occur,  depending upon  whether  $\lambda <\lambda_c$  or $\lambda  >
668:  \lambda_c$.  In the  LR  (long-range) phase,  $z=\frac{d+4-2\rho}{3}$
669:  \cite{frey99}.}
670: \label{diag}
671: \end{figure}
672: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
673: 
674: 
675: