Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 3 minor 44 references

Screening rho-meson mass in the presence of strong magnetic fields

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

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

Pith's one-line read In strong magnetic fields, two rho-meson screening modes grow while one stays flat.

desk verdict The screening-mass figures contradict the paper's own equations: the one-loop self-energy coefficients are purely imaginary at the relevant kinematics, so the printed formulas give a field-independent rho mass. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.08051 v1 pith:WYFMY7OT submitted 2025-02-12 hep-ph hep-th

Luis A. Hernández , Juan D. Martínez-Sánchez , R. Zamora This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-phhep-th
keywords rhomesonscreeningmassmagneticfieldlowestLandaulevelKroll-Lee-ZuminomodelvectorDebyeQCDmatter
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 aims to establish how the screening mass of the neutral rho-meson, the scale over which a static disturbance is damped in a medium, depends on an external magnetic field. Using the Kroll-Lee-Zumino model at one loop in the lowest Landau level approximation, the authors compute the rho self-energy and decompose it into three tensor structures, giving three independent modes. They find that the zero and perpendicular modes of both the parallel and perpendicular screening masses increase monotonically with magnetic field strength, while the parallel mode remains essentially constant. A sympathetic reader would care because this is a first prediction for rho screening in a pure magnetic field and it connects to lattice results on pole masses and to Debye screening in QCD matter.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the one-loop self-energy of the neutral rho-meson in the lowest Landau level approximation, built from the charged-pion propagator $D_{LLL}(k)=2i\,e^{-k_\perp^2/(2eB)}/(k_\parallel^2-m_B^2+i\epsilon)$ with $m_B^2=m_\pi^2+eB$. Because the field breaks Lorentz symmetry, the self-energy is written on a basis of three transverse tensors $\Sigma^{\mu\nu}_{\parallel}$, $\Sigma^{\mu\nu}_{\perp}$, and $\Sigma^{\mu\nu}_0$; the coefficients $P_\parallel$, $P_\perp$, and $P_0$ carry the field dependence and feed the propagator denominators $p^2-M_\rho^2-P_i$. Solving the resulting pole equations at $p_0=0$ yields the parallel and perpendicular screening masses for each mode.

What would settle it

Compute the same one-loop screening masses while keeping the next Landau level in the charged-pion propagator; if at $eB=0.5\,\mathrm{GeV}^2$ the zero or perpendicular modes change by more than ten percent, the lowest-Landau-level result is not robust. Alternatively, a lattice QCD measurement of the neutral rho screening mass at $eB\gtrsim 1\,\mathrm{GeV}^2$ that shows the perpendicular mode flat or decreasing would contradict the paper's central claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that, in a strong external magnetic field, the neutral rho-meson's screening mass splits into three modes and two kinematical types, and the field dependence is mode-dependent: the zero mode and the perpendicular mode grow monotonically with $eB$, whereas the parallel mode is nearly field-independent. This is obtained from the one-loop self-energy in the KLZ model with only the lowest Landau level of the charged pions retained, and by imposing transversality via the Ward-Takahashi identity. The calculation yields closed-form coefficients $P_0$, $P_\perp$, and $P_\parallel$, whose real parts enter the propagator poles at zero frequency; solving $p_3^2 = -M_\rho^2 - \mathrm{Re}[P_i]$ and $p_\perp^2 = -M_\rho^2 - \mathrm{Re}[P_i]$ produces the two screening-mass plots. The authors interpret the result as a decreasing Debye length with increasing field and note qualitative consistency with lattice and NJL studies showing an increasing neutral-rho pole mass.

Load-bearing premise

The calculation assumes the magnetic field is strong enough that only the lowest-energy orbit of the charged pion matters; if that assumption fails at the weaker fields studied, the predicted screening masses would change.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The Debye screening length of the neutral rho-meson decreases as the magnetic field grows in the zero and perpendicular modes.
  • The parallel mode's near-constancy means the rho meson's response along the field direction is almost unaffected by the magnetic field at the field strengths studied.
  • Since the pole mass of the neutral rho increases with the field in lattice and NJL calculations, the increasing screening masses are qualitatively consistent with the relation $M_{\rho,\mathrm{pole}} = M_{\rho,\mathrm{sc}}^{\parallel}$ quoted in the paper.
  • The closed-form coefficients permit direct evaluation of the three modes for any field strength within the LLL regime, without numerical simulation.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Extending the calculation to higher Landau levels would test whether the monotonic rise of the zero and perpendicular modes persists at field strengths where $eB$ is comparable to $M_\rho^2$; the current LLL approximation is expected to be most reliable when $eB \gg M_\rho^2$.
  • The same tensor decomposition could be applied to the neutral pion screening mass in a magnetic field, giving a direct comparison with existing linear-sigma-model results.
  • At finite temperature, thermal corrections to the parallel and perpendicular screening masses may mix with the magnetic effects, potentially changing the ordering of the modes; this is a natural next step the paper does not address.
  • A lattice QCD measurement of the rho screening mass in a strong magnetic field would provide a clean quantitative test of the predicted mode dependence.
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. The paper studies the one-loop self-energy of the neutral rho meson in the Kroll-Lee-Zumino model in an external magnetic field, using the lowest-Landau-level approximation for charged pions. It decomposes the self-energy into parallel, perpendicular, and zero tensor modes and defines parallel and perpendicular screening masses through the zeros of the corresponding inverse propagators at p0=0. The claimed result is that the zero and perpendicular modes of the screening mass increase monotonically with eB, while the parallel mode is essentially constant, as displayed in Figs. 4 and 5.

Significance. The topic is timely, and the analytic setup has some virtues: the tensor decomposition of the vector self-energy in a magnetic field is standard and clearly presented, the one-loop integrals are treated with dimensional regularization rather than left as numerical quadrature, and the model parameters are fixed from vacuum phenomenology rather than fitted to the target observable. If the screening masses really behaved as claimed, the result would be a useful benchmark for vector-meson properties in magnetized matter and would complement lattice and NJL studies of the rho pole mass. However, the central quantitative claim is not supported by the printed equations, so the contribution in its present form cannot be used.

major comments (2)
  1. [§IV, Eqs. (23), (32), (39), (43)–(45)] At the kinematics of both screening limits, every coefficient P_i printed in Eqs. (23), (32), and (39) is equal to -i times a real-valued function. For the parallel limit (p0=0, p⊥=0, p3≠0), p‖²=-p3²<0, so p‖/sqrt(4mB²-p‖²) = i p3/sqrt(4mB²+p3²) and arctan of this argument is i artanh(p3/sqrt(4mB²+p3²)); the product is real, and the tadpole logarithms are real as well. The same holds in the perpendicular limit (p0=0, p3=0, p⊥≠0), where the arctan terms vanish or tend to a real constant. Therefore Re[P‖]=Re[P⊥]=Re[P0]=0 in Eqs. (44) and (45). Equation (43) then gives p3²=-Mρ² and p⊥²=-Mρ² independent of eB. The monotonically increasing curves in Figs. 4 and 5 do not follow from the printed equations; as written they could only be obtained by replacing Re[P_i] with Im[P_i] or |P_i|, which is not stated or justified.
  2. [§IV, Figs. 4–5, Eq. (5)] The numerical results also rest on an unestablished scale choice. The text states 'we set µ = 2 eB', but µ appears as µ² inside logarithms such as Eq. (15), so this is dimensionally inconsistent unless the intended choice is µ²=2eB; either way, no scale-independence check is provided. Since the one-loop coefficients are proportional to ln(µ²/mB²), the plotted screening masses depend strongly on this choice. In addition, the LLL propagator (5) assumes eB is the dominant energy scale, yet the plots begin at eB=0.5 GeV², which is comparable to Mρ²≈0.59 GeV² and to mB²=mπ²+eB; the validity of the LLL approximation in this range is not justified.
minor comments (3)
  1. [§IV, figure captions] The axis labels in Figs. 4 and 5 are hard to read, and the definitions of the plotted quantities should be stated explicitly, for example M^{∥}_{ρ,sc}/M_ρ and M^{⊥}_{ρ,sc}/M_ρ.
  2. [§III, Eqs. (15), (21), (38)] The text calls the renormalization scheme 'M S scheme'; please use a standard notation such as MS or MS-bar to avoid ambiguity.
  3. [§V] The concluding paragraph contains a typographical doubled period ('very small..'); please correct it.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the one-loop KLZ calculation is self-contained with phenomenological inputs; the discrepancy between Eqs. (23)/(32)/(39) and Figs. 4-5 is an internal-consistency issue, not a circular derivation.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. The paper starts from the KLZ Lagrangian, the LLL propagator, and standard one-loop Feynman rules, then computes the rho self-energy coefficients P0, Pperp, and Pparallel. The input parameters (M_rho = 770 MeV, m_pi = 140 MeV, g^2/4pi = 2.93) are taken from vacuum phenomenology, not fitted to the screening masses that are the claimed output. No parameter is tuned to reproduce the plotted magnetic-field dependence, and no result is imported from a self-citation as the load-bearing step. Self-citations appear only as background or as precedents for the tensor basis (e.g., Refs. [25], [27], [36]) and are not used to force the outcome. The paper does contain a serious internal-consistency problem: at the stated screening kinematics (p0 = 0, p_perp -> 0 for parallel; p0 = 0, p3 = 0 for perpendicular), each printed Pi in Eqs. (23), (32), and (39) is purely imaginary, so Re[Pi] = 0 and Eq. (43) would give M_sc = M_rho independent of eB, contradicting the field-dependent curves in Figs. 4 and 5. That defect concerns the analytic continuation or the evaluation underlying the figures; it is a correctness/technical error, not a circular reduction of the prediction to its inputs by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central calculation rests on the KLZ model with vacuum parameters, the LLL approximation, a chosen renormalization scale, and standard computational techniques. No new particles or forces are introduced. The only tuned parameter is µ, chosen by hand.

free parameters (1)
  • renormalization scale µ = µ^2 = 2 eB
    The scale is set by hand to satisfy the LLL approximation. The self-energy coefficients depend on ln(µ^2/m_B^2), and no check of physical scale independence is presented.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Lowest Landau level approximation for the charged pion propagator: D_LLL(k) = 2i exp(-k_perp^2/(2eB))/(k_parallel^2 - m_B^2 + iε).
    Invoked in Section III, Eqs. (3)-(5). It assumes eB is the dominant energy scale and neglects all higher Landau levels.
  • standard math Ward-Takahashi identity for the transverse self-energy, p_μ Σ^μν = 0.
    Used to reduce the self-energy to three tensor structures, Eq. (8)-(10). Standard for a vector field coupled to a conserved current.
  • standard math Dimensional regularization and MS scheme for UV divergences.
    Applied in the derivations of Eqs. (15), (20)-(22), (26), (30), (35), and (38).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Screening rho-meson mass in the presence of strong magnetic fields." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/WYFMY7OT

@misc{pith2026250208051,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Screening rho-meson mass in the presence of strong magnetic fields},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/WYFMY7OT}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.08051}
}
abstract

We study the screening mass of the neutral rho-meson in the presence of strong magnetic fields using the Kroll-Lee-Zumino (KLZ) model. The rho-meson self-energy is computed at one-loop order within the lowest Landau level (LLL) approximation, considering the magnetic field as the dominant energy scale. Due to Lorentz symmetry breaking induced by the external field, we decompose the self-energy into three independent tensor structures, which give rise to three distinct modes. Additionally, the four-momentum splits into parallel and perpendicular components, leading to two types of screening masses: the parallel screening mass ( $p_0=0$ and $p_\perp \to 0$ ) and the perpendicular screening mass ( $p_0=0$ and $p_\parallel \to 0$ ). Our results show that the zero and perpendicular modes exhibit a monotonically increasing behavior with the magnetic field strength, whereas the parallel mode remains essentially constant. These findings provide new insights into the behavior of vector mesons in strongly magnetized media, with implications for QCD under extreme conditions.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.08051 by the authors.

Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Tadpole diagram for the one-loop correction to the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. FIG. 4. The three modes of the parallel screening mass of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 14 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    ρ0 µ ν ⃗ p ⃗ p π± ⃗k FIG

    Finally, an external uniform and constant magnetic field can be included in the model, introducing a covariant derivative in the La- grangian density, namely ∂µ→ Dµ = ∂µ + iqAµ , (2) where Aµ is the vector potential corresponding to an ex- ternal magnetic field along the ˆz axis, and q is the charge of the field. ρ0 µ ν ⃗ p ⃗ p π± ⃗k FIG. 2. Tadpole diagram ...

    work page

  2. [2]

    M. E. Gusakov, E. M. Kantor, and D. D. Ofengeim, On the evolution of magnetic field in neutron stars, Phys. Rev. D 96, 103012 (2017) , arXiv:1705.00508 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2017

  3. [3]

    + (p2 ‖ p2 ⊥(1− 2x)2 + eB(p2 ‖ + p2 ⊥)) m2 B− x(1− x)p2 ‖ ) . (21) The last step to perform is the integral over the Feynman parameter x, once it is calculated, we obtain P ± 0 = − ig2(eB)e− p2 ⊥ 2eB 2π2p2 [ p2 0− p2− p2 ⊥ 2 ln ( µ2 m2 B ) + eBp‖ √ 4m2 B− p2 ‖ arctan   p‖ √ 4m2 B− p2 ‖   ] . (22) Since we have at hand P t 0 and P ± 0 , we are able to ...

    work page

  4. [4]

    We use the following parameter values for the model: Mρ = 770 MeV, mπ = 140 MeV, and g2/4π = 2 .93 [37]

    shows the three modes of parallel screening mass of the neutral rho-meson, normalized to its value at a zero magnetic field, as a function of the magnetic field intensity. We use the following parameter values for the model: Mρ = 770 MeV, mπ = 140 MeV, and g2/4π = 2 .93 [37]. Additionally, we set µ = 2 eB to sat- isfy the lowest Landau level approximation. ...

    work page 2023

  5. [5]

    into Eq. ( 16), express the four momentum in terms of k‖ , k1 and k2, and obtain P ± 0 = 16g2 p2 ∫ d2k‖ dk1dk2 (2π)4 ( p2k2 ‖− p2(k2 1 + k2 2) − (p‖· k‖ )2 + 2p‖· k‖ (p1k1 + p2k2)− p2 1k2 1 − 2p1k1p2k2− p2 2k2 2 ) e−(k2 ⊥ +(p−k)2 ⊥ )/ (2eB) (k2 ‖− m2 B)((p− k)2 ‖− m2 B) . (17) We perform the integrals over k1 and k2. Hence, P ± 0 becomes P ± 0 =− g2eB 2p2...

    work page

  6. [6]

    Voronyuk, V

    V. Voronyuk, V. D. Toneev, W. Cassing, E. L. Bratkovskaya, V. P. Konchakovski, and S. A. Voloshin, (Electro-)Magnetic field evolution in relativistic heavy-ion collisions, Phys. Rev. C 83, 054911 (2011) , arXiv:1103.4239 [nucl-th]

    arXiv 2011

  7. [7]

    W. C. G. Ho, Evolution of a buried magnetic field in the central compact object neutron stars, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 414, 2567 (2011) , arXiv:1102.4870 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2011

  8. [8]

    McLerran and V

    L. McLerran and V. Skokov, Comments About the Electromagnetic Field in Heavy- Ion Collisions, Nucl. Phys. A 929, 184 (2014) , arXiv:1305.0774 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2014

Show all 44 references
  1. [9]

    A. P. Igoshev, S. B. Popov, and R. Hollerbach, Evolution of Neutron Star Magnetic Fields, Universe 7, 351 (2021) , arXiv:2109.05584 [astro-ph.HE]

    2021 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Grasso and H

    D. Grasso and H. R. Rubinstein, Magnetic fields in the early universe, Phys. Rept. 348, 163 (2001) , arXiv:astro-ph/0009061

    2001 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Subramanian, Magnetic fields in the early universe, Astron

    K. Subramanian, Magnetic fields in the early universe, Astron. Nachr. 331, 110 (2010) , arXiv:0911.4771 [astro-ph.CO]

    2010 arXiv

  4. [12]

    J. O. Andersen, W. R. Naylor, and A. Tran- berg, Phase diagram of QCD in a magnetic field: A review, Rev. Mod. Phys. 88, 025001 (2016) , arXiv:1411.7176 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Bzdak and V

    A. Bzdak and V. Skokov, Event-by-event fluctu- ations of magnetic and electric fields in heavy ion collisions, Phys. Lett. B 710, 171 (2012) , arXiv:1111.1949 [hep-ph]

    2012 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Bandyopadhyay and R

    A. Bandyopadhyay and R. L. S. Farias, In- verse magnetic catalysis: how much do we know about?, Eur. Phys. J. ST 230, 719 (2021) , arXiv:2003.11054 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Skokov, A

    V. Skokov, A. Y. Illarionov, and V. Toneev, Es- timate of the magnetic field strength in heavy- ion collisions, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 24, 5925 (2009) , arXiv:0907.1396 [nucl-th]

    2009 arXiv

  8. [16]

    J. D. Brandenburg, W. Zha, and Z. Xu, Mapping the electromagnetic fields of heavy-ion collisions with the Breit-Wheeler process, Eur. Phys. J. A 57, 299 (2021) , arXiv:2103.16623 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  9. [17]

    M. I. Abdulhamid et al. (STAR), Observation of the electromagnetic field effect via charge-dependent di- rected flow in heavy-ion collisions at the Relativis- tic Heavy Ion Collider, Phys. Rev. X 14, 011028 (2024) , arXiv:2304.03430 [nucl-ex]

    2024

  10. [18]

    G. S. Bali, F. Bruckmann, G. Endrodi, Z. Fodor, S. D. Katz, and A. Schafer, QCD quark condensate in ex- ternal magnetic fields, Phys. Rev. D 86, 071502 (2012) , arXiv:1206.4205 [hep-lat]

    2012 arXiv

  11. [19]

    V. A. Miransky and I. A. Shovkovy, Quantum field theory in a magnetic field: From quantum chromodynamics to graphene and Dirac semimetals, Phys. Rept. 576, 1 (2015) , arXiv:1503.00732 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Adhikari et al

    P. Adhikari et al. , Strongly interacting matter in extreme magnetic fields, arXiv:2412.18632 [nucl-th] (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Hattori, K

    K. Hattori, K. Itakura, and S. Ozaki, Strong-field physics in QED and QCD: From fundamentals to ap- plications, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 133, 104068 (2023) , arXiv:2305.03865 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Ayala, L

    A. Ayala, L. A. Hern´ andez, M. Loewe, and C. Villav- 8 icencio, QCD phase diagram in a magnetized medium from the chiral symmetry perspective: the linear sigma model with quarks and the Nambu–Jona-Lasinio model effective descriptions, Eur. Phys. J. A 57, 234 (2021) , arXiv:210...

    2021 arXiv

  15. [23]

    G. S. Bali, F. Bruckmann, G. Endrodi, Z. Fodor, S. D. Katz, S. Krieg, A. Schafer, and K. K. Szabo, The QCD phase diagram for external magnetic fields, JHEP 02, 044 , arXiv:1111.4956 [hep-lat]

    arXiv

  16. [24]

    Ayala, C

    A. Ayala, C. A. Dominguez, S. Hernandez-Ortiz, L. A. Hernandez, M. Loewe, D. Manreza Paret, and R. Zamora, Thermomagnetic evolution of the QCD strong coupling, Phys. Rev. D 98, 031501 (2018) , arXiv:1805.08198 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  17. [25]

    G. S. Bali, F. Bruckmann, G. Endr¨ odi, S. D. Katz, and A. Sch¨ afer, The QCD equation of state in background magnetic fields, JHEP 08, 177 , arXiv:1406.0269 [hep-lat]

    arXiv

  18. [26]

    and ( 31) at hand, we are able to write the coefficient corresponding to the basis element Π µν ⊥ P⊥ =− ig2(eB)e− p2 ⊥ 2eB 2π2 [ − 1 2 ln ( µ2 m2 B ) e p2 ⊥ 2eB + eB p‖ √ 4m2 B− p2 ‖ arctan   p‖ √ 4m2 B− p2 ‖   ] . (32) C. Coefficient P‖ The last coefficient to be calculated is ...

  19. [27]

    Ayala, J

    A. Ayala, J. J. Cobos-Mart ´ ınez, M. Loewe, M. E. Tejeda- Yeomans, and R. Zamora, Finite temperature quark- gluon vertex with a magnetic field in the Hard Thermal Loop approximation, Phys. Rev. D 91, 016007 (2015) , arXiv:1410.6388 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Ayala, C

    A. Ayala, C. A. Dominguez, L. A. Hernandez, M. Loewe, and R. Zamora, Inverse magnetic catal- ysis from the properties of the QCD coupling in a magnetic field, Phys. Lett. B 759, 99 (2016) , arXiv:1510.09134 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Ayala, C

    A. Ayala, C. A. Dominguez, L. A. Hernan- dez, M. Loewe, A. Raya, J. C. Rojas, and C. Villavicencio, Thermomagnetic properties of the strong coupling in the local Nambu–Jona- Lasinio model, Phys. Rev. D 94, 054019 (2016) , arXiv:1603.00833 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Zhang, W.-j

    R. Zhang, W.-j. Fu, and Y.-x. Liu, Properties of Mesons in a Strong Mag- netic Field, Eur. Phys. J. C 76, 307 (2016) , arXiv:1604.08888 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Fern´ andez, L

    G. Fern´ andez, L. A. Hern´ andez, and R. Zamora, Magnetic corrections to the QCD coupling: Strong field approximation, Phys. Rev. D 110, 014016 (2024) , arXiv:2403.14478 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  24. [32]

    G. S. Bali, B. B. Brandt, G. Endr˝ odi, and B. Gl¨ aßle, Meson masses in electromagnetic fields with Wil- son fermions, Phys. Rev. D 97, 034505 (2018) , arXiv:1707.05600 [hep-lat]

    2018 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Ayala, R

    A. Ayala, R. L. S. Farias, L. A. Hern´ andez, A. J. Mizher, J. Rend´ on, C. Villavicencio, and R. Zamora, Magnetic field dependence of the neutral pion longitudinal screening mass in the linear sigma model with quarks, Phys. Rev. D 109, 074019 (2024) , arXiv:2311.13068 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  26. [34]

    J. P. Carlomagno, D. Gomez Dumm, S. Noguera, and N. N. Scoccola, Neutral pseudoscalar and vector meson masses under strong mag- netic fields in an extended NJL model: Mix- ing effects, Phys. Rev. D 106, 074002 (2022) , arXiv:2205.15928 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  27. [35]

    H. Liu, L. Yu, and M. Huang, Charged and neutral vector ρ mesons in a mag- netic field, Phys. Rev. D 91, 014017 (2015) , arXiv:1408.1318 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Ayala, J

    A. Ayala, J. D. Casta˜ no Yepes, L. A. Hern´ andez, J. Salinas San Mart ´ ın, and R. Zamora, Gluon po- larization tensor and dispersion relation in a weakly magnetized medium, Eur. Phys. J. A 57, 140 (2021) , arXiv:2009.00830 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  29. [37]

    N. M. Kroll, T. D. Lee, and B. Zumino, Neutral Vec- tor Mesons and the Hadronic Electromagnetic Current, Phys. Rev. 157, 1376 (1967)

    1967

  30. [38]

    van Hees, The Renormalizability for massive Abelian gauge field theories revisited, arXiv:hep-th/0305076 (2003)

    H. van Hees, The Renormalizability for massive Abelian gauge field theories revisited, arXiv:hep-th/0305076 (2003)

    2003 arXiv

  31. [39]

    J. J. Sakurai, Theory of strong interactions, Annals Phys. 11, 1 (1960)

    1960

  32. [40]

    Hattori and D

    K. Hattori and D. Satow, Gluon spectrum in a quark-gluon plasma under strong mag- netic fields, Phys. Rev. D 97, 014023 (2018) , arXiv:1704.03191 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Ayala, J

    A. Ayala, J. D. Casta˜ no Yepes, M. Loewe, and E. Mu˜ noz, Gluon polarization tensor in a magnetized medium: Analytic approach starting from the sum over Landau levels, Phys. Rev. D 101, 036016 (2020) , arXiv:1912.07136 [hep-th]

    2020 arXiv

  34. [43]

    Gale and J

    C. Gale and J. I. Kapusta, Vector dominance model at finite temperature, Nucl. Phys. B 357, 65 (1991)

    1991

  35. [44]

    Sheng, Y

    B. Sheng, Y. Wang, X. Wang, and L. Yu, Pole and screening masses of neutral pions in a hot and magnetized medium: A comprehensive study in the Nambu–Jona- Lasinio model, Phys. Rev. D 103, 094001 (2021) , arXiv:2010.05716 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  36. [45]

    ( 5), where we also plot the three modes of the perpendicular screening mass as a function of the magnetic field strength

    are shown in Fig. ( 5), where we also plot the three modes of the perpendicular screening mass as a function of the magnetic field strength. Figure (

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.