text:
# References

Nonlinear Regimes in Thermostats of Berendsen’s Type
V.L. Golo and K.V. Shaitan††,
Department of Mechanics and Mathematics

††Department of Biology

Moscow University, Moscow 119899

RUSSIA

Abstract

We consider the models of relaxational dynamics within the framework of Berendsen’s and Nosé—Hoover’s thermostats. On studying the crucial case of ideal gas we come to the conclusion that both models mentioned above do not allow for describing the true thermodynamical equilibrium.

1. Introduction

The thermodynamical concept of thermostat supposes that a system under consideration is a small part of a large system, or thermostat, which is big enough so as to be insensitive to changes inside the small one, and thus a very large number of particles is generally required to the effect. On the other hand, the small system may be in its turn rather tiny, even comprise only one particle. The thermostat’s being macroscopical, creates serious difficulties for numerical modeling thermodynamical systems at fixed temperature and therefore, there is a need for simplified models that could accommodate the requirement of fixed temperature. The most straightforward approach to the problem is the use of the so-called collision thermostat, that provides adequate means for describing the system’s interaction with ambient media. This method has its drawbacks in that it is time consuming and puts severe constraints on the precision level. Hence, it is very tentative to find certain simpler ways of modeling, using systems that do not involve extremely large number of particles or stochastic equations. The most familiar models in this respect are the Berendsen,  and the Nosé—Hoover, , one. The idea of both is the same: we shall introduce in the right hand sides of a system under consideration relaxation terms that contain a dissipation parameter that should mimic the control exercised on the system by thermostat. To this end one uses a relation, of the most simple form possible, that requires that the kinetic energy of the total system should be close to that prescribed by the heat energy determined by thermostat parameters. Thus, from the mathematical point of view, equations obtained in this way are an extension of the initial ones through the introduction of nonlinear dissipative terms in the right hand side. The prescription is quite general, appealing intuitively, and easy to implement. But it reduces the problem to that of a finite nonlinear dissipative system, with no macroscopical features left and essential thermodynamical properties being muted. Cosequently, one may wonder as to whether the physical nature of the phenomenon has been preserved.

In this paper we are going to consider examples of applying the prescription to a simple, but extremely important, case of ideal gas. Its analysis brings us to the conclusion that the Berendsen and Nosé — Hoover systems allow for interesting nonlinear regimes, even for this simple case, but do not generate the system’s thermodynamical equilibrium.

2. Mechanical model

Let us recall the construction of the thermostats mentioned above. We shall begin with the Berendsen one. Suppose we have a system of particles whose dynamics is governed by the Newton equations

$$m_i\ddot{\stackrel{}{r}_i}=\frac{}{\stackrel{}{r}_i}U(r)$$

The presence of a thermostat at temperature $`T`$ is claimed to be accommodated through the introduction of non-linear dissipative terms in the equations indicated above, that is

$$m_i\ddot{\stackrel{}{r}_i}=\frac{}{\stackrel{}{r}_i}U(r)\gamma \dot{\stackrel{}{r}_i}$$
(1)
with the dissipative coefficient $`\gamma `$ being of the form

$$\gamma =\alpha \left[\frac{1}{3k_bTN}\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}m_i\dot{\stackrel{}{r}_i}^21\right]$$
(2)
where $`N`$ is the number of particles. Intuitively, it is ”clear” that the model described above by equations (1), (2) should guarantee that the system be at temperature T, or at least its total kinetic energy be close to that value. The distribution of the kinetic energy per particle is not so clear. To be more precise equation (1) in the notations of paper  contains the kinetic energy in the denominator; but it is not important for what follows.

In the Nosé — Hoover thermostat the dissipative variable $`\gamma `$ is treated on equal footing with other dynamical variables, and instead of the algebraic equation (2) they write the differential equation

$$\dot{\gamma }=\alpha \left[\frac{1}{3k_bTN}\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}m_i\dot{\stackrel{}{r}_i}^21\right]$$
(3)
The system of equations (1) and (3) is also quite appealing intuitively and looks excellently physically motivated. Again, at first sight it seems that the kinetic energy should be close to the heat one, at least if the system is kept long enough in the regime, and again one may have certain doubts, from the very beginning, as to its distribution with respect to degrees of freedom.

2. Ideal gas

Let us consider an ensemble of $`N`$ noninteracting identical particles of mass

$$m_i=m,i=1,2,\mathrm{},N$$

that is an ideal gas, in a thermostat. Consider first the Berendsen one. Then the equation 1 takes the form

$$m\ddot{\stackrel{}{r}_i}=\gamma \dot{\stackrel{}{r}_i}$$
(4)
in which $`i`$ takes the values $`1,2,\mathrm{},N`$. It is more convenient to use the momenta

$$\stackrel{}{p}_i=m\dot{\stackrel{}{r}_i},i=1,2,\mathrm{},N$$

and cast equations (1) in the form

$$\dot{\stackrel{}{p}_i}=\gamma \stackrel{}{p}_i$$
(5)
On multiplying equations in (5) with $`\stackrel{}{p}_i,i=1,2,\mathrm{},N`$ and next taking their sum, we obtain the equation for the energy $`E`$

$$\frac{d}{dt}E=2\alpha E\left(\frac{2E}{3k_bTN}1\right)$$
(6)
In equilibrium the value of energy is fixed, and therefore, the right hand side of the equation given above be equal to zero, so that we obtain the two values: (1) $`E=0`$, which is meaningless, and (2) $`E=\frac{3}{2}k_bTN`$, which is the right one. But the second requirement still remains, that is the existence of Maxwell’s distribution for velocities of particles. Here we run across serious difficulties. The main point is that thermostat ought to bring the system to the equilibrium, even if its initial configuration is outside the latter. Let us consider an initial state of the gas that comprises two beams of particles, the first one comprising of $`N_1`$ particles, all of them having the same momentum $`\stackrel{}{P}_1`$, and the second one of the remaining $`N_2=NN_1`$ particles, all having the momentum $`\stackrel{}{P}_2,\stackrel{}{P}_1\stackrel{}{P}_2`$. It is to be noted that equations (5) and (2) are invariant with respect to permutations of the indices $`i`$, that is we may interchange the particles so that solutions to equations (5), (2), remain valid. This is a form of Gibbs’ principle, that is particles of ideal gas being not distinguishable from each other. But the particles of the first beam have the same initial momenta, $`\stackrel{}{P}_1`$, and therefore they are described by the same equation in which

$$\stackrel{}{p}_i=\stackrel{}{P}_1,i=1,2,\mathrm{},N_1$$

and the same is true for the particles of the second beam, in which

$$\stackrel{}{p}_i=\stackrel{}{P}_2,i=N_1+1,N_1+2,\mathrm{},N$$

Thus, we may write only two equations for the momenta $`\stackrel{}{P}_1,\stackrel{}{P}_2`$ instead of $`N`$ equations (5), that is

$$\dot{\stackrel{}{P}_\nu }=\alpha \left[\frac{N_1P_1^2+N_2P_2^2}{3mk_bTN}1\right]\stackrel{}{P}_\nu ,\nu =1,2$$
(7)
From the last equation we infer that the locus of stationary states for a gas having an initial state consisting of two beams of $`N_1,N_2`$ of particles, respectfully, is the ellipse in plane $`P_1,P_2`$, given by the equation

$$\frac{N_1}{3k_bTN}P_1^2+\frac{N_2}{3mk_bTN}P_2^2=1$$
(8)
In Fig.1 we illustrate the specific case of ten particles, the first beam comprises 3 particle and the second one 7. The particles move on a straight line with the momenta $`P_1`$ and $`P_2`$, respectfully. The states given by equation(8) are by no means equilibrium thermodynamical states.

Let us turn to the ideal gas in the Nosé — Hoover thermostat. On using momenta we may cast equations (1), (3) in the form

$`\dot{\stackrel{}{p}_i}`$ $`=`$ $`\gamma \stackrel{}{p}_i`$ (9)
$`\dot{\gamma }`$ $`=`$ $`\alpha \left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3mk_bTN}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\dot{\stackrel{}{p}_i}^21\right]`$
Consider again the two beams of $`N_1`$ and $`N_2`$ particles having initial momenta $`\stackrel{}{P}_1`$ and $`\stackrel{}{P}_2`$, respectfully. Similarly to the situation considered above, we may write equations (9) in the form of three equations

$`\dot{\stackrel{}{P}_\nu }`$ $`=`$ $`\gamma \stackrel{}{P}_\nu ,\nu =1,2`$ (10)
$`\dot{\gamma }`$ $`=`$ $`\alpha \left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3mk_bTN}}(N_1P_1^2+N_2P_2^2)1\right]`$
Equations (10) have stationary states given by the constraint

$$\gamma =0$$

and equation(8). In this sense the Nosé — Hoover thermostat is similar to the Berendsen one; they are also similar in that the stationary states are not thermodynamical equilibria, as is illustrated in Fig.2. But it is worth noting that Nosé — Hoover’s thermostat, at least for the case of ideal gas we have been studying, does not allow for attractor regimes, and in this sense it is even farther from the real thermostat than Berendsen’s one.

3. Conclusion

The example of ideal gas shows quite convincingly that neither the Berendsen nor the Nosé — Hoover thermostat can serve as a device for modeling thermodynamical equilibrium. One may suggest, of course, that for system more sophisticated than an ideal gas they still could function to the effect, just owing to the complexity of a system under consideration, certain models of macromolecules, for example.

All the same, it is worthwhile to note that the Berendsen model isan interesting example of nonlinear dissipative problem, and its dynamics is characterized by the presence of a set in its phase space that attracts trajectories, that is an attractor. The latter is determined by the condition given by kinetic theory

$$\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}\frac{\dot{\stackrel{}{p}_i}^2}{2m}=\frac{3}{2}k_bTN$$

In fact, it has also a more subtle structure of preserving the beams of particles with equal momenta, as was discussed above. Thus, at equilibrium the states of the system lie on a sphere in phase space. If the equilibrium had been of thermodynamical nature, we should have had a distribution of momenta corresponding to the canonical ensemble at a temperature prescribed by the thermostat. Instead, we have the equation (8), which describes the values of momenta for beams of particles of the same momentum. Thus, there is no canonical ensemble in the mechanical thermostat, which resembles more nonlinear dissipative systems like the Brusselator, . At any rate, the system arrives at a stable state, following its evolution in time.

In contrats, Nosé — Hoover’s system for ideal gas does not have attractors, even though the set of its stationatry solutions is stable (see Fig.2 and 3).

FIGURE CAPTIONS

Fig.1
Ten one dimensional particles in the Berendsen thermostat. The set of initial conditions for the momenta $`P_1,P_2`$ of the two beams of 3 and 7 particles corresponds to the set of trajectories which indicate the descent of the beams on the stationary states belonging to the ellipse given by equation (8).

Fig.2
Ten one dimensional particles in the Nosé — Hoover thermostat. The horizontal axes are $`P_1,P_2`$, the vertical one gives values of $`\gamma `$. The closed curves indicate oscillatory motion round the set of stationary states, which is stable. The partition of the system into two beams is preserved, so that no thermodynamical equilibrium is achieved.

Fig.3
Ten one dimensional particles in the Nosé — Hoover thermostat. The horizontal axes are $`P_1,P_2`$, the vertical one gives values of $`\gamma `$. A large amplitude motion of the beam; no thermodynamical equilibrium.


format: text

text:
# Strong and electromagnetic contributions to the 𝑈_𝐴(1) anomaly and the 𝑃⁰→𝛾𝛾 decays

## I Introduction.

The understanding of the mechanisms leading to the mixing of pseudoscalar mesons is an important task in hadronic physics and this topic has been actively investigated during the last years . From the OZI rule perspective this mixing is unusually large, in contrast with e.g. vector mesons which are close to the ideal mixing composition dictated by the OZI rule. Mixing of pseudoscalar mesons has been traditionally described in the Gell-Mann basis for $`SU(3)`$. In this framework, octet axial currents are conserved in the massless quark limit

$$^\mu A_\mu ^a^\mu \overline{q}\frac{\lambda ^a}{2}\gamma _\mu \gamma _5q=0,a=1,\mathrm{},8,$$
(1)
whereas the singlet axial current has a non-vanishing divergence due to the gluonic ABJ triangular anomaly

$$^\mu A_\mu ^0=\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}\frac{n_f\alpha _s}{4\pi }G_{\alpha \beta }^a\stackrel{~}{G}^{a\alpha \beta }$$
(2)
where $`\stackrel{~}{G}^{a\alpha \beta }\frac{1}{2}\epsilon ^{\alpha \beta \mu \nu }G_{\mu \nu }^a`$. This has far-reaching consequences for hadronic systems, in particular to those sharing the quantum numbers of the operators on the left of Eq.(2). These relations must be modified in the presence of external vector fields to account for additional contributions coming from the coupling of fermions to these fields. The typical example of modifications to these relations is the case of massless QCD coupled to external electromagnetic fields. In this case, e.g. the divergence of $`A_\mu ^3`$ gets a contribution from the ABJ photon anomaly

$$^\mu A_\mu ^3=\frac{\alpha }{4\pi }F_{\alpha \beta }\stackrel{~}{F}^{\alpha \beta }$$
(3)
where $`F_{\alpha \beta }`$ stands for the electromagnetic strength field tensor. This result, and the characterization of the matrix element of $`A_\mu ^3`$ between the vacuum and two photons on the basis of Lorentz covariance, gauge invariance, parity etc. lead to the existence of a singularity at $`q^2=0`$ in this matrix element . In the confining theory, is meaningless to speak about the quarks as physical degrees of freedom and the only explanation for this singularity invokes ’t Hooft’s consistency condition , i.e. that singular contributions in $`0|A_\mu ^3|\gamma \gamma `$ at the level of quarks and at the level of hadrons must match. This leads to a massless hadronic excitation (the pion) which couples to $`A_\mu ^3`$ and to two photons. This mechanism successfully describe the $`\pi ^0\gamma \gamma `$ decay which in the absence of the anomaly would be forbidden ( actually of a lower power in $`m_\pi `$ ) which is inconsistent with experimental results.

In principle, one could try a similar calculation for the $`\eta \gamma \gamma `$ and $`\eta ^{}\gamma \gamma `$ decays. However, here we encounter the problem of how to quantify the effects of the strong contribution to the $`U_A(1)`$ anomaly in Eq.(2) at the hadron level and how these effects influence the mixing of pseudoscalar isoscalar fields.

In the conventional singlet-octet basis, the octet current gets no contributions from the gluon anomaly and a similar procedure to the case of the pion can be used to estimate the decay amplitude for $`\eta _8\gamma \gamma `$, although the extrapolation from $`q^2=0m_{\eta _8}^2`$ is more severe in this case . Relating this amplitude to the $`\eta \gamma \gamma `$ decay in principle requires a careful analysis of the mechanisms for mixing of pseudoscalars which nevertheless, in this case, seems to be quantitatively not so relevant due to the experimental fact that the naive mixing angle is small in this basis. In the case of the singlet we run in trouble due to the strong contribution to the singlet axial anomaly. Relating the physical amplitudes to the singlet-octet ones is more problematic in this case and definitively requires to clarify the role of the axial anomaly in the mixing of pseudoscalars (or stated differently, to quantify the gluon content of pseudoscalar mesons).

The mixing of the pseudoscalar isoscalar fields can also be formulated in flavor basis $`\{\eta _{\mathrm{ns}},\eta _\mathrm{s}\}`$. The most general form of the mass Lagrangian is

$$_{mass}=\frac{1}{2}(m_{\eta _{\mathrm{ns}}}^2\eta _{\mathrm{ns}}^2+m_{\eta _\mathrm{s}}^2\eta _\mathrm{s}^2+2m_{\mathrm{s}\mathrm{ns}}^2\eta _\mathrm{s}\eta _{\mathrm{ns}}).$$
(4)
where the last term account for the OZI rule violating $`\eta _{\mathrm{ns}}\eta _\mathrm{s}`$ transitions. The precise origin of this term is still unclear. The standard chiral expansion uses the octet and singlet fields, hence, whatever the mechanism for mixing of flavor fields be, it is considered from the very start in this formalism.

In the model-independent formulation of mixing in Eq.(4) we can relate the mixing angle to the non-diagonal term $`m_{\mathrm{s}\mathrm{ns}}^2`$. The extraction of the pseudoscalar mixing angle following this procedure requires the precise quantification of all the mechanisms contributing to meson masses which is a difficult task. In  it was shown that the $`U_A(1)`$ anomaly gives a sizeable contribution to $`m_{\mathrm{s}\mathrm{ns}}^2`$ via its coupling to the spontaneous breaking of chiral symmetry. Assuming that this is the only mechanism for mixing of flavor fields, a pseudoscalar mixing angle is obtained consistent with Gell-Mann’s $`SU(3)`$ symmetry when pseudoscalar meson masses are used as input to fix the values of the free parameters of the model. Although interesting from the conceptual point of view, this mechanism does not account for the experimentally measured mixing angle which is close to, but definitively different from the $`SU(3)`$ value. The precise description of the mixing angle calls for considering further mechanisms among which Lipkin’s loops cancellation  looks appealing as pointed out in . Another possibility for the extraction of this angle is to consider processes where this angle be involved but sensitivity to pseudoscalar meson masses be reduced.

Photonic decays of pseudoscalar mesons are appropriate to this end since, as we shall see below, in this case strong contributions to the $`U_A(1)`$ anomaly can play a role in the conformation of physical pseudoscalar mesons only and effects due meson masses on the corresponding widths are softened.

In this work we relate breaking of axial symmetry in the isoscalar channels to the pseudoscalar mass matrix in Eq.(4), within a Linear Sigma Model which incorporates $`U_A(1)`$ symmetry breaking. Contributions of external electromagnetic fields to the breaking of axial symmetry in the isoscalar channels are introduced using ’t Hooft’s anomaly matching condition. We calculate $`P^0\gamma \gamma `$ decays in this framework and extract the pseudoscalar mixing angle from experimental data on these processes.

In order to state notation we briefly review the model in the next section and work out its predictions for the isoscalar weak decay constants and the anomalies in the isoscalar axial currents. In section III we introduce effects of external electromagnetic fields and work out the predictions of this formalism for the $`P^0\gamma \gamma `$ decays. In section IV we give our conclusions.

## II Axial anomalies and the mass matrix of isoscalar pseudoscalar fields.

### A The model.

The chirally symmetric $`[U(3)_LU(3)_R]`$ meson Lagrangian , describes a scalar and a pseudoscalar nonet, in turn denoted by $`(\sigma _i)`$ and $`(P_i)`$,

$$=_{sym}+_{U_A(1)}+_{SB}.$$
(5)
Here,

$`_{sym}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{tr}\left[(_\mu M)(^\mu M^{})\right]{\displaystyle \frac{\mu ^2}{2}}X(\sigma ,P)`$ (7)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{4}}Y(\sigma ,P){\displaystyle \frac{\lambda ^{}}{4}}X^2(\sigma ,P),`$
$`M=\sigma +iP`$, and $`X,Y`$ stand in turn for the left-right symmetric traces

$$X(\sigma ,P)=\mathrm{tr}\left[MM^{}\right],Y(\sigma ,P)=\mathrm{tr}\left[(MM^{})^2\right]$$
(8)
The pseudoscalar and scalar matrix fields $`P`$ and $`\sigma `$ are written in terms of a specific basis spanned by seven of the standard Gell-Mann matrices, namely $`\lambda _i(i=1,\mathrm{},7)`$, and by two non-standard matrices $`\lambda _{\mathrm{ns}}`$=diag(1,1,0), and $`\lambda _\mathrm{s}`$ = $`\sqrt{2}`$ diag(0,0,1), respectively. The decomposition obtained in this way reads $`P\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\lambda _iP_i`$ with $`i=ns,s,1,\mathrm{},7`$ and similarly for the scalar field. The instanton-induced interaction in (5) is

$$_{U_A(1)}=\beta \left(\text{det}(M)+\text{det}(M^{})\right).$$
(9)
It stands for the bosonization of ’t Hooft’s effective quark-quark interaction which has a determinant structure in flavor space . Finally, there is the standard quark mass term

$$_{SB}=\mathrm{tr}\left[c\sigma \right]=\mathrm{tr}\left[\frac{b_0}{\sqrt{2}}_q(M+M^{})\right]$$
(10)
which breaks the left-right symmetry explicitly. The $`c`$ matrix is spanned by the same basis $`c\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\lambda _ic_i`$, where the nine expansion coefficients $`c_i`$ are independent constants. It is related to the quark mass matrix by $`c=\sqrt{2}b_0_q`$ and has $`\frac{c_{\mathrm{ns}}}{\sqrt{2}}=\sqrt{2}\widehat{m}b_0`$ and $`c_\mathrm{s}=\sqrt{2}m_sb_0`$ as the only non-vanishing entries. Here, $`b_0`$ is an unknown parameter with dimensions of squared mass. We work in the exact isospin limit, $`\widehat{m}=m_u=m_d`$ in the following. The linear $`\sigma `$ term in Eq. (10) induces $`\sigma `$-vacuum transitions which supply the scalar fields with non-zero vacuum expectation values (v.e.v) (hereafter denoted by $`\mathrm{}`$). To simplify notations, let us re-denote $`\sigma `$ by $`V`$ with $`V=`$diag ($`a,a,b`$), where $`a`$ and $`b`$ in turn denote the vacuum expectation values of the strange and non-strange quarkonium, respectively,

$$a=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\sigma _{\mathrm{ns}},b=\sigma _\mathrm{s}.$$
(11)
We now shift, as usual, the old $`\sigma `$ field to a new scalar field $`S=\sigma V`$ such that $`S=0`$. In this way, new mass terms, three-meson interactions, and a linear term are generated. All these terms are affected – via the ’t Hooft determinant by the $`U_A(1)`$ anomaly which get coupled to the v.e.v’ s of the scalar fields by the spontaneous breaking of chiral symmetry. The consequence of all these effects is the breaking of the original symmetry down to $`SU(2)_I`$ isospin. The masses of the seven unmixed pseudoscalar corresponding to the original Gell-Mann matrices $`\lambda _i`$ ($`i=1,\mathrm{},7`$), namely the isovector pseudoscalar ($`\pi `$) mesons as well as the two isodoublets of pseudoscalar ($`K`$) mesons, are obtained as

$$m_\pi ^2=\xi +2\beta b+\lambda a^2,m_K^2=\xi +2\beta a+\lambda (a^2ab\text{+}b^2);$$
(12)
where we used the convenient short–hand notation $`\xi \mu ^2+\lambda ^{}(2a^2+b^2)`$. The elimination of the linear terms imposes the following constraints on the explicit-symmetry-breaking terms $`c_{\mathrm{ns}}`$, and $`c_\mathrm{s}`$:

$$c_{\mathrm{ns}}=\sqrt{2}am_\pi ^2,c_\mathrm{s}+\frac{c_{\mathrm{ns}}}{\sqrt{2}}=(a+b)m_K^2.$$
(13)
or in term of the quark masses

$$am_\pi ^2=\sqrt{2}\widehat{m}b_0,(a+b)m_K^2=\sqrt{2}(\widehat{m}+m_s)b_0.$$
(14)
In Ref. the PCAC relations for the pion and kaon field are discussed. These relations yield

$$f_\pi =\sqrt{2}a,f_K=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(a+b),$$
(15)
which when used in (14) yields

$$f_\pi m_\pi ^2=2\widehat{m}b_0,f_Km_K^2=(\widehat{m}+m_s)b_0.$$
(16)
The mass term of the Lagrangian involving the mixed isoscalar pseudoscalar fields, which correspond to the $`\lambda _{\mathrm{ns}}`$ and $`\lambda _\mathrm{s}`$ matrices, has the structure of the mass Lagrangian in Eq.(4) with the specific values

$$m_{\eta _{\mathrm{ns}}}^2=\xi 2\beta b+\lambda a^2,m_{\eta _\mathrm{s}}^2=\xi +\lambda b^2,m_{\mathrm{s}\mathrm{ns}}^2=2\sqrt{2}\beta a$$
(17)
Here, $`m_{\eta _\mathrm{s}}`$ and $`m_{\eta _{\mathrm{ns}}}`$ are the masses of the strange and non-strange pseudoscalar quarkonia respectively, while $`m_{\mathrm{s}\mathrm{ns}}^2`$, denotes the transition mass-matrix elements of the strange–non-strange pseudoscalar quarkonia, which in this model is due to the interplay between ’t Hooft interaction and the spontaneous breakdown of chiral symmetry.

This mass Lagrangian can be diagonalized by rotating to the physical basis

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}\eta \\ \eta ^{}\end{array}\right)=R(\varphi _P)\left(\begin{array}{c}\eta _{\mathrm{ns}}\\ \eta _\mathrm{s}\end{array}\right)\mathrm{with}R(\varphi _P)=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}\mathrm{cos}\varphi _P,\hfill & \mathrm{sin}\varphi _P& & \\ \mathrm{sin}\varphi _P,\hfill & \mathrm{cos}\varphi _P& & \end{array}\right),$$
(18)
such that the diagonal physical mass matrix $`M_DDiag(m_\eta ^2,m_\eta ^{}^2)`$ is related to the same matrix in the flavor fields representation $`M_F`$ as

$$M_D=R(\varphi _P)M_FR^{}(\varphi _P)\mathrm{where}M_F=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}m_{\eta _{\mathrm{ns}}}^2,\hfill & m_{\mathrm{s}\mathrm{ns}}^2& & \\ m_{\mathrm{s}\mathrm{ns}}^2,\hfill & m_{\eta _\mathrm{s}}^2& & \end{array}\right).$$
(19)
### B Flavor weak decay constants

The flavor weak decay constants $`f_{\mathrm{ns}},f_\mathrm{s}`$ are defined by:

$$0|A_\mu ^{\mathrm{ns}}(0)|\eta ^{\mathrm{ns}}(q)=if_{\mathrm{ns}}q_\mu ,0|A_\mu ^\mathrm{s}(0)|\eta ^\mathrm{s}(q)=if_\mathrm{s}q_\mu .$$
(20)
In the literature we also find weak decay constants related to the following matrix elements

$$\begin{array}{c}0|A_\mu ^{\mathrm{ns}}(0)|\eta (q)=if_\eta ^{\mathrm{ns}}q_\mu ,0|A_\mu ^{\mathrm{ns}}(0)|\eta ^{}(q)=if_\eta ^{}^{\mathrm{ns}}q_\mu ,\\ 0|A_\mu ^\mathrm{s}(0)|\eta (q)=if_\eta ^\mathrm{s}q_\mu ,0|A_\mu ^\mathrm{s}(0)|\eta ^{}(q)=if_\eta ^{}^\mathrm{s}q_\mu .\end{array}$$
(21)
Let us analyze the predictions of the model for the divergences of the isoscalar currents and their implications for the weak decay constants. Under the axial transformations

$$\delta M=\frac{i}{\sqrt{2}}\{\epsilon ,M\},\delta M^{}=\frac{i}{\sqrt{2}}\{\epsilon ,M^{}\},$$
(22)
the Lagrangian in Eq.(5) is no longer invariant due to the breaking terms. A calculation of the divergences of the strange and non-strange axial currents in the model yields:

$$^\mu A_\mu ^{\mathrm{ns}}=c_{\mathrm{ns}}\eta _{\mathrm{ns}}+2\beta W,^\mu A_\mu ^\mathrm{s}=\sqrt{2}c_\mathrm{s}\eta _\mathrm{s}+\sqrt{2}\beta W$$
(23)
where $`W`$ stands for the contribution coming from t”Hooft interaction and contains trilinear, bilinear and linear terms in the fields. Explicitly

$$W=i(det(M)detM^{})=2\sqrt{2}ab\eta _{\mathrm{ns}}2a^2\eta _\mathrm{s}+bilinear+tril.$$
(24)
The bilinear and trilinear terms in Eq.(24) give vanishing contributions at tree level to the quantities to be considered here, hence they will be dropped in the following . Inserting (23, 24) in Eqs.(20) we obtain

$$f_{\mathrm{ns}}m_{\eta _{\mathrm{ns}}}^2=c_{\mathrm{ns}}4\sqrt{2}\beta ab,f_\mathrm{s}m_{\eta _\mathrm{s}}^2=\sqrt{2}c_\mathrm{s}2\sqrt{2}\beta a^2.$$
(25)
Also from Eqs(12,13,17) we obtain the following relations

$$m_{\eta _{\mathrm{ns}}}^2m_\pi ^2=4\beta bbm_{\eta _\mathrm{s}}^2+2\beta a^2=c_\mathrm{s},$$
(26)
which when inserted in Eq.(25) predict

$$f_{\mathrm{ns}}=\sqrt{2}a=f_\pi f_\mathrm{s}=\sqrt{2}b=2f_Kf_\pi .$$
(27)
On the other hand, inserting Eqs.(24,25) in Eqs.(23) we obtain

$$^\mu A_\mu ^{\mathrm{ns}}=f_{\mathrm{ns}}m_{\eta _{\mathrm{ns}}}^2\eta _{\mathrm{ns}}4\beta a^2\eta _\mathrm{s},^\mu A_\mu ^\mathrm{s}=f_\mathrm{s}m_{\eta _\mathrm{s}}^2\eta _\mathrm{s}4\beta ab\eta _{\mathrm{ns}}.$$
(28)
The last terms in the r.h.s of the previous two Eqs. are entirely due to the coupling of the $`U_A(1)`$ anomaly to the v.e.v.’s of scalars. They are a manifestation, at the hadron level, of the gluon ABJ anomaly in QCD which we assume here as dominated by instantons which generate ’t Hooft interaction. Eqs.(28) can be rewritten in a symmetric form

$$\begin{array}{c}\frac{1}{f_{\mathrm{ns}}}^\mu A_\mu ^{\mathrm{ns}}=m_{\mathrm{ns}}^2\eta _{\mathrm{ns}}+m_{\mathrm{s}\mathrm{ns}}^2\eta _\mathrm{s},\\ \frac{1}{f_\mathrm{s}}^\mu A_\mu ^\mathrm{s}=m_{\mathrm{s}\mathrm{ns}}^2\eta _{\mathrm{ns}}+m_\mathrm{s}^2\eta _\mathrm{s},\end{array}$$
(29)
which makes explicit the relation between the mass matrix of isoscalar pseudoscalars and the divergence of isosinglet axial currents . It is interesting to make also explicit terms driven by the quark masses and those induced by the $`U_A(1)`$ anomaly which are not related to quark masses. Using relations (13,26), Eqs.(28) can also be rewritten as

$$\begin{array}{c}^\mu A_\mu ^{\mathrm{ns}}=(2b_0\widehat{m}2\sqrt{2}\beta f_{\mathrm{ns}}f_\mathrm{s})\eta _{\mathrm{ns}}2\beta f_{\mathrm{ns}}^2\eta _\mathrm{s},\\ ^\mu A_\mu ^\mathrm{s}=(2b_0m_s\sqrt{2}\beta f_{\mathrm{ns}}^2)\eta _\mathrm{s}2\beta f_{\mathrm{ns}}f_\mathrm{s}\eta _{\mathrm{ns}}.\end{array}$$
(30)
which makes transparent that in the absence of the $`U_A(1)`$ symmetry breaking ($`\beta =0`$) the divergences of flavor currents are driven by quark masses and flavor isoscalar pseudoscalar fields are pseudo-Goldstone bosons. Eq.(29) is the fundamental relation which we will exploit below in the description of the two photon decay of isoscalar pseudoscalar mesons. Before this, let us make two remarks on the consequences of Eq.(29). The first one concerns the weak decay constants. Inserting (29) in the divergence of Eq.(21) and using Eq.(18) we obtain

$$\begin{array}{c}f_\eta ^{\mathrm{ns}}m_\eta ^2=f_{\mathrm{ns}}\left(m_{\mathrm{ns}}^2\mathrm{cos}\varphi _Pm_{\mathrm{s}\mathrm{ns}}^2\mathrm{sin}\varphi _P\right),\\ f_\eta ^\mathrm{s}m_\eta ^2=f_\mathrm{s}\left(m_{\mathrm{s}\mathrm{ns}}^2\mathrm{cos}\varphi _Pm_\mathrm{s}^2\mathrm{sin}\varphi _P\right),\\ f_\eta ^{}^{\mathrm{ns}}m_\eta ^{}^2=f_{\mathrm{ns}}\left(m_{\mathrm{s}\mathrm{ns}}^2\mathrm{cos}\varphi _P+m_{\mathrm{ns}}^2\mathrm{sin}\varphi _P\right),\\ f_\eta ^{}^\mathrm{s}m_\eta ^{}^2=f_\mathrm{s}\left(m_{\mathrm{s}\mathrm{ns}}^2\mathrm{sin}\varphi _P+m_\mathrm{s}^2\mathrm{cos}\varphi _P\right).\end{array}$$
(31)
On the other hand, from Eqs. (19) we get

$$\begin{array}{c}m_\eta ^2\mathrm{cos}\varphi _P=m_{\mathrm{ns}}^2\mathrm{cos}\varphi _Pm_{\mathrm{s}\mathrm{ns}}^2\mathrm{sin}\varphi _P,\\ m_\eta ^2\mathrm{sin}\varphi _P=m_{\mathrm{s}\mathrm{ns}}^2\mathrm{cos}\varphi _Pm_\mathrm{s}^2\mathrm{sin}\varphi _P,\\ m_\eta ^{}^2\mathrm{sin}\varphi _P=m_{\mathrm{s}\mathrm{ns}}^2\mathrm{cos}\varphi _P+m_{\mathrm{ns}}^2\mathrm{sin}\varphi _P,\\ m_\eta ^{}^2\mathrm{cos}\varphi _P=m_{\mathrm{s}\mathrm{ns}}^2\mathrm{sin}\varphi _P+m_\mathrm{s}^2\mathrm{cos}\varphi _P.\end{array}$$
(32)
which when inserted in Eq.(31) yields

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}f_\eta ^{\mathrm{ns}}& f_\eta ^\mathrm{s}\\ f_\eta ^{}^{\mathrm{ns}}& f_\eta ^{}^\mathrm{s}\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{cos}\varphi _P& \mathrm{sin}\varphi _P\\ \mathrm{sin}\varphi _P& \mathrm{cos}\varphi _P\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}f_{\mathrm{ns}}& 0\\ 0& f_\mathrm{s}\end{array}\right).$$
(33)
This relation was postulated in  and taken as the basic assumption in the analysis of pseudoscalar mixing and weak decay constants.

The second remark concerns the structure of the mass matrix and the contributions coming from quark mass terms. From Eqs.(30) it is possible to write the mass matrix in the flavor basis as

$$_F=\left(\begin{array}{cc}m_{\mathrm{qq}}^2+2\alpha ^2& \sqrt{2}\alpha ^2y\\ \sqrt{2}\alpha ^2y& m_{\mathrm{ss}}^2+\alpha ^2y^2\end{array}\right)$$
(34)
where

$$m_{\mathrm{qq}}^2=\frac{2\widehat{m}}{f_{\mathrm{ns}}}b_0,m_{\mathrm{ss}}^2=\frac{2m_s}{f_\mathrm{s}}b_0,\alpha ^2=2\beta b,y=\frac{f_{\mathrm{ns}}}{f_\mathrm{s}}=\frac{a}{b}.$$
(35)
It was shown in  that this result can be derived directly from QCD if  we assume Eq.(33). In terms of QCD quantities we identify

$$b_0=0|\overline{u}i\gamma _5u+\overline{d}i\gamma _5d|\eta _{\mathrm{ns}},\alpha ^2=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}f_{\mathrm{ns}}}0|\frac{\alpha _s}{4\pi }G\stackrel{~}{G}|\eta _{\mathrm{ns}}.$$
(36)
## III Electromagnetic contributions to $`U_A(1)`$-symmetry breaking and $`P^0\gamma \gamma `$ decays.

In the presence of external electromagnetic fields, relations(29) must be modified to account for the ABJ terms due to the photons. This modification can be obtained using ’t Hooft’s argument on the matching of the anomalies  to translate exactly the same form of the anomaly as calculated at the level of the fundamental theory (QCD) to the composite theory. For purposes of comparison below we include also the corresponding relation for pions

$`^\mu A_\mu ^3`$ $`=`$ $`f_\pi m_\pi ^2\pi ^0+{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{4\pi }}N_cD^3\epsilon _{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }F^{\mu \nu }F^{\rho \sigma },`$ (37)
$`^\mu A_\mu ^{\mathrm{ns}}`$ $`=`$ $`f_{\mathrm{ns}}\left(m_{\mathrm{ns}}^2\eta _{\mathrm{ns}}+m_{\mathrm{s}\mathrm{ns}}^2\eta _\mathrm{s}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{4\pi }}N_cD^{\mathrm{ns}}\epsilon _{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }F^{\mu \nu }F^{\rho \sigma },`$ (38)
$`^\mu A_\mu ^\mathrm{s}`$ $`=`$ $`f_\mathrm{s}\left(m_\mathrm{s}^2\eta _\mathrm{s}+m_{\mathrm{s}\mathrm{ns}}^2\eta _{\mathrm{ns}}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{4\pi }}N_cD^\mathrm{s}\epsilon _{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }F^{\mu \nu }F^{\rho \sigma }.`$ (39)
Here, $`D`$ denote the group factors $`D^\chi =tr(\{Q,Q\}\frac{\lambda ^\chi }{2})`$ with $`\chi =3,\mathrm{ns},\mathrm{s}`$ and $`Q`$ stands the quark charge matrix. The last two relations can be written in terms of physical pseudoscalar fields and in compact matrix form read

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}\frac{1}{f_{\mathrm{ns}}}A^{\mathrm{ns}}\\ \frac{1}{f_\mathrm{s}}A^\mathrm{s}\end{array}\right)=R^{}(\varphi _P)M_D\left(\begin{array}{c}\eta \\ \eta ^{}\end{array}\right)+\left(\begin{array}{c}\frac{1}{f_{\mathrm{ns}}}D^{\mathrm{ns}}\\ \frac{1}{f_\mathrm{s}}D^\mathrm{s}\end{array}\right)\xi $$
(40)
where $`\xi \frac{\alpha }{4\pi }N_c\epsilon _{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }F^{\mu \nu }F^{\rho \sigma }`$, $`M_D`$ denotes the diagonal mass matrix which is related to the same matrix in the flavor basis by Eq.(19).

The three-point function for an axial and two electromagnetic currents

$$T_{\mu \nu \lambda }^a(k_1,k_2,q)id^4xd^4yd^4ze^{i(k_1x+k_2yqz)}0|Tj_\mu (x)j_\nu (y)A_\lambda ^a(z)|0,$$
(41)
satisfy

$$q^\lambda T_{\mu \nu \lambda }^a=d^4xd^4yd^4ze^{i(k_1x+k_2yqz)}0|Tj_\mu (x)j_\nu (y)_z^\lambda A_\lambda ^a(z)|0.$$
(42)
Using relations (40) we obtain

$$\begin{array}{c}q^\lambda T_{\mu \nu \lambda }^{\mathrm{ns}}(k_1,k_2,q)=f_{\mathrm{ns}}\left(\frac{m_\eta ^2\mathrm{cos}\varphi _P}{q^2+m_\eta ^2}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mu \nu }^\eta (k_1,k_2)+\frac{m_\eta ^{}^2\mathrm{sin}\varphi _P}{q^2+m_\eta ^{}^2}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mu \nu }^\eta ^{}(k_1,k_2)\right)\\ D^{\mathrm{ns}}\xi _{\mu \nu }(k_1,k_2).\\ q^\lambda T_{\mu \nu \lambda }^\mathrm{s}(k_1,k_2,q)=f_\mathrm{s}\left(\frac{m_\eta ^2\mathrm{sin}\varphi _P}{q^2+m_\eta ^2}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mu \nu }^\eta (k_1,k_2)+\frac{m_\eta ^{}^2\mathrm{cos}\varphi _P}{q^2+m_\eta ^{}^2}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mu \nu }^\eta ^{}(k_1,k_2)\right)\\ D^\mathrm{s}\xi _{\mu \nu }(k_1,k_2).\end{array}$$
(43)
where

$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mu \nu }^P(k_1,k_2)id^4xd^4yd^4ze^{i(k_1x+k_2yqz)}0|Tj_\mu (x)j_\nu (y)P(z)|0,\\ \xi _{\mu \nu }(k_1,k_2)id^4xd^4yd^4ze^{i(k_1x+k_2yqz)}0|Tj_\mu (x)j_\nu (y)\xi (z)|0.\end{array}$$
(44)
In the limit $`q0`$ the l.h.s in Eqs.(43) vanishes yielding the following relations

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}f_{\mathrm{ns}}\mathrm{cos}\varphi _P& f_{\mathrm{ns}}\mathrm{sin}\varphi _P\\ f_\mathrm{s}\mathrm{sin}\varphi _P& f_\mathrm{s}\mathrm{cos}\varphi _P\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mu \nu }^\eta (k_1,k_2)\\ \mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mu \nu }^\eta ^{}(k_1,k_2)\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{c}D^{\mathrm{ns}}\xi _{\mu \nu }(k_1,k_2)\\ D^\mathrm{s}\xi _{\mu \nu }(k_1,k_2)\end{array}\right)$$
(45)
Using these results we obtain the invariant matrix element for neutral pseudoscalars decaying into two photons

$$(P^0(q,\eta )\gamma (k_1,ϵ_1)\gamma (k_2,ϵ_2))=M(P^0\gamma \gamma )\epsilon (ϵ_1,k_1,ϵ_2,k_2).$$
(46)
where

$$\begin{array}{c}M(\pi ^0\gamma \gamma )=\frac{\alpha }{\pi f_\pi }\\ M(\eta \gamma \gamma )=\frac{\alpha }{3\pi }\left(\frac{5}{f_{\mathrm{ns}}}\mathrm{cos}\varphi _P\frac{\sqrt{2}}{f_\mathrm{s}}\mathrm{sin}\varphi _P\right)\\ M(\eta ^{}\gamma \gamma )=\frac{\alpha }{3\pi }\left(\frac{5}{f_{\mathrm{ns}}}\mathrm{sin}\varphi _P+\frac{\sqrt{2}}{f_\mathrm{s}}\mathrm{cos}\varphi _P\right).\end{array}$$
(47)
It is worth remarking that the only effect of the $`U_A(1)`$ anomaly in these processes concerns the formation of the physical states $`\eta `$ and $`\eta ^{}`$ from the flavor states $`\eta ^{\mathrm{ns}},\eta ^\mathrm{s}`$. This is reflected in the $`\mathrm{sin}\varphi _P`$ and $`\mathrm{cos}\varphi _P`$ factors appearing in Eqs.(47). Additional effects of ’t Hooft interaction can be expected in the formation of final states. These effects can be important in the case of hadronic final states. For photonic final states the $`\overline{q}q\gamma \gamma `$ instanton induced interaction is highly suppressed . We must also be clear that the results in Eqs.(47) are valid in the soft limit $`q0`$. Extrapolation to the physical $`q^2=m_\eta ^2`$ and $`q^2=m_\eta ^{}^2`$ are necessary to compare with existing experimental data. Finally, notice that in the soft limit all the information on pseudoscalar meson masses cancels out. Thus the extraction of the mixing angle using photonic decays of pseudoscalar mesons is free of the uncertainties attributed to mechanisms for generation of meson masses at this point.

From Eqs.(47) we obtain the following fractions

$`{\displaystyle \frac{M(\eta \gamma \gamma )}{M(\pi ^0\gamma \gamma )}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\left(5\mathrm{cos}\varphi _P{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2}f_{\mathrm{ns}}}{f_\mathrm{s}}}\mathrm{sin}\varphi _P\right),`$ (48)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{M(\eta ^{}\gamma \gamma )}{M(\pi ^0\gamma \gamma )}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\left(5\mathrm{sin}\varphi _P+{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2}f_{\mathrm{ns}}}{f_\mathrm{s}}}\mathrm{cos}\varphi _P\right)`$ (49)
These results are usually written in terms of the mixing angle in the singlet-octet basis $`\theta _P=\varphi _P\varphi _{\mathrm{id}}`$ where$`\varphi _{\mathrm{id}}=54.7^{}`$ stands for the ideal mixing angle: $`\mathrm{cos}\varphi _{\mathrm{id}}=\sqrt{1/3}`$, $`\mathrm{sin}\varphi _{\mathrm{id}}=\sqrt{2/3}`$. In terms of this angle our results read

$`{\displaystyle \frac{M(\eta \gamma \gamma )}{M(\pi ^0\gamma \gamma )}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{52y}{3}}\mathrm{cos}\theta _P{\displaystyle \frac{5+y}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{2}}{3}}\mathrm{sin}\theta _P\right),`$ (50)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{M(\eta ^{}\gamma \gamma )}{M(\pi ^0\gamma \gamma )}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}}(5+y)\left(\mathrm{cos}\theta _P+{\displaystyle \frac{52y}{\sqrt{2}(5+y)}}\mathrm{sin}\theta _P\right),`$ (51)
Notice that in the case $`f_{\mathrm{ns}}=f_\mathrm{s}`$ we recover results from $`SU(3)`$ symmetry or quark model considerations .

The reported data  for these fractions is

$`{\displaystyle \frac{M(\eta \gamma \gamma )}{M(\pi ^0\gamma \gamma )}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1.73\pm 0.18}{\sqrt{3}}}`$ (52)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{M(\eta ^{}\gamma \gamma )}{M(\pi ^0\gamma \gamma )}}`$ $`=`$ $`2\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}}(0.78\pm 0.04).`$ (53)
Experimental data for $`\eta \gamma \gamma `$ decay constrains the mixing angle to the range $`\varphi _P[38.4^{},47.2^{}]`$ whereas data on $`\eta ^{}\gamma \gamma `$ restrains the same angle to the interval $`[34.3^{},41.0^{}]`$. In the whole, both decays yield

$$\varphi _P[38.4^{},41.0^{}].$$
(54)
This result is consistent with the averaged value obtained in . Indeed, our analytical results in Eq.(47) agree with the corresponding amplitudes in Eqs.(3.13) of . Although both approaches share the virtue of using the flavor basis instead of the widely used singlet-octet basis, there are important differences in the way this result has been derived. In  relations (33) and the generalized PCAC relations (see , Eq.(4.2))

$`^\mu A_\mu ^{\mathrm{ns}}`$ $`=`$ $`f_\eta ^{\mathrm{ns}}m_\eta ^2\eta +f_\eta ^{}^{\mathrm{ns}}m_\eta ^{}^2\eta ^{}`$ (55)
$`^\mu A_\mu ^\mathrm{s}`$ $`=`$ $`f_\eta ^\mathrm{s}m_\eta ^2\eta +f_\eta ^{}^\mathrm{s}m_\eta ^{}^2\eta ^{}`$ (56)
have been assumed and used to calculate the two photon decay widths of neutral pseudoscalars. In the present work, we start with a chiral Lagrangian which incorporates $`U_A(1)`$ symmetry breaking in a way inspired by instanton calculations. As a result we obtain a dynamical mechanism for the (OZI rule violating) mixing of pseudoscalar strange and non-strange quarkonia, namely, the coupling of the $`U_A(1)`$ symmetry breaking to the v.e.v’s of scalars due to the spontaneous breakdown of chiral symmetry. In this framework we are able to calculate modifications to the naive PCAC relations due to the $`U_A(1)`$ anomaly. In general, these modifications involve linear, bilinear and trilinear combinations of meson fields. However, only linear terms contribute to two photon decay of pseudoscalars at tree level and for this particular case we derive relations (33) and the modified PCAC relations (56) (first term in the r.h.s. of Eq.(40)) which are the starting point in .

## IV Conclusions

We use a $`U(3)\times U(3)`$ effective chiral model incorporating $`U_A(1)`$ symmetry breaking to study the strong and electromagnetic contributions to the non-conservation of the isosinglet axial currents in flavor basis. Strong contributions are explicitly calculated in the model and related to the mass matrix of isoscalar pseudoscalr fields and the corresponding weak decay constants. Electromagnetic contributions are introduced using ’t Hooft’s argument on anomaly matching. We calculate the $`P^0\gamma \gamma `$ decays in this framework and show that the only effect of the strong anomaly in these processes is in the formation of the $`\eta `$ and $`\eta ^{}`$ systems. We use these results to estimate the pseudoscalar mixing angle from experimental data on $`\eta \gamma \gamma `$ and $`\eta ^{}\gamma \gamma `$ obtaining $`\varphi _P[38.4^{},41.0^{}]`$


text:
# A search for extragalactic H2O maser emission towards IRAS galaxies

## 1 Introduction

The discovery of the highly Doppler-shifted maser emission at 22 GHz in the 616–523 transition of H2O in NGC 4258 (Nakai et al. (1993)), has resulted in a resurgence of single-dish surveys for extragalactic water masers. Recent maser surveys towards active galactic nuclei (AGN) have been motivated by the VLBI observations of a sub-parsec-scale H2O maser disk rotating around a central massive object in NGC 4258 (Miyoshi et al. (1995)). The detection and imaging of such H2O $`megamaser`$ emission enables us to probe the kinematics and dynamical structures of parsec-scale circumnuclear disks (Moran et al. (1999)). H2O megamasers studied to date can be categorised into two types; $`diskmasers`$ residing in a (sub-)parsec scale disk around an active nucleus, and $`nondiskmasers`$ which are seen significant distances from the nucleus. The latter can also be sub-categorised into two types: jet masers associated with radio jets e.g NGC 1068 (Gallimore et al. (1996)), NGC 1052 (Claussen et al. (1998)), and Mkn 348 (Falcke et al. (2000), Peck et al. (2001), Xanthopoulos & Richards (2001)) or a nuclear outflowing component such as that observed in the Circinus galaxy (Greenhill (2000)). Masers associated with jets appear to have different spectral characteristics than the $`diskmasers`$, the spectra tend to be broad (few hundred km s-1) and featureless, whereas the $`diskmasers`$ tend to consist of bright, narrow components clustered in velocity groups. H2O megamasers generally seem to trace the nuclear activity in the central parsecs of AGN. To deduce the general properties of such megamasers and those of the central parsecs of AGN, we need to increase the number of detections of water megamasers.

At this time, 24 extragalactic water masers inside AGN have been discovered with single-dish surveys (e.g. Moran et al. (1999)). The detection rates of new masers remain quite low, less than $``$ 7% (e.g., Braatz et al. (1996, 1997); Greenhill et al. (1997)). From the presently known sample of sources we have already deduced some properties of H2O megamasers. They prefer to lie in type 2 Seyfert AGN, suggesting that obscuring gas around an active nucleus coupled with long gain paths along an edge-on disk in the line of sight, plays a vital role in giving rise to strong maser emission. A number of H2O megamasers are known to contain a parsec-scale radio “core-jet” structure which the maser can amplify in the gaseous environment. Accordingly it is reasonable to search for H2O megamasers towards type 2 Seyfert/LINER nuclei enshrouded by circumnuclear gas around a compact continuum nucleus.

Here we report the result of an on-going single-dish survey for H2O megamasers towards AGN in infrared (IR)-luminous galaxies, and the discovery of the new maser in the galaxy NGC 6240.

## 2 Sample selection

The observed galaxies were primarily selected from far-infrared (FIR) luminous galaxies (IRAS galaxies) with an apparent FIR luminosity (LFIR) $`>`$ 1011 L (Soifer et al. (1989)). Condon et al. (1990) carried out 1.49 GHz imaging with the VLA at arcsecond resolution for these objects. Due to the now well-known correlation of LFIR with radio continuum flux density for the IR-luminous galaxies, Condon et al’s work has resulted in a significant number of detections of radio continuum sources towards such galaxies. The sample was selected from galaxies in which the ratio of 1.49 GHz continuum flux density to far-infrared (FIR) flux density (F21cm/FFIR) was $`>`$ 0.003, where FFIR = F$`_{60\mu m}`$ \+ F$`_{100\mu m}`$. About 25 IR-luminous galaxies were selected in this way, of which 14 sources have been observed to date. Here we present the initial results of the survey. The sample observed so far is listed in Table 1.

## 3 Observations

The observations of H2O emission (rest frequency: 22.23508 GHz) were made with the MPIfR 100 m radio telescope at Effelsberg between April and July 2001, as part of an extragalactic H2O maser survey towards infrared-luminous galaxies. 15 galaxies have been observed to date (Table 1). We used a K-band HEMT receiver with two orthogonal linear polarizations. The system temperature was typically 70–110 K, depending on atmospheric conditions. The amplitude calibration was based on a flux density at 22 GHz for 3C 286 (Ott et al. (1994)), and flux densities were estimated from the measured antennas temperature, $`T_{\mathrm{A}}^{}{}_{}{}^{}`$. The observations were made in position-switching mode. Typical observing time for each source was about 50–80 minutes, yielding rms sensitivities of $``$ 15–30 mJy. Pointing calibrations using nearby calibrator sources were carried out during the observations every $``$ 1–1.5 hours. The resultant pointing accuracy was $`<`$ 8” i.e. within 20 % of the antenna beam size (40” \[FWHM\]). Uncertainties in the amplitude calibration are nominally 10–20 %. The back-end digital autocorrelation system provided 4 autocorrelators for each of the 2 polarisation signals. Each autocorrelator produced a spectrum in a 40 MHz band (corresponding to a rest-frame velocity range of 540 km s-1) with 512 spectral channels providing a frequency resolution of 78 kHz or 1.1 km s-1. The center frequencies of the four autocorrelators were arranged to have 10 or 20 MHz overlap (depending on source), resulting in a total velocity coverage of $`\pm `$ 500 km s$`^1`$relative to the galaxy’s systemic velocity. After adding the two polarizations together, first or second order baselines were fitted to, and subtracted from, each of the spectra.

## 4 The survey results

The survey of 15 sources resulted in the detection of one new H2O megamaser. On 9 May 2001, we detected H2O emission towards the LINER galaxy NGC 6240 (Fig 1a), the detection was confirmed on 14 Jun 2001 (Fig 1b). We searched for water masers in the other 14 AGN but obtained no detections at a 3 $`\sigma `$ level of $``$ 40–90 mJy (Table 1). The detection of one new maser among the 15 AGN in the biased sample yields a detection rate of $``$ 6.7 %, which is comparable to those of $``$7.0 % in Braatz et al. (1997) and $``$3.4 % in Greenhill et al. (1997). The H2O maser in the Seyfert 2 galaxy NGC 5793 was originally selected from this sample, its discovery stimulated us to continue the programme (Hagiwara et al. (1997, 2001)). Our survey of IRAS galaxies is still ongoing, however, if we include the previous detection of the maser in NGC 5793, the detection rate in our survey is significantly higher than those mentioned above. Although the survey is incomplete, its success seems to partially depend on the assumption that the masing can be enhanced by “warm” dust emission heated by a nuclear radio source.

## 5 H2O maser in NGC 6240

Fig.1 shows spectra of the H2O maser towards NGC6240 taken with the 100m telescope at Effelsberg. The spectra show a prominent H2O maser feature with a narrow velocity-width (4.3 km s$`^1`$\[FWHM\]) centered at VLSR= 7565 km s$`^1`$. The feature is redshifted by 261 km s$`^1`$from the systemic velocity (Vsys = 7304 km s$`^1`$with respect to the local standard of rest (LSR), based on HI observations; de Vaucouleurs et al. (1991)). NGC 6240 exhibits bright emission with a peak flux density of $``$ 40 mJy (Gaussian-fitted intensity is 36 mJy). Fig.2 shows a spectrum averaged over the two earlier observing epochs in Fig.1 from which we estimate the apparent isotropic luminosity of the prominent feature alone to be $``$ 36 L at a distance of 97 Mpc. In addition, we detect faint narrower (1.1 km s$`^1`$\[FWHM\]) emission at VLSR= 7609 km s$`^1`$(3 $`\sigma `$ level detection). Including both emission features, the total luminosity of the maser is $``$ 40 L. Prior to our observations no H2O emission had been firmly detected (e.g. Claussen & Lo (1986)), although tentative detections had been reported (Henkel et al. (1984); Braatz et al. (1994)). The maser therefore appeared to be in a flaring state during our observing epochs in 2001. The peak flux density remained the same within the uncertainties of amplitude calibrations, at both early observing epochs. However, a third spectrum, taken on 12 July 2001 shows the strongest feature declining in flux to $``$ 27 mJy while the feature at 7609 km s$`^1`$is more prominent (Fig 1c).
NGC 6240 is categorized as an (ultra) luminous infrared galaxy (\[U\]LIRG) with a complex structure (Sanders et al. (1988)) and is one of the most distant megamasers ever detected, rivaling the “Giga Maser” in TXFS 2226–184, which lies at a distance of 100 Mpc (Koekemoer et al. (1995)). The basic characteristics of the galaxy are listed in Table 2. The large IR luminosity ($`>10^{10.8}`$ L) is considered as having its origin in re-emission from a dust shell surrounding a hot core, suggesting the presence of an on-going starburst triggered by the merger of two galaxies (Sanders et al. (1988)). However, recent hard X-ray measurements detected a strong iron-K emission line at $``$6.4 keV with an excess atomic hydrogen column density of $``$ 1022 cm-2 towards the nucleus, a phenomenon which appears to be common in the presence of an AGN (Iwasawa & Comastri (1998); Vignati et al. (1999); Ikebe et al. (2000)). A 5 GHz high-resolution MERLIN continuum map (Beswick et al. (2001)) revealed a double source with a separation of $``$ 1.5” ($``$ 700 pc). Beswick et al concluded that the radio continuum flux found in the galaxy is a combination of a starburst and a weak AGN induced by a merger event. A molecular gas concentration, which lies between the radio sources, was imaged in CO emission on 100 parsec-scales (Bryant & Scoville (1999); Tacconi et al. (1999); Tecza et al. (2000)). According to Tacconi et al. (1999), the CO emission is settling down into the two nuclei (which correspond to the double peaks in the MERLIN map) and will likely form a central thin disk in the final stage of evolution.

## 6 What is the maser in NGC 6240?

The detection of H2O masers from NGC 6240, which is exhibiting starburst activity, raises questions concerning the nuclear activity of the galaxy. The major energy source is considered to be a nuclear starburst (e.g., Tecza et al. (2000)) since the ratio of the hard X-ray luminosity to the IR luminosity is small, $`0.010.1`$ (Table 2). Such a ratio suggests that the hard X-ray source (i.e. the AGN) is not dominant (e.g., Ikebe et al. (2000)). What is the energy source that gives rise to the water maser in NGC 6240?

H2O megamasers are often associated with a compact continuum source such as a radio core or jet. In the nuclear region of NGC 6240 the two radio sources at 5, 8.4 and 15 GHz remain unresolved at $``$ 0.1 arcsecond resolution. Each source has a brightness temperature upper limit (Tb) of $`10^410^5`$ (K) (Colbert et al. (1994); Beswick et al. (2001)). (There has been no reported detection of milliarcsecond-scale structure in the galaxy.)
Tacconi et al. (1999) imaged the CO(2-1) emission peak between the two radio sources with 0.7” resolution, the spectral profiles show wide line-widths spanning $`\pm `$ 500 km s$`^1`$ with respect to the systemic velocity of 7339 km s$`^1`$. A similar result was obtained in HCN(1-0) emission, which is a more appropriate tracer of the warm dense molecular gas that can produce 22 GHz H2O maser emission. Both CO and HCN cover the velocities of the maser but there are no distinct velocity peaks corresponding to those of the maser, weakening the case for an association between the CO/HCN gas and the masing cloud.

The location of the H2O maser of NGC 6240 is of great interest. MERLIN high-resolution HI absorption observations show that there exist velocity gradients against the two unresolved radio sources. The HI gas in front of the two sources differ in their velocity centroids by $`150`$ km s$`^1`$; the gradients range from VLSR= 7100-7200 km s$`^1`$ and 7250-7350 km s$`^1`$respectively (Beswick et al. (2001)). However, there is no significant detection of HI gas at the H2O maser velocities of VLSR= 7565 and 7609 km s-1, implying the masers are not associated with the observed HI absorbing gas. It is thus unlikely that the maser emission is associated with these two radio sources, which are widely accepted as being supernova remnants. This is consistent with the fact that total maser luminosity, which we estimate to be $``$ 40 L is an order of magnitude larger than those of extragalactic H2O masers outside AGN (0.1-1.0 L), i.e. $`kilomasers`$ that are associated with star forming regions in nearby galaxies (Claussen et al. (1984); Ho et al. (1987); Greenhill et al. (1990)). Consequently, it is likely that the maser in NGC 6240 is directly associated with nuclear activity, the presence of which was probed by the hard X-ray measurements.
Given the detection of the features redshifted by 260-300 km s$`^1`$from Vsys and the narrowness of each line, it is reasonable to assume that the maser might originate from a well-defined region where the masing gas is receding relative to the molecular gas disk observed on 100 pc-scales. One can also speculate on the possible existence of an edge-on molecular gas disk rotating around a super massive object by analogy with other megamasers (Moran et al. (1999)). Such a hypothesis is supported by the nature of the observed spectrum of the H2O maser towards NGC6240 and its similarity to that of the so-called $`diskmasers`$. If such a scenario was true, the H2O maser should lie in the dynamical center of the galaxy, where the observed dense molecular gas will eventually settle down between the two radio sources and form a disk.
NGC 6240 has often been compared with the prototype ULIRG Arp 220 (IC 4553) from which hard X-ray radiation or other evidence of AGN activity has never been incontrovertibly detected (Kii et al. (1997); Genzel et al. (1998); Smith et al. (1998) and references therein). The galaxy is a merging system showing a large concentration of dense molecular gas between twin stellar/starburst nuclei (Scoville et al. (1997)). H2O maser emission has not been detected in Arp 220 (Braatz et al. (1997)) however, it is the prototype of the class of galaxies that exhibit OH megamaser emission. Recent surveys with Arecibo have revealed many new OH megamaser sources bringing the total number of detections to almost 100 (Darling & Giovanelli (2001)). Most of the OH megamaser detections are in galaxies that are classified as \[U\]LIRGs, and all \[U\]LIRGs appear to be merging systems. The most remarkable thing is that H2O nuclear megamasers and OH megamasers are mutually exclusive: No galaxy observed to date contains both an OH megamaser and a nuclear H2O megamaser. NGC 6240 does not show OH emission, however OH gas is seen in intense absorption (e.g. Baan et al. (1998)). This is similar to the case of the OH absorption towards the nucleus of the megamaser NGC 5793 (Hagiwara et al. (2000)). Until now there have been no detections of H2O masers towards merging systems, NGC 6240 appears to break the mould.

The presence of strong H2O maser emission and the iron-K line in NGC 6240 might mean that the galaxy is experiencing a different phase of merging from that of Arp 220 i.e. compact single disk formation surrounding a “central engine”, thereby placing it the final evolution stage in galaxy-galaxy merging.

## 7 Conclusions

We have made the first detection of H2O megamaser emission from a \[U\]LIRG/merger galaxy. We have detected emission in the LINER galaxy NGC 6240, the maser features are observed to be by 260-300 km s$`^1`$redshifted with respect to the systemic velocity and to have a luminosity of ($``$ 40 L). The maser could arise from a dense circumnuclear molecular cloud on a $`100`$ parsec scale or from a spatially compact maser disk inferred from the presence of the high velocity maser feature(s). The interpretation of the observed maser is not unique, though we favour the latter case. Interferometric observations of the new maser will provide an opportunity to investigate the kinematics of the ongoing merger.

###### Acknowledgements.

YH would like to thank H. Imai for his assistance with a part of the observations. YH also appreciates R. Kawabe for helpful discussion on the source selection, and A. W. Sherwood and Chr. Henkel for able advice during the data analysis. We acknowledge M. J. Claussen for his suggestions on the manuscript. This research has made use of the NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database (NED) which is operated by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.


text:
# The X-ray sources at the center of G266.1–1.2

## 1. Introduction

The supernova remnant G266.1–1.2 has been reported as a possible $`\gamma `$-ray source in the 1.156 MeV line of 44Ti (Iyudin et al. 1998). The short lifetime ($``$90 yrs) of this isotope, and the relatively small angular size of the remnant would imply an age of only $``$680 years and a small distance d$``$200 pc (Aschenbach et al. 1999). Thus G266.1–1.2 could be the remnant of the closest supernova event to have occurred in recent historical times.

However, ASCA observations showed that the X–rays from the SNR shell have a non-thermal spectrum and the fits require a high absorption value (Slane et al. 2001), favoring a distance of $``$1-2 kpc that would place G266.1–1.2 well beyond the Vela SNR (see also Mereghetti & Pellizzoni 2001). The ASCA data revealed also a central point source, AX J0851.9–4617.4 , surrounded by diffuse X–ray emission, that was interpreted as the neutron star associated to G266.1–1.2.

A BeppoSAX observation (Mereghetti 2001) of the central region of G266.1–1.2 showed the presence of a second source about 3 north of that detected by ASCA and with a harder spectrum. The northern source was named SAX J0852.0–4615. Since the BeppoSAX error circle of AX J0851.9–4617.4 contained two bright early type stars that might have produced the observed X–ray flux, while no optical counterparts brighter than V$``$15 were visible for SAX J0852.0–4615 , it was unclear which of the two sources was the most likely neutron star candidate.

The puzzle has been recently solved by a Chandra observation that provided an arcsecond position for AX J0851.9–4617.4 (Pavlov et al. 2001). The new error box is incompatible with the two early type stars that were previously considered as possible counterparts, thus confirming that AX J0851.9–4617.4 is the most likely neutron star candidate. SAX J0852.0–4615 was not detected in the 3 ks long Chandra observation reported by Pavlov et al. (2001). This might be due to variability, or to the hardness of this source, that was detected with BeppoSAX only above 5 keV. A deeper observation with XMM-Newton confirmed the existence of SAX J0852.0–4615 , with a flux about ten times fainter than that of AX J0851.9–4617.4 (Aschenbach, this conference).

Here we present optical observations of the fields of these two X–ray sources.

## 2. Optical observations of the field of AX J0851.9–4617.4

Optical images of the central region of G266.2–1.2 were obtained through the public archive of the European Southern Observatory (ESO). These data consist of images in the R and B bands taken with the Wide Field Imager instrument at the La Silla 2.2m telescope on July 30, 1998. We derived an approximate calibration of these data based on a number of stars of the USNO catalogue.

Figure 1 shows the R band image of the BeppoSAX error region (1 radius) of AX J0851.9–4617.4 . The two early type stars that were previously considered as possible counterparts are the B8 type star HD76060 (V=7.9), and Wray 16-30, a B\[e\] star with V=13.8 (Thé et al. 1994) also detected with IRAS.

The small circle indicates the new position of AX J0851.9–4617.4 determined with Chandra (Pavlov et al. 2001). No objects, down to limits of R$``$22.5 and B$``$23 are present at the Chandra position, besides a star with R$``$17 on the edge of the error circle. As discussed by Pavlov et al. this object is probably a late type star and cannot be the counterpart of the X–ray source.

Some diffuse emission is also visible to the West of the Chandra position. This nebula is better seen in the Hα image shown in Fig.2. The brightest part of the Hα nebula has a roughly elliptical shape with dimensions $``$40′′$`\times `$20′′, and a sharply defined western edge. Some nearly parallel filaments are also visible, one of which seems to be composed by a series of aligned bright spots (see Fig.1).

## 3. Optical observations of the field of SAX J0852.0–4615

The field of the northern source, SAX J0852.0–4615 , is shown in the R band image of Fig.3. The brightest stars in the BeppoSAX error region (1 radius) have R$``$15, implying a ratio of X–ray to optical flux Fx/Fopt$`>`$0.1. None of the stars in the error region has particularly unusual colors.

## 4. Conclusions

The deep optical limits for the possible counterparts of AX J0851.9–4617.4 confirm that this is most likely the neutron star remnant associated with G266.1–1.2.

An interesting Hα nebula has also been discovered in the data presented here. Emission in the Hα has been detected around a few radio pulsars and is thought to originate in the interstellar medium shocked by the relativistic pulsar wind. These nebulae have either a ”cometary” shape with the axis of symmetry along the direction of the pulsar transverse motion (e.g., PSR B2224+65 (”Guitar Nebula”, Cordes et al. 1993) or PSR B0740–28 (Stappers et al. these proceedings)) or an arc-like shape (e.g., PSR J0437–4715, Bell et al. 1996).

The morphology of the diffuse emission shown in Fig.1 and Fig.2 does not present any obvious connection with the location of the candidate neutron star as determined with Chandra. It is more likely that the nebula is related to the B\[e\] star Wray 16-30, which is located at the southern end of the nebula. However, its peculiar morphology and the location close to the center of G266.1–1.2 make this nebula a potentially interesting target for more detailed investigations.

### Acknowledgments.

This work was based on data obtained with the ESO telescopes at La Silla and made available through the ESO/STECF Science Archive Facility. We acknowledge the support of the Italian Space Agency and of the Italian Ministry of University and Research (Cofin-99-02-02).

## References

Aschenbach, B., Iyudin A.F., & Schönfelder V. 1999, A&A, 350, 997

Bell J.F. et al. 1995, ApJ, 440, L81

Cordes J.M., Romani R.W. & Lundgren S.C. 1993, Nature, 362, 133

Iyudin A.F. et al. 1998, Nature, 396, 142

Mereghetti S. 2001, ApJ, 548, L213

Mereghetti S. & Pellizzoni A. 2001, in Proc. GAMMA 2001, S.Ritz, N.Gehrels & C.R.Shrader eds., AIP Conf. Proc. n.587, 523

Pavlov G.G., Sanwal D., Kiziltan B. & Garmire G.P. 2001, ApJ, 559, L131

Slane P. et al. 2001, ApJ, 548, 814

Thé P.S., de Winter D. & Perez M.R. 1994, A&AS, 104, 315


text:
# From Linear to Nonlinear Response in Spin Glasses: Importance of Mean-Field-Theory Predictions

## I Introduction

The properties of spin glasses in a magnetic field have been the subject of considerable attention. It is widely recognized that the Parisi replica-symmetry breaking ansatz mez87  provides an essentially correct mean-field solution for the infinite-range Sherrington-Kirkpatrick model. she75  The spin-glass phase in this model is separated from the paramagnetic phase in the $`(T,H)`$ plane by the de Almeida-Thouless (AT) critical line. alm78  The situation is less clear in the case of finite-dimensional short-range models. Rigorous theoretical results show viability of the mean-field approach for the description of these systems, mar00  but progress is impeded by significant analytical difficulties. Numerical studies have repeatedly suggested the existence of an AT-type critical line at $`d=3`$ and higher dimensions. car90 ; zul98  However, magnetic field effects present a difficult challenge for computer simulations. Finite size, and difficulties in equilibrating large samples, do not yet allow a clear distinction between the mean-field picture and the droplet scenario. krz01  Because of this, the existence of the spin-glass phase transition in a magnetic field is considered a most relevant open problem.zul98

The experimental evidence for an AT-type critical behavior appears ambiguous. Many real spin glasses have mean-field-like phase diagrams, ken91  with an onset of strong $`MFCZFC`$ irreversibility along a certain line. This irreversibility is usually interpreted as a sign of replica-symmetry breaking. However, real spin glasses are always out of equilibrium, and the measured AT lines are time dependent. Therefore, it appears impossible to obtain information about the *equilibrium* phase diagram directly from experiments. We show in this paper, however, that the study of magnetic field effects on the *nonequilibrium* dynamics of spin glasses can shed light on the magnetic properties of the equilibrium spin-glass state.

Our motivation for this work is twofold. First, effects of magnetic field are understood fairly well within the mean-field theory, where they are derived from first principles. The minimum possible overlap, $`q_{min}(H)`$, of two states in the presence of a magnetic magnetic field, $`H`$, plays an important role in this approach. Yet, as usually happens in spin-glass physics, the theoretical predictions cannot be easily related to experimentally observable phenomena. Even those models of spin-glass dynamics that are based on the mean-field-like hierarchical picture of phase space tend to treat magnetic field effects phenomenologically in terms of the Zeeman energy. In this paper, we show that experimental results on the magnetic field dependence of spin-glass dynamics are consistent with the mean-field description.

The second reason for this work is practical. Spin-glass relaxation properties are usually studied under a change in magnetic field. It is often believed that the subsequent response is linear in magnetic field “for reasonably small field values (say $`<10G`$)”. kop88  We show in this paper that the very definition of what one means by “reasonably small” fields is impossible without knowledge of the spin-glass phase diagram. This knowledge becomes vital when results for different temperatures or different samples are compared.

The paper is organized as follows. The next Section describes a theoretical picture underlying our analysis. Sec. III.A presents results of magnetization measurements. Sec. III.B is devoted to experimental results for the effective waiting time. In Sec. III.C, the waiting-time dependence of the measured quantities is discussed in detail. Sec. IV summarizes our conclusions.

## II Theoretical background

### II.1  Mean-field dynamics

The main obstacle to an experimental test of mean-field-theory predictions is the problem of relating experimentally accessible spin-glass dynamics to the static equilibrium properties of the spin-glass state, described by the Parisi solution. Phenomenological phase-space models have provided important insights into possible physical mechanisms for spin-glass relaxation.led91 ; bou92  A recent theoretical breakthrough has been achieved within the mean-field theory of aging phenomena, proposed by Cugliandolo et al. cug93 ; fra95 ; mar98 ; fra98  Because these theoretical developments have profound significance for the interpretation of our experimental results, we shall briefly review them here.

The well-known fluctuation-dissipation theorem (FDT) kub66  establishes a link between the linear response of a system to an external perturbation, and the fluctuation properties of the system in thermal equilibrium. The response of a spin system at time $`t`$ to an instantaneous field at time $`t^{}`$, $`R(t,t^{})`$, and the spin autocorrelation function, $`C(t,t^{})`$, are defined as follows:

$$R(t,t^{})=(1/N)\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}\delta S_i(t)/\delta h(t^{});$$
(1)
$$C(t,t^{})=(1/N)\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}S_i(t)S_i(t^{}).$$
(2)
In thermodynamic equilibrium, both functions are time-translation invariant, and related by the fluctuation-dissipation theorem ($`\beta =1/k_BT`$):

$$R_{eq}(tt^{})=\beta C_{eq}(tt^{})/t^{}.$$
(3)
The violation of this theorem in a general off-equilibrium situation is described by the function $`X(t,t^{})1`$: cug93 ; fra95 ; mar98

$$R(t,t^{})=\beta X(t,t^{})C(t,t^{})/t^{}.$$
(4)
Violation of the fluctuation-dissipation theorem is associated with a deviation from linear response. A second-order nonlinearity does not appear because the magnetization changes sign when the field is reversed. It has been shown lev89  that the presence of a third-order nonlinear response turns the fluctuation-dissipation theorem into a fluctuation-dissipation inequality. This is consistent with the fact that $`X(t,t^{})`$ in Eq. (4) is generally less than unity.

When these formulas are applied to spin-glass dynamics, the relevant times are $`t=t_w+\tau `$ and $`t^{}=t_w`$, where $`t_w`$ and $`\tau `$ are the waiting time and observation time after the waiting time, respectively. The dynamical quantities $`C`$ and $`X`$ can be related to their equilibrium counterparts if both $`t_w`$ and $`\tau `$ are sent to infinity. However, time-translational invariance does not hold off equilibrium, and the limiting values depend on how the limits are taken. One can write for the correlation function, bou97 ; cug99

$$\underset{\tau \mathrm{}}{lim}\underset{t_w\mathrm{}}{lim}C(t_w+\tau ,t_w)=q_{EA},$$
(5)
and

$$\underset{\tau \mathrm{}}{lim}C(t_w+\tau ,t_w)=q_{min}.$$
(6)
Eq. (5) is a dynamical definition of the Edwards-Anderson order parameter, $`q_{EA}`$, as the value of the correlation function at the limit of validity of the fluctuation-dissipation theorem. Eq. (6) expresses the property of weak ergodicity breaking in spin glasses. If the waiting time is finite and the magnetic field is zero (giving $`q_{min}=0`$), the system is able to escape arbitrarily far from the configuration it had reached at $`t=t_w`$. bou97

The fluctuation-dissipation ratio $`X(q)`$ is defined as the limit of the function $`X(t,t^{})`$, taken along a path in the $`(t,t^{})`$ plane, characterized by a given value $`q`$ of the correlation function $`C(t,t^{})`$.fra98  The most important result of the theory is the fact that, under the assumption of stochastic stability,fra98  $`X(q)`$ is equal to the equilibrium order parameter function $`x(q)`$:

$$X(q)=\underset{t,t^{}\mathrm{};C=q}{lim}\frac{R(t,t^{})}{\beta C(t,t^{})/t^{}}=x(q).$$
(7)
The function $`x(q)`$ is an integral of the Parisi order parameter $`P(q)`$,mez87  which can be introduced for short-range spin glasses within the standard replica-symmetry breaking formalism. mar00  According to Eq. (7), there is a deep relationship between spin-glass dynamics and the static equilibrium properties of the spin-glass state. It implies that “in any finite-dimensional system, replica-symmetry breaking and aging in the response functions either appear together or do not appear at all”. fra98

We now consider the physical (experimental) significance of these theoretical results. It is well known that there are two main regimes of spin-glass relaxation. In the equilibrium, or stationary regime, observation times $`\tau t_w`$, the fluctuation-dissipation theorem holds and the response function depends only on $`\tau `$. In the nonequilibrium, or aging regime, observation times $`\tau >t_w`$, the FDT is violated and the relaxation depends on $`t_w`$ for any $`\tau `$. Both regimes have been observed experimentally oci85  and studied numerically.fra95 ; and92  The transition from one regime to the other is marked by a peak in the relaxation rate, corresponding to strong violation of FDT at $`\tau t_w`$.

These effects can be naturally explained within the mean-field theory of aging phenomena. It has been suggested cug93  that the function $`X(t,t^{})`$, introduced to describe violations of the FDT in Eq. (4), depends on its time arguments only through the correlation function: $`X=X[C(t,t^{})]`$. In the equilibrium regime, the correlation function decreases rapidly (on the linear time scale) from 1 to $`q_{EA}`$, and $`X(C)=1`$. In the aging regime, the correlation function relaxes slowly from $`q_{EA}`$ to $`q_{min}`$, and $`X(C)<1`$. cug99 ; par98  The transition from one regime to the other is a direct consequence of replica-symmetry breaking at $`q<q_{EA}`$.

### II.2  Chaotic nature of the spin-glass state

Another important issue is the chaotic nature of the spin glass state with respect to magnetic field. It has been demonstrated numerically that a small change in external field leads to a considerable reorganization of a spin configuration.ban81  The Parisi solution suggests that an average equilibrium overlap between two states at different but similar magnetic fields, $`(h_1h_2)^2N1`$,mar00  is equal to $`q_{min}`$, i.e. the minimum possible overlap.par83  Analysis of fluctuations around the Parisi solution, carried out by Kondor,kon89  demonstrates that the correlation overlap function $`C_H(r)`$ for two spins, $`i`$ and $`j`$, at a distance $`r`$, behaves as

$$C_H(r)=\overline{S_iS_j_HS_iS_j_0}\mathrm{exp}(r/\xi _H).$$
(8)
This means that the projection of the correlation $`S_iS_j_H`$ at field $`H`$ onto the correlation $`S_iS_j_0`$ at zero field vanishes beyond the finite characteristic length $`\xi _H`$. Near $`T_g`$ and at low fields, this magnetic correlation length is simply $`\xi _H=1/q_{min}(H)`$. In the mean-field theory, $`q_{min}(H)H^{2/3}`$, so that $`\xi _H`$ diverges rapidly as the field goes to zero.

The behavior of the correlation function, Eq. (8), is a consequence of replica-symmetry breaking. The low-temperature spin-glass phase has an essentially infinite number of pure equilibrium states. Each of them is characterized by an infinite correlation length. These states have equal free energies per site, except for differences of the order $`O(1/N)`$. Only a few states with the lowest energies contribute significantly to the partition function. Because of the small energy differences, any small (but finite) amount of energy, added to the system, is enough to reshuffle the Boltzmann weights of the different states and thus completely reorganize the equilibrium spin configuration. Application of a magnetic field is an example of such a perturbation.

The magnetic correlation length, $`\xi _H`$, has the following meaning.rit94  When a magnetic field $`H`$ is applied to the system, the minimum possible overlap of two states is equal to $`q_{min}(H)`$. Consequently, all the states having overlaps $`q<q_{min}`$ are suppressed by the field. Their free energies increase, and they acquire the finite correlation length $`\xi _H`$. The spatial spin correlations, corresponding to these states, survive only within this range. All the other pure states are still characterized by an infinite correlation length. At the AT line, where $`q_{min}=q_{EA}`$, all the states have a finite correlation length, and the system becomes paramagnetic. Thus, a change in magnetic field has a randomizing effect on the spin-glass state. The ratio $`q_{min}/q_{EA}`$ is a natural measure of this effect.

The chaotic nature of the spin-glass state is also reflected in the phenomenological droplet model. The magnetic correlation length is determined as an average droplet size for which the Zeeman energy is equal to the energy of the droplet excitation. It is given by the following expression:fis88

$$\xi _HH^{2/(d2\theta )}.$$
(9)
Even though this result, with $`d=3`$ and $`\theta 0.2`$, is similar to the result of the mean-field theory, the physics is quite different. Spin-glass properties in this model are governed by low-energy excitations of the ground state, created by coherent flipping of compact clusters of spins. It is suggested that the magnetic field, $`H`$, would flip all the droplets with sizes greater than $`\xi _H`$ and thus destroy *all* spin-glass correlations beyond this length scale. Therefore, at any nonzero field, there is only a paramagnetic state with the finite correlation length $`\xi _H`$.

In both these approaches, the chaotic nature of the spin-glass state with respect to magnetic field leads to departures from linear response as $`\mathrm{\Delta }H`$ increases.

## III Experimental results and analysis

The purpose of this paper is the study of violations of the fluctuation-dissipation theorem as a function of magnetic field change $`\mathrm{\Delta }H`$. According to Eq. (7), aging dynamics of the spin-glass state is ultimately determined by static equilibrium properties. Any violation of the FDT contains information about replica-symmetry breaking. Therefore, studies of the gradual deviation from linear response as $`\mathrm{\Delta }H`$ increases can provide insight into the nature of the spin-glass phase diagram. Direct experimental determination of the correlation function, Eq. (2), requires sophisticated measurements of the time dependent magnetic noise spectrum.bou88  Instead, we make use of quantities which can be obtained from magnetic susceptibility measurements. The first quantity of interest is the difference of the values of remanence, measured in TRM and ZFC experiments: $`TRM(MFCZFC)`$. It has been shown lun86  that, within the linear regime, this quantity is zero, provided that all three magnetizations are measured at the same time after the initial quench. The second quantity of interest is the effective waiting time, $`t_w^{eff}`$, defined as the value of the observation time $`\tau `$ where the relaxation rate $`S(\tau )=TRM(\tau ,t_w,\mathrm{\Delta }H)/\mathrm{log}\tau `$ has a maximum. It has been argued dju95  that, within the linear response regime, $`t_w^{eff}t_w`$, so that the peak in $`S(\tau )`$ is essentially unaffected by a small magnetic field change. The third quantity we study experimentally is the difference $`TRM(t_w)TRM(t_w=0)`$. It describes a change in the measured magnetization as a result of the waiting time, and thus allows closer examination of aging phenomena.

All experiments were performed on a single crystal of Cu:Mn 1.5 at %, a typical Heisenberg spin glass with a glass temperature of about $`15.2K`$. Results of conventional studies of the phase diagram for this sample will be reported elsewhere. A commercial Quantum Design SQUID magnetometer was used for all the measurements.

### III.1  Measurements of $`TRM`$, $`MFC`$, and $`ZFC`$

Fig. 1 exhibits the dependence of $`TRM`$, $`MFCZFC`$, and their difference, on the field change $`\mathrm{\Delta }H`$, measured at $`T=12.0K`$. All data points were taken at the same short observation time, $`\tau 40s`$, with zero waiting time, and an effective cooling time of about $`600s`$. Error bars are smaller than the symbol sizes. The same will apply to all figures without error bars. Fig. 1 shows that three different types of spin-glass behavior can be distinguished for different ranges of magnetic field change, $`\mathrm{\Delta }H`$. For field changes from $`\mathrm{\Delta }H=0`$ to $`\mathrm{\Delta }H_1120Oe`$, the difference $`TRM(MFCZFC)`$ is zero to within our experimental accuracy. Between $`\mathrm{\Delta }H_1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }H_2420Oe`$, there are weak deviations from linear response. At $`\mathrm{\Delta }H=\mathrm{\Delta }H_2`$, corresponding approximately to the peak in the $`MFCZFC`$ remanence, violation of linear response becomes strong, and the difference $`TRM(MFCZFC)`$ is a linear function of $`\mathrm{\Delta }H`$ with a large slope.

The temperature dependences of the critical field changes $`\mathrm{\Delta }H_1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }H_2`$ are presented in Fig. 2 and Fig. 3. The figures also show the critical AT line, determined for the same sample at the same observation and cooling times, using the onset of strong $`MFCZFC`$ irreversibility as the signature of the spin-glass phase transition. We assume that this dynamical line approximates the equilibrium AT line for infinite waiting time. The difference $`MFCZFC`$ in Fig. 1 is not zero at the AT field of $`1400Oe`$ because transverse freezing above the AT line leads to a weak longitudinal irreversibility.gab81

One sees from Fig. 2 that all three lines in the $`(T,\mathrm{\Delta }H)`$ plane have the same functional form, $`T_gT=a\mathrm{\Delta }H^{2/3}`$, typical of the equilibrium AT critical line alm78  in the SK model. Moreover, the two linear-response violation lines, $`\mathrm{\Delta }H_1(T)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }H_2(T)`$, determine dynamical transition temperatures which are very close to the actual glass temperature $`T_g`$. It would thus be incorrect to say that the critical AT-type line plays a role at high fields only. Our results demonstrate that this line manifests itself dynamically even at very low fields. A critical field change for a given degree of linear response violation seems to be a constant fraction of the AT field. It means, from a practical point of view, that results obtained at different temperatures can be directly compared only if they have the same $`\mathrm{\Delta }H/H_{AT}(T)`$ ratio.

A comment should be made at this point. It has been argued wen84  that a $`TH^{2/3}`$ dependence for transition lines is not a unique feature of the mean-field theory. A similar power law could be obtained from purely dynamical considerations without using the concept of the spin-glass phase transition.wen84  A dynamical freezing line, $`T_f(H,\omega )`$, appears in the droplet model as well.fis88  In the present analysis, we do not rely on the existence of the $`H^{2/3}`$ dependence by itself. Our argument is based on the fact that the experimental AT and linear response violation lines have the *same* functional form, as illustrated in Fig. 2 and Fig. 3. This result suggests that there is a close relationship between the static and dynamic properties of the spin-glass state, assuming that the measured AT line is related to the equilibrium one.

Of course, measured values of the critical field changes depend on both the waiting time and the observation time. This point is illustrated in Fig. 4 where values of $`TRM(MFCZFC)`$ are plotted for $`t_w=0`$ and $`t_w=30min`$. As the waiting time becomes larger, $`\mathrm{\Delta }H_1`$ increases, while $`\mathrm{\Delta }H_2`$ decreases. Thus, longer equilibration times make the system less susceptible to external perturbations, but only up to a certain point. This issue will be discussed further in Sec. III.C.

### III.2  Measurements of the effective waiting time

Let us now turn to a discussion of the effective waiting time, $`t_w^{eff}`$. Fig. 5 exhibits the dependence of $`\mathrm{log}_{10}(t_w^{eff})`$ on the magnetic field change $`\mathrm{\Delta }H`$ for three different waiting times: $`t_w=30min,5min`$, and 0. The temperature is the same as in Fig. 1. One can easily discern three regimes of FDT violation, corresponding to the three regimes of deviation from linear response seen in Fig. 1.

As the magnetic field change, $`\mathrm{\Delta }H`$, increases from zero up to about $`100Oe`$, the effective waiting time decreases only slightly. This means that FDT holds for observation times less than $`t_w^{eff}t_w`$. Of course, if the waiting time is short, $`t_w^{eff}`$ is determined by the cooling procedure.

In the interval from $`100Oe`$ to about $`400Oe`$, the effective waiting time drops sharply, and the field dependence of its logarithm is linear. In this case, nonequilibrium behavior appears much earlier, and the FDT holds only at short times $`\tau t_w^{eff}t_w`$. This corresponds to the weak deviation from linear response between $`\mathrm{\Delta }H_1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }H_2`$ in Fig. 1.

When the field change exceeds $`400Oe`$, the FDT is strongly violated. One can see from Fig. 5 that, in this regime, the curves for long waiting times approach the curve for zero waiting time, and the waiting time dependence almost disappears. This situation corresponds to the strong deviation from linear response at short observation times above $`\mathrm{\Delta }H_2`$ in Fig. 1. Therefore, the break from the linear dependence of $`\mathrm{log}_{10}(t_w^{eff})`$ on $`\mathrm{\Delta }H`$, observed at large field changes, is directly related to strong nonlinearity in the spin-glass response. The effective waiting time in this case is determined primarily by the zero waiting time results, dependent on the experimental protocol.

The waiting time dependence in Fig. 5 supports the conclusion, drawn from Fig. 4, that an increase in waiting time leads to an expansion of the linear response region to higher values of $`\mathrm{\Delta }H`$. An increase in the observation time $`\tau `$ has the opposite effect. The field dependence is more pronounced at longer times. This accounts for the fact that the critical field changes, extracted from the effective waiting time experiments (Fig. 5), seem to be lower than those obtained from the short-time magnetization measurements (Fig. 4). Another interesting feature of our results is that the dependence of $`\mathrm{log}_{10}(t_w^{eff})`$ on $`\mathrm{\Delta }H`$ for $`t_w=0`$, determined exclusively by the cooling procedure, does not exhibit the low-field plateau seen at longer waiting times. This behavior is analyzed in Sec. III.C.

The temperature dependence of the effective waiting time is exhibited in Fig. 6 and Fig. 7, where $`\mathrm{log}_{10}(t_w^{eff})`$ vs. $`\mathrm{\Delta }H`$ data for $`t_w=30min`$ are plotted for four different temperatures. The results for the smallest field change of $`10Oe`$ are not exactly the same because the effective cooling time increases as the measurement temperature is lowered. It is quite evident from Fig. 7, however, that the four curves scale rather well together if plotted vs. $`\mathrm{\Delta }H/\mathrm{\Delta }H_2`$. This means that the critical AT line sets a characteristic magnetic field scale at any temperature below $`T_g`$, and that it plays an important role for *all* aspects of spin-glass dynamics.

### III.3  Waiting time dependence of $`\mathrm{\Delta }H_1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }H_2`$

The waiting time dependences of the characteristic field changes, corresponding to the weak and strong linear response violations, deserve special attention. Our experimental results, exhibited in Fig. 4 and Fig. 5, suggest that $`\mathrm{\Delta }H_1`$ increases with $`t_w`$, while $`\mathrm{\Delta }H_2`$ diminishes.

In order to check this conclusion, we have measured the field dependence of the thermoremanent magnetization, $`TRM(\tau ,t_w,\mathrm{\Delta }H)`$, for three different waiting times: $`t_w=30min,5min`$, and 0. The measurement temperature is $`T=12.0K`$, and the observation time after the field change is $`\tau =40s`$. For convenience, we shall refer to the zero-waiting-time dependence as $`ZTRM(\tau ,\mathrm{\Delta }H)`$. This nonequilibrium relaxation function is determined by the cooling process and not by the waiting time. The results are exhibited in Fig. 8. One can see that the maxima in the TRM curves shift towards lower fields as the waiting time increases. To examine evolution of the measured magnetization curves due to aging phenomena, we consider the differences $`TRMZTRM`$, where both $`TRM`$ and $`ZTRM`$ are measured at the same observation time. Fig. 8 suggests that the maxima in $`TRMZTRM`$ correspond to higher fields at longer waiting times.

Fig. 9 exhibits the logarithm of the ratio $`(TRMZTRM)/\mathrm{\Delta }H`$. Two different types of behavior can be clearly distinguished. The ratio increases as long as the field change is less than about $`120Oe`$, and decreases at higher $`\mathrm{\Delta }H`$. The field dependence of its logarithm can be approximated by straight lines in both regimes. The results in Fig. 9 can be understood if we compare them with the data in Fig. 5. At low field changes, the effective waiting time for $`ZTRM`$ decreases more steeply with increasing $`\mathrm{\Delta }H`$ than the effective waiting time for $`TRM`$, which has a plateau in this region. The decay of the $`ZTRM`$ becomes faster in time, and the ratio $`(TRMZTRM)/\mathrm{\Delta }H`$, measured at fixed observation time, increases with $`\mathrm{\Delta }H`$. At higher magnetic field changes the drop in the effective waiting time for the $`TRM`$ is greater than for the $`ZTRM`$. As a result, the ratio $`(TRMZTRM)/\mathrm{\Delta }H`$ decreases. According to Fig. 9, the transition from one regime to the other occurs at a higher magnetic field change for a longer waiting time. This observation supports our conclusion that the plateau in the field dependence of the effective waiting time broadens as the system equilibrates.

Fig. 10 provides further insight into the nature of this effect. It displays the same quantity, the logarithm of $`(TRMZTRM)/\mathrm{\Delta }H`$, as a function of time at constant $`\mathrm{\Delta }H=10Oe`$. The experimental protocol is the same as before, except for the different waiting times. One can see a deep similarity between the results in Fig. 9 and Fig. 10. The waiting time dependence exhibited in Fig. 10 is readily understandable: the system stays longer in the quasiequilibrium regime for longer $`t_w`$, so the maximum in $`TRMZTRM`$ shifts towards longer observation times. Comparison with Fig. 9 suggests that the same is true for the field dependence: the system in the quasiequilibrium regime can sustain a stronger perturbation for a longer waiting time.

This similarity between the effects of the observation time and of the field change on the spin-glass state is a natural consequence of replica-symmetry breaking. The weak ergodicity breaking scenario, mentioned in Sec. II.A, suggests that, as the observation time increases, the system can evolve very far from the state at time $`t_w`$, with the minimum correlation set by $`q_{min}`$. This results from the fact that the average relaxation time is infinite because of the exponential distribution of free energies of different states. Chaotic nature of the spin-glass state with respect to magnetic field, discussed in Sec. II.B, forces the new equilibrium configuration after a field change to have the minimum overlap $`q_{min}`$ with the old configuration. This phenomenon is also related to existence of an essentially infinite number of states with very similar free energies. Thus, both an increasing observation time and an increasing field change make the spin-glass state less correlated with the state at time $`t_w`$.

It is of interest to examine the waiting time dependences of $`\mathrm{\Delta }H_1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }H_2`$ for the two “competing” descriptions of spin-glass dynamics: the droplet model and the phase-space picture.

In the droplet model,fis88  if $`R(t_w)`$ is an average droplet size, and $`L_\tau `$ is an observation length scale, two limiting cases can be distinguished. For $`R(t_w)\xi _H`$, the FDT is violated when $`L_\tau R(t_w)`$, and the field does not play a significant role. For $`\xi _HR(t_w)`$, the FDT is violated as soon as $`L_\tau \xi _H`$, and the waiting time is relatively unimportant. These regimes correspond approximately to experimental regimes with $`\mathrm{\Delta }H<\mathrm{\Delta }H_1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }H>\mathrm{\Delta }H_2`$, as discussed above. There is also an intermediate regime with $`R(t_w)\xi _H`$. This regime is very interesting physically, because violation of the FDT depends on interplay among all three length scales: $`L_\tau R(t_w)\xi _H`$. Unfortunately, no predictions for this regime are given within the droplet model.fis88  It has been arguedkop88  that, if the crossover between linear and nonlinear regimes is defined by a condition $`R(t_w)=\xi _H`$, the field change, needed to provoke nonlinear relaxation, should decrease with increasing $`t_w`$. This argument can explain the waiting time dependence of $`\mathrm{\Delta }H_2`$. However, it fails in the case of $`\mathrm{\Delta }H_1`$, which *increases* with $`t_w`$. Therefore, the experimentally observed waiting time dependence of $`\mathrm{\Delta }H_1`$ appears rather counterintuitive within the droplet scenario.

The phase-space picture of spin-glass dynamics does provide a consistent explanation for these phenomena. In this approach, evolution of a system in the phase space can be viewed as a series of transitions among traps, separated by free-energy barriers. bou92  As the system equilibrates, it encounters traps with higher barriers, and these traps increasingly resemble the pure states, contributing to equilibrium.cug93  The quasiequilibrium relaxation regime at short observation times corresponds to evolution within each trap, and the subsequent nonequilibrium behavior is related to evolution from trap to trap. As the waiting time, $`t_w`$, increases, the system has to overcome a higher effective barrier to leave a trap. This takes a longer time, or (if the observation time is fixed) a larger field change. Therefore, the characteristic field change for the weak linear response violation, $`\mathrm{\Delta }H_1`$, increases with $`t_w`$. However, after overcoming a higher barrier, the system can explore a broader free-energy landscape due to hierarchical structure of the phase space. It takes less time or a smaller field change to produce a state very different from the one at $`t_w`$. The nonequilibrium behavior is thus more affected by external perturbations for longer waiting times. Therefore, the characteristic field change for the strong linear response violation, $`\mathrm{\Delta }H_2`$, decreases with $`t_w`$.

The transition from the quasiequilibrium to the nonequilibrium regime is better defined after longer waiting times, both as a function of the observation time and as a function of the field change. This conclusion agrees with results of numerical simulations, which show the same effect when susceptibility is studied as a function of correlation.fra95

## IV Summary

The usual method for studying the spin-glass phase diagram is the observation of the $`MFCZFC`$ irreversibility as a function of temperature at a fixed magnetic field, $`H=\mathrm{\Delta }H`$. A different approach is employed in the present paper. The temperature is kept constant and “ irreversibility of the irreversibility”, $`TRM(MFCZFC)`$, is measured as a function of magnetic field change $`\mathrm{\Delta }H`$. Increasing $`\mathrm{\Delta }H`$ leads to a gradual deviation from linear response, and, equivalently, to a violation of the fluctuation-dissipation theorem. This violation, according to the mean-field theory of aging phenomena, is directly related to replica-symmetry breaking. Our experiments show that both methods give the same functional form for the critical lines, suggesting a mean-field-like phase diagram. This conclusion is further supported by measurements of the effective waiting time, $`t_w^{eff}`$. The study of waiting time effects on the linear response violation suggests the validity of the phase-space picture for spin-glass dynamics. Our results demonstrate the existence of a fundamental link between static and dynamic properties of spin glasses, predicted by the mean-field theory of aging phenomena.

We would like to thank Professor J. A. Mydosh for providing us with the Cu:Mn single crystal sample, prepared in Kamerlingh Onnes Laboratory (Leiden, The Netherlands). We are also grateful to Dr. G. G. Kenning for numerous interesting discussions and to Dr. J. Hammann and Dr. E. Vincent from CEA Saclay (France) for help and advice.