Nonlinear response functions in an exponential trap model

TL;DR

This paper investigates the nonlinear response functions in an exponential trap model, revealing how response characteristics depend on the choice of dynamical variables and temperature, especially near the glass transition.

Contribution

It provides a detailed analysis of nonlinear response functions in an exponential trap model, highlighting variable-dependent effects and limitations of existing approximation methods.

Findings

Response shape varies with dynamical variable near $T_0$

Peak in third-order response modulus can increase or decrease with temperature

Low-frequency divergence of cubic response at transition depends on variable

Abstract

The nonlinear response to an oscillating field is calculated for a kinetic trap model with an exponential density of states and the results are compared to those for the model with a Gaussian density of states. The calculations are limited to the high temperature phase of the model. It is found that the results are qualitatively different only in a temperature range near the glass transition temperature $T_0$ of the exponential model. While for the Gaussian model the choice of the dynamical variable that couples to the field has no impact on the shape of the linear response, this is different for the exponential model. Here, it is found that also the relaxation time strongly depends on the variable chosen. Furthermore, the modulus of the frequency dependent third-order response shows either a peak or exhibits a monotonuous decay from a finite low-frequency limit to a vanishing response at high frequencies depending on the dynamical variable. For variables that give rise to a peak in the modulus it is found that its height either increases or decreases as a function of temperature, again depending on the details of the choice of the variable. The peak value of the modulus shows a scaling behavior near $T_0$. It is found that for some variables the low-frequency limit of the cubic response diverges at the glass transition temperature and also at a further temperature determined by the particular variable. A recently proposed approximation that relates the cubic response to a four-time correlation function does not give reliable results due to a wrong estimate of the low-frequency limit of the response.