arxiv:cond-mat/ v3 19 Mar 2001

Transcription

1 Uniaxial Lifshitz Point at O(ǫ 2 L) Luiz C. de Albuquerque and Marcelo M. Leite Faculdade de Tecnologia de São Paulo - FATEC/SP-CEETPS-UNESP. Praça Fernando arxiv:cond-mat/ v3 19 Mar 2001 Prestes, 30, São Paulo,SP, Brazil Departamento de Física, Instituto Tecnológico de Aeronáutica, Centro Técnico Aeroespacial, São José dos Campos, SP, Brazil Abstract The critical exponents ν L2,η L2 and γ L of a uniaxial Lifshitz point are calculated at two-loop level using renormalization group and ǫ L expansion techniques. We introduced a new constraint involving the loop momenta along the competition axis, which allows to solve the two-loop integrals. The exponent γ L obtained using our method is in good agreement with numerical estimates based on Monte Carlo simulations. PACS: s; Cx; Kw Typeset using REVTEX claudio@fma.if.usp.br leite@fma.if.usp.br 1

2 I. INTRODUCTION The Lifshitz point occurs in a variety of physical systems and has been extensively studied over the last twenty-five years [1,2]. It appears in High-T C superconductivity [3 5], polymer physics [6 8], ferroelectric liquid crystals [9, 10], etc.. In magnetic systems, the uniaxial Lifshitz critical behavior can be described by an axially next-nearest-neighbor Ising model (ANNNI). It consists of a spin- 1 2 system on a cubic lattice (d = 3) with nearest-neighbor ferromagnetic couplings and next-nearest-neighbor antiferromagnetic interactions along a single lattice axis [11]. The competition gives origin to a modulated phase, in addition to the ferromagnetic and paramagnetic ones. In spite of having several modulated phases, it was shown recently that around the Lifshitz critical region, a simple field-theoretic setting can be defined for this ANNNI model [12]. In general, the antiferromagnetic couplings can show up in m directions. In that case, the system possesses the m-fold Lifshitz critical point. Here we are going to focus our attention in the uniaxial case (m = 1), since some materials present this type of critical behavior. MnP was studied both theoretically and experimentally and displays the uniaxial behavior [13, 14]. Theoretical studies involving the uniaxial Lifshitz point have been put forth using analytical and numerical tools. Examples of the latter are high-temperature series expansion [15] and Monte Carlo simulations [11]. Conformal invariance calculations in d = 2 (in the context of strongly anisotropic criticality) [16] and ǫ-expansion techniques [1] have been the main analytical tools available to dealing with this kind of system. From the field-theoretic point of view, the critical dimension of a scalar field theory describing the uniaxial Lifshitz critical behavior is found (by using the Ginzburg criterion) to be d c = 4.5. This half-integer critical dimension rises some nontrivial features in a perturbative analysis of the field theory in question. The expansion parameter is ǫ L = 4.5 d, where d is the space dimension of the system under consideration. In the pure Ising model the expansion parameter is ǫ = 4 d. As is well known, the critical exponents for the Lifshitz point at one-loop approximation have the same dependence in ǫ L as those from the pure Ising 2

3 model have in ǫ. This coincidence can be explained in the following way [12]. After choosing a convenient symmetry point to fix the external momenta scale in the quartic and quadratic directions, the one-loop integral contributing to the four-point function can be performed without any approximation. The solution of this integral yields a functional dependence on ǫ L which is the same as that obtained in ǫ when solving analogous one-loop integral for the Ising model. Thus, although the multiplicative factors to be absorbed in the coupling constant are different in the two cases, the critical exponents have the same dependence on the expansion parameter. The choice which simplifies the referred integral is to set the external momenta scale in the quartic direction to zero. Going one step further to evaluate higher order integrals in the loop expansion would be highly desirable using the same line of reasoning. In order to perform higher loop integrals, one has to make an approximation by introducing a constraint among the quartic loop momenta in different subdiagrams (along the competition axis). One may understand this approximation as equivalent to expand the field theory with competitive interactions, responsible for the appearance of the higher order derivative term, around the usual quadratic field theory (without the higher derivative term). In this way, all the dependence in the external momenta is along the (d 1) directions, perpendicular to the competition axis. In the resulting ǫ L expansion, the leading singularities can be chosen equal to those coming from the theory without competition (see below). The nontrivial new features of this expansion around the usual quadratic field theory are the coefficients of the subleading singularities and of the regular terms, which are no longer rational numbers. This approach would allow to treat this system properly in a perturbative expansion at least for correlation functions along the perpendicular directions to the competition axis. A better comprehension of this procedure might shed light in the perturbative study of higher order derivative field theories. In this sense, the Lifshitz critical behavior seems to be the natural laboratory to study higher order field theories in a perturbative framework. We report on what we believe to be the first study of critical exponents at two-loop order for the uniaxial Lifshitz point. Using λφ 4 field theory and the expansion in powers 3

4 of ǫ L = 4.5 d in the Lifshitz critical point, we calculate the exponents ν L2 and η L2. The exponents ν L2 and η L2 are associated with the directions perpendicular to the competition axis. The exponents ν L4 and η L4 are associated with the competition axis. Knowledge of three of these four exponents allows one to get all other exponents using scaling relations. Using ν L2 and η L2, we get γ L = 1.45 for this ANNNI model d = 3. The paper is organized as follows. In section 2 we introduce the notation and calculate the relevant integrals needed to get the critical exponents at two-loop level. We present the critical exponents η L2, ν L2 and γ L in section 3. In section 4 we discuss our results and compare the γ L exponent with numerical estimates based on Monte Carlo methods and high-temperature series. II. CALCULATION OF HIGHER LOOP INTEGRALS To begin with, we write down the bare Lagrangian associated with the Lifshitz critical behavior: L = φ (d 1) φ δ φ t 0φ ! λ 0φ 4 0. (1) The competition is responsible for the appearance of the quartic term in the free propagator. The Lifshitz critical point is characterized by the values t 0 = δ 0 = 0. From now on, this is the case which interests us in this work. First, we are going to compute the renormalized coupling constant at the fixed point. In order to find out the factor that shall be absorbed in the coupling constant, we quickly review the one-loop contribution to the four point function [12]. The relevant integral is: I sp = d d 1 qdk ((k + k ) 4 + (q + p) 2 ) (k 4 + q 2 ). (2) The external momenta are k along the quartic (competing) direction and p along the (d 1) quadratic directions. We then choose a symmetry point which simplifies the integral at external momenta k = 0, p 2 = 1. Using Schwinger s parameterization we get d d 1 qdk ) (k 4 + (q + p) 2 )(k 4 + q 2 ) = dα 1 dα 2 (2 dk exp( (α 1 + α 2 )k 4 ) d d 1 q exp( (α 1 + α 2 )q 2 2α 2 q.p α 2 p 2 ). (3) 4

5 The q integral is straightforward. It can be performed to give d d 1 q exp( (α 1 + α 2 )q 2 2α 2 q.p α 2 p 2 ) = 1 2 S d 1Γ( d 1 2 )(α 1 + α 2 ) d 1 2 exp( α 1α 2 p 2 ). (4) α 1 + α 2 The next step is to compute the k integration, which is: 2 0 dk exp( (α 1 + α 2 )k 4 ) = 1 2 (α α 2 ) 1 4 Γ( ). (5) 4 Replacing equations (4), (5) into equation (3) together with the value p 2 = 1, one finds ( d d 1 ) qdk = 1 (k 4 + (q + p) 2 )(k 4 + q 2 ) 4 S d 1Γ( d 1 2 )Γ(1 4 ) 0 0 p 2 =1 dα 1 dα 2 exp( α 1α 2 )(α 1 + α 2 ) ( d ). (6) α 1 + α 2 We can perform one of the integrals in the Schwinger parameters using a change of variables. Set v = α 2 α 1 +α 2, and u = α 1 v. The integral over u can be done, and we are left with 0 0 dα 1 dα 2 exp( α 1α 2 )(α 1 + α 2 ) ( d ) α 1 + α 2 = Γ(2 ( d )) 1 0 dv(v(1 v)) ( d ) 2. (7) Now we make the continuation d = 4.5 ǫ L. One obtains a result in terms of Gamma functions with non integer arguments. A useful identity involving the expansion of Gamma functions around a small number is given by: Γ(a + bx) = Γ(a) [ 1 + bxψ(a) + O(x 2 ) ], (8) where ψ(z) = d dz lnγ(z). This allows one to obtain the ǫ L-expansion when the Gamma functions have non integer arguments. Replacing Eqs. (7), (8) into Eq. (6), we obtain: I sp = 1 2 Γ(7/4)Γ(1/4)S 1 d 1 (1 + i 2 ǫ L ), (9) ǫ L where i 2 = 1 + π + 3ln2. In terms of ψ functions, i = (ψ(1) 2 ψ(7 )). We absorb 4 in the coupling constant a geometric angular factor, which is 1 2 Γ(7/4)Γ(1/4)S d 1, where S d = [2 d 1 π d 2Γ( d 2 )] 1 [17]. Then the redefined integral is: 5

6 or Ĩ sp = I sp 1 2 Γ(7/4)Γ(1/4)S d 1, (10) Ĩ sp = 1 ǫ L (1 + i 2 ǫ L ). (11) We suppress the tilde hereafter to simplify the notation. We have to keep in mind that we should divide out this factor for each loop integration. We now turn our attention to higherloop integrals. The beta function has the same form as the one coming from a pure Isinglike critical behavior, with the loop expansion parameter ǫ = 4 d replaced by ǫ L = 4.5 d. In practice, we have to calculate the two-loop integrals I 4SP I 4, p 2 I 3 SP I 3 and the three-loop integral I p 2 5 SP I 5, in order to find the fixed point at two-loop level and the critical exponents. The subscript SP is used to denote our choice of the subtraction point. They are given by (we found convenient to label all loop integrals according to the number of propagators they contain, see Figure 1): I 3 = d d 1 q 1 d d 1 q 2 dk 1 dk 2 (q k 4 1) (q k 4 2)((q 1 + q 2 + p) 2 + (k 1 + k 2 + k ) 4 ), (12) I 5 = d d 1 q 1 d d 1 q 2 d d 1 q 3 dk 1 dk 2 dk 3 (q1 2 + k1) 4 (q2 2 + k2) 4 (q3 2 + k3)((q q 2 p) 2 + (k 1 + k 2 k ) 4 ) 1 (q 1 + q 3 p) 2 + (k 1 + k 3 k ). (13) 4 I 4 = d d 1 q 1 d d 1 q 2 dk 1 dk 2 (q1 2 + k1) 4 ((P q 1 ) 2 + (K k 1 ) 4 )(q2 2 + k2) 4 1 (q 1 q 2 + p 3 ) 2 + (k 1 k 2 + k 3). (14) 4 In the first two integrals, p is the external momentum (associated with the two-point vertex) along (d 1) directions, whereas k is the external momentum along the competition axis. Inside the integral I 4, P = p 1 + p 2, with p 1, p 2, p 3 being the external momenta 6

7 (associated with the four-point vertex) along the quadratic directions, and K = k 1 + k 2, with k 1, k 2, k 3 the external momenta along the quartic direction. The symmetry point is chosen as follows. We set all the external momenta at the competition axis equal to zero. For the four-point vertex, the external momenta along the quadratic directions are chosen as p i.p j = κ2 4 (4δ ij 1). We fix the momentum scale of the two-point function through p 2 = κ 2 = 1. Now we turn our attention to the solution of the higher-loop integrals shown above. Consider the integral I 3. With our choice for the quartic external momenta it is given by: I 3 = d d 1 q 1 dk 1 (q k 4 1) d d 1 q 2 dk 2 (q k 4 2) ((q 1 + q 2 + p) 2 + (k 1 + k 2 ) 4 ). (15) First, we perform the integral over the internal bubble, i.e., we integrate over q 2 and k 2. In order to solve the internal bubble we demand that the loop momenta k 1 should be related to k 2. This means that k 1 is fixed inside the internal bubble. Note that we could have chosen the other way around, since the integral is symmetric under the exchange k 1 k 2, q 1 q 2. There are two issues which need to be emphasized here. First, the Lifshitz point condition eliminates the quadratic part of the momenta along the competition axis, for δ 0 = 0. Second, the remaining quartic part of the integral mixes the two loop momenta (k 1, k 2 ) in different subdiagrams, yielding crossed terms which are difficult to integrate. The constraint eliminates the crossed terms and is the simplest way to disentangle the two quartic integrals in the loop momenta. If the relation between the loop momenta at the quartic direction is linear, the integral becomes simplified. Then one can use k 1 = αk 2, where α( ±1) is a real number. However, this is not simple enough to handle the remaining integral. When the internal integral over k 2 and q 2 with generic α is performed, it remains the integral I= 1 0 dxx a (1 x) b (1 + (1 (1 α) 4 )x) c = B(a + 1, b + 1) F(1 + a, c; 2 + a + b; 1 + (1 α) 4 ). (16) 7

8 In order to obtain a result just in terms of the usual Beta function, we have to use a particular value for α. This simplicity is achieved for α = 2 (the Hypergeometric function is equal to 1 for this value of α). After this choice the integral is: I 3 = d d 1 q 1 dk 1 (q k 4 1) d d 1 q 2 dk 2 (q k 4 2) ((q 1 + q 2 + p) 2 + k 4 2). (17) The internal bubble is always proportional to the one-loop integral I sp. Performing the integral over q 2, k 2, we find: I 3 = d d 1 q 1 dk 1 (q k 4 1)[(q 1 + p) 2 ] ǫ L 2 I sp. (18) In the remaining integral we use Schwinger s parameterization again to solve along the quartic direction. We obtain: I 3 = I sp d d 1 q 1 [q 2 1] 3 4[(q 1 + p) 2 ] ǫ L 2. (19) The difference with respect to the pure φ 4 theory is that after performing the quartic integral, we get a exponent for the quadratic part of the momenta which is not an integer. At this point, one can use Feynman parameters to solve the momentum integrals. The dependence of the integral in the external momenta is proportional to (p 2 ) 1 ǫ L. We find : I 3 = 1 [ 1 + (i ) ] ǫ L. (20) 7ǫ L 7 The integral I 4 can be calculated in a similar fashion. First, we set the external momenta along the competing direction equal to zero. Therefore I 4 = d d 1 q 1 dk 1 (q k 4 1) ((P q 1 ) 2 + k 4 1) d d 1 q 2 dk 2 (q k 4 2) [(q 1 q 2 + p 3 ) 2 + (k 1 + k 2 ) 4 ], (21) where we changed variables from k 2 k 2. We set k 1 = 2k 2 in the internal bubble q 2, k 2 (as we did for I 3 ), and integrate over q 2, k 2. We then have 8

9 I 4 = I sp d d 1 q 1 dk 1 1. (22) (q1 2 + k1)((p 4 q 1 ) 2 + k1) 4 [(q 1 + p 3 ) 2 ] ǫ L 2 We use Schwinger s parameterization to get rid of the k 1 integral. After performing the change of variables used to calculate the one-loop integral and a rescaling, we can solve one of the parametric integrals to get 1 I 4 = I sp dz 0 d d 1 q 1 (q 2 1 2z P.q 1 + zp 2 ) 7 4 [(q 1 + p 3 ) 2 ] ǫ L 2. (23) In order to perform the integral over q 1, we make use of a Feynman parameter obtaining I 4 = 1 2 I sp ( 1 ǫ ) L 2 ψ(7 4 ) Γ(ǫL ) Γ (ǫ L2 ) 1 0 dy y 3 4 (1 y) 1 2 ǫ L 1 1 [ ] ǫl. dz yz(1 yz)p 2 + y(1 y)p 2 3 2yz(1 y)p 3.P (24) 0 There is a subtlety that needs to be analyzed with care. Here we proceed in complete analogy to the pure φ 4 theory [17]. The integral over y is singular at y = 1 when ǫ L = 0. We add and subtract the value of the integrand in the last integral at the point y = 1 [ ] yz(1 yz)p 2 + y(1 y)p 2 3 2yz(1 y)p ǫl 3.P = [z(1 z)p 2 ] ǫ L { [yz(1 yz)p 2 + y(1 y)p 2 3 ǫ L ln 2yz(1 y)p } 3.P] + O(ǫ 2 z(1 z)p 2 L ). (25) As y 1 the logarithm is zero when ǫ L = 0, leading to a well defined result for the integral over y. The coefficient of the integral is proportional to 1 ǫ L, which cancels the ǫ L in front of the logarithm. The logarithm contributes only to the order ǫ 0 L and can be neglected. We then find I 4 = 1 [ ] i2 ǫ 2ǫ 2 L. (26) L Finally, let us describe the computation of the three-loop integral I 5. At zero external momenta along the competition axis, this integral reads: I 5 = d d 1 q 1 dk 1 (q k 4 1) d d 1 q 2 dk 2 (q k 4 2)((q 1 + q 2 p) 2 + (k 1 + k 2 ) 4 ) 9

10 d d 1 q 3 dk 3 (q k 4 3) ((q 1 + q 3 p) 2 + (k 1 + k 3 ) 4 ). (27) The integral is symmetric in q 2 q 3, k 2 k 3. As the loop momenta are dummy variables, the two internal bubbles are really the same. That is why we do not need more than one relation among the loop momenta in the external and internal bubbles, even though this is a three-loop diagram (with two internal bubbles). As a matter of fact, we can solve the two integrals independently in the following way. In the internal bubble q 3, k 3 we set k 1 = 2k 3, as well as k 1 = 2k 2 over the other internal bubble q 2, k 2. Apparently we have two different relations among the loop momenta, but one of them is artificial. This means that the two internal bubbles give the same contribution, i.e. the integration over the internal bubbles is proportional to I 2 sp. Thus I 5 = I 2 sp d d 1 q 1 dk 1 (q k 4 1)[(q 1 + p) 2 ] ǫ L. (28) We integrate first over k 1 and proceed analogously as before, to find the following result: I 5 = 4 [ ( 1 + 2i 21ǫ ) ] ǫ L. (29) L 7 With the integrals calculated in this way, we are able to find out the exponents as is going to be shown in the next section. III. CRITICAL EXPONENTS To compute the critical exponents associated to the ferromagnetic planes at the Lifshitz critical point, one may use the standard field-theoretic approach [17]. This is possible since no new renormalization constants need to be introduced in this case 1. From the results for I 3, Eq. (20), and I 5, Eq. (29), we note that these integrals do not have the same 1 This is not valid in the calculation of the critical exponents along the competition axis. 10

11 leading singularities as in pure φ 4 theory. As an approximation, we introduce a weight factor for the two point vertex function, in order to identify the leading singularities with the ones appearing in the pure φ 4 field theory. This factor is 7 8 for the integrals above. This approximation is suitable when one considers the generalization for the m-fold case with m 8. In this way, we have a smooth transition from the Isinglike case (m = 0) to the general Lifshitz anisotropic critical behavior (m 8) [19]. The bare and renormalized quantities are related through φ 0 = Z 1/2 φ φ and u 0 = Z 2 φ Z u u, where φ 0 and λ 0 κ ǫ L u 0 are the bare parameters in Eq. (1). As usual, Z φ 1+δ φ and Z u 1+δ u are the wave-function and coupling constant renormalization constants, respectively. In addition, we introduce the composite field renormalization constant Z φ 2, and also Z φ 2 = Z φ 2 Z φ 1 + δ φ 2. We have β u = ǫ ( ln u ) 0 L u γ φ = β u ln Z φ u γ φ 2 = β u ln Z φ 2 u The fixed point u is given by the solution of the equation β u (u ) = 0, and the critical exponents by the relations η L2 = γ φ (u ) and ν 1 L2 = 2 η L2 γ 2 φ(u ). In case the order parameter has a O(N) symmetry, the formulas relating the integrals computed in section 2 and the renormalization constants defined above are: δ φ = B 2 u 2 I 3 + ( 2B 3 I sp I 3 B 3 I 5) u 3 + O(u 4 ) (30) δ u = 3A 1 u I sp + 3 ( 6A 2 1 I2 sp A(1) 2 I 2 sp 2A(2) 2 I 4 ) u 2 + O(u 3 ) (31) δ φ 2 = C 1 u I sp + (C 2 I 2 sp C 1 I 4 )u 2 + O(u 3 ) where A 1 = (N +8)/18, A (1) 2 = (N 2 +6N +20)/108, A (2) 2 = (5N +22)/54, B 2 = (N +2)/18, B 3 = (N + 2)(N + 8)/108, C 1 = (N + 2)/6, and C 2 = (N + 2)(N + 8)/36. With this information we compute the fixed point at two-loop level. We expand the dimensionless bare coupling constant u 0 in terms of the renormalized coupling u and the 11

12 ǫ L parameter. Using Eqs. (30) and (31), we find the fixed point for the O(N) symmetric theory in the following form: u = 6 { [( ) ]} 4(5N + 22) 8 + N ǫ (2 + N) L 1 + ǫ L 1 i (8 + N) 2 2 (8 + N) 2. (32) Therefore, the exponents η L2 and ν L2 are given by: η L2 = 1 2 ǫ2 L 2 + N (8 + N) 2 (33) + ǫ 3 L [( (2 + N) 4(5N + 22) 1 ) i (8 + N) 2 (8 + N) ] (2 + N) 2 7 (8 + N) 2. (34) ν L2 = ǫ L 2 + N 8 + N (35) + 1 [ ] (2 + N) 2(14N + 40) i 8 (8 + N) 3 2 2(2 + N) + (8 + N)(3 + N) ǫ 2 L. (36) As long as we are not treating the isotropic case, we assume that the scaling laws are valid to all orders in perturbation theory. Now using Fisher s law γ L = ν L2 (2 η L2 ), the exponent γ L can be written as: γ L = ǫ L 2 + N 8 + N (37) + 1 [ ] (2 + N) N + N i 4 (8 + N) 3 2 (20 + 7N) ǫ 2 L. (38) Previous results in the literature only yielded the exponent η L2 at O(ǫ 2 L ) and the exponent ν L2 at O(ǫ L ). For this uniaxial case, our results express the critical exponents in a higher order in ǫ L compared to earlier investigations. A detailed comparison with other methods is provided in the next section. 12

13 IV. DISCUSSION First of all, our result for the exponent η L2 is in agreement with Mukamel s calculation [18] at O(ǫ 2 L). Therefore, our method is equivalent to integrating over the momentum shell as was done in ref. [18] using the Landau-Ginzburg-Wilson Hamiltonian approach. For the ANNNI model, γ L = 1.4 ± 0.06 is the Monte Carlo output [11], whereas the best estimates from the high-temperature series is γ L = 1.62 ± 0.12 [15]. Our two-loop calculation (N = 1) in three dimensions yields γ L = This agrees (within the error bar) with the Monte Carlo result, the difference being of order Therefore, we consider that the agreement between the numerical (Monte Carlo) and analytical (ǫ L -expansion) results is remarkable for d = 3, despite the ǫ L parameter is 1.5 (not a small number). A comparison with the Ising model is in order. For the exponent γ in three dimensions, the ǫ-expansion gives a contribution of at O(ǫ) and at O(ǫ 2 ) [17]. The O(ǫ) contributes with 13% and the order O(ǫ 2 ) with 6% to the value of γ (1.24), respectively. For the uniaxial Lifshitz case, the contributions for the γ L index are 0.25 (17%) and (14%). Thus, even though the ǫ L parameter is not small, the ǫ L -expansion seems to be reliable. The numerical value obtained here for the correlation length exponent is ν L2 = The experimental value of this critical index is still lacking. We hope our result sheds some light towards its experimental determination (using neutron scattering measurements, for example). The extension of the present method to the calculation of critical exponents for the m-fold (m 8) case reduces to the Ising-like case when m = 0 and to the present case when m = 1 [19]. In principle one can compute corrections at O(ǫ 3 L) for the exponent γ L. This should be supplemented by resummation techniques. We would expect this based on the analogy with the Ising model, where this resummation is needed only at O(ǫ 3 ). This expectation is supported by the agreement of our O(ǫ 2 L ) calculation with the two numerical results given, especially with the Monte Carlo simulations outcome. An interesting open question is the calculation of the critical exponents ν L4 and η L4 using the ǫ L -expansion at two-loop level. The approach followed here is not suitable to computing 13

14 these critical exponents (parallel to the competition axis), since our choice of the symmetry point prevents a proper treatment in this direction. The possibility of devising another symmetry point to deal with these exponents seems to be feasible, and will be reported elsewhere. Nevertheless, our method can be used to test the consistency of the ratio θ ν L4 /ν L2 = 1/2 (which is known to be true at O(ǫ L ), where θ is the anisotropy exponent) at O(ǫ 2 L ). Recently, a renormalization group calculation for an m-fold Lifshitz point (m 1) was developed in [20]. There, it was found that θ 1/2 at two-loop level for the cases m = 2, 6. In the present uniaxial case we can use Josephson law involving the exponents ν L4, ν L2 and α L to see whether this relation is valid at two-loop order. One should get the exponent α L consistent with either the experimental value [21], or the high-temperature series result [15]. The relation is not valid at two-loop level, for one obtains α L < 0 in this way. This corroborates the above mentioned studies for m 1. In a very recent paper, some authors [22] studied a field-theoretic approach which heavily relies on coordinate space calculations. Although having recovered the results of reference [20] for the cases m = 2, 6 analytically, they only could get the exponents numerically for the m = 1 case. It is worth emphasizing that they computed the fixed point only at one-loop order (see equation (4.40) in the mentioned paper). In conclusion, we have found a way to perform two- and three-loop integrals for the uniaxial Lifshitz point, needed to calculate universal properties at directions perpendicular to the competition axis. The constraint in the loop momenta at the competition direction is the key ingredient to carry out the calculations. The particular value of α(= 2) is singled out when we demand that we should have an answer in terms of Gamma functions solely, to proceed the ǫ L -expansion. In this approximation, the loop momenta along the competition axis are not conserved when one uses this constraint. However the momenta along the (d 1) directions are conserved. Momentum non-conservation along the competing direction does not seem to affect the critical exponents considered here in a significant way, as indicated by the comparison of our study with the available numerical data for the d = 3 case. 14

15 It might be interesting to study general field theories including higher order derivative terms in this new framework. Topics including the extension of the present method to the region out of the Lifshitz point (δ 0 0) and two-loop calculations using a modified symmetry point along the competition axis are in development. Acknowledgments The authors acknowledge partial support from FAPESP, grant numbers 00/ (LCA), 98/ and 00/ (MML). LCA would like to thank Marcelo Gomes and A. J. da Silva for useful discussions. MML would like to thank Warren Siegel, Peter van Nieuwenhuizen, Victor O. Rivelles and Nathan Berkovits for useful discussions. He also acknowledges kind hospitality at C. N. Yang Institute for Theoretical Physics (SUNYSB) where this work has started. The authors also thank E. Abdalla for kind hospitality at the Departamento de Física Matemática da Universidade de São Paulo. 15

16 REFERENCES [1] Hornreich R M, Luban M and Shtrikman S 1975 Phys. Rev. Lett [2] Hornreich R M 1980 Journ. Magn. Magn. Mat [3] Hayden S M et al Phys. Rev. Lett [4] Keimer B et al Phys. Rev. Lett [5] Sachdev S and Ye J 1992 Phys. Rev. Lett [6] Fredrickson G H and Milner S T 1991 Phys. Rev. Lett [7] Bates F S et al 1995 Phys. Rev. Lett Bates F S et al 1997 ibid [8] Netz P R and Schick M 1996 Phys. Rev. Lett [9] Rananavare S B, Pisipati V G K M and Wong E W 1994 Phys. Rev. Lett [10] Zalar B et al 1998 Phys. Rev. Lett [11] Selke W 1988 Phys. Rep Selke W 1998 Phase Transitions and Critical Phenomena, edited by C. Domb and J. Lebowitz (Academic Press, London), vol.15 [12] Leite M M 2000 Phys. Rev. B [13] Yokoi C S O, Coutinho-Filho M D and Salinas S R 1981 Phys. Rev. B Yokoi C S O, Coutinho-Filho M D and Salinas S R 1984 ibid [14] Shapira Y 1982 J. Appl. Phys [15] Mo Z and Ferer M 1991 Phys. Rev. B [16] Henkel M 1997 Phys. Rev. Lett [17] Amit D J 1984 Field Theory, the Renormalization Group and Critical Phenomena 16

17 (World Scientific, Singapore) [18] Mukamel D 1979 J. Phys. A 10 L249 [19] de Albuquerque L C and Leite M M work in preparation [20] Mergulhão Jr C and Carneiro C E I 1998 Phys. Rev. B Mergulhão Jr C and Carneiro C E I 1999 ibid [21] Bindilatti V, Becerra C C and Oliveira N 1989 Phys. Rev. B [22] Diehl H W and Shpot M 2000 Phys. Rev. B

18 Figure captions Figure 1. Feynman graphs corresponding to the integrals: (a) I sp ; (b) I 3 ; (c) I 4 ; (d) I 5. The broken lines in the graphs (b), (c), and (d) define the internal bubbles in each case. The momenta q i, k i refer to the loop momenta in the quadratic and quartic directions, respectively. The labels p i, k i denote the external momenta in the quadratic and quartic directions, respectively. 18

19 q,k q+p,k+k a

20 q1,k1 q2,k2 q1+q2+p,k1+k2+k b

21 q1,k1 q2,k2 q2 q1 p3,k2 k1 k3 q1 P,k1 K c

22 q1,k1 q2,k2 q3,k3 q1+q2 p,k1+k2 k d q1+q3 p,k1+k3 k