Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 84 references

The paper claims that in a two-phase hadron-plus-PNJL model, isentropic trajectories crossing the hadron-quark mixed phase either cool or heat depending on the fixed entropy per baryon, that this produces distinctive speed-of-sound and poly

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

2026-08-02 18:25 UTC pith:6V2RSPYS

load-bearing objection A competent two-phase model study that delivers a useful isentropic taxonomy, with a load-bearing but untested per-phase strangeness constraint and a couple of correctable technical slips. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2603.11081 v2 pith:6V2RSPYS submitted 2026-03-10 hep-ph nucl-th

Isentropic thermodynamics across the hadron-quark mixed phase in a two-phase model with a PNJL quark description

Eduardo L. G. Salgado , Pedro Costa , Constan\c{c}a Provid\^encia This is my paper
classification hep-ph nucl-th
keywords hadron-quark mixed phasePNJL modelisentropic trajectoriesspeed of soundpolytropic indexhyperonscritical end pointtwo-phase model
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.

The paper aims to show that the thermodynamics of the hadron-quark mixed phase, built by Gibbs-matching a relativistic hadronic equation of state to a PNJL quark phase, is governed by how much entropy per baryon each coexisting phase carries. Depending on the fixed entropy per baryon, converting hadrons into quarks inside the coexistence region either heats the matter (low entropy per baryon) or cools it (high entropy per baryon, near the critical end point). These differences produce characteristic, entropy-dependent signatures in the adiabatic speed of sound and the polytropic index that could be searched for in heavy-ion collisions. The paper also argues that hyperons soften the hadronic equation of state, delay the onset of deconfinement, and reduce the density width of the mixed phase, while the location of the critical end point remains fairly stable across the scenarios considered.

Core claim

Using Gibbs conditions to join a relativistic mean-field hadronic phase (NL3ωρ without hyperons, FSU2H with the full baryon octet) to a (2+1)-flavor PNJL quark phase with vector interactions, the authors find that the temperature evolution inside the mixed phase is controlled by the difference between the local entropy per baryon of the quark and hadron phases. For s/ρB = 0.5 and 2, the quark phase carries less entropy per baryon than the hadron phase, so the temperature rises as the quark fraction increases; for s/ρB = 5, near the critical end point, the quark phase carries more entropy per baryon, so the temperature falls. The squared speed of sound drops steeply at the mixed-phase boundar

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is the two-phase construction itself: hadronic and quark equations of state are matched by Gibbs equilibrium (equal pressure, baryon chemical potential, and isospin chemical potential), with the baryon density in the mixed phase weighted by the quark fraction λ. The quantity doing the physical work is the comparison of local entropy per baryon in each phase, s_H/ρ_H versus s_Q/ρ_Q, along a fixed global isentrope; where the quark phase carries more entropy per baryon than the hadron phase, converting hadrons to quarks cools the mixture, and where it carries less, the mixture heats.

Load-bearing premise

The mixed phase is built by imposing zero net strangeness separately inside each phase (Eq. 21), which suppresses strangeness exchange between hadrons and quarks; the paper's hyperon-driven shift of the deconfinement onset and the reduced mixed-phase extent could change if a global strangeness-neutrality condition were imposed instead.

What would settle it

Re-solve the mixed phase with a single global strangeness chemical potential (global strangeness neutrality) instead of setting strangeness to zero separately in each phase; if the λ=0 onset density and the mixed-phase width no longer shift when hyperons are added, the paper's main hyperon result is an artifact of that constraint.

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

If this is right

  • Low- and intermediate-entropy trajectories (s/ρB = 0.5, 2) heat inside the mixed phase, while high-entropy trajectories near the critical end point (s/ρB = 5) cool, with temperature changes of tens of MeV across the coexistence region.
  • The squared speed of sound drops sharply at the mixed-phase boundaries and, for the low-entropy trajectory, develops a local maximum inside the mix; the peak-and-dip structures are entropy-dependent and modified by quark vector interactions and isospin asymmetry.
  • The polytropic index criterion γ ≤ 1.75 works for identifying quark matter along low- and intermediate-entropy isentropes, but near the critical end point a narrower interval γ ≲ 1–1.4 is needed.
  • Hyperons shift the onset of deconfinement to higher densities and reduce the density width of the mixed phase, especially at low temperature, while leaving the critical-end-point location largely unchanged.
  • Repulsive vector interactions stiffen the equation of state, raise transition pressure, and move both the mixed phase and the critical end point to higher densities, with the size of the effect depending on the chosen entropy per baryon.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The cleanest test of the paper's hyperon claim is to replace the per-phase strangeness constraint with a single global strangeness-neutrality condition; the hyperon-driven shift of the deconfinement onset and the shrinking of the mixed phase are the most sensitive outputs to that choice.
  • The predicted entropy-dependent cooling and heating gives a concrete interpretation for heavy-ion data: if the fireball crosses the mixed phase along a high-s/ρB path, one expects a transient cooling stage that could leave an imprint on thermal photon or dilepton spectra.
  • The paper notes that a fixed vector coupling prevents the high-density equation of state from approaching the conformal limit; implementing a density-dependent coupling would likely soften or remove the large c²s values the authors attribute to the vector interaction.
  • For neutron-star matter, a reduced mixed-phase extent in the presence of hyperons implies a more abrupt hadron-quark transition, which would alter the tidal-deformability signature in binary-merger gravitational-wave events.

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

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript constructs a two-phase hadron-quark equation of state by matching two relativistic mean-field hadronic models (NL3ωρ with nucleons only, FSU2H with the full baryon octet) to a (2+1)-flavor PNJL quark model with vector coupling ζ. The mixed phase is built with Gibbs conditions for pressure, baryon chemical potential, and isospin chemical potential, plus an imposed per-phase strangeness neutrality. The paper maps phase boundaries and CEPs, computes isentropic trajectories at s/ρ_B = 0.5, 2, 5, and studies the speed of sound and polytropic index along these trajectories and along isotherms. The central claims are that low- and intermediate-entropy trajectories heat inside the mixed phase while high-entropy trajectories near the CEP cool; that c_s^2 and γ develop s/ρ_B-dependent peak/dip structures; and that hyperons shift the deconfinement onset to higher baryon densities and reduce the density extent of the mixed phase.

Significance. If the central results hold, the s/ρ_B-dependent heating/cooling behavior and the associated c_s^2 and γ structures provide a useful phenomenological guide for interpreting heavy-ion collision signatures near the QCD critical point. The technical machinery is standard and the calculations appear internally consistent; the model parameters are taken from prior fits, and the isentropic behavior is not fitted to a target. The quantitative tables and phase-diagram comparisons are a strength. However, two load-bearing issues affect the robustness of the main claims: the non-equilibrium per-phase strangeness constraint in the Gibbs construction, and the confounding of hyperon effects with different hadronic parameterizations. These require additional calculations or clear justification before the stated conclusions can be accepted.

major comments (2)
  1. [§II.C, Eq. (21)] The mixed phase is constructed with Y_S^H = Y_S^Q = 0 and μ_S^H ≠ μ_S^Q. Since strangeness is a conserved charge in strong interactions, chemical equilibrium between coexisting phases requires μ_S^H = μ_S^Q; the globally strangeness-neutral condition is (1−λ)ρ_B^H Y_S^H + λ ρ_B^Q Y_S^Q = 0, not per-phase neutrality. The per-phase constraint removes one Gibbs equilibrium condition and suppresses strangeness exchange across the phase boundary. Because hyperon populations (Fig. 9), the hyperon-driven shift of the deconfinement onset (Figs. 8, Tables V/VII), and the isentropic heating/cooling and c_s^2 structures (Figs. 2, 10, 11) are all computed under this assumption, the central claims need a sensitivity test with μ_S^H = μ_S^Q and global Y_S = 0, or a physical justification for the non-equilibrium condition.
  2. [§III.B, Figs. 6–8, Tables V/VII] The paper attributes the shift of the deconfinement onset to larger densities and the reduced mixed-phase extent to hyperons, but the comparison is between NL3ωρ (no hyperons) and FSU2H (with hyperons). These parameter sets differ in compressibility, symmetry-energy slope, and other saturation properties (Table VIII), so the hyperon effect is not isolated. A quantitative hyperon claim requires comparing FSU2H without hyperons with FSU2H with hyperons (or NL3ωρ with and without hyperons). As written, the abstract's 'main effect of hyperons' is confounded by the EoS parameterization.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§III.A, Eq. (22)] Equation (22) is dimensionally inconsistent: the right-hand side has units of MeV^{-2} rather than being dimensionless. A factor involving p_F^2 is missing (and for a single species the standard degenerate limit is proportional to T/E_F). Please correct the formula and verify that the qualitative entropy-ordering argument is unchanged.
  2. [§III.A, text after Table II] The text states that with ζ=0.5 and α=0.2 the CEP density increases from 0.115 fm^{-3} to 0.195 fm^{-3}, but Table II reports ρ_B^{CEP} = 0.185 fm^{-3} for that case. Please reconcile the value.
  3. [§II.C, Eq. (20)] The denominator in the expression for α is written as (1−λ)ρ_B + λρ_B, which is ambiguous; it should be the total baryon density (1−λ)ρ_B^H + λρ_B^Q.
  4. [Appendix A, Eq. (A1)] The term 4G_D σ_u σ_d σ_u should presumably read 4G_D σ_u σ_d σ_s; the product as written misses the strange condensate and is not symmetric in the det interaction.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: all model parameters are externally fitted and the isentropic/c_s^2 results are genuine outputs of the model.

full rationale

The paper's quantitative inputs—NJL couplings, cutoff, Polyakov-potential parameters, RMF parameter sets NL3ωρ and FSU2H, and hyperon couplings—are taken from prior external fits, not adjusted to reproduce the reported isentropic behavior, speed-of-sound structures, polytropic indices, or CEP locations. Those quantities are computed from the resulting equations of state by standard thermodynamic relations (Eqs. A8–A11 and c_s^2 = (dP/dE)_{s/ρB}); the isentropes themselves are fixed input trajectories. Equation (21), the per-phase vanishing-strangeness constraint, is a physical modeling assumption referenced to external work on heavy-ion strangeness, not an output of the model; whether it is the correct equilibrium condition is a validity question, not evidence of circularity. The self-citations (e.g., Refs. [28,30,45,79]) supply parameter values and previously reported model behaviors, but none is invoked as a uniqueness theorem or as a substitute for the present computation. The choices s/ρB = 5 near the CEP and ζ = 0.1 for the hyperon study are scenario selections, not fits to the target claims; the reported curves remain genuine outputs for those scenarios. No 'prediction' in the paper is shown to be equal by construction to one of its fitted inputs, so there is no significant circularity.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

The ledger relies on pre-fitted model parameters from prior literature; the free choices in this paper are the vector coupling ratio ζ and the selected s/ρB values. No new entities are introduced. The main domain assumptions are the two-phase Gibbs construction, per-phase strangeness neutrality, and the quantitative reliability of the PNJL/RMF entropy calculations.

free parameters (2)
  • G_V/G_S ratio ζ = 0 and 0.5 used in Sec. III A; 0.1 adopted in Sec. III B
    The repulsive vector coupling is not fixed from data; it is varied, then the large value 0.5 is discarded because c_s^2 exceeds the conformal limit, and 0.1 is used for the hyperon studies. This is a hand-chosen parameter affecting the phase boundaries and all thermodynamic observables.
  • Isentrope s/ρB values = 0.5, 2, 5
    Chosen to probe low/intermediate entropy and to approach the CEP as closely as numerical stability allows; the qualitative conclusions are drawn from these three values, and the 'near-CEP' cooling claim rests on the single value 5.
axioms (5)
  • standard math Mean-field approximation for the PNJL and RMF thermodynamic potentials (Appendix A)
    The model is solved in mean field; fluctuations and the full dynamics of the Polyakov loop are neglected.
  • domain assumption Gibbs conditions (Eq. 16) with separately charged phases describe the mixed phase
    The Glendenning construction allows hadronic and quark phases to carry charge separately; this is central to the isospin-asymmetric results.
  • domain assumption Vanishing net strangeness in each phase separately (Eq. 21)
    Y_S^Q = Y_S^H = 0 with μ_S^Q ≠ μ_S^H; this choice affects hyperon populations and phase boundaries and is not tested against global strangeness neutrality.
  • domain assumption PNJL parameters and Polyakov potential (Refs. [37,46,47]) with T0=210 MeV and sharp cutoff are quantitatively reliable for entropy and mass in the quark phase
    The central heating/cooling mechanism depends on the entropy-per-baryon ordering between phases, which is sensitive to these inputs.
  • domain assumption Hadronic EoSs NL3ωρ and FSU2H, with hyperon couplings fixed by SU(3) symmetry and hypernuclear potentials (Appendix B), describe hadronic matter up to the transition
    The phase-boundary shift and mixed-phase extent depend on these pre-fitted parameter sets.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 29897 in / 15533 out tokens · 134650 ms · 2026-08-02T18:25:58.956440+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We study the hadron-quark mixed phase within a two-phase model for symmetric and asymmetric matter. For the quark sector we employ the (2+1) Polyakov-extended Nambu-Jona-Lasinio model (PNJL) with vector interactions. We investigate how the hadronic equation of state affects the phase diagram and the thermodynamic properties inside the mixed phase. The behavior of isentropic trajectories in the mixed phase depends on the fixed entropy per baryon ($s/\rho_B$), with trajectories near the critical end point (CEP) exhibiting a pronounced cooling pattern, while isentropic trajectories with low entropy per baryon undergo pronounced heating as the baryonic density increases. The adiabatic squared speed of sound displays characteristic peak and dip structures that depend on $s/\rho_B$. The polytropic index along isentropic and isothermal trajectories, including in the vicinity of the CEP are also investigated. The effects of vector interactions and isospin asymmetry on thermodynamic observables likewise depend on the chosen $s/\rho_B$ value. Finally, we discuss the population of hyperons along isentropic trajectories and their influence on the phase diagram. The main effect of hyperons is to shift the onset of deconfinement to larger densities and decrease the density extension of the mixed phase.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2603.11081 by Constan\c{c}a Provid\^encia, Eduardo L. G. Salgado, Pedro Costa.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: Phase transition in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: Phase diagram of the NL3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3: Local entropy per baryon number density of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: a, both the s/ρB = 5 and s/ρB = 2 curves show a monotonic decrease of c 2 s with increasing ρB; the steep drop at low ρB is, however, noticeably smaller for the s/ρB = 5 case than for s/ρB = 2. By contrast, the s/ρB = 0.5 curve, c 2 s increases immediately after the dis￾continuity at low ρB, reaches a local maximum inside the mixed phase, and then decreases. Indeed, the same local￾peak structure appears in… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: Polytropic index [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6: Phase transition in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7: The squared speed of sound [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8: Phase diagram of the FSU2H-PNJL two-phase model in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9: Baryon fractions as functions of the baryonic [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10: Sound velocity squared [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11: Polytropic index [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_11.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

84 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    The PNJL model The thermodynamical potential for the three-flavor PNJL model reads Ω(T,µi) =G S ( σ2 u +σ 2 d +σ 2 s ) + 4GDσuσdσu +GV (ρu +ρd +ρs)2−U ( Φ, ¯Φ,T ) −2T ∑ i=u,d,s ∫d3p (2π)3 ( NcβEi +z + Φ(Ei) +z− Φ (Ei) ) , (A1) whereE i = √ p2 i +m∗ i 2 is the quasiparticle energy of the quarki, andz ± Φ represent the following partition function densities...

  2. [2]

    (A15)-(A17)

    Hadronic models Within the relativistic mean-field approach, the ther- modynamical potential for the NL3ωρLagrangian den- sity is Ω(T,µb) = 1 2m2 σσ2 + κ 3!(gσNσ)3 + λ 4!(gσNσ)4 − 1 2m2 ωω2 0− ξ 4!(gωNω0)4 − 1 2m2 ρ(ρ3 0)2−Λωg2 ρNg2 ωN (ρ3 0)2(ω0)2 −2T ∑ b ∫d3p (2π)3 [ ln ( 1 +e−β(Eb+µ∗ b) ) + ln ( 1 +e−β(Eb−µ∗ b) )] ,(A12) withE b = √ p2 b +m∗ b 2, the e...

  3. [3]

    Y. Aoki, G. Endrodi, Z. Fodor, S. D. Katz and K. K. Szabo, Nature443(2006), 675-678 doi:10.1038/nature05120 [arXiv:hep-lat/0611014 [hep- lat]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  4. [4]

    Borsanyiet al.[Wuppertal-Budapest], JHEP 09(2010), 073 doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2010)073 [arXiv:1005.3508 [hep-lat]]

    S. Borsanyiet al.[Wuppertal-Budapest], JHEP 09(2010), 073 doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2010)073 [arXiv:1005.3508 [hep-lat]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  5. [5]

    H. T. Dinget al.[HotQCD], Phys. Rev. Lett.123(2019) no.6, 062002 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.123.062002 [arXiv:1903.04801 [hep-lat]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  6. [6]

    Bazavov, T

    A. Bazavov, T. Bhattacharya, M. Cheng, C. DeTar, H. T. Ding, S. Gottlieb, R. Gupta, P. Hegde, U. M. Heller and F. Karsch,et al.Phys. Rev. D85(2012), 054503 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.85.054503 [arXiv:1111.1710 [hep- lat]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  7. [7]

    A. Y. Kotov, M. P. Lombardo and A. Trunin, Phys. Lett. B823(2021), 136749 doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2021.136749 [arXiv:2105.09842 [hep-lat]]

    arXiv 2021

  8. [8]

    Cuteri, O

    F. Cuteri, O. Philipsen and A. Sciarra, JHEP11(2021), 141 doi:10.1007/JHEP11(2021)141 [arXiv:2107.12739 [hep-lat]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  9. [9]

    Costa, C

    P. Costa, C. A. de Sousa, M. C. Ruivo and H. Hansen, EPL86(2009) no.3, 31001 doi:10.1209/0295- 5075/86/31001 [arXiv:0801.3616 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  10. [10]

    Ferreira, P

    M. Ferreira, P. Costa and C. Providˆ encia, Phys. Rev. D 97(2018) no.1, 014014 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.97.014014 [arXiv:1712.08378 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  11. [11]

    Cao, Phys

    G. Cao, Phys. Rev. D112(2025) no.3, 034013 doi:10.1103/jjs8-mj6f [arXiv:2504.18874 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  12. [12]

    Cˆ amara Pereira, R

    R. Cˆ amara Pereira, R. Stiele and P. Costa, Eur. Phys. J. C80(2020) no.8, 712 doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-020-8296- 9 [arXiv:2003.12829 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  13. [13]

    Bzdak, S

    A. Bzdak, S. Esumi, V. Koch, J. Liao, M. Stephanov and N. Xu, Phys. Rept.853(2020), 1-87 doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2020.01.005 [arXiv:1906.00936 [nucl-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  14. [14]

    L. Du, A. Sorensen and M. Stephanov, Int. J. Mod. Phys. E33(2024) no.07, 2430008 doi:10.1142/9789811294679 0007 [arXiv:2402.10183 [nucl-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  15. [15]

    Eichmann, C

    G. Eichmann, C. S. Fischer and C. A. Welzbacher, Phys. Rev. D93(2016) no.3, 034013 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.034013 [arXiv:1509.02082 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  16. [16]

    W. j. Fu, J. M. Pawlowski and F. Ren- necke, Phys. Rev. D101(2020) no.5, 054032 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.101.054032 [arXiv:1909.02991 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  17. [17]

    A. Pandav, Precision Measurement of Net-proton Number Fluctuations in Au+Au Collisions at RHIC, Talk given at Critical Point and Onset of Deconfinement (CPOD) 2024 (May 20–24, 2024, Berkeley, CA, USA)

    2024

  18. [18]

    N. K. Glendenning, Phys. Rev. D46(1992), 1274-1287 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.46.1274

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.46.1274 1992

  19. [19]

    N. K. Glendenning and J. Schaffner-Bielich, Phys. Rev. C60(1999), 025803 doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.60.025803 [arXiv:astro-ph/9810290 [astro-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  20. [20]

    V. A. Dexheimer and S. Schramm, Phys. Rev. C 20 81(2010), 045201 doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.81.045201 [arXiv:0901.1748 [astro-ph.SR]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  21. [21]

    G. y. Shao, Phys. Lett. B704(2011), 343- 346 doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2011.09.030 [arXiv:1109.4340 [nucl-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  22. [22]

    Di Toro, A

    M. Di Toro, A. Drago, T. Gaitanos, V. Greco and A. Lavagno, Nucl. Phys. A775(2006), 102-126 doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2006.04.007 [arXiv:nucl- th/0602052 [nucl-th]]

    arXiv 2006

  23. [23]

    Di Toro, V

    M. Di Toro, V. Baran, M. Colonna, G. Ferini, T. Gai- tanos, V. Giordano, V. Greco, L. Bo, M. Zielinska- Pfabe and S. Plumari,et al.Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.62(2009), 389 doi:10.1016/j.ppnp.2008.12.038 [arXiv:0811.2880 [nucl-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  24. [24]

    Di Toro, B

    M. Di Toro, B. Liu, V. Greco, V. Baran, M. Colonna and S. Plumari, Phys. Rev. C83(2011), 014911 doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.83.014911 [arXiv:0909.3247 [nucl-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  25. [25]

    Cavagnoli, C

    R. Cavagnoli, C. Providencia and D. P. Menezes, Phys. Rev. C83(2011), 045201 doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.83.045201 [arXiv:1009.3596 [nucl-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  26. [26]

    G. Y. Shao, M. Di Toro, B. Liu, M. Colonna, V. Greco, Y. X. Liu and S. Plumari, Phys. Rev. D83(2011), 094033 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.83.094033 [arXiv:1102.4964 [nucl-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  27. [27]

    G. Y. Shao, M. Di Toro, V. Greco, M. Colonna, S. Plumari, B. Liu and Y. X. Liu, Phys. Rev. D84(2011), 034028 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.84.034028 [arXiv:1105.4528 [nucl-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  28. [28]

    R. Z. Denke and M. B. Pinto, Phys. Rev. D88 (2013) no.5, 056008 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.88.056008 [arXiv:1306.6246 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  29. [29]

    Costa, Phys

    P. Costa, Phys. Rev. D93(2016) no.11, 114035 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.114035 [arXiv:1610.06433 [nucl-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  30. [30]

    Ferreira, P

    M. Ferreira, P. Costa and C. Providˆ encia, Phys. Rev. D 98(2018) no.3, 034006 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.98.034006 [arXiv:1806.05757 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  31. [31]

    Fukushima, Phys

    K. Fukushima, Phys. Rev. D77(2008), 114028 [erratum: Phys. Rev. D78(2008), 039902] doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.77.114028 [arXiv:0803.3318 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  32. [32]

    Costa, M

    P. Costa, M. C. Ruivo, C. A. de Sousa and H. Hansen, Symmetry2(2010), 1338-1374 doi:10.3390/sym2031338 [arXiv:1007.1380 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  33. [33]

    Sorensen, D

    A. Sorensen, D. Oliinychenko, V. Koch and L. McLer- ran, Phys. Rev. Lett.127(2021) no.4, 042303 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.042303 [arXiv:2103.07365 [nucl-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  34. [34]

    Annala, T

    E. Annala, T. Gorda, A. Kurkela and A. Vuori- nen, Phys. Rev. Lett.120(2018) no.17, 172703 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.172703 [arXiv:1711.02644 [astro-ph.HE]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  35. [35]

    H. Liu, J. Xu and P. C. Chu, Phys. Rev. D105 (2022) no.4, 043015 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.105.043015 [arXiv:2202.11463 [nucl-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  36. [36]

    H. Liu, X. M. Zhang and P. C. Chu, Phys. Rev. D107 (2023) no.9, 094032 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.107.094032 [arXiv:2305.01662 [nucl-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  37. [37]

    H. Liu, Y. H. Yang, Y. Han and P. C. Chu, Phys. Rev. D108(2023) no.3, 034004 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.108.034004 [arXiv:2305.01246 [nucl-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  38. [38]

    Dutra, O

    M. Dutra, O. Louren¸ co, S. S. Avancini, B. V. Carl- son, A. Delfino, D. P. Menezes, C. Providˆ encia, S. Typel and J. R. Stone, Phys. Rev. C90 (2014) no.5, 055203 doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.90.055203 [arXiv:1405.3633 [nucl-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  39. [39]

    Fukushima, Phys

    K. Fukushima, Phys. Lett. B591(2004), 277- 284 doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2004.04.027 [arXiv:hep- ph/0310121 [hep-ph]]

    arXiv 2004

  40. [40]

    Abuki, R

    H. Abuki, R. Anglani, R. Gatto, G. Nardulli and M. Ruggieri, Phys. Rev. D78(2008), 034034 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.78.034034 [arXiv:0805.1509 [hep- ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  41. [41]

    W. j. Fu, Z. Zhang and Y. x. Liu, Phys. Rev. D77(2008), 014006 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.77.014006 [arXiv:0711.0154 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  42. [42]

    Ciminale, R

    M. Ciminale, R. Gatto, N. D. Ippolito, G. Nardulli and M. Ruggieri, Phys. Rev. D77(2008), 054023 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.77.054023 [arXiv:0711.3397 [hep- ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  43. [43]

    S. P. Klevansky, Rev. Mod. Phys.64(1992), 649-708 doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.64.649

    doi:10.1103/revmodphys.64.649 1992

  44. [44]

    Hatsuda and T

    T. Hatsuda and T. Kunihiro, Phys. Rept.247(1994), 221-367 doi:10.1016/0370-1573(94)90022-1 [arXiv:hep- ph/9401310 [hep-ph]]

    arXiv 1994

  45. [45]

    I. N. Mishustin, L. M. Satarov, H. Stoecker, and W. Greiner, Phys. Rev. C62, 034901 (2000) doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.62.034901 [hep-ph/0002148]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  46. [46]

    Bonanno and A

    L. Bonanno and A. Sedrakian, Astron. Astrophys. 539(2012), A16 doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201117832 [arXiv:1108.0559 [astro-ph.SR]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  47. [47]

    Cˆ amara Pereira, P

    R. Cˆ amara Pereira, P. Costa and C. Providˆ encia, Phys. Rev. D94(2016) no.9, 094001 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.94.094001 [arXiv:1610.06435 [nucl-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  48. [48]

    Ratti, M

    C. Ratti, M. A. Thaler and W. Weise, Phys. Rev. D73(2006), 014019 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.73.014019 [arXiv:hep-ph/0506234 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  49. [49]

    Roessner, C

    S. Roessner, C. Ratti and W. Weise, Phys. Rev. D75(2007), 034007 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.75.034007 [arXiv:hep-ph/0609281 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  50. [50]

    G. A. Lalazissis, J. Konig and P. Ring, Phys. Rev. C55(1997), 540-543 doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.55.540 [arXiv:nucl-th/9607039 [nucl-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  51. [51]

    Carriere, C

    J. Carriere, C. J. Horowitz and J. Piekarewicz, As- trophys. J.593(2003), 463-471 doi:10.1086/376515 [arXiv:nucl-th/0211015 [nucl-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  52. [52]

    C. J. Horowitz and J. Piekarewicz, Phys. Rev. Lett.86(2001), 5647 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.86.5647 [arXiv:astro-ph/0010227 [astro-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  53. [53]

    Tolos, M

    L. Tolos, M. Centelles and A. Ramos, Astrophys. J.834(2017) no.1, 3 doi:10.3847/1538-4357/834/1/3 [arXiv:1610.00919 [astro-ph.HE]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  54. [54]

    Tolos, M

    L. Tolos, M. Centelles and A. Ramos, Publ. As- tron. Soc. Austral.34, e065 doi:10.1017/pasa.2017.60 [arXiv:1708.08681 [astro-ph.HE]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  55. [55]

    W. C. Chen and J. Piekarewicz, Phys. Rev. C90 (2014) no.4, 044305 doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.90.044305 [arXiv:1408.4159 [nucl-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  56. [56]

    Danielewicz, R

    P. Danielewicz, R. Lacey and W. G. Lynch, Sci- ence298(2002), 1592-1596 doi:10.1126/science.1078070 [arXiv:nucl-th/0208016 [nucl-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  57. [57]

    Fuchs, A

    C. Fuchs, A. Faessler, E. Zabrodin and Y. M. Zheng, Phys. Rev. Lett.86(2001), 1974- 1977 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.86.1974 [arXiv:nucl- 21 th/0011102 [nucl-th]]

    arXiv 2001

  58. [58]

    W. G. Lynch, M. B. Tsang, Y. Zhang, P. Danielewicz, M. Famiano, Z. Li and A. W. Steiner, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.62(2009), 427 doi:10.1016/j.ppnp.2009.01.001 [arXiv:0901.0412 [nucl-ex]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  59. [59]

    F. J. Fattoyev, J. Piekarewicz and C. J. Horowitz, Phys. Rev. Lett.120(2018) no.17, 172702 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.172702 [arXiv:1711.06615 [nucl-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  60. [60]

    P. G. Krastev and B. A. Li, J. Phys. G46(2019) no.7, 074001 doi:10.1088/1361-6471/ab1a7a [arXiv:1801.04620 [nucl-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  61. [61]

    E. R. Most, L. R. Weih, L. Rezzolla and J. Schaffner- Bielich, Phys. Rev. Lett.120(2018) no.26, 261103 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.261103 [arXiv:1803.00549 [gr-qc]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  62. [62]

    B. P. Abbottet al.[LIGO Scientific and Virgo], Phys. Rev. Lett.119(2017) no.16, 161101 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.161101 [arXiv:1710.05832 [gr-qc]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  63. [63]

    Hempel, V

    M. Hempel, V. Dexheimer, S. Schramm and I. Iosilevskiy, Phys. Rev. C88(2013) no.1, 014906 doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.88.014906 [arXiv:1302.2835 [nucl-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  64. [64]

    G. Y. Shao, M. Colonna, M. Di Toro, B. Liu and F. Matera, Phys. Rev. D85(2012), 114017 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.85.114017 [arXiv:1202.6476 [nucl-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  65. [65]

    G. Y. Shao, M. Colonna, M. Di Toro, Y. X. Liu and B. Liu, Phys. Rev. D87(2013) no.9, 096012 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.87.096012 [arXiv:1305.1176 [nucl-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  66. [66]

    G. y. Shao, Z. d. Tang, M. Di Toro, M. Colonna, X. y. Gao and N. Gao, Phys. Rev. D94(2016) no.1, 014008 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.94.014008 [arXiv:1603.09033 [nucl-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  67. [67]

    Steiner, M

    A. Steiner, M. Prakash and J. M. Lattimer, Phys. Lett. B 486(2000), 239-248 doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(00)00780-2 [arXiv:nucl-th/0003066 [nucl-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  68. [68]

    Motta, R

    M. Motta, R. Stiele, W. M. Alberico and A. Be- raudo, Eur. Phys. J. C80(2020) no.8, 770 doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-020-8218-x [arXiv:2003.04734 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  69. [69]

    Mohanty and J

    B. Mohanty and J. e. Alam, Phys. Rev. C68(2003), 064903 doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.68.064903 [arXiv:nucl- th/0301086 [nucl-th]]

    arXiv 2003

  70. [70]

    L. N. Gao and F. H. Liu, Adv. High Energy Phys.2015(2015), 184713 doi:10.1155/2015/184713 [arXiv:1509.08603 [nucl-ex]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  71. [71]

    Adamet al.[ALICE], Phys

    J. Adamet al.[ALICE], Phys. Lett. B772 (2017), 567-577 doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2017.07.017 [arXiv:1612.08966 [nucl-ex]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  72. [72]

    Annala, T

    E. Annala, T. Gorda, A. Kurkela, J. N¨ attil¨ a and A. Vuorinen, Nature Phys.16(2020) no.9, 907-910 doi:10.1038/s41567-020-0914-9 [arXiv:1903.09121 [astro- ph.HE]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  73. [73]

    H. Liu, Y. H. Yang, C. Yuan, M. Ju, X. H. Wu and P. C. Chu, Phys. Rev. D109(2024) no.7, 074037 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.109.074037 [arXiv:2311.10059 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  74. [74]

    Kurkela, P

    A. Kurkela, P. Romatschke and A. Vuorinen, Phys. Rev. D81(2010), 105021 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.81.105021 [arXiv:0912.1856 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  75. [75]

    Annala, T

    E. Annala, T. Gorda, J. Hirvonen, O. Komoltsev, A. Kurkela, J. N¨ attil¨ a and A. Vuorinen, Nature Commun. 14(2023) no.1, 8451 doi:10.1038/s41467-023-44051-y [arXiv:2303.11356 [astro-ph.HE]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  76. [76]

    W. b. He, G. y. Shao, X. y. Gao, X. r. Yang and C. l. Xie, Phys. Rev. D105(2022) no.9, 094024 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.105.094024 [arXiv:2205.04614 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  77. [77]

    W. b. He, G. y. Shao and C. l. Xie, Phys. Rev. C107 (2023) no.1, 014903 doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.107.014903 [arXiv:2212.08263 [nucl-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  78. [78]

    M. B. Pinto, Phys. Rev. C107(2023) no.4, 045807 doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.107.045807 [arXiv:2211.11071 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  79. [79]

    Fujimoto, K

    Y. Fujimoto, K. Fukushima, L. D. McLerran and M. Praszalowicz, Phys. Rev. Lett.129(2022) no.25, 252702 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.129.252702 [arXiv:2207.06753 [nucl-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  80. [80]

    Costa, H

    P. Costa, H. Hansen, M. C. Ruivo and C. A. de Sousa, Phys. Rev. D81(2010), 016007 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.81.016007 [arXiv:0909.5124 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

Showing first 80 references.