Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Gluon splitting rates in an anisotropic plasma in the AMY formalism

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper presents a numerical method for computing gluon splitting rates in an anisotropic plasma, and shows that for its model the angular-averaged collision kernel reproduces the anisotropic rate to better than 0.5%, while the…

desk verdict A genuinely useful numerical method for anisotropic AMY rates, wrapped around a headline physics claim that outruns the O(xi) approximation it is computed from. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.09897 v1 pith:XTI573AK submitted 2025-09-11 hep-ph nucl-th

Florian Lindenbauer This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-phnucl-th
keywords gluonsplittingrateAMYformalismanisotropicQCDplasmacollisionkerneldipolecrosssectionFourier-modedecompositionkinetictheoryjetenergyloss
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

This paper presents a numerical method for computing the gluon splitting rate $g\to gg$ in an anisotropic quark-gluon plasma within the AMY effective-kinetic-theory formalism. Earlier rate calculations assumed an isotropic collision kernel; here the angular dependence of the dipole cross section is expanded in Fourier modes, turning the rate problem into a large coupled system of ordinary differential equations. The method is tested on a simple anisotropic model obtained by giving the Debye mass an angular dependence and expanding to first order in the anisotropy parameter $\xi$. The central numerical finding is that for this model the rate from the angular-averaged kernel agrees with the full anisotropic rate to better than 0.5%, while the commonly used isotropic kernel based on $T_*$ deviates by more than 10% at small parton energies. This matters because QCD kinetic-theory simulations of early heavy-ion collisions use the isotropic $T_*$ form for inelastic processes.

What carries the argument

The central object is the dipole cross section $C(b)$, the Fourier transform of the collision kernel $C(q_\perp)$, which is the sole medium input in the AMY rate equation. The argument is carried by a decomposition of the angular dependence of both the solution $g(b,\phi_b)$ and the potential $D(b,\phi_b)$ into Fourier modes $e^{in\phi_b}$. This reduces the impact-parameter integral equation to a coupled system of second-order ordinary differential equations for the modes $g_n(b)$, with boundary conditions fixed by the singular small-$b$ behavior and regularity at infinity. An anisotropic model kernel is constructed by giving the Debye mass the angular dependence $m_D^2(\phi)=(1-2\xi/3+\xi\cos^2\phi)\bar m_D^2$ and expanding the collision kernel to first order in $\xi$, so the comparison between anisotropic, angular-averaged, and $T_*$-based rates tests the method and the physics simultaneously.

What would settle it

Recompute the rate with the collision kernel kept to second order in $\xi$ (or with the full angular-dependent screening mass without expansion) at $\xi=1.35$ and $p\sim T$; if the anisotropic rate then differs from the angular-averaged rate by more than 0.5 percent, or if the $T_*$-based rate comes within 10 percent of the nonequilibrium rate, the paper's central numerical conclusions fail.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that the gluon splitting rate in a plasma with angular-dependent screening is nearly insensitive to the angular structure of the collision kernel once that structure is averaged over directions. For anisotropy parameters $\xi=0.5, 1.0, 1.35$ and splitting fractions $z=0.1, 0.5$, the anisotropic rate computed with 7 or 11 Fourier modes differs from the angular-averaged-kernel rate by less than 0.5 percent across parton energies from about $0.1\,T$ to $10^4\,T$. In contrast, the isotropic approximation used in QCD kinetic-theory simulations, which replaces the kernel by a thermal form with effective infrared temperature $T_*$ and anisotropic Debye mass $m_D$, deviates from the nonequilibrium rate by more than 10 percent, most strongly near the temperature scale. The paper also establishes that the Fourier-mode method itself is general: it applies to arbitrary anisotropic collision kernels, including those obtained from numerical kinetic-theory simulations.

Load-bearing premise

The anisotropic collision kernel is used only to first order in the anisotropy parameter $\xi$, yet the results are evaluated at $\xi=0.5$, $1.0$, and $1.35$, where neglected $O(\xi^2)$ terms could be large; if they are, the reported rates and the 0.5% and 10% comparisons would change.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The paper argues that QCD kinetic-theory simulations using the isotropic $T_*$ form may misestimate collinear gluon splitting rates in the anisotropic early stages of heavy-ion collisions by more than 10 percent near the temperature scale.
  • For the class of kernels tested, replacing an anisotropic kernel by its angular average changes the integrated splitting rate by less than 0.5 percent, suggesting that angular averaging is a safe simplification for this particular observable.
  • The same Fourier-mode method applies to $q\to qg$ and $g\to q\bar q$ splitting rates, which satisfy the same integral equation with different color factors.
  • The method accepts any anisotropic collision kernel, including realistic kernels generated by kinetic-theory simulations, not just the analytic first-order-in-$\xi$ model used here.
  • Convergence of the Fourier series at $n_{\text{fourier}}=7$ shows that only a small number of angular modes is needed for energy-integrated rates in this parameter range.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the 0.5-percent insensitivity to angular structure persists for realistic collision kernels, the full angular resolution of the splitting kernel could be replaced by an angular average in integrated-rate calculations, freeing computational resources for other aspects of kinetic-theory simulations.
  • The near-perfect agreement between anisotropic and angular-averaged rates probably reflects that the rate integrates over all transverse momentum and all emission angles; more differential observables, such as the transverse-momentum spectrum of emitted gluons, are likely to show stronger sensitivity to anisotropy than the integrated rate.
  • Because the numerical results are obtained at $\xi$ up to 1.35 from a kernel truncated at $O(\xi)$, a natural test is to extend the model to second order; if $O(\xi^2)$ terms shift the rate by more than the claimed 0.5 percent, the angular-averaging conclusion would need qualification at strong anisotropy.
  • The $T_*$ isotropic form fails mainly in the small-energy region where the formation time is long, which is exactly the regime most relevant for energy loss of moderate-energy jets; this may change the expected shape of jet suppression in the early plasma.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents a numerical method for computing gluon splitting rates in the AMY formalism when the collision kernel C(q_perp) (equivalently, the dipole cross section C(b)) is anisotropic. The method Fourier-decomposes the angular dependence of the impact-parameter-space function g and the dipole cross section, leading to a coupled system of radial ODEs with boundary conditions fixed by the small-b singular behavior. The method is validated against an isotropic thermal kernel and against variations of b_min, b_max, and the number of Fourier modes. It is then applied to a simple anisotropic model in which the Debye mass depends on angle as m_D^2(phi) = (1 - 2 xi/3 + xi cos^2 phi) bar m_D^2, with the collision kernel expanded to first order in xi. The reported numerical findings are: (i) the anisotropic rate agrees with the rate obtained from the angular-averaged kernel to better than 0.5% for the cases shown; (ii) the commonly used isotropic T_* form deviates from the nonequilibrium rate by more than 10% at small energies; and (iii) seven Fourier modes suffice. The code is publicly available.

Significance. If the main quantitative claim survives scrutiny, the result is practically useful: it suggests that, for this class of observables, an angular-averaged collision kernel may be a much better approximation than the standard T_*-based isotropic kernel for far-from-equilibrium plasmas. The paper has notable strengths: the numerical method is general and clearly described, the code is released, isotropic limits and Fourier-mode convergence are checked, and no parameter is fitted to the target rate. The central physical conclusion, however, rests on a first-order-in-xi expansion that is evaluated at xi values where the expansion parameter is not small, so the reported sub-0.5% agreement and the >10% T_* deviation need additional support before the conclusions can be regarded as robust for the exact model.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. III, Eq. (11), used in Sec. V B and Figs. 2-3] The rates shown in Figs. 2 and 3 are computed from the collision kernel expanded to first order in xi, Eqs. (11)-(12), but the results are presented at xi = 0.5, 1.0, and 1.35. At xi = 1.35 the expansion parameter xi(cos^2 phi - 2/3) ranges from about -0.9 to +0.45, so omitted O(xi^2) terms are not numerically small. Since both the 'anisotropic' rate and the 'angular-averaged' rate are evaluated with the same O(xi) truncated kernel, their agreement below 0.5% may only demonstrate that the first-order angular modulation has a small integrated effect, rather than that the exact anisotropic kernel is well approximated by its exact angular average. The angular average of the full kernel contains O(xi^2) contributions that are absent from Eq. (12), and those could change both the comparison to the anisotropic rate and the comparison to the T_* form. I ask the author to add results at small xi (e.g., 0.1 and 0.2), to estimate the O(xi^2) sensitivity at xi = 1.35, or to solve the same model with the full undivided angular kernel (or a resummed/Pade-improved version). The conclusions in Secs. V B and VI should be restated only after such a check.
  2. [Eq. (23)] Equation (23) defines D(z,b) = -1/2 [C(b) + C((1-z)b) + C((1-z)b)], with the same argument (1-z)b repeated and the expected C(z b) term missing. The symmetric form required by Eq. (2) should be C(b) + C((1-z)b) + C(z b). If the code follows the printed formula, then the z = 0.1 results in Figs. 2 and 3 are solutions to a different equation. Please correct the typo and confirm, preferably in the text, that the implementation uses the corrected expression.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Abstract and Sec. VI] The sentence 'while still deviating significantly from equilibrium' is slightly ambiguous; it should specify that it is the rate from the angular-averaged kernel that still deviates significantly from the thermal rate.
  2. [Eq. (28)] The denominators cos phi_b and sin phi_b in Eq. (28) may look singular when phi_b = pi/2 or 0; a parenthetical remark explaining that the expression is evaluated as a limit after combining the two terms would help the reader.
  3. [Ref. [46]] Reference [46] gives no arXiv identifier or persistent DOI; since the code is central to the reproducibility of the numerical claims, a stable identifier or repository link with version information should be provided.
  4. [Sec. IV B, text before Eq. (41)] The sentence 'Every system is initialized with exactly one nonzero coefficient' is slightly imprecise because, as stated in the preceding sentence, the coefficients with |n| >= 2 are set to zero for every system; rewording would improve clarity.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: all rates are numerical outputs from a specified kernel model, with no parameter fitted to the target rates and no load-bearing self-citation chain.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained as a numerical study. The only medium input is the anisotropic collision kernel model of Sec. III, taken explicitly from Ref. [45] (Eqs. (7), (11), and (12)), and the rates are obtained by solving the AMY integral equation (2) with that kernel. The angular-averaged comparison is defined by Eq. (52) as the phi-average of the same dipole cross section, and the T* comparison is the independently constructed isotropic model of Eq. (16). No parameter is fitted to the gluon splitting rate; the coupling g=0.1 is fixed and the Debye mass and T* are computed from the distribution function, not from the rate. The central claim that the angular-averaged kernel reproduces the anisotropic rate to better than 0.5% is a nontrivial numerical finding about the sensitivity of the rate functional to angular modulation, not an identity imposed by construction. The possible concern that the O(xi)-truncated kernel is used at xi=1.35, where O(xi^2) terms may matter, is a validity or correctness risk about the model truncation, not a circularity: both compared rates are outputs of the same truncated model, and the agreement is not enforced by any fitted parameter or by definition. Self-citations appear only as background, code, or companion-paper references and do not carry the central derivation. No uniqueness theorem is imported from the author's prior work, and no known result is renamed as a prediction.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the AMY formalism's infinite-medium and constant-kernel assumptions, a small-q_perp model form used for all q_perp, and a first-order-in-xi anisotropic kernel used at xi up to 1.35. The latter is the most fragile input. No entities are invented beyond the given collision-kernel models.

free parameters (2)
  • xi (anisotropy parameter) = 0.5, 1.0, 1.35
    Model parameter controlling the strength and direction of momentum-space anisotropy in the squeezed distribution (8); selected by hand for the numerical scans, not fitted to any target.
  • g (gauge coupling) = 0.1
    Numerical value of the strong coupling used in all rate computations; chosen as a representative weak-coupling value, not fitted.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The collision kernel C(q_perp) is constant during the formation time and the medium is infinite (AMY approximations).
    Stated in Sec. II as the validity conditions for Eqs. (1)-(2); inherited from Ref. [15].
  • domain assumption The small-q_perp form of the thermal kernel, Eq. (5), is used as the full collision kernel for all q_perp.
    Stated in Sec. III: 'Although this form is only valid for small q_perp, it will be used here as a model for the collision kernel for general q_perp.'
  • ad hoc to paper The anisotropic kernel is computed to first order in xi (Eqs. (11)-(12)) and used for xi = 0.5, 1.0, 1.35.
    The small-xi expansion in Sec. III is used in the numerical results of Sec. V B without discussing truncation validity at large xi; this is load-bearing for the reported rates.
  • domain assumption The parameter T in the anisotropic model is identified with the temperature of the thermal system with equal energy density (Landau matching).
    Defined in Sec. III (text below Eq. (15)).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Gluon splitting rates in an anisotropic plasma in the AMY formalism." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/XTI573AK

@misc{pith2026250909897,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Gluon splitting rates in an anisotropic plasma in the AMY formalism},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/XTI573AK}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.09897}
}
abstract

We introduce a novel numerical method to obtain the gluon splitting rates in an anisotropic QCD plasma in the AMY formalism, suitable for an anisotropic collision kernel. The method extends previous works by decomposing the additional angular information into Fourier modes, resulting in a significantly larger system of differential equations to solve numerically. It is then tested by calculating the rates for a simple anisotropic model for the collision kernel, which is compared to a thermal system. Remarkably, the obtained rates can be well-approximated by the rates calculated from an angular-averaged collision kernel, while still deviating significantly from equilibrium. An isotropic model for the collision kernel that is commonly used in QCD kinetic theory simulations, and which relies on the infrared temperature $T_*$ and an effective Debye mass, leads to rates that significantly deviate from the nonequilibrium rate, particularly at smaller parton energies.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.09897 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Gluon splitting rate [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Gluon splitting rate for an anisotropic dipole cross section (green curves) normalized to the thermal rate. The orange [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Gluon splitting rate for an anisotropic dipole cross section (green curves) normalized to the rate obtained from the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Gluon radiation from a QCD antenna with realistic parton-medium interactions

    hep-ph 2026-07 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    The in-medium antenna gluon spectrum is obtained by numerical solution of Dyson-type equations that fully resum multiple scatterings for Yukawa and HTL rates, without harmonic-oscillator or opacity truncations.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

59 extracted references · 3 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [45]

    Polarized photons from the early stages of relativistic heavy- ion collisions,

    Sigtryggur Hauksson and Charles Gale, “Polarized photons from the early stages of relativistic heavy- ion collisions,” Phys. Rev. C109, 034902 (2024), arXiv:2306.10307 [nucl-th]

    arXiv 2024

  2. [46]

    Anisotropic AMY Rate Solver,

    Florian Lindenbauer, “Anisotropic AMY Rate Solver,” (2025)

    work page 2025

  3. [1]

    Heavy Ion Collisions: The Big Picture, and the Big Questions,

    Wit Busza, Krishna Rajagopal, and Wilke van der Schee, “Heavy Ion Collisions: The Big Picture, and the Big Questions,” Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.68, 339–376 (2018), arXiv:1802.04801 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2018

  4. [2]

    Jet quenching in high-energy heavy-ion collisions,

    Guang-You Qin and Xin-Nian Wang, “Jet quenching in high-energy heavy-ion collisions,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. E 11 24, 1530014 (2015), arXiv:1511.00790 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2015

  5. [3]

    Heavy quarks and jets as probes of the QGP,

    Liliana Apolin´ ario, Yen-Jie Lee, and Michael Winn, “Heavy quarks and jets as probes of the QGP,” Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.127, 103990 (2022), arXiv:2203.16352 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2022

  6. [4]

    Fully quantum treatment of the Landau-Pomeranchuk-Migdal effect in QED and QCD,

    B. G. Zakharov, “Fully quantum treatment of the Landau-Pomeranchuk-Migdal effect in QED and QCD,” JETP Lett.63, 952–957 (1996), arXiv:hep-ph/9607440

    arXiv 1996

  7. [5]

    Radiative energy loss of high-energy quarks in finite size nuclear matter and quark - gluon plasma,

    B. G. Zakharov, “Radiative energy loss of high-energy quarks in finite size nuclear matter and quark - gluon plasma,” JETP Lett.65, 615–620 (1997), arXiv:hep- ph/9704255

    arXiv 1997

  8. [6]

    Light cone path integral approach to the Landau-Pomeranchuk-Migdal effect,

    B. G. Zakharov, “Light cone path integral approach to the Landau-Pomeranchuk-Migdal effect,” Phys. Atom. Nucl.61, 838–854 (1998), arXiv:hep-ph/9807540

    arXiv 1998

Show all 59 references
  1. [7]

    Radiative energy loss of high- energy quarks and gluons in a finite volume quark - gluon plasma,

    R. Baier, Yuri L. Dokshitzer, Alfred H. Mueller, S. Peigne, and D. Schiff, “Radiative energy loss of high- energy quarks and gluons in a finite volume quark - gluon plasma,” Nucl. Phys. B483, 291–320 (1997), arXiv:hep- ph/9607355

    1997

  2. [8]

    Radiative energy loss and p(T) broadening of high-energy partons in nuclei,

    R. Baier, Yuri L. Dokshitzer, Alfred H. Mueller, S. Peigne, and D. Schiff, “Radiative energy loss and p(T) broadening of high-energy partons in nuclei,” Nucl. Phys. B484, 265–282 (1997), arXiv:hep-ph/9608322

    1997 arXiv

  3. [9]

    Energy loss in perturbative QCD,

    R. Baier, D. Schiff, and B. G. Zakharov, “Energy loss in perturbative QCD,” Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.50, 37–69 (2000), arXiv:hep-ph/0002198

    2000 arXiv

  4. [10]

    Jet quenching in thin quark gluon plasmas. 1. Formal- ism,

    Miklos Gyulassy, Peter Levai, and Ivan Vitev, “Jet quenching in thin quark gluon plasmas. 1. Formal- ism,” Nucl. Phys. B571, 197–233 (2000), arXiv:hep- ph/9907461

    2000

  5. [11]

    Reaction operator approach to nonAbelian energy loss,

    M. Gyulassy, P. Levai, and I. Vitev, “Reaction operator approach to nonAbelian energy loss,” Nucl. Phys. B594, 371–419 (2001), arXiv:nucl-th/0006010

    2001 arXiv

  6. [12]

    Jet quenching and radiative energy loss in dense nuclear matter,

    Miklos Gyulassy, Ivan Vitev, Xin-Nian Wang, and Ben- Wei Zhang, “Jet quenching and radiative energy loss in dense nuclear matter,” , 123–191 (2004), arXiv:nucl- th/0302077

    2004

  7. [13]

    Gluon radiation off hard quarks in a nuclear environment: Opacity expansion,

    Urs Achim Wiedemann, “Gluon radiation off hard quarks in a nuclear environment: Opacity expansion,” Nucl. Phys. B588, 303–344 (2000), arXiv:hep-ph/0005129

    2000 arXiv

  8. [14]

    Cal- culating quenching weights,

    Carlos A. Salgado and Urs Achim Wiedemann, “Cal- culating quenching weights,” Phys. Rev. D68, 014008 (2003), arXiv:hep-ph/0302184

    2003 arXiv

  9. [15]

    Photon and gluon emission in relativistic plas- mas,

    Peter Brockway Arnold, Guy D. Moore, and Laurence G. Yaffe, “Photon and gluon emission in relativistic plas- mas,” JHEP06, 030 (2002), arXiv:hep-ph/0204343

    2002 arXiv

  10. [16]

    Radiative energy loss in a finite dynamical QCD medium,

    Magdalena Djordjevic and Ulrich W. Heinz, “Radiative energy loss in a finite dynamical QCD medium,” Phys. Rev. Lett.101, 022302 (2008), arXiv:0802.1230 [nucl-th]

    2008 arXiv

  11. [17]

    Simple Formula for High- Energy Gluon Bremsstrahlung in a Finite, Expand- ing Medium,

    Peter Brockway Arnold, “Simple Formula for High- Energy Gluon Bremsstrahlung in a Finite, Expand- ing Medium,” Phys. Rev. D79, 065025 (2009), arXiv:0808.2767 [hep-ph]

    2009 arXiv

  12. [18]

    QCD Split- ting/Joining Functions at Finite Temperature in the Deep LPM Regime,

    Peter Brockway Arnold and Caglar Dogan, “QCD Split- ting/Joining Functions at Finite Temperature in the Deep LPM Regime,” Phys. Rev. D78, 065008 (2008), arXiv:0804.3359 [hep-ph]

    2008 arXiv

  13. [19]

    Finite-size effects on the radiative energy loss of a fast parton in hot and dense strongly interacting matter,

    Simon Caron-Huot and Charles Gale, “Finite-size effects on the radiative energy loss of a fast parton in hot and dense strongly interacting matter,” Phys. Rev. C82, 064902 (2010), arXiv:1006.2379 [hep-ph]

    2010 arXiv

  14. [20]

    Medium-induced gluon branching,

    Jean-Paul Blaizot, Fabio Dominguez, Edmond Iancu, and Yacine Mehtar-Tani, “Medium-induced gluon branching,” JHEP01, 143 (2013), arXiv:1209.4585 [hep- ph]

    2013 arXiv

  15. [21]

    Gluon bremsstrahlung in finite media beyond multiple soft scattering approximation,

    Yacine Mehtar-Tani, “Gluon bremsstrahlung in finite media beyond multiple soft scattering approximation,” JHEP07, 057 (2019), arXiv:1903.00506 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  16. [22]

    Improved opacity expansion for medium-induced parton splitting,

    Yacine Mehtar-Tani and Konrad Tywoniuk, “Improved opacity expansion for medium-induced parton splitting,” JHEP06, 187 (2020), arXiv:1910.02032 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  17. [23]

    Medium-induced radiative ker- nel with the Improved Opacity Expansion,

    Jo˜ ao Barata, Yacine Mehtar-Tani, Alba Soto-Ontoso, and Konrad Tywoniuk, “Medium-induced radiative ker- nel with the Improved Opacity Expansion,” JHEP09, 153 (2021), arXiv:2106.07402 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  18. [24]

    Collisional energy loss of a heavy quark in an anisotropic quark- gluon plasma,

    Paul Romatschke and Michael Strickland, “Collisional energy loss of a heavy quark in an anisotropic quark- gluon plasma,” Phys. Rev. D71, 125008 (2005), arXiv:hep-ph/0408275

    2005 arXiv

  19. [25]

    Momentum broadening in an anisotropic plasma,

    Paul Romatschke, “Momentum broadening in an anisotropic plasma,” Phys. Rev. C75, 014901 (2007), arXiv:hep-ph/0607327

    2007 arXiv

  20. [26]

    Jet broadening in unstable non- Abelian plasmas,

    Adrian Dumitru, Yasushi Nara, Bjoern Schenke, and Michael Strickland, “Jet broadening in unstable non- Abelian plasmas,” Phys. Rev. C78, 024909 (2008), arXiv:0710.1223 [hep-ph]

    2008 arXiv

  21. [27]

    Momentum broadening of energetic partons in an anisotropic plasma,

    Sigtryggur Hauksson, Sangyong Jeon, and Charles Gale, “Momentum broadening of energetic partons in an anisotropic plasma,” Phys. Rev. C105, 014914 (2022), arXiv:2109.04575 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  22. [28]

    Ab initio coupling of jets to collective flow in the opacity expansion approach,

    Andrey V. Sadofyev, Matthew D. Sievert, and Ivan Vitev, “Ab initio coupling of jets to collective flow in the opacity expansion approach,” Phys. Rev. D104, 094044 (2021), arXiv:2104.09513 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  23. [29]

    Jet broadening in flowing mat- ter: Resummation,

    Carlota Andres, Fabio Dominguez, Andrey V. Sadofyev, and Carlos A. Salgado, “Jet broadening in flowing mat- ter: Resummation,” Phys. Rev. D106, 074023 (2022), arXiv:2207.07141 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  24. [30]

    Jet broadening in dense inhomogeneous matter,

    Jo˜ ao Barata, Andrey V. Sadofyev, and Carlos A. Sal- gado, “Jet broadening in dense inhomogeneous matter,” Phys. Rev. D105, 114010 (2022), arXiv:2202.08847 [hep- ph]

    2022 arXiv

  25. [31]

    Medium induced gluon spec- trum in dense inhomogeneous matter,

    Jo˜ ao Barata, Xo´ an Mayo L´ opez, Andrey V. Sadofyev, and Carlos A. Salgado, “Medium induced gluon spec- trum in dense inhomogeneous matter,” Phys. Rev. D 108, 034018 (2023), arXiv:2304.03712 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  26. [32]

    Jet quenching in anisotropic flowing matter,

    Matvey V. Kuzmin, Xo´ an Mayo L´ opez, Jared Reiten, and Andrey V. Sadofyev, “Jet quenching in anisotropic flowing matter,” Phys. Rev. D109, 014036 (2024), arXiv:2309.00683 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  27. [33]

    Jet quenching in the glasma phase: Medium-induced radiation,

    Jo˜ ao Barata, Sigtryggur Hauksson, Xo´ an Mayo L´ opez, and Andrey V. Sadofyev, “Jet quenching in the glasma phase: Medium-induced radiation,” Phys. Rev. D110, 094055 (2024), arXiv:2406.07615 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  28. [34]

    Effective kinetic theory for high temper- ature gauge theories,

    Peter Brockway Arnold, Guy D. Moore, and Lau- rence G. Yaffe, “Effective kinetic theory for high temper- ature gauge theories,” JHEP01, 030 (2003), arXiv:hep- ph/0209353

    2003

  29. [35]

    UV cascade in classical Yang-Mills the- ory via kinetic theory,

    Mark C. Abraao York, Aleksi Kurkela, Egang Lu, and Guy D. Moore, “UV cascade in classical Yang-Mills the- ory via kinetic theory,” Phys. Rev. D89, 074036 (2014), arXiv:1401.3751 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  30. [36]

    Approach to Equilibrium in Weakly Coupled Non-Abelian Plasmas,

    Aleksi Kurkela and Egang Lu, “Approach to Equilibrium in Weakly Coupled Non-Abelian Plasmas,” Phys. Rev. Lett.113, 182301 (2014), arXiv:1405.6318 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  31. [37]

    Isotropization and hydro- dynamization in weakly coupled heavy-ion collisions,

    Aleksi Kurkela and Yan Zhu, “Isotropization and hydro- dynamization in weakly coupled heavy-ion collisions,” 12 Phys. Rev. Lett.115, 182301 (2015), arXiv:1506.06647 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  32. [38]

    Chemical equilibration in weakly coupled QCD,

    Aleksi Kurkela and Aleksas Mazeliauskas, “Chemical equilibration in weakly coupled QCD,” Phys. Rev. D99, 054018 (2019), arXiv:1811.03068 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  33. [39]

    Chemical Equilibration in Hadronic Collisions,

    Aleksi Kurkela and Aleksas Mazeliauskas, “Chemical Equilibration in Hadronic Collisions,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 142301 (2019), arXiv:1811.03040 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  34. [40]

    Equilibration of weakly coupled QCD plasmas,

    Xiaojian Du and S¨ oren Schlichting, “Equilibration of weakly coupled QCD plasmas,” Phys. Rev. D104, 054011 (2021), arXiv:2012.09079 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  35. [41]

    Equilibration of the Quark-Gluon Plasma at Finite Net-Baryon Density in QCD Kinetic Theory,

    Xiaojian Du and S¨ oren Schlichting, “Equilibration of the Quark-Gluon Plasma at Finite Net-Baryon Density in QCD Kinetic Theory,” Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 122301 (2021), arXiv:2012.09068 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  36. [42]

    Ektqhat - ef- fective kinetic theory solver with jet quenching parame- ter,

    Aleksi Kurkela and Florian Lindenbauer, “Ektqhat - ef- fective kinetic theory solver with jet quenching parame- ter,” (2023)

    2023

  37. [43]

    Soft- gluon exchange matters: Isotropic screening in QCD kinetic theory,

    Kirill Boguslavski and Florian Lindenbauer, “Soft- gluon exchange matters: Isotropic screening in QCD kinetic theory,” Phys. Rev. D110, 074017 (2024), arXiv:2407.09605 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  38. [44]

    Solving the QCD effective kinetic theory with neural networks,

    Sergio Barrera Cabodevila, Aleksi Kurkela, and Florian Lindenbauer, “Solving the QCD effective kinetic theory with neural networks,” (2025), arXiv:2506.19632 [hep- ph]

    2025

  39. [47]

    Medium-induced gluon radiation with full resummation of multiple scatterings for realistic parton-medium interactions,

    Carlota Andres, Liliana Apolin´ ario, and Fabio Dominguez, “Medium-induced gluon radiation with full resummation of multiple scatterings for realistic parton-medium interactions,” JHEP07, 114 (2020), arXiv:2002.01517 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  40. [48]

    In-medium gluon radi- ation spectrum with all-order resummation of multiple scatterings in longitudinally evolving media,

    Carlota Andres, Liliana Apolin´ ario, Fabio Dominguez, and Marcos Gonzalez Martinez, “In-medium gluon radi- ation spectrum with all-order resummation of multiple scatterings in longitudinally evolving media,” JHEP11, 025 (2024), arXiv:2307.06226 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Non-perturbative determination of colli- sional broadening and medium induced radiation in QCD plasmas,

    Guy D. Moore, Soeren Schlichting, Niels Schlusser, and Ismail Soudi, “Non-perturbative determination of colli- sional broadening and medium induced radiation in QCD plasmas,” JHEP10, 059 (2021), arXiv:2105.01679 [hep- ph]

    2021 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Splitting rates in QCD plasmas from a nonperturbative determination of the momentum broadening kernel C(q⊥),

    Soeren Schlichting and Ismail Soudi, “Splitting rates in QCD plasmas from a nonperturbative determination of the momentum broadening kernel C(q⊥),” Phys. Rev. D 105, 076002 (2022), arXiv:2111.13731 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Leading order, next-to-leading or- der, and nonperturbative parton collision kernels: Effects in static and evolving media,

    Rouzbeh Modarresi Yazdi, Shuzhe Shi, Charles Gale, and Sangyong Jeon, “Leading order, next-to-leading or- der, and nonperturbative parton collision kernels: Effects in static and evolving media,” Phys. Rev. C106, 064902 (2022), arXiv:2206.05855 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  44. [52]

    QCD jets in a hot and dense medium: A study of shower formation time and col- lision kernels,

    Rouzbeh Modarresi-Yazdi, Shuzhe Shi, Charles Gale, and Sangyong Jeon, “QCD jets in a hot and dense medium: A study of shower formation time and col- lision kernels,” Phys. Rev. C111, 054904 (2025), arXiv:2407.19966 [hep-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Landau-Pomeranchuk-Migdal resummation for dilep- ton production,

    P. Aurenche, F. Gelis, G. D. Moore, and H. Zaraket, “Landau-Pomeranchuk-Migdal resummation for dilep- ton production,” JHEP12, 006 (2002), arXiv:hep- ph/0211036

    2002

  46. [54]

    High-energy jet quenching in weakly-coupled quark-gluon plasmas,

    Peter Brockway Arnold and Wei Xiao, “High-energy jet quenching in weakly-coupled quark-gluon plasmas,” Phys. Rev. D78, 125008 (2008), arXiv:0810.1026 [hep- ph]

    2008 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Collective modes of an anisotropic quark gluon plasma,

    Paul Romatschke and Michael Strickland, “Collective modes of an anisotropic quark gluon plasma,” Phys. Rev. D68, 036004 (2003), arXiv:hep-ph/0304092

    2003 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Jet broadening and radiation in the early anisotropic plasma in heavy-ion collisions,

    Alois Altenburger, Kirill Boguslavski, and Florian Lin- denbauer, “Jet broadening and radiation in the early anisotropic plasma in heavy-ion collisions,” (2025), arXiv:2509.03868 [hep-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Medium-induced gluon radiation and colour decoherence beyond the soft approx- imation,

    Liliana Apolin´ ario, N´ estor Armesto, Jos´ e Guilherme Mil- hano, and Carlos A. Salgado, “Medium-induced gluon radiation and colour decoherence beyond the soft approx- imation,” JHEP02, 119 (2015), arXiv:1407.0599 [hep- ph]

    2015 arXiv

  50. [58]

    Jet polarisa- tion in an anisotropic medium,

    Sigtryggur Hauksson and Edmond Iancu, “Jet polarisa- tion in an anisotropic medium,” JHEP08, 027 (2023), arXiv:2303.03914 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Gluon to qq antenna in anisotropic QCD matter: spin- polarized and azimuthal jet observables,

    Jo˜ ao Barata, Carlos A. Salgado, and Jo˜ ao M. Silva, “Gluon to qq antenna in anisotropic QCD matter: spin- polarized and azimuthal jet observables,” JHEP12, 023 (2024), arXiv:2407.04774 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.