format: text

text:
# Phase diagram of disordered fermion model on two-dimensional square lattice with 𝜋-flux

## I Introduction

Anderson localization has attracted renewed interest since a plenty of new universality classes were discoverd . One is a system with particle-hole symmetry studied by Gade . Although generic disorderd systems in two dimensions are believed to be insulators , she showed that such a system has a random critical point at the band center. Typical examples studied so far are the random flux model  and the random-hopping model with $`\pi `$-flux . This class is often referred to as $`A`$III and $`BD`$I in the case with broken and unbroken time reversal symmetry, respactively, which corresponds to the chiral Gaussian unitary and chiral Gaussian orthogonal ensamble of the random matirx theory in the zero dimensional limit .

Other examples of new universality classes are found in disordered $`d`$-wave superconductors described by a mean-field Bogoliubov-deGennes Hamiltonian . Altland and Zirnbauer  classified them by two basic symmetries, i.e, spin-ratation and time-reversal into four kinds of classes. With (without) spin-rotation invariance, disordered $`d`$-wave superconductors belong to class $`C`$ and $`C`$I ($`D`$ and $`D`$III), respectively, in the case with broken and unbroken time-reversal symmetry. The beta function of the renormalization group for corresponding nonlinear sigma models in two dimensions tells that the classes $`C`$ and $`C`$I have localized states only, whereas the classes $`D`$ and $`D`$III may have delocalized states. What is particularly interesting is that some of them allow in the nonlinear sigma model description the topological term  which plays a crucial role, for example, in quantum Hall transitions , or the Wess-Zumino-Witten (WZW) term  which gives rise to a nontrivial strong-coupling fixed point. Therefore, disordered $`d`$-wave superconductors are expected to have quite rich phase diagram.

These developments can shed new light on the localization problems. For example, the question whether the density of states of the random flux model diverges had been a long-standing problem. Recognizing, however, that it belongs to the Gade’s class of $`A`$III type, Furusaki concluded that the DOS actually diverges. Another example is the disordered fermion model with $`\pi `$-flux we will revisit in this paper. This model was already studied by Fisher and Fradkin  in 1984. They showed that the effective field theory of the lattice model with random on-site potentials belongs to the universality class of O($`2n,2n`$)/O($`2n)\times `$O($`2n`$) nonlinear sigma model, concluding thereby that all states are localizaed.

A point here is that the continuum limit of the model includes random potentials specified by four independent coupling constants. Since Fisher and Fradkin studied only the case where all the coupling constants are equal, we can expect richer phase diagram in the whole space of the coupling constants. Actually, although the generic points in this space should flow into the localized phase mentioned-above, the model has enhanced symmetry in special cases and accordingly renormalization group flows in them are toward different fixed points. Another point in this paper is concerned with chiral symmetry. It was shown that generic disordered $`d`$-wave superconductors in class $`C`$I, described by Dirac fermions, yield no WZW term  although those Dirac fermions have chiral Sp($`n)\times `$Sp($`n`$) symmetry. The reason may be that chirality is not unique in the $`d`$-wave Dirac fermions, since the lattice fermion gives the species doubling in the continuum limit. Here, chiral symmetry means that there exist a matrix which anticommutes with a Hamiltonian.

In this paper, we investigate in detail the phase diagram of the disordered fermion model with $`\pi `$-flux by means of the fermionic replica method to clarify these points. We show that this model, described by double Dirac fermions, has three kinds of chiral symmetry in special cases. Interestingly, these different chiral symmetries lead to different universality classes. To be concrete, an effective action of the Green functions has Sp($`n)\times `$Sp($`n`$) symmetry in one of them and U$`(2n)`$ symmetry in the others, both of which are broken down to Sp($`n`$). It turns out that corresponding Goldstone mode can be described by Sp($`n)_2`$ WZW model and U($`n`$)/Sp($`n`$) nonlinear sigma model, respectively.

This paper is organized as follows. In the next section, we introduce a lattice model, which is the same as Fisher and Fradkin studied, and derive Dirac Hamiltonian in the continuum limit. Although the most generic model has only time-reversal invariance, symmetry is enhanced on three surfaces in the space of the coupling constants. We focus our attention to one of them with Sp($`n)\times `$Sp($`n`$) symmetry (others have U($`2n`$) symmetry) and give calcualtions in detail. Based on the continuum Hamiltonian, we derive an effective generating functional of ensemble-averaged Green functions in Sec. III. We show that Sp($`n)\times `$Sp($`n`$) symmetry is spontaneously broken down to Sp($`n`$). In Sec. IV, we derive an effective action for the Goldstone mode, resulting in Sp($`n)_2`$ WZW model (U($`2n`$)/Sp($`n`$) nonlinear sigma model for the others). In Sec. V, we present the phase diagram. In Sec. VI, we give a summary and concluding remarks.

## II Model

### A A lattice model and its continuum limit

We define a baisc lattice model on the square lattice in two dimensions. For convenience, we introduce similar notations used by Ludwig et al  in the following way.

The square lattice in two dimensions is divided into unit cells, each composed of a plaqutte enclosing four sites. A plaquette is labled by a set of integers $`j(j_x,j_y)`$ and four sites on it are numbered 1,2,3 and 4 counterclockwise, as illustrated in Fig. 1. With such a notational convention, a pure and disorder Hamiltonian denoted respectively as $`H_\mathrm{p}`$ and $`H_\mathrm{d}`$ are defined by

$`H_\mathrm{p}={\displaystyle \underset{j}{}}\left(c_{1j}^{}c_{2j}+c_{2j}^{}c_{3j}c_{3j}^{}c_{4j}+c_{4j}^{}c_{1j}+c_{2j}^{}c_{1j+\widehat{x}}c_{3j}^{}c_{4j+\widehat{x}}+c_{3j}^{}c_{2j+\widehat{y}}+c_{4j}^{}c_{1j+\widehat{y}}+\text{h.c.}\right),`$ (1)
$`H_\mathrm{d}={\displaystyle \underset{j}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{a=1}{\overset{4}{}}}v_{aj}^{}c_{aj}^{}c_{aj},`$ (2)
where $`\widehat{x}(1,0)`$, $`\widehat{y}(0,1)`$, and $`v_{aj}^{}`$ is random real number due to nonmagnetic impurities. Negative signs of the third and the sixth terms in $`H_\mathrm{p}`$ are due to $`\pi `$ flux imposed. Now let us construct an effective Hamiltonian near the band center in the case of weak disorder. To this end, we first derive the continuum limit of the pure model, and next we take into account the effects of disorder.

Fourier transformation $`c_{aj}=\frac{d^2k}{(2\pi )^2}e^{ikj}c_a(k)`$ for $`a=1,\mathrm{},4`$ leads to

$`H_\mathrm{p}={\displaystyle \frac{d^2k}{(2\pi )^2}c^{}(k)\left(\begin{array}{cccc}& 1+e^{ik_x}& & 1+e^{ik_y}\\ 1+e^{ik_x}& & 1+e^{ik_y}& \\ & 1+e^{ik_y}& & (1+e^{ik_x})\\ 1+e^{ik_y}& & (1+e^{ik_x})& \end{array}\right)c(k)},`$ (7)
where $`c^{}(k)(c_1^{}(k),\mathrm{},c_4^{}(k))`$. It is readily seen that the Hamiltonian gives zero-energies at $`k=(\pi ,\pi )`$. In the vicinity of them, the model can be effectively described by Dirac fermions. To see this, set $`k=(\pi ,\pi )+a_0p`$ with the lattice constant $`a_0`$, expand the Hamiltonian to the first order of $`p`$, and introduce a field operator in the continuum limit $`c_a((\pi ,\pi )+a_0p)a_0^{\frac{3}{2}}\psi _a(p)`$ for $`a=1,\mathrm{},4`$. Then we have

$`H_\mathrm{p}{\displaystyle \frac{d^2p}{(2\pi )^2}\psi ^{}(p)\left(\sigma _21p_x\sigma _1\sigma _2p_y\right)\psi (p)},`$ (8)
where $`\psi ^{}=(\psi _1^{},\psi _2^{},\psi _3^{},\psi _4^{})`$. Accordingly, effective Hamiltonian near the zero energy can be expressed by the following field theoretical Hamiltonian

$`H_\mathrm{p}={\displaystyle d^2x\psi ^{}(x)_\mathrm{p}\psi (x)},_\mathrm{p}\gamma _\mu i_\mu ,`$ (9)
where $`x=a_0j`$, $`\psi (x)\frac{d^2p}{(2\pi )^2}e^{ipx}\psi (p)`$, and $`\gamma `$ matrices are defined as $`\gamma _1=\sigma _21`$ and $`\gamma _2=\sigma _1\sigma _2`$.

By using the relation between the lattice operator $`c_{aj}`$ and the continuum field operator $`\psi _a(x)`$,

$`c_{aj}{\displaystyle \frac{d^2(a_0p)}{(2\pi )^2}e^{i(\pi ,\pi )j+ia_0pj}a_0^{\frac{3}{2}}\psi _a(p)}=a_0^{\frac{1}{2}}()^{\frac{x}{a_0}+\frac{y}{a_0}}\psi _a(x),`$ (10)
the continuum limit of the disorder potentials are readily derived; $`H_\mathrm{d}=d^2x_{a=1}^4\psi _a^{}(x)v_a^{}(x)\psi _a(x)`$, where $`v_a^{}(x)`$ is the slowly-varying part of $`v_{aj}^{}`$ defined as $`v_{aj}^{}a_0v_a^{}(x)`$. Taking suitable linear combination of $`v_a^{}`$, we can rewrite the random potentials as

$`H_\mathrm{d}={\displaystyle d^2x\psi ^{}(x)_\mathrm{d}\psi (x)},_\mathrm{d}={\displaystyle \underset{\nu =1}{\overset{4}{}}}v_\nu (x)\alpha _\nu ,`$ (11)
where $`\alpha _1=1\sigma _3,\alpha _2=\sigma _3\sigma _3,\alpha _3=\sigma _31`$ and $`\alpha _4=11`$. We assume that the four disorder potentials obey Gaussian probability distribution

$`P[v_\nu (x)]e^{\frac{2}{g_\nu }v_\nu ^2(x)},\text{for}\nu =1,\mathrm{},4.`$ (12)
It may be more convenient to switch into another basis via suitable rotation for $`\psi `$,

$`\gamma _1=\sigma _21,\gamma _2=\sigma _1\sigma _3,`$ (13)
$`\alpha _1=1\sigma _2,\alpha _2=\sigma _3\sigma _2,\alpha _3=\sigma _31,\alpha _4=11.`$ (14)
In what follows, we refer to the space where these matrices live as $`V`$. It is distinguished from the replica space $`W_\mathrm{r}`$ introduced momentarily. The total Hamiltonian we investigate in this paper is $`H=H_\mathrm{p}+H_\mathrm{d}`$ in Eqs. (9) and (11) with (14). It is noted that this is the same model as Fisher and Fradkin  studied in the case $`g_1=g_2=g_3=g_4`$. They showed that the effective field theory is O($`2n,2n`$)/O($`2n)\times `$O$`(2n`$) nonlinear sigma model for the bosonic replicas \[or Sp($`2n`$)/Sp($`n)\times `$Sp($`n`$) nonlinear sigma model for the fermionic ones\], concluding thereby that all states are localized. According to Zirnbauer, this class is referred to as $`A`$II . Although a slight relaxation of the condition $`g_1=g_2=g_3=g_4`$ still leads to the same universality class, several subspaces in $`(g_1,g_2,g_3,g_4)`$ have not only time-reversal symmetry but also additional enhanced symmetry specified below, and therefore belong to different universality classes.

### B Symmetries of the model

In this subsection, we examine symmetries of the present model, which plays a crucial role in the classification of the universality classes for disordered systems . First of all, the most general Hamiltonian has unbroken time-reversal symmetry. In the original basis, it is expressed by $`^\mathrm{t}=`$, whereas in the rotated basis where the Hamiltonian is described by the matrices in Eq. (14), it is expressed by

$`=𝒯^\mathrm{t}𝒯^1,𝒯=1\sigma _1.`$ (15)
If the model does not have any other symmetries, the universality class is $`A`$II and hence all states are localized. There are several subspaces in $`(g_1,g_2,g_3,g_4)`$, however, on which symmetry is enhanced. To be concrete, the Hamiltonian (9) has following symmetry

$`=𝒫_j𝒫_j^1,\text{with}\{\begin{array}{cc}𝒫_1=\sigma _3\sigma _3,& \text{for}g_3=g_4=0\\ 𝒫_2=\sigma _1\sigma _1,& \text{for}g_2=g_4=0\\ 𝒫_3=\sigma _1i\sigma _2,& \text{for}g_1=g_4=0\end{array}.`$ (19)
Recently, Hatsugai et.al  proposed the same model as Eq. (2) but with random hoppings instead of random on-site potential, which we will refer to as HWKM model. They have shown that such Hamiltonian has not only time-reversal symmetry but also another one often called chiral symmetry. It has been shown  that this symmetry is responsible for the existence of delocalized critical point at the zero energy. Chiral symmetry in this case is expressed as $`=𝒫_4𝒫_4^1`$ with $`𝒫_4=\sigma _31`$, similarly to Eq. (19), and the universality class is specified as $`BD`$I or in other words U$`(2n)/`$Sp($`n`$) (Gl(2$`n`$,R)/O(2$`n`$)) nonlinear sigma model for fermionic (bosonic) replica method. Considering these, it is easily guessed that the symmetry (19) also plays a crucial role in Anderson localization for the present model. In what follows, we refer to the symmetry in Eq. (19) also as chiral symmetry.

## III Replica method

It is so tedious to repeat similar calculations that we concentrate on the case $`𝒫_1`$, and hence we often denote $`𝒫_1`$ just as $`𝒫`$ for short. But with slight modification, any $`𝒫_j`$ can apply to the formulation. At the moment, the difference between $`𝒫_1`$ and the others is whether $`𝒫_j`$ commutes or anticommutes with $`𝒯`$ and whether it is real symmetric or antisymmetric. Surprisingly, this difference, which seems trivial at first glance, leads to a different universality class.

In order to study the trasport properties of the model near the zero energy, we need to compute the Green functions

$`G(\pm iϵ)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pm iϵ}}.`$ (20)
With the $`𝒫`$ symmetry, however, we do not need to distinguish the retarded and advanced Green functions, since they are related with each other via the relation ,

$`G(+iϵ)=𝒫{\displaystyle \frac{1}{iϵ+}}𝒫^1=𝒫G(iϵ)𝒫^1.`$ (21)
The Green function $`G(iϵ)`$ can be computed by a replicated functional

$`𝒵={\displaystyle 𝒟\psi 𝒟\psi ^{}e^{{\scriptscriptstyle d^2x}}},`$ (22)
with

$`={\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{n}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{j,k=1}{\overset{4}{}}}\psi _{j\alpha }^{}(iϵ1_4)_{jk}\psi _{k\alpha }\mathrm{tr}_{W_\mathrm{r}}\psi ^{}(iϵ1_4)\psi ,`$ (23)
where the subscript $`\alpha `$ denotes the $`n`$ species in the replica space $`W_\mathrm{r}`$, $`\psi _{\alpha j}^{}=\psi _{j\alpha }^{}`$, and the usual convention of the matrix product is applied to the fermion matrix field $`\psi _{j\alpha }^{}`$ and $`\psi _{j\alpha }`$. Although such a notational convention is not always necessary, it is quite convenient for us to save many complicated subscripts. It should be noted that the fields $`\psi _{\alpha j}^{}`$ and $`\psi _{\alpha j}`$ are completely independent Grassmann variables. Therefore, they obey in general different transformation laws.

### A Auxiliary space

Based on the Lagrangian (23), we will construct an effective theory of order parameter fields for the replicas by averaging-over disorder. In this process, it is quite important to fully incorporate the symmetries (15) and (19) in the space $`V`$. To this end, we introduce an auxiliary space to reflect these into the replicas, according to the method developed by Zirnbauer . Namely, we extend the replica space as $`W_\mathrm{r}WW_\mathrm{r}W_\mathrm{t}W_\mathrm{c}`$, where $`W_\mathrm{t}`$ $`(W_\mathrm{c})`$ stands for the space associtaed with time-reversal (chiral) symmetry. We then introduce a $`4n\times 4(4\times 4n)`$ matrix field $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}_{\alpha j}(\mathrm{\Psi }_{j\alpha })`$,

$`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}=\left(\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{~}{\chi }_+\\ \stackrel{~}{\chi }_{}\end{array}\right)\mathrm{\Psi }=(\chi _+,\chi _{});\stackrel{~}{\chi }_\pm =\stackrel{~}{\chi }𝒫_{},\chi _\pm =𝒫_\pm \chi ,`$ (26)
where

$`\stackrel{~}{\chi }={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}\left(\begin{array}{c}\psi ^{}\\ \psi ^\mathrm{t}𝒯\end{array}\right),\chi ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}(\psi ,𝒯\psi ^{}),`$ (29)
$`𝒫_\pm =\frac{1\pm 𝒫}{2}`$, and $`\psi ^\mathrm{t}`$ stands for the transpose of $`\psi `$. Since the components of these fields are not independent of each other, the fields are subject to the constraints

$`\begin{array}{ccc}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}=\gamma \mathrm{\Psi }^\mathrm{t}𝒯,\hfill & \mathrm{\Psi }=𝒯\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}^\mathrm{t}\gamma ^1,\hfill & \gamma =1_ni\sigma _21_2,\hfill \\ \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}=\pi \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}𝒫,\hfill & \mathrm{\Psi }=𝒫\mathrm{\Psi }\pi ,\hfill & \pi =1_n1_2\sigma _3.\hfill \end{array}`$ (32)
Note that the matrices $`\gamma `$ and $`\pi `$ are defined in $`W`$, whereas $`𝒯`$ and $`𝒫`$ are defined in $`V`$. We immediately find

$`\mathrm{\Psi }\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}=𝒯(\mathrm{\Psi }\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }})^\mathrm{t}𝒯^1,\mathrm{\Psi }\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}=𝒫(\mathrm{\Psi }\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }})𝒫^1.`$ (33)
These relations tell that the matrix $`\mathrm{\Psi }\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}`$ in $`V`$ has the same symmetries as $``$ has. It is also easy to find alternative relations for the matrix $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}\mathrm{\Psi }`$ in $`W`$,

$`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}\mathrm{\Psi }=\gamma (\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}\mathrm{\Psi })^\mathrm{t}\gamma ^1,\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}\mathrm{\Psi }=\pi (\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}\mathrm{\Psi })\pi ^1.`$ (34)
These relations actually specify the symmetry of the model, as we shall see lator.

Although the potentials $`\alpha _1`$ and $`\alpha _2`$ have time-reversal and chiral symmetries, the converse is not true: The symmetries (15) and (19) admit other potentials $`\beta _1=\sigma _11,\beta _2=\sigma _2\sigma _3,\beta _3=1\sigma _1`$ and $`\beta _4=\sigma _3\sigma _1`$. The reason why there are no beta matrices in Eq. (11) is that the basic lattice model (2) includes only on-site random potential. Namely, if we take all kinds of possible disorder for the lattice Hamiltonian including random (nearest neighbor and diagonal) hoppings as well as random on-site potentials, we have a continuum Hamiltonian with all kinds of possible disorder potentials specified by the relations (15) and (19). Such a model may be referred to as a model with maximum entropy. Since we are interested in the model with on-site random potentials, we have to remove these $`\beta `$ matrices. For this purpose, we take account of additional conditions

$`_\mathrm{d}=𝒯_\mathrm{d}𝒯,_\mathrm{d}=_\mathrm{d},\sigma _31.`$ (35)
It is readily seen that the potentials including beta matrices do not satisfy these relations. Let us then introduce the fields

$`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}\\ \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}\\ \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}𝒯\\ \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}𝒯\end{array}\right),\mathrm{\Psi }^{}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\mathrm{\Psi },\mathrm{\Psi },𝒯\mathrm{\Psi },𝒯\mathrm{\Psi }).`$ (40)
We refer to this extra space as $`W^{}`$. It is easy to verfy that the matrix $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{}`$ obeys the same relations that $`_\mathrm{d}`$ does in (35) and in (33) with extension $`\gamma \gamma 1_2\sigma _3`$ and $`\pi \pi 1_2\sigma _3`$, which means that the undesirable potentials are in fact excluded. By using these fields we can reexpress the Lagrangian (23) as

$`=\mathrm{tr}_W(iϵ\omega \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}\mathrm{\Psi }\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}i\overline{)}\mathrm{\Psi })\mathrm{tr}_{WW^{}}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{}_\mathrm{d}\mathrm{\Psi }^{},`$ (41)
where $`\omega 1_n1_2\sigma _1`$ and $`\overline{)}\gamma _\mu _\mu `$.

### B Effective Lagrangian averaged-over disorder

Now we are ready to ensemble-average the Lagrangian (41) over disorder. In this subsection, we assume $`g_1=g_2=g`$ for simplicity. More general case $`g_1g_2`$ is briefly discussed in Sec. III D. The probability distribution (12) can be expressed as

$`P[_\mathrm{d}]e^{\frac{1}{2g}\mathrm{tr}_V_\mathrm{d}^2}.`$ (42)
Therefore, the Lagrangian is converted into

$``$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2g}}\mathrm{tr}_V_\mathrm{d}^2+\mathrm{tr}_W(iϵ\omega \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}\mathrm{\Psi }\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}i\overline{)}\mathrm{\Psi })\mathrm{tr}_{WW^{}}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{}_\mathrm{d}\mathrm{\Psi }^{},`$ (43)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2g}}\mathrm{tr}_V\left(_\mathrm{d}+g\mathrm{\Psi }^{}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{}\right)^2{\displaystyle \frac{g}{2}}\mathrm{tr}_V(\mathrm{\Psi }^{}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{})^2+\mathrm{tr}_W(iϵ\omega \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}\mathrm{\Psi }\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}i\overline{)}\mathrm{\Psi }),`$ (44)
where we have used a relation $`\mathrm{tr}_{WW^{}}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{}_\mathrm{d}\mathrm{\Psi }^{}=\mathrm{tr}_V_\mathrm{d}\mathrm{\Psi }^{}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{}`$. It should be noted that integration over $`_\mathrm{d}`$ is readily performed, since the matrix $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{}`$ has completely the same symmetries as $`_\mathrm{d}`$ has. This is the reason why we have introduced several auxiliary spaces in the last subsection. By using $`\mathrm{tr}_V(\mathrm{\Psi }^{}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{})^2=\mathrm{tr}_{WW^{}}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{}\mathrm{\Psi }^{})^2`$ again and the definition of (40), the gaussian integration over $`_\mathrm{d}`$ leads to

$`=\mathrm{tr}_W(iϵ\omega \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}\mathrm{\Psi }\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}i\overline{)}\mathrm{\Psi })+{\displaystyle \frac{g^{}}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{\tau =1}{\overset{4}{}}}\mathrm{tr}_W(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}𝒪_\tau \mathrm{\Psi })^2,`$ (45)
where $`𝒪_1=1,𝒪_2=,𝒪_3=i𝒯`$, $`𝒪_4=i𝒯`$, and $`g^{}=\frac{g}{4}`$. We mention in passing that if the model have maximun entropy, there appears only one interaction term with $`𝒪_1=1`$ and $`g^{}=g`$. Eq. (45) is an effective Lagrangian which generates the emsanble-averaged Green functions for the present model. It is easy to confirm that new matrices are subject to

$`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}𝒪_\tau \mathrm{\Psi }=\gamma (\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}𝒪_\tau \mathrm{\Psi })^\mathrm{t}\gamma ^1,\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}𝒪_\tau \mathrm{\Psi }=\pi (\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}𝒪_\tau \mathrm{\Psi })\pi ^1\text{for}\{\begin{array}{c}\tau =1,2\\ \tau =3,4,\end{array}`$ (48)
So far we have obtained an effective action including four fermi interactions by averaging over disorder. The next task is to introduce auxiliary (order-parameter) fields to decouple them. To this end, we add the following terms of auxiliary fields $`Q_\tau `$ $`(\tau =1,\mathrm{},4)`$ to the Lagrangian (45):

$`^{}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2g^{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\tau =1}{\overset{4}{}}}\mathrm{tr}_W(Q_\tau +g^{}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}𝒪_\tau \mathrm{\Psi }+\delta _{\tau 1}iϵ\omega )^2.`$ (49)
Then, the Lagrangian becomes

$`=\mathrm{tr}_W\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}i\overline{)}\mathrm{\Psi }{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2g^{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\tau }{}}\mathrm{tr}_W\left(Q_\tau ^2+iϵ\omega Q_1\delta _{\tau 1}\right){\displaystyle \underset{\tau }{}}\mathrm{tr}_WQ_\tau \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}𝒪_\tau \mathrm{\Psi }.`$ (50)
Eq. (49) requires that $`Q_\tau `$ should obey the same symmetrirs that $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}𝒪_\tau \mathrm{\Psi }`$ does in Eq. (48). Therefore,

$`Q_\tau ^{}=Q_\tau ,Q_\tau =\gamma Q_\tau ^\mathrm{t}\gamma ^1,Q_\tau =\pi Q_\tau \pi ^1\text{for}\{\begin{array}{c}\tau =1,2\\ \tau =3,4.\end{array}`$ (53)
The antihermiticity ensures that the integration over $`Q_\tau `$ in Eq. (50) converges.

This Lgrangian (50) has a global Sp($`n)\times `$Sp($`n`$) symmetry. To see this, let us onsider a transformation $`\mathrm{\Psi }\mathrm{\Psi }g^1`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}g\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}`$, and $`Q_\tau gQ_\tau g^1`$. Since this transformation should keep the relations (53), $`g`$ is subject to $`g^{}g=1,g^\mathrm{t}\gamma g=\gamma `$ and $`g^1\pi g=\pi `$. Therefore, $`g`$ has the following form

$`g=\left(\begin{array}{cc}g_+& \\ & g_{}\end{array}\right),g_\pm g_\pm ^{}=1,g_\pm \gamma _0g_\pm ^\mathrm{t}=\gamma _0,\gamma _01_ni\sigma _2,`$ (56)
where $`2n\times 2n`$ matrices $`g_\pm `$ belongs to $`W_{\mathrm{rt}}=W_\mathrm{r}W_\mathrm{t}`$ and the explicit matrix above represent the space $`W_\mathrm{c}`$. The conditions for $`g_\pm `$ require $`g_\pm `$ Sp($`n`$).

Next let us solve Eq. (53),

$`Q_\tau =\left(\begin{array}{cc}& M_\tau \\ M_\tau ^{}& \end{array}\right),\text{for}\tau =1,2,`$ (59)
$`Q_\tau =\left(\begin{array}{cc}A_{\tau 2}^+& \\ & A_{\tau 2}^{}\end{array}\right),\text{for}\tau =3,4,`$ (62)
where $`2n\times 2n`$ matrices $`M_\tau `$ and $`A_\tau ^\pm `$ are subject to $`M_\tau =\gamma _0M_\tau ^{}\gamma _0^1`$, $`A_\tau ^\pm =\gamma _0A_\tau ^{\pm \mathrm{t}}\gamma _0^1`$, and $`A_\tau ^\pm =A_\tau ^\pm `$. Using the definition in Eq. (26), the Lagrangian is now written as

$`=`$ $`\mathrm{tr}_{W_{\mathrm{rt}}}(\stackrel{~}{\chi }_+i\overline{)}\chi _++\stackrel{~}{\chi }_{}i\overline{)}\chi _{})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2g^{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\tau =1}{\overset{2}{}}}\mathrm{tr}_{W_{\mathrm{rt}}}\left[2M_\tau M_\tau ^{}(A_\tau ^{+2}+A_\tau ^2)\right]{\displaystyle \frac{iϵ}{2g^{}}}\mathrm{tr}_{W_{\mathrm{rt}}}(M_1M_1^{})`$ (64)
$`{\displaystyle \underset{\tau =1}{\overset{2}{}}}\mathrm{tr}_{W_{\mathrm{rt}}}\left(M_\tau \stackrel{~}{\chi }_{}𝒪_\tau \chi _+M_\tau ^{}\stackrel{~}{\chi }_+𝒪_\tau \chi _{}+A_\tau ^+\stackrel{~}{\chi }_+𝒪_{\tau +2}\chi _++A_\tau ^{}\stackrel{~}{\chi }_{}𝒪_{\tau +2}\chi _{}\right).`$
The tranformation laws under $`g`$ are

$`\chi _\pm \chi _\pm g_\pm ^{},\stackrel{~}{\chi }_\pm g_\pm \stackrel{~}{\chi }_\pm ,M_\tau g_+M_\tau g_{}^{},A_\tau ^\pm g_\pm A_\tau ^\pm g_\pm ^{}.`$ (65)
So far we have examined the case $`𝒫_1`$. It has been shown that the Lagrangian has Sp($`n)\times `$Sp($`n`$) symmetry and hence the model belongs to $`C`$I, which is the same class as $`d`$-wave superconductors with unbroken time-reversal and spin-rotation symmetries. Contrary to this, in the other cases associated with $`𝒫_2`$ and $`𝒫_3`$, symmetry of the Lagrangian is quite different. Similar calculations above show that these Lagrangians have U($`2n`$) symmetry insted of Sp($`n)\times `$Sp($`n`$) dut to the fact that $`\gamma `$ defined in (32) is $`\gamma =1_ni\sigma _2\sigma _1`$ if we take the same $`\pi `$. This is the same class as HKWM model, which is often referred to as $`BD`$I or chiral orthogonal class.

### C Effective potential

Based on the Lagrangian in the last subsection, we derive the effective potential to study the spontaneous symmetry breaking. We assume that the order-paramters are diagonal in the space $`W_\mathrm{r}`$. Namely, set

$`M_\tau =i\text{diag}(m_{\tau 1},\mathrm{},m_{\tau n})1_2,A_\tau ^\pm =i\text{diag}(a_{\tau 1}\pm b_{\tau 1},\mathrm{},a_{\tau n}\pm b_{\tau n})1_2,\tau =1,2,`$ (66)
where $`m_{\tau \alpha }(x),a_{\tau \alpha }(x)`$ and $`b_{\tau \alpha }(x)`$ are real fields. Then the Lagrangian (64) becomes

$`={\displaystyle \frac{2}{g^{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\tau =1}{\overset{2}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{n}{}}}\left(m_{\tau \alpha }^2+a_{\tau \alpha }^2+b_{\tau \alpha }^2\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{2ϵ}{g^{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{n}{}}}m_{1\alpha }+{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{n}{}}}\psi _\alpha ^{}\left(i\overline{)}+v_\alpha \right)\psi _\alpha ,`$ (67)
where $`v_\alpha `$ is $`4\times 4`$ matrix defined by

$`v_\alpha =i(m_{1\alpha }11+m_{2\alpha }\sigma _31)+a_{1\alpha }1\sigma _1ib_{1\alpha }\sigma _3\sigma _2+a_{2\alpha }\sigma _3\sigma _1ib_{1\alpha }1\sigma _2.`$ (68)
Integrating out the fermi fields, we have an effective potential $`V_\alpha (\{m,a,b\})=S(\{m(x)=m,a(x)=a,b(x)=b\})/\text{volume}`$ of one-loop order,

$`V_\alpha (\{m,a,b\})={\displaystyle \frac{2}{g^{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\tau =1}{\overset{2}{}}}\left(m_{\tau \alpha }^2+a_{\tau \alpha }^2+b_{\tau \alpha }^2\right){\displaystyle \frac{d^2k}{(2\pi )^2}\mathrm{ln}\underset{V}{det}(\overline{)}k+v_\alpha )}+{\displaystyle \frac{2ϵ}{g^{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{n}{}}}m_{1\alpha }.`$ (69)
Since the potential $`V_\alpha `$ is a function of six variables, it is hard to find out the true minimum. However, it is readily expected from the symmetry breaking term that $`m_{1\alpha }`$ has a finite value. Assuming it, we have tried to find out nontrivial sulution $`V_\alpha /m_{\tau \alpha }=V_\alpha /a_{\tau \alpha }=V_\alpha /b_{\tau \alpha }=0`$, but in vain. Although possibility of some other solutions still remains, the solution $`m_{1\alpha }0`$ and others=0 is of course a natural solution. In this case, the saddle point equaiton for $`m_{1\alpha }`$ becomes

$`0={\displaystyle \frac{V_\alpha }{m_{1\alpha }}}={\displaystyle \frac{4m_{1\alpha }}{g^{}}}2{\displaystyle \frac{d^2k}{(2\pi )^2}\frac{2m_{1\alpha }}{k^2+m_{1\alpha }^2}},`$ (70)
which gives nontrivial solution $`m_{1\alpha }=m\mathrm{\Lambda }(e^{\frac{4\pi }{g^{}}}1)^{\frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{\Lambda }e^{\frac{2\pi }{g^{}}}`$. This result suggests that the operator $`(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}𝒪_1\mathrm{\Psi })^2`$ is relevant whereas others are irrelaevant around the present saddle-point. Therefore, in the following analysis, we neglect the irrelavant interactions and take only the relevant interaction into account. In the next section, we will discuss slow fluctuation aroung the saddle point. But before it, we will see how the anisotropy $`g_1g_2`$ modifies the theory so far obtained.

### D Anisotropy effects

In the case where $`g_1=g_2`$, we could treat them simultaneously in Eq. (42). Contrary to this simple case, we have to treat the two potentials $`\alpha _1`$ and $`\alpha _2`$ separately in anisotropic case. To this end, first introduce a new matrix $`=\sigma _11_2`$ under which they transform

$`\alpha _1=\alpha _1^1,\alpha _2=\alpha _2^1.`$ (71)
We next introduce

$`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}_1^{}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}\left(\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{}\hfill \\ \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{}\hfill \end{array}\right),\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}_2^{}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}\left(\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{}\hfill \\ \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{}\hfill \end{array}\right),\mathrm{\Psi }_1^{}=\mathrm{\Psi }_2^{}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}(\mathrm{\Psi }^{},\mathrm{\Psi }^{}).`$ (76)
Let us denote $`_{\mathrm{d}j}v_j\alpha _j`$ for $`j=1,2`$ and the extra auxiliary space as $`W^{}`$. Since the matrix $`\mathrm{\Psi }_j^{}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}_j^{}(j=1,2)`$ has completely the same symmetry property as $`_{\mathrm{d}j}`$, we can average over disorder in the following way:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2g_1}}\mathrm{tr}_V_{\mathrm{d1}}^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2g_2}}\mathrm{tr}_V_{\mathrm{d2}}^2`$ $`\mathrm{tr}_{WW^{}W^{}}\left(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}_1^{}_{\mathrm{d1}}\mathrm{\Psi }_1^{}+\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}_2^{}_{\mathrm{d2}}\mathrm{\Psi }_2^{}\right)`$ (79)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{g_1}{2}}\mathrm{tr}_{WW^{}W^{}}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}_1^{}\mathrm{\Psi }_1^{})^2+{\displaystyle \frac{g_2}{2}}\mathrm{tr}_{WW^{}W^{}}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}_1^{}\mathrm{\Psi }_1^{})^2`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{g_1+g_2}{2}}\mathrm{tr}_{WW^{}}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{}\mathrm{\Psi }^{})^2+{\displaystyle \frac{g_1g_2}{2}}\mathrm{tr}_{WW^{}}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Psi }}^{}\mathrm{\Psi }^{})^2,`$
where arrow menas that the integration over $`_{\mathrm{d}j}`$ is carried out. This equaiton shows that anisotropy $`g_1g_2`$ yields an additional term including $``$. However, it turns out that this term is also irrelevant and therefore can be neglected, following similar discussions to the previous subsection.

## IV Effective action for the Goldstone mode

The saddle-point $`M_1=m1_n1_2`$ is invariant under $`g_+=g_{}`$ type transformation in Eq. (65) but not invarinat under $`g_+=g_{}^{}`$. This means that Sp($`n)\times `$Sp($`n`$) symmetry is broken to Sp($`n`$). Therefore, fluctuation around the saddle-point can be incorporated by parametrizing the order-parameter field $`M_1`$ as

$`M_1=\xi im\xi =im\xi ^2=imU,`$ (80)
where $`\xi `$ and $`U`$ Sp($`n`$), i.e., $`U^\mathrm{t}\gamma _0U=\gamma _0`$, $`U^{}U=1_{2n}`$. The field $`U`$ descirbes the Goldstone mode around the saddle point. Then, the Lagrangian becomes

$`=\mathrm{tr}_{W_{\mathrm{rt}}}\left[\stackrel{~}{\chi }_+i\overline{)}\chi _++\stackrel{~}{\chi }_{}i\overline{)}\chi _{}+im(U\stackrel{~}{\chi }_{}\chi _++U^{}\stackrel{~}{\chi }_+\chi _{})\right]+{\displaystyle \frac{ϵm}{2g^{}}}\mathrm{tr}_{W_{\mathrm{rt}}}(U+U^{})+{\displaystyle \frac{2nm^2}{g^{}}}`$ (81)
The last constant term will be neglected, since it vanishes in the replica limit $`n0`$. In the following subsection, we construct an effective theory for small fluctuation $`U`$ around the saddle point.

### A Integration over fermi fields

So far we have treated $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }`$ and $`\chi `$ as matrix fields to save complicated subscripts. It has actually worked well especially for the discussions of the symmetry. However, in order to extract an effective Lagrangian for $`U`$ via chiral gauge transformation introduced below, we cannot treat the space $`V`$ and $`W`$ separately any longer. Therefore, we switch into the standard notation for fermi fields as follows: Note the following identity, for example, $`\mathrm{tr}_{W_{\mathrm{rt}}}U\stackrel{~}{\chi }_{}\chi _+=_{\alpha ,\alpha ^{}}_jU_{\alpha ^{}\alpha }\stackrel{~}{\chi }_{\alpha j}\chi _{+j\alpha ^{}}=_{j,\alpha }_{j^{},\alpha ^{}}\stackrel{~}{\chi }_{\alpha j}\delta _{jj^{}}U_{1\alpha \alpha ^{}}^\mathrm{t}\chi _{+j^{}\alpha ^{}}=_{j,\alpha }_{j^{},\alpha ^{}}\stackrel{~}{\chi }_{\alpha j}\delta _{jj^{}}\gamma _0U_{1\alpha \alpha ^{}}^{}\gamma _0^1\chi _{+j^{}\alpha ^{}}\stackrel{~}{\chi }_{}1_4U^{}\chi _+`$, where the last arrow means that we have made a $`\gamma _0`$ rotation to $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }`$ and $`\chi `$ and we have regarded $`\chi _\pm `$ as a vector with $`8n`$ components in $`VW_{\mathrm{rt}}`$. Then the fermion part of the Lagrangian can be denoted as

$`_F`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_+i\overline{)}1_{2n}\chi _++\stackrel{~}{\chi }_{}i\overline{)}1_{2n}\chi _{}+im\left(\stackrel{~}{\chi }_{}1_4U^{}\chi _++\stackrel{~}{\chi }_+1_4U\chi _{}\right)`$ (82)
$`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }\left[i\overline{)}1_{2n}+im\left(𝒫_+U^{}+𝒫_{}U\right)\right]\chi .`$ (83)
Although this Lagrangian seems to be standard, the integration over $`\chi `$ is not straightforward. It is because the elementary fields $`\psi ^{}`$ and $`\psi `$ are doubly included in $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }`$ and $`\chi `$ defined in Eq. (29). It is possible, however, to rewrite this Lagrangian as

$`_F=\stackrel{~}{\psi }^{}\left(\begin{array}{cc}imU^{}& i(_2i_1)1_{2n}\\ i(_2+i_1)1_{2n}& imU\end{array}\right)\psi ^{};\stackrel{~}{\psi }^{}=(\psi _1^{},\psi _3^\mathrm{t},\psi _2^{},\psi _4^\mathrm{t}),\psi ^{}=\left(\begin{array}{c}\psi _1\hfill \\ \psi _3^{}\hfill \\ \psi _2\hfill \\ \psi _4^{}\hfill \end{array}\right),`$ (90)
where $`\stackrel{~}{\psi }^{}`$ and $`\psi ^{}`$ have $`4n`$ components whose explicit subscripts in the above definition are those for $`V`$. It should be noted that this Lagrangian is described by independent field variables $`\stackrel{~}{\psi }^{}`$ and $`\psi ^{}`$ only. As a result, we can integrate out fermi fields, which results in

$`{\displaystyle 𝒟\psi 𝒟\psi ^{}e^{{\scriptscriptstyle d^2x_F}}}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{Det}_{VW_\mathrm{r}}\left(\begin{array}{cc}imU^{}& i(_2i_1)1_{2n}\\ i(_2+i_1)1_{2n}& imU\end{array}\right)`$ (93)
$`=`$ $`\mathrm{Det}_{VW_{\mathrm{rt}}}^{\frac{1}{2}}\left[i\overline{)}1_{2n}+im\left(𝒫_+U^{}+𝒫_{}U\right)\right].`$ (94)
Based on this result, we derive an effective action for the fluctuation $`U`$ in the next subsection.

### B Chiral gauge transformation

Suppose that the fluctuation $`U(x)`$ around the saddle-point varies slowly with $`x`$. Then, we can expand, with respect to derivatives, the determinant derived in the last subsection. To this end, make the folowing transformation

$`\begin{array}{cc}\stackrel{~}{\chi }_+^U=\stackrel{~}{\chi }_+U,\hfill & \chi _+^U=U^{}\chi _+,\hfill \\ \stackrel{~}{\chi }_{}^U=\stackrel{~}{\chi }_{},\hfill & \chi _{}^U=\chi _{}.\hfill \end{array}`$ (97)
Here and hereafter, we often denote $`1_4U`$ just as $`U`$ for simplicity. Without confusion, we also use e.g., $`𝒫`$ instead of $`𝒫1_{2n}`$. The Lagrangian is now converted into

$`_F=\stackrel{~}{\chi }^U(i\overline{)}\widehat{D}+im)\chi ^U,`$ (98)
where

$`\widehat{D}_\mu =D_{+\mu }+_\mu ;D_{+\mu }=D_\mu 𝒫_+,_\mu =_\mu 𝒫_{},`$ (99)
with

$`D_\mu =_\mu +A_\mu ,A_\mu =U^{}_\mu U.`$ (100)
Integration over fermi fields $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }^U`$ and $`\chi ^U`$ gives also a determinant, and the action for $`U`$ is

$`S={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{Det}_{VW_{\mathrm{rt}}}(i\overline{)}\widehat{D}+im)\mathrm{ln}J(U)+{\displaystyle \frac{ϵm}{2g^{}}}{\displaystyle d^2x\mathrm{tr}_{W_{\mathrm{rt}}}(U+U^{})}`$ (101)
where $`J(U)`$ is a Jacobian  due to the transformation (97). It turns out that expansion of the determinant yields no second order terms with respect to the derivative, and hence we neglect the contribution from it in the leading order approximation. In what follows, we then concnetrate on the calculation of the Jacobian. We mention in passing that we will use the Lagrangian (83) to compute the Jacobian, although (90) is less confusing.

Let us consider the following eigenvalue problem for the Dirac opeartor (99) to define and regularize the Jacobian of the path integration,

$`i\overline{)}\widehat{D}\phi _n=\lambda _n\phi _n,\varphi _n^{}i\overline{)}\widehat{D}=\varphi _n^{}\lambda _n,`$ (102)
where right- and left-eigenvalue equations are introduced, since the Dirac operator is non-hermitian. The eigenfunctions are normalized via the inner product $`(\varphi _n^{},\phi _m)d^2x\varphi _n^{}\phi _m=\delta _{nm}`$. Assuming the completeness of the eigenfunctions, the fields $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }`$ and $`\chi `$ are expanded as

$`\begin{array}{cc}\chi ^U=_na_n^U\phi _n,\hfill & a_n^U=(\varphi _n^{},\chi ^U),\hfill \\ \stackrel{~}{\chi }^U=_n\varphi _n^{}\stackrel{~}{b}_n^U,\hfill & \stackrel{~}{b}_n^U=(\stackrel{~}{\chi }^U,\phi _n).\hfill \end{array}`$ (105)
The measure is then defined as

$`𝒟\chi ^U={\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}da_n^U\text{or}𝒟\stackrel{~}{\chi }^U={\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}d\stackrel{~}{b}_n^U.`$ (106)
It should be noted that if one uses the Lagrangian (90) described by independent field variables $`\stackrel{~}{\psi }^{}`$ and $`\psi ^{}`$ only, the measure is defined by $`𝒟\psi ^{}𝒟\stackrel{~}{\psi }^{}`$ as usual. In the present case, however, either $`𝒟\chi `$ or $`𝒟\stackrel{~}{\chi }`$ is enough, since each already includes all independent variables. It seems to be unusual, to be sure, but we follow the calculation with the latter notation. Using the definitions for the path integration measure, we can compute the Jacobian for infinitesimal small change for the gauge transformation (97), $`\chi ^U\chi ^{U+\delta U}=\chi ^U+\delta \chi ^U`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }^U\stackrel{~}{\chi }^{U+\delta U}=\stackrel{~}{\chi }^U+\delta \stackrel{~}{\chi }^U`$ with $`\delta \chi ^U=𝒫_+U^{}\delta U\chi ^U`$ and $`\delta \stackrel{~}{\chi }^U=\stackrel{~}{\chi }^U𝒫_{}U^{}\delta U`$ as follows :

$`a_n^{U+\delta U}=(\varphi _n^{},\chi ^U+\delta \chi ^U)={\displaystyle \underset{m}{}}(1N)_{nm}a_m^U,`$ (107)
$`\stackrel{~}{b}_n^{U+\delta U}=(\stackrel{~}{\chi }^U+\delta \stackrel{~}{\chi }^U,\phi _n)={\displaystyle \underset{m}{}}\stackrel{~}{b}_m^U(1\stackrel{~}{N})_{mn},`$ (108)
where

$`N_{mn}=(\varphi _m^{},𝒫_+U^{}\delta U\phi _n),`$ (109)
$`\stackrel{~}{N}_{mn}=(\varphi _m^{}𝒫_{}U^{}\delta U,\phi _n).`$ (110)
Therefore, the measure changes as $`da_n^U=\mathrm{Det}_{VW_{\mathrm{rt}}M}(1N)da_n^{U+\delta U}`$ and $`d\stackrel{~}{b}_n^U=\mathrm{Det}_{VW_{\mathrm{rt}}M}(1\stackrel{~}{N})d\stackrel{~}{b}_n^{U+\delta U}`$, where $`M`$ stands for the space for the eigenmodes of the Dirac operator. Noting that $`det(1+ϵX)e^{ϵ\mathrm{tr}X+O(ϵ^2)}`$ valid for small $`ϵ`$, we reach

$`𝒟\chi ^U=𝒟\chi ^{U+\delta U}e^{\delta \mathrm{\Gamma }_\chi },`$ (111)
$`𝒟\stackrel{~}{\chi }^U=𝒟\stackrel{~}{\chi }^{U+\delta U}e^{\delta \mathrm{\Gamma }_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }}},`$ (112)
where $`\delta \mathrm{\Gamma }_\chi =\mathrm{Tr}_{VW_{\mathrm{rt}}M}Nd^2x_n\mathrm{tr}_{VW_{\mathrm{rt}}}N_{nn}`$ and $`\delta \mathrm{\Gamma }_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }}=\mathrm{Tr}_{VW_{\mathrm{rt}}M}\stackrel{~}{N}d^2x_n\mathrm{tr}_{VW_{\mathrm{rt}}}\stackrel{~}{N}_{nn}`$. Here $`\mathrm{Tr}_M`$ stands for the trace for $`x`$ and $`M`$. In principle, we can choose either $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\chi `$ or $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }}`$ as the Jacobian in Eq. (101) if they can be regularized. In what follows, we will apply standard regularization scheme in Refs. . Nevertheless, it turns out that they still give rise to divergent terms for each $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Fortunately, as we shall see below, they cancel each other in $`\delta \mathrm{\Gamma }_\chi +\delta \mathrm{\Gamma }_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }}`$. Therefore, it is suitable to define the Jacobian in Eq. (97) as a square root of the product of the naive Jacobians as $`\mathrm{Det}_{VW_{\mathrm{rt}}M}^{\frac{1}{2}}(1N)(1\stackrel{~}{N})`$. Namely,

$`\delta \mathrm{ln}J(U)\delta \mathrm{\Gamma }={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\delta \mathrm{\Gamma }_\chi +\delta \mathrm{\Gamma }_{\stackrel{~}{\chi }}).`$ (113)
It is possible to show that the Jacobian based on $`𝒟\psi ^{}𝒟\stackrel{~}{\psi }^{}`$ for the Lagrangian (90) indeed yields the same Jacobian.

We now give the outline of how to calculate the Jacobian following Refs. . Using the definition of the $`\mathrm{Tr}_M`$, we have

$`\delta \mathrm{\Gamma }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{Tr}_{VW_{\mathrm{rt}}}{\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}\varphi _n^{}(x)𝒫U^{}\delta U\phi _n(x)`$ (114)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{Tr}_{VW_{\mathrm{rt}}}{\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}\varphi _n^{}(x)𝒫U^{}\delta Ue^{\left(\lambda _n/\mathrm{\Lambda }\right)^2}\phi _n(x)`$ (115)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{Tr}_{VW_{\mathrm{rt}}M}𝒫U^{}\delta Ue^{\left(i\overline{)\widehat{D}}/\mathrm{\Lambda }\right)^2}`$ (116)
where ultraviolet cut-off $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is introduced, which will be set $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{}`$ at the end of the calculation. Using the relation $`\overline{)}\widehat{D}^2=\overline{)}D_+\overline{)}_{}+\overline{)}_{}\overline{)}D_+`$, we have

$`\delta \mathrm{\Gamma }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{Tr}_{VW_{\mathrm{rt}}M}U^{}\delta U\left[𝒫(e^{\partial ̸\mathit{}/\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}+e^{\mathit{}\partial ̸/\mathrm{\Lambda }^2})+(e^{\partial ̸\mathit{}/\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}e^{\mathit{}\partial ̸/\mathrm{\Lambda }^2})\right]`$ (117)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^2k}{(2\pi )^2}\mathrm{Tr}_{VW_{\mathrm{rt}}}e^{ikx}U^{}\delta U\left[𝒫(e^{\partial ̸\mathit{}/\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}+e^{\mathit{}\partial ̸/\mathrm{\Lambda }^2})+(e^{\partial ̸\mathit{}/\mathrm{\Lambda }^2}e^{\mathit{}\partial ̸/\mathrm{\Lambda }^2})\right]e^{ikx}},`$ (118)
where in the last line we have switched the basis for $`M`$ from the eigenmodes of the Dirac operator into plane waves. Expanding $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and taking the limit $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{}`$, we reach

$`\delta \mathrm{\Gamma }={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^2k}{(2\pi )^2}e^{k^2}\mathrm{Tr}_{VW_{\mathrm{rt}}}\left[𝒫U^{}\delta U(i\times D)+1U^{}\delta U(D)\right]}.`$ (119)
where $`a\times b=\sigma _{\mu \nu }a_\mu b_\nu `$ and $`ab=g_{\mu \nu }a_\mu b_\nu `$ with

$`\sigma _{\mu \nu }={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2i}}[\gamma _\mu ,\gamma _\nu ]=ϵ_{\mu \nu }\sigma _3\sigma _3,g_{\mu \nu }={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\{\gamma _\mu ,\gamma _\nu \}=\delta _{\mu \nu }11.`$ (120)
Therefore, taking trace in $`x`$\- and $`V`$-space, we have

$`\delta \mathrm{\Gamma }={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle d^2x\mathrm{tr}_{W_{\mathrm{rt}}}U^{}\delta U\left(\delta _{\mu \nu }iϵ_{\mu \nu }\right)_\mu A_\nu }.`$ (121)
It is nowadays well-known that the action function satisfying above includes not only the usual kinetic term but also the WZW term,

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }=S_{\mathrm{WZW}}^k{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\pi }}{\displaystyle d^2x\mathrm{tr}_{W_{\mathrm{rt}}}_\mu U_\mu U^{}}+{\displaystyle \frac{ik}{12\pi }}{\displaystyle d^3xϵ_{\mu \nu \lambda }\mathrm{tr}_{W_{\mathrm{rt}}}U^{}_\mu UU^{}_\nu UU^{}_\lambda U},`$ (122)
with $`k=2`$. Adding the symmetry-breaking term in (101), we end up with an action

$`S=S_{\mathrm{WZW}}^{k=2}+{\displaystyle \frac{ϵm}{2g^{}}}{\displaystyle d^2x\mathrm{tr}_{W_{\mathrm{rt}}}(U+U^{})}.`$ (123)
Therefore, it turns out that the Goldstone mode of the model with chiral symmetry of type $`𝒫_1`$ can be described by Sp($`n)_2`$ WZW model (122) with a symmetry breaking term as in (123).

So far we have considered the case where Hamiltonian has the chiral symmetry specified by $`𝒫_1`$ in Eq. (19). As to the other cases, similar calculations lead to U($`2n`$)/Sp($`n`$) nonlinear sigma model, which is so-called chiral orthogonal class or $`BD`$I, the same universality class as HWKM model.

## V Phase diagram

We present a schematic phase diagram at the zero energy in Fig. 2, which is valid for weak disorder, i.e, for small $`g_j`$.

In the case $`g_3=g_4=0`$, which is denoted by a white surface in the figure, the model belongs to class $`C`$I and is described by Sp($`n)_2`$ WZW model with some irrelevant perturbations discussed in Sec. III C and III D. The reason why the present WZW model is level-2 is that the continuum limit (9) leads to double Dirac fermions. One of the main origin of the irrelevant interactions is that the lattice model has only on-site potentials without any hopping randomness. Namely, the model does not have maximum entropy. Another origin is the anisotropy $`g_1g_2`$, as discussed in Sec. III D. Besides, the continuum model should have basically many higher order irrelevant interactions. Therefore, at the zero energy any points on this surface flow to the Sp($`n)_2`$ WZW fixed point, denoted by a black circle in the figure. It turns out that around the fixed point the density of states obeys the scaling law $`\rho (E)E^{\frac{1}{11}}`$, following from the exact results obtained by Knizhnik and Zamolodchikov .

On the other hand, the universality class of the two surfaces $`g_1=g_4=0`$ and $`g_2=g_4=0`$, shaded in the figure, is different. They belong to the class of U($`2n`$)/Sp($`n`$) nonlinear sigma model or in other words, chiral orthogonal class or class $`BD`$I, which is the same universality class as that of HWKM model. It is well-known that the beta function of the renormalization group vanishes and the coupling constant of the nonlinear sigma model is not renormalized. Hence any points on these surfaces are critical. The density of states is conjectured to be divergent at the zero energy, according to $`\rho (E)\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{E}\mathrm{exp}[\alpha \sqrt{\mathrm{ln}(\mathrm{\Lambda }/E)}]`$ with a positive constant $`\alpha `$ .

These surfaces, one $`C`$I and two $`BD`$I’s, are unstable: Out the surfaces renormalization group flows are toward the strong-coupling limit of Sp($`2n`$)/Sp($`n)\times `$Sp($`n`$) nonlinear sigma model, as shown by Fisher and Fradkin for $`g_1=g_2=g_3=g_4`$ case. Therefore, all states away from the surfaces are expected to be localized.

## VI Summary and concluding remarks

We have studied the phase diagram of the disordered fermion model with random on-site potential defined on a two-dimensional square lattice with $`\pi `$-flux. The continuum limit near the zero energy yields Dirac fermions with random potentials specified by four independent coupling constants. It has been argued that in addition to time-reversal symmetry, this model has so-called chiral symmetry in three subspaces in the space of the coupling constants. Here, chiral symmetry means that there exist a matrix anticommuting with the Hamiltonian. What is interesting is that this model alows three kinds of chiral symmetry, which is due to the species doubling of the lattice fermion. It has been shown that one of them leads to Sp($`n)\times `$Sp($`n`$) symmety of the Lagrangian for generating functional of emsemble-averaged Green functions whereas the others lead to U($`2n`$) symmetry, both of which is broken to Sp($`n`$). It has been found that the fluctuation around the saddle point is described, respectively, by Sp($`n)_2`$ WZW model for the former and U($`2n`$)/Sp($`n`$) nonlinear sigma model for the latter. Based on these results, we have proposed a phase diagram.

The Dirac fermion model with $`𝒫_1`$ symmetry calculated in detail in the text is quite similar to that for the disordered $`d`$-wave superconductors with spin-ratation and time-reversal symmetries. Actually, effective Lagrangians for these systems have Sp($`n)\times `$Sp($`n`$) symmetry and hence both the models belong to the same universality class $`C`$I. However, fixed-points are quite different due to the WZW term. It was shown  that in the $`d`$-wave superconductors the WZW terms for several species of Dirac fermions cancel each other and the resultant theory predicts localization of quasiparticles at the band center. Contrary to this, the model treated in this paper is described by level-2 WZW model, which means that it has delocalized states. The difference lies in Eq. (120): In the present model the WZW term survives owing to the relation $`\sigma _{\mu \nu }=[\gamma _\mu ,\gamma _\nu ]/2i=ϵ_{\mu \nu }𝒫_1`$, which is due to $`𝒫_1=i\gamma _1\gamma _2`$. This is just the same definition of so-called $`\gamma _5`$ in the particle physics literature, although the present $`\gamma `$ matrices are not $`2\times 2`$ but $`4\times 4`$. Conversely, we can say that chiral symmetry only in this sense yields the chiral anomaly and hence the WZW term, although we often use the same words for other similar symmetry in the Anderson localization literature. Considering the fact that the lattice model having $`𝒫_1`$ chiral symmetry is realized in the case $`v_3^{}=v_1^{}`$ and $`v_4^{}=v_2^{}`$ in Eq. (2), which is indeed a fine-tuned model, we conclude that the delocalization due to the existence of the WZW term seldom occures in nature.