Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 3 minor 89 references

Properties of QCD axion in two-flavor color superconductive matter with massive quarks

T0 review · 2 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read In dense quark matter, the chiral transition into the two-flavor color-superconducting phase enhances the QCD axion's mass and quartic self-coupling rather than suppressing them.

desk verdict Solid NJL extension with a genuine self-coupling result, but the axion mass enhancement flips sign at weaker diquark coupling and the abstract overstates it. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.04560 v2 pith:KIWO3Q36 submitted 2025-01-08 hep-ph

Zhao Zhang , Wenhao Zhao This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-ph PACS 12.38.Mh14.80.Va
keywords QCDaxioncolorsuperconductivityNambu-Jona-Lasiniomodelinstanton-inducedinteractiontopologicalsusceptibilityself-couplingdomainwallthetaangle
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper asks what happens to the QCD axion when dense quark matter becomes a two-flavor color superconductor (2SC). Working in an NJL model with instanton-induced interactions, it couples the axion to both quark-antiquark and diquark condensates and computes the axion mass, quartic self-coupling, and potential at finite temperature and chemical potential. Its central claim is that the chiral transition into the 2SC phase does not reduce the axion mass or its self-coupling; instead, both are enhanced for the commonly adopted parameters. If correct, axion physics in compact-star interiors is qualitatively different from earlier NJL results without pairing: the axion gets heavier and more strongly self-interacting just where quark matter turns superconducting, and the effective potential becomes approximately $\pi$-periodic.

What carries the argument

The central object is the Nambu-Gorkov inverse quark propagator with four condensates: the chiral condensate $\sigma$, the pseudo-scalar condensate $\eta$, the scalar diquark condensate $\delta$, and the pseudo-scalar diquark condensate $\omega$. The axion enters through phases $e^{\pm i a/f_a}$ in the instanton-induced interactions, producing two Dirac-type mass gaps ($M_s$, $M_p$) and two Majorana-type diquark gaps ($\Delta_s$, $\Delta_p$). The paper derives the six analytic dispersion relations $E_{1,\pm}$ through $E_{6,\pm}$ from this propagator, sums the Matsubara frequencies, and obtains the thermodynamic potential; the axion mass is then the second derivative of that potential at $a = 0$ (equivalently $\chi_t/f_a^2$) and the quartic self-coupling is the fourth derivative.

What would settle it

Repeat the same NJL calculation at $T = 0$ with the diquark coupling ratio $H_2/G_2 = 0.5$: the paper's Figure 17 predicts $\chi_t^{1/4}$ then decreases across the chiral transition, which would contradict the enhancement claim. Alternatively, a model-independent determination of the effective diquark coupling in 2SC matter from lattice or functional methods that lands at or below $0.5$ would overturn the conclusion.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper establishes that in the two-flavor NJL model with one-gluon and instanton-induced four-quark interactions, once scalar and pseudo-scalar condensates in both the chiral and diquark channels are included, the axion mass squared (the topological susceptibility $\chi_t$) jumps upward at the chiral transition when 2SC pairing appears. With the Fierz-fixed ratio $H_2/G_2 = 3/4$ and $c = 0.2$, $\chi_t^{1/4}$ rises from about $79.8\,\mathrm{MeV}$ to roughly $100\,\mathrm{MeV}$ at $T = 0$ and then grows with chemical potential, while the normalized quartic self-coupling also increases sharply at the transition and can become repulsive for larger $c$. The axion potential in the 2SC phase develops two degenerate maxima at $\theta = \pi/2$ and $3\pi/2$ with a local minimum at $\theta = \pi$, so an approximate period $\pi$ replaces the usual single peak. The domain-wall tension falls only mildly across the transition, in contrast to the large drop found without color superconductivity.

Load-bearing premise

The central claim rests on the diquark pairing coupling being as strong as the Fierz transformation dictates (ratio $H_2/G_2 = 3/4$, with $c = 0.2$); the paper's own appendix shows that if that ratio is lowered to $0.5$, the topological susceptibility drops at the transition instead of rising.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For $c$ in the range $(0.05, 0.45)$, the topological susceptibility and axion mass jump upward at the chiral transition point and keep growing with $\mu$ rather than falling.
  • The quartic axion self-coupling is enhanced at the transition for most of the $c \in (0, 0.5)$ window, and it turns positive (repulsive) for $c \gtrsim 0.28$ at low temperature.
  • In the 2SC phase the axion potential has two degenerate maxima at $\theta = \pi/2$ and $3\pi/2$ and a local minimum at $\theta = \pi$, making the potential approximately $\pi$-periodic.
  • Axion domain walls in color-superconducting matter remain narrow, and their surface tension decreases only slightly across the transition instead of dropping sharply as in the case without pairing.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The enhancement window is tied to the Fierz-determined diquark coupling; a first-principles calculation of the effective $H_2/G_2$ in 2SC matter would decide whether compact-star axions are heavy or light, a question the paper leaves open.
  • If axions are heavier inside 2SC cores, axion-mediated energy transport and cooling in neutron stars would be stronger than estimated from no-pairing NJL calculations, although the paper does not quantify this.
  • The approximate $\pi$ periodicity makes the $\theta = 0$ and $\theta = \pi$ vacua nearly degenerate inside superconducting matter, which could ease the formation of domain walls in quark cores; the paper computes the wall profile but does not discuss production rates.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. This paper studies the QCD axion in a two-flavor NJL model with instanton-induced interactions at low temperature and moderate baryon chemical potential, including both chiral condensates (σ, η) and diquark condensates (δ, ω) at the mean-field level. It presents analytic dispersion relations for quarks in the presence of the four condensates at nonzero θ=a/fa, then computes the axion potential, the topological susceptibility/axion mass, the quartic self-coupling, and the domain-wall surface tension in the chiral symmetry broken and 2SC phases. The central claim is that, due to the emergence of color superconductivity, the chiral transition does not lead to a decrease of axion mass and self-coupling but instead to an enhancement, and that the axion potential develops an approximate period π. The paper also checks an analytic formula for χ_t and explores sensitivity to the parameter c and to the diquark coupling ratios in an appendix.

Significance. If the main claim holds, the paper would provide a qualitatively new picture for axions in neutron-star matter: instead of dropping at chiral restoration, m_a could jump upward when 2SC pairing appears, and the axion potential would become approximately π-periodic. The explicit inclusion of Dirac-type masses alongside Majorana-type masses is a natural extension of previous NJL treatments, and the limiting checks against the massless case and earlier 2SC results are useful. The analytic dispersion relations, if verified, are a reusable technical contribution. The paper does not ship code or machine-checked proofs, and its quantitative predictions are model-dependent; nevertheless the structure of the computation is transparent enough to be checked by a reader.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract; Sec. III.C; Appendix] The abstract and Sec. IV state that the chiral transition with 2SC leads to an "obvious enhancement" of the axion mass and self-coupling, but the mass part of this claim is not robust over the explored parameter space. In Appendix Fig. 17, with c=0.2 and H1/G1=H2/G2=0.5, χ_t (hence m_a^2) drops at the chiral transition instead of rising, and Fig. 19 shows the same trend when only H2/G2 is reduced while H1/G1 remains 0.75. The enhancement therefore holds only for sufficiently strong diquark couplings, and H2/G2 is a model input fixed by a Fierz transformation rather than by QCD itself. Please (i) determine and state explicitly the interval in H2/G2 (and in c) for which χ_t/m_a increases across the transition, (ii) separate the axion-mass claim from the self-coupling claim, since Fig. 18 indicates that the self-coupling still rises at r=0.5, and (iii) revise the abstract and conclusion so that the unqualified "obvious enhancement" is replaced by a statement with the quantitative coupling range.
  2. [Sec. II-D, Eqs. (54)-(62)] The analytic dispersion relations are load-bearing for every numerical result, but their derivation is not shown. Eqs. (54)-(62), especially the nontrivial mixing terms Z^2_± in Eq. (62), are quoted after referring to the appendices of Refs. [73] and [74]; those references do not contain the present combination of Dirac and Majorana masses with nonzero axion angle. Please include an explicit derivation, or at least a direct verification (for example, by computing det[γ0 S^{-1} - p0] and checking the eigenvalue multiplicities), in an appendix. This is needed for a reader to confirm the factor of four degeneracy used in Eq. (64) and the claimed reduction to the 2SC and massless limits.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Sec. I and Sec. II-A] There are several typographical errors: "singel-instanton" in the Introduction, "Feirz transformation" in Sec. II-A, and "it's value" in Sec. IV. These should be corrected.
  2. [Abstract; Sec. III.B] The abstract says the axion potential "exhibits an appropriate period of π", but Sec. III.B and Sec. IV correctly state that the period is only approximate for nonzero current quark mass and exact only in the chiral limit. Please use consistent wording, e.g., "approximate period π in the 2SC phase", and quantify the breaking near the phase boundary.
  3. [Appendix, Figs. 17-20] The appendix varies H1/G1 and H2/G2, but the main text does not refer readers to these figures when making the c-sensitivity statements in Sec. III.C. A sentence in Sec. III.C pointing to Figs. 17-20 would clarify which conclusions are robust to diquark-coupling variations.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: axion mass and self-coupling are derived from the NJL thermodynamic potential with parameters fixed by independent vacuum observables; the coupling-ratio sensitivity is a documented model-scope caveat, not a circular step.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. The model parameters Lambda, G, c, and m are adopted from Ref. [58] and fixed by fitting the pion mass, pion decay constant, and chiral condensate in vacuum (Sec. III), none of which is the axion mass or quartic self-coupling. The axion field enters through the U(1)_A phase of the instanton-induced quark-antiquark and diquark interactions (Eqs. 22-23), and m_a^2 and lambda_a are computed as the second and fourth derivatives of the mean-field thermodynamic potential at theta=0 (Eqs. 69-70), with condensates determined by the gap equations (67). No target quantity is inserted into the model. The analytic formula (73), chi_t = H2 delta^2 (1-2c), is used only as a consistency check and is explicitly noted not to hold when quark masses are included. Self-citations [70-72] appear only as background motivation for the interplay of chiral and diquark condensates and are not load-bearing for the axion results. The abstract's 'obvious enhancement' claim is conditional on c approximately in (0.05, 0.45) and on the Fierz ratios H1/G1 = H2/G2 = 3/4; the appendix itself shows chi_t dropping at the transition when H2/G2 = 0.5. This is a parameter-sensitivity or robustness caveat, not circular reasoning, because the dependence is computed from the same model rather than assumed from the desired conclusion.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new entities; it uses the standard NJL model with inputs fitted to vacuum meson properties. The free parameters are those of the model, and the central results depend on them, especially c and the Fierz ratio H2/G2.

free parameters (6)
  • cutoff Λ = 590 MeV
    Momentum cutoff of the NJL model, fitted to vacuum observables as in Ref. [58].
  • coupling G = 2.435/Λ^2
    Four-fermion coupling in the meson channel, fitted to pion mass, pion decay constant, and chiral condensate.
  • current quark mass m0 = 6 MeV
    Light quark mass, fitted to vacuum observables.
  • mixing parameter c = 0.2
    Relative weight between one-gluon exchange and instanton-induced interactions; varied in (0, 0.5) to test sensitivity.
  • Fierz ratios H1/G1 and H2/G2 = 3/4
    Fixed by Fierz transformation of the color current interaction; varied in Appendix A.
  • axion decay constant fa = 10^9 GeV (for domain wall plots)
    Chosen in the classical window; only sets the length scale of the wall, not the axion mass.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption NJL model as effective theory for QCD at moderate density
    The paper uses the two-flavor NJL model with an ultraviolet cutoff to approximate QCD in the moderate-density regime. Section II.
  • domain assumption Mean-field approximation
    Condensates are treated as classical fields; the functional integral is evaluated at saddle point, neglecting quantum fluctuations of meson and diquark fields. Sections II-C and II-D.
  • domain assumption Axion coupling only through instanton-induced interaction
    The axion is introduced by promoting the U(1)_A phase in the instanton-induced interaction L2 to a/f_a; the one-gluon exchange interaction L1 is U(1)_A-invariant and does not couple to the axion. Section II-B.
  • domain assumption 2SC ansatz of pairing only in the λ2 color channel
    Only red-green pairing is considered; other color channels are ignored. Section II-C.
  • domain assumption Real and uniform condensates
    The condensates σ, η, δ, ω are taken to be real and spatially constant in the thermodynamic potential. Section II-C.
  • standard math Fierz transformation of the interactions
    The Fierz identities are used to rewrite the four-fermion interactions in the chosen channels; this is a standard algebraic transformation. Section II-A.
  • domain assumption Local equilibrium for domain wall
    The condensates are assumed to follow the local value of θ(x) adiabatically, neglecting gradient energy of the condensates. Section III-D.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Properties of QCD axion in two-flavor color superconductive matter with massive quarks." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/KIWO3Q36

@misc{pith2026250104560,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Properties of QCD axion in two-flavor color superconductive matter with massive quarks},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/KIWO3Q36}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.04560}
}
abstract

We investigate the properties of QCD axion at low temperature and moderate density in the Nambu-Jona-Lasinio model with instanton induced interactions by simultaneously considering the scalar and pseudo-scalar condensates in both quark-antiquark and diquark channels. We derive the analytical dispersion relations of quarks with four-type condensates at nonzero theta angle $\theta=a/f_a$. The axion mass, quartic self-coupling, and the axion potential are calculated in both the chiral symmetry breaking and two-flavor color superconducting phases. Using the commonly adopted model parameters, we find that due to the emergence of color superconductivity, the chiral phase transition not only does not lead to a significant decrease in axion mass and self-coupling, but rather results in an obvious enhancement of them. As a $\theta$ function, the axion potential exhibits an appropriate period of $\pi$, which is quite different from the case without considering the color superconductivity. The surface tension of axion domain wall is also calculated in the presence of color superconductivity.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.04560 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. The chiral condensate [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. displays σ, η, and ω as functions of µ at a/fa = π for the same values of T as that in Fig.1. Compared to Fig.1, the roles of the scalar condensate σ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. The normalized pseudo-scalar diquark condensate [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (15 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Majorana masses [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Topological susceptibility [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. The normalized axion mass [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_9.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Upper panel [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_8.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. The axion mass [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. The normalized axion self-coupling as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12. The normalized axion quartic self-coupling as func [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: FIG. 13. Axion walls, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: FIG. 14. Axion wall structure: Normalized condensates [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_14.png]
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: FIG. 16. Dependence of surface tension [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_16.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: FIG. 15. Axion wall structure: Dirac masses [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_15.png]
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: shows the topological susceptibility χ 1/4 t ver￾sus µ for different values of H1/G1 and H2/G2 at T = 0. The parameter c is fixed as 0.2 and H1/G1 = H2/G2 = r 300 325 350 375 400 425 450 40 60 80 100 120 1/4 t [MeV] m[MeV] H1 /G1=H2 /G2=1.00 H1 /G1=H2 /G2=0.75 H1 /G1=…
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: displays the axion self-coupling λa versus µ under the same conditions as that in Fig.17. Due to the appearance of the 2CS, the self-coupling gets enhanced at the chiral transition point for all the cases: the stronger the diquark couplings, the more sharply the self-…
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: FIG. 19. Topological susceptibility [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_19.png]
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: FIG. 20. Normalized axion self-coupling [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_20.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

89 extracted references · 14 canonical work pages

  1. [68]

    at a = 0, which reads λa = d4V da4 ⏐ ⏐ ⏐ ⏐ a=0 . (70) Since the physical condensates are all implicitly depen- dent on a, the total differential of V (a) with respect to a satisfies the following relation dV da = ∂V ∂a + ∂V ∂σ ∂σ ∂a + ∂V ∂η ∂η ∂a + ∂V ∂δ ∂δ ∂a + ∂V ∂ω ∂ω ∂a . (71) Therefore to evaluate the axion mass and self-coupling, we need to calculate ...

  2. [73]

    Here we will focus on how χt is affected by the chiral condensate in the presence of the 2CS, especially how it varies cross the chiral phase transition line

    does’t hold when the quark masses are considered. Here we will focus on how χt is affected by the chiral condensate in the presence of the 2CS, especially how it varies cross the chiral phase transition line. In Fig. 7, we show the topological susceptibility as func- tions of µ for different temperatures with c = 0 .2. For comparison, we also present the re...

  3. [74]

    M. G. Alford, K. Rajagopal and F. Wilczek, Phys. Lett. B 422, 247-256 (1998) doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(98)00051-3 [ arXiv:hep-ph/9711395 [hep-ph]]

    arXiv 1998

  4. [1]

    Furthermore, taking into account the quark mass matrix Mq, the complete coeffi- cient of Q takes the form θ = θ0 − arg(detMq)

    breaks both parity and time reversal symmetries but respects charge conjugation symmetry. Furthermore, taking into account the quark mass matrix Mq, the complete coeffi- cient of Q takes the form θ = θ0 − arg(detMq). (2) The phase angle θ is directly related to the neutron elec- tric dipole moment (NEDM) dn via the predicted relation |dn| ∼ 10−16θe · cm (3)...

  5. [2]

    C. A. Baker, D. D. Doyle, P. Geltenbort, K. Green, M. G. D. van der Grinten, P. G. Har- ris, P. Iaydjiev, S. N. Ivanov, D. J. R. May and J. M. Pendlebury, et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 131801 (2006) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.97.131801 [ arXiv:hep-ex/0602020 [hep-ex]]

    arXiv 2006

  6. [3]

    C. Abel, S. Afach, N. J. Ayres, C. A. Baker, G. Ban, G. Bison, K. Bodek, V. Bondar, M. Burghoff and E. Chanel, et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, no.8, 081803 (2020) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.124.081803 [ arXiv:2001.11966 [hep-ex]]

    arXiv 2020

  7. [4]

    R. D. Peccei and H. R. Quinn, Phys. Rev. D 16 (1977), 1791-1797 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.16.1791

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.16.1791 1977

  8. [5]

    R. D. Peccei and H. R. Quinn, Phys. Rev. Lett. 38, 1440- 1443 (1977) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.38.1440

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.38.1440 1977

Show all 89 references
  1. [6]

    We see that such a breaking is quite small at lower temperature and larger quark chemical potential since the axion potentials calculated with and without m0 are almost coincident

    is broken by the current quark masses. We see that such a breaking is quite small at lower temperature and larger quark chemical potential since the axion potentials calculated with and without m0 are almost coincident. Of course, the breaking becomes relatively obvious near t...

  2. [7]

    This suggests that for higher µ and lower T the dominant contribution to χt comes from the diquark condensate since the chiral condensate is suppressed significantly

    On the other hand, the numeri- cal results of χt in the 2CS phase at T = 0 and 25 MeV agree quite well with that calculated using the analytical formula for higher µ and small deviations appear near the phase transition point. This suggests that for higher µ and lower T the do...

  3. [8]

    J. E. Kim and G. Carosi, Rev. Mod. Phys. 82, 557-602 (2010) [erratum: Rev. Mod. Phys. 91, no.4, 049902 (2019)] doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.82.557 [ arXiv:0807.3125 [hep-ph]]

    2010 arXiv

  4. [9]

    We see that the deviation is quite small and thus the analytic formula is still a good approximation for the calculation of χt in the presence of σ and δ

    in the 2CS phase for T = 0, 50 MeV. We see that the deviation is quite small and thus the analytic formula is still a good approximation for the calculation of χt in the presence of σ and δ. The normalized axion mass as the function of µ under the same conditions as that in Fi...

  5. [10]

    10 displays that for µ < µ c ( µ > µ c), the normalized ma is insensitive (sensitive) to c

    Similarly, Fig. 10 displays that for µ < µ c ( µ > µ c), the normalized ma is insensitive (sensitive) to c. /s32 /s99 /s61/s48/s46/s48/s49 FIG. 10. The axion mass ma (normalized by its vacuum value obtained using the same c) as a function of µ under the same conditions as that...

  6. [11]

    R. J. Crewther, P. Di Vecchia, G. Veneziano, and E. Witten. Phys. Lett. B, 88, 123 (1979). doi:10.1016/0370-2693(79)90128-X

    1979 doi

  7. [12]

    Zhitnitsky, Yad

    A. Zhitnitsky, Yad. Fiz.31, 497 (1980); [Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 31, 260 (1980)]

    1980

  8. [13]

    Sikivie, Phys

    P. Sikivie, Phys. Rev. Lett. 48 (1982), 1156-1159 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.48.1156

    1982 doi

  9. [14]

    Preskill, M

    J. Preskill, M. B. Wise and F. Wilczek, Phys. Lett. B 120, 127-132 (1983) doi:10.1016/0370-2693(83)90637-8

    1983 doi

  10. [15]

    L. F. Abbott and P. Sikivie, Phys. Lett. B 120, 133-136 (1983) doi:10.1016/0370-2693(83)90638-X

    1983 doi

  11. [16]

    Weinberg, Phys

    S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 40, 223-226 (1978) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.40.223

    1978 doi

  12. [17]

    Wilczek, Phys

    F. Wilczek, Phys. Rev. Lett. 40, 279-282 (1978) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.40.279

    1978 doi

  13. [18]

    L. D. Duffy and K. van Bibber, New J. Phys. 11, 105008 (2009) doi:10.1088/1367-2630/11/10/105008 [ arXiv:0904.3346 [hep-ph]]

    2009 arXiv

  14. [19]

    and ( 20) with a/fa, where a is the axion field. So the NJL lagrangian density with the axion field reads Leff = ¯q (i/∂ + ˆµγ0 − m0) q +Lq¯ q1+ Lqq1 + Laq¯ q+ Laqq, (21) where Laq¯ q= 8G2 [ e−i a fa det(¯qRqL) + ei a fa det(¯qLqR) ] (22) and Laqq = −2H2 ∑ A [ e−i a fa d† A,RdA,L...

  15. [20]

    J. E. Kim, Phys. Rev. Lett. 43 (1979), 103 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.43.103 16

    1979 doi

  16. [21]

    M. A. Shifman, A. I. Vainshtein and V. I. Zakharov, Nucl. Phys. B 166 (1980), 493-506 doi:10.1016/0550- 3213(80)90209-6

    1980 doi

  17. [22]

    M. Dine, W. Fischler and M. Srednicki, Phys. Lett. B 104 (1981), 199-202 doi:10.1016/0370-2693(81)90590-6

    1981 doi

  18. [23]

    F. S. Guzman and L. A. Urena-Lopez, Astro- phys. J. 645, 814-819 (2006) doi:10.1086/504508 [ arXiv:astro-ph/0603613 [astro-ph]]

    2006 arXiv

  19. [24]

    Barranco and A

    J. Barranco and A. Bernal, Phys. Rev. D 83, 043525 (2011) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.83.043525 [ arXiv:1001.1769 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2011 arXiv

  20. [25]

    Braaten, A

    E. Braaten, A. Mohapatra and H. Zhang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, no.12, 121801 (2016) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.121801 [ arXiv:1512.00108 [hep-ph]]

    2016 arXiv

  21. [26]

    Dine and W

    M. Dine and W. Fischler, Phys. Lett. B 120, 137-141 (1983) doi:10.1016/0370-2693(83)90639-1

    1983 doi

  22. [27]

    Visinelli and P

    L. Visinelli and P. Gondolo, Phys. Rev. D 80, 035024 (2009) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.80.035024 [ arXiv:0903.4377 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2009 arXiv

  23. [28]

    Helfer, D

    T. Helfer, D. Marsh, K. Clough, M. Fairbairn, E. Lim, and R. Becerril, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 03 (2017) 055 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2017/03/055 [ arXiv:1609.04724 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2017 arXiv

  24. [29]

    Colpi, S

    M. Colpi, S. L. Shapiro and I. Wasser- man, Phys. Rev. Lett. 57, 2485-2488 (1986) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.57.2485

    1986 doi

  25. [30]

    I. I. Tkachev, Phys. Lett. B 261, 289-293 (1991) doi:10.1016/0370-2693(91)90330-S

    1991 doi

  26. [31]

    E. W. Kolb and I. I. Tkachev, Phys. Rev. Lett. 71, 3051-3054 (1993) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.71.3051 [ arXiv:hep-ph/9303313 [hep-ph]]

    1993 arXiv

  27. [32]

    P. H. Chavanis, Phys. Rev. D 84, 043531 (2011) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.84.043531 [ arXiv:1103.2050 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2011 arXiv

  28. [33]

    Cotner, Phys

    E. Cotner, Phys. Rev. D 94, no.6, 063503 (2016) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.94.063503 [ arXiv:1608.00547 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2016 arXiv

  29. [34]

    Y. Bai, V. Barger and J. Berger, JHEP 12, 127 (2016) doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2016)127 [ arXiv:1612.00438 [hep- ph]]

    2016 arXiv

  30. [35]

    Sikivie and Q

    P. Sikivie and Q. Yang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 111301 (2009) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.103.111301 [ arXiv:0901.1106 [hep-ph]]

    2009 arXiv

  31. [36]

    Davidson and T

    S. Davidson and T. Schwetz, Phys. Rev. D 93, no.12, 123509 (2016) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.123509 [ arXiv:1603.04249 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2016 arXiv

  32. [37]

    J. Eby, M. Leembruggen, P. Suranyi and L. C. R. Wijewardhana, JHEP 12, 066 (2016) doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2016)066 [ arXiv:1608.06911 [astro- ph.CO]]

    2016 arXiv

  33. [38]

    Sedrakian, Phys

    A. Sedrakian, Phys. Rev. D 93, no.6, 065044 (2016) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.065044 [ arXiv:1512.07828 [astro-ph.HE]]

    2016 arXiv

  34. [39]

    D. G. Levkov, A. G. Panin and I. I. Tkachev, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, no.1, 011301 (2017) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.118.011301 [ arXiv:1609.03611 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2017 arXiv

  35. [40]

    J. Eby, M. Leembruggen, P. Suranyi and L. C. R. Wijewardhana, JHEP 06, 014 (2017) doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2017)014 [ arXiv:1702.05504 [hep- ph]]

    2017 arXiv

  36. [41]

    Visinelli, S

    L. Visinelli, S. Baum, J. Redondo, K. Freese and F. Wilczek, Phys. Lett. B 777, 64-72 (2018) doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2017.12.010 [ arXiv:1710.08910 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2018 arXiv

  37. [42]

    P. H. Chavanis, Phys. Rev. D 94, no.8, 083007 (2016) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.94.083007 [ arXiv:1604.05904 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2016 arXiv

  38. [43]

    B. S. Lopes, R. L. S. Farias, V. Dexheimer, A. Bandy- opadhyay and R. O. Ramos, Phys. Rev. D 106, no.12, L121301 (2022) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.106.L121301 [ arXiv:2206.01631 [hep-ph]]

    2022 arXiv

  39. [44]

    Lucente, P

    G. Lucente, P. Carenza, T. Fischer, M. Giannotti and A. Mirizzi, JCAP 12, 008 (2020) doi:10.1088/1475- 7516/2020/12/008 [ arXiv:2008.04918 [hep-ph]]

    2020

  40. [45]

    Fischer, P

    T. Fischer, P. Carenza, B. Fore, M. Giannotti, A. Mirizzi and S. Reddy, Phys. Rev. D 104, no.10, 103012 (2021) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.104.103012 [ arXiv:2108.13726 [hep-ph]]

    2021 arXiv

  41. [46]

    P. H. Chavanis, Phys. Rev. D 98, no.2, 023009 (2018) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.98.023009 [ arXiv:1710.06268 [gr- qc]]

    2018 arXiv

  42. [47]

    Caputo and G

    A. Caputo and G. Raffelt, doi:10.22323/1.454.0041 [ arXiv:2401.13728 [hep-ph]]

    arXiv

  43. [48]

    Borsanyi, Z

    S. Borsanyi, Z. Fodor, J. Guenther, K. H. Kampert, S. D. Katz, T. Kawanai, T. G. Kovacs, S. W. Mages, A. Pasztor and F. Pittler, et al. Nature 539, no.7627, 69-71 (2016) doi:10.1038/nature20115 [ arXiv:1606.07494 [hep-lat]]

    2016 arXiv

  44. [49]

    Sedrakian, Phys

    A. Sedrakian, Phys. Rev. D 99, no.4, 043011 (2019) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.99.043011 [ arXiv:1810.00190 [astro-ph.HE]]

    2019 arXiv

  45. [50]

    Buschmann, C

    M. Buschmann, C. Dessert, J. W. Foster, A. J. Long and B. R. Safdi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, no.9, 091102 (2022) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.128.091102 [ arXiv:2111.09892 [hep-ph]]

    2022 arXiv

  46. [51]

    [73] or [74])

    can be simplified significantly once we obtain the eigenvalues of the fol- lowing matrix (for more details on the method see the appendix of Ref. [73] or [74]). Z = γ0S−1(p0, ⃗ p) − p01 (52) =   −⃗ γ· ⃗ p+ µ − γ0M γ 0Φ − γ0Φ + −⃗ γ· ⃗ p− µ − γ0M   . (53) The traceless proper...

  47. [52]

    L. B. Leinson, JCAP 08, 031 (2014) doi:10.1088/1475- 7516/2014/08/031 [ arXiv:1405.6873 [hep-ph]]

    2014 arXiv

  48. [53]

    Balkin, J

    R. Balkin, J. Serra, K. Springmann, S. Stelzl and A. Weiler, [ arXiv:2211.02661 [hep-ph]]

    arXiv

  49. [54]

    Nambu and G

    Y. Nambu and G. Jona-Lasinio, Phys. Rev. 124, 246-254 (1961) doi:10.1103/PhysRev.124.246

    1961 doi

  50. [55]

    S. P. Klevansky, Rev. Mod. Phys. 64, 649-708 (1992) doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.64.649

    1992 doi

  51. [56]

    Noordhuis, A

    D. Noordhuis, A. Prabhu, C. Weniger and S. J. Witte, Phys. Rev. X 14, no.4, 041015 (2024) doi:10.1103/PhysRevX.14.041015 [ arXiv:2307.11811 [hep-ph]]

    2024 arXiv

  52. [57]

    Berkowitz, M

    E. Berkowitz, M. I. Buchoff and E. Ri- naldi, Phys. Rev. D 92, no.3, 034507 (2015) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.92.034507 [ arXiv:1505.07455 [hep-ph]]

    2015 arXiv

  53. [58]

    Z. Y. Lu and M. Ruggieri, Phys. Rev. D 100, no.1, 014013 (2019) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.100.014013 [ arXiv:1811.05102 [hep-ph]]

    2019 arXiv

  54. [59]

    Aoki et al

    S. Aoki et al. [JLQCD], EPJ Web Conf. 175, 04008 (2018) doi:10.1051/epjconf/201817504008 [ arXiv:1712.05541 [hep-lat]]

    2018

  55. [60]

    Bonati, M

    C. Bonati, M. D’Elia, M. Mariti, G. Martinelli, M. Mesiti, F. Negro, F. Sanfilippo and G. Villadoro, JHEP 03, 155 (2016) doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2016)155 [ arXiv:1512.06746 [hep-lat]]

    2016 arXiv

  56. [61]

    Petreczky, H

    P. Petreczky, H. P. Schadler and S. Sharma, Phys. Lett. B 17 762, 498-505 (2016) doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2016.09.063 [arXiv:1606.03145 [hep-lat]]

    2016 arXiv

  57. [62]

    Grilli di Cortona, E

    G. Grilli di Cortona, E. Hardy, J. Pardo Vega and G. Villadoro, JHEP 01, 034 (2016) doi:10.1007/JHEP01(2016)034 [ arXiv:1511.02867 [hep- ph]]

    2016 arXiv

  58. [63]

    Nambu and G

    Y. Nambu and G. Jona-Lasinio, Phys. Rev. 122, 345-358 (1961) doi:10.1103/PhysRev.122.345

    1961 doi

  59. [64]

    M. G. Alford, K. Rajagopal and F. Wilczek, Nucl. Phys. B 537, 443-458 (1999) doi:10.1016/S0550- 3213(98)00668-3 [ arXiv:hep-ph/9804403 [hep-ph]]

    1999 arXiv

  60. [65]

    R. Rapp, T. Sch¨ afer, E. V. Shuryak and M. Velkovsky, Annals Phys. 280, 35-99 (2000) doi:10.1006/aphy.1999.5991 [ arXiv:hep-ph/9904353 [hep-ph]]

    2000

  61. [66]

    Hatsuda and T

    T. Hatsuda and T. Kunihiro, Phys. Rept. 247, 221-367 (1994) doi:10.1016/0370-1573(94)90022-1 [ arXiv:hep-ph/9401310 [hep-ph]]

    1994 arXiv

  62. [67]

    with respect to a. III. NUMERICAL RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS In this section, we present the numerical results ob- tained in the NJL model. We focus on the axion poten- tial, axion mass, and axion self coupling at finite T and µ. The properties of axion domain walls in the presenc...

  63. [69]

    Buballa, Phys

    M. Buballa, Phys. Rept. 407, 205-376 (2005) doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2004.11.004 [ arXiv:hep-ph/0402234 [hep-ph]]

    2005 arXiv

  64. [70]

    Bandyopadhyay, R

    A. Bandyopadhyay, R. L. S. Farias, B. S. Lopes and R. O. Ramos, Phys. Rev. D 100, no.7, 076021 (2019) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.100.076021 [ arXiv:1906.09250 [hep-ph]]

    2019 arXiv

  65. [71]

    Abhishek, A

    A. Abhishek, A. Das, H. Mishra and R. K. Mo- hapatra, Phys. Rev. D 103, no.7, 074003 (2021) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.103.074003 [ arXiv:2006.15727 [hep-ph]]

    2021 arXiv

  66. [72]

    Zhang, D

    B. Zhang, D. E. A. Castillo, A. G. Grunfeld and M. Ruggieri, Phys. Rev. D 108, no.5, 054010 (2023) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.108.054010 [ arXiv:2304.10240 [hep-ph]]

    2023 arXiv

  67. [75]

    R. Rapp, T. Sch¨ afer, E. V. Shuryak and M. Velkovsky, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 53-56 (1998) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.81.53 [ arXiv:hep-ph/9711396 [hep-ph]]

    1998 arXiv

  68. [76]

    M. G. Alford, A. Schmitt, K. Rajagopal and T. Sch¨ afer, Rev. Mod. Phys. 80, 1455-1515 (2008) doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.80.1455 [ arXiv:0709.4635 [hep-ph]]

    2008 arXiv

  69. [77]

    Balkin, J

    R. Balkin, J. Serra, K. Springmann and A. Weiler, JHEP 07, 221 (2020) doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2020)221 [ arXiv:2003.04903 [hep-ph]]

    2020 arXiv

  70. [78]

    Murgana, D

    F. Murgana, D. E. A. Castillo, A. G. Grunfeld and M. Ruggieri, Phys. Rev. D 110, no.1, 014042 (2024) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.110.014042 [ arXiv:2404.14160 [hep-ph]]

    2024 arXiv

  71. [79]

    Hatsuda, M

    T. Hatsuda, M. Tachibana, N. Yamamoto and G. Baym, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 122001 (2006) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.97.122001 [ arXiv:hep-ph/0605018 [hep-ph]]

    2006 arXiv

  72. [80]

    Zhang, K

    Z. Zhang, K. Fukushima and T. Kunihiro, Phys. Rev. D 79, 014004 (2009) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.79.014004 [ arXiv:0808.0927 [hep-ph]]

    2009 arXiv

  73. [81]

    Zhang and T

    Z. Zhang and T. Kunihiro, Phys. Rev. D 80, 014015 (2009) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.80.014015 [ arXiv:0904.1062 [hep-ph]]

    2009 arXiv

  74. [82]

    Zhang and T

    Z. Zhang and T. Kunihiro, Eur. Phys. J. A 52, no.8, 230 (2016) doi:10.1140/epja/i2016-16230-y [ arXiv:1510.04417 [hep-ph]]

    2016 arXiv

  75. [83]

    S. B. Ruester, V. Werth, M. Buballa, I. A. Shovkovy and D. H. Rischke, Phys. Rev. D 72, 034004 (2005) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.72.034004 [ arXiv:hep-ph/0503184 [hep-ph]]

    2005 arXiv

  76. [84]

    Blaschke, S

    D. Blaschke, S. Fredriksson, H. Grigorian, A. M. Oztas and F. Sandin, Phys. Rev. D 72, 065020 (2005) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.72.065020 [ arXiv:hep-ph/0503194 [hep-ph]]

    2005 arXiv

  77. [85]

    Finite-Temperature Field Theory,

    J. I. Kapusta and C. Gale, “Finite-Temperature Field Theory,” Cambridge University Press, 2023, ISBN 978-1-009-40196-8, 978-1-009-40195-1, 978-1-009-40198 -2 doi:10.1017/9781009401968

    2023 doi

  78. [86]

    R. F. Dashen, Phys. Rev. D 3, 1879 (1971)

    1971

  79. [87]

    Shifman, Advanced Topics in Quantum Field The- ory, Cambridge University Press, 2022, ISBN 978-1-108- 88591-1, 978-1-108-84042-2 doi:10.1017/9781108885911

    M. Shifman, Advanced Topics in Quantum Field The- ory, Cambridge University Press, 2022, ISBN 978-1-108- 88591-1, 978-1-108-84042-2 doi:10.1017/9781108885911

    2022 doi

  80. [88]

    E. J. Weinberg, Cambridge University Press, 2012, ISBN 978-0-521-11463-9, 978-1-139-57461-7 doi:10.1017/CBO9781139017787

    2012 doi

  81. [89]

    Nagashima, Beyond the standard model of elemen- tary particle physics, Wiley-VCH, 2014, ISBN 978-3-527- 41177-1, 978-3-527-66505-1

    Y. Nagashima, Beyond the standard model of elemen- tary particle physics, Wiley-VCH, 2014, ISBN 978-3-527- 41177-1, 978-3-527-66505-1

    2014

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.