Reply to Comment on "Evidence of Non-Mean-Field-Like Low-Temperature Behavior in the Edwards-Anderson Spin-Glass Model"

TL;DR

This paper defends previous findings that the low-temperature behavior of the Edwards-Anderson spin glass model is not mean-field like, countering criticisms that rely on replica symmetry breaking theory and inappropriate model comparisons.

Contribution

The authors demonstrate that the critique based on replica symmetry breaking does not account for their data, reaffirming the non-mean-field nature of the Edwards-Anderson model at low temperatures.

Findings

Data contradicts replica symmetry breaking interpretation

Supports non-mean-field low-temperature behavior

Reaffirms original conclusions about Edwards-Anderson model

Abstract

In Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 219701 (2013) [arXiv:1211.0843] Billoire et al. criticize the conclusions of our Letter [Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 177204 (2012), arxiv:1206.0783]. They argue that considering the Edwards-Anderson and Sherrington-Kirkpatrick models at the same temperature is inappropriate and propose an interpretation based on the replica symmetry breaking theory. Here we show that the theory presented in the Comment does not explain our data on the Edwards-Anderson spin glass and we stand by our assertion that the low-temperature behavior of the Edwards-Anderson spin glass model does not appear to be mean-field like.