Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 100 references

Hadron-quark phase transitions along proto-neutron-star evolution

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read In every model studied, hybrid neutron stars fall short of the maximum mass allowed by their cold equations of state.

desk verdict Careful EOS construction with a well-verified LCN isentropic scheme, but the 'no astrophysical path' headline overreaches the paper's own assumptions. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.09195 v1 pith:BRWEH3ZS submitted 2026-08-10 nucl-th astro-ph.HEgr-qc

P. Laskos-Patkos , P.S. Koliogiannis , Ch.C. Moustakidis This is my paper · ORCID
classification nucl-thastro-ph.HEgr-qc PACS 97.60.Jd26.60.-c21.65.-f
keywords proto-neutronstarhybridquark-hadronphasetransitionhotequationofstateneutrinotrappingGibbsconstructionMaxwellmaximummass
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper asks whether the hottest moments of a neutron star's life can limit how massive it can ever become once it cools. The authors compute hot hybrid equations of state — matter with both hadrons and deconfined quarks — at three proto-neutron-star stages: trapped neutrinos with entropy per baryon $S_b=1$ and lepton fraction $Y_l=0.4$; hotter, neutrino-free matter with $S_b=2$; and the cold $T=0$ endpoint. They then trace constant-rest-mass sequences through these stages and apply the turning-point stability criterion. The central claim is that, for all their models, no astrophysical path leads to the maximum-mass configurations predicted by the cold equations of state, regardless of whether electric charge is conserved locally or globally. If true, the earlier evolutionary stages set an effective upper mass limit on cold hybrid stars.

What carries the argument

The engine of the paper is the construction of hot hybrid equations of state: two hadronic parametrizations (SkI4 and Ska) are matched to a vector-bag quark model through phase-equilibrium conditions. In the sharp-interface case (local charge neutrality) the authors use a Maxwell construction but let the hadronic and quark phases carry unequal entropies per baryon, fixing each EOS by requiring equal temperatures at coexistence and validating the result with the Clausius-Clapeyron relation. In the global-charge-conservation case the Gibbs construction with a mixed phase is used instead, and the trapped-neutrino stage always uses a mixed phase because the lepton fraction is only conserved globally. Structural evolution is then followed along constant-rest-mass sequences — each star keeps a fixed baryon number while its equation of state changes from stage to stage — and the turning-point criterion identifies which configurations are stable. This constant-rest-mass map is the object that exposes the missing path to the cold maximum mass.

What would settle it

A numerical evolution that carries a star with the cold maximum-mass rest mass through the $S_b=2$ stage without dynamical instability would falsify the claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central discovery is that a proto-hybrid star's evolutionary history controls the maximum possible gravitational mass at its cold final state. Tracing constant-rest-mass sequences through the three stages, the authors find that in the local-charge-conservation case the middle, neutrino-free isentropic stage has a lower maximum rest mass than either the trapped-neutrino stage or the cold stage, so a star born heavier than that limit becomes dynamically unstable before it can cool into a cold maximum-mass configuration. In the global-charge-conservation case the cold maximum rests on a maximum rest mass that is itself unstable already at the first stage, so again no path reaches it. The finding holds for two hadronic parametrizations and two quark-model parametrizations, and it does not depend on whether electric charge is conserved locally or globally.

Load-bearing premise

The argument depends on real proto-hybrid stars evolving at fixed rest mass through the three prescribed states ($S_b=1$ with trapped neutrinos, $S_b=2$ without neutrinos, then $T=0$), with stability judged by the standard turning-point criterion; rotation, accretion, mass loss, or slow phase conversion could break this.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The cold maximum mass is not reachable by standard cooling; any hybrid star observed near that mass would require a formation path that avoids the unstable stage, for example delayed phase conversion or rotation.
  • In local-charge-conservation models the $S_b=2$ stage is the bottleneck: it has the lowest maximum rest mass, so it sets an upper bound on the final mass.
  • In global-charge-conservation models the bottleneck appears already at the trapped-neutrino stage, whose maximum rest mass lies below that of the cold maximum.
  • Thermal twin star solutions (same mass, different radii) appear in the middle stage for local charge conservation, marking the phase-transition instability.
  • The derived hot hybrid EOSs are built to satisfy thermal equilibrium (unequal phase entropies in the LCN case) and pass the Clausius-Clapeyron test, making them usable inputs for further proto-neutron-star studies.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If this bottleneck is generic across equations of state, the highest observed neutron-star mass may constrain the proto-neutron-star stage as much as the cold matter model, changing how mass measurements are used in dense-matter inference.
  • The same constant-rest-mass reasoning could lower maximum predicted masses for purely hadronic or hyperonic proto-stars, since the instability mechanism depends on the hot stages rather than on quark matter specifically.
  • Rotation, accretion, and slow phase conversion are listed by the authors as open effects; a simulation that includes them would directly test whether the bottleneck survives.
  • The order-unity entropy difference between phases in the LCN case suggests that simpler isentropic hybrid models forcing equal entropy per baryon in both phases may misestimate transition pressures and stability windows.
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 constructs hot hybrid equations of state (EOSs) describing hadron-quark phase transitions during proto-neutron-star evolution. It considers three stages: neutrino-trapped matter with entropy per baryon S_b=1 and lepton fraction Y_l=0.4, deleptonized hot matter with S_b=2, and the cold T=0 endpoint. Hadronic matter is modeled with two Skyrme interactions (SkI4, Ska) and quark matter with two vector-MIT-bag parametrizations (vMIT(a), vMIT(b)), under both local (LCN) and global (GCN) electric-charge conservation. The authors verify their numerical thermodynamics against Sommerfeld expansions and the Clausius-Clapeyron relation, solve the Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkoff equations, and study structural evolution through constant-rest-mass sequences. The central claim is that, for all models constructed, no astrophysical path leads to the maximum-mass configurations predicted by the cold EOSs, so earlier evolutionary stages can set an effective upper mass limit on cold hybrid stars.

Significance. The topic is timely and the paper contains several strengths: internal thermodynamic consistency checks via Sommerfeld expansions (Fig. 1, Fig. 3) and the Clausius-Clapeyron relation (Table I), a clear treatment of the entropy-per-baryon discontinuity in isentropic LCN constructions, and a physically motivated use of rest-mass sequences to discuss evolutionary viability. If the main conclusion were established, it would be an interesting and potentially important caveat for interpreting massive compact stars as hybrid stars: the cold EOS may allow a high maximum mass, but the intermediate protoneutron-star stage could prevent the star from ever reaching it. However, as discussed below, the conclusion as stated is broader than what the presented analysis and the paper's own caveats support.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. VII and Sec. VI (last paragraph)] The categorical statement in Sec. VII that "for all the models constructed in this study, there is no astrophysical path leading to the maximum-mass configurations predicted by the cold EOSs" is directly undercut by the authors' own qualifications in Sec. VI. There they state that for proto-compact stars out of weak equilibrium the range of gravitational stability can be extended beyond the maximum-mass configuration [89,90], that a slow phase transition can widen the dynamical stability region [91-96], and, for GCN, that out-of-equilibrium effects "could, in principle, extend the range of stability making the maximum mass configuration for the cold case a viable one." In addition, the constant-rest-mass sequences built from Eq. (47) exclude post-formation accretion, which is a standard mass-growth channel: a star could pass through the intermediate stage at a lower rest mass and later accrete up to the cold maximum mass. The conclusion therefore holds only for isolated, non-accreting stars with fast phase conversion and beta equilibrium; it is not established as a general no-path statement. The conclusion should be reworded to state precisely these conditions, or the analysis should be extended to show that these mechanisms do not open a path in the models considered.
  2. [Sec. VI (parameter choice)] The main conclusion rests on only two hand-picked quark-matter parametrizations, vMIT(a) and vMIT(b), which differ in both Gv and B (Gv=0.17 fm^-2, B^(1/4)=160 MeV vs Gv=0.3 fm^-2, B^(1/4)=165 MeV) and were chosen so that the cold LCN and GCN phase transitions occur at similar pressure. No sensitivity analysis is presented, and the wording "for all the models constructed in this study" covers only these two cases. The relative ordering of the maximum rest masses across the three stages, which is the basis of the no-path claim, could plausibly change with the stiffness of the quark phase and the transition pressure. A scan over Gv and B (or at least a discussion of how the gap between the stage-2 maximum rest mass and the cold maximum rest mass varies) is needed to determine whether the conclusion is a property of the construction scheme or an artifact of the particular parametrization pair.
  3. [Sec. VI (stability criterion)] The stability analysis relies entirely on the turning-point criterion dM/depsilon_c=0 applied to each EOS. As the authors themselves note, this criterion is not the final word for matter out of weak equilibrium or for slow phase conversion, where the stability region can be extended [89-96]. Since the central claim is about the absence of an astrophysical path, the paper should either incorporate these effects into the stability analysis or explicitly restrict the claim to the fast-conversion, beta-equilibrium limit. As written, the conclusion is a statement about the chosen stability criterion rather than about astrophysical paths in general.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Fig. 4 caption] The caption says panels (c) and (d) denote results "in the GCN scenario (local conservation of electric charge)"; this should read "global conservation of electric charge."
  2. [Fig. 5 caption] The caption states "Panels (b) and (c) Ska was used" in the description of the lower panels; the correct panels for Ska are (b) and (d).
  3. [Throughout] There are several typos and misspellings: "Claussius-Clapeyron" should be "Clausius-Clapeyron," "Sommerefeld" should be "Sommerfeld," "Specically" should be "Specifically," and "aslow" should be "a slow."
  4. [Reference [94]] Reference [94] is incomplete: it reads "P. B. Rau and A. Sedrakian, , Phys. Rev. D107, 103042 (2023)" with no article title.
  5. [Abstract vs Sec. VII] The abstract uses the appropriately cautious phrasing that earlier stages "may play a crucial role," but Sec. VII states a categorical no-path result. The language should be made consistent, with the conclusion reflecting the conditional nature of the analysis.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central rest-mass result is a numerical TOV output, not an imposed input; parameter choices are disclosed calibrations, and self-citations are not load-bearing.

full rationale

None of the load-bearing steps reduces, by construction or by self-citation, to its own inputs. The finite-temperature EOSs are derived from Skyrme Hamiltonians and the vector MIT bag model with standard beta-equilibrium and charge-neutrality conditions (Eqs. 7-9, 28-29, 45-46), and the numerical implementation is independently checked against the Sommerfeld expansion of Ref. [75] (Fig. 1). The hybrid constructions follow Maxwell and Gibbs phase-equilibrium conditions (Eqs. 37-38), and the LCN entropy offset is validated with the Clausius-Clapeyron relation (Eq. 42, Table I). The central conclusion is obtained by solving the TOV equations for each EOS and comparing constant rest-mass sequences via Eq. (47); the finding that intermediate-stage maximum rest masses lie below cold maximum rest masses is a numerical output, not an input. The vMIT(a)/vMIT(b) parameters are explicitly calibrated so that the cold phase transition occurs at a similar pressure in LCN and GCN; this disclosed choice controls the comparison but does not by itself produce the rest-mass result. The paper's caveats about out-of-equilibrium or slow-conversion stability extensions, rotation, and accretion delimit the scope of the 'no astrophysical path' statement; they concern robustness and overbreadth, not circularity. Self-citations (e.g., Refs. [7,23,46,96]) are background or related-work references and are not load-bearing for the derivation. The paper is self-contained in its numerical calculation and externally benchmarked against analytical approximations and astrophysical observations, so no circular step is exhibited.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 8 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard dense-matter models and on the adopted evolutionary staging; no new entity is proposed. The hand-selected vMIT parameters are the main free inputs, and the isentropic staging plus turning-point criterion are the main domain assumptions.

free parameters (4)
  • vMIT(a) vector coupling Gv=(gv/mV)^2 = 0.17 fm^-2
    Chosen for LCN models in this paper; no derivation or data fit.
  • vMIT(a) bag constant B^(1/4) = 160 MeV
    Chosen for LCN models.
  • vMIT(b) vector coupling Gv = 0.3 fm^-2
    Chosen for GCN models, selected to align cold phase-transition pressure with the LCN case.
  • vMIT(b) bag constant B^(1/4) = 165 MeV
    Chosen for GCN models.
assumptions (8)
  • domain assumption Skyrme density functional describes hot hadronic matter in the relevant density range.
    Used throughout Sec. II to compute the hadronic EOS.
  • domain assumption Vector MIT bag model describes deconfined quark matter in the relevant regime.
    Used in Sec. III for the quark phase.
  • domain assumption Three-stage proto-neutron-star thermodynamics (trapped, deleptonized, cold) is representative of evolution.
    Imported from Refs. [27,62,66] in Sec. V.
  • domain assumption Global lepton fraction Y_l=0.4 is conserved during the trapped stage.
    Enforced in Sec. V C via Eqs. (45) and (46).
  • domain assumption TOV equations describe hydrostatic equilibrium of proto-hybrid stars.
    Applied in Sec. VI for mass-radius relations.
  • domain assumption Constant rest mass sequences track the cooling and deleptonization evolution.
    Used in Eq. (47) and Fig. 6.
  • standard math Turning-point criterion determines secular stability for each EOS.
    Used in Sec. VI, including for hot matter where it is standard but less certain.
  • domain assumption Anti-quark contributions are negligible.
    Stated without quantitative demonstration in Sec. III.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Hadron-quark phase transitions along proto-neutron-star evolution." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/BRWEH3ZS

@misc{pith2026260809195,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Hadron-quark phase transitions along proto-neutron-star evolution},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/BRWEH3ZS}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.09195}
}
read the original abstract

The new era of multi-messenger astronomy requires the accurate and self-consistent derivation of the nuclear equation of state at high temperature. In the present work, we focused on the calculation of hot hybrid equations of state, studying the different evolution stages of a proto-neutron star with a quark matter core (proto-hybrid star). For the hadronic matter we used two distinct Skyrme effective interactions, while for quark matter the well-known vector MIT bag model was employed. To model the era of trapped neutrinos in the system we considered the global conservation of lepton fraction which resulted in an equation of state with an extended mixed phase. For periods following the neutrino diffusion phase of a proto-neutron star, the equations of state were modelled using both the Maxwell and the Gibbs construction depending on the assumption for either local or global electric-charge conservation. With the use of the derived hybrid models, we solved the Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkov equations to describe the corresponding hybrid star configurations. Finally, we investigated how the structure of proto-hybrid stars evolves, using constant rest mass sequences. We found that regardless of whether electric-charge is globally or locally conserved, the earlier stages of a hybrid star's life may play a crucial role on the determination of its maximum possible gravitational mass in later stages.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.09195 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Comparing numerical and analytical calculations for the models employed in this work. Panels (a), (b) and (c) depict the results for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Phase diagram and isentropic curves in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. The hot hybrid EOSs constructed within the Gibbs framework in the present study. In all panels the blue curves denote the Skyrme [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. All of the hybrid EOSs constructed in this study. The solid blue curves denote the cold EOSs ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Mass-radius diagrams for the EOSs presented in Fig. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Gravitational mass as a function of the rest mass for the EOSs presented in Fig. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

100 extracted references · 75 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Construction of the phase diagram using Eq. (37)

  2. [2]

    Construction of a hadronic EOS with constant entropy per baryon (Sb = 2)

  3. [3]

    Calculation of the intersection between the phase dia- gram and the derived EOS

  4. [4]

    A similar approach has been used in the work of Ref

    Construction of a quark EOS with constant entropy that intersects the point derived in the previous step. A similar approach has been used in the work of Ref. [ 53], where the authors constructed EOSs by selecting the transition temperature (i.e., the fixed temperature at which the transition occurs). It is noteworthy that there is a simple way to test th...

  5. [5]

    Schaffner-Bielich,Compact Star Physics(Cambridge Univer- sity Press, Cambridge, UK, 2020)

    J. Schaffner-Bielich,Compact Star Physics(Cambridge Univer- sity Press, Cambridge, UK, 2020)

    2020

  6. [6]

    Glendenning,Compact Stars: Nuclear Physics, Particle Physics, and General Relativity(Springer, Berlin, 2000)

    N. Glendenning,Compact Stars: Nuclear Physics, Particle Physics, and General Relativity(Springer, Berlin, 2000)

    2000

  7. [7]

    Haensel, A

    P. Haensel, A. Y . Potekhin, and D. G. Yakovlev, eds.,Neutron Stars 1: Equation of State and Structure, Astrophysics and Space Science Library, V ol. 326 (Springer, New York, 2007)

    2007

  8. [8]

    S. L. Shapiro and S. A. Teukolsky,Black Holes, White Dwarfs, and Neutron Stars: The Physics of Compact Objects(John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1983)

    1983

Show all 100 references
  1. [9]

    J. M. Lattimer and M. Prakash, Neutron star structure and the equation of state, Astrophys. J.550, 426 (2001)

    2001

  2. [10]

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

    2004

  3. [11]

    P. S. Koliogiannis, A. Kanakis-Pegios, and C. C. Moustakidis, Neutron Stars and Gravitational Waves: The Key Role of Nuclear Equation of State, Foundations , 217 (2021)

    2021

  4. [12]

    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

  5. [13]

    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). 15

    2019

  6. [14]

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

    2019

  7. [15]

    Salmi, D

    T. Salmi, D. Choudhury, Y . Kini, T. E. Riley, S. Vinciguerra, A. L. Watts, M. T. Wolff, Z. Arzoumanian, S. Bogdanov, D. Chakrabarty, K. Gendreau, S. Guillot, W. C. G. Ho, D. Hup- penkothen, R. M. Ludlam, S. M. Morsink, and P. S. Ray, The radius of the high-mass pulsar psr j07...

    2024

  8. [16]

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

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

    2024

  9. [17]

    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

  10. [18]

    Vinciguerra, T

    S. Vinciguerra, T. Salmi, A. L. Watts, D. Choudhury, T. E. Riley, P. S. Ray, S. Bogdanov, Y . Kini, S. Guillot, D. Chakrabarty, W. C. G. Ho, D. Huppenkothen, S. M. Morsink, Z. Wadiasingh, and M. T. Wolff, An Updated Mass–Radius Analysis of the 2017–2018 NICER Data Set of PSR J...

    2024

  11. [19]

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

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

    2021

  12. [20]

    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

  13. [21]

    B. P. Abbottet al.(LIGO Scientific Collaboration and Virgo Collaboration), GW170817: Observation of gravitational waves from a binary neutron star inspiral, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 161101 (2017)

    2017

  14. [22]

    B. P. Abbottet al.(The LIGO Scientific Collaboration and the Virgo Collaboration), GW170817: Measurements of neutron star radii and equation of state, Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 161101 (2018)

    2018

  15. [23]

    Nandi and P

    R. Nandi and P. Char, Hybrid Stars in the Light of GW170817, Astrophys. J.857, 12 (2018)

    2018

  16. [24]

    Monta˜na, L

    G. Monta˜na, L. Tol´os, M. Hanauske, and L. Rezzolla, Constrain- ing twin stars with GW170817, Phys. Rev. D99, 103009 (2019)

    2019

  17. [25]

    Annala, T

    E. Annala, T. Gorda, A. Kurkela, J. N ¨attil¨a, and A. Vuorinen, Evidence for quark-matter cores in massive neutron stars, Nat. Phys.16, 907 (2020)

    2020

  18. [26]

    Annala, T

    E. Annala, T. Gorda, J. Hirvonen, O. Komoltsev, A. Kurkela, J. N¨attil¨a, and A. Vuorinen, Strongly interacting matter exhibits deconfined behavior in massive neutron stars, Nat. Commun.14, 8451 (2023)

    2023

  19. [27]

    Laskos-Patkos, P

    P. Laskos-Patkos, P. S. Koliogiannis, and C. C. Moustakidis, Hybrid stars in light of the HESS J1731-347 remnant and the PREX-II experiment, Phys. Rev. D109, 063017 (2024)

    2024

  20. [28]

    J. J. Li, A. Sedrakian, and M. Alford, Hybrid Star Models in the Light of New Multimessenger Data, Astrophys. J.967, 116 (2024)

    2024

  21. [29]

    Sharifi, M

    Z. Sharifi, M. Bigdeli, D. Alvarez-Castillo, and E. Nasiri, Bi- nary neutron star mergers within kaon condensation:GW170817, Phys. Scr.96, 125311 (2021)

    2021

  22. [30]

    Veselsk´y, P

    M. Veselsk´y, P. Koliogiannis, V . Petousis, J. Leja, and C. Mous- takidis, How the HESS J1731-347 object could be explained usingK − condensation, Phys. Lett. B860, 139185 (2025)

    2025

  23. [31]

    Prakash, I

    M. Prakash, I. Bombaci, M. Prakash, P. J. Ellis, J. M. Lattimer, and R. Knorren, Composition and structure of protoneutron stars, Phys. Rep.280, 1 (1997)

    1997

  24. [32]

    J. M. Lattimer, The Equation of State of Hot Dense Matter and Supernovae, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.31, 337 (1981)

    1981

  25. [33]

    Baiotti and L

    L. Baiotti and L. Rezzolla, Binary neutron star mergers: a review of Einstein’s richest laboratory, Rep. Prog. Phys.80, 096901 (2017)

    2017

  26. [34]

    Radice, S

    D. Radice, S. Bernuzzi, and A. Perego, The Dynamics of Binary Neutron Star Mergers and GW170817, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 70, 95 (2020)

    2020

  27. [35]

    Abdikamalov, G

    E. Abdikamalov, G. Pagliaroli, and D. Radice,Handbook of Gravitational Wave Astronomy(Springer, Singapore, 2021)

    2021

  28. [36]

    Radice, V

    D. Radice, V . Morozova, A. Burrows, D. Vartanyan, and H. Na- gakura, Characterizing the Gravitational Wave Signal from Core- collapse Supernovae, Astrophys. J. Lett.876, L9 (2019)

    2019

  29. [37]

    De Pietri, A

    R. De Pietri, A. Feo, J. A. Font, F. L ¨offler, M. Pasquali, and N. Stergioulas, Numerical-relativity simulations of long-lived remnants of binary neutron star mergers, Phys. Rev. D101, 064052 (2020)

    2020

  30. [38]

    D. Q. Lamb, J. M. Lattimer, C. J. Pethick, and D. G. Ravenhall, Hot Dense Matter and Stellar Collapse, Phys. Rev. Lett.41, 1623 (1978)

    1978

  31. [39]

    Bethe, G

    H. Bethe, G. Brown, J. Applegate, and J. Lattimer, Equation of state in the gravitational collapse of stars, Nucl. Phys. A324, 487 (1979)

    1979

  32. [40]

    Brown, H

    G. Brown, H. Bethe, and G. Baym, Supernova theory, Nucl. Phys. A375, 481 (1982)

    1982

  33. [41]

    J. M. Lattimer and F. Douglas Swesty, A generalized equation of state for hot, dense matter, Nucl. Phys. A535, 331 (1991)

    1991

  34. [42]

    C. C. Moustakidis and C. P. Panos, Equation of state forβ-stable hot nuclear matter, Physical Review C79, 045806 (2009)

    2009

  35. [43]

    C. C. Moustakidis, Equation of state for dense supernova matter, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D18, 1205 (2009)

    2009

  36. [44]

    Burgio, G. F. and Schulze, H.-J., The maximum and minimum mass of protoneutron stars in the Brueckner theory, Astron. As- trophys.518, A17 (2010)

    2010

  37. [45]

    Wellenhofer, J

    C. Wellenhofer, J. W. Holt, and N. Kaiser, Thermodynamics of isospin-asymmetric nuclear matter from chiral effective field theory, Phys. Rev. C92, 015801 (2015)

    2015

  38. [46]

    Lu, Z.-H

    J.-J. Lu, Z.-H. Li, G. F. Burgio, A. Figura, and H.-J. Schulze, Hot neutron stars with microscopic equations of state, Phys. Rev. C100, 054335 (2019)

    2019

  39. [47]

    Li, J.-J

    F. Li, J.-J. Lu, Z.-H. Li, C.-Y . Chen, G. F. Burgio, and H.-J. Schulze, Accurate nuclear symmetry energy at finite temperature within a Brueckner-Hartree-Fock approach, Phys. Rev. C103, 024307 (2021)

    2021

  40. [48]

    Constantinou, B

    C. Constantinou, B. Muccioli, M. Prakash, and J. M. Lattimer, Thermal properties of supernova matter: The bulk homogeneous phase, Phys. Rev. C89, 065802 (2014)

    2014

  41. [49]

    Constantinou, B

    C. Constantinou, B. Muccioli, M. Prakash, and J. M. Lattimer, Thermal properties of hot and dense matter with finite range interactions, Phys. Rev. C92, 025801 (2015)

    2015

  42. [50]

    P. S. Koliogiannis and C. C. Moustakidis, Thermodynamical De- scription of Hot, Rapidly Rotating Neutron Stars, Protoneutron Stars, and Neutron Star Merger Remnants, Astrophys. J.912, 69 (2021)

    2021

  43. [51]

    Sedrakian and A

    A. Sedrakian and A. Harutyunyan, Equation of State and Com- position of Proto-Neutron Stars and Merger Remnants with Hy- perons, Universe7, 382 (2021)

    2021

  44. [52]

    F. M. da Silva, A. Issifu, L. C. N. Santos, T. Frederico, and D. P. Menezes, Hyperons and ∆’s in rotating protoneutron stars: Global properties, Phys. Rev. D112, 023007 (2025)

    2025

  45. [53]

    Thakur, A

    P. Thakur, A. Issifu, I. A. Rather, Y . Lim, and T. Frederico, Ra- dial and Non-Radial Oscillations of Protoneutron Stars with Hyperonic Composition (2025), arXiv:2505.24104 [nucl-th]

    2025

  46. [54]

    Drago and U

    A. Drago and U. Tambini, Finite temperature quark matter and su- pernova explosion, J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys.25, 971 (1999)

    1999

  47. [55]

    Pagliara, M

    G. Pagliara, M. Hempel, and J. Schaffner-Bielich, Quark–hadron mixed phases in protoneutron stars, J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys. 37, 094065 (2010). 16

    2010

  48. [56]

    Roark and V

    J. Roark and V . Dexheimer, Deconfinement phase transition in proto-neutron-star matter, Phys. Rev. C98, 055805 (2018)

    2018

  49. [57]

    Malfatti, M

    G. Malfatti, M. G. Orsaria, G. A. Contrera, F. Weber, and I. F. Ranea-Sandoval, Hot quark matter and (proto-) neutron stars, Phys. Rev. C100, 015803 (2019)

    2019

  50. [58]

    Roark, X

    J. Roark, X. Du, C. Constantinou, V . Dexheimer, A. W. Steiner, and J. R. Stone, Hyperons and quarks in proto-neutron stars, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.486, 5441 (2019)

    2019

  51. [59]

    Logoteta, I

    D. Logoteta, I. Bombaci, and A. Perego, Isoentropic equations of state of β-stable hadronic matter with a quark phase transition, Eur. Phys. J. A58, 55 (2022)

    2022

  52. [60]

    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

  53. [61]

    J. P. Carlomagno, G. A. Contrera, A. G. Grunfeld, and D. Blaschke, Thermal twin stars within a hybrid equation of state based on a nonlocal chiral quark model compatible with modern astrophysical observations, Phys. Rev. D109, 043050 (2024)

    2024

  54. [62]

    J. P. Carlomagno, G. A. Contrera, A. G. Grunfeld, and D. Blaschke, Hybrid Isentropic Twin Stars, Universe10, 336 (2024)

    2024

  55. [63]

    S. A. Ghaemmaghami and M. Ghazanfari Mojarrad, Hot hybrid neutron star matter within a statistical baryonic approach and the PNJL quark model, Phys. Rev. D111, 023026 (2025)

    2025

  56. [64]

    Sabatucci and A

    A. Sabatucci and A. Sedrakian, Isentropic Hybrid Stars in the Nambu–Jona-Lasinio Model: Effects of Neutrino Trapping, Par- ticles9, 61 (2026)

    2026

  57. [65]

    Kunkel, I

    S. Kunkel, I. A. Rather, H. Gholami, M. Hofmann, and J. Schaffner-Bielich, The petit four of color-superconducting phases in proto-neutron star evolution (2026), arXiv:2607.11537 [nucl-th]

    2026 arXiv

  58. [66]

    Steiner, M

    A. Steiner, M. Prakash, and J. Lattimer, Quark-hadron phase transitions in Young and old neutron stars, Phys. Lett. B486, 239 (2000)

    2000

  59. [67]

    Hempel, G

    M. Hempel, G. Pagliara, and J. Schaffner-Bielich, Conditions for phase equilibrium in supernovae, protoneutron, and neutron stars, Phys. Rev. D80, 125014 (2009)

    2009

  60. [68]

    Issifu, D

    A. Issifu, D. P. Menezes, Z. Rezaei, and T. Frederico, Proto- neutron stars with quark cores, Journal of Cosmology and As- troparticle Physics2025(01), 024

  61. [69]

    Pagliara, M

    G. Pagliara, M. Hempel, and J. Schaffner-Bielich, New possible quark-hadron mixed phase in protoneutron stars, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 171102 (2009)

    2009

  62. [70]

    Astrophys.601, A21 (2017)

    Mariani, M., Orsaria, M., and Vucetich, H., Constant entropy hybrid stars: a first approximation of cooling evolution, Astron. Astrophys.601, A21 (2017)

    2017

  63. [71]

    N. K. Glendenning, First-order phase transitions with more than one conserved charge: Consequences for neutron stars, Phys. Rev. D46, 1274 (1992)

    1992

  64. [72]

    Skyrme, The effective nuclear potential, Nuclear Physics9, 615 (1958)

    T. Skyrme, The effective nuclear potential, Nuclear Physics9, 615 (1958)

    1958

  65. [73]

    K¨ohler, Skyrme force and the mass formula, Nuclear Physics A258, 301 (1976)

    H. K¨ohler, Skyrme force and the mass formula, Nuclear Physics A258, 301 (1976)

    1976

  66. [74]

    Reinhard and H

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

    1995

  67. [75]

    Kl¨ahn and T

    T. Kl¨ahn and T. Fischer, Vector interaction enhanced bag model for astrophysical applications, Astrophys. J.810, 134 (2015)

    2015

  68. [76]

    L. L. Lopes, C. Biesdorf, K. D. Marquez, and D. P. Menezes, Modified mit bag models—part ii: Qcd phase diagram and hot quark stars, Phys. Scr.96, 065302 (2021)

    2021

  69. [77]

    L. L. Lopes, C. Biesdorf, and D. P. Menezes, Modified mit bag models—part i: Thermodynamic consistency, stability windows and symmetry group, Phys. Scr.96, 065303 (2021)

    2021

  70. [78]

    Gomes, P

    R. Gomes, P. Char, and S. Schramm, Constraining strangeness in dense matter with gw170817, Astrophys. J.877, 139 (2019)

    2019

  71. [79]

    Constantinou, B

    C. Constantinou, B. Muccioli, M. Prakash, and J. M. Lattimer, Degenerate limit thermodynamics beyond leading order for mod- els of dense matter, Annals of Physics363, 533 (2015)

    2015

  72. [80]

    W. J. Cody and J. H. C. Thacher, Rational chebyshev approxi- mations for fermi–dirac integrals of orders −1/2, 1/2, and 3/2, Mathematics of Computation21, 30 (1967)

    1967

  73. [81]

    R. O. Gomes, V . Dexheimer, S. Han, and S. Schramm, Can magnetic fields (de)stabilize twin stars?, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society485, 4873 (2019)

    2019

  74. [82]

    Jaikumar, A

    P. Jaikumar, A. Semposki, M. Prakash, and C. Constantinou, g-mode oscillations in hybrid stars: A tale of two sounds, Phys. Rev. D103, 123009 (2021)

    2021

  75. [83]

    Constantinou, S

    C. Constantinou, S. Han, P. Jaikumar, and M. Prakash, g-modes of neutron stars with hadron-to-quark crossover transitions, Phys. Rev. D104, 123032 (2021)

    2021

  76. [84]

    Constantinou, S

    C. Constantinou, S. Han, P. Jaikumar, and M. Prakash, Quasi- normal modes of neutron stars with quarks, Phys. Rev. D105, 103025 (2022)

    2022

  77. [85]

    Constantinou, T

    C. Constantinou, T. Zhao, S. Han, and M. Prakash, Framework for phase transitions between the maxwell and gibbs construc- tions, Phys. Rev. D107, 074013 (2023)

    2023

  78. [86]

    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

  79. [87]

    Z. F. Seidov, The Stability of a Star with a Phase Change in General Relativity Theory, Sov. Astron.15, 347 (1971)

    1971

  80. [88]

    Bombaci, The maximum mass of a neutron star., Astron

    I. Bombaci, The maximum mass of a neutron star., Astron. As- trophys.305, 871 (1996)

    1996

  81. [89]

    Strobel and M

    K. Strobel and M. K. Weigel, On the minimum and maximum mass of neutron stars and the delayed collapse, Astron. Astro- phys.367, 582 (2001)

    2001

  82. [90]

    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

  83. [91]

    Kumar, T

    D. Kumar, T. Malik, H. Mishra, and C. m. c. Providˆencia, Con- straints on maximum neutron star mass from protoneutron star evolution, Phys. Rev. D112, 063042 (2025)

    2025

  84. [92]

    Harrison, K

    B. Harrison, K. Thorne, M. Wakano, and J. Wheeler,Gravitation Theory and Gravitational Collapse(University of Chicago Press, 1965)

    1965

  85. [93]

    Ghosh, T

    S. Ghosh, T. Zhao, B. Kumar, and S. R. Mohanty, The role of adiabatic sound speeds in neutron star radial oscillations and stability, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys.2025(09), 025

    2025

  86. [94]

    M. O. Canullan-Pascual, G. Lugones, M. G. Orsaria, and I. F. Ranea-Sandoval, Neutron star stability beyond the mass peak: Assessing the role of out-of-equilibrium perturbations, Astro- phys. J.989, 135 (2025)

    2025

  87. [95]

    J. P. Pereira, C. V . Flores, and G. Lugones, Phase transition effects on the dynamical stability of hybrid neutron stars, Astro- phys. J.860, 12 (2018)

    2018

  88. [96]

    I. A. Rather, K. D. Marquez, B. C. Backes, G. Panotopoulos, and I. Lopes, Radial oscillations of hybrid stars and neutron stars including delta baryons: The effect of a slow quark phase transition, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys.2024(05), 130

    2024

  89. [97]

    Lugones, Recent developments in quark matter and compact stars, J

    G. Lugones, Recent developments in quark matter and compact stars, J. Phys. Conf. Ser.2536, 012008 (2023)

    2023

  90. [98]

    P. B. Rau and A. Sedrakian, , Phys. Rev. D107, 103042 (2023)

    2023

  91. [99]

    Mariani, L

    M. Mariani, L. Tonetto, M. C. Rodr´ıguez, M. O. Celi, I. F. Ranea- Sandoval, M. G. Orsaria, and A. P. Mart´ınez, Oscillating magne- tized hybrid stars under the magnifying glass of multimessenger observations, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc.512, 517 (2022). 17

    2022

  92. [100]

    Laskos-Patkos and C

    P. Laskos-Patkos and C. C. Moustakidis, Xte j1814-338: A po- tential hybrid star candidate, Phys. Rev. D111, 063058 (2025)

    2025

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.