Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 3 cited by

Vortex-antivortex collisions in the deep type II regime display chaotic bounce windows, driven by a Feshbach resonance.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-04 08:55 UTC pith:3WFMQRKC

load-bearing objection First map of multi-bounce windows in vortex-antivortex collisions at λ≳4, with a plausible but not yet proven Feshbach-mode explanation; the decoupled-mode calculation is the weak link. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2510.17964 v2 pith:3WFMQRKC submitted 2025-10-20 hep-th hep-phnlin.PS

Resonance phenomena in vortex-antivortex collisions

Maximilian Bachmaier , Andrzej Wereszczynski This is my paper
classification hep-th hep-phnlin.PS
keywords vortex-antivortex scatteringAbelian-Higgs modelFeshbach resonancequasinormal modebounce windowsresonant energy transferNielsen-Olesen vortextype II regime
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

This paper establishes that head-on collisions of a Nielsen-Olesen vortex and antivortex, in the deep type II regime (coupling λ≳4), produce a chaotic pattern of final states: narrow multi-bounce windows (where the vortices separate after several collisions) interleaved with annihilation regions. The mechanism is the resonant energy transfer known from kink-antikink collisions: kinetic energy is temporarily stored in an internal vibrational degree of freedom of the vortex. Crucially, for λ>1.5 the unit vortex has no genuine bound mode; the paper argues that the relevant degree of freedom is a Feshbach resonance, a quasinormal mode in which the matter-field component is localized while the gauge-field component radiates. Measuring the vibration frequency of the recreated outgoing vortices, the authors find good agreement with the frequency of the approximated lowest Feshbach mode, identifying it as the trigger of the multi-bounce structure. If correct, this extends the resonance-energy-transfer paradigm to 2+1 dimensions and to solitons whose internal excitations are quasinormal rather than bound.

Core claim

The central discovery is a complete map of vortex-antivortex scattering scenarios in the Abelian-Higgs model for λ∈[0.1,8] and initial velocities v∈[0.8,0.98]. For λ≳4.0, instead of the simple annihilation/one-bounce dichotomy, the final state alternates chaotically between annihilation and multi-bounce windows; e.g., at λ=4.4 a wide two-bounce window and a narrow three-bounce window appear immersed in annihilation regions. The paper attributes this structure to the resonant energy transfer mechanism triggered by the lowest Feshbach resonance of the unit vortex: during collision, translational kinetic energy is transferred into this quasinormal mode, and when energy flows back the vortices s

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the Feshbach resonant mode: a quasinormal mode of the unit vortex that appears when the genuine bound mode crosses the gauge-field mass threshold at λ≈1.5 and transmutes into a half-bound state. In the decoupled approximation (Section IV), the gauge-field perturbation is set to zero and the off-diagonal terms of the coupled ordinary differential equations (10)–(11) are suppressed, reducing the problem to a single Schrödinger-type equation for the matter-field perturbation u(r). The frequency of this approximated mode (orange curve in Fig. 4) is compared with the measured vibration frequency of the outgoing vortex (black dots), and the agreement identifies this mode

Load-bearing premise

The argument hinges on the approximation that the Feshbach mode can be described by a simplified equation that ignores the gauge-field perturbation and the coupling between the two fluctuation channels; the paper gives no estimate of how accurate that simplification is.

What would settle it

Compute the full coupled linearized spectrum of equations (10)–(11) without the decoupling approximation and extract the quasinormal frequency and decay width of the lowest Feshbach resonance. If the frequency deviates significantly from the orange curve in Fig. 4, or if the width is so large that the mode cannot store energy for the duration of a bounce, the paper's mechanism fails. A cleaner observable: measure the radiation emitted during the temporary recreation and check whether its frequency matches the Feshbach frequency predicted by the full coupled problem.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Resonant energy transfer is not a one-dimensional artifact; the same mechanism that produces kink-antikink bounce windows governs vortex-antivortex scattering in 2+1 dimensions.
  • Multi-bounce windows can be driven by a quasinormal mode rather than a genuine bound mode, so the absence of a bound mode does not preclude soliton-antisoliton resonance structure.
  • The full scattering map (Figure 1) provides benchmarks for collective-coordinate models of vortex-antivortex collisions, which would need to incorporate the Feshbach mode and its amplitude-dependent moduli-space deformations.
  • For λ≲3.2 the recreated vortices do not vibrate measurably and no multi-bounce windows occur; the onset of the Feshbach-mode vibration correlates with the appearance of bounce windows.
  • As λ grows, the number of half-bound modes increases, and the paper suggests this may be why multi-bounce structure is not observed at very large λ: energy is less likely to flow back to kinetic degrees of freedom.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A direct test of the causal claim would be to prepare initial vortices with the Feshbach mode explicitly excited and measure how the bounce-window pattern shifts; the paper's hypothesis predicts a systematic shift in the critical velocities.
  • The same resonant transfer mechanism should appear in other soliton-antisoliton systems with a quasinormal internal mode, e.g., monopole-antimonopole scattering, where Feshbach resonances are known—so an analogous chaotic final-state map is a concrete prediction.
  • The chaotic pattern may be fractal; higher-resolution velocity scans near the bounce-window boundaries could reveal self-similar structure, mirroring kink-antikink bion chimneys.
  • A collective-coordinate reduction that treats the Feshbach resonance as a damped oscillator coupled to the vortex separation would make quantitative predictions about window widths and outgoing velocities, and could be tested against the λ=4.4 and λ=4.9 data.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies head-on vortex-antivortex collisions in the Abelian-Higgs model in 2+1 dimensions, scanning λ in [0.1, 8] and initial velocities in [0.8, 0.98]. The authors report annihilation, one-bounce recreation, and, for λ ≳ 4, multi-bounce windows immersed in annihilation regions, with backscattering or pass-through final states. They attribute this structure to resonant energy transfer through a Feshbach quasinormal mode of the isolated vortex, whose frequency they compute from a decoupled linear perturbation problem and compare with the measured vibration frequency of outgoing vortices. The paper also notes that for λ < 1.5 the vortex has a genuine bound mode but no analogous multi-bounce windows are found, and that for large λ a growing number of Feshbach resonances may suppress the windows.

Significance. If the central claim holds, this is a significant result: it would extend the resonant energy transfer mechanism from 1D kink collisions to 2+1-dimensional vortex-antivortex scattering and identify a quasinormal/Feshbach mode, rather than a genuine bound mode, as the agent controlling multi-bounce windows. The fine velocity scans at λ = 4.4 and λ = 4.9, the detailed supplementary numerical setup, and the clear presentation of the bounce-window structure are strengths. However, the causal attribution rests on an approximate mode calculation and on frequency matching alone, which is not sufficient to establish that the Feshbach mode is the mechanism rather than a spectator excitation.

major comments (3)
  1. [§IV, Eqs. (10)–(11)] The Feshbach frequency shown in Fig. 4 is obtained from a decoupled spectral problem in which the gauge-field perturbation is set to zero (v(r)≡0) and the off-diagonal coupling terms in (10)–(11) are suppressed. This is precisely the approximation that converts a genuine quasinormal mode (complex frequency) into a real bound state. The authors give no estimate of the error from the decoupling, no check that the off-diagonal coupling is small, and no computation of the mode width or decay rate. Since the resonant-energy-transfer explanation requires the mode to store energy for a time comparable to the multi-bounce time scale, the real part of the frequency alone is not sufficient. A full coupled linearized-mode calculation, or at least a numerical estimate of the complex frequency and a norm of the neglected terms, is needed before the central attribution can be accepted.
  2. [§IV and Fig. 4] The sentence 'To confirm that this is indeed this mode...' overstates what frequency matching can show. The fact that the outgoing vortex vibrates at a frequency close to the approximate Feshbach frequency is consistent with the mode being excited, but it does not prove that this mode is the agent that enables the multi-bounce windows; it could be excited as a spectator after the collision. The manuscript provides no direct evidence tying the mode amplitude or energy content to the bounce decision, e.g., no mode-amplitude time series during the collision, no energy budget, and no collective-coordinate model. A direct test—such as comparing collisions with and without initial Feshbach-mode excitation, or computing the energy transfer to the mode during the first encounter—would substantially strengthen the causal claim.
  3. [Abstract and Fig. 1] The abstract promises a 'full map' of scattering scenarios, but Fig. 1 is obtained from a coarse scan with Δλ=0.1 and Δv=0.01 (Appendix A). This grid cannot resolve narrow multi-bounce windows; only λ=4.4 and λ=4.9 have Δv=0.001. The claim of a full map is therefore not supported, and the absence of bounce windows elsewhere in the λ–v plane is not established. I suggest relabeling Fig. 1 as a survey and either refining the scan near the critical region or softening the abstract.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§III] The statement 'These two scenarios fully describe the dynamics for λ<4.0' is confusing because Fig. 1 contains several subregions (gray, yellow, orange, red) for λ<4.0. Clarify what distinguishes these subregions and how they are defined.
  2. [Appendix B] The frequency is extracted by counting oscillations over a short interval; the paper should report the number of periods and the estimated uncertainty, and add error bars to Fig. 4.
  3. [Throughout] There are several typos and formatting issues ('VOR TEX-ANTIVOR TEX', 'TEX', 'Supple-ment'), and reference [30] contains ORCID identifiers in the author field.
  4. [§III, Fig. 2] The term 'chaotic' is used qualitatively. Specify whether it refers to sensitivity to initial conditions with a quantitative measure (e.g., window structure) or merely irregular appearance. Also, add a legend or clearer caption for Fig. 2 explaining the line/color conventions.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the Feshbach-mode frequency is an independent spectral computation that is then compared, not fitted, to full-scattering data.

full rationale

The paper's claimed derivation chain is: solve the static vortex profiles (5)-(6), compute an approximate Feshbach frequency from the decoupled scalar fluctuation problem in Section IV (v(r)=0, off-diagonal terms suppressed), independently measure the oscillation frequency of the recreated vortex in full field-theory simulations (Appendix B), and then identify this mode as the agent of multi-bounce dynamics through the frequency agreement in Figure 4. At no point is a parameter of the spectral calculation fitted to the scattering outcomes: the orange curve in Figure 4 follows from the vortex profile and λ alone, while the black dots come from the full nonlinear evolution. Thus the comparison is a genuine independent check rather than a fit disguised as prediction. The bounce windows in Figures 2 and 6 are direct numerical observations, and the statement that the mode 'triggers' them is an interpretation supported by the frequency match, not an equation that reduces to its own input. The decoupled approximation is indeed uncontrolled—the paper itself says the off-diagonal terms are 'effectively responsible for the decay' and gives no error estimate, and Appendix B cautions that the frequency measurement is not a fully precise Fourier analysis—but these are correctness/rigor limitations, not circularity. Self-citations such as Ref. [5] appear only as background examples of quasinormal-mode-mediated resonance or in future-work suggestions; no load-bearing premise is justified solely by an overlapping-author citation. Therefore no circular step can be exhibited with the specificity required by the rubric.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 4 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no fitted physical parameters; the model is fixed by λ, which is scanned. The load-bearing additions are assumptions: the decoupled approximation for the Feshbach frequency, the spectral-transmutation picture from refs. [29,31], the adequacy of the product initial ansatz, and the reliability of absorbing boundaries. These assumptions are reasonable but not independently validated inside the paper.

axioms (4)
  • domain assumption For λ>1.5 the unit vortex has no genuine bound mode; the lowest mode survives as a Feshbach resonance.
    Invoked in Section IV via refs [29,31]; if this spectral transition is wrong, the mechanism attribution collapses.
  • ad hoc to paper The decoupled fluctuation problem with v(r)=0 and off-diagonal terms suppressed gives the frequency of the Feshbach mode responsible for scattering.
    Section IV: 'we assume the decoupled version... suppress the off-diagonal terms'; this is an unvalidated approximation with no error bound.
  • domain assumption Product ansatz plus linear superposition of gauge fields is an adequate boosted initial state.
    Supp. A, Eqs. (12)-(13); standard practice, but initial radiation from the approximate ansatz could in principle shift window boundaries.
  • domain assumption The absorbing-boundary/adiabatic damping method does not alter collision outcomes.
    Supp. A; the authors state radiation effects are negligibly small but provide no quantitative convergence study.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 12091 in / 13295 out tokens · 106579 ms · 2026-08-04T08:55:30.516824+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

In this work, we provide a full map of scattering scenarios between a Nielsen-Olesen vortex and antivortex. Importantly, in the deep type II regime, such a collision reveals a chaotic pattern in the final state formation with bounce windows immersed into annihilation regions. This structure is due to the energy transfer mechanism triggered by a quasinormal mode, specifically the Feshbach resonant mode, hosted by the vortex.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2510.17964 by Andrzej Wereszczynski, Maximilian Bachmaier.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: A summary of the different outcomes in vortex-antivortex collisions. On the x-axis, the values for λ are given. On the y-axis, the initial velocity is given. density L = − 1 4 FµνF µν + 1 2 Dµϕ Dµϕ − λ 8 (ϕ ϕ − V 2 ) 2 , (1) where Dµϕ = (∂µ − igAµ)ϕ is the covariant derivative of the complex scalar field ϕ and Fµν = ∂µAν −∂νAµ is the electromagnetic field tensor for the gauge field Aµ. If we rescale to dim… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Time evolution of the real part of the scalar field at the origin, Re ϕ(⃗x = 0, t), during a vortex-antivortex scattering for λ = 4.4, shown for different initial velocities vin. zero of the vortex (solid) and the antivortex (dashed). In￾terestingly, the temporary recreated solitons, both in the annihilation chimneys and in the bounce windows, have a rather chaotic location, where the backscattering and pa… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Several examples of vortex-antivortex scatterings are shown. The density plot represents the scalar field Re ϕ along the x-axis, while the solid (dashed) lines indicate the zeros of the vortex (antivortex). For λ < 1.5, the unit charge (anti)vortex has one bound mode [29]. Of course, its frequency is always be￾low the mass of the Higgs field mh = √ λ and the mass of the gauge field mv = 1. As λ → 1.5, the … view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Measured frequency of the vibrating vortex recreated in one-bounce collisions (black dots) vs. the approximated frequency of the Feshbach resonance (orange curve) and the bound mode (red curve). Blue and green curves are the mass thresholds of the Higgs and gauge fields respectively. growing number of half-bound modes as λ increases. Asymptotically, for λ → ∞, we recover the global vortex model, which is k… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: VAV scattering for λ = 4.4. Final velocity of recreated vortex as a function of vin [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Time evolution of the real part of the scalar field at the origin, Re ϕ(⃗x = 0, t), during a vortex-antivortex scattering for λ = 4.9, shown for different initial velocities vin. For λ = 4.4 and λ = 4.9, we analyzed vortex-antivortex collisions with a finer velocity spacing (∆u1 = ∆u2 = 0.001). This higher resolution allowed us to obtain a clearer picture of the recreation and multi-bounce win￾dows (see Fi… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Illustration of the two possible outcomes when the vortex and antivortex are fully recreated. The “rainbow” plot shows the phase of the complex scalar field ϕ. Filled (empty) circles indicate the positions of the vortex (antivortex) cores. In the simplest case one needs a two-channel problem, which in 2 + 1 dimensions take the following form − 1 r d dr  r du dr  + Uu(r)u + µW(r)v = ω 2 nu, (14) − 1 r d d… view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Localized Vector Modes on Local Cosmic Strings

    hep-th 2026-07 accept novelty 6.0

    Vector gauge modes trapped on Abelian-Higgs cosmic strings remain bound for all couplings λ, decay as t^{-1/2} via bulk radiation (or via quasinormal modes at large λ), and parametrically excite both transverse zero modes.

  2. Unified theory of oscillons and modes

    hep-th 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Oscillons are reinterpreted as localized resonant modes from threshold or antibound modes via nonlinearity, with wobblerons as new kink-oscillon bound states.

  3. Scattering of kinks in Frankensteinian potentials: Kinks as bubbles of exotic mass and phase transitions in oscillon production

    hep-th 2026-03 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    In two Frankensteinian potentials, kink scattering shows a phase-transition-like change from massive wave disintegration to oscillon production when field thresholds are low enough.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

70 extracted references · 46 linked inside Pith · cited by 3 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Kink-Antikink collisions in the two- dimensional phi**4 model,

    T. Sugiyama, “Kink-Antikink collisions in the two- dimensional phi**4 model,” Prog. Theor. Phys.61, 1550–1563 (1979)

    1979

  2. [2]

    Resonance structure in kink- antikink interactions inφ4 theory ,

    David K. Campbell, Jonathan F. Schonfeld, and Charles A. Wingate, “Resonance structure in kink- antikink interactions inφ4 theory ,” Physica D9, 1 (1983)

    1983

  3. [3]

    Collective Coordinate Model of Kink- Antikink Collisions inϕ4 Theory,

    N. S. Manton, K. Oles, T. Romanczukiewicz, and A. Wereszczynski, “Collective Coordinate Model of Kink- Antikink Collisions inϕ4 Theory,” Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 071601 (2021), arXiv:2106.05153 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  4. [4]

    Resonant kink-antikink scattering through quasinormal modes,

    Patrick Dorey and Tomasz Roma´ nczukiewicz, “Resonant kink-antikink scattering through quasinormal modes,” Phys. Lett. B779, 117–123 (2018), arXiv:1712.10235 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  5. [5]

    Feshbach resonances and dynamics of BPS solitons,

    Alberto Garc ´ ıa Mart ´ ın-Caro, Jose Queiruga, and An- drzej Wereszczynski, “Feshbach resonances and dynamics of BPS solitons,” (2025), arXiv:2501.02589 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  6. [6]

    Kink-antikink collisions in the ϕ6 model,

    Patrick Dorey, Kieran Mersh, Tomasz Romanczukiewicz, and Yasha Shnir, “Kink-antikink collisions in the ϕ6 model,” Phys. Rev. Lett.107, 091602 (2011), arXiv:1101.5951 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  7. [7]

    Multikink scattering in theϕ6 model revisited,

    C. Adam, P. Dorey, A. Garcia Martin-Caro, M. Huido- bro, K. Oles, T. Romanczukiewicz, Y. Shnir, and A. Wereszczynski, “Multikink scattering in theϕ6 model revisited,” Phys. Rev. D106, 125003 (2022), arXiv:2209.08849 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  8. [8]

    Swift Memory Burden in Merging Black Holes: how information load affects black hole’s classi- cal dynamics,

    Gia Dvali, “Swift Memory Burden in Merging Black Holes: how information load affects black hole’s classi- cal dynamics,” (2025), arXiv:2509.22540 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2025

  9. [9]

    Vortex String Motion in the Abelian Higgs Model,

    P. J. Ruback, “Vortex String Motion in the Abelian Higgs Model,” Nucl. Phys. B296, 669–678 (1988)

    1988

  10. [10]

    Vortex Scattering in Two-dimensions,

    E. P. S. Shellard and P. J. Ruback, “Vortex Scattering in Two-dimensions,” Phys. Lett. B209, 262–270 (1988)

    1988

  11. [11]

    A Study of the interaction and scattering of vortices in the Abelian Higgs (or Ginzburg-Landau) model,

    Eric Myers, Claudio Rebbi, and Richard Strilka, “A Study of the interaction and scattering of vortices in the Abelian Higgs (or Ginzburg-Landau) model,” Phys. Rev. D45, 1355–1364 (1992)

    1992

  12. [12]

    Vortex scattering,

    T. M. Samols, “Vortex scattering,” Commun. Math. Phys.145, 149–180 (1992)

    1992

  13. [13]

    Dynamics of Abelian Higgs vortices in the near Bogomolny regime,

    D. Stuart, “Dynamics of Abelian Higgs vortices in the near Bogomolny regime,” Commun. Math. Phys.159, 51–91 (1994)

    1994

  14. [14]

    Scattering of vortices with excited normal modes,

    Steffen Krusch, Morgan Rees, and Thomas Winyard, “Scattering of vortices with excited normal modes,” Phys. Rev. D110, 056050 (2024), arXiv:2406.04164 [math-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  15. [15]

    Collective coordinate models for 2-vortex shape mode dynamics,

    A. Alonso Izquierdo, N. S. Manton, J. Mateos Guilarte, and A. Wereszczynski, “Collective coordinate models for 2-vortex shape mode dynamics,” Phys. Rev. D110, 085006 (2024), arXiv:2405.20249 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  16. [16]

    Dynamics of Excited BPS 3-Vortices,

    A. Alonso-Izquierdo, N. S. Manton, J. Mateos Guilarte, M. Rees, and A. Wereszczynski, “Dynamics of Excited BPS 3-Vortices,” (2025), arXiv:2502.15087 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  17. [17]

    Spectral wall in collisions of ex- cited Abelian Higgs vortices,

    A. Alonso-Izquierdo, J. Mateos Guillarte, M. Rees, and A. Wereszczynski, “Spectral wall in collisions of ex- cited Abelian Higgs vortices,” Phys. Rev. D110, 065004 (2024), arXiv:2406.05725 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  18. [18]

    Vortex Line Models for Dual Strings,

    Holger Bech Nielsen and P. Olesen, “Vortex Line Models for Dual Strings,” Nucl. Phys. B61, 45–61 (1973)

    1973

  19. [19]

    Static intervortex forces,

    J. M. Speight, “Static intervortex forces,” Phys. Rev. D 55, 3830–3835 (1997), arXiv:hep-th/9603155

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  20. [20]

    Short-range in- tervortex forces,

    Martin Speight and Thomas Winyard, “Short-range in- tervortex forces,” Phys. Rev. D112, 055024 (2025)

    2025

  21. [21]

    Scattering of the double sine-Gordon kinks,

    Vakhid A. Gani, Aliakbar Moradi Marjaneh, Alidad Askari, Ekaterina Belendryasova, and Danial Saadat- mand, “Scattering of the double sine-Gordon kinks,” Eur. Phys. J. C78, 345 (2018), arXiv:1711.01918 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  22. [22]

    Scattering between wobbling kinks,

    A. Alonso Izquierdo, L. M. Nieto, and J. Queiroga- Nunes, “Scattering between wobbling kinks,” Phys. Rev. D103, 045003 (2021), arXiv:2007.15517 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  23. [23]

    Wob- bling double sine-Gordon kinks,

    Jo˜ ao G. F. Campos and Azadeh Mohammadi, “Wob- bling double sine-Gordon kinks,” JHEP09, 067 (2021), arXiv:2103.04908 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  24. [24]

    Kink scattering in the presence of geometric constric- tions,

    Jo˜ ao G. F. Campos, Fabiano C. Simas, and D. Bazeia, “Kink scattering in the presence of geometric constric- tions,” JHEP10, 124 (2023), arXiv:2306.08802 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  25. [25]

    Kink scattering in deformedφ6 model,

    Aliakbar Moradi Marjaneh, Azam Ghaani, and Kurosh Javidan, “Kink scattering in deformedφ6 model,” Phys. Rev. E110, 064205 (2024), arXiv:2309.12599 [nlin.PS]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  26. [26]

    Scattering of Kinks in Coreless Potentials,

    Ondˇ rej Nicolas Karp ´ ıˇ sek, Luk´ aˇ s Rafaj, and Filip Blaschke, “Scattering of Kinks in Coreless Potentials,” PTEP2024, 113A01 (2024), arXiv:2407.14313 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  27. [27]

    Amplitude modulations and resonant decay of excited oscillons,

    F. Blaschke, T. Roma´ nczukiewicz, K. S lawi´ nska, and A. Wereszczy´ nski, “Amplitude modulations and resonant decay of excited oscillons,” Phys. Rev. E110, 014203 (2024), arXiv:2403.00443 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  28. [28]

    Oscillons and bubbles inQ-ball dynamics,

    D. Canillas Mart ´ ınez, P. Dorey, T. Roma´ nczukiewicz, Paul M. Saffin, K. Slawinska, and A. Wereszczy´ nski, “Oscillons and bubbles inQ-ball dynamics,” (2025), arXiv:2509.03192 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  29. [29]

    Dis- secting normal modes of vibration on vortices in Ginzburg-Landau superconductors,

    A. Alonso-Izquierdo and D. Miguelez-Caballero, “Dis- secting normal modes of vibration on vortices in Ginzburg-Landau superconductors,” Phys. Rev. D110, 125026 (2024), arXiv:2410.08705 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  30. [30]

    Ta-Pei [0000-0002-1137-0969] Cheng and Ling-Fong [0000-0002-8035-3329] Li,Gauge Theory of Elementary Particle Physics(Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 1984)

    1984

  31. [31]

    Ex- cited Abelian-Higgs vortices: Decay rate and radi- ation emission,

    A. Alonso-Izquierdo, J. J. Blanco-Pillado, D. Migu´ elez- Caballero, S. Navarro-Obreg´ on, and J. Queiruga, “Ex- cited Abelian-Higgs vortices: Decay rate and radi- ation emission,” Phys. Rev. D110, 065009 (2024), arXiv:2405.06030 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  32. [32]

    Unified theory of nuclear reactions,

    Herman Feshbach, “Unified theory of nuclear reactions,” Annals of Physics5, 357–390 (1958)

    1958

  33. [33]

    Internal excitations of 9 global vortices,

    Jose J. Blanco-Pillado, Daniel Jim´ enez-Aguilar, Jose M. Queiruga, and Jon Urrestilla, “Internal excitations of 9 global vortices,” JCAP10, 047 (2021), arXiv:2107.02215 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  34. [34]

    Suppression of two-bounce win- dows in kink-antikink collisions,

    F. C. Simas, Adalto R. Gomes, K. Z. Nobrega, and J. C. R. E. Oliveira, “Suppression of two-bounce win- dows in kink-antikink collisions,” JHEP09, 104 (2016), arXiv:1605.05344 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  35. [35]

    A Phase transi- tion in U(1) configuration space: Oscillons as remnants of vortex-antivortex annihilation,

    Marcelo Gleiser and Joel Thorarinson, “A Phase transi- tion in U(1) configuration space: Oscillons as remnants of vortex-antivortex annihilation,” Phys. Rev. D76, 041701 (2007), arXiv:hep-th/0701294

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  36. [36]

    Vilenkin and E

    A. Vilenkin and E. P. S. Shellard,Cosmic Strings and Other Topological Defects(Cambridge University Press, 2000)

    2000

  37. [37]

    Cosmic strings,

    M. B. Hindmarsh and T. W. B. Kibble, “Cosmic strings,” Rept. Prog. Phys.58, 477–562 (1995), arXiv:hep- ph/9411342

    arXiv 1995

  38. [38]

    Numerical simulations of string networks in the Abelian Higgs model,

    Graham Vincent, Nuno D. Antunes, and Mark Hind- marsh, “Numerical simulations of string networks in the Abelian Higgs model,” Phys. Rev. Lett.80, 2277–2280 (1998), arXiv:hep-ph/9708427

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  39. [39]

    On the evolution of Abelian Higgs string networks,

    J. N. Moore and E. P. S. Shellard, “On the evolution of Abelian Higgs string networks,” (1998), arXiv:hep- ph/9808336

    arXiv 1998

  40. [40]

    Cosmic String Loop Collapse in Full General Relativity,

    Thomas Helfer, Josu C. Aurrekoetxea, and Eu- gene A. Lim, “Cosmic String Loop Collapse in Full General Relativity,” Phys. Rev. D99, 104028 (2019), arXiv:1808.06678 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  41. [41]

    Abelian–Higgs cosmic string evolution with mul- tiple GPUs,

    J. R. C. C. C. Correia and C. J. A. P. Mar- tins, “Abelian–Higgs cosmic string evolution with mul- tiple GPUs,” Astron. Comput.34, 100438 (2021), arXiv:2005.14454 [physics.comp-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  42. [42]

    Evolution of Cosmic Strings,

    Andreas Albrecht and N. Turok, “Evolution of Cosmic Strings,” Phys. Rev. Lett.54, 1868–1871 (1985)

    1985

  43. [43]

    Cosmic string evolution,

    David P. Bennett and Francois R. Bouchet, “Cosmic string evolution,” Phys. Rev. Lett.63, 2776 (1989)

    1989

  44. [44]

    Cosmic string evo- lution: a numerical simulation,

    Bruce Allen and E. P. S. Shellard, “Cosmic string evo- lution: a numerical simulation,” Phys. Rev. Lett.64, 119–122 (1990)

    1990

  45. [45]

    Fractal proper- ties and small-scale structure of cosmic string networks,

    C. J. A. P. Martins and E. P. S. Shellard, “Fractal proper- ties and small-scale structure of cosmic string networks,” Phys. Rev. D73, 043515 (2006), arXiv:astro-ph/0511792

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  46. [46]

    Cosmological evolution of cosmic string loops,

    Christophe Ringeval, Mairi Sakellariadou, and Fran- cois Bouchet, “Cosmological evolution of cosmic string loops,” JCAP02, 023 (2007), arXiv:astro-ph/0511646

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  47. [47]

    Large parallel cosmic string simulations: New results on loop production,

    Jose J. Blanco-Pillado, Ken D. Olum, and Benjamin Shlaer, “Large parallel cosmic string simulations: New results on loop production,” Phys. Rev. D83, 083514 (2011), arXiv:1101.5173 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  48. [48]

    The number of cosmic string loops,

    Jose J. Blanco-Pillado, Ken D. Olum, and Benjamin Shlaer, “The number of cosmic string loops,” Phys. Rev. D89, 023512 (2014), arXiv:1309.6637 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  49. [49]

    Mod- elling fractal behaviour of wobbling kinks,

    J. P. Bradshaw, A. N. W. Hone, and S. Krusch, “Mod- elling fractal behaviour of wobbling kinks,” (in prepara- tion)

  50. [50]

    Moduli space metric of the excited vortex,

    D. Migu´ elez-Caballero, S. Navarro-Obreg´ on, and A. Wereszczynski, “Moduli space metric of the excited vortex,” (2025), arXiv:2503.15227 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  51. [51]

    Abelian-Higgs vortices in the oscillating axion background,

    Naoya Kitajima and Shota Nakagawa, “Abelian-Higgs vortices in the oscillating axion background,” (2025), arXiv:2507.16720 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  52. [52]

    Charged Vortex in Superconductor,

    Yoonbai Kim, SeungJun Jeon, and Hanwool Song, “Charged Vortex in Superconductor,” (2025), arXiv:2505.04359 [cond-mat.supr-con]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  53. [53]

    Effective Field Theory of Superconductivity,

    Yoonbai Kim, SeungJun Jeon, and Hanwool Song, “Effective Field Theory of Superconductivity,” (2025), arXiv:2505.03370 [cond-mat.supr-con]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  54. [54]

    Anyon interactions in the Chern–Simons– Landau–Ginzburg model of the fractional quantum Hall effect,

    Paul Leask, “Anyon interactions in the Chern–Simons– Landau–Ginzburg model of the fractional quantum Hall effect,” (2025), arXiv:2510.04830 [cond-mat.supr-con]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  55. [55]

    Multimodal axion emissions from Abelian-Higgs cosmic strings,

    Naoya Kitajima and Michiru Uwabo-Niibo, “Multimodal axion emissions from Abelian-Higgs cosmic strings,” (2025), arXiv:2510.10708 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  56. [56]

    Dynamics of Non- Abelian Vortices,

    Minoru Eto, Toshiaki Fujimori, Muneto Nitta, Keisuke Ohashi, and Norisuke Sakai, “Dynamics of Non- Abelian Vortices,” Phys. Rev. D84, 125030 (2011), arXiv:1105.1547 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  57. [57]

    Dynamics of global and lo- cal vortices with orientational moduli,

    Minoru Eto, Adam Peterson, Fidel I. Schaposnik Mas- solo, and Gianni Tallarita, “Dynamics of global and lo- cal vortices with orientational moduli,” JHEP03, 156 (2021), arXiv:2012.04098 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  58. [58]

    Monopole-Antimonopole Scatter- ing,

    Tanmay Vachaspati, “Monopole-Antimonopole Scatter- ing,” Phys. Rev. D93, 045008 (2016), arXiv:1511.05095 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  59. [59]

    What does a strongly excited ’t Hooft-Polyakov magnetic monopole do?

    Gyula Fodor and Istvan Racz, “What does a strongly excited ’t Hooft-Polyakov magnetic monopole do?” Phys. Rev. Lett.92, 151801 (2004), arXiv:hep-th/0311061

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  60. [60]

    Resonant exci- tations of the ’t Hooft-Polyakov monopole,

    Peter Forgacs and Mikhail S. Volkov, “Resonant exci- tations of the ’t Hooft-Polyakov monopole,” Phys. Rev. Lett.92, 151802 (2004), arXiv:hep-th/0311062

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  61. [61]

    Numerical investigation of highly excited magnetic monopoles in SU(2) Yang- Mills-Higgs theory,

    Gyula Fodor and Istvan Racz, “Numerical investigation of highly excited magnetic monopoles in SU(2) Yang- Mills-Higgs theory,” Phys. Rev. D77, 025019 (2008), arXiv:hep-th/0609110

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  62. [62]

    On resonances and bound states of the ’t Hooft-Polyakov monopole,

    Katie M Russell and Bernd J Schroers, “On resonances and bound states of the ’t Hooft-Polyakov monopole,” Phys. Rev. D83, 065004 (2011), arXiv:1012.3438 [hep- th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  63. [63]

    A Remark on the Scattering of BPS Monopoles,

    N. S. Manton, “A Remark on the Scattering of BPS Monopoles,” Phys. Lett. B110, 54–56 (1982)

    1982

  64. [64]

    Low-Energy Scatter- ing of Nonabelian Monopoles,

    M. F. Atiyah and Nigel J. Hitchin, “Low-Energy Scatter- ing of Nonabelian Monopoles,” Phys. Lett. A107, 21–25 (1985)

    1985

  65. [65]

    Low-energy scat- tering of nonAbelian magnetic monopoles,

    M. F. Atiyah and Nigel J. Hitchin, “Low-energy scat- tering of nonAbelian magnetic monopoles,” Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond. A315, 459–469 (1985)

    1985

  66. [66]

    Classical and Quan- tum Dynamics of BPS Monopoles,

    G. W. Gibbons and N. S. Manton, “Classical and Quan- tum Dynamics of BPS Monopoles,” Nucl. Phys. B274, 183–224 (1986)

    1986

  67. [67]

    Simulations of magnetic monopole collisions,

    Maximilian Bachmaier, Gia Dvali, Josef Seitz, and Juan Sebasti´ an Valbuena-Berm´ udez, “Simulations of magnetic monopole collisions,” Phys. Rev. D111, 075014 (2025), arXiv:2502.01756 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  68. [68]

    The art of simulating the early Universe – Part I,

    Daniel G. Figueroa, Adrien Florio, Francisco Tor- renti, and Wessel Valkenburg, “The art of simulating the early Universe – Part I,” JCAP04, 035 (2021), arXiv:2006.15122 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  69. [69]

    Longlived lo- calized field configurations in small lattices: Applica- tion to oscillons,

    Marcelo Gleiser and Andrew Sornborger, “Longlived lo- calized field configurations in small lattices: Applica- tion to oscillons,” Phys. Rev. E62, 1368–1374 (2000), arXiv:patt-sol/9909002

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  70. [70]

    Numba: A llvm-based python jit compiler,

    Siu Kwan Lam, Antoine Pitrou, and Stanley Seibert, “Numba: A llvm-based python jit compiler,” inProceed- ings of the Second Workshop on the LL VM Compiler In- frastructure in HPC(2015) pp. 1–6

    2015