405

Progress of Theoretical Physics, VoL 59, No. 2, February 1978

Renormalizatio n-Group Approach to Spin Glass

Transition of a Random Bond Ising Model
in Two- and Three-Dimensi ons

Takeshi TATSUMI

Department of Chemistry, Faculty of Science, Kyoto University

Kyoto 606

Downloaded from http://ptp.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on September 22, 2015

(Received October 15, 1977)

An Ising spin glass of random bonds with the Gaussian and two-peaked distributions in
two- and three-dimensions is investigated with the cumulant expansion and two-step deci-
mation transformations. It is found that the spin glass state exists in two- and three-dimen-
sions and that the ferromagnetic phase shrinks to that of the pure system in two-dimension
for the two-peaked distribution. The specific heat exponent at the spin glass transition point
is found to be -1.08 and -0.471 for the square and simple cubic lattices, respectively. Also
the effect of bond correlations on the spin glass state is considered.

§ 1. Introduction

Recently much attention has been paid to explain the qualitative features of the
experimentally observed spin glass transition;v. 2> a sharp cusp-like peak in the low-
field susceptibilityll, 2> and no indication of a discontinuity or of a cooperative-type
peak in the specific heat. 2>
A simple model with the Gaussian distribution of the exchange interactions
which explains the sharp cusp-like peak in the susceptibility has been proposed by
Edwards and Anderson 8> and subsequently studied with the mean-field approxima-
tion;>~n and by extending to a spherical model. 8>
The spin glass transition of a random Ising model of the ferromagnetic and
antiferromagnetic bond mixtures has been studied by various authors. 9 >~ 12 J
Although these theoretical approaches show the cusped susceptibility 3 >~al.8>~w
and specific heae>~a>,s>.Io> at the spin glass transition, Harris et al.13l find with the
e-expansion method the spin glass specific heat exponent a<
-1 for dimension-
alities d<6.
On the other hand, the spin glass transition in a quenched Ising site modeP 4 >~Iol
shows a cusp-like peak in the susceptibility and a divergent anomaly in the specific
heat.
Recently the Edwards-Anderson modeP> of a spin gl<iss transition was investi-
gated by the finite lattice renormalization-gro up transformations. m~Jg) Jayaprakash
et al.m generalized the Migdal recursion relations 20 >~ 2 v to a two-peaked distribution,
and showed that a spin glass phase exists for d = 2, 3 and 4. However Kirkpat-
rick18> showed that under the improved Migdal transformation a spin glass does
406 T. Tatsumi

not order m 2d. Southern and Y oung 19J also argued the absence of a spm glass
transition for the square lattice with the decimation transformation. Thus it is
needed to investigate whether an Ising spin glass phase does exist or not in 2d.
Also the specific heat exponent at the spin glass transition was found to take the
large negative values by Jayaprakash et al.,m and Southern and Young/ 9) which is
compatible with the experimemtal calorimetric results. 2J However their results, m. 19J
show large negative specific heat exponents for the pure case, as well. Therefore
more improved approaches are necessary to study a spin glass transition.
In a previous approach 22 J a spm glass transition was not found for the square
lattice. 23 J
We will discuss in this report a spin glass transition for two- and three-

Downloaded from http://ptp.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on September 22, 2015

dimensional Ising bond models with the renormalization -group transformations
(RGT).
We consider an Ising model of bond mixtures described by the Hamiltonian

(1)

where si= ±1 is the site spin variable, Kij={1Jij({3=1 /kBT) IS the random bond
variable, and the sum is over nearest-neighbo r pairs of sites. The random bond
variables is assumed to be statistically independent. As for the distribution of the
random bond variables, we consider the Gaussian distribution

(2)
with the mean J 0 and the width A, and the two-peaked distribution

(3)
where p is the concentration of the ferromagnetic bonds. The mean J 0 and width
A for the two-peaked distribution are given, respectively, by

J 0 = (2p-1)J (4)
and

A= -./4p(1-p) J. (5)
In a quenched random system the transformed distribution is obtained by aver-
aging the recursion equation for the interaction parameters over the old one.w
At each RGT iteration we force the transformed distribution into an original form
with the renormalized mean J 0 ' and width A'. The ferromagnetic, paramagnetic
and spin glass phases are characterized by J 0 ->= and A/ J 0 ----'>0, Jo =A= 0 and
J 0/ A----'>0 and A->=, respectively.
In what follows, the phase diagram is determined with this criterion.
First we treat in § 2 the square (SQ) lattice for the case for the Gaussian
distribution with the cumulant expansion method. 25 J
Next we treat the SQ, simple cubic (SC) and face centered cubic (FCC)
 Renormalization-Group Approach to Spin Glass Transition 407

lattices by the use of the two-step decimation transformations. 26 J' 2 n In this RGT
we consider only the case for the two-peaked distribution because of its simplicity.
The successive decimation transformations used in this report do not give the
antiferromagnetic transition. Therefore we consider only for the case p>0.5. The
phase diagram of a random Ising bond model for the case Jii = ± J is expected to
be symmetrical a bout P = 0.5 for the SQ and SC lattices, but not for the FCC
lattice. For the SQ lattice we consider the two-step decimation transformation
between the SQ lattices where the lattice spacing is increased by the factor for v2
each step. The scale factor b for this RGT is 2. For the SC and FCC lattices
we use the two-step decimation transformations between the SC and FCC lattices
as discussed in Ref. 27). Section 3 is devoted to discussion.

Downloaded from http://ptp.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on September 22, 2015

§ 2. Formulations and results

A. Cumulant expansion for the square

lattice
We consider RGT for the SQ lattice
where each cell contains five spins. In this
case the scale factor b is v--s-.
We consider
an approximate evaluation as in Niemeijer and
van Leeuwen 251 on the basis of the separa-
tion of H into H 0 (an intra-cellular part)
and V (an inter-cellular part). Only the first 4
order cumulant is treated in this report. Fig. 1. Five·spins cells on the square lat-
The transformed interaction parameter tice. The symbols and numbers are
used in the text.
x;j is given by
(6)
with

f/' = (~' sia exp Ho) / (~' exp H 0 ) , (a= 2, 3, 4 and 5) (7)
~d ~d

where the primes denote the partial sum over all internal spin configurations of
cells with fixed configuration {s'} of the cell spins, and the cell spin dependence
on the right-hand side of Eq. (6) is suppressed. The site numbering as well as
the cell labelling of Fig. 1 has been used. ft contains four bond variables (K/ 2 ,
K/S, K/ 4 and Ki 15 ) in the i-th cell. By performing the Gaussian integral of Eq.
(6), the set of recursion equations of the mean and width for the Gaussian distri-
bution is given by

Jo' = 3 Jo<f) 2 , (8)

J' = -./3 (t1 2 + J/·) ((])2) 2 +2Jo"(]a F) ( <r If)+ 2( (])2)) - 9Jo"<f?, (a~r)
where < ) denotes the average over the probability distribution of random bond
408 T. Tatsumi

variables. By performing the Gaussian integral of Eq. (8) numerically, nontrivial

fixed points are obtained and shown m Table I. The linearized transformation
at the fixed point ({3J0 * and {3L1*)

(9)
has thermal eigenvalues l.r. The thermal eigenvalue Ar is related to the thermal
scaling index Yr and the specific heat exponent through such relations as

(10)
and

a=2-d/Yr. (11)

Downloaded from http://ptp.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on September 22, 2015

These values are also contained in Table I. The phase diagram is determined by
the renormalization-group flow of Eq. (8) according to the criterion described in
§ 1. The phase diagram is found numerically to consist of the paramagnetic (PM),
ferromagnetic (FM) and spin glass (SG) phases.
Figure 2 shows the schematic phase diagram as a function of {3L1 and {3J0 , and

Table I. Nontrivial fixed points and thermal critical exponents for the square lattice. The
case (a) is the results for the Gaussian distribution obtained by the cumulant expansion.
The case (b) is the results for the two-peaked distribution with the two-step decimation
transformation. The point B denotes the phase boundary between the ferromagnetic
and spin glass phases at {3J-7oo.

p* {34* (JjJ,)* YT a
- --- ----------·---·---- -----~----------

Exact 1.0 0.4407 () () 1 0 (In)

(a) b=-15
Pure Case (P) 1.0 0.5931 0 0 0.9009 -0.2201
B 00 00 0.5416 1.199 0.3320
T ricri tical (T) 0.7053 0.4916 0.6970 0.6705 -0.9832
Spin Glass (S) 0 2.480 00 0.6034 -1.315
(b) b=2
Pure Case (P) 1.0 0.6094 () 0 1. 494 0.6617
Spin Glass (S) 0.5 0 1. 409 00 0.6501 -1.076

Fig. 2. Schematic phase diagram and renormalization-group

flows of an Ising bond model for the Gaussian distri-
bution of interaction parameters in the square lattice
obtained from the first order cumulant. The symbols
PM, FM and SG denote the paramagnetic, ferromagne-
tic and spin glass phases, respectively. Fixed points
p
are denoted by the open circles.
 Renormalization-Group Approach to Spin Glass Transition 409

the renormalization-group flows obtained with the iterations of Eq. (8). In what
follows, the fixed point S denotes the spin glass-to-paramagnetic transition point
for the symmetrical case ( J 0 = 0), P the ferromagnetic-to-paramagnetic transition
point for the pure case and B the phase boundary between the spin glass and
ferromagnetic phases at f3LJ~oo. Three phases meet at the tricritical point
T (j3J0 * = 0.7053 and j3LJ* = 0.4916). The phase boundary between the spin glass
and the paramagnetic phases curves in the vicinity of the tricritical point.
On the other hand, the mean-field 5> and spherical-model 8> calculations yield
the horizontal line of transitions between the spin glass and paramagnetic
phases.
The specific heat exponent a for the spin glass transition at Sis found to be

Downloaded from http://ptp.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on September 22, 2015

-1.315, which shows a cusp-like specific heat.
B. Two-step decimation transformations for the SQ, SC and FCC lattices
The careful estimation of the competition between ferromagnetic and antifer-
romagnetic interactions is necessary to treat the magnetically delicate spin glass
state with the finite-lattice renormalization-group transformations. To this end we
treat the large clusters with using the two-step decimation transformations between
two systems with the same dimensionalities. 26 >' 27 > The sites of the SQ and SC
lattices are denoted by the open and solid circles and the crosses in Figs. 3 and 4.
In Fig. 4 the site denoted by the solid circles constitute the FCC lattice. We
briefly describe the decimation procedures for the SQ and SC lattices. By perform-
ing successively the partial sums of the spin variables on the sites denoted by the
open and solid circles, respectively, in this order, the SQ and SC lattices are
transformed into the SQ and FCC lattices, and then into the SQ and SC lattices,
respectively. Therefore each transformed lattice has an original lattice symmetry
where the lattice spacing is increased by the scale factor b. In this case b is

k 2
/
/
''
'
'' ''
, / '' ''
X ', X
'' 5 /

'' ,'
'' , /

'' /
/

4 3
Fig. 3. Square lattice. The sites denoted by
the open and solid circles are decimated by
the first- and second ·step of the successive
transformations, respectively.
Fig. 4. Simple cubic and face centered cubic
lattices.
410 T. Tatsumi

2 both for the SQ and SC lattices. The FCC lattice can be treated in a similar
manner as above.
We treat the case for the two-peaked distribution. The transformed interaction
parameter K~ 1 for the SQ lattice is given by
(12)

with, for example,

Kik = 1/2 ~ ln [cosh (K;c + Kck) /cosh (K;c- Kck)], (13)

C=l,5

where Ku, Kkf and K 11 also take similar forms to the above. By averaging K~ 1

Downloaded from http://ptp.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on September 22, 2015

and (K~1 ) 2 over the old two-peaked distribution, and forcing the transformed distri-
bution into an original one, the mean and width for the new distribution are given
by
(3Jo' = h1 (P) ln g ({3J) (14)

and
;311' = .j Ch2(P) +h3 (p)) /2- (h1 (P))" ln g ({3J) (15)

with
g ({3J) =cosh {2[ln cosh (2;3J)]}, (16)

where
h1(p) =<ln[cosh (K;a +Ka1) /cosh (K;a- Ka1) J>/ln g (;3J), (17)

h2 (p) = < {ln [cosh (K;a +Kat)/ cosh (K;a- Ka1 )]} 2) / (ln g ({3J)) 2 (18)

and
h 3 (p) =< {ln[cosh(K;k+Kk1)/cosh(K;k-Kk1 )]}
X {ln[cosh(Ku +K11 )/cosh (Ku-K1J]} )/ (ln g (;3J) ) 2 • (19)

The recursion equations of the mean and width for the SC lattice are obtained
in a similar manner to the above, and given by

f3Jo' = 2h 1 (P) ln g ({3J) (20)

and
(21)

h 1(p) and h2 (P), and h 3 (p) are evaluated by averaging over 27 and 2 12 bond
configurations, respectively. We do not give the explicit forms of h; (P) (i = 1, 2
and 3) for these complications.
The recursion equations for the FCC lattice are similar to the above, but more
complicated. To evaluate the renormalized mean and width, we must perform the
sums over 2 15 and 2 28 bond configurations, respectively. Thus we assume that the
 Renormalizati on-Group Approach to Spin Glass Transition 411

q p
N
q
N PM

-
-.
1-
-"'
PM --. 5
1-
-"'
t
<I
c:l.
~
q
5
5G FM
5G
0
0 0.5 p 1.0 0
0 0.5 p

Downloaded from http://ptp.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on September 22, 2015

Fig. 5. Phase diagram for the
two-peaked distribution of
random bond variables in
the square lattice.
p B 1.0
Fig. 6. Phase diagram for the
two-peaked distribution of
random bond variables in
the simple cubic lattice.
PJ.-::.
Fig. 7. Fixed points and re-
normalization-gro up flows
of Fig. 6 on the plane
(fiJo, fid).

interaction parameters generated by the first-step decimation transformation are

statistically independent. The resulting equations are complicated, and we do not
write them down here_
The phase diagrams are obtained by generating the renormalization -group flow
on the plane ((3J0 , (3.:1) _ These are converted into ones on the plane (P, J) by the
use of Eqs. ( 4) and (5) _ Nontrivial fixed points and thermal critical exponents
for the SQ, and SC and FCC lattices are represented in Table I and II, respec-
tively. Also data from the series expansion for the pure case 28 ) are contained in
Table II for comparison_ We represent the nontrivial fixed points and phase bound-
aries for the SQ and SC lattices in Figs_ 5 and 6, respectively, where the fixed
point T indicates the tricritical point. Also the schematic renormalization -group
flows of Eqs. (20) and (21) for the SC lattice are shown in Fig. 7. The phase
boundary between the spin glass and ferromagnetic phases for the SC lattice is
exactly vertical as seen from Eqs. ( 4), (5), (20) and (21) _ At the broken line
in Fig_ 6 the renormalization -group flow reverses its direction on the plane (p, J),
but flows into the same fixed point ((JJ0 * = (3.:1* = 0) on the plane ((JJ0 , (3.:1) _
The phase diagram for the FCC lattice resembles that for the SC lattice, but
the phase boundary between T and B is not verticaL The phase diagram is
expected to be symmetrical a bout P = 0.5 for the SQ and SC lattices, but not for
the FCC lattices. Another RGT which yields the antiferromagne tic transition is
necessary for treating the case for P<0.5.
The main results of the present work are as follows: (i) the spin glass state
exists for d>2. (ii) the ferromagnetic phase shrinks to the line in 2d. (iii) the
specific heat exponent at the spin glass transition decreases as d decreases and is
considerably larger than those obtained from other RGT calculations. m,Jg)
Although the cumulant expansion and two-step decimation transformation
412 T. Tatsumi

Table II. Nontrivial fixed points and thermal critical exponents for the SC and FCC lattices.
The point B denotes the phase boundary between the ferromagnetic and spin glass
phases at f3LI->oo.

p* {3Jo* ,u* (LI/Jo) * y,. a

- - - - - - --- -- -------

Pure Casctd (P) 1.0 0. 438:1 (SC) i

!
() () 1. 748 o. ~11:07
0. :l43~ (FCC)
Seriesbl 1.0 0. 2217(SC) () () 1. li 0.125
0. 1021 (FCC)
(a) sc
Tricritical (T) 0.9315 0.4441 0.~599 0.5820 y, ~1. 6111 0.1721
y,=O. 2677 ·-9. ~OR

Downloaded from http://ptp.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on September 22, 2015

B 0.9315 00 00 0.5820 y,=2. 7 19 1 0.9087
y,=2.481 0.7909
Spin Glass (S) 0.5 () 0. 79:3:3 00 l. 214 -0.4709
(b) FCC
Tricritical en 0.8479 0.4023 0.4152 1.():)2 y,= l. 370 -0.1901
y,=O. 7947 -1.775
B 0.8459 00 00 1. 044 y,=3. 354 l.l()(i

y,= -3.940 I'

Spin Glass (S) 0.5 0 0.9616 co 0.8558 -1.506

a) Reported in Ref. 26). b) Reported in Ref. 28).

yield a= -0.22 and 0.66 for the pure case m 2d, respectively, it 1s noted that
CL at the spin glass transition for both cases differs only a little.

§ 3. Discussion

First we discuss the effect of bond correlations on the spin glass state. If we
neglect the 12 bonds correlations in Eq. (19) and approximate h 3 (P) as (h, (l>) r.
the set of recursion equations for the SQ and SC lattices is reduced to

(3Jo' = nh, (P) In g ((3J), (22)

(311'=~n(h 2 (P) -/z,(J;)')/2ln q((U).

where 11 =, 1 for the SQ lattice, and 2 for the SC lattice. This approximation
corresponds to the overestimation of the width of the di:'ltribution. In this case
the phase boundary between the ferromagnetic and spin glass phases are vertical at
p = 0.953 and 0.819 for the SQ and SC lattices, respectively. a at the spin glass
transition (P = 0.5) is -2.02 and -1.19 for the SQ and SC lattices, respectively.
The large negative a for the FCC lattice is also considered to be caused by the
same reason as the above. Therefore the neglect of the cancellations from the
competition between ferromagnetic and antiferromagnetic interactions causes to sta-
bilize the ferromagnetic phase as in Ref. 17). On the other hand, if one treats the
first-step and second-step of the present RGT for the SQ and SC lattices, respec-
 Renormalization-GroujJ I1pproach to Spin Glass Transition 413

tively, this corresponds to Ref. 19). In this case 19 ) the above-mentioned cancella-
tions are overestimated since the bond correlations are taken into account only
insufficiently. Therefore to treat correctly the magnetically delicate spin glass
state with RGT it is necessary to take into account as many bonds as possible.
In this report we only use the two-step decimation transformations. More
improvement will be possible by employing the. three-step decimation transforma-
tions among the SC, body centered cubic and FCC lattices, or by enlarging the
cluster size. Also the application of the present method to the honeycomb lattice 26 l
is straightforward.

Downloaded from http://ptp.oxfordjournals.org/ by guest on September 22, 2015

Acknowledgements

The author wishes to thank Professor T. Yamamoto for encouragement

throughout the course of thi.s work. He also acknowledges Kyoto University
Data Processing Center for services.

References

1) J. A. Mydosh, in "Magnetism and Magnetic Materials-1974", AlP Conference Proceeding

No. 24, edited by C. D. Graham, Jr., J. J. Rhyne and G. H. Lander (American Institute
of Physic;;, New York, 1975), p. 131.
2) L. E. Wenger and P. H. Keesom, Phys. Rev. B13 (1976), 4053.
3) S. P. Edwards and P. W. Anderson, J. of Phys. F5 (1975), 965.
4) K. H. Fischer, Phys. Rev. Letters 34 (1975), 1438.
5) D. Sherrington and S. Kirkpatrick, Phys. Rev. Letters 35 (1975), 1792.
G) D. Sherrington and B. W. Southern, J. of Phys. F5 (1975), L49.
7) T. Kaneyoshi, J. of Phys. C9 (1976), L289.
8) J. M. Kosterlitz, D. ]. Thouless and R. C. Jones, Phys. Rev. Letters 36 (1976), 1217.
9) F. Matsubara and M. Sakata, Prog. Theor. Phys. 55 (1976), 672.
10) S. Katsura, Prog. Theor. Phys. 55 (1976), 1049; J. of Phys. C9 (1976), 619.
11) Y. Ueno and T. Oguchi, .T. Phys. Soc. Japan 40 (1975), 151:1.
T. Oguchi and Y. Ueno, J. Phys. Soc. Japan 41 (1976), 1123.
12) C. Domb, J. of Phys. A9 (1976), Ll7.
l::l) A. B. Harris, T. C. Lubensky and J.·H. Chen, Phys. Rev. Letters 36 (1976), 415.
14) D. C. Mattis, Phys. Letters 56A (1976), 421.
15) .T. M. Luttinger, Phys. Rev. Letters 37 (1976), 778.
16) T. Tatsumi, to be published.
17) C. Jayaprakash, J. Chalupa and M. Wortis, Phys. Rev. B15 (1977), 1495.
18) S. Kirkpatrick, Phys. Rev. B15 (1977), 1533,
19) B. W. Southern and A. P. Young, ]. Phys. C10 (1977), 2179,
20) A. A. Migdal, Zhur. Eksp. i Teor. Fiz. 69 (1975), 1457.
21) L. P. Kadanoff, Ann. of Phys. 100 (1976), 359.
22) T. Tatsumi and K. Kawasaki, Prog. Theor. Phys. 55 (1976), 612.
K. Kawasaki and T. Tatsumi, Prog. Theor. Phys. 55 (1976), 614.
2cl) T. Tatsumi, Prog. Theor. Phys. 58 (1977), 1066.
24) A. B. Harris and T. C. Lubensky, Phys. Rev. Letters 33 (1974), 1540.
25) Th. Niemeijer and J. M . .T. van Leeuwen, Phys. Rev. Letters 31 (1973), 1411; Physica 71
(1974)' 17.
26) T. Tatsumi, Prog. Theor. Phys. 58 (1977), 1058.
27) T. Tatsumi, to be published.
28) C. Domb, in Phase Transitions and Critical Phenomena, edited by C. Domb and M. S.
Green (Academic Press, New York, 1974), Vol. 3.