Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 77 references

The paper derives, from the lattice tight-binding model in the lowest Landau level, a closed-form longitudinal magnetoconductivity σ_zz = |e|^3 |B| v_F / (4π² ℏ ε) · (1−|M|²)/(2|M|²), and argues this confirms that the current is carried by

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-01 12:21 UTC pith:B4XJSL6I

load-bearing objection Solid analytic Keldysh calculation with a genuinely new vertex-correction factor, but the CME-confirmation claim outruns the approximations and the key factor is sensitive to unquantified off-shell corrections. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.19589 v1 pith:B4XJSL6I submitted 2026-07-21 cond-mat.mes-hall hep-ph

Chiral Magnetic Conductivity in the Tight-Binding Model of Dirac Semimetals

Mustafa Bohra , Yuexiang Zhang , M.A. Zubkov This is my paper
classification cond-mat.mes-hall hep-ph
keywords chiral magnetic effectDirac semimetallowest Landau levelmagnetoconductivitySSH modelimpurity scatteringvertex correctionKeldysh formalism
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

This paper tries to show that the negative longitudinal magnetoresistance of Dirac semimetals can be derived microscopically from the lattice tight-binding model, without invoking an equilibrium chiral chemical potential by hand. In a strong magnetic field the dynamics collapses onto the lowest Landau level, and the model becomes a one-dimensional SSH-type chain along the field. Impurity scattering is treated in the non-equilibrium Green's function technique, and the field-induced correction to the self-energy is resummed through the impurity ladder. The resulting closed formula for σ_zz contains a vertex factor (1−|M|²)/(2|M|²) that was missing from the earlier continuum calculation, and the paper argues that the current is carried by the chiral (axial) charge imbalance. If correct, it turns the heuristic chiral-magnetic-effect picture into a calculable lattice statement and explains why the conductivity plateaus with field before decreasing at very large fields.

Core claim

The central claim is that in the quantum limit of a strong magnetic field, a lattice-regularized Dirac semimetal has longitudinal conductivity σ_zz = |e|^3 |B| v_F / (4π² ℏ ε) · (1−|M|²)/(2|M|²), with ε = u_0² n_imp |eB|/(4π v_F ℏ²) the impurity half-width and |M| ≈ Δ/μ the normalized mass (plus small lattice and field corrections). This is derived rather than assumed: the lowest-Landau-level projection gives an SSH-type one-dimensional Hamiltonian; the impurity self-energy is evaluated explicitly; and the field-induced self-energy correction is resummed through the impurity ladder, which satisfies the Ward identity. The factor (1−|M|²)/(2|M|²) is the complete vertex correction, and the rela

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the lowest-Landau-level-projected effective Hamiltonian, which is exactly an SSH-type one-dimensional two-band model along the magnetic field: H_LLL(θ) = v_F [γ0γ3 sinθ + γ0 (m + 1 − cosθ + |B|/2)]. The transport argument proceeds through the non-equilibrium Green's function technique: the impurity self-energy is computed from the LLL propagator, the field-induced self-energy correction is calculated, and the repeated impurity scattering (the ladder) is resummed. After the on-shell reduction the ladder kernel becomes an algebraic map whose odd-channel eigenvalue is q = (1−|M|²)/(1+|M|²); the final conductivity is proportional to q/(1−q) = (1−|M|²)/(2|M|²). Here |M|

Load-bearing premise

The whole result hinges on the claim that the repeated-impurity-scattering ladder can be reduced to one number q, because the final conductivity contains 1/(1−q), so even a small error in q changes the answer a lot.

What would settle it

Evaluate the linearized ladder equation numerically with the full matrix self-energy width (not its on-shell projection) for |M| ≈ 0.1; if the odd-channel eigenvalue of the kernel differs from q = (1−|M|²)/(1+|M|²) by order εa/(ℏv_F), the closed form fails exactly where it departs from the earlier result.

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

If this is right

  • The vertex correction multiplies the earlier continuum result by (1−|M|²)/(2|M|²); at fixed μ and moderate B the explicit |B| cancels the impurity width ε ∝ |B|, producing a plateau in σ_zz(B) rather than linear growth.
  • Once |B| is large enough that the field-dependent part of |M| becomes significant, σ_zz decreases with field, giving a microscopic account of the high-field downturn observed in low-temperature magnetotransport.
  • The relation J_3 = sign(B) v_F ρ_5 survives the entire ladder resummation, so the ratio of longitudinal current to axial density is fixed by the Fermi velocity and the current is genuinely carried by the field-induced chiral imbalance.
  • In the massless continuum limit |M| → 0 the chirality relaxation time diverges and the chiral magnetic current is non-dissipative; on a lattice the finite relaxation persists through the band-edge connection of the two chiral branches.
  • Strictly at T = 0 the reduced one-dimensional channels are subject to Anderson localization, so the Drude-type formulas apply to samples shorter than the backscattering mean free path or in the presence of finite dephasing.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Extending the paper's logic, the small-|M| regime is where the 1/|M|² enhancement is largest and also where the on-shell approximation is least controlled; a full finite-width solution of the ladder equation may regularize the apparent divergence and is the natural next step.
  • The same ladder factor should persist at finite frequency up to ω ∼ 2ε_on; above that the kernel becomes frequency-dependent, so a frequency-dependent plateau in σ_zz(Ω) is a testable signature of the mechanism.
  • Because the vertex correction renormalizes only the common response denominator and not the J_3–ρ_5 proportionality, a separate probe of the axial density — numerical or experimental — would test the mechanism more directly than conductivity alone.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper analyzes a 3D lattice-regularized Dirac semimetal in parallel electric and magnetic fields, in the strong-field/LLL limit. Projecting onto the lowest Landau level and expanding transverse lattice operators, the model is reduced to an effective 1D SSH-type Hamiltonian along the field axis (Sec. II, Eq. (24)). Using Keldysh Green functions and a Born treatment of point-like impurities, the authors compute the impurity self-energy (Sec. V), the electric-field-induced correction to the Green function including an exact resummation of the impurity ladder (Sec. VI and Appendices E, F), and then evaluate the axial charge density and longitudinal current (Sec. VII). The central results are Eq. (119)/(124): in the low-energy, leading on-shell approximation, σ_zz = |e|^3 |B| v_F/(4π^2 ℏ ε) × (1-|M|^2)/(2|M|^2), with ε = u0^2 n_imp |eB|/(4π v_F ℏ^2) and |M| ≈ Δ/μ, together with the proportionality J_3 = sign(B) v_F ρ_5 (Eq. (113)). The paper presents this as a microscopic confirmation that the magnetoconductivity is due to the chiral magnetic effect, and as a correction to Ref. [48], whose bare-bubble result is multiplied by the factor (1-|M|^2)/(2|M|^2).

Significance. If correct, the result is significant: it gives a lattice-microscopic, Keldysh-based derivation of the quantum-limit longitudinal magnetoconductivity of a Dirac semimetal with impurity scattering, including an explicit vertex correction, and it clarifies the status of the chiral magnetic effect as a nonequilibrium dissipative transport phenomenon. The derivation is transparent in several places: the LLL reduction, the impurity self-energy integral, the spectral identities of Appendix C, and the algebraic diagonalization of the leading on-shell kernel in Appendix F are all carried out in closed form. The paper also explicitly states its validity hierarchies and acknowledges important limitations, including the zero-temperature Anderson-localization caveat in Sec. VII B and the on-shell nature of the vertex reduction in Appendix F. These strengths make the paper a useful contribution regardless of whether the final factor (1-|M|^2)/(2|M|^2) survives more exact treatment. The main unresolved issue is quantitative: the ladder eigenvalue q, which controls the most novel part of the result, is computed only at leading on-shell order, and the correction to it enters a 1/(1-q) denominator

major comments (3)
  1. [Appendix F / Eq. (91), Eq. (F1), Eq. (119)] The central new factor (1-|M|^2)/(2|M|^2) comes from resumming the ladder denominator 1-q, where q=(1-|M|^2)/(1+|M|^2). Appendix F reduces the integral kernel to the algebraic map (F1) by dropping off-shell, matrix-width, and regular corrections of relative order ε a/(ℏ v_F). The eigenvalue q is therefore known only up to an uncomputed shift δq = C ε a/(ℏ v_F). Since 1-q = 2|M|^2/(1+|M|^2), the relative error in σ_zz is δq/(1-q) ≈ C ε a/(ℏ v_F) (1+|M|^2)/(2|M|^2). The stated hierarchy 2|M|^2/(1+|M|^2) ≫ ε a/(ℏ v_F) only guarantees |M|^2 ≫ ε a/(ℏ v_F); without a bound on C, the correction is uncontrolled precisely in the small-|M| regime where the factor differs most from Ref. [48]. A numerical inversion of the full finite-width kernel—which is a one-dimensional integral kernel in p_3—would settle whether Eq. (119) survives; this is a concrete and feasible check.
  2. [Sec. VII B (penultimate paragraph)] The manuscript explicitly states that at strictly T=0 the reduced 1D channels are Anderson-localized and that the Drude-type expressions apply only to samples shorter than the backscattering mean free path or in the presence of finite dephasing. This is an important limitation of the headline result: Eq. (119)/(124) is not the DC conductivity of an infinite 3D sample at T=0 in the thermodynamic limit, but a finite-sample or dephasing-limited formula. The paper is honest about this, but the abstract and conclusion present the result without this qualification. The authors should either state the finite-sample/dephasing domain explicitly in the abstract and conclusion, or provide a localization-length estimate that shows the regime is experimentally relevant.
  3. [Sec. VI / Eq. (92)] The solution of the linearized Schwinger-Dyson equation uses the on-shell projected drive and the algebraic kernel spectrum (91). The retarded/advanced components of the field-induced self-energy are computed in Eq. (E6) and are O(ε E_3/μ), which is consistent. However, the ladder resummation itself is justified only by the leading on-shell approximation; the regular parts of the kernel, which are not computed, are asserted to be of relative order ε a/(ℏ v_F). Since the pole at q=1 in the odd channel is the mechanism that produces the large factor 1/(2|M|^2), this is a load-bearing point. The manuscript would be materially strengthened by either a direct estimate of the coefficient C in the shift of q, or by numerically solving the full kernel for representative parameters.
minor comments (6)
  1. [General] There are several typographical and grammatical errors: 'dirves' in the Introduction, 'Theoy' in Ref. [69], 'matirx' in Appendix A, 'Prove of it' in Appendix A. These should be corrected.
  2. [Eq. (115) and Eq. (119)] The final conductivity formulas display only the lower band-edge step θ(|μ| - v_F(m+|B|a/2)), whereas the earlier expression (114) contains both lower and upper band-edge factors. For μa/v_F ≪ 1 the upper step is redundant, but this should be stated to avoid apparent inconsistency.
  3. [Eq. (81)] The definition of D is written as 'D = (2 + 2ma + |B|a^2)/2' only in passing; later D is used again with a=1. Please define D once, consistently in both conventions.
  4. [Sec. III / Eq. (35)] The paper says 'small temperature limit' in the abstract, but the calculation uses T=0 via n'(ω) = -δ(ω-μ). The finite-temperature extension is only mentioned as future work. Please make the T=0 assumption explicit in the abstract.
  5. [Eq. (113)] The proportionality J_3 = sign(B) v_F ρ_5 is quoted as a direct relation, but the equation itself carries O(θ_F^2, ma, |B|a^2, ε/μ) corrections. In the conclusion this is stated without caveats; adding the same qualifiers would be more accurate.
  6. [Appendix C] Appendix C explicitly states that the matrix chain rule for ∂_{p_3} δ(p_0-H) is not exact on the lattice because [H,H']≠0, and that the result is a leading on-shell identity with O(ε/μ) remainders. This is an important honesty check and should be highlighted more prominently in the main text, not only in the appendix.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the conductivity is computed from the lattice model; the CME form is a post-hoc rewriting, not an input.

full rationale

The headline result, Eqs. (119) and (124), is derived from the lattice Dirac Hamiltonian by LLL projection, an explicit Born impurity self-energy, and a resummed impurity ladder. The heuristic CME formula, Eq. (5), appears only as introductory motivation and is not used to compute the response; the response time tau_5,resp is explicitly defined after the calculation (Sec. VII B: "the algebraic identity rho_5 = (E.B) tau_5,resp/(2 pi^2) defines the response time tau_5,resp"), so the apparent CME proportionality is a rewriting of the already-derived sigma_zz and rho_5, not an assumed input. The vertex factor (1-|M|^2)/(2|M|^2) follows algebraically from the kernel eigenvalue q=(1-|M|^2)/(1+|M|^2), Eq. (91), and the geometric series in Eq. (92); no parameter is fitted to the predicted conductivity. Self-citations such as [43] and [48] provide context or a corrected comparison result, but the central derivation is self-contained rather than resting on an unverified self-cited premise. The paper itself flags the weak-disorder on-shell approximation and the Anderson-localization limitation in Sec. VII B ("strictly at T=0 the reduced one-dimensional channels are subject to Anderson localization..."); these are validity restrictions, not circular reductions. Overall, the derivation chain does not reduce by construction to its inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 7 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on a hierarchy of stated limits rather than on fitted numbers: |B|a^2 ≪ 1 for the transverse expansion (Sec. II), mu a/v_F ≫ ma + |B|a^2 and the weak-disorder inequality for the on-shell ladder (Sec. VI), and the sample-scale/decoherence condition for Drude validity (Sec. VII B). The one model parameter with arbitrary value on which the final number depends is the disorder correlator u0^2 n_imp; the paper performs no fit to data, so no quantitative prediction of sigma's magnitude is made without specifying it. No new entities (particles, forces, conserved charges) are introduced; the heuristic mu_5 of the introduction is explicitly de-emphasized as an ill-defined construct.

free parameters (1)
  • disorder strength u0^2 n_imp = not fitted (model input)
    White-noise correlator of Eq. (58); the final sigma_zz is inversely proportional to u0^2 n_imp (Eqs. 124-125). The paper makes no quantitative comparison, so the magnitude of the prediction is undetermined until this parameter is specified.
axioms (7)
  • domain assumption Transverse continuum expansion: sin(Π_{x,y}) ≈ Π_{x,y}, 1−cos(Π_{x,y}) ≈ Π^2_{x,y}/2, valid for |B| ≪ 1/a^2 (magnetic length much larger than lattice spacing), while the longitudinal dispersion is kept fully lattice-valued
    Sec. II Eqs. (14)-(18); the controlled limit that makes the LLL reduction exact-algebraic. Requires the stated hierarchy a ≪ l_B ≤ sqrt(2) l_mu.
  • domain assumption White-noise delta-correlated scalar disorder with ⟨U(x)U(y)⟩ = u0^2 n_imp δ^{(3)}(x−y)
    Eq. (58); the entire dissipation mechanism is this single correlator; no other scattering channel is included.
  • domain assumption At T=0 only elastic impurity scattering remains; phonons vanish and Coulomb interactions are neglected
    Sec. I and Conclusion: 'Coulomb interactions may still remain relevant, but we do not consider their effect.'
  • ad hoc to paper Born/weak-disorder + leading on-shell approximation: the impurity-ladder kernel in App. F reduces to the algebraic map (F1) with spectrum (91), dropping off-shell, matrix-width, and regular corrections of relative order eps a/(hbar v_F)
    Appendices E and F; Sec. VI validity condition 2|M|^2/(1+|M|^2) ≫ eps a/(hbar v_F). This is the load-bearing technical premise for the vertex-corrected factor.
  • ad hoc to paper Spectral-decomposition and integration-by-parts identities in App. C hold at leading on-shell order; interband remainders are O(eps/mu)
    Appendix C, paragraph after Eq. (C8): 'It is not an exact matrix-chain-rule result. As ρ5 = iE3|B|I/2, this determines the leading contribution.'
  • domain assumption DC linear response: the electric field is treated to first order via the Wigner gradient expansion; Zener tunneling between the split bands is exponentially suppressed
    Conclusion: 'the above expressions disregard tunneling phenomenon... exponentially suppresses the effect due to nonzero gap.'
  • domain assumption The reduced 1D channels conduct Ohmically at DC, i.e., samples are shorter than the backscattering mean free path or have finite dephasing, despite strict T=0 Anderson localization
    Sec. VII B, penultimate paragraph: 'strictly at T=0 the reduced one-dimensional channels are subject to Anderson localization... The Drude-type expressions above refer to the samples shorter than this scale, or to the presence of a finite dephasing.'

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 35095 in / 42525 out tokens · 347932 ms · 2026-08-01T12:21:50.902587+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We consider the typical tight - binding model of Dirac semimetal in the presence of both magnetic and electric fields. The electric conductivity reveals dependence on magnetic field. We calculate this dependence in the limit of strong magnetic field, when the given model is described effectively by the one - dimensional SSH model because the dynamics in the plane orthogonal to magnetic field is reduced to that of the lowest Landau level (LLL). Considering the small temperature limit we take into account dissipation due to scattering on impurities. The corresponding dissipation rate is calculated explicitly. The obtained results confirm that the source of the magnetoconductivity in this system is chiral magnetic effect.

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

77 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    M. A. Zubkov and R. A. Abramchuk, Effect of interac- tions on the topological expression for the chiral separa- tion effect, Physical Review D107, 094021 (2023)

    2023

  2. [2]

    Abramchuk, Z

    R. Abramchuk, Z. Khaidukov, and M. Zubkov, Anatomy of the chiral vortical effect, Physical Review D98, 076013 (2018)

    2018

  3. [3]

    Zhang and M

    C. Zhang and M. Zubkov, Hall conductivity as the topo- logical invariant in the phase space in the presence of interactions and a nonuniform magnetic field, JETP let- ters110, 487 (2019)

    2019

  4. [4]

    Selch, M

    M. Selch, M. Zubkov, S. Pramanik, and M. Lewkow- icz, Non-renormalization of the fractional quantum hall conductivity by interactions, Annals of Physics , 170202 (2025)

    2025

  5. [5]

    G. E. Volovik and M. Zubkov, Nambu sum rule in the njl models: from superfluidity to top quark condensation, JETP letters97, 301 (2013)

    2013

  6. [6]

    Volovik and M

    G. Volovik and M. Zubkov, Scalar excitation with leggett frequency in he 3-b and the 125 gev higgs particle in top quark condensation models as pseudo-goldstone bosons, Physical Review D92, 055004 (2015)

    2015

  7. [7]

    Katsnelson, G

    M. Katsnelson, G. Volovik, and M. Zubkov, Euler– heisenberg effective action and magnetoelectric effect in multilayer graphene, Annals of Physics331, 160 (2013)

    2013

  8. [8]

    Zubkov and G

    M. Zubkov and G. Volovik, Momentum space topological invariants for the 4d relativistic vacua with mass gap, Nuclear Physics B860, 295 (2012)

    2012

  9. [9]

    M. A. Zubkov and Z. V. Khaidukov, Topology of the momentum space, wigner transformations, and a chiral anomaly in lattice models, JETP Letters106, 172 (2017)

    2017

  10. [10]

    Volovik and M

    G. Volovik and M. Zubkov, Standard model as the topo- logical material, New Journal of Physics19, 015009 (2017)

    2017

  11. [11]

    Bakker, A

    B. Bakker, A. Veselov, and M. Zubkov, Central domi- nance and the confinement mechanism in gluodynamics, Physics Letters B471, 214 (1999)

    1999

  12. [12]

    Bakker, A

    B. Bakker, A. Veselov, and M. Zubkov, Standard model with the additional z6 symmetry on the lattice, Physics Letters B620, 156 (2005)

    2005

  13. [13]

    Zubkov, Momentum space topology of qcd, Annals of Physics393, 264 (2018)

    M. Zubkov, Momentum space topology of qcd, Annals of Physics393, 264 (2018)

    2018

  14. [14]

    Q. Li, D. E. Kharzeev, C. Zhang, Y. Huang, I. Pletikosic, A. V. Fedorov, R. D. Zhong, J. A. Schneeloch, G. D. Gu, and T. Valla, Chiral magnetic effect in ZrTe5, Nature Phys.12, 550 (2016), arXiv:1412.6543 [cond-mat.str-el]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  15. [15]

    Kaushik and D

    S. Kaushik and D. E. Kharzeev, Quantum oscillations in the chiral magnetic conductivity, Physical Review B95, 235136 (2017)

    2017

  16. [16]

    E. V. Gorbar, V. A. Miransky, and I. A. Shovkovy, Chi- ral anomaly, dimensional reduction, and magnetoresis- tivity of weyl and dirac semimetals, Physical Review B 89, 085126 (2014)

    2014

  17. [17]

    Lu, S.-B

    H.-Z. Lu, S.-B. Zhang, and S.-Q. Shen, High-field mag- netoconductivity of topological semimetals with short- range potential, Physical Review B92, 045203 (2015)

    2015

  18. [18]

    Li, H.-Z

    S. Li, H.-Z. Lu, and X. C. Xie, Impurity and dispersion effects on the linear magnetoresistance in the quantum limit, Physical Review B107, 235202 (2023)

    2023

  19. [19]

    Fukushima, D

    K. Fukushima, D. E. Kharzeev, and H. J. Warringa, The Chiral Magnetic Effect, Phys. Rev. D78, 074033 (2008), arXiv:0808.3382 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  20. [20]

    M. A. Stephanov and Y. Yin, Chiral kinetic theory, Phys- ical Review Letters109, 162001 (2012)

    2012

  21. [21]

    Burkov, Chiral anomaly and diffusive magnetotrans- port in weyl metals, Physical Review Letters113, 247203 (2014)

    A. Burkov, Chiral anomaly and diffusive magnetotrans- port in weyl metals, Physical Review Letters113, 247203 (2014)

    2014

  22. [22]

    D. T. Son and B. Z. Spivak, Chiral anomaly and classi- cal negative magnetoresistance of weyl metals, Physical Review B88, 104412 (2013)

    2013

  23. [23]

    Gorbar, I

    E. Gorbar, I. Shovkovy, S. Vilchinskii, I. Rudenok, A. Bo- yarsky, and O. Ruchayskiy, Anomalous maxwell equa- tions for inhomogeneous chiral plasma, Physical Review 24 D93, 105028 (2016)

    2016

  24. [24]

    Gao, Z.-T

    J.-H. Gao, Z.-T. Liang, S. Pu, Q. Wang, and X.-N. Wang, Chiral Anomaly and Local Polarization Effect from Quantum Kinetic Approach, Phys. Rev. Lett.109, 232301 (2012), arXiv:1203.0725 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  25. [25]

    Lin and L

    S. Lin and L. Yang, Chiral kinetic theory from landau level basis, Physical Review D101, 034006 (2020)

    2020

  26. [26]

    Hattori, S

    K. Hattori, S. Li, D. Satow, and H.-U. Yee, Longitudinal conductivity in strong magnetic field in perturbative qcd: Complete leading order, Physical Review D95, 076008 (2017)

    2017

  27. [27]

    Huang, Y

    A. Huang, Y. Jiang, S. Shi, J. Liao, and P. Zhuang, Out- of-equilibrium chiral magnetic effect from chiral kinetic theory, Physics Letters B777, 177 (2018)

    2018

  28. [28]

    S. N. Valgushev, M. Puhr, and P. V. Buividovich, Chiral magnetic effect in finite-size samples of parity-breaking weyl semimetals (2015)

    2015

  29. [29]

    D. T. Son and N. Yamamoto, Berry curvature, triangle anomalies, and the chiral magnetic effect in fermi liquids, Physical Review Letters109, 181602 (2012)

    2012

  30. [30]

    Sekine, D

    A. Sekine, D. Culcer, and A. H. MacDonald, Quantum kinetic theory of the chiral anomaly, Physical Review B 96, 235134 (2017)

    2017

  31. [31]

    Sekine and K

    A. Sekine and K. Nomura, Axion electrodynamics in topological materials, Journal of Applied Physics129, 10.1063/5.0038804 (2021)

    doi:10.1063/5.0038804 2021

  32. [32]

    G. E. Volovik, On the chiral magnetic effect in weyl su- perfluid 3he-a, JETP letters105, 34 (2017)

    2017

  33. [33]

    P. V. Buividovich, M. Puhr, and S. N. Valgushev, Chiral magnetic conductivity in an interacting lattice model of parity-breaking weyl semimetal, Physical Review B92, 205122 (2015)

    2015

  34. [34]

    Buividovich, Spontaneous chiral symmetry break- ing and the chiral magnetic effect for interacting dirac fermions with chiral imbalance, Physical Review D90, 125025 (2014)

    P. Buividovich, Spontaneous chiral symmetry break- ing and the chiral magnetic effect for interacting dirac fermions with chiral imbalance, Physical Review D90, 125025 (2014)

    2014

  35. [35]

    Buividovich, Anomalous transport with overlap fermions, Nuclear Physics A925, 218 (2014)

    P. Buividovich, Anomalous transport with overlap fermions, Nuclear Physics A925, 218 (2014)

    2014

  36. [36]

    Zubkov, Wigner transformation, momentum space topology, and anomalous transport, Annals of Physics 373, 298 (2016)

    M. Zubkov, Wigner transformation, momentum space topology, and anomalous transport, Annals of Physics 373, 298 (2016)

    2016

  37. [37]

    Zubkov, Absence of equilibrium chiral magnetic effect, Physical Review D93, 105036 (2016)

    M. Zubkov, Absence of equilibrium chiral magnetic effect, Physical Review D93, 105036 (2016)

    2016

  38. [38]

    M. M. Vazifeh and M. Franz, Electromagnetic response of weyl semimetals, Physical Review Letters111, 027201 (2013)

    2013

  39. [39]

    Yamamoto, Generalized bloch theorem and chiral transport phenomena, Physical Review D92, 085011 (2015)

    N. Yamamoto, Generalized bloch theorem and chiral transport phenomena, Physical Review D92, 085011 (2015)

    2015

  40. [40]

    Banerjee, M

    C. Banerjee, M. Lewkowicz, and M. A. Zubkov, Equilib- rium chiral magnetic effect: Spatial inhomogeneity, finite temperature, interactions, Physics Letters B819, 136457 (2021)

    2021

  41. [41]

    Banerjee, M

    C. Banerjee, M. Lewkowicz, and M. A. Zubkov, Chiral magnetic effect out of equilibrium, Physical Review D 106, 074508 (2022)

    2022

  42. [42]

    W. P. Su, J. R. Schrieffer, and A. J. Heeger, Solitons in polyacetylene, Phys. Rev. Lett.42, 1698 (1979)

    1979

  43. [43]

    Bohra and M

    M. Bohra and M. Zubkov, Relation between chiral anomaly and electric transport in 1d dirac semimetal, Solid State Communications409, 116276 (2026)

    2026

  44. [44]

    W. P. Su, J. R. Schrieffer, and A. J. Heeger, Soliton ex- citations in polyacetylene, Physical Review B22, 2099 (1980)

    2099

  45. [45]

    B. A. Bernevig,Topological insulators and topological su- perconductors(Princeton university press, 2013)

    2013

  46. [46]

    L. Lima, Interplay of phase transition from purely real and line-gapped phase on quantum entanglement in the generalized su–schrieffer–heeger model, Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications694, 131574 (2026)

    2026

  47. [47]

    McCann, Non-hermitian su-schrieffer-heeger model with the energy levels of free parafermions, Physical Re- view B113, 10.1103/hdzd-94qm (2026)

    E. McCann, Non-hermitian su-schrieffer-heeger model with the energy levels of free parafermions, Physical Re- view B113, 10.1103/hdzd-94qm (2026)

    work page doi:10.1103/hdzd-94qm 2026

  48. [48]

    R. A. Abramchuk and M. A. Zubkov, Magnetoconduc- tivity of dirac semimetals and chiral magnetic effect from keldysh technique, Journal of Physics: Condensed Mat- ter38, 035601 (2026)

    2026

  49. [49]

    Sakurai and J

    J. Sakurai and J. Napolitano,Modern Quantum Mechan- ics(Cambridge University Press, 2017)

    2017

  50. [50]

    Shankar,Principles of Quantum Mechanics(Springer US, 1994)

    R. Shankar,Principles of Quantum Mechanics(Springer US, 1994)

    1994

  51. [51]

    L. V. Keldysh, Diagram technique for nonequilibrium processes, Sov. Phys. JETP20, 1018 (1965), [Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 47, 1515 (1964)]; reprinted in: Selected Papers of Leonid V Keldysh (World Scientific, 2023), p. 47

    1965

  52. [52]

    P. I. Arseev, On the nonequilibrium diagram technique: derivation, some features and applications, Phys. Usp. 58, 1159 (2015)

    2015

  53. [53]

    Kamenev, Many-body theory of non-equilibrium sys- tems (2005), arXiv:cond-mat/0412296 [cond-mat.dis-nn]

    A. Kamenev, Many-body theory of non-equilibrium sys- tems (2005), arXiv:cond-mat/0412296 [cond-mat.dis-nn]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  54. [54]

    Kamenev,Field Theory of Non-Equilibrium Systems (Cambridge University Press, 2023)

    A. Kamenev,Field Theory of Non-Equilibrium Systems (Cambridge University Press, 2023)

    2023

  55. [55]

    Zubkov, Discrete wigner–weyl calculus for the finite lattice, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theo- retical56, 395201 (2023)

    M. Zubkov, Discrete wigner–weyl calculus for the finite lattice, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theo- retical56, 395201 (2023)

    2023

  56. [56]

    M. N. Chernodub and M. Zubkov, Scale magnetic effect in quantum electrodynamics and the wigner-weyl formal- ism, Physical Review D96, 056006 (2017)

    2017

  57. [57]

    Zhang and M

    C. Zhang and M. Zubkov, Influence of interactions on the anomalous quantum hall effect, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical53, 195002 (2020)

    2020

  58. [58]

    Suleymanov and M

    M. Suleymanov and M. Zubkov, Wigner–weyl formalism and the propagator of wilson fermions in the presence of varying external electromagnetic field, Nuclear Physics B 938, 171 (2019)

    2019

  59. [59]

    Szmigielski, Weyl-wigner quantization, inEncyclopedia of Mathematical Physics(Elsevier, 2025) pp

    J. Szmigielski, Weyl-wigner quantization, inEncyclopedia of Mathematical Physics(Elsevier, 2025) pp. 314–320

    2025

  60. [60]

    Weyl, Quantenmechanik und gruppentheorie, Zeitschrift f¨ ur Physik46, 1 (1927)

    H. Weyl, Quantenmechanik und gruppentheorie, Zeitschrift f¨ ur Physik46, 1 (1927)

    1927

  61. [61]

    J. E. Mayer and W. Band, On the quantum correction for thermodynamic equilibrium, The Journal of Chemical Physics15, 141 (1947)

    1947

  62. [62]

    Wigner, On the quantum correction for thermody- namic equilibrium, Physical Review40, 749 (1932)

    E. Wigner, On the quantum correction for thermody- namic equilibrium, Physical Review40, 749 (1932)

    1932

  63. [63]

    F. S. Roux and N. Fabre, Wigner functional theory for quantum optics (2019)

    2019

  64. [64]

    J. E. Moyal, Quantum mechanics as a statistical theory, Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosoph- ical Society45, 99–124 (1949)

    1949

  65. [65]

    Peierls, Zur theorie des diamagnetismus von leitungse- lektronen, Zeitschrift f¨ ur Physik80, 763 (1933)

    R. Peierls, Zur theorie des diamagnetismus von leitungse- lektronen, Zeitschrift f¨ ur Physik80, 763 (1933)

    1933

  66. [66]

    Gelfand and G

    I. Gelfand and G. Shilov,Generalized Functions: Prop- erties and operations, by I. M. Gelfand and G. E. Shilov, translated by E. Saletan, Generalized Functions (Aca- demic Press, 1964)

    1964

  67. [67]

    Banerjee, I

    C. Banerjee, I. V. Fialkovsky, M. Lewkowicz, C. X. Zhang, and M. A. Zubkov, Wigner-weyl calculus in keldysh technique, Journal of Computational Electron- ics20, 2255 (2021). 25

    2021

  68. [68]

    Zhang and M

    C. Zhang and M. Zubkov, Feynman rules in terms of the wigner transformed green functions, Physics Letters B 802, 135197 (2020)

    2020

  69. [69]

    Onoda, N

    S. Onoda, N. Sugimoto, and N. Nagaosa, Theoy of Non-equilibirum states driven by constant electromag- netic fields: Non-commutative quantum mechanics in the Keldysh formalism, Prog. Theor. Phys.116, 61 (2006), arXiv:cond-mat/0605363

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  70. [70]

    V. A. Miransky and I. A. Shovkovy, Quantum field theory in a magnetic field: From quantum chromodynamics to graphene and dirac semimetals, Physics Reports576, 1 (2015)

    2015

  71. [71]

    Gusynin, V

    V. Gusynin, V. Miransky, and I. Shovkovy, Dimensional reduction and dynamical chiral symmetry breaking by a magnetic field in 3 + 1 dimensions, Physics Letters B 349, 477 (1995)

    1995

  72. [72]

    Hupfer, H

    T. Hupfer, H. Leschke, and S. Warzel, Upper bounds on the density of states of single landau levels broadened by gaussian random potentials, Journal of Mathematical Physics42, 5626 (2001)

    2001

  73. [73]

    Gusynin, V

    V. Gusynin, V. Miransky, and I. Shovkovy, Dimensional reduction and catalysis of dynamical symmetry breaking by a magnetic field, Nuclear Physics B462, 249 (1996)

    1996

  74. [74]

    R. A. Abramchuk, Negative magneto-resistance and chi- ral magnetic effect in dirac semimetals from keldysh technique in landau levels basis, Journal of Physics and Chemistry of Solids210, 113374 (2026)

    2026

  75. [75]

    V. P. Gusynin, V. A. Miransky, and I. A. Shovkovy, Dy- namical chiral symmetry breaking by a magnetic field in qed, Phys. Rev. D52, 4747 (1995)

    1995

  76. [76]

    Kharzeev, Parity violation in hot qcd: Why it can happen, and how to look for it, Physics Letters B633, 260 (2006)

    D. Kharzeev, Parity violation in hot qcd: Why it can happen, and how to look for it, Physics Letters B633, 260 (2006)

    2006

  77. [77]

    V. V. SKOKOV, A. Y. ILLARIONOV, and V. D. TONEEV, Estimate of the magnetic field strength in heavy-ion collisions, International Journal of Modern Physics A24, 5925 (2009), https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217751X09047570

    doi:10.1142/s0217751x09047570 2009