PHYSICAL REVIEW B VOLUME 45, NUMBER 1 1 JANUARY 1992-I

Dynamics of the normal to vortex-glass transition: Mean-field theory and fluctuations

Alan T. Dorsey
Department of Physics, University of Virginia, McCormick Road, Charlottesville, Virginia 2290l

Ming Huang
Laboratory of Atomic and Solid State Physics. Cornell University, Ithaca, IVew York l4853 250I-

Matthew P. A. Fisher
IBM Research Division, Thomas J. Watson Research Center, P. o. Box 218, Yorktown Heights, New York 10598
(Received 6 June 199I)
A mean-field theory is developed for the recently proposed normal to superconducting vortex-glass
transition. Using techniques developed to study the critical dynamics of spin glasses, we calculate the
mean-field vortex-glass phase boundary Ts(H), and find that the dynamic critical exponent z=4 in
mean-field theory. In addition, we find that the fluctuation conductivity in the vicinity of the transi-
tion has the form cr (t- '+ i, in agreement with recent scaling theories of the transition. The exten-
—
sion of these results beyond the mean-field regime is also discussed.

Understanding the dynamic properties of the mixed critical exponent using renormalization-group methods.
state in type-II superconductors is theoretically challeng- Our work draws heavily on studies of the critical dynam-
ing due to the competition between collective intervortex ics of spin glasses.
interactions and vortex pinning. As discussed by Larkin The Ginzburg-Landau free-energy functional for a su-
and Qvchinnikov, pinning destroys the translational perconductor in an external magnetic field H Vx A is
long-range order of the Abrikosov flux lattice. Recently,
one of us (M. P.A. F.) argued that pinning and collective 2
dr [V —t'(2e/6 c )Al '-+ [a+ a i (r ) ] [ lit] '-
effects conspire to produce a vortex-glass phase at suf- 2m
( ttt (

ficiently low temperatures. In this phase the vortices

are frozen into an equilibrium configuration characterized
by a type of "spin-glass" order, rather than the transla-
tional long-range order of the flux lattice. As a result,
the linear resistance RL — =limt pV/I is identically zero in
this phase, in contradistinction to the Anderson-Kim mod-
el of flux creep, which predicts that RL&0 throughout
the entire mixed state. Tentative experimental evidence
for the vortex-glass phase in the high-temperature super-
conductor Ya-Ba-Cu-Q has been given by Koch et al. ,
and Gammel, Schneemeyer, and Bishop, who have used a
recently developed scaling theory of the conductivity to
interpret the nonlinear I-V characteristics in terms of the
vortex-glass model. Theoretical evidence for the transi-
tion consists of the existence of a vortex-glass phase in a
two-dimensional toy model of a vortex glass, ' and nu-
merical simulations on a simplified three dimensional
model of a vortex glass. "
In this paper we consider a mean-field theory for the
dynamics of the normal to superconducting vortex-glass
transition. This allows us to calculate the mean-field
phase boundary for a realistic model of a vortex glass in
+ I ltrl h ilt by
where m is the mass of a Cooper pair (assumed to be iso-
tropic), h and h* are conjugate fields which are intro-
duced to generate response and correlation functions, and
where the terms for the magnetic-field energy have been
dropped. For simplicity we ignore fluctuations in the elec-
tromagnetic field, and we are thus modeling an extreme
type-I I superconductor (with an infinite penetration
length). The quenched disorder has been incorporated by
defining a random T,. [a=ap(T/Tp —I)], which is as-
sumed to have Gaussian white-noise correlations, so that
ai(r) =0, ai(r)ai(r') =4kb(r —r'), where the overbar
denotes an ensemble average over disorder. This spatial
variation in T, simulates vortex pinning since regions of
the sample which havebitt*(r,
a locally lower T„, and, conse-
quently, a higher free energy, will tend to attract the nor-
mal cores of the vortices. %'e will assume relaxational dy-
"
namics for the nonconserved
~),
order parameter (model

three dimensions. In addition, we determine the mean-

field static and dynamic critical exponents for the transi-
tion. Gaussian fluctuations about the mean-field theory
lead to a linear conductivity which diverges at the vortex-
rp 'ti, itt(r, t) = —, BS
t )
+I;(r, t), (2a)

glass phase boundary, in agreement with expectations (P(r, t)g(r, t )) =2knTI p 'b'(r —r')b(t —t'), (2b)
based on the scaling theory. Finally, we construct an
eA'ective field theory for the vortex-glass order-parameter where the angular brackets denote a noise average. Equa-
fields, which allows for the calculation of the dynamic tions (I) and (2) define our model. The response and

523 1992 The American Physical Society

 ALAN T. DORSEY, MING HUANG, AND MAL IHEW P. A. FISHER

correlation functions for the order parameter y are troduce the vortex-glass propagators
8(lr(r, t)&
(r, t )
8h
(3) G '
(k, to, to') =„d(r —r')
C(r, t;r', t') =(y(r, t)y (r', t')). x eik (r —
. r')
R(r, r';to) R*(r, r';to'), (5)
These are the response and correlation functions for a par-
ticular realization of the disorder; the disorder averaged G' (k, to, co') = d(r —r')
response and correlation functions will be denoted by R
and C. We also need to define an appropriate order pa- xe'" ' ' C(r, r';to)C*(r, r';to').
rameter for the vortex-glass phase; this is the Edwards-
Anderson (EA) order parameter, defined by q EA Using the fluctuation-dissipation theorem, C(r, r';to)
)(y(r))~~. In order to study spatial and temporal =2k&T ImR(r, r', to)/to, we may express G ~ in terms of
fluctuations, following Sompolinsky and Zippelius we in- G (I ).

=,
I

(ktt T)
'
G (k, co, to') [G '
(k, to, —to')+G '
(k, —co, to') —Gt I
(k, co, co') —G (l ) (k, —to, —to')l.

We also introduce a dynamic vortex-glass susceptibility,

l

tibility. "
First, we rewrite the equation of motion, Eq.
gyo(k, to) (kttT) G ' (k, to, to). The static vortex-glass (2), as a functional integral, and introduce a set of auxili-
susceptibility, gyo(k, 0), is the Fourier transform of the ary fields to facilitate the calculation of the response and
equilibrium vortex-glass correlation function Gyo(r correlation functions. This functional is then averaged
—r') ((lit(r)y (r'))( . This correlation function will
approach a nonzero constant as r — r'( in the~
~
over the Gaussian disorder, thereby generating a spatially
uniform but temporally nonlocal quartic interaction. '
vortex-glass phase, and in the vortex-fluid phase it will fall We decouple the disorder-induced quartic term by intro-
oA' exponentially with the vortex-glass correlation length, ducing vortex-glass fields Q, s, as in Sompolinsky and Zip-
(yo. As a result, the long wavelength vortex-glass sus- pelius, and we treat the quartic interaction term y~ us- ~

ceptibility, gyo(0, 0), should diverge at the vortex-glass ing a self-consistent Hartree approximation. Evaluating
transition. The propagator G will be important in our the resulting functional by the saddle-point method leads
discussion of the fluctuation conductivity as the vortex- to the following self-consistent equations for the disorder-
glass phase boundary is approached from above (see averaged order-parameter response and correlation func-
below). tions (for Tg): T)
We first sketch the derivation of the vortex-glass suscep-
I

II p to hR(r, r;to) — V i —
A +a + ktt TbR(r, r;0) R(r, r';to) =8(r —r'), (8)
2m hc

C(r, r';co) =2kttTI p 'J dr~ R (r, r~, to)R(r', r~, to)+h„dr~ R*(r,r~, to)R(r', r~, to)C(r~, r~, to) .
I

We note that (I) these equations are equivalent to the approach. If desired, this approach may be systematized
"ladder summation" approximation employed by Ma and into a controlled large N expansion (N y fields), with the
Rudnick' to study the zero-field random T„model and saddle-point solution as the exact N solution and the =~
(2) in the absence of disorder (6=0) these equations Gaussian fluctuations giving O(l/N) corrections.
reduce to the Hartree approximation for a superconductor The phase boundary. We first consider the solution of
in a magnetic field, which has been used by several au- the saddle-point equations for k =0, in order to deter- =e
thors to study the transport properties' of a superconduc- mine the mean-field phase boundary. First, note from
tor in a magnetic field in the absence of pinning. The Eqs. (10) and (11) that the vortex-glass susceptibility
vortex-glass propagator G ' may be calculated in a simi- gyo(0, 0) =G ' (0, 0, 0) diverges when h, I(0, 0, 0) = l.
lar fashion, by summing a ladder of disorder-induced ver- Next, we set co=0 in the self-consistent equation for the
tex corrections, which is equivalent to keeping Gaussian response function, Eq. (8), and solve the resulting equa-
fluctuations about the saddle point: tion by expanding the response function in a basis consist-
ing of Landau levels in the x-y plane and plane waves
G ' (k, to, to') =I(k, to, to') [1 —Al(k, to, to')] (10) along the z axis. The result is
where
—4) Pl COO m
1(k, to, to') =g d(r —r')e'" a =a+(kgTb
~ I

2~A
x R(r, r';to)R*(r, r';to') . N

Equations (8)-(11) are the main results of our mean-field

x g [a+@top(n+
n=0
'
—, )I (12)
 DYNAMICS OF THE NORMAL TO VORTEX-GLASS. . . 525

where N is a cutoff, a is the renormalized value of a, and Eq. (11) for small k, co, and t = (T
— T— g )/Tg, to obtain the
cop = 2eH/me. Stability considerations require that vortex-glass susceptibility [for T & Ts(H)l
k&Tb & h, . The vortex-glass susceptibility will diverge at
gyo(k, co) =A[k~+y'k, '+&yG' i—
co/I (co)]
'
(15)
a certain value ag of a given by
' l/2
')] ''
1
where

2 2zQ 2Q
g
~~p
[a +hco (n+ — (13)
co/I (co) = —
i— &yG [1
—(1 /0)
i co— '
'],
We must solve Eqs. (12) and (13) simultaneously to where A is a constant, y is an anisotropy parameter,
determine Tg(H). This is rather difficult, in general; how- gyG ix: t is the vortex-glass correlation length, and
ever, in the limit of high magnetic fields or weak disorder 0 lL'(yG. By a suitable rescaling of the momenta, we see
it can be shown that the solution is dominated by the that the vortex-glass transition is isotropic The. refore,
lowest Landau level (n=0). "
Then by evaluating Eq. near the vortex-glass transition, the susceptibility assumes
(12) at T=Tg(H), we may eliminate ag from Eqs. (12) the scaling form,
and (13) to obtain the following expression for Tg (H) [re-
call that a =ap(T/Tp —I )]: gyo(k, co) =A/go "f(k(yo, co/0), (i 7)
where (yo-1T Tyo(H)1 ", with v= —, rt 0, and ',
Tg H
= T 2(H)+3Tp(bh) 0 cL (ycjt, with z =4. These are the same mean-field criti-
1+ (2ke Tpb/d ) (bh ) cal exponents which have previously obtained for the criti-
where T„2(H) =Tp(1 —hcop/2ap) is the mean-field Abri- cal dynamics of the Ising spin glass. Using Eq. (7), we
kosov flux lattice transition temperature. We have in- see that the propagator G also has a scaling form,
troduced the dimensionless parameters h =H/H„2(0), 0 co'/0), (is)
G (k, co, co') Ag g (kgyG, co/0,
b=(m gp/2tth )6, with H, 2(0) =f2/2eg (0) the zero-
temperature critical field and ((0) = lti/(2map) 't the where g (k, co, co') is a scaling function.
zero-temperature coherence length. Equation (14) is The fluctuation conductivity Wha. t measurement will
correct in the limit 8 t ((h ' . Under some cir- " probe the vortex-glass correlations discussed above?
cumstances we find that T„2 —Ts cx:h reminiscent the t, Since the equilibrium vortex-glass correlation function in-
vortex-glass phase boundary determined by Koch et al. , volves a disorder average of four order-parameter fields
but for other choices of the parameters the phase bound- lie(r), one might expect that the vortex-glass correlations
ary has a curvature which is in disagreement with the ex- could be observed by measuring a suitable four-point
periments (i.e., Tg & T, 2). function. One experimentally accessible four-point func-
Mean field c-ritical exponents We now .turn to the crit- tion is the conductivity; one implication of the vortex-glass
ical dynamics in mean-field theory, in order to determine instability is that the conductivity diverges at Tyo(H).
the structure of the dynamic vortex-glass susceptibility. To show this, we first relate the real part of the conduc-
Since we are primarily interested in the long-wavelength, tivity to the current-current correlation function via the
low-frequency response near the transition, we can expand Kubo formula:
I

„a', ( c)o=
4
dt 4 drl dr2e '
'(j„(rl, t)j,(r2, 0))
2kgTV

kttT he + dco'
drl(tll„—82„)[ —II.(rl, r2, co+, co —)+II„(rl,r2, co+, —co )
2 mi 4 2x coyco- 4

+II (rl r2 co+ co —) Ii (rl r2 co+ co —)]12 I (i9)

=
where II(rl, r2, col, co2) is the vector vertex function, co+ =co'+ co/2, Vis the system volume, and tl„— (2e/h)A„—. To cl„i
evaluate the vertex function we use the ladder approximation, and keep only the noncrossing impurity ladders. In this re-
gard, the calculation of the fluctuation conductivity is similar in spirit to the calculation of the conductivity for nonin-
teracting electrons in a random potential. ' The ladder approximation leads to the following integral equation for the
vertex function:

II,.(r, r';col, co2) = drl(8l, —82, )R(r, rl, col)R*(r', r2', col)12=i+5 drl R(r, rl, col)R*(r', rl, co2)II, (rl, rl col co2) .
mi 4
(20)
To solve Eq. (20) we first set r'=r; the kernel in the resulting integral equation is only a function and the in- of r —rl,
tegral equation can be solved using Fourier transforms. The resulting expression for the vertex function is then substitut-
ed into the conductivity, Eq. (19). Near the vortex-glass transition temperature the conductivity simplifies, and we find

dao' d' k
0'lI„(co) =Bp~ G (k, co+, co —) =gyG Spy(copy@), (2i)
2n & (2n)'t
 ALAN T. DORSEY, MING HUANG, AND MATTHE%' P. A. FISHER
where the second Iine is obtained by using the scaling
form of 6 in Eq. (18), and an appropriate rescaling of
the momentum and frequency variables. In Eq. (21) 8„„
is a (magnetic-field dependent) constant, and S„'„(x) is a
scaling function. Thus, the linear conductivity assumes
the scaling form recently proposed by Fisher, Fisher, and
Huse. At the transition, the scaling function is of the
form S (x) -x +' t'. In addition, causality dictates
that at the transition the real and imaginary parts be re-
lated by o "(ta)/o'(ta) tan[tr(2 —d+z)/2z], so that the
phase angle between the real and imaginary parts of the
conductivity is universal. '6 We have explicitly confirmed
these expectations within our saddle-point approximation.
Recent measurements of the ac impedance of Y-Ba-Cu-0
'
thin films appear to support these predictions. Note that
in the absence of any pinning (d, 0), the conductivity
does not diverge due to flux flow. '
Critical fluctuations Final. ly, we study the Iluctuations
about the saddle-point solution, in order to calculate the
corrections to our saddle-point approximation. By ex-
panding the functional integral about its saddle point, we
find that the first nonlinear term in the eff'ective theory is
of order Q3. Power counting arguments then indicate that
d=6 is the upper critical dimension for the transition,
which is the same as for conventional spin glasses.
studying the critical dynamics for d & 6 in an e 6 d ex-
— By
pansion, we find that the vortex-glass kinetic coe%cient
is not renormalized to first order in e, in agreement with
the results of Zippelius. Therefore van Hove scaling,
z =2(2 —ri), is correct to O(e); however, this relationship
may break down at higher order in e.
'
A replica calcula-
'A. I. Larkin and Yu. N. Ovchinnikov, J. Low Temp. Phys. 34,
409 (1979).
zM. P. A. Fisher, Phys. Rev. Lett. 62, 1415 (1989).
D. S. Fisher, M. P. A. Fisher, and D. A. Huse, Phys. Rev. B 43,
130 (1991).
4For a review of spin glasses, see K. Binder and A. P. Young,
Rev. Mod. Phys. 5$, 801 (1986).
~P. %. Anderson and Y. B. Kim, Rev. Mod. Phys. 36, 39
(1964).
~R. H. Koch, V. Foglietti, %. J. Gallagher, G. Koren, A. Gupta,
and M. P. A. Fisher, Phys. Rev. Lett. 63, 1511 (1989); R. H.
Koch, V. Foglietti, and M. P. A. Fisher, Phys. Rev. Lett. 64,
2586 (1990).
7P. L. Gammel, L. F. Schneemeyer, and D. J. Bishop, Phys. Rev.
Lett. 66, 953 (1991).
"D. A. Huse and H. S. Seung, Phys. Rev. B 42, 1059 (1990); J.
D. Reger, T. A. Tokuyasu, A. P. Young, and M. P. A. Fisher,
ibid 44, 7147 (1991); M. . J. P. Gittgras (unpublished); K. H.
Lee and D. Stroud, Phys. Rev. B 44, 9780 (1991).
H. Sompolinsky and A. Zippelius, Phys. Rev. B 25, 6860
(1982); Phys. Rev. Lett. 50, 1297 (1983); A. Zippelius, Phys.
Rev. B 29, 2717 (1984).
' P. C. Hohenberg and B. I. Halperin, Rev. Mod. Phys. 49, 435
(1977).
' 'Details of the calculation will be provided in a future publica-
tion; A. T. Dorsey and M. P. A. Fisher (unpublished).
'zC. De Dominicis, Phys. Rev. B 1$, 4913 (1978).
'3S. k. Ma and J. Rudnick, Phys. Rev. Lett. 40, 589 (1978).
tion' gives ri= — e/6+O(e ), indicating a dynamic ex-
ponent z = 5 in three dimensions, although the extrapola-
tion to a=3 should be only viewed as a guide to the mag-
nitude of z. The precise value of z in d =3 is best deter-
mined by detailed numerical simulation.
To summarize, we have introduced a random T, model
to study the effects of vortex pinning in the mixed state of
type-II superconductors. We have shown that a mean-
field approximation which has been employed in the study
of spin glasses causes an appropriately defined vortex-
glass susceptibility to diverge at the vortex-glass phase
boundary Tz(H). The mean-field critical exponents are
the same as for Ising spin glasses, v= and z =4. We
&
have also calculated the electrical conductivity for
T& Tz(H), and have shown that it diverges with an ex-
ponent which is in agreement with a recently developed
scaling theory of the conductivity. This is in contrast
with the conductivity in the absence of any vortex pinning,
'
which is always finite due to flux flow. Finally, in the
critical regime we find that the dynamic critical exponent
z 2(2 —t)), in agreement with the results of Zippelius
for the Ising spin glass.
It is a pleasure to acknowledge helpful conversations
with D. A. Huse and S. Ullah. A. T.D. would like to ac-
knowledge support from IBM during the initial stages of
this work at Cornell University, and support from NSF
Grant No. DMR 89-14051 at the University of Virginia,
and M. H. acknowledges support from NSF Grant No.
NMR 88-15685.
The ladder approximation used in this paper incorrectly pre-
dicts the existence of a spin-glass phase for the zero-field ran-
dom T,. model, as shown by D. Sherrington, Phys. Rev. B 22,
5553 (1980). Here, however, the external magnetic field
modulates the order parameter and provides a source of frus-
tration which is absent in the zero-field case. This fact, along
with the existing numerical evidence for a vortex-glass transi-
tion (see Ref. 8), would indicate that the ladder approxima-
tion is at least qualitatively correct for the vortex-glass transi-
tion.
'4R. Ikeda, T. Ohmi, and T. Tsuneto, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 58, 1377
(1989); R. Ikeda, T. Ohmi, and T. Tsuneto (unpublished); S.
Ullah and A. T. Dorsey, Phys. Rev. Lett. 65, 2066 (1990); S.
Ullah and A. T. Dorsey, Phys. Rev. B 44, 262 (1991).
'~See, for instance, A. A. Abrikosov, L. P. Gorkov, and I. E.
Dzyaloshinski, Methods of Quantum Field Theory in Statist
ieai Physics (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Clilfs, NJ, 1963),
Sect. 39.
'6A. T. Dorsey, Phys. Rev. B 43, 7575 (1991).
' H. K. Olsson, R. H. Koch, W. Eidelloth, and R. P. Robertazzi,
Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 2661 (1991).
'"A breakdown of the van Hove result is suggested by Monte
Carlo simulations of the d =3 Ising spin glass by A. T. Ogiel-
ski, Phys. Rev. B 32, 7384 (1985); and D. A. Huse, ibid 40, .
304 (1989), which indicate that (2 —tt)/z =
0.39.
' A. Houghton and M. A. Moore, Phys. Rev. B 3&, 5045 (1988);
M. A. Moore and S. Murphy, ibid 42, 2687 (1990. ).