Reformulation of the pionless effective field theory for practical few- and many-body applications

Cameron P. Shotwell; Roland C. Farrell; Silas R. Beane; Ubirajara van Kolck

REVIEW

Reformulation of the pionless effective field theory for practical few- and many-body applications

Silas R. Beane, Roland C. Farrell, Cameron P. Shotwell, Ubirajara van Kolck

Nuclear Theory · Submitted 21 Oct 2026 · 75 references

Pith's verdict: EPT gives you soft, separable potentials that fit NN phase shifts well and are perturbative for many-body work, but the extension past 200 MeV is phenomenological and the central perturbativity claim is less ironclad than the paper suggests.

T0 · AI review

How this review was made: An AI referee (deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash) read the paper on October 22, 2026 and answered a fixed list of questions about it. T0 is the starting level every paper gets. The levels describe how deeply Pith has checked the paper, never the authors.

T0 AI review An AI read the paper and answered a fixed list of questions.
T1 Audit Automatic checks that the references and files the paper relies on exist and match.
T2 Compute The paper's code or calculations re-run with the same results.
T3 Formal statement The claims written out in a formal math language a computer can read.
T4 Proof Those claims proved, and the proof checked by computer.

How Pith checks papers →

· 2 major objections · 8 minor · Ask about this paper · The compiled record · Read the full review →

Challenge this review Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗

Cite ▾

arXiv ID2610.29077 (version 1)

Pith IDL7LYMXYI, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review

CitationCameron P. Shotwell, Roland C. Farrell, Silas R. Beane, Ubirajara van Kolck. "Reformulation of the pionless effective field theory for practical few- and many-body applications." arXiv:2610.29077 (2026). https://pith.science/paper/L7LYMXYI

Cite this reviewBibTeX for Pith's review of this paper

Claim paper

Why Pith says this

Highlight any text to comment on it.

Editor's note

read the letter

The paper delivers what it promises: a clean construction of separable, momentum-dependent potentials that reproduce the effective-range expansion order-by-order, in any partial wave, with or without coupling. The RG analysis connecting the minimal potentials to standard pionless EFT power counting is a nice piece of formalism. The Weinberg eigenvalue plots are the most useful part — they show that most of these potentials are genuinely soft, which is a real selling point for many-body practitioners. The asymptotic D/S ratio for the deuteron (Table I) is a genuine prediction, though convergence is slow.

The soft spots are real. The extension to 405 MeV builds on the approximation that pion branch cuts can be represented by a handful of simple poles. The paper says this is 'not unreasonable' and claims it is no worse than uncontrolled cutoffs in chiral EFT, but it does not test convergence by adding more poles and checking stability. The stress test worry — that perturbativity is a selection effect rather than a generic property of the ERE — is partly addressed by the authors' conscious choice among phase-equivalent potentials, but it would be stronger if they showed a systematic criterion for when the pole parameters yield a perturbative potential. The fits themselves are refits of ERE parameters determined from the same data, so the phase-shift 'predictions' inside the fit window are essentially rebinning. That is not a flaw — it is the method — but it means the validation is weaker than an independent-blind prediction would be.

Who should read this? People who do many-body calculations with contact forces and want a pre-packaged, perturbative NN interaction. The supplemented version up to 405 MeV is useful as a phenomenological interaction even if the EFT justification is thinner there. It deserves a serious referee. I would recommend acceptance after the authors add a brief convergence study for the pole approximation beyond M_pi/2 — even just showing that adding one more pole does not significantly change phase shifts or Weinberg eigenvalues in a few representative channels. That would address the stress-test concern cleanly.

Referee report

Significance

If the central claims hold, EPT provides a practical tool for few- and many-body calculations with controlled errors. By constructing potentials that are both exactly phase-equivalent to a given ERE order and soft enough to be treated perturbatively, the framework addresses a long-standing tension in pionless EFT: the need to sum large effective ranges to all orders while retaining a simple Schrödinger-equation form. The perturbativity demonstrated via Weinberg eigenvalues up to 405 MeV is a notable result; it suggests that the Born series can converge in channels where naïve estimates would fail. The explicit construction of potentials with amplitude zeros (re-summed ERE) is also a practical advance. The paper is carefully argued, with a clear separation of assumed contact-force structure (rational S-matrix) from the subsequent derivations, and the limitations of the pole approximation for k > M_π/2 are stated.

Major objections (2)

[Section VII.A and Figs. 6–7] The extension of EPT to momenta above M_π/2 (k up to 405 MeV) relies on approximating the physical branch cuts by simple poles. The manuscript acknowledges this (b399) and claims that the approximation “can be made arbitrarily precise” (b473), but no systematic convergence test is provided. Figures 8–10 show fits at a few fixed pole counts, but there is no study demonstrating that increasing the number of poles systematically reduces the deviation from the empirical phase shifts. I request either a brief convergence study (e.g., comparing fits with 3, 4, 5 poles in a representative channel) or an explicit estimate of the uncertainty induced by the pole approximation, which is currently missing from the error budget of Section VII.
[Section VI.C, Table II] Several channels exhibit best-fit effective-range parameters that are unnaturally large (e.g., r = 460 MeV for 3D3 at N3LO, r = 80 MeV for 3F4). The paper notes that higher-order parameters can vary widely while maintaining phase equivalence (b362), but given the naturalness assumptions of EFT, these values raise questions about the convergence of the ERE in those channels. Please clarify whether these parameters are consistent with the expected power-counting estimates, and whether the phase shifts remain stable under small variations of these large parameters.

Minor objections (8)

[Eq. (10)] The expression for v_{n',ℓ} in terms of the elementary symmetric polynomials may have a sign ambiguity; please verify that it matches the standard ERE convention (e.g., Ref. [62] or the Nijmegen group’s definitions).
[Section III.B] The minimal p-wave potential is shown to require a_1 < 0 if r_1 ≥ 0. The text later explains (Section V.A.3) that channels with a_1 > 0 (1P1, 3P1) need two redundant poles. Adding a brief forward reference to that discussion when Eq. (23) is first introduced would improve readability.
[Figs. 2, 3, 8, 9] The axis labels in the provided text appear with unicode substitution codes (e.g., “/uni00000013”). These should be replaced with proper mathematical notation (e.g., δ_0(k) in degrees) in the final manuscript.
[Section V.A.2] The 3P0 channel is listed as first non-vanishing at NLO; the text should explicitly note that LO gives a vanishing amplitude (as the minimal ERE starts at O(k^3)), so NLO is indeed the lowest nontrivial order. A brief sentence would suffice.
[Section VI.B] The uncertainty estimation for coupled channels approximates the Jacobian by its decoupling limit (b305). While the paper notes that corrections are O(1), a brief justification (e.g., that ϵ_J is small enough in the fitted range) would strengthen the argument.
[Section III.B] The term “redundant pole” is introduced; it would be helpful to define it explicitly at first use (e.g., “a pole in the form factor that is not a physical bound-state or resonance pole, but is required to generate a given ERE”).
[Table II] The unit of the off-diagonal scattering length a_02 in the 3S1-3D1 channel is given as fm^3; please verify that this is consistent with the convention k^{ℓ+ℓ'+1} M_{ℓ,ℓ'} = -a_{ℓ,ℓ'}^{-1} + ... .
[Refs. [26,27,70]] These references are listed as preprints (2026). If they have appeared in peer-reviewed venues, please update the citations.

How Pith checks papers → · Full audit of this paper →

The paper

The paper claims

A reformulation of pionless effective field theory uses momentum-dependent separable potentials that reproduce the effective-range expansion to any fixed order and are perturbative for few- and many-body applications.

The reading

This paper introduces Effective Pole Theory (EPT), a reformulation of pionless effective field theory (EFT(π/)) that replaces the usual derivative expansion of local operators with a family of momentum-dependent, separable, non-local potentials. These potentials are designed to reproduce the effective-range expansion (ERE) exactly to any fixed order in any partial wave, with the S-matrix being a rational function whose poles are permuted by a symmetry that simplifies the inverse problem. The central claim is that with enough poles, the resulting potentials are weak (have Weinberg eigenvalues with magnitude less than one) over momenta up to at least 405 MeV, except in channels with bound states, and therefore provide a practical, perturbative input for many-body calculations. A second key claim is that by including zeros of the scattering amplitude, EPT can be smoothly extended beyond the pion mass to describe nucleon-nucleon phase shifts up to pion-production threshold. A sympathetic reader would care because this construction gives a systematic, parameter-free way to incorporate large effective ranges and higher-order shape parameters without losing the renormalization-group benefits of contact EFT, and offers a route to controlled calculations of nuclear matter and other many-body observables.

What carries the argument

The central machinery is the rational S-matrix construction: the S-matrix element in each partial wave is written as a ratio of polynomials S(k) = ∏_j (γ_j - ik)/(γ_j + ik), with d = max(2ℓ+1, 2n) poles. The underlying potential is taken to be rank-one separable, V_ℓ(p,p') = g_ℓ G_ℓ(p) G_ℓ(p'), with a form factor G_ℓ(p) = p^ℓ ∏_{j=1}^{m+ℓ} ($γ_j^{2}$ + $p^{2}$)^{-1/2} that encodes the redundant poles (those that appear in the potential but are generated dynamically by the Lippmann-Schwinger equation). This choice ensures the integral equation can be solved algebraically. The essential identity is the relation between the effective-range parameters and the elementary symmetric polynomials (ESPs) of the pole positions, e.g., a_ℓ = (-1)^ℓ e_d(d-(2ℓ+1)) / e_d(d). The permutation symmetry of the S-matrix under S_d then provides a family of phase-equivalent potentials. The Weinberg eigenvalue η(k) = 1 + (M k/4π) V(k,k) (cot δ(k) - i) is used as a diagnostic of perturbativity: the work argues that for the fitted EPT potentials, |η(k)| < 1 for all k ≤ 405 MeV in channels without bound states, and even in channels with bound states the magnitude decreases as more poles are added.

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper establishes that one can define a family of rank-one separable potentials (EPT potentials) whose on-shell form is specified by a fixed number of S-matrix poles {γ_j} and, when needed, a zero at momentum k*. These potentials exactly reproduce the effective-range expansion truncated at a given order, including coupled channels, via the S_d permutation symmetry of the rational S-matrix. The key result is that for all partial waves up to f-waves, fits to the Nijmegen partial-wave analysis show that the largest Weinberg eigenvalue is comfortably below 1 for momenta up to 405 MeV (except in the 3S1 channel, which hosts the deuteron bound state). This demonstrates that the potentials are perturbative in the quantum-mechanical sense, making them suitable for systematic many-body perturbation theory. The paper further shows that by including amplitude zeros, the ERE can be resummed to extend the reach of the contact interaction description to momenta where pion-production threshold effects become important, providing accurate phase shifts up to that point.

Load-bearing premise

The underlying interaction is strictly contact, so the S-matrix is exactly a rational function with a finite number of simple poles (Equation 7); this is justified at scales below the pion mass, but for momenta above M_π/2 the pion branch cuts are approximated by simple poles, and the number of poles needed to reproduce the detailed energy dependence up to 405 MeV is not rigorously derived.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Many-body nuclear calculations (e.g., neutron matter, superfluid gaps) can now use these weak, separable potentials in perturbative many-body theory, reducing the need for costly nonperturbative resummations.
The systematic EPT power counting provides a practical alternative to standard EFT(π/) expansions, naturally accommodating large effective ranges without promoting operators manually.
The extension to 405 MeV suggests that EFT(π/) can be pushed farther than its nominal breakdown scale (∼ M_π/2) by approximating pion branch cuts with poles, potentially simplifying chiral EFT calculations in some regimes.
The explicit construction of phase-equivalent potentials via the S_d symmetry allows one to test the sensitivity of three-body and many-body observables to off-shell details, guiding the role of three-body forces.

Reading between the lines

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

If the EPT potentials remain perturbative when used in three-body Skornyakov–Ter-Martirosian-type equations, they could provide a controlled framework for three-nucleon observables without the complications of energy-dependent interactions.
The success of the simple pole approximation for branch cuts up to 405 MeV suggests that, for many practical purposes, the detailed analytic structure beyond the first branch cut may be less important than the low-momentum effective-range parameters; this could be tested by comparing EPT predictions with chiral EFT results in the same momentum window.
A natural testable extension is to compute the neutron-neutron scattering cross section using the s-wave EPT potential and compare to future experimental data; failure would indicate that the pole approximation for the two-pion exchange cut is insufficient at low energies.
The method of adding auxiliary shape parameters to cure pathological asymptotic behavior (e.g., in the 1S0 channel) implicitly defines a family of potentials that are arbitrarily close to the original ERE; one could check whether the three-body binding energy depends smoothly on these auxiliary parameters, as the paper's logic requires.

Original abstract

The effective field theory (EFT) of contact forces which describes few-nucleon systems at distance scales larger than the pion Compton wavelength ${\rm EFT}({\pi\hskip-0.54em /})$ can be defined in terms of momentum-dependent potentials that contain a fixed number of simple poles and generate the effective-range expansion to a given fixed order. These potentials provide a practical generalization of the standard ${\rm EFT}({\pi\hskip-0.54em /})$ power-counting scheme which, for instance, naturally accounts for the large effective ranges in the s-wave channels. Nucleon-nucleon phase shifts computed in this formulation of ${\rm EFT}({\pi\hskip-0.54em /})$ are compared to modern phase-shift analyses, and effective-range parameters are tabulated. The ${\rm EFT}({\pi\hskip-0.54em /})$ potentials, which provide a rational approximation of the S-matrix, are easily extended into the regime of pion physics through the inclusion of additional S-matrix poles and zeros, and provide an accurate description of data up to pion-production threshold. The potentials in this scheme are in an important sense weak over all relevant distance scales, and are therefore of utility for systematic calculations of many-nucleon observables.

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged, kept beside the review and separate from it. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Compiled by classifier-1.13.0 via TypeSafe API, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-10-22: 1 request, 4,656 input tokens.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.04 · states limitation 0.16 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.13 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.15 · compares with prior results 0.87 · mentions code or data availability 0.02.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v1. Results and the main claim are underlined; show every role.

The effective field theory (EFT) of contact forces which describes few-nucleon systems at distance scales larger than the pion Compton wavelength ${\rm EFT}({\pi\hskip-0.54em /})$ can be defined in terms of momentum-dependent potentials that contain a fixed number of simple poles and generate the effective-range expansion to a given fixed order. These potentials provide a practical generalization of the standard ${\rm EFT}({\pi\hskip-0.54em /})$ power-counting scheme which, for instance, naturally accounts for the large effective ranges in the s-wave channels. Nucleon-nucleon phase shifts computed in this formulation of ${\rm EFT}({\pi\hskip-0.54em /})$ are compared to modern phase-shift analyses, and effective-range parameters are tabulated. The ${\rm EFT}({\pi\hskip-0.54em /})$ potentials, which provide a rational approximation of the S-matrix, are easily extended into the regime of pion physics through the inclusion of additional S-matrix poles and zeros, and provide an accurate description of data up to pion-production threshold. The potentials in this scheme are in an important sense weak over all relevant distance scales, and are therefore of utility for systematic calculations of many-nucleon observables.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#	sentence	role	the authors' own work	states the main conclusion	strength
s0	The effective field theory (EFT) of contact forces which describes few-nucleon systems at distance scales larger than the pion Compton wavelength ${\rm EFT}({\pi\hskip-0.54em /})$ can be defined in terms of momentum-dependent potentials that contain a fixed number of simple poles and generate the effective-range expansion to a given fixed order.	contribution 0.44	0.26	0.15	asserted 0.99
s1	These potentials provide a practical generalization of the standard ${\rm EFT}({\pi\hskip-0.54em /})$ power-counting scheme which, for instance, naturally accounts for the large effective ranges in the s-wave channels.	interpretation 0.73	0.42	0.16	asserted 0.96
s2	Nucleon-nucleon phase shifts computed in this formulation of ${\rm EFT}({\pi\hskip-0.54em /})$ are compared to modern phase-shift analyses, and effective-range parameters are tabulated.	result 0.50	0.90	0.08	asserted 0.98
s3	The ${\rm EFT}({\pi\hskip-0.54em /})$ potentials, which provide a rational approximation of the S-matrix, are easily extended into the regime of pion physics through the inclusion of additional S-matrix poles and zeros, and provide an accurate description of data up to pion-production threshold.	result 0.42	0.66	0.25	asserted 1.00
s4	The potentials in this scheme are in an important sense weak over all relevant distance scales, and are therefore of utility for systematic calculations of many-nucleon observables.	interpretation 0.95	0.60	0.32	asserted 0.99

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: method or tool 0.82 · evidence from simulation or computation 0.80.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read

arXiv listing abstract v1

not examined

full text
figures and tables
references and citing sentences
relations to other papers

levels run

P abstract

not run

S sections
T body sentences
C citations
R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

Figures

**Figure 1.** FIG. 1. The phase shifts in the neutron-proton

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2. Phase shifts for all of the EPT potentials fit in

**Figure 3.** FIG. 3. Fractional errors in the phase shifts from the EPT potentials fit in

**Figure 4.** FIG. 4. Weinberg eigenvalues for EPT potentials fit in

**Figure 5.** FIG. 5. The Weinberg eigenvalues for two phase-equivalent potentials in the

**Figure 6.** FIG. 6. The Weinberg eigenvalues for the potentials

**Figure 7.** FIG. 7. The Weinberg eigenvalues of the

**Figure 8.** FIG. 8. Phase shifts from EPT potentials fit up to a relative momentum of 405 MeV. The phase shifts from

**Figure 9.** FIG. 9. The fractional errors in the phase shifts from EPT potentials fit up to a relative momentum of 405

**Figure 10.** FIG. 10. Weinberg eigenvalues from EPT potentials fit up to a relative momentum of 405 MeV. These

Figures reproduced from arXiv:2610.29077 by the authors.

References

Works cited (75)

[1]

H.-W. Hammer, S. König, and U. van Kolck, Nuclear effective field theory: status and perspectives, Rev. Mod. Phys.92, 025004 (2020), arXiv:1906.12122 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2020
[2]

U. van Kolck, Nucleon-nucleon interaction and isospin violation, Lect. Notes Phys.513, 62 (1998), arXiv:hep-ph/9711222

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1998
[3]

D. B. Kaplan, M. J. Savage, and M. B. Wise, A New expansion for nucleon-nucleon interactions, Phys. Lett. B424, 390 (1998), arXiv:nucl-th/9801034

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1998
[4]

D. B. Kaplan, M. J. Savage, and M. B. Wise, Two nucleon systems from effective field theory, Nucl. Phys. B534, 329 (1998), arXiv:nucl-th/9802075

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1998
[5]

U. van Kolck, Effective field theory of short-range forces, Nucl. Phys. A645, 273 (1999), arXiv:nucl- th/9808007

View on Pith 1999
[6]

D. B. Kaplan and J. V. Steele, The Long and short of nuclear effective field theory expansions, Phys. Rev. C60, 064002 (1999), arXiv:nucl-th/9905027

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999
[7]

S. R. Beane and M. J. Savage, Rearranging pionless effective field theory, Nucl. Phys. A694, 511 (2001), arXiv:nucl-th/0011067

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001
[8]

R. U. Nijmegen, NN-online,http://nn-online.org/(2005), accessed: 2018-12-01

View on Pith 2005
[9]

G. P. Lepage, How to renormalize the Schrödinger equation, in8th Jorge André Swieca Summer School on Nuclear Physics(1997) pp. 135–180, arXiv:nucl-th/9706029

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1997
[10]

A. Ekström and L. Platter, Quantifying the breakdown scale of pionless effective field theory, Phys. Lett. B860, 139207 (2025), arXiv:2409.08197 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2025
[11]

L. Contessi, M. Pavon Valderrama, and U. van Kolck, Limits on an improved action for contact effective field theory in two-body systems, Phys. Lett. B856, 138903 (2024), arXiv:2403.16596 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2024
[12]

A. Kievsky, M. Gattobigio, L. Girlanda, and M. Viviani, From correlations to universal behavior in few-nucleon systems, EPJ Web Conf.290, 10008 (2023)

View on Pith 2023
[13]

A. Tuminoet al., Test of the Charge Symmetry Hypothesis of NN Interaction from the Coulomb-Free p–p Scattering Cross Section and Its Relation to Universality, Few Body Syst.66, 5 (2025)

View on Pith 2025
[14]

H. W. Grießhammer and U. van Kolck, Universality of three identical bosons with large, negative effective range, Eur. Phys. J. A59, 289 (2023), arXiv:2308.01394 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2023
[15]

S. R. Beane and R. C. Farrell, UV/IR symmetries of the S-matrix and RG flow, Nucl. Phys. A1024, 122478 (2022), arXiv:2112.03472 [hep-ph]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2022
[16]

S. R. Beane and R. C. Farrell, Symmetries of the Nucleon–Nucleon S-Matrix and Effective Field Theory Expansions, Few Body Syst.63, 45 (2022), arXiv:2112.05800 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2022
[17]

V. S. Timóteo and U. van Kolck, Two-body double pole and three-body bound states: Physical and unphysical quark masses, Phys. Lett. B852, 138619 (2024), arXiv:2304.01165 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2024
[18]

R. Peng, S. Lyu, S. König, and B. Long, Constructing chiral effective field theory around unnatural leading-order interactions, Phys. Rev. C105, 054002 (2022), arXiv:2112.00947 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2022
[19]

E. P. Wigner, Lower Limit for the Energy Derivative of the Scattering Phase Shift, Phys. Rev.98, 145 (1955)

View on Pith 1955
[20]

D. R. Phillips and T. D. Cohen, How short is too short? Constraining contact interactions in nucleon- nucleon scattering, Phys. Lett. B390, 7 (1997), arXiv:nucl-th/9607048. 39

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1997
[21]

H.-W. Hammer and D. Lee, Causality and universality in low-energy quantum scattering, Phys. Lett. B681, 500 (2009), arXiv:0907.1763 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2009
[22]

H.-W. Hammer and D. Lee, Causality and the effective range expansion, Annals Phys.325, 2212 (2010), arXiv:1002.4603 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2010
[23]

S. R. Beane, P. F. Bedaque, L. Childress, A. Kryjevski, J. McGuire, and U. van Kolck, Singular potentials and limit cycles, Phys. Rev. A64, 042103 (2001), arXiv:quant-ph/0010073

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001
[24]

B. Long and U. van Kolck, Renormalization of Singular Potentials and Power Counting, Annals Phys. 323, 1304 (2008), arXiv:0707.4325 [quant-ph]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2008
[25]

U. van Kolck, The Problem of Renormalization of Chiral Nuclear Forces, Front. in Phys.8, 79 (2020), arXiv:2003.06721 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2020
[26]

C. Gantenberg and D. B. Kaplan, Dimer Effective Field Theory (2026), arXiv:2603.28842 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2026
[27]

O. Thim, A. Ekström, and C. Forssén, Perturbative calculations of light nuclei up to N3LO in chiral effective field theory (2026), arXiv:2604.14985 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2026
[28]

M. Sánchez Sánchez, C.-J. Yang, B. Long, and U. van Kolck, Two-nucleon1S0 amplitude zero in chiral effective field theory, Phys. Rev. C97, 024001 (2018), arXiv:1704.08524 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2018
[29]

B. Behzadmoghaddam, S. Bayegan, and M. M. Arani, Proton–proton fusion in new pionless EFT power counting, Eur. Phys. J. A56, 158 (2020)

View on Pith 2020
[30]

D. B. Kaplan, More effective field theory for nonrelativistic scattering, Nucl. Phys. B494, 471 (1997), arXiv:nucl-th/9610052

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1997
[31]

M. Sánchez Sánchez, N. A. Smirnova, A. M. Shirokov, P. Maris, and J. P. Vary, Improved description of light nuclei through chiral effective field theory at leading order, Phys. Rev. C102, 024324 (2020), arXiv:2002.12258 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2020
[32]

C.-J. Yang, A. Ekström, C. Forssén, and G. Hagen, Power counting in chiral effective field theory and nuclear binding, Phys. Rev. C103, 054304 (2021), arXiv:2011.11584 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2021
[33]

M. Sánchez Sánchez, D. D. Duc, and L. Bonneau, Cutoff effects in Hartree-Fock calculations at leading order of chiral effective field theory, Phys. Rev. C107, 064307 (2023), arXiv:2104.05474 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2023
[34]

B. Behzadmoghaddam, M. Radin, and S. Bayegan, The1S0 channel of proton–proton scattering in new chiral effective field theory power counting, Sci. Rep.13, 7041 (2023)

View on Pith 2023
[35]

G. Rupak, A. Vaghani, R. Higa, and U. van Kolck, Fate of the neutron–deuteron virtual state as an Efimov level, Phys. Lett. B791, 414 (2019), arXiv:1806.01999 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2019
[36]

S. Weinberg, Quasiparticles and the Born Series, Phys. Rev.131, 440 (1963)

View on Pith 1963
[37]

S. K. Bogner, A. Schwenk, R. J. Furnstahl, and A. Nogga, Is nuclear matter perturbative with low- momentum interactions?, Nucl. Phys. A763, 59 (2005), arXiv:nucl-th/0504043

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2005
[38]

V. Bargmann, On the connection between phase shifts and scattering potential, Rev. Mod. Phys.21, 488 (1949)

View on Pith 1949
[39]

D. R. Phillips, S. R. Beane, and M. C. Birse, Scheming in dimensional regularization, J. Phys. A32, 3397 (1999), arXiv:hep-th/9810049

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999
[40]

C. A. Bertulani, H.-W. Hammer, and U. van Kolck, Effective field theory for halo nuclei, Nucl. Phys. A712, 37 (2002), arXiv:nucl-th/0205063

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002
[41]

Q. Li, S. Lyu, C. Ji, and B. Long, Effective field theory with resonant P-wave interaction, Phys. Rev. C108, 024002 (2023), arXiv:2303.17292 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2023
[42]

N. Hu, On the application of Heisenberg’s theory ofS-matrix to the problems of resonance scattering and reactions in nuclear physics, Phys. Rev.74, 131 (1948)

View on Pith 1948
[43]

W. Schützer and J. Tiomno, On the connection of the scattering and derivative matrices with causality, Phys. Rev.83, 249 (1951)

View on Pith 1951
[44]

N. G. van Kampen,S-matrix and causality condition. II. nonrelativistic particles, Phys. Rev.91, 1267 (1953)

View on Pith 1953
[45]

S. R. Beane and R. C. Farrell, Causality and dimensionality in geometric scattering, Annals Phys.440, 168841 (2022), arXiv:2112.02733 [quant-ph]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2022
[46]

Y. Nishida, Impossibility of the Efimov effect for p-wave interactions, Phys. Rev. A86, 012710 (2012), arXiv:1111.6961 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2012
[47]

E.Braaten, P.Hagen, H.-W.Hammer,andL.Platter,RenormalizationintheThree-bodyProblemwith Resonant P-wave Interactions, Phys. Rev. A86, 012711 (2012), arXiv:1110.6829 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2012
[48]

S.König, H.W.Grießhammer, H.W.Hammer,andU.vanKolck,NuclearPhysicsAroundtheUnitarity Limit, Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 202501 (2017), arXiv:1607.04623 [nucl-th]. 40

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2017
[49]

S. König, Second-order perturbation theory for3Heand pd scattering in pionless EFT, J. Phys. G44, 064007 (2017), arXiv:1609.03163 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2017
[50]

U. van Kolck, Unitarity and Discrete Scale Invariance, Few Body Syst.58, 112 (2017)

View on Pith 2017
[51]

W. G. Dawkins, J. Carlson, U. van Kolck, and A. Gezerlis, Clustering of Four-Component Unitary Fermions, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 143402 (2020), arXiv:1908.04288 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2020
[52]

S. König, Energies and radii of light nuclei around unitarity, Eur. Phys. J. A56, 113 (2020), arXiv:1910.12627 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2020
[53]

Y. P. Teng and H. W. Grießhammer, On two nucleons near unitarity with perturbative pions, Eur. Phys. J. A61, 211 (2025), arXiv:2410.09653 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2025
[54]

H. W. Grießhammer, The Unitarity-Limit Expansion for Two Nucleons with Perturbative Pions: Digest and Ideas (2025), arXiv:2504.13353 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2025
[55]

S. D. Chowdhury, R. Mishra, and D. T. Son, Applied nonrelativistic conformal field theory: Scattering- length and effective-range corrections to rate of production of three neutrons at low relative momenta, Phys. Rev. D109, 016001 (2024), arXiv:2309.15177 [hep-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2024
[56]

S. R. Beane, D. Orlando, and S. Reffert, Exact evaluation of large-charge correlation functions in nonrelativistic conformal field theory, Phys. Rev. D110, 025011 (2024), arXiv:2403.18898 [hep-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2024
[57]

S. R. Beane, D. Orlando, and S. Reffert, Unnuclear matter at large charge, Phys. Rev. D112, 014028 (2025), arXiv:2501.10505 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2025
[58]

S. R. Beane and R. C. Farrell, Geometry and entanglement in the scattering matrix, Annals Phys.433, 168581 (2021), arXiv:2011.01278 [hep-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2021
[59]

C. Eckart, The Penetration of a Potential Barrier by Electrons, Phys. Rev.35, 1303 (1930)

View on Pith 1930
[60]

R. G. Newton,Scattering Theory of Waves and Particles, 2nd ed., Theoretical and Mathematical Physics (Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1982)

View on Pith 1982
[61]

P. J. Mohr, D. B. Newell, B. N. Taylor, and E. Tiesinga, CODATA recommended values of the funda- mental physical constants: 2022*, Rev. Mod. Phys.97, 025002 (2025), arXiv:2409.03787 [hep-ph]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2025
[62]

M. Pavon Valderrama and E. Ruiz Arriola, Low-energy NN scattering at next-to-next-to-next-to-next- to-leading order for partial waves with j≤5, Phys. Rev. C72, 044007 (2005)

View on Pith 2005
[63]

V. G. J. Stoks, R. A. M. Klomp, C. P. F. Terheggen, and J. J. de Swart, Construction of high quality N N potential models, Phys. Rev. C49, 2950 (1994), arXiv:nucl-th/9406039

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1994
[64]

J. J. de Swart, C. P. F. Terheggen, and V. G. J. Stoks, The low-energy n p scattering parameters and the deuteron, in3rd International Symposium on Dubna Deuteron 95(1995) arXiv:nucl-th/9509032 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1995
[65]

N. L. Rodning and L. D. Knutson, Asymptotic d-state to s-state ratio of the deuteron, Phys. Rev. C 41, 898 (1990)

View on Pith 1990
[66]

M. I. Krivoruchenko, Remarks on the origin of Castillejo-Dalitz-Dyson poles, Phys. Rev. C82, 018201 (2010), arXiv:1001.1659 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2010
[67]

M. S. Sánchez, J. A. Oller, and D. R. Entem, Confronting the Lippmann–Schwinger equation and the N/Dmethodforcoupled-waveseparablepotentials,AnnalsPhys.469,169767(2024),arXiv:2403.05486 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2024
[68]

S. Ramanan and M. Urban, Pairing in pure neutron matter, Eur. Phys. J. ST230, 567 (2021), arXiv:2010.09632 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2021
[69]

S. R. Beane, Z. Capatti, and R. C. Farrell, Universal corrections to the superfluid gap in a cold Fermi gas, Phys. Rev. A111, 013309 (2025), arXiv:2407.20168 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2025
[70]

S. R. Beane, R. C. Farrell, and C. P. Shotwell, Universal enhancement of the pairing gap in a dilute Fermi superfluid (2026), arXiv:2610.20434 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2026
[71]

S. Gandolfi, G. Palkanoglou, J. Carlson, A. Gezerlis, and K. E. Schmidt, The 1s0 pairing gap in neutron matter, Condensed Matter7, 19 (2022)

View on Pith 2022
[72]

Y. Fujimoto, Renormalization-group approach to Kohn-Luttinger superconductivity: Amplification of the pairing gap fromℓ4 toℓ, Phys. Rev. B111, 184510 (2025), arXiv:2502.01169 [cond-mat.supr-con]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2025
[73]

M. Kumamoto and S. Reddy, Kohn-Luttinger effect in dense matter and its implications for neutron stars, Phys. Rev. C110, 025804 (2024), arXiv:2405.12243 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2024
[74]

W. Kohn and J. M. Luttinger, New Mechanism for Superconductivity, Phys. Rev. Lett.15, 524 (1965)

View on Pith 1965
[75]

S. Maiti and A. V. Chubukov, Superconductivity from repulsive interaction, inAIP Conference Pro- ceedings(AIP, 2013). 41 Appendix A: Best-fit parameters for EPT potentials fit inEFT(π /) This appendix collects the values for the EPT potential parameters inEFT(π /)corresponding to the best fits to the Nijmegen PWA [8] described in Section VI. The ERE and p...

View on Pith 2013

Discussion

Disagree with the review, or know something it missed? Leave a comment, highlight any passage above to comment on it, or challenge this review formally.

[1] [1]

H.-W. Hammer, S. König, and U. van Kolck, Nuclear effective field theory: status and perspectives, Rev. Mod. Phys.92, 025004 (2020), arXiv:1906.12122 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2020

[2] [2]

U. van Kolck, Nucleon-nucleon interaction and isospin violation, Lect. Notes Phys.513, 62 (1998), arXiv:hep-ph/9711222

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1998

[3] [3]

D. B. Kaplan, M. J. Savage, and M. B. Wise, A New expansion for nucleon-nucleon interactions, Phys. Lett. B424, 390 (1998), arXiv:nucl-th/9801034

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1998

[4] [4]

D. B. Kaplan, M. J. Savage, and M. B. Wise, Two nucleon systems from effective field theory, Nucl. Phys. B534, 329 (1998), arXiv:nucl-th/9802075

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1998

[5] [5]

U. van Kolck, Effective field theory of short-range forces, Nucl. Phys. A645, 273 (1999), arXiv:nucl- th/9808007

View on Pith 1999

[6] [6]

D. B. Kaplan and J. V. Steele, The Long and short of nuclear effective field theory expansions, Phys. Rev. C60, 064002 (1999), arXiv:nucl-th/9905027

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999

[7] [7]

S. R. Beane and M. J. Savage, Rearranging pionless effective field theory, Nucl. Phys. A694, 511 (2001), arXiv:nucl-th/0011067

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001

[8] [8]

R. U. Nijmegen, NN-online,http://nn-online.org/(2005), accessed: 2018-12-01

View on Pith 2005

[9] [9]

G. P. Lepage, How to renormalize the Schrödinger equation, in8th Jorge André Swieca Summer School on Nuclear Physics(1997) pp. 135–180, arXiv:nucl-th/9706029

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1997

[10] [10]

A. Ekström and L. Platter, Quantifying the breakdown scale of pionless effective field theory, Phys. Lett. B860, 139207 (2025), arXiv:2409.08197 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2025

[11] [11]

L. Contessi, M. Pavon Valderrama, and U. van Kolck, Limits on an improved action for contact effective field theory in two-body systems, Phys. Lett. B856, 138903 (2024), arXiv:2403.16596 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2024

[12] [12]

A. Kievsky, M. Gattobigio, L. Girlanda, and M. Viviani, From correlations to universal behavior in few-nucleon systems, EPJ Web Conf.290, 10008 (2023)

View on Pith 2023

[13] [13]

A. Tuminoet al., Test of the Charge Symmetry Hypothesis of NN Interaction from the Coulomb-Free p–p Scattering Cross Section and Its Relation to Universality, Few Body Syst.66, 5 (2025)

View on Pith 2025

[14] [14]

H. W. Grießhammer and U. van Kolck, Universality of three identical bosons with large, negative effective range, Eur. Phys. J. A59, 289 (2023), arXiv:2308.01394 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2023

[15] [15]

S. R. Beane and R. C. Farrell, UV/IR symmetries of the S-matrix and RG flow, Nucl. Phys. A1024, 122478 (2022), arXiv:2112.03472 [hep-ph]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2022

[16] [16]

S. R. Beane and R. C. Farrell, Symmetries of the Nucleon–Nucleon S-Matrix and Effective Field Theory Expansions, Few Body Syst.63, 45 (2022), arXiv:2112.05800 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2022

[17] [17]

V. S. Timóteo and U. van Kolck, Two-body double pole and three-body bound states: Physical and unphysical quark masses, Phys. Lett. B852, 138619 (2024), arXiv:2304.01165 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2024

[18] [18]

R. Peng, S. Lyu, S. König, and B. Long, Constructing chiral effective field theory around unnatural leading-order interactions, Phys. Rev. C105, 054002 (2022), arXiv:2112.00947 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2022

[19] [19]

E. P. Wigner, Lower Limit for the Energy Derivative of the Scattering Phase Shift, Phys. Rev.98, 145 (1955)

View on Pith 1955

[20] [20]

D. R. Phillips and T. D. Cohen, How short is too short? Constraining contact interactions in nucleon- nucleon scattering, Phys. Lett. B390, 7 (1997), arXiv:nucl-th/9607048. 39

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1997

[21] [21]

H.-W. Hammer and D. Lee, Causality and universality in low-energy quantum scattering, Phys. Lett. B681, 500 (2009), arXiv:0907.1763 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2009

[22] [22]

H.-W. Hammer and D. Lee, Causality and the effective range expansion, Annals Phys.325, 2212 (2010), arXiv:1002.4603 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2010

[23] [23]

S. R. Beane, P. F. Bedaque, L. Childress, A. Kryjevski, J. McGuire, and U. van Kolck, Singular potentials and limit cycles, Phys. Rev. A64, 042103 (2001), arXiv:quant-ph/0010073

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2001

[24] [24]

B. Long and U. van Kolck, Renormalization of Singular Potentials and Power Counting, Annals Phys. 323, 1304 (2008), arXiv:0707.4325 [quant-ph]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2008

[25] [25]

U. van Kolck, The Problem of Renormalization of Chiral Nuclear Forces, Front. in Phys.8, 79 (2020), arXiv:2003.06721 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2020

[26] [26]

C. Gantenberg and D. B. Kaplan, Dimer Effective Field Theory (2026), arXiv:2603.28842 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2026

[27] [27]

O. Thim, A. Ekström, and C. Forssén, Perturbative calculations of light nuclei up to N3LO in chiral effective field theory (2026), arXiv:2604.14985 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2026

[28] [28]

M. Sánchez Sánchez, C.-J. Yang, B. Long, and U. van Kolck, Two-nucleon1S0 amplitude zero in chiral effective field theory, Phys. Rev. C97, 024001 (2018), arXiv:1704.08524 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2018

[29] [29]

B. Behzadmoghaddam, S. Bayegan, and M. M. Arani, Proton–proton fusion in new pionless EFT power counting, Eur. Phys. J. A56, 158 (2020)

View on Pith 2020

[30] [30]

D. B. Kaplan, More effective field theory for nonrelativistic scattering, Nucl. Phys. B494, 471 (1997), arXiv:nucl-th/9610052

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1997

[31] [31]

M. Sánchez Sánchez, N. A. Smirnova, A. M. Shirokov, P. Maris, and J. P. Vary, Improved description of light nuclei through chiral effective field theory at leading order, Phys. Rev. C102, 024324 (2020), arXiv:2002.12258 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2020

[32] [32]

C.-J. Yang, A. Ekström, C. Forssén, and G. Hagen, Power counting in chiral effective field theory and nuclear binding, Phys. Rev. C103, 054304 (2021), arXiv:2011.11584 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2021

[33] [33]

M. Sánchez Sánchez, D. D. Duc, and L. Bonneau, Cutoff effects in Hartree-Fock calculations at leading order of chiral effective field theory, Phys. Rev. C107, 064307 (2023), arXiv:2104.05474 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2023

[34] [34]

B. Behzadmoghaddam, M. Radin, and S. Bayegan, The1S0 channel of proton–proton scattering in new chiral effective field theory power counting, Sci. Rep.13, 7041 (2023)

View on Pith 2023

[35] [35]

G. Rupak, A. Vaghani, R. Higa, and U. van Kolck, Fate of the neutron–deuteron virtual state as an Efimov level, Phys. Lett. B791, 414 (2019), arXiv:1806.01999 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2019

[36] [36]

S. Weinberg, Quasiparticles and the Born Series, Phys. Rev.131, 440 (1963)

View on Pith 1963

[37] [37]

S. K. Bogner, A. Schwenk, R. J. Furnstahl, and A. Nogga, Is nuclear matter perturbative with low- momentum interactions?, Nucl. Phys. A763, 59 (2005), arXiv:nucl-th/0504043

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2005

[38] [38]

V. Bargmann, On the connection between phase shifts and scattering potential, Rev. Mod. Phys.21, 488 (1949)

View on Pith 1949

[39] [39]

D. R. Phillips, S. R. Beane, and M. C. Birse, Scheming in dimensional regularization, J. Phys. A32, 3397 (1999), arXiv:hep-th/9810049

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1999

[40] [40]

C. A. Bertulani, H.-W. Hammer, and U. van Kolck, Effective field theory for halo nuclei, Nucl. Phys. A712, 37 (2002), arXiv:nucl-th/0205063

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2002

[41] [41]

Q. Li, S. Lyu, C. Ji, and B. Long, Effective field theory with resonant P-wave interaction, Phys. Rev. C108, 024002 (2023), arXiv:2303.17292 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2023

[42] [42]

N. Hu, On the application of Heisenberg’s theory ofS-matrix to the problems of resonance scattering and reactions in nuclear physics, Phys. Rev.74, 131 (1948)

View on Pith 1948

[43] [43]

W. Schützer and J. Tiomno, On the connection of the scattering and derivative matrices with causality, Phys. Rev.83, 249 (1951)

View on Pith 1951

[44] [44]

N. G. van Kampen,S-matrix and causality condition. II. nonrelativistic particles, Phys. Rev.91, 1267 (1953)

View on Pith 1953

[45] [45]

S. R. Beane and R. C. Farrell, Causality and dimensionality in geometric scattering, Annals Phys.440, 168841 (2022), arXiv:2112.02733 [quant-ph]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2022

[46] [46]

Y. Nishida, Impossibility of the Efimov effect for p-wave interactions, Phys. Rev. A86, 012710 (2012), arXiv:1111.6961 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2012

[47] [47]

E.Braaten, P.Hagen, H.-W.Hammer,andL.Platter,RenormalizationintheThree-bodyProblemwith Resonant P-wave Interactions, Phys. Rev. A86, 012711 (2012), arXiv:1110.6829 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2012

[48] [48]

S.König, H.W.Grießhammer, H.W.Hammer,andU.vanKolck,NuclearPhysicsAroundtheUnitarity Limit, Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 202501 (2017), arXiv:1607.04623 [nucl-th]. 40

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2017

[49] [49]

S. König, Second-order perturbation theory for3Heand pd scattering in pionless EFT, J. Phys. G44, 064007 (2017), arXiv:1609.03163 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2017

[50] [50]

U. van Kolck, Unitarity and Discrete Scale Invariance, Few Body Syst.58, 112 (2017)

View on Pith 2017

[51] [51]

W. G. Dawkins, J. Carlson, U. van Kolck, and A. Gezerlis, Clustering of Four-Component Unitary Fermions, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 143402 (2020), arXiv:1908.04288 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2020

[52] [52]

S. König, Energies and radii of light nuclei around unitarity, Eur. Phys. J. A56, 113 (2020), arXiv:1910.12627 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2020

[53] [53]

Y. P. Teng and H. W. Grießhammer, On two nucleons near unitarity with perturbative pions, Eur. Phys. J. A61, 211 (2025), arXiv:2410.09653 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2025

[54] [54]

H. W. Grießhammer, The Unitarity-Limit Expansion for Two Nucleons with Perturbative Pions: Digest and Ideas (2025), arXiv:2504.13353 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2025

[55] [55]

S. D. Chowdhury, R. Mishra, and D. T. Son, Applied nonrelativistic conformal field theory: Scattering- length and effective-range corrections to rate of production of three neutrons at low relative momenta, Phys. Rev. D109, 016001 (2024), arXiv:2309.15177 [hep-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2024

[56] [56]

S. R. Beane, D. Orlando, and S. Reffert, Exact evaluation of large-charge correlation functions in nonrelativistic conformal field theory, Phys. Rev. D110, 025011 (2024), arXiv:2403.18898 [hep-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2024

[57] [57]

S. R. Beane, D. Orlando, and S. Reffert, Unnuclear matter at large charge, Phys. Rev. D112, 014028 (2025), arXiv:2501.10505 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2025

[58] [58]

S. R. Beane and R. C. Farrell, Geometry and entanglement in the scattering matrix, Annals Phys.433, 168581 (2021), arXiv:2011.01278 [hep-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2021

[59] [59]

C. Eckart, The Penetration of a Potential Barrier by Electrons, Phys. Rev.35, 1303 (1930)

View on Pith 1930

[60] [60]

R. G. Newton,Scattering Theory of Waves and Particles, 2nd ed., Theoretical and Mathematical Physics (Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1982)

View on Pith 1982

[61] [61]

P. J. Mohr, D. B. Newell, B. N. Taylor, and E. Tiesinga, CODATA recommended values of the funda- mental physical constants: 2022*, Rev. Mod. Phys.97, 025002 (2025), arXiv:2409.03787 [hep-ph]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2025

[62] [62]

M. Pavon Valderrama and E. Ruiz Arriola, Low-energy NN scattering at next-to-next-to-next-to-next- to-leading order for partial waves with j≤5, Phys. Rev. C72, 044007 (2005)

View on Pith 2005

[63] [63]

V. G. J. Stoks, R. A. M. Klomp, C. P. F. Terheggen, and J. J. de Swart, Construction of high quality N N potential models, Phys. Rev. C49, 2950 (1994), arXiv:nucl-th/9406039

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1994

[64] [64]

J. J. de Swart, C. P. F. Terheggen, and V. G. J. Stoks, The low-energy n p scattering parameters and the deuteron, in3rd International Symposium on Dubna Deuteron 95(1995) arXiv:nucl-th/9509032 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1995

[65] [65]

N. L. Rodning and L. D. Knutson, Asymptotic d-state to s-state ratio of the deuteron, Phys. Rev. C 41, 898 (1990)

View on Pith 1990

[66] [66]

M. I. Krivoruchenko, Remarks on the origin of Castillejo-Dalitz-Dyson poles, Phys. Rev. C82, 018201 (2010), arXiv:1001.1659 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2010

[67] [67]

M. S. Sánchez, J. A. Oller, and D. R. Entem, Confronting the Lippmann–Schwinger equation and the N/Dmethodforcoupled-waveseparablepotentials,AnnalsPhys.469,169767(2024),arXiv:2403.05486 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2024

[68] [68]

S. Ramanan and M. Urban, Pairing in pure neutron matter, Eur. Phys. J. ST230, 567 (2021), arXiv:2010.09632 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2021

[69] [69]

S. R. Beane, Z. Capatti, and R. C. Farrell, Universal corrections to the superfluid gap in a cold Fermi gas, Phys. Rev. A111, 013309 (2025), arXiv:2407.20168 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2025

[70] [70]

S. R. Beane, R. C. Farrell, and C. P. Shotwell, Universal enhancement of the pairing gap in a dilute Fermi superfluid (2026), arXiv:2610.20434 [cond-mat.quant-gas]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2026

[71] [71]

S. Gandolfi, G. Palkanoglou, J. Carlson, A. Gezerlis, and K. E. Schmidt, The 1s0 pairing gap in neutron matter, Condensed Matter7, 19 (2022)

View on Pith 2022

[72] [72]

Y. Fujimoto, Renormalization-group approach to Kohn-Luttinger superconductivity: Amplification of the pairing gap fromℓ4 toℓ, Phys. Rev. B111, 184510 (2025), arXiv:2502.01169 [cond-mat.supr-con]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2025

[73] [73]

M. Kumamoto and S. Reddy, Kohn-Luttinger effect in dense matter and its implications for neutron stars, Phys. Rev. C110, 025804 (2024), arXiv:2405.12243 [nucl-th]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2024

[74] [74]

W. Kohn and J. M. Luttinger, New Mechanism for Superconductivity, Phys. Rev. Lett.15, 524 (1965)

View on Pith 1965

[75] [75]

S. Maiti and A. V. Chubukov, Superconductivity from repulsive interaction, inAIP Conference Pro- ceedings(AIP, 2013). 41 Appendix A: Best-fit parameters for EPT potentials fit inEFT(π /) This appendix collects the values for the EPT potential parameters inEFT(π /)corresponding to the best fits to the Nijmegen PWA [8] described in Section VI. The ERE and p...

View on Pith 2013