Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 109 references

Universal relation between dipole polarizability of finite nuclei and neutron-star compactness

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-03 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that the ratio ζ = β_{1.4}/L̃ of neutron-star compactness to symmetry-energy slope is exponentially, equation-of-state-insensitively tied to the dipole polarizability of atomic nuclei, turning laboratory nuclear data into n

desk verdict A credible empirical α_D–compactness correlation, but the final R1.4/L constraints are not EOS-independent: they rely on a second fit to the same EDF ensemble. read the letter →

arxiv 2601.16894 v2 pith:GXB3YPHB submitted 2026-01-23 nucl-th astro-ph.HEastro-ph.SRnucl-ex

P.S. Koliogiannis , T. Ghosh , E. Yuksel , N. Paar This is my paper · ORCID
classification nucl-thastro-ph.HEastro-ph.SRnucl-ex
keywords universalrelationelectricdipolepolarizabilityneutronstarcompactnesssymmetryenergyslopenuclearequationofstatedensityfunctionalsradiusfinitenuclei
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

Neutron-star matter is governed by the nuclear equation of state, whose uncertainty is largely set by the poorly known density dependence of the symmetry energy. This paper claims that a single dimensionless quantity, ζ = β_{1.4} L̃^{-1} (compactness of a 1.4-solar-mass star divided by the symmetry-energy slope in units of 100 MeV), follows an exponential, equation-of-state-insensitive relation with the electric dipole polarizability α_D of finite nuclei. Using measured α_D values in ten neutron-rich nuclei, the authors translate this relation into bands on the product R_{1.4} L, then intersect those bands with an empirical R_{1.4}-L correlation to obtain bounds on the radius and slope. If correct, laboratory dipole measurements become a direct handle on neutron-star radius and on the symmetry energy, and the same relation can be inverted to predict α_D for nuclei not yet measured.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is ζ, the ratio of neutron-star compactness β_{1.4} to the normalized symmetry-energy slope L̃ = L/100 MeV. Its role is to combine a low-density nuclear datum (L) with a stellar-scale quantity (β_{1.4}) into a single stiffness parameter. The relation itself is the empirical exponential expression ζ = c1(A) e^{-c2(A) α_D} + c3(δ), whose coefficients are made nucleus-dependent through expansions in A^{-k} and δ^k. This functional form is the mechanism that lets a finite-nucleus observable be inverted into a neutron-star constraint and vice versa.

What would settle it

Measure the electric dipole polarizability of 52Ca, 90Zr, or 132Sn with a technique comparable to that used for the tin isotopes and compare with the predicted 2.911, 5.423, or 9.816 fm³; a deviation beyond the quoted roughly 3% uncertainty would falsify the universality claim. Alternatively, evaluate Eq. (4) with a microscopic equation of state not belonging to the fitted functional family and check whether ζ still tracks the exponential curve.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that ζ = β_{1.4} L̃^{-1} is exponentially correlated with the electric dipole polarizability α_D of finite nuclei across all 38 equations of state considered. The authors fit this trend as ζ = c1(A) e^{-c2(A) α_D} + c3(δ), with the coefficients expanded in inverse powers of the mass number A and powers of the isospin asymmetry δ. The fit uses fourteen training nuclei and achieves a coefficient of determination R² ≳ 0.9. Because both α_D and β_{1.4} are tied to the symmetry-energy slope L, the correlation is nearly independent of the equation of state. Inserting experimental α_D values yields weighted averages ζ = 0.390 ± 0.052 (four conservative nuclei) and ζ = 0.435

Load-bearing premise

The result stands on the premise that the empirical exponential relation fitted to 38 energy-density functionals and fourteen training nuclei remains valid for all other nuclei and equations of state, including the power-law link used to turn ζ into radius and slope bounds.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Measured α_D for neutron-rich nuclei can now be used as a largely model-independent constraint on the product of the 1.4-solar-mass neutron-star radius and the symmetry-energy slope.
  • The same universal curve can be inverted to predict α_D for nuclei without measurements, giving concrete targets for future experiments such as 52Ca, 90Zr, and 132Sn.
  • If the relation holds beyond the training set, it provides a consistency test that any viable equation of state must satisfy, complementing astrophysical bounds from pulsar timing, NICER, and gravitational-wave events.
  • Future measurements of α_D in medium and heavy neutron-rich nuclei will narrow the R_{1.4}-L bands and reduce the spread between the conservative and extended nuclear sets.
  • The relation quantitatively links laboratory nuclear-structure experiments and neutron-star observations through the same underlying symmetry-energy physics.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Because the exponential form was chosen empirically, one immediate test is to measure α_D for 52Ca or 132Sn; a disagreement beyond the quoted uncertainty would indicate the relation or its error band is not universal.
  • The same construction could be applied to other isovector nuclear observables, such as neutron-skin thickness, to search for analogous dimensionless ratios that connect finite nuclei to neutron-star compactness.
  • The R_{1.4}-L power law used for the final translation is itself an empirical correlation; folding in independent nuclear-theory or astrophysical priors on L could convert the product constraint into tighter joint bounds on radius and slope.
  • If the bridge holds, it extends the spirit of stellar universal relations to a microscopic observable, suggesting that such EOS-insensitive links can connect laboratory measurements and astrophysical objects rather than only stellar properties.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper introduces a dimensionless quantity ζ = β1.4 (L/100 MeV)^{-1} that couples the compactness of a 1.4 M_sun neutron star to the symmetry-energy slope L. Using a set of 38 energy density functionals (relativistic point-coupling, meson-exchange, and Skyrme), the authors find an exponential correlation between ζ and the electric dipole polarizability α_D of 14 finite nuclei, with coefficients expanded in mass number A and isospin asymmetry δ. They then use experimental α_D values from two subsets (CNSP-4 and CNSP-10) to constrain ζ, convert this into a constraint on the product R1.4 L, and finally, using an empirical R1.4–L power law, derive separate bounds on R1.4 and L. The paper also predicts α_D for 52Ca, 90Zr, and 132Sn.

Significance. If the proposed correlation is truly EOS-insensitive, it would provide a novel and useful bridge between terrestrial nuclear measurements and neutron-star radii. The paper has clear strengths: a broad EDF set spanning L from 19 to 140 MeV, a transparent distinction between the CNSP-4 and CNSP-10 data sets, published fit coefficients, and clear figures. However, the universality claim is currently validated only within the EDF model family: the R1.4–L relation used for the final bounds is a fit to the same 38 EDFs, and the predicted α_D values are checked only against those same models. The numerical conversion from ζ to R1.4 L also appears internally inconsistent. The idea is promising and worth publication after the overclaims are tempered and the technical issues are fixed.

major comments (3)
  1. [IV.B, Eq. (12), Fig. 3, Table III] The final constraints on R1.4 and L in Table III are obtained by intersecting the ζ-derived product R1.4 L with Eq. (12), R1.4 = 7.049 L^0.146 ± 0.581 km. But Eq. (12) is a power-law fit to the same 38 EDFs shown in Fig. 3. No independent validation against non-EDF equations of state (e.g., chiral EFT, Brueckner–Hartree–Fock, or phenomenological EOSs) is provided. Therefore the advertised 'equation-of-state independent' bounds are supported only inside the EDF model class. Please add external validation or clearly reframe the claim as 'within the considered EDF family.'
  2. [IV.B, Eqs. (3), (8), (10)] There is a numerical inconsistency in the conversion from ζ to the product R1.4 L. From Eq. (3), ζ = β1.4 / (L/100) = 100 GM/(c^2 R1.4 L) ≈ 206.7/(R1.4 L). With the reported CNSP-4 central value ζ = 0.390 ± 0.052, one obtains R1.4 L = 530.0 ± 70.7 km MeV, not 554.4 ± 73.4 as stated in Eq. (10). The same issue affects Eq. (11) and propagates to Table III; the table values appear to be based on the 554.4 central product. Please correct the conversion constant and rerun the analysis, or explain the discrepancy.
  3. [IV.A, Eq. (4), Fig. 4] The 'universal relation' Eq. (4) is an empirical fit to 38 EDFs and 14 training nuclei. Its predictive power is tested only for 52Ca, 90Zr, and 132Sn, and the comparison in Fig. 4 is against the same EDF family used to construct the fit. No experimental measurement or independent non-EDF calculation is used as a validation. The claim of 'twofold predictive power' therefore overstates what is currently demonstrated. Please either include an out-of-sample test that is not based on the same models, or soften the language to state that the relation is predictive within the EDF model class.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Fig. 4 caption] The caption writes 'ζ ≡ β1.4 L̃' but Eq. (3) defines ζ ≡ β1.4 L̃^{-1}. The missing exponent should be corrected.
  2. [IV.B, generally] The acronym CNSP-4/CNSP-10 is used without definition. Please spell out the full name or state that it refers to the nuclear data sets introduced in Ref. [101].
  3. [IV.B, Eq. (12)] The fit parameters in Eq. (12) are quoted as fixed values with no uncertainties on the prefactor and exponent. Please report the fitted parameter errors, including their covariance if available.
  4. [I, Introduction] The relationship with Ref. [101] by the same authors should be made explicit: which elements (CNSP-4/10, ζ construction) are reused, and what is genuinely new in this work?
  5. [V, Conclusion] Minor language issue: 'this work progress the connection' should be 'this work progresses/advances the connection.'

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the paper fits an empirical ζ(α_D) relation and an EDF-family R1.4–L fit, then uses external α_D data; no prediction reduces to its inputs by construction.

full rationale

The derivation chain is a fit-and-apply exercise rather than a tautology. Equation (4) is an empirical exponential relation calibrated on model-generated pairs (α_D, ζ) from 38 EDFs and 14 nuclei; the experimental α_D values used to constrain ζ are external data not used in that fit. The conversion from ζ to the product R1.4L is a direct algebraic consequence of the definition ζ = β1.4 / L̃, not a hidden re-use of fitted output. The subsequent split into separate R1.4 and L bounds uses Eq. (12), a power-law fit to the same EDF ensemble; while this makes the final R1.4 and L ranges model-family dependent and weakens the advertised 'equation-of-state independent' claim, it is not circular—the constraints still combine an independent experimental product with an empirical structural relation. The self-citation to Ref. [101] for the CNSP-4/CNSP-10 subset choice is descriptive and not a load-bearing uniqueness theorem. The α_D predictions for 52Ca, 90Zr, and 132Sn are out-of-fit interpolations checked against EDF calculations not in the training set, so they are not statistically forced by the fit itself. Overall, the paper exhibits no step where a claimed prediction is equivalent by construction to a fitted parameter or a self-citation chain; its limitations are about validation breadth and model dependence, not circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on a small number of fitted parameters (the qik coefficients plus the R–L power law) and on the domain assumption that EDF/QRPA calculations are a valid source for both α_D and β_{1.4}. The empirical fit is not derived from first principles, and the final constraints stack two fits to the same model ensemble.

free parameters (6)
  • c1(A) expansion coefficients q1k (k=0..3) = 5.558e3, -1.080e6, 6.909e7, -1.432e9
    Fitted to ζ vs QRPA α_D across 38 EDFs and 14 nuclei in Eqs. (4)–(5); no uncertainties given in Table II.
  • c2(A) expansion coefficients q2k (fm^-3) = -0.770, 3.666e2, -2.749e4, 8.540e5
    Exponential decay coefficients fitted to the same training set in Eq. (4)–(6); no uncertainties given.
  • c3(δ) expansion coefficients q3k = -0.257, 3.993, -15.288, 20.714
    Isospin-dependent offset coefficients fitted in Eq. (4)–(7); absorb residual per-nucleus offsets.
  • R1.4–L power-law prefactor = 7.049 km (MeV)^{-0.146}
    Fitted to the same 38 EOSs in Eq. (12) and used to map ζ constraints to R1.4/L ranges in Table III.
  • R1.4–L power-law exponent = 0.146
    Fitted exponent in Eq. (12); combined with the prefactor to convert the ζ band into R1.4 and L limits.
  • L0 reference value in ζ = 100 MeV
    Hand-chosen normalization in Eq. (3); it sets the scale of ζ and is absorbed into the fit coefficients, so it is not independent of the relation.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Energy density functionals (relativistic and Skyrme) describe both finite nuclei and neutron-star matter consistently.
    Sec. II: all α_D and β_{1.4} values come from EDF/QRPA and TOV calculations within this framework.
  • domain assumption Quasiparticle random phase approximation (QRPA) yields reliable electric dipole polarizabilities for the considered nuclei.
    Sec. III, Eq. (1): the α_D training values are QRPA outputs, not measurements, and the fit inherits any QRPA systematics.
  • ad hoc to paper The exponential form of Eq. (4) with expansions (5)–(7), truncated at k=3, captures the true universal relation.
    Chosen empirically; the paper gives no derivation or independent selection criterion beyond the achieved R².
  • ad hoc to paper The fitted R1.4–L power law of Eq. (12) remains valid for all EOSs, including those outside the 38-model set.
    Used in Sec. IV.B to convert ζ bands into R1.4/L ranges; this is an extrapolation of a fit to the same model ensemble.
  • ad hoc to paper The universal relation extends to nuclei outside the 14-nucleus training set (52Ca, 90Zr, 132Sn).
    Sec. IV.C: validated only by comparison with the same EDF family used to construct the fit.
invented entities (1)
  • ζ ≡ β_{1.4} L̃^{-1}
    purpose: Dimensionless combination of neutron-star compactness and symmetry-energy slope intended to bridge α_D and β_{1.4}; the target of the universal relation in Eq. (3).
    A new composite variable rather than a new physical entity. It has no independent falsifiable handle beyond the R1.4 and L it combines, and the universal relation is fit using it.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Universal relation between dipole polarizability of finite nuclei and neutron-star compactness." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GXB3YPHB

@misc{pith2026260116894,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Universal relation between dipole polarizability of finite nuclei and neutron-star compactness},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GXB3YPHB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2601.16894}
}
abstract

The nuclear equation of state, which determines the structure and properties of neutron stars, remains subject to substantial theoretical uncertainties, leading to model dependence in predicted observables. Universal relations have emerged as a powerful tool to mitigate this dependence by linking neutron star observables in a framework-independent manner. In this work, we introduce a new universal relation that \emph{bridges} finite nuclei and neutron stars through the dimensionless quantity $\zeta = \beta_{1.4}\tilde{L}^{-1}$, which couples the compactness of a $1.4~M_{\odot}$ neutron star to the slope of the nuclear symmetry energy at saturation. The relation is examined under a broad set of relativistic energy density functionals with point-coupling and meson-exchange interactions, as well as non-relativistic Skyrme functionals. We demonstrate that $\zeta$ exhibits a strong exponential correlation with the electric dipole polarizability $\alpha_D$ in finite nuclei across all considered equations of state. By exploiting experimental $\alpha_D$ data for selected neutron-rich nuclei, we constrain $\zeta$ and translate these constraints into equation-of-state independent bounds on the neutron star radius $R_{1.4}$ and the symmetry-energy slope $L$, providing insights into the properties of neutron star matter.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2601.16894 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (a) The energy density as a function of pressure for the full set of EOSs. (b) The corresponding gravitational mass as a function of radius [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. illustrates the dimensionless quantity ζ as a function of the electric dipole polarizability αD for the full set of EOSs, as well as for ten neutron-rich nuclei for which experimental αD values are available: 48Ca [21], 68Ni [22], 120Sn [23, 26], 208Pb [23, 24], and even-even isotopes 112−124Sn [27]. De￾spite their different theoretical foundations, all EOS-models follow a general trend, revealing an EOS-insensitive… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. displays R1.4 as a function of the symmetry energy slope L for the full set of EOSs. As mentioned in Sec. III, we also denote the high-degree correlation of R1.4 and L, ex￾pressed as R1.4 = 7.049(L/MeV)0.146 ± 0.581 (km). (12) In addition, we overlay the αD−informed constraints, CNSP-4 and CNSP-10 from Eqs. (10) and (11), respectively. As these bands serve as a consistency criterion for neutron stars, their intersec… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: shows ζ as a function of the electric dipole polariz￾ability αD for the three selected nuclei. The horizontal shaded bands indicate the CNSP-4 and CNSP-10 constraints, while the exponential curves correspond to the universal relation given in Eq. (4) for each nucleus. …

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

109 extracted references · 1 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    J. M. Lattimer and M. Prakash, The physics of neutron stars, Sci.304, 536 (2004)

    2004

  2. [2]

    Lattimer, Neutron Stars and the Nuclear Matter Equation of State, Ann

    J. Lattimer, Neutron Stars and the Nuclear Matter Equation of State, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.71, 433 (2021)

    2021

  3. [3]

    Burgio, H.-J

    G. Burgio, H.-J. Schulze, I. Vida ˜na, and J.-B. Wei, Neutron stars and the nuclear equation of state, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 120, 103879 (2021)

    2021

  4. [4]

    Arzoumanianet al., The NANOGrav 11-year Data Set: High-precision Timing of 45 Millisecond Pulsars, Astrophys

    Z. Arzoumanianet al., The NANOGrav 11-year Data Set: High-precision Timing of 45 Millisecond Pulsars, Astrophys. J. Suppl. S.235, 37 (2018)

    2018

  5. [5]

    Antoniadiset al., A Massive Pulsar in a Compact Relativistic Binary, Sci.340, 1233232 (2013)

    J. Antoniadiset al., A Massive Pulsar in a Compact Relativistic Binary, Sci.340, 1233232 (2013)

    2013

  6. [6]

    Cromartieet al., Relativistic Shapiro delay measurements of an extremely massive millisecond pulsar., Nat

    H. Cromartieet al., Relativistic Shapiro delay measurements of an extremely massive millisecond pulsar., Nat. Astron.4, 72 (2020)

    2020

  7. [7]

    Fonsecaet al., Refined Mass and Geometric Measurements of the High-mass PSR J0740+6620, Astrophys

    E. Fonsecaet al., Refined Mass and Geometric Measurements of the High-mass PSR J0740+6620, Astrophys. J. Lett.915, L12 (2021)

    2021

  8. [8]

    R. W. Romani, D. Kandel, A. V . Filippenko, T. G. Brink, and W. Zheng, PSR J0952-0607: The Fastest and Heaviest Known Galactic Neutron Star, Astrophys. J. Lett.934, L17 (2022)

    2022

Show all 109 references
  1. [9]

    M. C. Milleret al., PSR J0030+0451 Mass and Radius from NICER Data and Implications for the Properties of Neutron Star Matter, Astrophys. J. Lett.887, L24 (2019)

    2019

  2. [10]

    T. E. Rileyet al., A NICER View of PSR J0030+0451: Mil- lisecond Pulsar Parameter Estimation, Astrophys. J. Lett.887, L21 (2019)

    2019

  3. [11]

    Raaijmakerset al., A NICER View of PSR J0030+0451: Implications for the Dense Matter Equation of State, Astrophys

    G. Raaijmakerset al., A NICER View of PSR J0030+0451: Implications for the Dense Matter Equation of State, Astrophys. J. Lett.887, L22 (2019)

    2019

  4. [12]

    M. C. Milleret al., The Radius of PSR J0740+6620 from NICER and XMM-Newton Data, Astrophys. J. Lett.918, L28 (2021)

    2021

  5. [13]

    T. E. Rileyet al., A NICER View of the Massive Pulsar PSR J0740+6620 Informed by Radio Timing and XMM-Newton Spectroscopy, Astrophys. J. Lett.918, L27 (2021)

    2021

  6. [14]

    A. J. Dittmannet al., A More Precise Measurement of the Radius of PSR J0740+6620 Using Updated NICER Data, As- trophys. J.974, 295 (2024)

    2024

  7. [15]

    F. J. Fattoyev, J. Piekarewicz, and C. J. Horowitz, Neutron Skins and Neutron Stars in the Multimessenger Era, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 172702 (2018)

    2018

  8. [16]

    B. P. Abbottet al., GW190425: Observation of a Compact Binary Coalescence with Total Mass ∼ 3.4 M⊙, Astrophys. J. Lett.892, L3 (2020)

    2020

  9. [17]

    J. W. T. Hessels, S. M. Ransom, I. H. Stairs, P. C. C. Freire, V . M. Kaspi, and F. Camilo, A Radio Pulsar Spinning at 716 Hz, Sci.311, 1901 (2006)

    1901

  10. [18]

    Bejger, T

    M. Bejger, T. Bulik, and P. Haensel, Constraints on the dense matter equation of state from the measurements of PSR J0737- 3039A moment of inertia and PSR J0751+1807 mass, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.364, 635 (2005)

    2005

  11. [19]

    P. S. Koliogiannis and C. C. Moustakidis, Effects of the equa- tion of state on the bulk properties of maximally rotating neu- tron stars, Phys. Rev. C101, 015805 (2020). 8

    2020

  12. [20]

    Roca-Maza and N

    X. Roca-Maza and N. Paar, Nuclear equation of state from ground and collective excited state properties of nuclei, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.101, 96 (2018)

    2018

  13. [21]

    Birkhanet al., Electric Dipole Polarizability of 48Ca and Implications for the Neutron Skin, Phys

    J. Birkhanet al., Electric Dipole Polarizability of 48Ca and Implications for the Neutron Skin, Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 252501 (2017)

    2017

  14. [22]

    D. M. Rossiet al., Measurement of the Dipole Polarizability of the Unstable Neutron-Rich Nucleus 68Ni, Phys. Rev. Lett.111, 242503 (2013)

    2013

  15. [23]

    Roca-Maza, X

    X. Roca-Maza, X. Vi˜nas, M. Centelles, B. K. Agrawal, G. Col`o, N. Paar, J. Piekarewicz, and D. Vretenar, Neutron skin thickness from the measured electric dipole polarizability in 68Ni, 120Sn, and 208Pb, Phys. Rev. C92, 064304 (2015)

    2015

  16. [24]

    Tamiiet al., Complete Electric Dipole Response and the Neutron Skin in 208Pb, Phys

    A. Tamiiet al., Complete Electric Dipole Response and the Neutron Skin in 208Pb, Phys. Rev. Lett.107, 062502 (2011)

    2011

  17. [25]

    Piekarewicz, B

    J. Piekarewicz, B. K. Agrawal, G. Col`o, W. Nazarewicz, N. Paar, P.-G. Reinhard, X. Roca-Maza, and D. Vretenar, Electric dipole polarizability and the neutron skin, Phys. Rev. C85, 041302 (2012)

    2012

  18. [26]

    Hashimotoet al., Dipole polarizability of 120Sn and nuclear energy density functionals, Phys

    T. Hashimotoet al., Dipole polarizability of 120Sn and nuclear energy density functionals, Phys. Rev. C92, 031305 (2015)

    2015

  19. [27]

    Bassaueret al., Evolution of the dipole polarizability in the stable tin isotope chain, Phys

    S. Bassaueret al., Evolution of the dipole polarizability in the stable tin isotope chain, Phys. Lett. B810, 135804 (2020)

    2020

  20. [28]

    Brandhermet al., Electric dipole polarizability of 58Ni, Phys

    I. Brandhermet al., Electric dipole polarizability of 58Ni, Phys. Rev. C111, 024312 (2025)

    2025

  21. [29]

    Zhang and L.-W

    Z. Zhang and L.-W. Chen, Electric dipole polarizability in 208Pb as a probe of the symmetry energy and neutron matter aroundρ 0/3, Phys. Rev. C92, 031301 (2015)

    2015

  22. [30]

    Russottoet al., Results of the ASY-EOS experiment at GSI: The symmetry energy at suprasaturation density, Phys

    P. Russottoet al., Results of the ASY-EOS experiment at GSI: The symmetry energy at suprasaturation density, Phys. Rev. C 94, 034608 (2016)

    2016

  23. [31]

    Le F`evre, Y

    A. Le F`evre, Y . Leifels, W. Reisdorf, J. Aichelin, and C. Hart- nack, Constraining the nuclear matter equation of state around twice saturation density, Nucl. Phys. A945, 112 (2016)

    2016

  24. [32]

    Huthet al., Constraining neutron-star matter with micro- scopic and macroscopic collisions, Nat.606, 276 (2022)

    S. Huthet al., Constraining neutron-star matter with micro- scopic and macroscopic collisions, Nat.606, 276 (2022)

    2022

  25. [33]

    Yagi and N

    K. Yagi and N. Yunes, I-Love-Q: Unexpected Universal Rela- tions for Neutron Stars and Quark Stars, Sci.341, 365 (2013)

    2013

  26. [34]

    Maselli, V

    A. Maselli, V . Cardoso, V . Ferrari, L. Gualtieri, and P. Pani, Equation-of-state-independent relations in neutron stars, Phys. Rev. D88, 023007 (2013)

    2013

  27. [35]

    Yagi and N

    K. Yagi and N. Yunes, I-Love-Q relations in neutron stars and their applications to astrophysics, gravitational waves, and fun- damental physics, Phys. Rev. D88, 023009 (2013)

    2013

  28. [36]

    Chakrabarti, T

    S. Chakrabarti, T. Delsate, N. G¨urlebeck, and J. Steinhoff, I−Q Relation for Rapidly Rotating Neutron Stars, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 201102 (2014)

    2014

  29. [37]

    Jiang and K

    N. Jiang and K. Yagi, Analytic I-Love-C relations for realistic neutron stars, Phys. Rev. D101, 124006 (2020)

    2020

  30. [38]

    Lowrey, K

    T. Lowrey, K. Yagi, and N. Yunes, Improved analytic Love-C relations for neutron stars, Phys. Rev. D111, 024075 (2025)

    2025

  31. [39]

    J. M. Lattimer and M. Prakash, Neutron Star Structure and the Equation of State, Astrophys. J.550, 426 (2001)

    2001

  32. [40]

    Reed and C

    B. Reed and C. J. Horowitz, Total energy in supernova neutrinos and the tidal deformability and binding energy of neutron stars, Phys. Rev. D102, 103011 (2020)

    2020

  33. [41]

    Laskos-Patkos, P

    P. Laskos-Patkos, P. S. Koliogiannis, A. Kanakis-Pegios, and C. C. Moustakidis, Thermodynamics of Hot Neutron Stars and Universal Relations, Universe8, 395 (2022)

    2022

  34. [42]

    J. M. Lattimer and M. Prakash, Neutron star observations: Prog- nosis for equation of state constraints, Phys. Rep.442, 109 (2007), the Hans Bethe Centennial V olume 1906-2006

    2007

  35. [43]

    D. D. Doneva, S. S. Yazadjiev, N. Stergioulas, and K. D. Kokko- tas, Breakdown of I–Love–Q Universality in Rapidly Rotating Relativistic Stars, Astrophys. J. Lett.781, L6 (2013)

    2013

  36. [44]

    Martinon, A

    G. Martinon, A. Maselli, L. Gualtieri, and V . Ferrari, Rotating protoneutron stars: Spin evolution, maximum mass, and I-Love- Q relations, Phys. Rev. D90, 064026 (2014)

    2014

  37. [45]

    Breu and L

    C. Breu and L. Rezzolla, Maximum mass, moment of inertia and compactness of relativistic stars, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.459, 646 (2016)

    2016

  38. [46]

    Cipolletta, C

    F. Cipolletta, C. Cherubini, S. Filippi, J. A. Rueda, and R. Ruffini, Last stable orbit around rapidly rotating neutron stars, Phys. Rev. D96, 024046 (2017)

    2017

  39. [47]

    Luk and L.-M

    S.-S. Luk and L.-M. Lin, Universal Relations for Innermost Stable Circular Orbits around Rapidly Rotating Neutron Stars, Astrophys. J.861, 141 (2018)

    2018

  40. [48]

    Riahi, S

    R. Riahi, S. Z. Kalantari, and J. A. Rueda, Universal relations for the keplerian sequence of rotating neutron stars, Phys. Rev. D99, 043004 (2019)

    2019

  41. [49]

    W. Sun, D. Wen, and J. Wang, New quasiuniversal relations for static and rapid rotating neutron stars, Phys. Rev. D102, 023039 (2020)

    2020

  42. [50]

    H. O. Silva, G. Pappas, N. Yunes, and K. Yagi, Surface of rapidly-rotating neutron stars: Implications to neutron star pa- rameter estimation, Phys. Rev. D103, 063038 (2021)

    2021

  43. [51]

    Papigkiotis and G

    G. Papigkiotis and G. Pappas, Universal relations for rapidly rotating neutron stars using supervised machine-learning tech- niques, Phys. Rev. D107, 103050 (2023)

    2023

  44. [52]

    Musolino, C

    C. Musolino, C. Ecker, and L. Rezzolla, On the Maximum Mass and Oblateness of Rotating Neutron Stars with Generic Equations of State, Astrophys. J.962, 61 (2024)

    2024

  45. [53]

    Manoharan and K

    P. Manoharan and K. D. Kokkotas, Finding universal relations using statistical data analysis, Phys. Rev. D109, 103033 (2024)

    2024

  46. [54]

    Marques, M

    M. Marques, M. Oertel, M. Hempel, and J. Novak, New tem- perature dependent hyperonic equation of state: Application to rotating neutron star models and I−Q relations, Phys. Rev. C 96, 045806 (2017)

    2017

  47. [55]

    A. R. Raduta, M. Oertel, and A. Sedrakian, Proto-neutron stars with heavy baryons and universal relations, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.499, 914 (2020)

    2020

  48. [56]

    Khadkikar, A

    S. Khadkikar, A. R. Raduta, M. Oertel, and A. Sedrakian, Max- imum mass of compact stars from gravitational wave events with finite-temperature equations of state, Phys. Rev. C103, 055811 (2021)

    2021

  49. [57]

    Yagi and N

    K. Yagi and N. Yunes, Approximate universal relations for neutron stars and quark stars, Phys. Rep.681, 1 (2017)

    2017

  50. [58]

    J.-B. Wei, A. Figura, G. F. Burgio, H. Chen, and H.-J. Schulze, Neutron star universal relations with microscopic equations of state, J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys.46, 034001 (2019)

    2019

  51. [59]

    Khosravi Largani, T

    N. Khosravi Largani, T. Fischer, A. Sedrakian, M. Cierniak, D. E. Alvarez-Castillo, and D. B. Blaschke, Universal relations for rapidly rotating cold and hot hybrid stars, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.515, 3539 (2022)

    2022

  52. [60]

    Kumar, M

    A. Kumar, M. K. Ghosh, P. Thakur, V . B. Thapa, K. K. Nath, and M. Sinha, Universal relations for compact stars with exotic degrees of freedom, Eur. Phys. J. C84, 692 (2024)

    2024

  53. [61]

    Andersson and K

    N. Andersson and K. D. Kokkotas, Gravitational Waves and Pulsating stars: What Can We Learn from Future Observa- tions?, Phys. Rev. Lett.77, 4134 (1996)

    1996

  54. [62]

    Andersson and K

    N. Andersson and K. D. Kokkotas, Towards gravitational wave asteroseismology, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.299, 1059 (1998)

    1998

  55. [63]

    D. D. Doneva, E. Gaertig, K. D. Kokkotas, and C. Kr ¨uger, Gravitational wave asteroseismology of fast rotating neutron stars with realistic equations of state, Phys. Rev. D88, 044052 (2013). 9

    2013

  56. [64]

    Lioutas, A

    G. Lioutas, A. Bauswein, and N. Stergioulas, Frequency de- viations in universal relations of isolated neutron stars and postmerger remnants, Phys. Rev. D104, 043011 (2021)

    2021

  57. [65]

    Yagi and N

    K. Yagi and N. Yunes, Approximate universal relations among tidal parameters for neutron star binaries, Class. Quantum Grav. 34, 015006 (2016)

    2016

  58. [66]

    Kumar and P

    B. Kumar and P. Landry, Inferring neutron star properties from GW170817 with universal relations, Phys. Rev. D99, 123026 (2019)

    2019

  59. [67]

    J. A. Saes and R. F. P. Mendes, Equation-of-state-insensitive measure of neutron star stiffness, Phys. Rev. D106, 043027 (2022)

    2022

  60. [68]

    K. K. Nath, R. Mallick, and S. Chatterjee, I-Love-Q relations for a generic family of neutron star equations of state, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.524, 1438 (2023)

    2023

  61. [69]

    B. K. Pradhan, A. Vijaykumar, and D. Chatterjee, Impact of updated multipole love numbers and f-Love universal relations in the context of binary neutron stars, Phys. Rev. D107, 023010 (2023)

    2023

  62. [70]

    Aranguren, J

    E. Aranguren, J. A. Font, N. Sanchis-Gual, and R. Vera, Revis- iting the I-Love-Q relations for superfluid neutron stars, Phys. Rev. D108, 104065 (2023)

    2023

  63. [71]

    J. A. Saes, R. F. P. Mendes, and N. Yunes, Approximately universal I-Love-⟨c2 s⟩ relations for the average neutron star stiffness, Phys. Rev. D110, 024011 (2024)

    2024

  64. [72]

    Suleiman and J

    L. Suleiman and J. Read, Quasiuniversal relations in the context of future neutron star detections, Phys. Rev. D109, 103029 (2024)

    2024

  65. [73]

    Legred, B

    I. Legred, B. O. Sy-Garcia, K. Chatziioannou, and R. Essick, Assessing equation of state-independent relations for neutron stars with nonparametric models, Phys. Rev. D109, 023020 (2024)

    2024

  66. [74]

    Chatterjee and K

    S. Chatterjee and K. K. Nath, Insights into neutron stars from gravitational redshifts and universal relations, Eur. Phys. J. C 85, 862 (2025)

    2025

  67. [75]

    Manoharan, C

    P. Manoharan, C. J. Kr¨uger, and K. D. Kokkotas, Universal rela- tions for binary neutron star mergers with long-lived remnants, Phys. Rev. D104, 023005 (2021)

    2021

  68. [76]

    D. A. Godzieba, R. Gamba, D. Radice, and S. Bernuzzi, Up- dated universal relations for tidal deformabilities of neutron stars from phenomenological equations of state, Phys. Rev. D 103, 063036 (2021)

    2021

  69. [77]

    Y . Xie, D. Chatterjee, G. Holder, D. E. Holz, S. Perkins, K. Yagi, and N. Yunes, Breaking bad degeneracies with love relations: Improving gravitational-wave measurements through universal relations, Phys. Rev. D107, 043010 (2023)

    2023

  70. [78]

    Y¨uksel, T

    E. Y¨uksel, T. Oishi, and N. Paar, Nuclear Equation of State in the Relativistic Point-Coupling Model Constrained by Excita- tions in Finite Nuclei, Universe7, 71 (2021)

    2021

  71. [79]

    Koliogiannis, E

    P. Koliogiannis, E. Y¨uksel, and N. Paar, Constraining neutron star properties through parity-violating electron scattering ex- periments and relativistic point coupling interactions, Phys. Lett. B862, 139362 (2025)

    2025

  72. [80]

    Vretenar, T

    D. Vretenar, T. Nikˇsi´c, and P. Ring, A microscopic estimate of the nuclear matter compressibility and symmetry energy in relativistic mean-field models, Phys. Rev. C68, 024310 (2003)

    2003

  73. [81]

    Reinhard, M

    P.-G. Reinhard, M. Rufa, J. Maruhn, W. Greiner, and J. Friedrich, Nuclear ground-state properties in a relativistic meson-field theory, Z. Phys. A323, 13 (1986)

    1986

  74. [82]

    G. A. Lalazissis, J. K¨onig, and P. Ring, New parametrization for the lagrangian density of relativistic mean field theory, Phys. Rev. C55, 540 (1997)

    1997

  75. [83]

    B. Sun, S. Bhattiprolu, and J. M. Lattimer, Compiled properties of nucleonic matter and nuclear and neutron star models from nonrelativistic and relativistic interactions, Phys. Rev. C109, 055801 (2024)

    2024

  76. [84]

    G. A. Lalazissis, T. Nikˇsi´c, D. Vretenar, and P. Ring, New rela- tivistic mean-field interaction with density-dependent meson- nucleon couplings, Phys. Rev. C71, 024312 (2005)

    2005

  77. [85]

    B. K. Agrawal, S. Shlomo, and V . K. Au, Determination of the parameters of a skyrme type effective interaction using the simulated annealing approach, Phys. Rev. C72, 014310 (2005)

    2005

  78. [86]

    Van Giai and H

    N. Van Giai and H. Sagawa, Spin-isospin and pairing properties of modified skyrme interactions, Phys. Lett. B106, 379 (1981)

    1981

  79. [87]

    B. K. Agrawal, S. Shlomo, and V . Kim Au, Nuclear matter incompressibility coefficient in relativistic and nonrelativistic microscopic models, Phys. Rev. C68, 031304 (2003)

    2003

  80. [88]

    Chabanat, P

    E. Chabanat, P. Bonche, P. Haensel, J. Meyer, and R. Schaeffer, A Skyrme parametrization from subnuclear to neutron star densities, Nuc. Phys. A627, 710 (1997)

    1997

  81. [89]

    Chabanat, P

    E. Chabanat, P. Bonche, P. Haensel, J. Meyer, and R. Schaeffer, A Skyrme parametrization from subnuclear to neutron star densities Part II. Nuclei far from stabilities, Nuc. Phys. A635, 231 (1998)

    1998

  82. [90]

    Reinhard and H

    P.-G. Reinhard and H. Flocard, Nuclear effective forces and isotope shifts, Nuclear Physics A584, 467 (1995)

    1995

  83. [91]

    Roca-Maza, G

    X. Roca-Maza, G. Col`o, and H. Sagawa, New skyrme interac- tion with improved spin-isospin properties, Phys. Rev. C86, 031306 (2012)

    2012

  84. [92]

    Douchin and P

    F. Douchin and P. Haensel, A unified equation of state of dense matter and neutron star structure, Astron. Astrophys.380, 151 (2001)

    2001

  85. [93]

    G. Baym, C. Pethick, and P. Sutherland, The Ground State of Matter at High Densities: Equation of State and Stellar Models, Astrophys. J.170, 299 (1971)

    1971

  86. [94]

    R. P. Feynman, N. Metropolis, and E. Teller, Equations of State of Elements Based on the Generalized Fermi-Thomas Theory, Phys. Rev.75, 1561 (1949)

    1949

  87. [95]

    Cai and L.-W

    B.-J. Cai and L.-W. Chen, Nuclear matter fourth-order symme- try energy in the relativistic mean field models, Phys. Rev. C 85, 024302 (2012)

    2012

  88. [96]

    N. Paar, C. C. Moustakidis, T. Marketin, D. Vretenar, and G. A. Lalazissis, Neutron star structure and collective excitations of finite nuclei, Phys. Rev. C90, 011304 (2014)

    2014

  89. [97]

    Doroshenko, V

    V . Doroshenko, V . Suleimanov, G. P¨uhlhofer, and A. Santan- gelo, A strangely light neutron star within a supernova remnant., Nat. Astron.6, 1444–1451 (2022)

    2022

  90. [98]

    Choudhuryet al., A NICER View of the Nearest and Bright- est Millisecond Pulsar: PSR J0437–4715, Astrophys

    D. Choudhuryet al., A NICER View of the Nearest and Bright- est Millisecond Pulsar: PSR J0437–4715, Astrophys. J. Lett. 971, L20 (2024)

    2024

  91. [99]

    Salmiet al., A NICER View of PSR J1231-1411: A Complex Case, Astrophys

    T. Salmiet al., A NICER View of PSR J1231-1411: A Complex Case, Astrophys. J.976, 58 (2024)

    2024

  92. [100]

    B. P. Abbottet al.(LIGO Scientific Collaboration and Virgo Collaboration), Properties of the Binary Neutron Star Merger GW170817, Phys. Rev. X9, 011001 (2019)

    2019

  93. [101]

    Koliogiannis, E

    P. Koliogiannis, E. Y¨uksel, T. Ghosh, and N. Paar, Dipole Polar- izability of Finite Nuclei as a Probe of Neutron Stars, Astrophys. J. Lett.996, L18 (2025)

    2025

  94. [102]

    N. Paar, D. Vretenar, E. Khan, and G. Col`o, Exotic modes of excitation in atomic nuclei far from stability, Rep. Prog. Phys. 70, R02 (2007)

    2007

  95. [103]

    Roca-Maza, M

    X. Roca-Maza, M. Brenna, G. Col `o, M. Centelles, X. Vi˜nas, B. K. Agrawal, N. Paar, D. Vretenar, and J. Piekarewicz, Elec- tric dipole polarizability in 208Pb: Insights from the droplet model, Phys. Rev. C88, 024316 (2013)

    2013

  96. [104]

    N. Paar, P. Ring, T. Nikˇsi´c, and D. Vretenar, Quasiparticle ran- dom phase approximation based on the relativistic Hartree- Bogoliubov model, Phys. Rev. C67, 034312 (2003). 10

    2003

  97. [105]

    Col `o, L

    G. Col `o, L. Cao, N. Van Giai, and L. Capelli, Self- consistent RPA calculations with Skyrme-type interactions: The skyrme rpa program, Comp. Phys. Comm.184, 142 (2013)

    2013

  98. [106]

    Col`o and X

    G. Col`o and X. Roca-Maza, User guide for the hfbcs-qrpa(v1) code (2021), arXiv:2102.06562 [nucl-th]

    2021 arXiv

  99. [107]

    Reinhard and W

    P.-G. Reinhard and W. Nazarewicz, Information content of a new observable: The case of the nuclear neutron skin, Phys. Rev. C81, 051303 (2010)

    2010

  100. [108]

    C. D. Capanoet al., Stringent constraints on neutron-star radii from multimessenger observations and nuclear theory, Nat. As- tron.4, 625 (2020)

    2020

  101. [109]

    Dietrichet al., Multimessenger constraints on the neutron- star equation of state and the Hubble constant, Sci.370, 1450 (2020)

    T. Dietrichet al., Multimessenger constraints on the neutron- star equation of state and the Hubble constant, Sci.370, 1450 (2020)

    2020

Pith tools

Reviewed August 3, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.