PHYSICAL REVIEW B 87, 064202 (2013)
Fragility of the mean-field scenario of structural glasses for disordered spin models
in finite dimensions
Chiara Cammarota,
1,2,*
Giulio Biroli,
1,†
Marco Tarzia,
2,‡
and Gilles Tarjus
2,§
1
IPhT, CEA/DSM-CNRS/URA 2306, CEA Saclay, F-91191 Gif-sur-Yvette Cedex, France
2
LPTMC, CNRS-UMR 7600, Universit´ e Pierre et Marie Curie, boˆ ıte 121, 4 Pl. Jussieu, 75252 Paris c´ edex 05, France
(Received 11 October 2012; revised manuscript received 18 January 2013; published 21 February 2013)
At the mean-field level, on fully connected lattices, several disordered spin models have been shown to belong
to the universality class of “structural glasses” with a “random first-order transition” (RFOT) characterized by
a discontinuous jump of the order parameter and no latent heat. However, their behavior in finite dimensions
is often drastically different, displaying either no glassiness at all or a conventional spin-glass transition. We
clarify the physical reasons for this phenomenon and stress the unusual fragility of the RFOT to short-range
fluctuations, associated, e.g., with the mere existence of a finite number of neighbors. Accordingly, the solution
of fully connected models is only predictive in very high dimension, whereas despite being also mean-field in
character, the Bethe approximation provides valuable information on the behavior of finite-dimensional systems.
We suggest that before embarking on a full blown account of fluctuations on all scales through computer
simulation or renormalization-group approach, models for structural glasses should first be tested for the effect
of short-range fluctuations and we discuss ways to do it. Our results indicate that disordered spin models do
not appear to pass the test and are therefore questionable models for investigating the glass transition in three
dimensions. This also highlights how nontrivial is the first step of deriving an effective theory for the RFOT
phenomenology from a rigorous integration over the short-range fluctuations.
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.87.064202 PACS number(s): 64.70.Q−, 75.10.Nr, 64.70.pm
I. INTRODUCTION
The random first-order transition (RFOT) theory
1,2
of the
glass transition builds on a mean-field scenario in which a
complex free-energy landscape with an exponentially large
number of metastable states emerges below a critical temper-
ature T
d
and the configurational entropy associated with these
metastable states vanishes at a lower temperature T
K
. At T
K
, an
RFOT, i.e., a transition with a discontinuous order parameter
yet no latent heat, to an ideal glass takes place. This scenario
is realized in mean-field-like approximations of a variety
of glass-forming systems (liquid models, lattice glasses,
uniformly frustrated systems) as well as in mean-field, fully
connected, spin models with quenched disorder
2,3
(e.g., p-spin
model, Potts glass). The latter correspond to spin glasses
without spin inversion symmetry, and their behavior differs
from that of the fully connected Sherrington-Kirkpatrick Ising
spin glass, which is characterized by a continuous transition
in place of the RFOT. They have been investigated in great
detail and have provided most of the clues about the generic
behavior of “mean-field structural glasses.”
To make progress toward a theory of the glass transition,
one must, however, go beyond the mean-field description and
include the effect of fluctuations
4
in finite-dimensional systems
with finite-range interactions. The main assumption behind
the RFOT theory of glass formation is that the mean-field
scenario with a dynamic and a static critical temperature retains
some validity when fluctuations are taken into account. The
ergodicity breaking transition at T
d
is expected to be smeared
and the metastable states no longer have an infinite lifetime
because of entropically driven nucleation events. This under-
lies the picture of a glass-forming liquid as a “mosaic state”
with its relaxation to equilibrium dominated by thermally
activated rare events involving “entropic droplets.”
1
Yet, the
main ingredients associated with the RFOT are assumed to
persist, even if renormalized by the effect of the fluctuations.
2
The issue can be understood in the much simpler setting of
the liquid-gas transition of simple fluids. The mean-field van
der Waals approach predicts a liquid-gas transition with a
terminal critical point. It is known that this homogeneous
mean-field picture needs to be modified, e.g., through the
classical nucleation theory and the renormalization group:
concepts such as metastability and spinodal are no longer
crisply defined, critical exponents as well as nonuniversal
quantities are modified, yet the transition with the two, liquid
and gas, free-energy states remains valid, at least when the
dimension d is larger than 1. In d = 1, the mean-field treatment
is plain wrong and predicts a transition that is not present.
Fluctuations can therefore have a more or less dramatic
influence on the mean-field scenario: this is the key-point
concerning the relevance of the RFOT theory to glass-forming
liquids.
One natural path to follow in order to investigate the effect
of the fluctuations on the RFOT and the two-temperature
picture is then to consider, both numerically and analytically,
the various proposed models of structural glasses in finite
dimensions. The disordered spin models are especially con-
venient as they are both well defined at the mean-field level
and much easier to investigate than more realistic models of
structural glass-formers or effective Ginzburg-Landau theories
in the replica formalism. In particular, they quite directly
lend themselves to computer simulations and to real-space
renormalization group (RG) treatments. The major obstacle
on this seemingly straightforward route is that so far no traces
of the RFOT scenario have been found in such studies on
finite-dimensional, finite-range models, with either a complete
absence of transition to a glass phase
5
or a behavior more
compatible with a continuous spin-glass transition
6
than a
discontinuous “random first-order” one.
064202-1 1098-0121/2013/87(6)/064202(22) ©2013 American Physical Society