Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 63 references

Study on axial fields in the dynamically assisted Schwinger effect

T0 review · 3 major / 6 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 A spatial axial field, induced by a circularly polarized high-frequency wave, significantly raises the number of fermions produced in the dynamically assisted Schwinger effect.

desk verdict New idea — Floquet-Magnus effective axial fields for the Schwinger effect — but the long-time enhancement claim rests on dropping an O(1) kick operator, so the main quantitative result is not yet established. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.14283 v3 pith:MQ53C4VI submitted 2025-01-24 hep-ph nucl-th

Chengpeng Yu This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-phnucl-th
keywords dynamicallyassistedSchwingereffectaxialfieldFloquet-Magnusexpansionhigh-frequencyeffectivetheorypairproductioncircularlypolarizedlaserDiracvacuummagnetic
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 claims that in the dynamically assisted Schwinger effect—fermion pair production by a strong slow field assisted by a weak high-frequency field—a circularly polarized high-frequency plane wave generates an effective spatial axial field, and that this effective axial field substantially increases the number of fermions produced. The argument is carried by the Floquet-Magnus expansion of the time-evolution operator, which yields a time-dependent expression for the per-state fermion number and a long-time limit built from degenerate eigenstates of the effective Hamiltonian. For a uniform circularly polarized wave the first-order effective Hamiltonian reduces to axial coupling with $A_5 = -\frac{4eA_\omega^2}{\omega}\mathbf{e}_3$, whose magnitude in the numerical setup is $eA_5 = 16.00\,\omega$. The numerical results show fermion numbers rising from far below the experimentally observable threshold to at or above it once the axial field is present, on both long and short timescales. This matters because it suggests a concrete laser configuration that could bring Schwinger pair production within experimental reach.

What carries the argument

The central object is the Floquet-Magnus decomposition of the time-evolution operator, $\hat{U}(t,t_{\rm in}) = e^{-i\hat{K}(t)}e^{-i\hat{H}_F(t-t_{\rm in})}e^{i\hat{K}(t_{\rm in})}$, which separates the fast micromotion (the kick operator $\hat{K}(t)$) from a static Floquet effective Hamiltonian $\hat{H}_F$. The argument expands both operators in powers of $1/\omega$; the first-order effective Hamiltonian for a Dirac fermion is $\hat{H}_F^{(1)} = -\frac{e^2}{\omega}[\gamma^0\gamma^\mu,\gamma^0\gamma^\nu]\tilde{A}_\mu\tilde{A}^*_\nu$, and a Dirac-algebra identity converts this commutator into $2i\epsilon_{ijk}\gamma^0\gamma^k\gamma^5\tilde{A}_i\tilde{A}^*_j$, an axial-vector coupling. That identity is what produces the effective spatial axial field $\mathbf{A}_5 = \frac{2ie}{\omega}(\tilde{\mathbf{A}}\times\tilde{\mathbf{A}}^*)$, hence $A_5 = -\frac{4eA_\omega^2}{\omega}\mathbf{e}_3$ for a circularly polarized plane wave. The long-time fermion number then follows by projecting onto degenerate eigenstates of $\hat{H}_F$ while dropping the kick operator.

What would settle it

Solve the full time-dependent Dirac equation for the field configuration used in the paper (static field $e\varphi(z)=eV_0/\cosh(z/a)$ with $a=0.5\pi\,\omega^{-1}$, $eV_0=-2am^2$, plus a circularly polarized wave with $eA_\omega=1.00\,\omega$ and $m=10\,\omega$) without invoking the high-frequency expansion, and compare the produced fermion number with the long-time formula; if the enhancement over the no-assist case does not match the predicted axial-field boost, the central claim is refuted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, this paper establishes a high-frequency effective theory for the dynamically assisted Schwinger effect in which a spatial axial electromagnetic field $A_5$ emerges from the high-frequency field and acts as the mechanism of enhancement. For a static electric field plus a circularly polarized plane wave of frequency $\omega$ and amplitude $A_\omega$, the first-order Floquet-Magnus Hamiltonian becomes the axial coupling $e\gamma^0\gamma^3\gamma^5$ multiplied by $4eA_\omega^2/\omega$, giving $A_5 = -\frac{4eA_\omega^2}{\omega}\mathbf{e}_3$. Using the time-evolution expression for the produced number, together with the long-time projection onto degenerate eigenstates of the effective Hamiltonian, the paper computes the produced fermion number for momenta near the axis and transverse to it, and finds that the axial field strongly enhances production of low-energy fermions, leaves fermions moving parallel to the field unenhanced, and produces a nonmonotonic angular distribution. On short timescales the initial kick of the high-frequency field makes the enhancement still larger, so that $eA_\omega \approx 0.10\,\omega$ suffices for observable yields where the long-time limit would need $eA_\omega \approx 1.00\,\omega$.

Load-bearing premise

The long-time results are obtained by treating the fast oscillatory motion induced by the high-frequency field at the beginning and end of the process as negligible; if that fast motion contributes at the same order as the first-order effective Hamiltonian, the predicted enhancement could change.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A circularly polarized assist laser with $eA_\omega \approx 1.00\,\omega$ raises long-time fermion yields from far below the observable threshold $n_{p_T}^S$ to at or above it, even though the static field remains below the Schwinger threshold.
  • On short timescales the axial-field kick dominates, so pulses with $eA_\omega \approx 0.10\,\omega$ already reach observable yields; short pulses are therefore a more efficient experimental route than a constant axial field.
  • The enhancement is largest for low-energy fermions and for directions away from the axial-field axis, with production peaking at intermediate scatter angles; fermions moving parallel to the axial field are not enhanced.
  • For effectively massless fermions the constant axial field becomes a pure gauge and produces no enhancement, which explains why the effect weakens at high energy and focuses experimental attention on the massive low-energy sector.
  • For a Gaussian-beam profile the same mechanism induces an effective axial magnetic field $\mathbf{B}_5 = \nabla\times\mathbf{A}_5$, which after pair creation drives a vortical charge current through the axial magnetic effect.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the axial field is the operative mechanism, reversing the circular polarization (flipping the sign of $A_5$) should change the fermion yields in a way a generic scalar enhancement would not; comparing left- and right-circular yields at fixed intensity would separate the axial mechanism from multiphoton effects.
  • The same effective-theory construction could be applied to time-dependent envelopes and to heavier fermion species; the paper's short-pulse result suggests that optimizing pulse shape may produce larger peak yields than any constant axial field.
  • The vortical axial magnetic field for a Gaussian beam implies that, after pair creation, a spontaneously generated vortical current should appear; detecting such a current would be a signature of the axial field rather than of the assist wave itself.
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

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. This manuscript studies the dynamically assisted Schwinger effect in the presence of a high-frequency, circularly polarized plane wave. Using the Floquet-Magnus expansion, the authors derive an effective static Hamiltonian that contains a spatial axial-vector field A5 ∝ (A×A*)/ω, set up a Furry-picture formula for the produced fermion number in each mode, and compute numerically the long-time and short-time fermion spectra for a periodic static electric field. The main claim is that the induced axial field substantially enhances fermion pair production, on long timescales by orders of magnitude and on short timescales even more, so that production rates can approach or exceed the experimentally observable threshold.

Significance. The proposal that a circularly polarized assist laser generates an effective spatial axial field that enhances pair production is novel and, if correct, would be experimentally relevant. The paper is self-contained: it derives the effective-field mapping, supplies a lattice method with a Wilson term to remove doublers, and benchmarks the eAω=0 case against the constant-field estimate. No parameters are fitted to the target result, and the qualitative behavior (axial-field enhancement, angular dependence, suppression for fermions moving along z) is a falsifiable prediction. However, as detailed below, the quantitative long-time predictions are not yet supported because the derivation drops the Floquet kick operator at leading order and because there are internal sign inconsistencies in the effective axial field.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. V, Eqs. (44), (48), (50), (53), and Sec. VI, Eq. (60)] The sign of the effective axial field is internally inconsistent. Equation (44) together with the Appendix identity (A10) gives H_F^(1) = -2i e^2/ω γ0γ·γ5 (A×A*). Comparing with the axial-field coupling eγ0γ·γ5 A5 yields A5 = -2i e/ω (A×A*), not the plus sign in Eq. (50). With A = (e1 - i e2) f e^{iωz}, A×A* = 2i f^2 e3, so the correct expression is A5 = +4e f^2/ω e3, opposite to Eq. (53) and to Eq. (54). The numerical Hamiltonian in Eq. (60) uses +4e^2 A_ω^2/ω γ0γ3γ5, which corresponds to the corrected sign, not to the sign in Eqs. (50) and (54). Since the sign of the axial term determines which chirality is energetically lowered, the paper must fix this sign convention and rerun or confirm the numerics with a single consistent sign.
  2. [Sec. IV, Eqs. (31) and (39); Sec. VII, Fig. 4] The long-time limit formula Eq. (39) is obtained by setting K(t) ≈ 0 and K(tin) ≈ 0 in Eq. (31), justified only by the statement that one is 'not interested in the micromotion.' This is not a controlled approximation: by Eq. (61), K^(1)(t) has coefficient 2eAω/ω, which equals 2 for eAω = 1.00ω and 4 for eAω = 2.00ω in Table I, so the kick operator is not a small perturbation. Since Eq. (31) contains e^{-iK(t)} and e^{iK(tin)} sandwiched around S(t), the first-order matrix elements of K contribute at the same order as the retained axial-field terms from H_F^(1). The van Vleck condition ∫dt K(t)=0 only makes the average of K(t) vanish, not the average of e^{-iK(t)}, whose second-order cumulant is O(‖K‖^2) and survives time-averaging. The paper itself attributes the short-time enhancement to the initial kick (Sec. VII), so the kick has physical consequences; setting it to zero in the long-time formula is unjustified. The numerical results of Figs. 2 and 3 are computed from Eq. (39), so the claimed long-time enhancement is not established. The authors should either include the kick contributions to first order in the long-time average, or demonstrate numerically that their effect is negligible by comparing Eq. (39) with the full time-dependent expression at large t.
  3. [Sec. V, Eq. (56), and Sec. VI, Table I] The first-order Floquet-Magnus truncation may not be valid for the largest field amplitudes used in the numerics. The paper's own convergence estimate, Eq. (56), requires γ_K^2 (m/ω) ≪ 1. With m = 10ω (Table I) and eAω = 2.00ω, the Keldysh parameter is γ_K = eAω/m = 0.2, so γ_K^2 (m/ω) = 0.4, which is not much smaller than unity. Thus for the eAω = 2.00ω curves in Figs. 2-3, the neglected H_F^(2) and higher-order terms can be comparable to the retained axial-field term. The authors should quantify the truncation error, e.g., by computing the next order or by restricting the quantitative claims to the regime where Eq. (56) is satisfied.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Sec. II, Eq. (7)] Equation (7) defines |v_in^α(t)⟩ using |u_in^α(tin)⟩ on the right-hand side; it should be |v_in^α(tin)⟩.
  2. [Sec. III, Eq. (34)] Equation (34) appears to be missing the sum over β from the definition of nα(t) in Eq. (13). If the matrix element vanishes for all β the result is still zero, but the notation should be corrected.
  3. [Sec. IV, Eq. (38)] The transition from Eq. (38) to Eq. (39) drops all off-diagonal energy terms, but for the finite periodic lattice used in the numerics the spectrum is discrete, so these oscillatory terms do not automatically vanish; a time-averaging or L→∞ prescription should be stated explicitly.
  4. [Sec. V, Eq. (47)] Equation (47) has factors and signs in the exponent that are inconsistent with Eq. (46); since this equation is only illustrative, it should be clarified or corrected.
  5. [Sec. VII, first paragraph] The text says 'receptively' instead of 'respectively' in the description of Figs. 2 and 3.
  6. [Sec. VI, numerical method] The lattice discretization details, including the exact form of the Wilson term and its effect on the spectrum, are only briefly described; a short description of convergence with Nz would improve reproducibility.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the axial-field result follows from direct Floquet-Magnus algebra; the dropped kick operator in Eq. (39) is a convergence/truncation concern, not a circular input.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation is self-contained and does not reduce to its inputs. The pair-number formula (Eq. 13) is the standard Furry-picture expression, the Floquet-Magnus ansatz (Eq. 16) and first-order formulas (Eqs. 20-25) are standard technique, and the effective axial field (Eqs. 48-54) is obtained by direct Dirac algebra from the specified Hamiltonian (Eq. 42). No parameter is fitted to the target enhancement; the axial-field strength is an algebraic consequence of the circularly polarized plane wave, and the numerical fermion numbers are computed outputs of the diagonalized static Hamiltonians, compared against the independent constant-field estimates n0 and nS. The only self-citation, Ref. [5], appears in a general list of recent works and is not load-bearing. The main caveat is not circularity but perturbative consistency: Sec. IV obtains Eq. (39) by setting K(t)≈0 and K(tin)≈0, while Sec. VII attributes the short-time peak to the initial kick in exp(iK(tin)) and exp(-iK(t)); since Eq. (61) gives K^(1) with coefficient 2eAω/ω, which is O(1) for eAω=1-2ω, the long-time expression may omit non-negligible micromotion effects. That is a validity/truncation concern, not a case of a prediction being equivalent to an input by definition or by construction, so the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The paper introduces no fitted free parameters: the table values are physical inputs (mass, field strengths, lattice size). The central claim relies on the validity of the first-order Floquet-Magnus truncation, the standard Furry-picture counting, the long-time cancellation of oscillatory terms and the kick operator, and the lattice Wilson-term prescription.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Floquet-Magnus expansion converges to first order for the parameters used.
    Sec. V estimates gamma_K^2 m/omega ~ 0.1 for the chosen parameters but gives no rigorous convergence bound; the validity of the truncation is assumed.
  • standard math The Furry-picture formula Eq. (13) gives the number of produced fermions.
    This is a standard QED result (cited from Refs. [54,55]) and is used without modification.
  • domain assumption In the long-time limit, oscillating cross-energy terms average out and the kick operator K(t), K(tin) can be set to zero.
    Sec. IV drops K(t) and K(tin) after Eq. (38) without a derivation; this is a load-bearing step for Eq. (39).
  • domain assumption The Wilson term Eq. (64) removes lattice doublers without biasing the physical spectrum.
    Standard lattice technique, but its effect on the truncated Dirac Hamiltonian is not analyzed numerically in the paper.
invented entities (1)
  • Effective axial electromagnetic field A5
    purpose: Encodes the first-order Floquet-Magnus correction of a circularly polarized high-frequency field, acting oppositely on left- and right-handed fermions.
    The field is derived from the known Dirac Hamiltonian via the Floquet-Magnus expansion, so it is an emergent effective field rather than a new fundamental particle. It lacks a falsifiable handle outside the effective-theory framework presented here.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Study on axial fields in the dynamically assisted Schwinger effect." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/MQ53C4VI

@misc{pith2026250114283,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Study on axial fields in the dynamically assisted Schwinger effect},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/MQ53C4VI}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.14283}
}
read the original abstract

The dynamically assisted Schwinger effect, the generation of fermion-antifermion pairs in vacuum under a strong, slow-varying field and a weak, high-frequency field, has become a promising avenue to probe the vacuum structure and the nonlinear dynamics of QED. However, the role of axial fields in this phenomenon has remained underexplored. This study aims at analyzing how spatial axial fields influence particle production in the dynamically assisted Schwinger effect. Employing the high-frequency effective theory based on the Floquet-Magnus expansion, we demonstrate that a spatial axial field can occur as the effective field of a circular polarized high-frequency plane wave and significantly increase the number of fermions produced across different timescales. This enhancement offers both theoretical insights and useful tools for the experimental implementation of the Schwinger effect.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.14283 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1: External electric strength in one period of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2: Number of the positive-energy fermions with respect to the energy [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3: Number of the positive-energy fermions with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

63 extracted references · 42 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    The axial field enhances the particle production of the dynamically assisted Schwinger effect both on the long and short timescale

    work page

  2. [2]

    For fermions moving in the direction parallel to the ax- ial field, however, the enhancement diminishes

    On the long timescale, the axial-field enhancement is particularly strong for large-mass fermions. For fermions moving in the direction parallel to the ax- ial field, however, the enhancement diminishes

    work page

  3. [3]

    It in- duces the rapid rise and fall of the fermion number, with a peak value that is larger than the fermion number on the long timescale

    On the short timescale, the initial kick from the kick operator of the axial field plays an important role in enhancing the particle production. It in- duces the rapid rise and fall of the fermion number, with a peak value that is larger than the fermion number on the long timescale. In conclusion, we show that axial fields can easily occur in the dynamic...

    work page

  4. [4]

    H. Taya, T. Fujimori, T. Misumi, M. Nitta, and N. Sakai, JHEP 03, 082, arXiv:2010.16080 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2010

  5. [5]

    J. S. Schwinger, Phys. Rev. 82, 664 (1951)

    1951

  6. [6]

    Gelis and N

    F. Gelis and N. Tanji, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 87, 1 (2016), arXiv:1510.05451 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2016

  7. [7]

    Perturbative methods for assisted nonperturbative pair production

    G. Torgrimsson, Phys. Rev. D 99, 096002 (2019), arXiv:1812.04607 [hep-ph]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2019

  8. [8]

    Pair Production in Circularly Polarized Waves

    C. Kohlf¨ urst, Phys. Rev. D 110, L111903 (2024), arXiv:2212.03180 [hep-ph]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2024

Show all 63 references
  1. [9]

    Yu, Phys

    C. Yu, Phys. Rev. D 108, 116009 (2023), arXiv:2309.03570 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  2. [10]

    I. A. Aleksandrov, A. Kudlis, and A. I. Klochai, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, 043009 (2024), arXiv:2403.17204 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  3. [11]

    J. W. Yoon et al., Optica 8, 630 (2021)

    2021

  4. [12]

    Torgrimsson, J

    G. Torgrimsson, J. Oertel, and R. Sch¨ utzhold, Phys. Rev. D 94, 065035 (2016), arXiv:1607.02448 [hep-th]

    2016 arXiv

  5. [13]

    L.-N. Hu, O. Amat, L. Wang, A. Sawut, H.-H. Fan, and B. S. Xie, Phys. Rev. D 107, 116010 (2023), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 108, 039905 (2023)], arXiv:2303.15781 [hep- ph]

    2023 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Schutzhold, H

    R. Schutzhold, H. Gies, and G. Dunne, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 130404 (2008), arXiv:0807.0754 [hep-th]

    2008 arXiv

  7. [15]

    G. V. Dunne, H. Gies, and R. Schutzhold, Phys. Rev. D 80, 111301 (2009), arXiv:0908.0948 [hep-ph]

    2009 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Ababekri, B.-S

    M. Ababekri, B.-S. Xie, and J. Zhang, Phys. Rev. D 100, 016003 (2019), arXiv:1905.01629 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Torgrimsson, C

    G. Torgrimsson, C. Schneider, J. Oertel, and R. Sch¨ utzhold, JHEP 06, 043, arXiv:1703.09203 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  10. [18]

    W¨ ollert, M

    A. W¨ ollert, M. Klaiber, H. Bauke, and C. H. Keitel, Phys. Rev. D 91, 065022 (2015), arXiv:1410.2401 [quant-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Taya, Phys

    H. Taya, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 023257 (2020), arXiv:2003.08948 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  12. [20]

    S. A. Sato, J. W. McIver, M. Nuske, P. Tang, G. Jotzu, B. Schulte, H. H¨ ubener, U. De Giovannini, L. Mathey, M. A. Sentef, A. Cavalleri, and A. Rubio, Phys. Rev. B 99, 214302 (2019)

    2019

  13. [21]

    A. M. Fedotov and A. A. Mironov, Phys. Rev. A 88, 062110 (2013), arXiv:1310.7258 [hep-ph]

    2013 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Broers and L

    L. Broers and L. Mathey, Phys. Rev. Res. 4, 013057 (2022)

    2022

  15. [23]

    Oka and H

    T. Oka and H. Aoki, Phys. Rev. B 79, 081406 (2009)

    2009

  16. [24]

    W. Wang, Z. Zhang, G.-X. Tang, and T. Wang, Phys. Rev. A 110, 023308 (2024), arXiv:2404.12682 [cond- mat.quant-gas]

    2024 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Luo, Phys

    M. Luo, Phys. Rev. B 109, 155401 (2024), arXiv:2311.12350 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    2024 arXiv

  18. [26]

    K. Shi, X. Zhang, and W. Zhang, Phys. Rev. A 109, 013324 (2024), arXiv:2401.01250 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

    2024 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Mumford, D

    J. Mumford, D. Kamp, and D. H. J. O’Dell, Phys. Rev. A 110, 043310 (2024), arXiv:2404.00533 [cond-mat.quant- gas]

    2024 arXiv

  20. [28]

    E. S. Mananga and T. Charpentier, Physics Reports 609, 1 (2016)

    2016

  21. [29]

    Chakrabarty and S

    A. Chakrabarty and S. Datta, Phys. Rev. B 110, 064314 (2024), arXiv:2404.12297 [cond-mat.dis-nn]

    2024 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Schnell, L.-N

    A. Schnell, L.-N. Wu, A. Widera, and A. Eckardt, Phys. Rev. A 107, L021301 (2023), arXiv:2204.07147 [cond- mat.quant-gas]

    2023 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Blanes, F

    S. Blanes, F. Casas, J. A. Oteo, and J. Ros, Phys. Rept. 470, 151 (2009)

    2009

  24. [32]

    Magnus, Commun

    W. Magnus, Commun. Pure Appl. Math. 7, 649 (1954)

    1954

  25. [33]

    Yamada and N

    A. Yamada and N. Yamamoto, Phys. Rev. D104, 054041 (2021), arXiv:2107.07074 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Fukushima, Y

    K. Fukushima, Y. Hidaka, T. Shimazaki, and H. Taya, Annals Phys. 458, 169494 (2023), arXiv:2305.11432 [hep- ph]

    2023 arXiv

  27. [35]

    L. D. Marin Bukov and A. Polkovnikov, Advances in Physics 64, 139 (2015), https://doi.org/10.1080/00018732.2015.1055918

    2015

  28. [36]

    Aidelsburger, S

    M. Aidelsburger, S. Nascimbene, and N. Gold- man, Comptes Rendus Physique 19, 394 (2018), arXiv:1710.00851 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    2018 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Rahav, I

    S. Rahav, I. Gilary, and S. Fishman, Phys. Rev. A 68, 013820 (2003)

    2003

  30. [38]

    Oka and S

    T. Oka and S. Kitamura, Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics 10, 387 (2019)

    2019

  31. [39]

    Goldman and J

    N. Goldman and J. Dalibard, Phys. Rev. X 4, 031027 (2014), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.X 5, 029902 (2015)], arXiv:1404.4373 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

    2014 arXiv

  32. [40]

    R. Ilan, A. G. Grushin, and D. I. Pikulin, Nature Rev. Phys. 2, 29 (2019), arXiv:1903.11088 [cond-mat.mes- hall]

    2019 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Eckardt and E

    A. Eckardt and E. Anisimovas, New J. Phys. 17, 093039 (2015)

    2015

  34. [42]

    G. S. Uhrig, M. H. Kalthoff, and J. K. Freericks, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 130604 (2019)

    2019

  35. [43]

    Rodriguez-Vega, M

    M. Rodriguez-Vega, M. Vogl, and G. A. Fiete, Annals of Physics 435, 168434 (2021)

    2021

  36. [44]

    Arjona, E

    V. Arjona, E. V. Castro, and M. A. H. Vozmediano, Phys. Rev. B 96, 081110 (2017), arXiv:1703.05399 [cond- mat.mes-hall]

    2017 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Jamotte, N

    M. Jamotte, N. Goldman, and M. Di Liberto, Commun. Phys. 5, 30 (2022), arXiv:2104.13394 [cond-mat.quant- gas]

    2022 arXiv

  38. [46]

    M. N. Chernodub, Y. Ferreiros, A. G. Grushin, K. Land- steiner, and M. A. H. Vozmediano, Phys. Rept. 977, 1 (2022), arXiv:2110.05471 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    2022 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Cortijo, Y

    A. Cortijo, Y. Ferreiros, K. Landsteiner, and M. A. H. Vozmediano, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 177202 (2015), arXiv:1603.02674 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    2015 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Copinger and S

    P. Copinger and S. Pu, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 35, 2030015 (2020), arXiv:2008.03635 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  41. [49]

    E. V. Gorbar, V. A. Miransky, I. A. Shovkovy, and P. O. Sukhachov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 127601 (2017), arXiv:1610.07625 [cond-mat.str-el]

    2017 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Landsteiner and Y

    K. Landsteiner and Y. Liu, Phys. Lett. B783, 446 (2018), arXiv:1703.01944 [cond-mat.mes-hall]

    2018 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Yamamoto and D.-L

    N. Yamamoto and D.-L. Yang, Phys. Rev. D103, 125003 (2021), arXiv:2103.13208 [hep-th]

    2021 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Domcke, Y

    V. Domcke, Y. Ema, and K. Mukaida, JHEP 05, 001, arXiv:2101.05192 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  45. [53]

    Huang and H

    X.-G. Huang and H. Taya, Phys. Rev. D 100, 016013 (2019), arXiv:1904.08200 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  46. [54]

    I. A. Aleksandrov and A. Kudlis, Phys. Rev. D 110, L011901 (2024), arXiv:2404.02878 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Fukushima, D

    K. Fukushima, D. E. Kharzeev, and H. J. Warringa, Phys. Rev. D 78, 074033 (2008), arXiv:0808.3382 [hep- ph]

    2008 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Di Piazza, Phys

    A. Di Piazza, Phys. Rev. A 91, 042118 (2015), arXiv:1501.06475 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Copinger, K

    P. Copinger, K. Hattori, and D.-L. Yang, Phys. Rev. D 107, 056016 (2023), arXiv:2208.12913 [hep-th]

    2023 arXiv

  50. [58]

    (60) naively, we will find that for each ϵpT ,k (or ¯ϵ−pT ,k), upT ,k F (z) [or v−pT ,k F (z)] is of eightfold degener- acy

    for more discussion of doublers.) For example, if we choose V0 = 0, Aω = 0 and discretize ˆHF defined in Eq. (60) naively, we will find that for each ϵpT ,k (or ¯ϵ−pT ,k), upT ,k F (z) [or v−pT ,k F (z)] is of eightfold degener- acy. However, in the continuous limit, the corre...

  51. [59]

    W. H. Furry, Phys. Rev. 81, 115 (1951). 13

    1951

  52. [60]

    Moortgat-Pick, J

    G. Moortgat-Pick, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 198, 012002 (2009)

    2009

  53. [61]

    H. Taya, H. Fujii, and K. Itakura, Phys. Rev. D 90, 014039 (2014), arXiv:1405.6182 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  54. [62]

    Fukushima, Phys

    K. Fukushima, Phys. Rev. D 92, 054009 (2015), arXiv:1501.01940 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Di Piazza, Phys

    A. Di Piazza, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 040402 (2014), arXiv:1310.7856 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

Pith tools

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