Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 84 references

Cosmological Vacuum Decays from Schwinger-Keldysh Formalism

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper derives a Langevin-type equation of motion for the mean field of a phase transition in a radiation-dominated expanding universe, with the noise and memory kernels obtained from tracing out short-wavelength fluctuations.

desk verdict A competent but limited SK/Langevin derivation for a radiation-dominated FLRW phase transition; the formal framework is sound, but the computed kernels sit in a regime where the physics is not the vacuum decay the title points to. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.12736 v1 pith:OSA3SZ4J submitted 2026-08-13 gr-qc hep-phhep-th

Zi-Yan Yuwen This is my paper · ORCID
classification gr-qchep-phhep-th
keywords Schwinger-Keldyshformalismvacuumdecayfirst-orderphasetransitionLangevinequationnon-Markovianmemorykernelnon-Gaussiannoiseopenquantumsystemsradiation-dominatedFLRWuniverse
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

The paper sets out to describe cosmological vacuum decay—the tunnelling of an order-parameter field from a false vacuum during a first-order phase transition—as a real-time open-quantum-system problem rather than a Euclidean tunnelling calculation. It splits the phase-transition field $\Phi$ into a spatially uniform mean field $\phi$ and short-wavelength fluctuations $\sigma$, traces out $\sigma$ as an environment, and claims the resulting effective dynamics of $\phi$ is a classical Langevin-type stochastic equation with a non-Markovian memory kernel and colored, non-Gaussian noise. The memory and noise kernels are computed explicitly for a polynomial potential in a radiation-dominated FLRW universe, using the fact that the rescaled short-wavelength modes behave like plane waves with a constant mass before the critical time. A sympathetic reader should care because the derivation offers a first-principles real-time route to the stochastic dynamics of the order parameter, with dissipation and noise both traceable to the same $\sigma$ propagators, and it points toward numerical simulations of bubble nucleation and expansion without Euclidean bounce assumptions.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the influence functional $F[\phi_+,\phi_-]$ obtained by tracing over $\sigma$, reorganized into the Keldysh basis of a classical component $\phi_c$ and a difference component $\phi_\Delta$. Its quadratic terms define the retarded memory kernel $D=\Theta(\eta_1-\eta_2)\,\mathrm{Im}\,G$ and the noise kernel $N=\frac12\,\mathrm{Re}\,G$, where the $G$'s are connected correlators of composite operators built from powers of the $\sigma$ propagator; a generalized Hubbard-Stratonovich transformation then trades all $\phi_\Delta$ polynomials for a random field $\xi$ whose cumulants are exactly the $K_n$ of the effective action. In the radiation-dominated background, rescaling $\chi=a\sigma$ turns the mode equation into a flat-space form with constant mass $\tilde{m}$, so plane-wave propagators $e^{-iE_k\Delta\eta}/(2E_k)$ carry the calculation; spatial averages of their powers produce the sine and Bessel/Hankel integral kernels that appear in the final equation of motion, and a finite-volume cutoff $L$ regularizes the noise correlations through spherical Bessel functions.

What would settle it

Compute the kernels of Eqs. (3.20)–(3.50) with the exact Parabolic Cylinder mode functions (2.17) instead of plane waves near and after the critical time $\eta_0$; if the imaginary part of the spatially integrated propagator no longer matches the early-time sine form or develops growing contributions, the quantitative Langevin equation is not valid for vacuum decay, even though the formal framework could survive. A complementary lattice test would be to evolve the full $\Phi$ field in the radiation-dominated background and compare the measured noise autocorrelation of the spatially averaged field with Eq. (3.50).

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the reduced dynamics of the mean field is governed by Eq. (3.14): $\phi'' + 2H\phi' + \tilde{m}^2 \phi + \frac{a\tilde{g}}{2}\phi^2 + \frac{a^2\lambda}{6}\phi^3 + a^2 J^\mathrm{lin}_\Delta{}^\top \int_0^\eta d\eta'\, a(\eta')^4 \bar{D}(\eta,\eta') J^\mathrm{lin}_c(\eta') = a^2 \bar{\xi}(\eta)$, with $\tilde{m}=am$. The kernel $\bar{D}$ is built from the imaginary part of the $\sigma$ two-point functions, and the noise $\bar{\xi}$ has correlation functions built from their real parts. Because the potential of a phase-transition field necessarily contains cubic (and quartic) vertices, the noise is generically non-Gaussian; because $\bar{D}$ is not proportional to $\delta(\eta-\eta')$, the dynamics is non-Markovian. In the worked example of a radiation-dominated background with high-temperature mass, the tree-level kinetic contribution to the memory kernel vanishes (since $a''=0$), while the surviving tree-level and one-loop contributions are expressed in terms of elementary sines and integrals of Hankel functions. The formal structure survives a less aggressive scale split where $\phi$ carries spatial dependence, giving an equation that could be simulated to follow bubble nucleation and expansion together.

Load-bearing premise

The quantitative memory and noise kernels are computed assuming the short-wavelength fluctuations oscillate like simple plane waves, which is justified only well before the critical time when the field's squared mass turns negative; close to that time the exact modes become unstable, so the computed kernels could be wrong even though the Langevin structure might survive.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the framework is correct, the order parameter during a first-order phase transition cannot be described by a local differential equation: its acceleration at time $\eta$ depends on the whole history of $\phi$ through the convolution with $\bar{D}$, so any local approximation must be justified against the memory timescale.
  • Non-Gaussianity of the noise is not optional: it follows from the existence of at least two vacua, because the potential then contains cubic and higher vertices, so two-point noise statistics alone are insufficient to characterise the stochastic forcing.
  • The same $\sigma$ propagators determine both dissipation (imaginary part) and noise (real part), giving a concrete microscopic link between the two that could be tested by measuring the noise spectrum from simulations.
  • On coarse-graining scales much larger than the Hubble radius, the noise correlations are suppressed as $1/V$, so in that limit the effective dynamics is deterministic and the mean field stays trapped in the false vacuum; stochastic decay requires choosing a finite coarse-graining scale such as the Hubble radius.
  • Extending the split to a spatially dependent $\phi$ yields a Langevin equation for the full field, which the paper proposes as a semi-classical tool for simulating vacuum bubble nucleation and expansion simultaneously.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the Langevin description is right, the Euclidean bounce action should emerge as a limiting object: in the semiclassical limit, the most probable noise histories that drive $\phi$ out of the false vacuum should be related to the bounce configuration, giving a real-time derivation of decay rates that could be compared with instanton results.
  • The structure $D=\mathrm{Im}\,G$, $N=\frac12\mathrm{Re}\,G$ suggests a generalized fluctuation-dissipation relation in the expanding background; one could define an effective temperature from the ratio of noise to dissipation and check whether it tracks the Hubble temperature or the mass parameter.
  • The noise correlator depends on the chosen coarse-graining length $L$ (Hubble radius vs bubble radius), so predicted nucleation rates carry a scheme dependence; comparing results at different $L$ would quantify the uncertainty of the open-system reduction.
  • The oscillatory non-Markovian memory has period roughly $1/\tilde{m}$, so heavy fields cannot be treated with a Markov approximation; numerical implementations will need memory-buffer algorithms, and the paper's own caveat that non-Gaussian colored noise does not give a closed local Fokker-Planck equation marks this as a genuine barrier.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript constructs an open-quantum-system description of a real scalar order parameter undergoing a first-order phase transition in a radiation-dominated FLRW background. It splits the field Φ into a spatially homogeneous mean field φ and short-wavelength fluctuations σ, traces out σ using the Schwinger-Keldysh/in-in formalism, and derives a Langevin-type equation for φ with a non-Markov memory kernel and a generally non-Gaussian noise. For a polynomial potential with temperature-dependent mass, the influence functional is computed to second order in the σ propagators, and explicit expressions are derived for the spatially averaged memory kernel (Sec. 3.1) and for noise correlators in large- and small-scale limits (Sec. 3.2). A generalized Hubbard-Stratonovich transformation is used to represent higher powers of the quantum field φ_Δ as cumulants of a stochastic field ξ.

Significance. If the quantitative results were valid, the paper would provide a useful real-time alternative to Euclidean bounce calculations for cosmological first-order phase transitions, with computable noise and dissipation kernels that could feed into numerical simulations of bubble nucleation. The formal SK derivation, Keldysh rotation, and the generalized HS representation are competently executed and self-contained, and the paper is transparent about the plane-wave approximation and about the Markov approximation's limitations. However, the specific quantitative kernels are computed with mode functions that are invalid in the decay epoch, and the spatial averaging procedure is inconsistent with the declared short-wavelength split. These issues affect the central quantitative claims rather than the formal framework.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 2.2 and Eqs. (3.20)–(3.50)] The quantitative memory and noise kernels are all built from the plane-wave mode function (2.14), but the paper itself states after Eq. (2.17) that this is valid only for early times η0 ≫ η. In the physical regime of vacuum decay, η is near η0, where Eq. (2.16) shows a²m² = M²T0²(1 − η²/η0²) crosses zero and becomes negative; the exact Parabolic Cylinder modes (2.17) then develop the tachyonic instability that drives the decay. The plane-wave approximation removes this instability, so Eqs. (3.20)–(3.50) cannot quantitatively describe vacuum decay near η0. This is a load-bearing gap: the paper should either recompute the kernels with the exact mode functions or clearly restrict the quantitative claims to the early-time regime and adjust the title and abstract accordingly.
  2. [Sec. 3.1, Eqs. (3.12)–(3.20)] The spatial average of the propagator in Eq. (3.19) uses ∫d³r e^{ik·r} = (2π)³δ³(k), so the tree-level averaged memory kernel receives only the k = 0 contribution of the σ propagator. But σ is defined as the short-wavelength/environment part of the split in Eq. (2.3), and k = 0 belongs to the long-wavelength field φ, not to the traced-out environment. A spatially homogeneous φ couples only to the zero mode of σ, so if the environment genuinely excludes k = 0 the tree-level kernel (3.20) should vanish, and the interpretation of the volume-averaged noise in Sec. 3.2 is similarly affected. The paper never specifies the k-space cutoff or the precise definition of 'short-wavelength', so the averaging in (3.12) is not equivalent to tracing out the intended environment.
  3. [Sec. 3, Eqs. (3.8)–(3.10)] The claim that a PDF P(ξ) can always be reconstructed by matching all cumulants C_n is not generally valid: an arbitrary set of multi-time cumulants need not satisfy the positivity and moment constraints required for a stochastic process to exist. The same issue affects the generalized HS identity (3.5) when the kernel K is not positive. Since the Langevin equation (3.14) presupposes the existence of the stochastic noise ξ, the paper should either prove or construct such a process, or explicitly state that the noise is a formal device whose correlation functions are defined by the influence functional.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. 3, Eq. (3.3)] The last definition in Eq. (3.3) should read J^{nl}_Δ, not J^{nl}_c.
  2. [Sec. 3, Eq. (3.7)] The symmetric definition should be K_n(x_{π(1)}, ..., x_{π(n)}); the text currently repeats x_{π(1)} twice.
  3. [Sec. 2.2, Eq. (2.17)] The parameters γ and ν are not fully defined: γ = m/t0 uses an m that has not been specified for the exact solution, and it would help to distinguish the constant ~m² = a²m² from the time-dependent m².
  4. [Sec. 3.2, after Eq. (3.35)] The sentence beginning 'For an extended Kn, the suppression factor could be less stronger' is unclear and should be rephrased.
  5. [Throughout] There are several typos, including 'first tow terms' (should be 'first two terms') and 'It’ clear' (should be 'It is clear'), and 'the limit the limit ~m→0' (should be 'the limit ~m→0').

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

Self-contained SK derivation; no fitted inputs, load-bearing self-citations, or definitional reduction. The plane-wave mode approximation is a stated validity limitation, not circularity.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. The effective action (Eq. 3.1) is obtained by tracing the short-wavelength modes σ out of the Schwinger-Keldysh path integral, with the influence functional (Eq. 2.35) fixed by the σ propagators (Eqs. 2.20-2.22) and Wick contractions; no parameter is fitted to any target quantity and no external data enters. The memory kernel and noise kernel are respectively the imaginary and real parts of the same propagator combinations (Eq. 2.37), and the generalized Hubbard-Stratonovich transformation (Eqs. 3.5-3.10) is explicitly presented as a mathematical reconstruction of the noise PDF, with the paper noting the reconstruction is not necessarily unique. The noise statistics therefore are not an independently assumed input; they are the image of the influence functional under that transformation, which is the standard content of an open-quantum-system Langevin equation rather than a circular prediction. The only internal limitation flagged in the manuscript is in Sec. 2.2: the explicit kernels (e.g., Eqs. 3.20-3.50) use the plane-wave mode function (2.15), which the paper itself states is valid for η0 ≫ η, whereas the exact mode function (2.17) develops a tachyonic instability near η0. That is a quantitative validity gap for the vacuum-decay regime, not a circular reduction: replacing (2.15) with (2.17) would change the computed kernels but leave the formal SK/Langevin framework intact. Self-citations ([31], [45]) appear only as background references in the introduction and are not load-bearing; the results used in the derivation, such as the parity property of powers of ϕΔ and the HS transformation literature ([70], [81], [82]), are cited as external results rather than assumed by fiat. No circular step is identifiable.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The derivation is largely self-contained from the SK path integral; the main external inputs are the RD FLRW background, the high-temperature form of the potential, and the free vacuum for σ. The only free choice is the coarse-graining scale L. The load-bearing axioms are the second-order truncation of the influence functional and the use of plane-wave modes in place of the exact Parabolic Cylinder solutions; both are stated in the text. The noise field ξ is an auxiliary stochastic device with no independent physical handle.

free parameters (1)
  • coarse-graining scale L = L = η1 (Hubble radius at the later time)
    The noise correlation functions depend on an arbitrary volume cutoff L; the paper chooses L=1/H1 as a natural comoving scale (Sec. 3.2), but this choice is not derived from the theory and different choices change the noise strength (Eq. 3.35).
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption RD FLRW background with a''(η)=0 and T∝1/a, so m̃²=a²m² and g̃=ag are constant
    Used to reduce the χ action to a flat-space form (Eqs. 2.14-2.18). Fails outside radiation domination.
  • domain assumption High-temperature limit m²≃M²T² with T0 neglected
    Eq. (2.2) and following; required for m̃² to be constant.
  • domain assumption Initial state is a pure product vacuum |Ω>_φ ⊗ |Ω>_σ
    Sec. 2.1; the reduced density matrix and the influence functional are computed from this state. A thermal initial state, natural for a finite-temperature background, would give different kernels.
  • domain assumption Truncation of the influence functional at second order in ∆S_int (i.e., 1-loop and 0-loop kernels)
    Eq. (2.8); higher orders are neglected; the sunrise diagram G>^3−G<^3 is dropped in Eq. (3.33).
  • ad hoc to paper Plane-wave mode functions (2.14) instead of the exact Parabolic Cylinder solutions (2.17)
    Sec. 2.2: 'we still apply solution (2.14) in later calculations for convenience'; valid only for η0≫η, away from the tachyonic instability region where vacuum decay is relevant.
  • standard math Tadpole contributions are removed by normal ordering
    Sec. 2.2, after Eq. (2.23); standard in SK calculations.
  • ad hoc to paper The PDF P(ξ) for the generalized HS transformation exists and can reproduce all cumulants
    Sec. 3, Eqs. (3.6)-(3.10); the reconstruction is asserted but not carried out beyond the Gaussian level.
invented entities (1)
  • The stochastic noise field ξ (and its volume-averaged version ξ̄)
    purpose: Encodes the quantum fluctuations of the traced-out short-wavelength modes σ; drives the Langevin dynamics of φ.
    Auxiliary field introduced via the Hubbard-Stratonovich transformation (Eq. 3.5); its correlation functions are defined to match the influence functional, so it has no independent falsifiable handle.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Cosmological Vacuum Decays from Schwinger-Keldysh Formalism." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/OSA3SZ4J

@misc{pith2026260812736,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Cosmological Vacuum Decays from Schwinger-Keldysh Formalism},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/OSA3SZ4J}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.12736}
}
abstract

In this work, we establish a systematic framework to describe the vacuum decays in a radiation-dominated FLRW universe from the Schwinger-Keldysh formalism. By splitting the phase transition field $\Phi$ into the mean field $\phi$ and the short-wavelength modes $\sigma$ and tracing over the latter as the environment, we obtain a classical Langevin-type equation-of-motion for the mean field $\phi$, where the quantum effects are encoded in a non-Markov memory kernel and a non-Gaussian noise. As a phenomenological example, we consider a polynomial potential and study the structure of the memory kernel as well as the correlation functions of the noise term. With a less restrictive scale split by allowing $\phi$ to carry spatial dependence, further extensions remain possible to describe the whole dynamics of cosmological first-order phase transitions via numerical simulations.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

84 extracted references · 21 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    S. W. Hawking, I. G. Moss and J. M. Stewart,Bubble Collisions in the Very Early Universe,Phys. Rev. D26(1982) 2681

    1982

  2. [2]

    Witten,Cosmic Separation of Phases,Phys

    E. Witten,Cosmic Separation of Phases,Phys. Rev. D30(1984) 272–285

    1984

  3. [3]

    C. J. Hogan,Gravitational radiation from cosmological phase transitions,Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.218(1986) 629–636

    1986

  4. [4]

    Mazumdar and G

    A. Mazumdar and G. White,Review of cosmic phase transitions: their significance and experimental signatures,Rept. Prog. Phys.82(2019) 076901, [1811.01948]

    arXiv 2019

  5. [5]

    M. B. Hindmarsh, M. L¨ uben, J. Lumma and M. Pauly,Phase transitions in the early universe,SciPost Phys. Lect. Notes24(2021) 1, [2008.09136]

    arXiv 2021

  6. [6]

    Caldwell et al.,Detection of early-universe gravitational-wave signatures and fundamental physics,Gen

    R. Caldwell et al.,Detection of early-universe gravitational-wave signatures and fundamental physics,Gen. Rel. Grav.54(2022) 156, [2203.07972]

    arXiv 2022

  7. [7]

    Athron, C

    P. Athron, C. Bal´ azs, A. Fowlie, L. Morris and L. Wu,Cosmological phase transitions: From perturbative particle physics to gravitational waves,Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.135(2024) 104094, [2305.02357]

    arXiv 2024

  8. [8]

    A. G. Cohen, D. B. Kaplan and A. E. Nelson,Baryogenesis at the weak phase transition,Nucl. Phys.B349(1991) 727–742

    1991

Show all 84 references
  1. [9]

    A. G. Cohen, D. B. Kaplan and A. E. Nelson,WEAK SCALE BARYOGENESIS, Phys. Lett.B245(1990) 561–564

    1990

  2. [10]

    A. E. Nelson, D. B. Kaplan and A. G. Cohen,Why there is something rather than nothing: Matter from weak interactions,Nucl. Phys.B373(1992) 453–478

    1992

  3. [11]

    A. G. Cohen, D. B. Kaplan and A. E. Nelson,Progress in electroweak baryogenesis, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.43(1993) 27–70, [hep-ph/9302210]

    1993 arXiv

  4. [12]

    A. G. Cohen, D. B. Kaplan and A. E. Nelson,Diffusion enhances spontaneous electroweak baryogenesis,Phys. Lett.B336(1994) 41–47, [hep-ph/9406345]

    1994 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Cohen, D

    T. Cohen, D. E. Morrissey and A. Pierce,Electroweak Baryogenesis and Higgs Signatures,Phys. Rev.D86(2012) 013009, [1203.2924]

    2012 arXiv

  6. [14]

    J. Liu, L. Bian, R.-G. Cai, Z.-K. Guo and S.-J. Wang,Primordial black hole production during first-order phase transitions,Phys. Rev. D105(2022) L021303, [2106.05637]

    2022 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Hashino, S

    K. Hashino, S. Kanemura and T. Takahashi,Primordial black holes as a probe of strongly first-order electroweak phase transition,Phys. Lett. B833(2022) 137261, [2111.13099]

    2022 arXiv

  8. [16]

    M. J. Baker, M. Breitbach, J. Kopp and L. Mittnacht,Primordial black holes from first-order cosmological phase transitions,Phys. Lett. B868(2025) 139625, [2105.07481]. – 21 –

    2025 arXiv

  9. [17]

    M. J. Baker, M. Breitbach, J. Kopp and L. Mittnacht,Detailed calculation of primordial black hole formation during first-order cosmological phase transitions, Phys. Rev. D111(2025) 063544, [2110.00005]

    2025 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Kawana and K.-P

    K. Kawana and K.-P. Xie,Primordial black holes from a cosmic phase transition: The collapse of Fermi-balls,Phys. Lett. B824(2022) 136791, [2106.00111]

    2022 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Jinno, J

    R. Jinno, J. Kume and M. Yamada,Super-slow phase transition catalyzed by BHs and the birth of baby BHs,Phys. Lett. B849(2024) 138465, [2310.06901]

    2024 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Wang, Y.-l

    H. Wang, Y.-l. Zhang and T. Suyama,Nearly Monochromatic Primordial Black Holes as total Dark Matter from Bubble Collapse,2510.19233

  13. [21]

    Ning, X.-X

    Z. Ning, X.-X. Zeng, R.-G. Cai and S.-J. Wang,Numerical simulations of primordial black hole formation via delayed first-order phase transitions,2601.21878

    arXiv

  14. [22]

    C. J. Hogan,Magnetohydrodynamic Effects of a First-Order Cosmological Phase Transition,Phys. Rev. Lett.51(1983) 1488–1491

    1983

  15. [23]

    J. M. Quashnock, A. Loeb and D. N. Spergel,Magnetic Field Generation During the Cosmological QCD Phase Transition,Astrophys. J. Lett.344(1989) L49–L51

    1989

  16. [24]

    Vachaspati,Magnetic fields from cosmological phase transitions,Phys

    T. Vachaspati,Magnetic fields from cosmological phase transitions,Phys. Lett.B265 (1991) 258–261

    1991

  17. [25]

    Cheng and A

    B.-l. Cheng and A. V. Olinto,Primordial magnetic fields generated in the quark - hadron transition,Phys. Rev.D50(1994) 2421–2424

    1994

  18. [26]

    G. Baym, D. Bodeker and L. D. McLerran,Magnetic fields produced by phase transition bubbles in the electroweak phase transition,Phys. Rev.D53(1996) 662–667, [hep-ph/9507429]

    1996 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Kamionkowski, A

    M. Kamionkowski, A. Kosowsky and M. S. Turner,Gravitational radiation from first order phase transitions,Phys. Rev. D49(1994) 2837–2851, [astro-ph/9310044]

    1994 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Jinno and M

    R. Jinno and M. Takimoto,Gravitational waves from bubble collisions: An analytic derivation,Phys. Rev.D95(2017) 024009, [1605.01403]

    2017 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Hindmarsh,Sound shell model for acoustic gravitational wave production at a first-order phase transition in the early Universe,Phys

    M. Hindmarsh,Sound shell model for acoustic gravitational wave production at a first-order phase transition in the early Universe,Phys. Rev. Lett.120(2018) 071301, [1608.04735]

    2018 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Hindmarsh and M

    M. Hindmarsh and M. Hijazi,Gravitational waves from first order cosmological phase transitions in the Sound Shell Model,JCAP1912(2019) 062, [1909.10040]

    2019 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Cai, S.-J

    R.-G. Cai, S.-J. Wang and Z.-Y. Yuwen,Hydrodynamic sound shell model,Phys. Rev. D108(2023) L021502, [2305.00074]

    2023 arXiv

  24. [32]

    H.-K. Guo, K. Sinha, D. Vagie and G. White,Phase Transitions in an Expanding Universe: Stochastic Gravitational Waves in Standard and Non-Standard Histories, JCAP01(2021) 001, [2007.08537]

    2021 arXiv

  25. [33]

    S. R. Coleman,The Fate of the False Vacuum. 1. Semiclassical Theory,Phys. Rev. D15(1977) 2929–2936. – 22 –

    1977

  26. [34]

    C. G. Callan, Jr. and S. R. Coleman,The Fate of the False Vacuum. 2. First Quantum Corrections,Phys. Rev. D16(1977) 1762–1768

    1977

  27. [35]

    A. D. Linde,Fate of the False Vacuum at Finite Temperature: Theory and Applications,Phys. Lett. B100(1981) 37–40

    1981

  28. [36]

    A. D. Linde,Decay of the False Vacuum at Finite Temperature,Nucl. Phys. B216 (1983) 421

    1983

  29. [37]

    S. R. Coleman and F. De Luccia,Gravitational Effects on and of Vacuum Decay, Phys. Rev. D21(1980) 3305

    1980

  30. [38]

    S. W. Hawking and I. G. Moss,Supercooled Phase Transitions in the Very Early Universe,Phys. Lett. B110(1982) 35–38

    1982

  31. [39]

    I. G. Moss,BLACK HOLE BUBBLES,Phys. Rev. D32(1985) 1333

    1985

  32. [40]

    W. A. Hiscock,CAN BLACK HOLES NUCLEATE VACUUM PHASE TRANSITIONS?,Phys. Rev. D35(1987) 1161–1170

    1987

  33. [41]

    Gregory, I

    R. Gregory, I. G. Moss and B. Withers,Black holes as bubble nucleation sites,JHEP 03(2014) 081, [1401.0017]

    2014 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Burda, R

    P. Burda, R. Gregory and I. Moss,Gravity and the stability of the Higgs vacuum, Phys. Rev. Lett.115(2015) 071303, [1501.04937]

    2015 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Burda, R

    P. Burda, R. Gregory and I. Moss,Vacuum metastability with black holes,JHEP08 (2015) 114, [1503.07331]

    2015 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Mukaida and M

    K. Mukaida and M. Yamada,False Vacuum Decay Catalyzed by Black Holes,Phys. Rev. D96(2017) 103514, [1706.04523]

    2017 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Yuwen, R.-G

    Z.-Y. Yuwen, R.-G. Cai and S.-J. Wang,Vacuum bubbles from cosmic ripples, 2604.01516

    arXiv

  38. [46]

    Tanizaki and T

    Y. Tanizaki and T. Koike,Real-time Feynman path integral with Picard–Lefschetz theory and its applications to quantum tunneling,Annals Phys.351(2014) 250–274, [1406.2386]

    2014 arXiv

  39. [47]

    W.-Y. Ai, B. Garbrecht and C. Tamarit,Functional methods for false vacuum decay in real time,JHEP12(2019) 095, [1905.04236]

    2019 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Z.-G. Mou, P. M. Saffin and A. Tranberg,Quantum tunnelling, real-time dynamics and Picard-Lefschetz thimbles,JHEP11(2019) 135, [1909.02488]

    2019 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Nishimura, K

    J. Nishimura, K. Sakai and A. Yosprakob,A new picture of quantum tunneling in the real-time path integral from Lefschetz thimble calculations,JHEP09(2023) 110, [2307.11199]

    2023 arXiv

  42. [50]

    J. S. Schwinger,Brownian motion of a quantum oscillator,J. Math. Phys.2(1961) 407–432

    1961

  43. [51]

    L. V. Keldysh,Diagram Technique for Nonequilibrium Processes,Sov. Phys. JETP 20(1965) 1018–1026. – 23 –

    1965

  44. [52]

    Weinberg,Quantum contributions to cosmological correlations,Phys

    S. Weinberg,Quantum contributions to cosmological correlations,Phys. Rev. D72 (2005) 043514, [hep-th/0506236]

    2005 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Weinberg,Quantum contributions to cosmological correlations

    S. Weinberg,Quantum contributions to cosmological correlations. II. Can these corrections become large?,Phys. Rev. D74(2006) 023508, [hep-th/0605244]

    2006 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Kamenev and A

    A. Kamenev and A. Levchenko,Keldysh technique and nonlinear sigma-model: Basic principles and applications,Adv. Phys.58(2009) 197, [0901.3586]

    2009 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Polkovnikov,Phase Space Representation of Quantum Dynamics,Annals Phys

    A. Polkovnikov,Phase Space Representation of Quantum Dynamics,Annals Phys. 325(2010) 1790–1852, [0905.3384]

    2010 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Calzetta, A

    E. Calzetta, A. Roura and E. Verdaguer,Stochastic description for open quantum systems,Physica A319(2003) 188–212, [quant-ph/0011097]

    2003 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Calzetta, A

    E. Calzetta, A. Roura and E. Verdaguer,Dissipation, noise and vacuum decay in quantum field theory,Phys. Rev. Lett.88(2002) 010403, [hep-ph/0101052]

    2002 arXiv

  50. [58]

    M. P. Hertzberg and M. Yamada,Vacuum Decay in Real Time and Imaginary Time Formalisms,Phys. Rev. D100(2019) 016011, [1904.08565]

    2019 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Finelli, G

    F. Finelli, G. Marozzi, A. A. Starobinsky, G. P. Vacca and G. Venturi,Generation of fluctuations during inflation: Comparison of stochastic and field-theoretic approaches,Phys. Rev. D79(2009) 044007, [0808.1786]

    2009 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Lopez Nacir, R

    D. Lopez Nacir, R. A. Porto, L. Senatore and M. Zaldarriaga,Dissipative effects in the Effective Field Theory of Inflation,JHEP01(2012) 075, [1109.4192]

    2012 arXiv

  53. [61]

    Perreault Levasseur,Lagrangian formulation of stochastic inflation: Langevin equations, one-loop corrections and a proposed recursive approach,Phys

    L. Perreault Levasseur,Lagrangian formulation of stochastic inflation: Langevin equations, one-loop corrections and a proposed recursive approach,Phys. Rev. D88 (2013) 083537, [1304.6408]

    2013 arXiv

  54. [62]

    Moss and G

    I. Moss and G. Rigopoulos,Effective long wavelength scalar dynamics in de Sitter, JCAP05(2017) 009, [1611.07589]

    2017 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Christodoulidis and J.-O

    P. Christodoulidis and J.-O. Gong,Gravitational open effective field theory of inflation,2512.21234

  56. [64]

    Yokoyama,Fate of oscillating scalar fields in the thermal bath and their cosmological implications,Phys

    J. Yokoyama,Fate of oscillating scalar fields in the thermal bath and their cosmological implications,Phys. Rev. D70(2004) 103511, [hep-ph/0406072]

    2004 arXiv

  57. [65]

    Miyamoto, H

    Y. Miyamoto, H. Motohashi, T. Suyama and J. Yokoyama,Langevin description of gauged scalar fields in a thermal bath,Phys. Rev. D89(2014) 085037, [1308.4794]

    2014 arXiv

  58. [66]

    Kaplanek, M

    G. Kaplanek, M. Mylova and A. J. Tolley,Gauging Open EFTs from the top down, 2512.17089

    arXiv

  59. [67]

    Kaplanek, M

    G. Kaplanek, M. Mylova and A. J. Tolley,Schwinger-Keldysh Path Integral for Gauge theories,2604.26941

    arXiv

  60. [68]

    W.-Y. Ai, M. Carosi, B. Garbrecht, C. Tamarit and M. Vanvlasselaer,Bubble wall dynamics from nonequilibrium quantum field theory,JHEP08(2025) 077, [2504.13725]. – 24 –

    2025 arXiv

  61. [69]

    Quiros,Finite temperature field theory and phase transitions, inICTP Summer School in High-Energy Physics and Cosmology, pp

    M. Quiros,Finite temperature field theory and phase transitions, inICTP Summer School in High-Energy Physics and Cosmology, pp. 187–259, 1, 1999. hep-ph/9901312

    1999 arXiv

  62. [70]

    Colas,Lectures on Open Effective Field Theories, 9, 2025.2510.00140

    T. Colas,Lectures on Open Effective Field Theories, 9, 2025.2510.00140

    2025

  63. [71]

    R. P. Feynman and F. L. Vernon, Jr.,The Theory of a general quantum system interacting with a linear dissipative system,Annals Phys.24(1963) 118–173

    1963

  64. [72]

    Donath and E

    Y. Donath and E. Pajer,The in-out formalism for in-in correlators,JHEP07 (2024) 064, [2402.05999]

    2024 arXiv

  65. [73]

    X. Chen, Y. Wang and Z.-Z. Xianyu,Loop Corrections to Standard Model Fields in Inflation,JHEP08(2016) 051, [1604.07841]

    2016 arXiv

  66. [74]

    X. Chen, Y. Wang and Z.-Z. Xianyu,Standard Model Background of the Cosmological Collider,Phys. Rev. Lett.118(2017) 261302, [1610.06597]

    2017 arXiv

  67. [75]

    X. Chen, Y. Wang and Z.-Z. Xianyu,Schwinger-Keldysh Diagrammatics for Primordial Perturbations,JCAP12(2017) 006, [1703.10166]

    2017 arXiv

  68. [76]

    Boyanovsky,Effective Field Theory out of Equilibrium: Brownian quantum fields, New J

    D. Boyanovsky,Effective Field Theory out of Equilibrium: Brownian quantum fields, New J. Phys.17(2015) 063017, [1503.00156]

    2015 arXiv

  69. [77]

    Kamenev,Field Theory of Non-Equilibrium Systems

    A. Kamenev,Field Theory of Non-Equilibrium Systems. Cambridge University Press, 2011

    2011

  70. [78]

    Alvestad, A

    D. Alvestad, A. Rothkopf and D. Sexty,Real time simulations of scalar fields with kernelled complex Langevin equation, in41st International Symposium on Lattice Field Theory, 2, 2025.2502.20876

    2025

  71. [79]

    R. L. Stratonovich,On a Method of Calculating Quantum Distribution Functions, Soviet Physics Doklady2(July, 1957) 416

    1957

  72. [80]

    Hubbard,Calculation of partition functions,Phys

    J. Hubbard,Calculation of partition functions,Phys. Rev. Lett.3(1959) 77–80

    1959

  73. [81]

    Chakrabarty, J

    B. Chakrabarty, J. Chakravarty, S. Chaudhuri, C. Jana, R. Loganayagam and A. Sivakumar,Nonlinear Langevin dynamics via holography,JHEP01(2020) 165, [1906.07762]

    2020 arXiv

  74. [82]

    S. A. Salcedo, T. Colas and E. Pajer,The open effective field theory of inflation, JHEP10(2024) 248, [2404.15416]

    2024 arXiv

  75. [83]

    G. A. Athanassoulis and K. I. Mamis,Extensions of the novikov–furutsu theorem, obtained by using volterra functional calculus,Physica Scripta94(aug, 2019) 115217, [1811.06579]

    2019 arXiv

  76. [84]

    G. A. Athanassoulis, N. P. Nikoletatos-Kekatos and K. I. Mamis,A systematic path to non-markovian dynamics ii: Probabilistic response of nonlinear multidimensional systems to gaussian colored noise excitation,Journal of Statistical Physics193 (2026) 84, [2405.10236]. – 25 –

    2026 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.