text:
# Dynamics of structural models with a long-range interaction : glassy versus non-glassy behavior

## I Introduction

The theoretical description of slow dynamics is a crucial point to elucidate the nature of the glass transition in structural glass - forming liquids. One of the commonly used approaches, mode-coupling theory (MCT), was from the very beginning designed for the supercooled simple liquids  , i.e. for the non - disordered models (as opposed to the models which contain quenched disorder naturally). Later it has been proven that MC - equations become exact for a number of spin - glass models  as well as for the polymeric manifold in a random media  (i.e. for the models with quenched disorder) provided that the number of variables components goes to the infinite.

Actually applicability of the MC - equations has been substantially extended to the case when the time translation invariance and the fluctuation - dissipation theorem do not hold any more . This striking similarity between the models with and without quenched disorder suggests that the effective disordered potential (e.g., in a supercooled liquid) is in a sense “ self - induced” and the difference between such a “self - induced disorder” and the quenched disorder might not be crucial .

In order to provide some insight into self - induced disorder we employed in ref. a Feynman variational principle (VP) for a set of interacting particles. Indeed it was shown that the VP is capable to treat metastable states of the glass - forming system. The main point in ref.  was that the partition function representation in terms of functional integrals is twofold : (a) either as an integral over the local density , $`\rho (𝐫)`$, or (b) over the conjugated to $`\rho (𝐫)`$ field $`\psi (𝐫)`$. It has been assumed that the component average free energy , $`\overline{F}`$, (which is only meaningful in the supercooled regime) is equal to the variational free energy $`F_{\mathrm{VP}}`$. There are at least four strong reasons in favor of this (at first sight not obvious) assumption.

* The variational free energy $`F_{\mathrm{VP}}`$ is a upper bound for the canonical free energy, i.e., $`F_\mathrm{c}\overline{F}=F_{\mathrm{VP}}`$ , as it should be since $`F_\mathrm{c}=\overline{F}T\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ , where the complexity $`\mathrm{\Sigma }0`$ .
* After implementation of VP the initial problem is reduced to a self - consistent random field Ginzburg - Landau model (RFGLM). Then, as was shown previously, the corresponding field $`\psi (𝐫)`$ must be upgraded to a replicated field $`\psi _a(𝐫)`$, where $`a=1,..,n`$ (with the final limit $`n0`$) and the density field $`\rho (𝐫)`$ plays the role of an “external” field. Note that here the density $`\rho (𝐫)`$ is Gaussian due to the use of the VP. Eventually the correlators of $`\psi `$ and $`\rho `$ \- fields can be determined self - consistently.
* The resulting replicated partition function for RFGLM has a typical form which may eventually lead to the replica symmetry breaking (RSB), structural glass transition and the “self - induced “ disorder.
* Finally, in the case of the long - range interaction the partition function allows the expansion around the saddle point , or mean - field (MF), solution. It is possible to show then that the next to the mean - field approximation and VP merge and both become exact, i. e. $`\overline{F}=F_\mathrm{c}`$ and the glassy phase does not appear.

Some evidence for this behavior was deduced from the results for the particles on a $`M`$\- dimensional hypersphere  at large dimensions, $`M\mathrm{}`$.

The aim of this paper is to face the full dynamical problem for a non - disorded model with a long range interaction. Using the expansion around the saddle point solution we derive the full equation of motion for the time dependent density - density correlator and show that a “glassy” solution does not exist. Conversly, if we add a term describing quenched disorder, by random distribution of the strength of the interaction potential, then the resulting equations of motion for two time density correlation and response functions fall in the same class as MC - equations which have been widely discussed . This means that the “self - induced” disorder is not generic for the pure model with the long-range interaction and vice versa on addition of a quenched disorder the phase space becomes very rugged resulting in slow dynamical processes.

The paper is organized as follows. In the next section II we first introduce the theorotical model without quenched disorder . Its dynamics is discussed by using the functional integral technique. The saddle point solution yields the mean field dynamcis. Expansions around the saddle point yield one loop corrections. The Legendre transformation provides the possibilty of the analysis of the full dynamic correlation matrix. In the section III quenched disorder is introduced by a “random bond model” and a Gaussian disorder. The corresponding generating functional (GF) is computed by the self-consistent Hartree approximation, which results in a set of coupled Langevin equations, that are solved in their asymptotic regimes. More details on the calculations are laid out in the corresponding appendices.

## II The model without quenched disorder

We start from a simple model system which consists of interacting particles. To do so, let us consider a set of $`N(1)`$ particles in $`d`$ \- dimensional space interacting by a pair potential of the form

$`V(r)=\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mu }{N}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{exp}(\kappa r)}{4\pi r^\alpha }}.`$ (1)
This is a typical example of a long-range potential with a characteristic length $`\kappa `$ and a coupling constant $`\mu /N`$. The choice of this potential is twofold. It contains a cut off at a $`\kappa ^1`$ and allows thus to control the range of the interaction. Moreover at small scales $`(r<\kappa ^1)`$ it consists of a typical power law decay with long range character, if $`0<\alpha <2`$. Therefore the so chosen potential allows to keep control on range and nature of the interaction, which will become essential below. To ensure extensivity of the total interaction energy we require that the integral $`d^dV(𝐫)=𝒪(N^0)`$, i.e. it does not depend on the number of particles $`N`$. As a result we have $`\kappa N^{1/(d\alpha )}`$. The intermolecular potential (1) has the form of the generalized Kac potential

$`V(𝐫)=\kappa ^df(\kappa 𝐫),`$ (2)
which has been used for the rigorous treatment of the van-der-Waals theory . In order to provide conditions for the expansion around a saddle point, carried out later on (see below), we should require that the length $`\kappa ^1`$ must be larger compared to the characteristic size of the system, which scales naturally as $`N^{1/d}`$) at $`N\mathrm{}`$. As a consequence we find the limits for the range parameter $`\alpha `$

$`0<\alpha <d.`$ (3)
Below we shall restrict our considerations to the case: $`d=3,\alpha =1`$, and the strength of the interaction $`\mu >0`$ (pure repulsion) without loss of generalization in the main statements we are going to predict. Then the Fourier transformation of the potential (1) takes especially simple form

$`V(𝐤)=\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mu }{N}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{1}{k^2+\kappa ^2}},`$ (4)
which allows accurate analytic calculations. In the limit $`N\mathrm{}`$ we have thus $`\kappa ^2N^1`$, but the relevant minimum wave vector is $`k_{\mathrm{min}}^2N^{2/3}`$ and thus $`\kappa ^2`$ can be actually neglected under the integration over the whole $`k`$ \- space. As a result we arrive formally at a one - component plasma model (OCP)  where the electroneutrality is implicitly provided by a neutralizing background.

### A The generating functional method

In the following we set up the relevant equations of motion for the model system. We restrict ourselves to the Langevin dynamics, which can be comfortably formulated in terms of dynamic functionals which allows the systematic $`1/N`$ \- expansion treatment. The Langevin dynamics of $`N`$ particles interacting via the potential (1) (at $`d=3,\alpha =1`$ and $`\mu >0`$) is described by the equation of motion

$`m_0{\displaystyle \frac{^2}{t^2}}𝐫^{(p)}(t)+\gamma _0{\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}𝐫^{(p)}(t){\displaystyle \frac{\mu }{N}}{\displaystyle \underset{m=1}{\overset{N}{}}}v(𝐫^{(p)}𝐫^{(m)})=𝐟^{(p)}(t),`$ (5)
where $`m_0`$ and $`\gamma _0`$ are the mass and the friction coefficient respectively, $`p=1,2,\mathrm{},N`$ and $`v(r;\kappa )=\mathrm{exp}(\kappa r)/4\pi r`$. The random force in eq.(5) is Gaussian with $`f_i^{(p)}(t)=0`$ and the correlator

$`f_i^{(p)}(t)f_j^{(n)}(t^{})=2T\gamma _0\delta _{pm}\delta _{ij}\delta (tt^{}),`$ (6)
where from now on we work in units where the Boltzmann constant $`\mathrm{k}_\mathrm{B}=1`$.

As was mentioned, it is more convenient to reformulate the Langevin problem (5)-(6) by using the celebrated Martin-Siggia-Rose generating functional (GF) method . The method was first applied for the $`\varphi ^4`$ \- model with the long-range interaction in  and for the polymer melt dynamics in . Despite the fact that the Langevin equation (5) is of the second order it is possible to show that the Jacobian which appear under transformation to the functional variables, still equal to one (see Appendix in ). After using this technique for the problem (5) - (6), GF takes the form

$`Z\{\mathrm{}\}={\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}D𝐫^{(p)}(t)D\widehat{𝐫}^{(p)}(t)\mathrm{exp}\left\{\underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}A_0[𝐫^{(p)},\widehat{𝐫}^{(p)}]+𝑑t\underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}\underset{m=1}{\overset{N}{}}\frac{\mu }{N}i\widehat{r}_j^{(p)}(t)_j^{(p)}v\left(𝐫^{(p)}𝐫^{(m)}\right)\right\}},`$ (7)
where the action of the free system

$`A_0[𝐫^{(p)},\widehat{𝐫}^{(p)}]={\displaystyle 𝑑t\left\{T\gamma _0\left[i\widehat{r}_j^{(p)}(t)\right]^2+i\widehat{r}_j^{(p)}(t)\left[m_0\frac{^2}{t^2}r_j^{(p)}(t)+\gamma _0\frac{}{t}r_j^{(p)}(t)\right]\right\}}.`$ (8)
In the following we are going to transform this functional to collective density variables. By using the transformations to the mass density

$`\rho (𝐫)={\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\delta (𝐫𝐫^{(p)}(t))`$ (9)
and the longitudinal projection of the response field density

$`\pi (𝐫)={\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}i\widehat{r}_i^{(p)}(t)_i\delta (𝐫𝐫^{(p)}(t))`$ (10)
for the GF one gets

$`Z\left\{\chi _\alpha \right\}={\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =0}{\overset{1}{}}D\rho _\alpha (1)\mathrm{exp}\left\{W\{\rho _\alpha \}\frac{1}{2}d1d2\rho _\alpha (1)U_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)\rho _\beta (2)+d1\rho _\alpha (1)\chi _\alpha (1)\right\}},`$ (11)
where the summation over the repeated Greek indices is implied. In eq.(11) we have introduced 2-dimensional field

$`\rho _\alpha (1)\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\rho (1)}{\pi (1)}}\right),`$ (12)
where $`\alpha =0,1`$ and $`1(𝐫,t)`$. The “entropy” of the free system is given as usual by

$`W\{\rho ,\pi \}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{log}{\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}D𝐫^{(p)}(t)D\widehat{𝐫}^{(p)}(t)\mathrm{exp}\left\{\underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}A_0\{𝐫^{(p)},\widehat{𝐫}^{(p)}\}\right\}}`$ (13)
$`\times `$ $`\delta \left[\rho (𝐫,t){\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\delta (𝐫𝐫^{(p)}(t))\right]`$ (14)
$`\times `$ $`\delta \left[\pi (𝐫,t){\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}i\widehat{r}_j^{(p)}(t)_j\delta (𝐫𝐫^{(p)}(t))\right],`$ (15)
and $`U_{\alpha \beta }`$ is the 2$`\times `$ 2 - interaction matrix

$`U_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)=\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{0}{V(|𝐫_1𝐫_2|)}}{\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{V(|𝐫_1𝐫_2|)}{0}}\right)`$ (16)
and $`\chi _\alpha (1)`$ is a source field.

An alternative valuable representation of GF can be obtained through the “functional Fourier transformation”

$`\mathrm{exp}\left\{F\{\psi _\alpha \}\right\}={\displaystyle D\rho _\alpha (1)\mathrm{exp}\left\{W\{\rho _\alpha \}id1\rho _\alpha (1)\psi _\alpha (1)\right\}}`$ (17)
and its inversion

$`\mathrm{exp}\left\{W\{\rho _\alpha \}\right\}={\displaystyle D\psi _\alpha (1)\mathrm{exp}\left\{F\{\psi _\alpha \}+id1\rho _\alpha (1)\psi _\alpha (1)\right\}}.`$ (18)
The substitution of eq.(15) into eq.(17) leads to the explicit expression for the free-system GF

$`\mathrm{exp}\left\{F\{\psi _\alpha \}\right\}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle }{\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}D𝐫^{(p)}(t)D\widehat{𝐫}^{(p)}(t)\mathrm{exp}\{{\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}A_0[𝐫^{(p)},\widehat{𝐫}^{(p)}]`$ (19)
$``$ $`i{\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle }dt\psi \left(𝐫^{(p)}\right)+i{\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle }dti\widehat{r}_j^{(p)}(t)_j\varphi (𝐫)|_{𝐫=𝐫^{(p)}(t)}\},`$ (20)
where $`\psi (1)`$ and $`\varphi (1)`$ are components of the column - variable

$`\psi _\alpha (1)\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\psi (1)}{\varphi (1)}}\right).`$ (21)
By making use (18) in (11) and after functional integration over $`\rho _\alpha (1)`$ one gets

$`Z\{\chi _\alpha ,\lambda _\alpha \}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle }{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =0}{\overset{1}{}}}D\psi _\alpha (1)\mathrm{exp}\{F\{\psi _\alpha \}+`$ (22)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle }d1d2[i\psi _\alpha (1)`$ $`+`$ $`\chi _\alpha (1)][U^1]_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)[i\psi _\beta (2)+\chi _\beta (2)]+{\displaystyle }d1\psi _\alpha (1)\lambda _\alpha (1)\},`$ (23)
where we have also add a source field $`\lambda _\alpha (1)`$ conjugated to $`\psi _\alpha (1)`$. As a result eqs.(11) and (23) provide two equivalent representations of GF. For the purpose of expansion around the saddle point we use representation (23) at $`\lambda _\alpha (1)=0`$ which after the transformation $`\psi _\alpha \psi _\alpha +i\chi _\alpha `$, yields

$`Z\left\{\chi _\alpha \right\}={\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =0}{\overset{1}{}}D\psi _\alpha (1)\mathrm{exp}\left\{NA[\psi _\alpha ;\chi _\alpha ]\right\}},`$ (24)
which is appropriate for a saddle point integration, since the particle number $`N`$ is large. The action hereby is given as

$`A[\psi _\alpha ;\chi _\alpha ]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle 𝑑td^3𝐫d^3𝐫^{}\psi _\alpha (𝐫,t)\left[v^1\right]_{\alpha \beta }(𝐫𝐫^{};\kappa )\psi _\beta (𝐫^{},t)}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}\mathrm{log}{\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}D𝐫^{(p)}(t)D\widehat{𝐫}^{(p)}(t)}`$ (25)
$`\times `$ $`\mathrm{exp}\left\{{\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}A_0[𝐫^{(p)},\widehat{𝐫}^{(p)}]i{\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle 𝑑tr_\alpha ^{(p)}(t)\left[\psi _\alpha \left(𝐫^{(p)}(t)\right)+i\chi _\alpha \left(𝐫^{(p)}(t)\right)\right]}\right\},`$ (26)
and the interaction matrix

$`v_{\alpha \beta }(𝐫;\kappa )=\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{0}{1}}{\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{1}{0}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{exp}(\kappa r)}{4\pi r}}.`$ (27)
Recall that the relation $`\kappa N^{1/2}`$ is necessary for the validity of the saddle point integration. Moreover we have defined the column-vector

$`r_\alpha ^{(p)}(t)=\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{1}{i\widehat{r}_j^{(p)}(t)𝑑\tau \frac{\delta }{\delta r_j^{(p)}(\tau )}}}\right)`$ (28)
for convenience.

### B The saddle point solution and expansion around the SP

Minimization of $`A[\psi _\alpha ;\chi _\alpha ]`$ with respect to $`\psi _\alpha (1)`$ leads to the SP - equations for the mean fields $`\overline{\psi _\alpha }(1)`$

$`\overline{\psi _\alpha }(𝐫,t)={\displaystyle \frac{i\mu }{N}}{\displaystyle d^3𝐫^{}v_{\alpha \beta }(𝐫𝐫^{})\rho _\beta (𝐫^{},t)_{\mathrm{SP}}},`$ (29)
where the average $`\mathrm{}_{SP}`$ is calculated by using the cumulant GF

$`P_{\mathrm{SP}}\{\overline{\psi _\alpha }+i\chi _\alpha \}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}\mathrm{log}{\displaystyle }{\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}D𝐫^{(p)}(t)D\widehat{𝐫}^{(p)}(t)\mathrm{exp}\{{\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}A_0[𝐫^{(p)},\widehat{𝐫}^{(p)}]`$ (30)
$`i{\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle }dtr_\alpha ^{(p)}(t)[\overline{\psi _\alpha }\left(𝐫^{(p)}(t)\right)+i\chi _\alpha \left(𝐫^{(p)}(t)\right)]\}.`$ (31)
The correlation matrix in the random phase approximation (RPA) is defined in such a way

$`S_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)=\underset{\overline{\psi _\alpha }+i\chi _\alpha 0}{lim}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\delta \rho _\alpha (1)_{\mathrm{SP}}}{N\delta \chi _\beta (2)}}\right].`$ (32)
After linearization of eq.(31) with respect to $`\overline{\psi _\alpha }+i\chi _\alpha `$ the 2$`\times `$2 - RPA correlation matrix is easily found to coincide with the well known form

$`S_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)=\left\{\left[\widehat{F}^1+\mu \widehat{v}\right]^1\right\}_{\alpha \beta }(1,2),`$ (33)
where $`\widehat{v}`$ is the interaction matrix (27) and $`F_{\alpha \beta }`$ is the correlation matrix for the free system $`F_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)=\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _\alpha (1)\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _\beta (2)_0/N`$ has the form

$`F_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)=\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{F_{00}(1,2)}{F_{10}(1,2)}}{\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{F_{01}(1,2)}{0}}\right).`$ (34)
In eq.(34) $`F_{01}(1,2)`$ and $`F_{10}(1,2)`$ are response functions whereas $`F_{00}(1,2)`$ stands for the correlation function. The relation between them is given by the fluctuation dissipation theorem (FDT) which in $`(𝐤,t)`$\- representation has the form

$`\beta {\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}F_{00}(𝐤,t)=F_{01}(𝐤,t)F_{10}(𝐤,t).`$ (35)
It is easy to check that in this case the FDT for the RPA type correlation matrix (33) also holds

$`\beta {\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}S_{00}(𝐤,t)=S_{01}(𝐤,t)S_{10}(𝐤,t),`$ (36)
where $`\beta =1/T`$ is the inverse temperature. The corresponding elements of the RPA - matrix (33) are of an especially simple form in the Fourier - $`(𝐤,\omega )`$ \- representation, namely

$`S_{00}(𝐤,\omega )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{F_{00}(𝐤,\omega )}{\left[1+v(k)F_{10}(𝐤,\omega )\right]\left[1+v(k)F_{01}(𝐤,\omega )\right]}}`$ (37)
$`S_{01}(𝐤,\omega )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{F_{01}(𝐤,\omega )}{1+v(k)F_{01}(𝐤,\omega )}}`$ (38)
$`S_{10}(𝐤,\omega )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{F_{10}(𝐤,\omega )}{1+v(k)F_{10}(𝐤,\omega )}}.`$ (39)
It turns out interesting to recover the wellknown form in the static limit, where we have $`S_{01}(𝐤,\omega 0)=\beta S_{\mathrm{st}}(𝐤)=\left[\left(\beta F_{\mathrm{st}}\right)^1+\mu k^2\right]`$ and for the correlator $`S_{\mathrm{RPA}}(𝐤)=S_{\mathrm{st}}(𝐤)/\rho _0`$ one gets

$`S_{\mathrm{RPA}}(𝐤)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{1+\frac{\beta \mu \rho _0}{k^2}}},`$ (40)
where we have used $`F_{\mathrm{st}}=\rho _0`$ . This expression is completely equivalent to the correlator for the OCP-model (see eq.(10.1.7) in ) with the direct correlation function $`c(𝐤)=\mu \beta /k^2`$ and the Debye wavenumber $`k_\mathrm{D}=\left(\beta \mu \rho _0\right)^{1/2}`$.

Now let us expand the action (26) around SP-solution (29) up to the second order with respect to the fluctuations $`\psi _\alpha (1)\overline{\psi _\alpha }(1)`$. After the functional integration we arrive at the following result for the GF

$`P\left\{\chi _\alpha \right\}`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}\mathrm{log}Z\left\{\chi _\alpha \right\}`$ (41)
$`=`$ $`P_{\mathrm{SP}}\left\{\overline{\psi _\alpha }+\chi _\alpha \right\}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2N}}\mathrm{Tr}\left[\mathrm{log}T_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)\right],`$ (42)
where $`T_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)`$ is the inverse matrix of the effective interactions

$`T_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mu }}\left[v^1\right]_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _\alpha (1)\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _\beta (2)_{\mathrm{SP}}.`$ (43)
In eqs.(42) - (43) we deliberately keep external field $`\chi _\alpha (1)`$ nonzero because it to be used in the next subsection for the Legendre transformation.

### C The Legendre transformation

The functional Legendre transformation is a general way to provide the Dyson equation for the full correlation matrix $`G_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)`$ . In doing so the irreducible GF, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }\left\{\rho _\alpha (1)\right\}`$ , is defined by the identity

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }\left\{\rho _\alpha (1)\right\}+P\left\{\chi _\alpha (1)\right\}={\displaystyle d1\rho _\alpha (1)\chi _\alpha (1)}.`$ (44)
By doing functional differentiation of (44) one gets

$`\chi _\alpha (1)={\displaystyle \frac{\delta \mathrm{\Gamma }\left\{\rho _\alpha (1)\right\}}{\delta \rho _\alpha (1)}}`$ (45)
and

$`\left[G^1\right]_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)={\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^2\mathrm{\Gamma }\left\{\rho _\alpha (1)\right\}}{\delta \rho _\alpha (1)\delta \rho _\beta (2)}}.`$ (46)
Taking into account the result in eq.(42) we find the following result for GF

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }\left\{\rho _\alpha (1)\right\}=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{SP}}\left\{\rho _\alpha (1)\right\}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2N}}\mathrm{Tr}\left[\mathrm{log}T_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)\right],`$ (47)
where

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{SP}}\left\{\rho _\alpha (1)\right\}=P_{\mathrm{SP}}\left\{\chi _\alpha \right\}+{\displaystyle d1\rho _\alpha (1)\chi _\alpha (1)}.`$ (48)
In eq.(47) one should consider $`\chi _\alpha (1)`$ as a functional of $`\rho _\alpha (1)`$ given by eq.(45). Double differentiation of eq.(47) leads to an equation of the Dyson form

$`\left[G^1\right]_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)=\left[S^1\right]_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\alpha \beta }(1,2),`$ (49)
where the RPA - correlation matrix, $`S_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)`$, is defined by eqs.(37) - (39) and the “self - energy” functional $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)`$ has the form

$`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2N}}\mathrm{Tr}\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^2}{\delta \rho _\alpha (1)\delta \rho _\beta (2)}}\mathrm{log}T_{\gamma \delta }(3,4)\right\}_{\chi _\alpha =0}.`$ (50)
In eq.(50) the “trace” is taken over the variables 3,4 and indices $`\gamma ,\delta `$. The explicit differentiation in eq.(50) leads to the result

$`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2N}}\mathrm{Tr}\left\{\widehat{T}^1{\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^2\widehat{T}}{\delta \rho _\alpha (1)\delta \rho _\beta (2)}}\right\}_{\chi _\alpha =0},`$ (51)
where $`\widehat{T}`$ is a short hand notation of the matrix $`T_{\gamma \delta }(3,4)`$ and we have took into account that $`\delta T_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)/\delta \chi _\gamma (3)=\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _\alpha (1)\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _\beta (2)\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _\gamma (3)_{\mathrm{SP}}/N=0`$ at $`\chi _\alpha =0`$ because the fluctuations are Gaussian. Further calculation yields

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^2T_{\gamma \delta }(3,4)}{\delta \rho _\alpha (1)\delta \rho _\beta (2)}}={\displaystyle d5d6\frac{1}{N}\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _\gamma (3)\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _\delta (4)\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _\omega (5)\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _\chi (6)_{\mathrm{SP}}R_{\omega \beta }(5,2)R_{\chi \alpha }(6,1)},`$ (52)
where

$`R_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)={\displaystyle \frac{\delta \vartheta _\alpha (1)}{\delta \rho _\beta (2)}}`$ (53)
and the full mean field

$`\vartheta _\alpha (1)=i\overline{\psi _\alpha }(1)+\chi _\alpha (1).`$ (54)
The expression for $`R_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)`$ can be easily found by differentiation of eq.(54) with respect to $`\rho _\beta (2)`$. Taking into account eqs.(29), (45) and (46) at $`\chi _\alpha 0`$ one gets

$`R_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)=\left[G^1\right]_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)\mu {\displaystyle d4d3v_{\alpha \omega }(1,4)S_{\omega \gamma }(4,3)R_{\gamma \beta }(3,2)}`$ (55)
or finally

$`R_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)={\displaystyle d3\left\{\left[\widehat{1}+\mu \widehat{v}\widehat{S}\right]^1\right\}_{\alpha \gamma }(1,3)\left[\widehat{G}^1\right]_{\gamma \beta }(3,2)},`$ (56)
where the hatted variables stands for the corresponding 2$`\times `$2 matrices. Substitution eqs.(56) and (52) in eq.(51) yields

$`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)={\displaystyle d3d4K_{\gamma \delta }(3,4)\left[G^1\right]_{\gamma \alpha }(3,1)\left[G^1\right]_{\delta \beta }(4,2)},`$ (57)
where 2$`\times `$2 vertex - matrix has the form

$`K_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle d3d4d5d6\left\{\left[(\mu \widehat{v})^1+\widehat{S}\right]^1\right\}_{\delta \gamma }(4,3)S_{\gamma \delta \omega \chi }^{(4)}(3,4,5,6)}`$ (58)
$`\times `$ $`\left\{\left[\widehat{1}+\mu \widehat{v}\widehat{S}\right]^1\right\}_{\omega \alpha }(5,1)\left\{\left[\widehat{1}+\mu \widehat{v}\widehat{S}\right]^1\right\}_{\chi \beta }(6,2).`$ (59)
In eq.(59) $`S_{\alpha \beta \gamma \delta }^{(4)}(1,2,3,4)`$ is the 4 - point (response) correlator matrix in RPA

$`S_{\alpha \beta \gamma \delta }^{(4)}(1,2,3,4)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{N^2}}\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _\alpha (1)\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _\beta (2)\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _\gamma (3)\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _\delta (4)_{\mathrm{SP}}.`$ (60)
The explicit calculation of $`S_{\alpha \beta \gamma \delta }^{(4)}(1,2,3,4)`$ is implemented in Appendix B. The vertex - matrix can be seen as a one-loop diagram (see Fig. 1).

The higher loops contributions which include generally speaking 2m - point correlators , $`S_{\alpha \beta \mathrm{}\gamma }^{(2m)}(1,2,\mathrm{},2m)`$, can be also considered, however the “self - energy” has still the same convolution structure : $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Sigma }}=\widehat{G}^1\stackrel{~}{K}\widehat{G}^1`$. Here the vertex - matrix $`\stackrel{~}{K}_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)`$ is calculated in RPA only . That is why these contributions basically do not change our results.

As a result in the $`(𝐤,\omega )`$\- representation the Dyson equation (49) with the “self - energy” functional (57) reduces to a quadratic one

$`G_{\alpha \gamma }(𝐤,\omega )\left[S^1\right]_{\gamma \delta }(𝐤,\omega )G_{\delta \beta }(𝐤,\omega )G_{\alpha \beta }(𝐤,\omega )+K_{\alpha \beta }(𝐤,\omega )=0.`$ (61)
The coefficients of the eq.(61) trace the problem back to the free system dynamics which is embodied in the correlation matrices $`F_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)`$ and $`F_{\alpha \beta \gamma \delta }^{(4)}(1,2,3,4)`$. It is not surprising then that a specification of the model for the free system dynamics is necessary, before going to the investigation of eq.(61).

### D Analysis of the equation for the full correlation matrix

As we have mentioned the explicit solution of eq.(61) needs the specification of the free system dynamics. Two simple models are most amenable for the theoretical treatment : free diffusion model (FDM) and the relaxation time approximation model (RTAM ) . The latter provide more reasonable dynamical information also for short time intervals, $`\mathrm{\Delta }t<m_0/\gamma _0`$ , where the FDM completely failed (e.g., the sum rule does not hold). It turns out that upon calculation of the trace in eq.(59) the integral is ultraviolet \- divergent for FDM and only RTAM leads to the finite result. The matrix elements for RTAM has the form

$`F_{00}(𝐤,\omega )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2F_{\mathrm{st}}k^2D}{\omega ^2+(k^2D\omega ^2\tau _0)^2}}`$ (62)
$`F_{01}(𝐤,\omega )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\beta F_{\mathrm{st}}k^2D}{i\omega +k^2D\omega ^2\tau _0}}`$ (63)
$`F_{10}(𝐤,\omega )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\beta F_{\mathrm{st}}k^2D}{i\omega +k^2D\omega ^2\tau _0}},`$ (64)
where we introduced the diffusion coefficient $`D=T/\gamma _0`$, the characteristic time scale $`\tau _0=m_0/\gamma _0`$, and $`F_{\mathrm{st}}=\rho _0`$ for the overall density. At $`\tau _0=0`$ we return to FDM. In the case of RTAM the solution of eq.(61) for the full correlation matrix reads

$`G_{01}(𝐤,\omega )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1+\sqrt{14\left[i\omega \tau _\mathrm{c}\omega ^2\tau _0\tau _\mathrm{c}+\chi _{st}^1\right]K_{01}(𝐤,\omega )}}{2\left[i\omega \tau _\mathrm{c}\omega ^2\tau _0\tau _\mathrm{c}+\chi _{st}^1(k)\right]}}`$ (65)
$`G_{10}(𝐤,\omega )`$ $`=`$ $`G_{01}(𝐤,\omega )`$ (66)
and

$`G_{00}(𝐤,\omega )={\displaystyle \frac{\frac{\tau _\mathrm{c}}{2\beta }\left|\frac{1+\sqrt{14\left[i\omega \tau _\mathrm{c}\omega ^2\tau _0\tau _\mathrm{c}+\chi _{st}^1(𝐤)\right]K_{01}(𝐤,\omega )}}{i\omega \tau _\mathrm{c}\omega ^2\tau _0\tau _\mathrm{c}+\chi _{st}^1(𝐤)}\right|^2K_{00}(𝐤,\omega )}{\mathrm{Re}\left\{\sqrt{14\left[i\omega \tau _\mathrm{c}\omega ^2\tau _0\tau _\mathrm{c}+\chi _{st}^1(𝐤)\right]K_{01}(𝐤,\omega )}\right\}}}.`$ (67)
The explicit calculation of the matrix $`K_{\alpha \beta }(𝐤,\omega )`$ (see eq.(59) is given in the Appendix C. The overall behavior of the correlation function $`G_{00}(𝐤,\omega )`$ according eq. (67) is shown in Fig. 2 (at $`\mu =10,\beta =0.1,\rho _0=1\text{and}\tau _0=0.1`$). It can be seen clearly that there no singularity appears at $`\omega 0`$.

The singularity, however, might be responsible for a glass transition. Instead, the low frequency limit of $`G_{00}(𝐤,\omega )`$ slowly changed with control parameters (which is not shown in Fig.2). That means that for the non - disordered model with a general repulsive long ranged potential (1) the glass transition is not generic. This very important conclusion suggest that for the model with a long range interaction the phase space is too smooth to show a glass transition. In order to obtain a glass like transition a competing interactions or a quenched disorder should be added. This leads to glassy dynamics, as we will show in the next section.

It is interesting to note, that for the generalized Kac potential eq. (2), where $`f(𝐫)`$ and its Fourier transformation are positive definite functions, MCT - memory kernel vanishes at $`\kappa 0`$. The corresponding argumentation is relegated to the Appendix D. The explanation for this result lies in the fact that the “cage effect”, which is a cornerstone of MCT, is missing in the MF - limit.

The “glass transition” which has been studied in ref. for the particles interacted via the Kac potential (2) has a completely different nature. In ref. the function $`f(𝐫)`$ has a step form so that its Fourier transform $`f(𝐤)`$ is negative at some value of $`𝐤`$ . As a result the system becomes unstable and a nonuniform configuration where the particles are grouped into “clumps” shows up. It was found that the slow dynamics of the MF - model is associated with these clumps and does not touch a single particle motion. Obviously it is different from the conventional glass transition .

## III The structural model with a competing quenched interactions

### A Specification of the model

In the previous sections we have shown in detail that in the absence of disorder the dynamical spectrum changed monotonically with a control parameter and no glassy dynamics can be seen. The natural question which arises now is: How will the introduction of competing interactions and / or quenched disorder affect the dynamics of the system discussed above? To provide an answer to this question we will use already existing models of heteropolymers and their disordered two body interaction . The use of these models and techniques are here natural, since the behavior of heteropolymers is well discussed in the literature. In principle, two practical possibilities exist.

* The strength of the two- body interaction , $`\mu `$, in eq.(1) is now a random function of all pairs of the interacted particles, $`\mu _{pm}`$ (“random - bond model”).
* Each particle carry a single “charge” $`\sigma _p`$, so that $`\mu _{pm}=\xi _0+b\sigma _p\sigma _m`$ and each $`\sigma _p`$ is randomly distributed (“random sequence model”).

It turns out to be sufficient for the purpose of this paper to restrict ourself only with the “random - bond model” , where $`\mu _{pm}`$ does not depend from the choice of pairs and has a Gaussian distribution

$`P\{\mu _{pm}\}\mathrm{exp}\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{(\mu _{pm}\xi _0)^2}{2\chi ^2}}\right\}.`$ (68)
The competing long range interactions frustrates the system of particles and the question is whether a glass transition exist or not. Normally frustration and frozen disorder is enough for the existence of glassy phases. Here the problem is more complicated, since the long range nature of the interaction may provide opposite effects.

The averaging over the quenched disorder in eq.(7) (after the substitution $`\mu \mu _{pm})`$ can be carried out just in the same way as in ref.. Similarly, typical two-time dependent terms immediately appear. They are also bilinear with respect to the forces of interaction $`_jv(𝐫)`$ . In order to rationalize these terms it is convenient to introduce (besides the mass density (9) and the response field density (10)) the following collective variables

$`Q_0(𝐫,t;𝐫^{},t^{})`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\delta (𝐫𝐫^p(t))\delta (𝐫^{}𝐫_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{p}(t^{}))`$ (69)
$`Q_1(𝐫,t;𝐫^{},t^{})`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}i\widehat{r}_j(t)_j\delta (𝐫𝐫^p(t))i\widehat{r}_l(t^{})_l\delta (𝐫^{}𝐫_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{p}(t^{}))`$ (70)
$`Q_2(𝐫,t;𝐫^{},t^{})`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}i\widehat{r}_j(t)_j\delta (𝐫𝐫^p(t))\delta (𝐫^{}𝐫_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{p}(t^{}))`$ (71)
$`Q_3(𝐫,t;𝐫^{},t^{})`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}i\widehat{r}_j(t^{})_j\delta (𝐫^{}𝐫^p(t^{}))\delta (𝐫𝐫^p(t)).`$ (72)
After the introduction of the 4-dimensional column - fields

$`Q_\mathrm{a}(1;1^{})=\left[\begin{array}{c}Q_0(1;1^{})\\ Q_1(1;1^{})\\ Q_2(1;1^{})\\ Q_3(1;1^{})\end{array}\right],`$ (77)
where $`a=1,2,3,4`$and 4$`\times `$4 - matrix

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{ab}}(1,2,3,4)=\left[\begin{array}{cccc}0& v(1,3)v(2,4)& 0& 0\\ v(1,3)v(2,4)& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& v(1,4)v(3,2)\\ 0& 0& v(1,4)v(3,2)& 0\end{array}\right]`$ (82)
the whole expression for GF takes the form

$`Z_{\mathrm{av}}\{\chi _\alpha ,H_a\}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle }{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =0}{\overset{1}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{a=0}{\overset{3}{}}}D\rho _\alpha (1)DQ_\mathrm{a}(1;1^{})\mathrm{exp}\{\stackrel{~}{W}\{\rho _\alpha (1);Q_\mathrm{a}(1;1^{})\}`$ (83)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\xi _0}{2N}}{\displaystyle d1d2\rho _\alpha (1)U_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)\rho _\beta (2)}+{\displaystyle d1\rho _\alpha (1)\chi _\alpha (1)}`$ (84)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\chi ^2}{4N^2}}{\displaystyle }d1d2d3d4Q_\mathrm{a}(1;2)\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{ab}}(1,2,3,4)Q_\mathrm{b}(3;4)+{\displaystyle }d1d2Q_\mathrm{a}(1;2)H_a(1;2)\},`$ (85)
where the entropy is given by

$`\stackrel{~}{W}\{\rho _\alpha (1);Q_\mathrm{a}(1;1^{})\}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{log}{\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}D𝐫^{(p)}(t)D\widehat{𝐫}^{(p)}(t)\mathrm{exp}\left\{A_0\{𝐫^{(p)},\widehat{𝐫}^{(p)}\}\right\}}`$ (86)
$`\times `$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =0}{\overset{1}{}}}\delta \left[\rho _\alpha (1){\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}r_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)\delta (𝐫_1𝐫^{(p)}(t))\right]`$ (87)
$`\times `$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{a}=1}{\overset{4}{}}}\delta \left[Q_\mathrm{a}(1;2){\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}p_\mathrm{a}^{(p)}(1;2)\delta (𝐫_1𝐫^{(p)}(t_1))\delta (𝐫_2𝐫^{(p)}(t_2))\right].`$ (88)
We had used the column - operators

$`r_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)=\left(\begin{array}{c}1\\ i\widehat{r}_j^{(p)}(t_1)_{j,1}\end{array}\right)p_\mathrm{a}^{(p)}(1;2)=\left(\begin{array}{c}1\\ i\widehat{r}_j^{(p)}(t_1)_{j,1}i\widehat{r}_l^{(p)}(t_2)_{l,2}\\ i\widehat{r}_j^{(p)}(t_1)_{j,1}\\ i\widehat{r}_j^{(p)}(t_2)_{j,2}\end{array}\right)`$ (95)
and the external field, $`H_\mathrm{a}(1;2)`$, conjugated to $`Q_\mathrm{a}(1;2)`$, has been introduced also.

The two- point collective fields (72) have a meaning of the dynamical “overlaps”. It is a dynamical generalization of the Parisi “overlaps” in a replica space . For example $`Q_0(1;1^{})`$ quantify density - density and $`Q_2(1;1^{})`$ response - density overlaps respectively between two space-time points. The “entropy” (88) corresponds to the volume in the dynamical phase space when not only fields $`\rho _\alpha (1)`$ but also overlaps $`Q_\mathrm{a}(1;1^{})`$ are given. In a sense the “entropy” (88) is again the generalization of the entropy for the heteropolymer spanned in a replica space at the given set of “overlaps” .

### B The saddle point treatment

Let us introduce the functional $`\stackrel{~}{F}\{\psi _\alpha (1);\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{a}(1;1^{})\}`$ by the functional Fourier transformation

$`\mathrm{exp}\{\stackrel{~}{W}\{\rho _\alpha (1);Q_\mathrm{a}(1;1^{})\}\}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle }{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =0}{\overset{1}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{a=0}{\overset{3}{}}}D\psi _\alpha (1)D\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{a}(1;1^{})\mathrm{exp}\{\stackrel{~}{F}\{\psi _\alpha (1);\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{a}(1;1^{})\}`$ (96)
$`+`$ $`i{\displaystyle }d1\rho _\alpha (1)\psi _\alpha (1)+i{\displaystyle }d1d2Q_\mathrm{a}(1;2)\mathrm{\Phi }_a(1;2)\}.`$ (97)
After substitution in eq.(85) and integration over $`\rho _\alpha `$ and $`Q_\mathrm{a}(1;2)`$ one gets

$`Z_{\mathrm{av}}\{\chi _\alpha ,H_a\}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle }{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =0}{\overset{1}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{a=0}{\overset{3}{}}}D\psi _\alpha (1)D\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{a}(1;1^{})\mathrm{exp}\{\stackrel{~}{F}\{\psi _\alpha (1);\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{a}(1;1^{})\}`$ (98)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{N}{2\xi _0}}{\displaystyle d1d2\psi _\alpha (1)\left[v^1\right]_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)\psi _\beta (2)}`$ (99)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{N}{\chi _0^2}}{\displaystyle }d1d2d3d4\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{a}(1;2)\left[\mathrm{\Gamma }^1\right]_{\mathrm{ab}}(1,2,3,4)\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{b}(3;4)\},`$ (100)
where

$`\stackrel{~}{F}\{\psi _\alpha (1);\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{a}(1;1^{})\}=\mathrm{log}{\displaystyle }{\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}D𝐫^{(p)}(t)D\widehat{𝐫}^{(p)}(t)\mathrm{exp}\{{\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}A_0[𝐫^{(p)},\widehat{𝐫}^{(p)}]`$ (101)
$`i{\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle 𝑑tr_\alpha ^{(p)}(t)\left[\psi _\alpha \left(𝐫^{(p)}(t)\right)+i\chi _\alpha \left(𝐫^{(p)}(t)\right)\right]}`$ (102)
$`i{\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle }dtdt^{}p_a^{(p)}(t;t^{})[\mathrm{\Phi }_a[𝐫^{(p)}(t);𝐫^{(p)}(t^{})]+iH_a[𝐫^{(p)}(t);𝐫^{(p)}(t^{})]]\}.`$ (103)
In order to ensure the extensivity of the whole effective action in eq.(100) we put the variance $`\chi ^2=\chi _0^2N`$ (so that the variance of the whole strength factor in eq.(4) scaled as $`N^{1/2}`$ akin to ref.) . This enable to represent GF in a similar to eq.(24) form

$`Z_{\mathrm{av}}\left\{\chi _\alpha \right\}={\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =0}{\overset{1}{}}\underset{a=1}{\overset{3}{}}D\psi _\alpha (1)D\mathrm{\Phi }_a\mathrm{exp}\left\{N\stackrel{~}{A}[\psi _\alpha ,\mathrm{\Phi }_a;\chi _\alpha ,H_a]\right\}},`$ (104)
where

$`\stackrel{~}{A}[\psi _\alpha ,\mathrm{\Phi }_a;\chi _\alpha ,H_a]={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\xi _0}}{\displaystyle 𝑑td1d2\psi _\alpha (1)\left[v^1\right]_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)\psi _\beta (2)}`$ (105)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\chi _0^2}}{\displaystyle d1d2d3d4\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{a}(1;2)\left[\mathrm{\Gamma }^1\right]_{\mathrm{ab}}(1,2,3,4)\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{b}(3;4)}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}\mathrm{log}{\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}D𝐫^{(p)}(t)D\widehat{𝐫}^{(p)}(t)}`$ (106)
$`\times \mathrm{exp}\{{\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}A_0[𝐫^{(p)},\widehat{𝐫}^{(p)}]i{\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle }dtr_\alpha ^{(p)}(t)[\psi _\alpha \left(𝐫^{(p)}(t)\right)+i\chi _\alpha \left(𝐫^{(p)}(t)\right)]`$ (107)
$`i{\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle }dtdt^{}p_a^{(p)}(t;t^{})[\mathrm{\Phi }_a[𝐫^{(p)}(t);𝐫^{(p)}(t^{})]+iH_a[𝐫^{(p)}(t);𝐫^{(p)}(t^{})]]\}.`$ (108)
The resulting SP - equation reads

$`\overline{\psi _\alpha }(1)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i\xi _0}{N}}{\displaystyle d2v_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)\rho _\beta (2)_{\mathrm{SP}}}`$ (109)
$`\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }_a}(1)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{i\xi _0}{N}}{\displaystyle d3d4\mathrm{\Gamma }_{ab}(1,2,3,4)\rho _b(2)_{\mathrm{SP}}},`$ (110)
where the average $`<\mathrm{}>_{SP}`$ is calculated with the GF

$`Z_0_{\mathrm{av}}\{\chi _\alpha ,H_a\}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle }{\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}D𝐫^{(p)}(t)D\widehat{𝐫}^{(p)}(t)\mathrm{exp}\{{\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}A_0[𝐫^{(p)},\widehat{𝐫}^{(p)}]`$ (111)
$``$ $`i{\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle 𝑑tr_\alpha ^{(p)}(t)\left[\overline{\psi _\alpha }\left(𝐫^{(p)}(t)\right)+i\chi _\alpha \left(𝐫^{(p)}(t)\right)\right]}`$ (112)
$``$ $`i{\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle }dtdt^{}p_a^{(p)}(t;t^{})[\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }_a}[𝐫^{(p)}(t);𝐫^{(p)}(t^{})]+iH_a[𝐫^{(p)}(t);𝐫^{(p)}(t^{})]]\}.`$ (113)
Thereby we are left with the GF of a free system which experiences the external mean-fields $`\overline{\psi _\alpha }+i\chi _\alpha `$ and $`\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }_a}+iH_a`$.

### C The self-consistent Hartree approximation

In order to calculate GF given by eq.(113) we will use the self-consistent Hartree approximation (SCHA). For this approximation we replace the real action by an appropriate Gaussian one in such a way that all terms which include more then two fields $`r_j^{(p)}(t)`$ or/and $`\widehat{r}_j^{(p)}(t)`$ are written in all possible ways as products of pairs of $`r_j^{(p)}(t)`$ or $`\widehat{r}_j^{(p)}(t)`$ coupled to self-consistent averages of the remaining fields.

The analogy between SCHA and SP-approximation at $`N\mathrm{}`$ for the special case when the non-quadratic terms in the action are only the functions of the mean-squared displacement $`d^2(tt^{})=_{p=1}^N\left[𝐫^{(p)}(t)𝐫^{(p)}(t^{})\right]^2/N`$ has been proven in ref.. In our case the action in eq.(113) has a more general form. In the Appendix E we show that the SCHA and the next to the saddle point approximation (NSPA) merge and both become exact, if the GF with an arbitrary action can be treated by a steepest descent approach at $`N\mathrm{}`$.

Let us make the Fourier transformation of the mean-fields

$`\overline{\psi _\alpha }\left(𝐫^{(p)}(t)\right)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{d^3k}{(2\pi )^3}\overline{\psi _\alpha }\left(𝐤\right)\mathrm{exp}\left\{i\mathrm{𝐤𝐫}^{(p)}(t)\right\}}`$ (114)
$`\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }_a}(𝐫^{(p)}(t);𝐫^{(p)}(t^{}))`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{d^3k^1d^3k^2}{(2\pi )^6}\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }_a}(𝐤^\mathrm{𝟏},𝐤^\mathrm{𝟐})\mathrm{exp}\left\{i𝐤^\mathrm{𝟏}𝐫^{(p)}(t)+ı𝐤^\mathrm{𝟐}𝐫^{(p)}(t^{})\right\}}`$ (115)
and insert it in eq.(113) . Then for eq.(113) we use the Hartree - type action (see eq.(D33). By doing so we put for simplicity the expectation value $`\xi _0=0`$ . It is easy to assure oneselves also that the “response \- response overlap” $`Q_1(1,1^{})=0`$ (similar to $`\widehat{\sigma }\widehat{\sigma }=0`$ in ref.). In the curse of the derivation we have used SP - equation (110) and defined the correlator (or the incoherent scattering function)

$`C(𝐤^\mathrm{𝟏},t;𝐤^\mathrm{𝟐},t^{})={\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}Q_0(𝐤^\mathrm{𝟏},t;𝐤^\mathrm{𝟐},t^{})`$ (116)
as well as the response functions

$`G(𝐤^\mathrm{𝟏},t;𝐤^\mathrm{𝟐},t^{})`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}Q_3(𝐤^\mathrm{𝟏},t;𝐤^\mathrm{𝟐},t^{})\text{at}t^{}<t`$ (117)
$`G(𝐤^\mathrm{𝟐},t;𝐤^\mathrm{𝟏},t^{})`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}Q_2(𝐤^\mathrm{𝟏},t;𝐤^\mathrm{𝟐},t^{})\text{at}t^{}>t,`$ (118)
where $`\mathrm{}`$ stands for the averaging with the Hartree \- type of action. After collection of all terms the final result (at $`\chi _\alpha =0\text{and}H_a=0`$) reads then

$`Z_0_{\mathrm{av}}\{\overline{\psi _\alpha },\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }_a}\}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle }{\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}D𝐫^{(p)}(t)D\widehat{𝐫}^{(p)}(t)\mathrm{exp}\{{\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}A_0[𝐫^{(p)},\widehat{𝐫}^{(p)}]+{\displaystyle }dtdt^{}i\widehat{𝐫}^{(p)}(t)𝐫^{(p)}(t)\lambda (t,t^{})`$ (119)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle }dtdt^{}i\widehat{𝐫}^{(p)}(t)𝐫^{(p)}(t^{})\lambda (t,t^{})+{\displaystyle }dtdt^{}i\widehat{𝐫}^{(p)}(t)i\widehat{𝐫}^{(p)}(t^{})\eta (t,t^{})\},`$ (120)
where

$`\lambda (t,t^{})={\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}\chi _0^2{\displaystyle \frac{d^3k}{(2\pi )^3}k^2\left|v(k)\right|^2G(𝐤;t,t^{})C(𝐤;t,t^{})}`$ (121)
and

$`\eta (t,t^{})={\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}\chi _0^2{\displaystyle \frac{d^3k}{(2\pi )^3}k^2\left|v(k)\right|^2\left[C(𝐤;t,t^{})\right]^2}.`$ (122)
In eqs.(120) - (122) we have restricted ourselves to the homogeneous case

$`C(𝐤,t;𝐤^{},t^{})`$ $`=`$ $`(2\pi )^3\delta (𝐤+𝐤^{})C(𝐤;t,t^{})`$ (123)
$`G(𝐤,t;𝐤^{},t^{})`$ $`=`$ $`(2\pi )^3\delta (𝐤+𝐤^{})G(𝐤;t,t^{})`$ (124)
for the correlation and response function. The equation of motion for the one particle correlator

$`𝒫(t,t^{})={\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{3}{}}}r_j^{(p)}(t)r_j^{(p)}(t^{})`$ (125)
and the corresponding response function

$`𝒢(t,t^{})={\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{3}{}}}i\widehat{r}_j^{(p)}(t^{})r_j^{(p)}(t)`$ (126)
(which actually does not depend from the particle index $`p`$) can be derived from eq.(120) by using the standard techniques . The resulting equations read

$`\left[m_0{\displaystyle \frac{^2}{t^2}}+\gamma _0{\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}+{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{t}{}}}𝑑\tau \lambda (t,\tau )\right]𝒫(t,t^{}){\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{t}{}}}𝑑\tau \lambda (t,\tau )𝒫(t,t^{})`$ (127)
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{t^{}}{}}}𝑑\tau \eta (t,\tau )𝒢(t^{},\tau )=2T\gamma _0𝒢(t^{},t)`$ (128)
and

$`\left[m_0{\displaystyle \frac{^2}{t^2}}+\gamma _0{\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}+{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{t}{}}}𝑑\tau \lambda (t,\tau )\right]𝒢(t,t^{}){\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{t}{}}}𝑑\tau \lambda (t,\tau )𝒢(\tau ,t^{})`$ (129)
$`=\delta (tt^{}).`$ (130)
Eqs.(128) - (130) should be supplemented with the initial conditions $`\gamma _0𝒢(t+0^+,t)=1`$ and $`𝒢(t,t)=0`$. By making use this condition , equipartition $`(m_0/3)_{j=1}^3\dot{r}_j(t)\dot{r}_j(t)=T`$, causality $`𝒢(t,t^{})=0`$ at $`tt^{}`$ as well as the condition $`(1/3)_{j=1}^3\dot{r}_j(t)r_j(t)=0`$ one find from eq.(128) the following equation

$`\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}m_0{\displaystyle \frac{^2}{t^2}}+{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{t}{}}}𝑑\tau \lambda (t,\tau )\right]𝒫(t,t){\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{t}{}}}𝑑\tau \lambda (t,\tau )𝒫(\tau ,t^{})+{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{t}{}}}𝑑\tau \eta (t,\tau )𝒢(t,\tau )=2T.`$ (131)
The set of eqs.(128) - (130) have the same structure as the Dyson eq.(49). After the matrices inversions and going to the time domain eqs.(49) (in time-translational invariant case) take the form

$`\left[m_0{\displaystyle \frac{^2}{t^2}}+\gamma _0{\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}+\mu (0)\right]G_{01}(t,t^{})`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{t}{}}}𝑑\tau \mathrm{\Sigma }_{10}(t\tau )G_{01}(\tau t^{})=\delta (tt^{})`$ (132)
$`\left[m_0{\displaystyle \frac{^2}{t^2}}+\gamma _0{\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}+\mu (0)\right]G_{00}(t,t^{})`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{t}{}}}𝑑\tau \mathrm{\Sigma }_{10}(t\tau )G_{00}(\tau t^{})`$ (133)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle 𝑑\tau \mathrm{\Sigma }_{11}(t\tau )G_{10}(\tau t^{})}=2T\gamma _0G_{10}(tt^{}),`$ (134)
where $`\mu (0)=\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝑑t\lambda (t)`$ and RPA - Fourier spectrum

$`S_{01}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{i\gamma _0\omega m_0\omega ^2+\mu (0)}}.`$ (135)
Eqs.(128) - (130) are turned to the Dyson equations (133) - (134) provided that

$`G_{00}(t)`$ $`=`$ $`𝒫(t),G_{01}(t)=𝒢(t),`$ (136)
$`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{10}(t)`$ $`=`$ $`\lambda (t),\mathrm{\Sigma }_{11}(t)=\eta (t).`$ (137)
We can show  that the relation

$`\beta {\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}\mathrm{\Sigma }_{11}(t)=\mathrm{\Sigma }_{10}(t)\mathrm{\Sigma }_{01}(t)`$ (138)
holds, provided that the FDT is satisfied for $`G_{\alpha \beta }(t)`$. We then have in addition

$`\beta {\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}G_{00}(t)=G_{01}(t)G_{10}(t).`$ (139)
Bearing eqs.(137) in mind the eq.(138) takes in our case the form (at $`t>0`$)

$`\beta {\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}\eta (t)=\lambda (t).`$ (140)
The validity of the relationship (140) can be checked by replacing (121) and (122) in (140).

The general eqs.(128) - (130) are equivalent, mutatis mutandis, to the corresponding equations for the $`p`$ \- spin system or a particle in the random potential at the large dimension . The most important features of these equations are the glassy dynamical behavior and the universal aging regime. At low temperatures the system tries to minimize the energy and each particle (with a number $`p`$) tends to surround itself with other particles which assure the strength parameter $`\mu _{\mathrm{pm}}<0`$. On the other hand the long - range interaction tries to support other pairs $`(ij)`$ corresponding to $`\mu _{ij}>0`$. As a result the system becomes “frustrated” and many local free energy minima appear.

In the spirit of ref. when $`t,t^{}\mathrm{}`$ we have to discriminate between different cases: (i) the asymptotic regime when $`(tt^{})/t0`$ and (ii) the aging regime when $`(tt^{})/t^{}𝒪(1)`$. The aging regime is much more complicated because the time - translational invariance and FDT are violated. This regime has been extensively investigated both theoretically  and by the computer simulation . In the following we restrict ourselves only to the asymptotic regime, for the sake of clearness and simplicity, and since the main features will be already visible.

### D The asymptotic regime

This asymptotic regime is characterized by the large time scales, i.e., $`t,t^{}\mathrm{}`$ but keeping the difference $`\tau =tt^{}`$ finite. Under these circumstances we can define

$`𝒫_{\mathrm{as}}(\tau )=\underset{t^{}\mathrm{}}{lim}𝒫(t^{}+\tau ,t^{})`$ (141)
$`𝒢_{\mathrm{as}}(\tau )=\underset{t^{}\mathrm{}}{lim}𝒢(t^{}+\tau ,t^{})`$ (142)
Then the equation for the displacement $`𝒟_{\mathrm{as}}=2[𝒫_{\mathrm{as}}(0)𝒫_{\mathrm{as}}(\tau )]`$, response function $`𝒢_{\mathrm{as}}(\tau )`$ and the static correlator $`𝒫_{\mathrm{as}}(0)`$ takes correspondingly the forms

$`\left[m_0{\displaystyle \frac{^2}{\tau ^2}}+\gamma _0{\displaystyle \frac{}{\tau }}+M\right]𝒟_{\mathrm{as}}(\tau ){\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\tau }{}}}𝑑\tau ^{}\lambda _{\mathrm{as}}(\tau \tau ^{})𝒟_{\mathrm{as}}(\tau ^{})`$ (143)
$`{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}𝑑\tau ^{}\left[\lambda _{\mathrm{as}}(\tau +\tau ^{})\lambda _{\mathrm{as}}(\tau ^{})\right]𝒟_{\mathrm{as}}(\tau ^{})2{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}𝑑\tau ^{}\left[\eta _{\mathrm{as}}(\tau +\tau ^{})\eta _{\mathrm{as}}(\tau ^{})\right]𝒢_{\mathrm{as}}(\tau ^{})=2T`$ (144)
$`\left[m_0{\displaystyle \frac{^2}{\tau ^2}}+\gamma _0{\displaystyle \frac{}{\tau }}+M\right]𝒢_{\mathrm{as}}(\tau ){\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\tau }{}}}𝑑\tau ^{}\lambda _{\mathrm{as}}(\tau \tau ^{})𝒢_{\mathrm{as}}(\tau ^{})=0`$ (145)
$`𝒫_{\mathrm{as}}(0)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{MM_{\mathrm{as}}}}\left[T{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}𝑑\tau \lambda _{\mathrm{as}}𝒟_{\mathrm{as}}(\tau ){\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}𝑑\tau \eta _{\mathrm{as}}𝒢_{\mathrm{as}}(\tau )\right],`$ (146)
where

$`M=\underset{t\mathrm{}}{lim}{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{t}{}}}𝑑\tau \lambda (t,\tau ).`$ (147)
$`M_{\mathrm{as}}={\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}𝑑\tau \lambda _{\mathrm{as}}(\tau ).`$ (148)
However, it is also convenient to define the “anomaly” $`\overline{M}=MM_{\mathrm{as}}`$ . The eqs.(144) - (146) has been analyzed first in the context of polymeric manifold in the random media  and the random - phase sine - Gordon model . The peculiarity of our model is defined by its memory functions $`\lambda _{\mathrm{as}}(\tau )`$ and $`\eta _{\mathrm{as}}(\tau )`$.

For example, let as give an explicit expression for $`\eta _{\mathrm{as}}(\tau )`$. The Gaussian form of the correlator, $`C(\tau )=\mathrm{exp}\left\{k^2𝒟_{\mathrm{as}}(\tau )/2\right\}`$, leads from eq.(122)to the result

$`\eta _{\mathrm{as}}(\tau )={\displaystyle \frac{\chi _0^2\sqrt{\pi }}{6}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{𝒟_{\mathrm{as}}(\tau )}}}.`$ (149)
Usually it is assumed that at the high temperature FDT holds, i.e.

$`\beta {\displaystyle \frac{}{\tau }}𝒟_{\mathrm{as}}(\tau )=2𝒢_{\mathrm{as}}(\tau )`$ (150)
and

$`\beta {\displaystyle \frac{}{\tau }}\eta _{\mathrm{as}}(\tau )=2\lambda _{\mathrm{as}}(\tau ).`$ (151)
In this case eqs.(144) and (145) merge and take a simple form

$`\left[m_0{\displaystyle \frac{^2}{\tau ^2}}+\gamma _0{\displaystyle \frac{}{\tau }}+M\right]𝒟_{\mathrm{as}}(\tau ){\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\tau }{}}}𝑑\tau ^{}\lambda _{\mathrm{as}}(\tau \tau ^{})𝒟_{\mathrm{as}}(\tau ^{})=2T.`$ (152)
It turns out  that the solution which satisfies the FDT is only stable above a critical temperature $`T_\mathrm{c}`$. For the stability analysis it is convenient to represent eq.(152) in the form

$`\left[m_0{\displaystyle \frac{^2}{\tau ^2}}+\gamma _0{\displaystyle \frac{}{\tau }}+\overline{M}+M_{\mathrm{as}}(\tau )\right]𝒟_{\mathrm{as}}(\tau ){\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\tau }{}}}𝑑\tau ^{}\left[\eta _{\mathrm{as}}(\tau \tau ^{})\eta _{\mathrm{as}}(\tau )\right]{\displaystyle \frac{}{\tau ^{}}}𝒟_{\mathrm{as}}(\tau ^{})=2T,`$ (153)
where

$`M_{\mathrm{as}}(\tau )={\displaystyle \underset{\tau }{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}𝑑\tau ^{}\lambda _{\mathrm{as}}(\tau ^{}).`$ (154)
For $`\tau \mathrm{}`$ the stability condition which comes out of eq.(153) reads

$`\left[\overline{M}+M_{\mathrm{as}}(\tau )\right]𝒟_{\mathrm{as}}(\tau )2T.`$ (155)
Then the stationary value of the displacement $`𝒟_{\mathrm{as}}(\tau \mathrm{})=q_0`$ reads

$`q_0={\displaystyle \frac{2T}{\overline{M}}}.`$ (156)
By taking into account eqs.(150) and (151) the stability condition becomes

$`D(q,T)0`$ (157)
for $`0qq_0`$, where

$`D(q,T)\left[\left({\displaystyle \frac{\chi _0}{T}}\right)^2{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{\pi }}{12\sqrt{q_0}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{q_0}}\right]q\left({\displaystyle \frac{\chi _0}{T}}\right)^2{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{\pi }}{12}}\sqrt{q}+1.`$ (158)
The critical values $`q_\mathrm{c}`$ and $`T_\mathrm{c}`$ at which the condition (157) first becomes violated is defined by equations

$`D(q_\mathrm{c},T_\mathrm{c})`$ $`=`$ $`0`$ (159)
$`D^{}(q_\mathrm{c},T_\mathrm{c})`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$ (160)
Consequently, eqs. (160) have the simple solution

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{T_\mathrm{c}}{\chi _0}}\right)^2={\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{\pi q_0}}{24}}\text{and}q_\mathrm{c}=q_0.`$ (161)
The Fig.3 shows the behavior of $`D(q,T)`$ in the vicinity of the critical point. It can be seen that the minimum, $`q_mq_0`$, at which $`D(q,T)0`$ appears continuously, i.e. the instability of the FDT solution shows up as a $`2^{\mathrm{nd}}`$ order phase transition. This is analogous to the dynamics of polymeric manifolds in a medium with the long range correlation in disorder . In particular, if “anomaly” $`\overline{M}0`$ then $`q_0\mathrm{}`$ and $`T_\mathrm{c}\mathrm{}`$, so in this case the FDT solution is unstable for any finite temperature.

Let us consider the dynamics at the temperature slightly above the critical point: $`T=T_\mathrm{c}(1+\epsilon )`$, where $`0<\epsilon 1`$. For large $`\tau `$ the decomposition

$`𝒟_{\mathrm{as}}(\tau )=q_0f(\tau ),`$ (162)
is possible, where $`f(\tau )q_0`$. The substitution of this decomposition into eq.(153) and the expansion up to the second order with respect to $`f(\tau )`$ yields

$`\epsilon q_0f(\tau )+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8}}\left[f(\tau )\right]^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\tau }{}}}𝑑\tau ^{}\left[f(\tau \tau ^{})f(\tau )\right]{\displaystyle \frac{}{\tau ^{}}}f(\tau ^{})=0.`$ (163)
Following ref. let us make the Laplace transformation $`[f(\tau )]\stackrel{~}{f}(z)`$ and introduce the scaling functions, $`\widehat{\varphi }(\widehat{z})`$ or $`\widehat{\varphi }(\widehat{\tau })`$ , in a such way

$`\stackrel{~}{f}(z)={\displaystyle \frac{c_\epsilon }{\omega _\epsilon }}\widehat{\varphi }(\widehat{z})\text{or}f(\tau )=c_\epsilon \widehat{\varphi }(\widehat{\tau }),`$ (164)
where $`\widehat{z}=z/\omega _\epsilon `$ and $`\widehat{\tau }=\tau \omega _\epsilon `$. If $`c_\epsilon =\epsilon `$ and $`\omega _\epsilon =\omega _0\epsilon ^{1/a}`$ then one can write eq.(163) in the form

$`q_0\widehat{\varphi }(\widehat{z}){\displaystyle \frac{3}{8}}\left\{\widehat{\varphi }^2(\widehat{\tau })\right\}(\widehat{z})+\widehat{z}\widehat{\varphi }^2(\widehat{z})=0`$ (165)
(see eq.(2.68b) from ref.).

In the critical regime $`\widehat{z}1`$ (or $`\widehat{\tau }1`$) the solution of eq.(165) has a form $`\widehat{\varphi }(\widehat{\tau })\widehat{\tau }^a`$. In this limit the first term in eq.(165) is dropped out and the exponent is defined by the equation

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }^2(1a)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(12a)}}={\displaystyle \frac{3}{4}}.`$ (166)
The solution of eq. (166) gives $`a=0.30465`$. In the opposite limit $`\widehat{z}1`$ (or $`\widehat{\tau }1`$) the last term in eq.(165) can be neglected. In this case the solution has the form $`\widehat{\varphi }(\widehat{\tau })A_\epsilon \widehat{\tau }^a\mathrm{exp}\{\lambda \widehat{\tau }\}`$, where $`A_\epsilon =8\epsilon q_0\mathrm{\Gamma }(1a)2^{(12a)}/3\mathrm{\Gamma }(12a)\lambda ^2`$. As a result the overall scaling reads

$`𝒟_{\mathrm{as}}(\tau )=\{{\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{q_0\frac{c_\epsilon }{(\omega _\epsilon \tau )^a},\text{at}\omega _\epsilon \tau 1}{q_0\frac{A_\epsilon }{(\omega _\epsilon \tau )^a}\mathrm{exp}\{\lambda (\omega _\epsilon \tau )\},\text{at}\omega _\epsilon \tau 1}},`$ (167)
where $`\lambda `$ is some constant.

At $`T<T_\mathrm{c}`$ the FDT is violated for the large time separation $`\tau `$ and the aging regime is arising. It should be mentioned that the asymptotic regime cannot be decoupled from the aging one . In actual fact, the “anomaly” $`\overline{M}`$ in the asymptotic eqs. (144) - (146) strictly speaking can be calculated only from the aging regime. Because of the distinct aim in this paper we are not going to discuss the aging regime here expecting to return to it in a later publication.

## IV Conclusion

In the present paper we have considered the dynamics of two models with the long range repulsive interaction. The interaction potential was designed in a way to enable the saddle point treatment, as well as a fluctuation expansion.

For the pure model we have derived eq.(61) for the full correlation matrix $`G_{\alpha \beta }(𝐤,\omega )`$ in the one-loop approximation, which has an the explicit solution (see eqs.(65) - (67) ). This solution has a “boring behavior” at $`\omega 0`$ which manifests the absence of the glass dynamics. The physical background of this stems from the fact that the potential is much too soft and the “cage effect” is completely missing.

This conclusion is in accordance with the interacting particles statistical thermodynamics analysis, which was given in ref.. It was shown there that for the infinite range interaction potential, which allows a well defined saddle point treatment, the glassy phase is simply suppressed.

On the other hand, the same model but with a randomly distributed strength of interaction (the “random - bond model”) leads to the continuous glass transition. This type of transition is also the case for the polymeric manifolds in the disordered medium with long range correlation  as well as for the $`p`$ \- spin interaction spin-glass model at the large external field . It would be also interesting to investigate the more realistic “random sequence model” when each particle carry a random “charge”.

Qualitatively the same glassy behavior have been found in the pure spin models with the deterministic but very rapidly oscillating coupling between variables . It was assumed that the effective quenched disorder is “self - induced”. This means that because of the slow dynamics some degrees of freedom freeze and play the role of the effectively quenched disorder.

As a conclusion, the glass transition in the pure systems of the interacting particles, where the disorder is actually “self - induced”, goes beyond the mean-field level . This appears to hard to implement in the present context, because it implies the consideration of the short range interaction potential as well as activated processes.

## V Acknowledgments

The authors have benefited from discussions with M. Fuchs, A. Latz, G. Migliorini and greatly indebted to the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG), the Sonderforschungsbereich SFB 262 for financial support of the work.

## A Calculation of the 4-point RPA - correlation matrix

In the full analogy with eq.(32) the expression for $`S_{\alpha \beta \gamma \delta }^{(4)}(1,2,3,4)`$ reads

$`S_{\alpha \beta \gamma \delta }^{(4)}(1,2,3,4)=\underset{\overline{\psi _\alpha }+i\chi _\alpha .0}{lim}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\delta }{N^2\delta \chi _\beta (2)\delta \chi _\gamma (3)\delta \chi _\delta (4)}}\rho _\alpha (1)_{\mathrm{SP}}\right]`$ (A1)
The expansion of the $`\rho _\alpha (1)_{\mathrm{SP}}`$ up to the $`3^\mathrm{d}`$ order with respect to the mean field $`\overline{\psi _\alpha }+i\chi _\alpha `$ can be easily obtained from eq.(31)

$`\rho _\alpha (1)_{\mathrm{SP}}`$ $`=`$ $`\rho _\alpha (1)_0+{\displaystyle d2\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _\alpha (1)\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _\beta (2)_0\left[\chi _\beta (2)i\overline{\psi _\beta }(2)\right]}`$ (A2)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2!}}{\displaystyle d2d3\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _\alpha (1)\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _\beta (2)\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _\gamma (3)_0\left[\chi _\beta (2)i\overline{\psi _\beta }(2)\right]\left[\chi _\gamma (3)i\overline{\psi _\gamma }(3)\right]}`$ (A3)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3!}}{\displaystyle d2d3d4\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _\alpha (1)\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _\beta (2)\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _\gamma (3)\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _\delta (4)_0}`$ (A4)
$`\times `$ $`\left[\chi _\beta (2)i\overline{\psi _\beta }(2)\right]\left[\chi _\gamma (3)i\overline{\psi _\gamma }(3)\right]\left[\chi _\delta (4)i\overline{\psi _\delta }(4)\right].`$ (A5)
By using the SP-equation (29) and after threefold differentiation with respect to $`\chi _\alpha (1)`$ (see eq.(A1)) we find

$`S_{\alpha \beta \gamma \delta }^{(4)}(1,2,3,4)`$ $`=`$ $`F_{\overline{\alpha }\overline{\beta }\overline{\gamma }\overline{\delta }}^{(4)}(\overline{1},\overline{2},\overline{3},\overline{4})`$ (A6)
$`\times `$ $`\left\{\left[\widehat{1}+\mu \widehat{v}\widehat{F}^{(2)}\right]^1\right\}_{\overline{\alpha }\alpha }(\overline{1},1)\left\{\left[\widehat{1}+\mu \widehat{v}\widehat{F}^{(2)}\right]^1\right\}_{\overline{\beta }\beta }(\overline{2},2)`$ (A7)
$`\times `$ $`\left\{\left[\widehat{1}+\mu \widehat{v}\widehat{F}^{(2)}\right]^1\right\}_{\overline{\gamma }\gamma }(\overline{3},3)\left\{\left[\widehat{1}+\mu \widehat{v}\widehat{F}^{(2)}\right]^1\right\}_{\overline{\delta }\delta }(\overline{4},4),`$ (A8)
where the 4-point free system correlation matrix

$`F_{\alpha \beta \gamma \delta }^{(4)}(1,2,3,4)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{N^2}}\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _\alpha (1)\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _\beta (2)\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _\gamma (3)\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _\delta (4)_0.`$ (A9)
In eq.(A8) we imply the summation (integration) over the barred indices (barred space - time variables). When deriving eq.(A8) we have also kept in mind that $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _\alpha (1)\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _\beta (2)N`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _\alpha (1)\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _\beta (2)\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _\gamma (3)\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _\delta (4)_0N^2`$ , etc. The fact that the matrix $`F_{\alpha \beta \gamma \delta }^{(4)}(1,2,3,4)`$ is symmetrical with respect to simultaneous permutations of Greek indices and space-time arguments as well as eq.(33) have been used.

It is easy to show that $`F_{\alpha \beta \gamma \delta }^{(4)}(1,2,3,4)`$ is factorized

$`F_{\alpha \beta \gamma \delta }^{(4)}(1,2,3,4)`$ $`=`$ $`F_{\alpha \beta }^{(2)}(1,2)F_{\gamma \delta }^{(2)}(3,4)+F_{\alpha \gamma }^{(2)}(1,3)F_{\beta \delta }^{(2)}(2,3)+F_{\alpha \delta }^{(2)}(1,4)F_{\beta \gamma }^{(2)}(2,3).`$ (A10)
On the other side it is instructive to check that even in this case $`S_{\alpha \beta \gamma \delta }^{(4)}(1,2,3,4)`$ can not be factorized.

## B calculation of the vertex-matrix $`K_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)`$

The substitution of the eg.(A8) into eq.(59) after the straightforward algebra yields

$`K_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)`$ $`=`$ $`\left\{\left[\left(2\mu \right)^1\widehat{v}^1+\widehat{F}\right]^1\left[\mu ^1\widehat{v}^1+\widehat{F}\right]^1\right\}_{\overline{\beta }\overline{\alpha }}(\overline{2},\overline{1})`$ (B1)
$`\times `$ $`\left\{F_{\overline{\alpha }\overline{\beta }}(\overline{1},\overline{2})F_{\overline{\gamma }\overline{\delta }}(\overline{3},\overline{4})+F_{\overline{\alpha }\overline{\gamma }}(\overline{1},\overline{3})F_{\overline{\beta }\overline{\delta }}(\overline{2},\overline{4})+F_{\overline{\alpha }\overline{\delta }}(\overline{1},\overline{4})F_{\overline{\beta }\overline{\gamma }}(\overline{2},\overline{3})\right\}`$ (B2)
$`\times `$ $`\left\{\left[\overline{1}+2\mu \overline{v}\overline{F}\right]^1\right\}_{\overline{\gamma }\alpha }(\overline{3},1)\left\{\left[\overline{1}+2\mu \widehat{v}\widehat{F}\right]^1\right\}_{\overline{\delta }\beta }(\overline{4},2),`$ (B3)
where as before for the repeated barred indices (variables) the summation (integration) is implied. For the time - space - translational invariant case the respective Fourier transformation leads to the result:

$`K_{\alpha \beta }(𝐤,\omega )`$ $`=`$ $`\{IF_{\overline{\gamma }\overline{\delta }}(𝐤,\omega )`$ (B4)
$`+`$ $`\left\{\left[\left(2\mu \right)^1\widehat{v}^1+\widehat{F}\right]^1\left[\mu ^1\widehat{v}^1+\widehat{F}\right]^1\right\}_{\overline{\beta }\overline{\alpha }}(𝐤,\omega )F_{\overline{\alpha }\overline{\gamma }}(𝐤,\omega )F_{\overline{\beta }\overline{\delta }}(𝐤,\omega )`$ (B5)
$`+`$ $`\{[\left(2\mu \right)^1\widehat{v}^1+\widehat{F}]^1[\mu ^1\widehat{v}^1+\widehat{F}]^1\}_{\overline{\beta }\overline{\alpha }}(𝐤,\omega )F_{\overline{\alpha }\overline{\delta }}(𝐤,\omega )F_{\overline{\beta }\overline{\gamma }}(𝐤,\omega )\}`$ (B6)
$`\times `$ $`\left\{\left[\overline{1}+2\mu \widehat{v}\widehat{F}\right]^1\right\}_{\overline{\gamma }\alpha }(𝐤,\omega )\left\{\left[\overline{1}+2\mu \overline{v}\overline{F}\right]^1\right\}_{\overline{\delta }\beta }(𝐤,\omega ),`$ (B7)
where the trace

$`I={\displaystyle \frac{d^3qd\omega }{(2\pi )^4}\left\{\left[\widehat{1}+\left(2\mu \right)^1\widehat{F}^1\widehat{v}^1\right]^1\left[\widehat{1}+\mu ^1\widehat{F}^1\widehat{v}^1\right]^1\right\}_{\overline{\alpha }\overline{\alpha }}(𝐪,\omega )}.`$ (B8)
With the correlation matrix $`\widehat{F}`$ given by eqs.(64), by doing integration over $`\omega `$ one can check that the trace $`I=0`$. This gives finally

$`K_{\alpha \beta }(𝐤,\omega )=L_{\alpha \beta }(𝐤,\omega )+L_{\alpha \beta }(𝐤,\omega ),`$ (B9)
where

$`L_{\alpha \beta }(𝐤,\omega )`$ $`=`$ $`\left\{\left[\overline{1}+2\mu \widehat{v}\widehat{F}\right]^1\right\}_{\alpha \overline{\gamma }}(𝐤,\omega )F_{\overline{\gamma }\overline{\beta }}(𝐤,\omega )`$ (B10)
$`\times `$ $`\left\{\left[\widehat{1}+\left(2\mu \right)^1\widehat{F}^1\widehat{v}^1\right]^1\left[\widehat{1}+\mu ^1\widehat{F}^1\widehat{v}^1\right]^1\right\}_{\overline{\beta }\overline{\delta }}(𝐪,\omega )`$ (B11)
$`\times `$ $`\left\{\left[\overline{1}+2\mu \widehat{v}\widehat{F}\right]^1\right\}_{\alpha \overline{\gamma }}(𝐤,\omega ).`$ (B12)
## C The MCT for the generalized Kac potential

In this case the direct correlation function $`c(𝐫)=\beta V(𝐫)`$ and its Fourier transformation takes the scaling form

$`c(𝐤)=\beta f\left({\displaystyle \frac{𝐤}{\kappa }}\right).`$ (C1)
Let us insert this expression to the MCT - memory kernel (see eq.(3.32) in ). It is reasonable then to rescale the integration variables in the memory kernel , $`𝐤\kappa 𝐤,𝐩\kappa 𝐩`$ as well as to put for the external wave vector $`𝐪=\kappa 𝐪_0`$ , where $`𝐪_0`$ is some reference wave vector. The last scaling means that in the MF - limit an experiment probes a very small wave vector : $`𝐪0`$. The resulting scaling of the memory kernel , $`m(𝐪,t)`$, reads

$`m(\kappa 𝐪_0,t)`$ $`=`$ $`\kappa ^d\stackrel{~}{S}(𝐪_0){\displaystyle \frac{\rho _0}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{d𝐤d𝐩}{(2\pi )^{2d}}\delta ^{(d)}(𝐤+𝐩𝐪_0)}`$ (C2)
$`\times `$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\left\{e^L(𝐪)\beta \left[𝐤f(𝐤)+𝐩f(𝐩)\right]\right\}^2}{q_0^2}}\stackrel{~}{S}(𝐤,t)\stackrel{~}{S}(𝐩,t),`$ (C3)
where we have took into account the scaling form of the correlator: $`S(𝐤,t)=\stackrel{~}{S}(𝐤/\kappa ;t)`$. Thus we finally arrive at the scaling $`m(\kappa 𝐪_0,t)\kappa ^d0`$ and the glass transition dies out.

## D The analogy between SCHA and NSPA

Let us prove that SCHA becomes exact for GF given by (113) in the limit $`N\mathrm{}`$. We will consider even a more general GF

$`Z\{\chi _\alpha \}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle }{\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha =0,1}{}}Dx_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)\mathrm{exp}\{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle }d1d2x_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)A_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)x_\beta ^{(p)}(2)`$ (D1)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}W\left[x_\alpha ^{(p)}\right]+{\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle }d1x_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)\chi _\alpha (1)\},`$ (D2)
where we have used the shorthand notations

$`x_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)=\left(\begin{array}{c}r_j(t)\\ i\widehat{r}_j(t)\end{array}\right),`$ (D5)
and “1” embraces Cartesian indices as well as time variable: $`1\{i,j,k;t\}`$. In eq.(D2) $`W\left[x_\alpha ^{(p)}\right]`$ is an arbitrary functional of $`x_\alpha ^{(p)}`$.

Instead of the exact action functional in eq.(D2) we consider now the trial one which has a Gaussian form

$`S\left[x_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)\right]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle }d1d2x_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)A_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)x_\beta ^{(p)}(2)`$ (D6)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle }d1d2x_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)x_\beta ^{(p)}(2){\displaystyle }d1L_\alpha (1)x_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)\}.`$ (D7)
Let us look for the “best” coefficients $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)`$ and $`L_\alpha (1)`$ in a sense that the exact “free energy” $`F\left[\chi _\alpha \right]=\mathrm{log}Z\left\{\chi _\alpha \right\}`$ tends to the trial one $`F_0\left[\chi _\alpha \right]=\mathrm{log}Dx_\alpha ^{(p)}\mathrm{exp}\{S[x_\alpha ^{(p)}]\}`$, i. e.

$`F\left[\chi _\alpha \right]F_0\left[\chi _\alpha \right]`$ (D8)
and both becomes exact at $`N\mathrm{}`$.

We can show that the property (D7) is satisfied by $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\alpha \beta }`$ and $`L_\alpha `$ which are obtained by extremization of the functional

$`\mathrm{\Phi }\{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\alpha \beta },L_\alpha \}`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{log}{\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}\underset{\alpha =0,1}{}Dx_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)\mathrm{exp}\left\{S\left[x_\alpha ^{(p)}\right]\right\}}`$ (D9)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\{{\displaystyle }d1d2\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)x_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)x_\beta ^{(p)}(2)_\mathrm{s}`$ (D10)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle }d1[L_\alpha (1)\chi _\alpha ]x_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)_\mathrm{s}W\left[x_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)\right]_\mathrm{s}\},`$ (D11)
where we use the notations

$`\mathrm{}_\mathrm{s}={\displaystyle \frac{_{p=1}^N_{\alpha =0,1}Dx_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)\mathrm{}\mathrm{exp}\left\{S\left[x_\alpha ^{(p)}\right]\right\}}{_{p=1}^N_{\alpha =0,1}Dx_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)\mathrm{exp}\left\{S\left[x_\alpha ^{(p)}\right]\right\}}}.`$ (D12)
The extremization conditions reads

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\delta }{\delta \mathrm{\Gamma }_{\alpha \gamma }(1,2)}}\mathrm{\Phi }`$ $`=`$ $`0`$ (D13)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\delta }{\delta L_\alpha (1)}}\mathrm{\Phi }`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$ (D14)
The variations in eqs.(D12) can be done directly. During the calculation the generalized Wick’s theorem  should be also taken into account. Namely, because the averaging (D11) is simply the Gaussian integral the Wick’s theorem yields

$`x_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)W\left[x_\alpha ^{(p)}\right]_\mathrm{s}`$ $`=`$ $`x_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)_\mathrm{s}W\left[x_\alpha ^{(p)}\right]_\mathrm{s}`$ (D15)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle d2\mathrm{\Delta }x_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)\mathrm{\Delta }x_\beta ^{(p)}(2)_\mathrm{s}\frac{\delta }{\delta x_\beta ^{(p)}(2)}W\left[x_\alpha ^{(p)}\right]_\mathrm{s}},`$ (D16)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }x_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)x_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)x_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)_\mathrm{s}`$. After the straightforward calculation we find

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\alpha \gamma }(1,2)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^2}{\delta x_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)\delta x_\beta ^{(p)}(2)}}W\left[x_\alpha ^{(p)}\right]_\mathrm{s}`$ (D17)
and

$`L_\alpha (1)={\displaystyle d2\left[A_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)\right]x_\alpha ^{(p)}(2)_\mathrm{s}}.`$ (D18)
Then equations for the two moments take the form

$`x_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)_\mathrm{s}={\displaystyle d2\left[A^1\right]_{\alpha \beta ]}(1,2)\left[\frac{\delta }{\delta x_\beta ^{(p)}(2)}W\left[x_\alpha ^{(p)}\right]_\mathrm{s}+\chi _\beta (2)\right]}`$ (D19)
and

$`\mathrm{\Delta }x_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)\mathrm{\Delta }x_\beta ^{(p)}(2)_\mathrm{s}=\left\{\left[\widehat{A}2\widehat{\mathrm{\Gamma }}\right]^1\right\}_{\alpha \beta }(1,2),`$ (D20)
where $`\widehat{A}`$ and $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Gamma }}`$ stands for the corresponding $`2\times 2`$ \- matrices.

On the other side the saddle point (SP) treatment of eq.(D2) at $`N\mathrm{}`$ yields

$`{\displaystyle d2A_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)\overline{x}_\beta ^{(p)}(2)}+{\displaystyle \frac{\delta W}{\delta x_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)}}|_{x_\alpha =\overline{x}_\alpha }+\chi _\alpha (1)=0`$ (D21)
and

$`\mathrm{\Delta }x_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)\mathrm{\Delta }x_\beta ^{(p)}(2)_{\mathrm{SP}}=\left\{\left[\widehat{A}2\widehat{B}\right]^1\right\}_{\alpha \beta }(1,2),`$ (D22)
where

$`B_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^2W}{\delta x_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)\delta x_\beta ^{(p)}(2)}}|_{x_\alpha =\overline{x}_\alpha }`$ (D23)
and $`\overline{x}_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)`$ stands for the field in SP.

In order to show the analogy between eqs.(D19)-(D20) and eqs.(D21)-(D22) let us make the functional Fourier transformation

$`\mathrm{exp}\left\{K\left[y_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)\right]\right\}={\displaystyle Dx_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)\mathrm{exp}\left\{W\left[x_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)\right]id1x_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)y_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)\right\}}`$ (D24)
and its inversion

$`\mathrm{exp}\left\{W\left[x_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)\right]\right\}={\displaystyle Dy_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)\mathrm{exp}\left\{K\left[y_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)\right]+id1x_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)y_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)\right\}}.`$ (D25)
Then eqs.(D21) - (D22) can be written as

$`\overline{x}_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)={\displaystyle d2\left[A^1\right]_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)\left[iy_\beta ^{(p)}(2)_{\mathrm{SP}}+\chi _\beta (2)\right]}`$ (D26)
and

$`\mathrm{\Delta }x_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)\mathrm{\Delta }x_\beta ^{(p)}(2)_{\mathrm{SP}}=\left\{\left[\widehat{A}+\mathrm{\Delta }y\mathrm{\Delta }y_{\mathrm{SP}}\right]^1\right\}_{\alpha \beta }(1,2),`$ (D27)
where the correlation matrix

$`\mathrm{\Delta }y\mathrm{\Delta }y_{\mathrm{SP}}=\mathrm{\Delta }y_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)\mathrm{\Delta }y_\beta ^{(p)}(2)_{\mathrm{SP}}`$ (D28)
and

$`\mathrm{}_{\mathrm{SP}}={\displaystyle \frac{Dy_\alpha ^{(p)}\mathrm{}\mathrm{exp}\left\{K\left[y_\alpha ^{(p)}\right]+id1\overline{x}_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)y_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)\right\}}{Dy_\alpha ^{(p)}\mathrm{exp}\left\{K\left[y_\alpha ^{(p)}\right]+id1\overline{x}_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)y_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)\right\}}}.`$ (D29)
At $`N\mathrm{}`$ by making use eq.(D25) one can immediately see that

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\delta }{\delta x_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)}}W\left[x_\alpha ^{(p)}\right]_\mathrm{s}iy_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)_{\mathrm{SP}}`$ (D30)
and

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^2}{\delta x_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)\delta x_\beta ^{(p)}(2)}}W\left[x_\alpha ^{(p)}\right]_\mathrm{s}\mathrm{\Delta }y_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)\mathrm{\Delta }y_\beta ^{(p)}(2)_{\mathrm{SP}},`$ (D31)
and SCHA exactly corresponds to NSPA . For the case which was treated in Sec.III C $`x_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)_\mathrm{s}=0`$ and the Hartree - type action (D7) cast the form

$`S\left[x_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)\right]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle }d1d2x_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)A_{\alpha \beta }(1,2)x_\beta ^{(p)}(2)`$ (D32)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle }d1d2{\displaystyle \frac{\delta ^2}{\delta x_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)\delta x_\beta ^{(p)}(2)}}W\left[x_\alpha ^{(p)}\right]_\mathrm{s}x_\alpha ^{(p)}(1)x_\beta ^{(p)}(2)\}.`$ (D33)