Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 7 minor 300 references

The paper argues that the equation of state—pressure as a function of density—is the single bridge between quark-level physics and the observable mass and radius of neutron stars.

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 19:16 UTC pith:BX3YNU6P

load-bearing objection A competent, explicitly pedagogical review chapter with no new results; worth refereeing for a handbook, but it carries a factor-of-six density error and a PREX misattribution that need fixing. the 4 major comments →

arxiv 2607.17006 v1 pith:BX3YNU6P submitted 2026-07-18 nucl-th astro-ph.HEastro-ph.SRhep-th

The equation of state for neutron stars

Veronica Dexheimer This is my paper
classification nucl-th astro-ph.HEastro-ph.SRhep-th
keywords equation of stateneutron starsdense matterstrong interactionexotic matterQCD phase diagramhyperonsspeed of sound
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 chapter is a survey aimed at establishing where the field stands on the equation of state (EoS) of neutron-star matter—the relation between pressure, density, and composition that determines a star's mass and radius. It argues that the EoS is built by combining relativistic many-body models with constraints from nuclear experiments, heavy-ion collisions, pulsar timing, X-ray radius measurements, and gravitational-wave detections. The core message is that the low- and high-density ends are anchored by controlled calculations, while the several-times-saturation-density regime relevant to neutron-star cores remains the domain of phenomenological models and extrapolations. A sympathetic reader would care because the same curve decides whether hyperons or deconfined quarks appear in stellar cores, whether two-solar-mass stars can be supported, and which signatures future gravitational-wave detectors should see.

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the neutron-star equation of state is knowable, but only through a triangulation: no single theory, experiment, or observation covers the whole density range. At densities up to about twice nuclear saturation, chiral effective field theory provides quantified uncertainties; at asymptotically high densities, perturbative QCD is reliable, and causality bounds let it constrain matter at lower densities; in between, relativistic models with couplings fitted to saturation properties fill the gap. The chapter catalogs the constraints—symmetry energy and its slope from nuclear experiments, the two-solar-mass pulsar, X-ray radius measurements, and the tidal deformab

What carries the argument

The central object is the equation of state itself, P(ε,n_B), together with the speed of sound c_s² = dP/dε. It is fed into the general-relativistic hydrostatic equilibrium equations to produce mass-radius sequences, so every astrophysical constraint on mass, radius, or tidal deformability becomes a constraint on the EoS. On the microphysics side, the workhorse is the relativistic mean-field Lagrangian (meson fields replaced by their average values) with scalar and vector meson fields σ, ω, and ρ, extended with nonlinear self-interactions, many-body-force couplings, or explicit density dependence; these variants let the survey connect nuclear saturation properties to neutron-star observables

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that phenomenological models whose couplings are fitted to nuclear saturation properties can be safely extrapolated to the several-times-saturation densities in neutron-star cores and stitched together with first-principles calculations and observations into a single coherent picture—something the chapter itself concedes is currently supported only by extrapolation.

What would settle it

A decisive experiment would be a definitive measurement of the neutron-skin thickness of a heavy nucleus: the current analyses of the same lead experiment disagree on the symmetry-energy slope, and a resolved value would either validate or break the nuclear anchor that the chapter's models use for extrapolation to neutron-star densities. Equally decisive would be an observation of a compact object in the mass gap confirmed as a neutron star with a mass-radius combination that no causal equation of state in the surveyed framework can support.

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

If this is right

  • If the surveyed constraints are right, neutron-star cores at several times nuclear saturation density cannot be described by laboratory nuclear physics alone; the EoS there must be inferred from astronomical observations.
  • The appearance of hyperons near twice saturation density softens the EoS, so any model that includes them must still support neutron stars near two solar masses—the so-called hyperon puzzle is a genuine constraint, not an artifact.
  • The speed of sound in dense matter is expected to rise above the conformal value, develop non-monotonic structure, and approach the conformal limit from above, producing observable features in mass-radius and tidal-deformability relations.
  • Post-merger gravitational-wave signals at kilohertz frequencies should directly probe the speed of sound and the response of matter out of beta-equilibrium and at finite temperature.
  • Large regions of the QCD phase diagram remain covered only by phenomenological models; next-decade measurements of radii, maximum masses, and post-merger signals will determine whether those models are extrapolating correctly.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • An implicit consequence of the survey is that the EoS may be better pinned down by nonparametric reconstruction directly from neutron-star mass-radius-tidal data than by any single microphysical model; the paper's own constraint compilation makes such a data-driven inversion a natural next step.
  • If the speed-of-sound 'bumps' are as generic as described, then a future measurement showing a smooth, monotonic speed of sound over the full density range would count against the surveyed model framework—a testable distinction between the paper's consensus picture and simpler alternatives.
  • The tension between different analyses of neutron-skin experiments on the symmetry-energy slope suggests that the nuclear anchor at saturation is not fully converged; a resolved measurement would either tighten or split the model band that the chapter treats as the working constraint.
  • Extending the survey's logic, the same equation-of-state framework could be applied to proto-neutron stars and merger remnants, where finite temperature and trapped neutrinos matter; the chapter hints at this but leaves the corresponding multidimensional EoS tables as future work.

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

4 major / 7 minor

Summary. This manuscript is a book chapter (review) that surveys the neutron-star equation of state from a relativistic nuclear-theory perspective. It covers neutron-star interiors, the historical development of relativistic mean-field and chiral models, possible phases and phase transitions, the QCD phase diagram, and constraints from lattice QCD, perturbative QCD, chiral effective field theory, heavy-ion collisions, nuclear experiments, and astrophysical observations, closing with future directions. The chapter claims to provide an up-to-date introduction to and overview of our current understanding of dense matter, including open questions. It contains no new derivations; its value is as a synthesis and pedagogical reference.

Significance. As a review, the chapter's significance depends on the accuracy and representativeness of its survey. Its strengths are broad and current coverage (citations through 2026), explicit treatment of model dependence and extrapolation caveats, and a clear conceptual structure that will be useful to students. The manuscript does not claim to prove new results, so circularity concerns do not apply. However, the survey's reliability is compromised by several factual errors in reference quantities: the saturation-density conversion in §1.2, the attribution of a saturation-density result to PREX in §3.3, the liquid-gas critical density in §3.2, and the sign of the Ξ potential in §3.3. These are exactly the kind of numbers a reader will take away from a reference chapter, and they must be corrected before the chapter can serve as a trustworthy introduction.

major comments (4)
  1. [§1.2] The equivalence claimed in §1.2, ρ_B = 1.67–1.90×10^15 g/cm3 for n_B = 0.15–0.17 fm^-3, is internally inconsistent by a factor of about 6. Using ρ_B = n_B m_N gives 2.5–2.8×10^14 g/cm3, consistent with the 'normal nuclear density' ~3×10^14 g/cm3 quoted in §1.1. Because n_sat is the reference density for multiple figures and equations (Figs. 2, 3, 5, 11; Eqs. 21–22), this error should be corrected.
  2. [§3.3] The sentence 'From measurements of the elastic scattering of longitudinally polarized electrons from 208Pb, the Lead Radius Experiment (PREX) collaboration reported nsat = 0.1480 ± 0.0038 fm−3 (Adhikari et al. (2021))' misattributes the result. PREX measured the neutron-skin thickness of 208Pb, not n_sat, and the quoted value is not the PREX central result. This statement should be replaced or removed; PREX is properly cited later in the same subsection for the symmetry-energy slope L.
  3. [§3.2] The text states that χEFT gives 'critical values Tc ∼ 17 − 19 MeV with corresponding densities nc ∼ 0.6 − 0.8 /fm3' for the nuclear liquid-gas phase transition. The density is off by an order of magnitude: the critical density in Wellenhofer et al. (2014) is of order 0.06–0.08 fm^-3, well below n_sat. As printed, this is a quantitatively wrong constraint and should be corrected.
  4. [§3.3] The hyperon-potentials paragraph quotes U_Ξ = −14 MeV from Gal et al. (2016) and U_Ξ = 21.9 ± 0.7 MeV from Friedman and Gal (2021) while describing the Ξ potential as attractive. A positive U_Ξ is repulsive, so the sentence is internally contradictory. Please verify the sign and interpretation of the Friedman–Gal value.
minor comments (7)
  1. [Fig. 2 caption] The caption says 'We discuss n_sat in the following, for now, we assume it to be approximately the density of a typical nucleus (~0.12 fm^-3)', which is inconsistent with n_sat = 0.15–0.17 fm^-3 used elsewhere (and with the 0.16 fm^-3 values in §3.3). The assumed value should be harmonized.
  2. [§1.2] The statement 'Around n_sat, there is also strong competition ... nuclear pasta' is not correct: pasta phases occur at subsaturation densities, roughly 0.03–0.1 fm^-3, not around n_sat.
  3. [§4] The text says c_s^2 is expected to 'exceed the value √1/3 before decreasing again'. For c_s^2 the conformal value is 1/3, not √1/3; the sentence should read 'exceed 1/3'.
  4. [§2.3] The name 'Gibbs-Duhen' should be 'Gibbs-Duhem'.
  5. [Eq. (13)] The definition M*_i = M_i − Σ_i g_{σ,i} arψ_i ψ_i σ is ill-defined; for species i the mean-field effective mass should be M_i − g_{σ,i} σ (no sum over species inside the definition).
  6. [Table 1] The PSR J0437+4715 Illinois-Maryland row reports the radius as '11.8 − 15.1', which is not formatted as a central value with uncertainties. This should be harmonized with the other rows (e.g., as a quoted interval or with central value and errors).
  7. [Bibliography] Several references contain malformed author macros (e.g., 'Andersen JOea', 'Ghiglieri Jea', 'Haque Nea') that need to be expanded to proper author names.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the chapter is a descriptive review; model inputs and extrapolation caveats are disclosed, and self-citations are not load-bearing. One saturation-density value is internally inconsistent, but that is a correctness issue, not circularity.

full rationale

This is a review/update chapter, not a derivation, so the main circularity patterns (fit-then-predict, result equal to input by construction, uniqueness imported from the authors' prior work) have no purchase. The organizing claim is descriptive: that the field constrains the dense-matter EoS using lattice QCD, pQCD, chiral EFT, nuclear experiments, and neutron-star observations. The paper does not fit parameters and then label the output as a prediction; Eqs. (21)-(22) are explicitly presented as fitted couplings, with the text noting that 'The additional parameters provide greater flexibility when fitting parameters,' not as predictions. The extrapolation caveat is stated openly in Sec. 3.1: 'large portions of the phase diagram remain unexplored, where our current knowledge relies exclusively on extrapolations or (phenomenological) models.' The many self-citations (e.g., Dexheimer & Schramm 2010, Dexheimer et al. 2008a, Jacobsen et al. 2026, Cruz-Camacho et al. 2025) appear as model illustrations, historical credits, and reports of specific model calculations, but none is the load-bearing warrant for the chapter's survey thesis. I therefore find no circular step. Separately, there is an internal numerical inconsistency worth flagging as a correctness concern: Sec. 1.2 gives rho_sat = 1.67-1.90e15 g/cm^3 for n_sat = 0.15-0.17 fm^-3, which is about a factor of six higher than the ~3e14 g/cm^3 typical nuclear density stated in Sec. 1.1; this is a factual/unit error, not a circularity.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

This review introduces no new free parameters, axioms, or entities; everything quantitative is inherited from cited models and measurements. Quark stars, twin stars, and parity partners are discussed as hypotheses from prior literature (Itoh 1970; Bodmer-Witten; Detar and Kunihiro 1989) and are not given new falsifiable handles here. The free parameters listed are the fitted couplings of models the chapter presents as the field's working tools.

free parameters (3)
  • DD model density-dependent coupling parameters a,b,c,d (Eqs. 21-22) = not given in chapter
    The chapter presents these as the working couplings of the Density-Dependent model, fitted to nuclear saturation properties and ab-initio calculations in the cited literature (Typel and Wolter 1999); the chapter itself does not derive or refit them.
  • Hyperon coupling schemes (Universal, Moszkowski, SU(6)) = three alternative schemes
    Figure 3 panels differ exclusively by hyperon coupling scheme, and the chapter emphasizes that particle fractions, onset densities, and abundances depend strongly on the adopted scheme. The schemes themselves come from the cited literature.
  • Couplings of MBF / CMF / Parity-Doublet models = not given in chapter
    Results shown in Fig. 3 and Fig. 5 depend on couplings fitted in the cited model papers (Jacobsen et al. 2026; Dexheimer et al. 2008a). These are prior fitted parameters, not new ones, but the survey's narrative leans on them.
axioms (5)
  • standard math TOV equations describe the hydrostatic equilibrium of isolated, non-rotating, non-magnetized neutron stars.
    Introduced in Section 2.1 and used throughout Section 3.4 to translate EoSs into masses, radii, and tidal deformabilities that are compared with observations.
  • domain assumption The mean-field approximation is quantitatively valid at the high densities and low temperatures of neutron-star interiors.
    Section 2.2: 'The mean-field approximation works remarkably well at high densities and low Ts, precisely the conditions found in neutron-star interiors.' All the relativistic model results surveyed rest on this.
  • domain assumption Neutron-star core matter is in beta-equilibrium with vanishing neutrino chemical potential, and is globally charge neutral.
    Sections 1.1-1.2 define the EoS for neutron-star matter using mu_n = mu_p + mu_e, mu_nu = 0, and n_Q = 0. This is standard but is an assumption about the astrophysical setting.
  • domain assumption Cited first-principles results (lattice QCD, pQCD, CEFT) are reliable within their stated domains.
    Section 3.2 builds the 'known from theory' regions of Fig. 11 on these external results. The chapter inherits them as inputs without independent verification.
  • domain assumption Chiral symmetry breaking generates ~99% of hadron mass, and chiral restoration at high density is a meaningful organizing principle.
    Section 2.5 motivates the Parity Doublet and chiral models, which are central to the chapter's discussion of exotic matter. The premise is taken from prior literature.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 54027 in / 12451 out tokens · 114018 ms · 2026-08-01T19:16:33.333448+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

This chapter is intended as an introduction to dense matter and the equation of state of neutron stars and their mergers. It begins with a brief description of neutron star interiors, followed by a historical overview of the theoretical frameworks used to describe them focusing on relativistic formalisms, including different degrees of freedom, models, symmetries, and phases. It also provides an overview of our current understanding of dense matter (including theory, experiments, and observations) and discusses the advances we expect to see in the field over the next decade.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.17006 by Veronica Dexheimer.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: The densities reached during the gravitational collapse of massive stars create a macroscopic environment in which [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

300 extracted references · 25 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    N. K. Glendenning , title =

  2. [2]

    Experimental tests of asymptotic freedom

    Bethke, Siegfried. Experimental tests of asymptotic freedom. Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 2007. doi:10.1016/j.ppnp.2006.06.001. arXiv:hep-ex/0606035

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  3. [3]

    Effective field theory approach to high temperature thermodynamics

    Braaten, Eric and Nieto, Agustin. Effective field theory approach to high temperature thermodynamics. Phys. Rev. D. 1995. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.51.6990. arXiv:hep-ph/9501375

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  4. [4]

    Next-to-next-to leading-order hard-thermal-loop perturbation-theory predictions for the curvature of the QCD phase transition line

    Haque, Najmul et al. Next-to-next-to leading-order hard-thermal-loop perturbation-theory predictions for the curvature of the QCD phase transition line. Phys. Rev. C. 2021. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.103.L031901. arXiv:2011.06938

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  5. [5]

    and Teaney, Derek

    Ghiglieri, Jacopo and Moore, Guy D. and Teaney, Derek. QCD Shear Viscosity at (almost) NLO. JHEP. 2018. doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2018)179. arXiv:1802.09535

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  6. [6]

    and Yaffe, Laurence G

    Arnold, Peter Brockway and Moore, Guy D. and Yaffe, Laurence G. Transport coefficients in high temperature gauge theories. 1. Leading log results. JHEP. 2000. doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2000/11/001. arXiv:hep-ph/0010177

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  7. [7]

    and Teaney, Derek

    Ghiglieri, Jacopo and Moore, Guy D. and Teaney, Derek. Second-order Hydrodynamics in Next-to-Leading-Order QCD. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2018. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.121.052302. arXiv:1805.02663

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  8. [8]

    Hot and dense QCD shear viscosity at leading log

    Danhoni, Isabella and Moore, Guy D. Hot and dense QCD shear viscosity at leading log. JHEP. 2023. doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2023)124. arXiv:2212.02325

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  9. [9]

    The Bulk Viscosity of High-Temperature QCD

    Arnold, Peter Brockway and Dogan, Caglar and Moore, Guy D. The Bulk Viscosity of High-Temperature QCD. Phys. Rev. D. 2006. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.74.085021. arXiv:hep-ph/0608012

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  10. [10]

    Andersen, Jens O. et al. Three-loop HTL QCD thermodynamics. JHEP. 2011. doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2011)053. arXiv:1103.2528

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  11. [11]

    Anisotropy as a signature of transverse collective flow

    Ollitrault, Jean-Yves. Anisotropy as a signature of transverse collective flow. Phys. Rev. D. 1992. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.46.229

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.46.229 1992

  12. [12]

    Identified charged particle azimuthal anisotropy in PHENIX at RHIC

    Esumi, ShinIchi. Identified charged particle azimuthal anisotropy in PHENIX at RHIC. Nucl. Phys. A. 2003. doi:10.1016/S0375-9474(02)01541-5. arXiv:nucl-ex/0210012

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  13. [13]

    and others

    Adler, C. and others. Azimuthal Anisotropy of K _ S ^ 0 and + Production at Midrapidity from Au+Au Collisions at s _ NN =130 GeV. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2002. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.89.132301. arXiv:hep-ex/0205072

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  14. [14]

    and Nava Acuna, A

    Mroczek, D. and Nava Acuna, A. R. and Noronha-Hostler, J. and Parotto, P. and Ratti, C. and Stephanov, M. A. Quartic cumulant of baryon number in the presence of a QCD critical point. Phys. Rev. C. 2021. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.103.034901. arXiv:2008.04022

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  15. [15]

    and Toivanen, J

    Vesely, P. and Toivanen, J. and Carlsson, B. G. and Dobaczewski, J. and Michel, N. and Pastore, A. Giant Monopole Resonances and nuclear incompressibilities studied for the zero-range and separable pairing interactions. Phys. Rev. C. 2012. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.86.024303. arXiv:1202.5617

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  16. [16]

    and Colo, G

    Cao, Li-Gang and Sagawa, H. and Colo, G. Microscopic Study of the Isoscalar Giant Monopole Resonance in Cd, Sn and Pb Isotopes. Phys. Rev. C. 2012. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.86.054313. arXiv:1206.6552

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  17. [17]

    Agrawal, B. K. and Shlomo, S. and Au, V. Kim. Nuclear matter incompressibility coefficient in relativistic and nonrelativistic microscopic models. Phys. Rev. C. 2003. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.68.031304. arXiv:nucl-th/0308042

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  18. [18]

    and Van Giai, N

    Colo, G. and Van Giai, N. and Meyer, J. and Bennaceur, K. and Bonche, P. Microscopic determination of the nuclear incompressibility within the nonrelativistic framework. Phys. Rev. C. 2004. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.70.024307. arXiv:nucl-th/0403086

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  19. [19]

    and Garg, U

    Colo, G. and Garg, U. and Sagawa, H. Symmetry energy from the nuclear collective motion: constraints from dipole, quadrupole, monopole and spin-dipole resonances. Eur. Phys. J. A. 2014. doi:10.1140/epja/i2014-14026-9. arXiv:1309.1572

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  20. [20]

    Todd-Rutel, B. G. and Piekarewicz, J. Neutron-Rich Nuclei and Neutron Stars: A New Accurately Calibrated Interaction for the Study of Neutron-Rich Matter. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2005. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.95.122501. arXiv:nucl-th/0504034

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  21. [21]

    and Swiatecki, Wladyslaw J

    Myers, William D. and Swiatecki, Wladyslaw J. Nuclear masses and deformations. Nucl. Phys. 1966. doi:10.1016/S0029-5582(66)80001-9

    work page doi:10.1016/s0029-5582(66)80001-9 1966

  22. [22]

    R and Shaw, G

    Martin, B. R and Shaw, G. Nuclear and particle physics : an introduction. 2019

    2019

  23. [23]

    QCD equation of state matched to lattice data and exhibiting a critical point singularity

    Parotto, Paolo and Bluhm, Marcus and Mroczek, Debora and Nahrgang, Marlene and Noronha-Hostler, Jacquelyn and Rajagopal, Krishna and Ratti, Claudia and Sch. QCD equation of state matched to lattice data and exhibiting a critical point singularity. Phys. Rev. C. 2020. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.101.034901. arXiv:1805.05249

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  24. [24]

    Myers, W. D. and Swiatecki, W. J. Nuclear properties according to the Thomas-Fermi model. Nucl. Phys. A. 1996. doi:10.1016/0375-9474(95)00509-9

    doi:10.1016/0375-9474(95)00509-9 1996

  25. [25]

    , year =

    Myers, W.D. , year =. Droplet model of atomic nuclei , publisher =

  26. [26]

    The NANOGrav 15 yr Data Set: Observations and Timing of 68 Millisecond Pulsars

    Agazie, Gabriella and others. The NANOGrav 15 yr Data Set: Observations and Timing of 68 Millisecond Pulsars. Astrophys. J. Lett. 2023. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acda9a. arXiv:2306.16217

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  27. [27]

    and Schaffner-Bielich, J

    Kurkela, Aleksi and Fraga, Eduardo S. and Schaffner-Bielich, J. Constraining neutron star matter with Quantum Chromodynamics. Astrophys. J. 2014. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/789/2/127. arXiv:1402.6618

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  28. [28]

    Dexheimer, V. A. and Schramm, S. A Novel Approach to Model Hybrid Stars. Phys. Rev. C. 2010. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.81.045201. arXiv:0901.1748

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  29. [29]

    A Lower Mass Estimate for PSR J0348+0432 Based on CHIME/Pulsar Precision Timing

    Saffer, Alexander and others. A Lower Mass Estimate for PSR J0348+0432 Based on CHIME/Pulsar Precision Timing. Astrophys. J. Lett. 2025. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/adc25e. arXiv:2412.02850

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  30. [30]

    Gravitation and Relativity , editor =

    John Archibald Wheeler , title =. Gravitation and Relativity , editor =. 1964 , pages =

    1964

  31. [31]

    Kent and Thorne, Kip S

    Harrison, B. Kent and Thorne, Kip S. and Wakano, Masami and Wheeler, John Archibald , title =. 1965 , isbn =

    1965

  32. [32]

    Miller, M. C. and others. The Radius of PSR J0437 4715 from NICER Data. Astrophys. J. Lett. 2026. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ae5057. arXiv:2512.08790

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  33. [33]

    Dynamical response of twin stars to perturbations

    Haque, Shamim and Rezzolla, Luciano and Mallick, Ritam. Dynamical response of twin stars to perturbations. Phys. Rev. D. 2026. doi:10.1103/99c1-2p2y. arXiv:2602.02654

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  34. [34]

    The scenario of two families of compact stars : 1

    Drago, Alessandro and Lavagno, Andrea and Pagliara, Giuseppe and Pigato, Daniele. The scenario of two families of compact stars : 1. Equations of state, mass-radius relations and binary systems. Eur. Phys. J. A. 2016. doi:10.1140/epja/i2016-16040-3. arXiv:1509.02131

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  35. [35]

    and Schmidt, Bernd G

    Kokkotas, Kostas D. and Schmidt, Bernd G. Quasinormal modes of stars and black holes. Living Rev. Rel. 1999. doi:10.12942/lrr-1999-2. arXiv:gr-qc/9909058

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  36. [36]

    Neutron Stars : The Aspect of High Density Matter, Equations of State and Observables. 2012

    2012

  37. [37]

    and Sedrakian, Armen , title =

    Alford, Mark G. and Sedrakian, Armen , title =. Phys. Rev. Lett. , volume =. 2017 , doi =. 1706.01592 , archivePrefix =

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  38. [38]

    Equation of State at Supranuclear Densities and the Existence of a Third Family of Superdense Stars

    Gerlach, Ulrich H. Equation of State at Supranuclear Densities and the Existence of a Third Family of Superdense Stars. Phys. Rev. 1968. doi:10.1103/PhysRev.172.1325

    doi:10.1103/physrev.172.1325 1968

  39. [39]

    and Greiner, C

    Schertler, K. and Greiner, C. and Schaffner-Bielich, J. and Thoma, M. H. Quark phases in neutron stars and a 'third family' of compact stars as a signature for phase transitions. Nucl. Phys. A. 2000. doi:10.1016/S0375-9474(00)00305-5. arXiv:astro-ph/0001467

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  40. [40]

    ON COMPLEX PROBABILITIES

    Parisi, G. ON COMPLEX PROBABILITIES. Phys. Lett. B. 1983. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(83)90525-7

    doi:10.1016/0370-2693(83)90525-7 1983

  41. [41]

    Mendes, Marlon M. S. and Filho, Odilon Louren c o da Silva and Lenzi, C \'e sar H. Reconciling GW170817 and GW190814 with a Nonmonotonic Sound-Speed Equation of State. 2026. arXiv:2605.30369

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  42. [42]

    Necessary and sufficient conditions for correctness of complex Langevin

    Mandl, Michael and Seiler, Erhard and Sexty, D \'e nes. Necessary and sufficient conditions for correctness of complex Langevin. J. Phys. A. 2025. doi:10.1088/1751-8121/ae2245. arXiv:2508.14512

    arXiv 2025

  43. [43]

    Finite-density equation of state of hot QCD using the complex Langevin equation

    Mandl, Michael and Sexty, D \'e nes and Unterhuber, Daniel. Finite-density equation of state of hot QCD using the complex Langevin equation. 2026. arXiv:2604.19649

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  44. [44]

    Lattice field theories with a sign problem

    Aarts, Gert and Sexty, D \'e nes. Lattice field theories with a sign problem. 2026. arXiv:2604.24290

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  45. [45]

    Introductory lectures on lattice QCD at nonzero baryon number

    Aarts, Gert. Introductory lectures on lattice QCD at nonzero baryon number. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2016. doi:10.1088/1742-6596/706/2/022004. arXiv:1512.05145

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  46. [46]

    and Harris, Steven P

    Alford, Mark G. and Harris, Steven P. and Sachdeva, Pratik S. On the stability of strange dwarf hybrid stars. Astrophys. J. 2017. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa8509. arXiv:1705.09880

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  47. [47]

    and Kettner, Christiane

    Glendenning, Norman K. and Kettner, Christiane. Nonidentical neutron star twins. Astron. Astrophys. 2000. arXiv:astro-ph/9807155

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  48. [48]

    Approximate Universal Relations for Neutron Stars and Quark Stars

    Yagi, Kent and Yunes, Nicol \'a s. Approximate Universal Relations for Neutron Stars and Quark Stars. Phys. Rept. 2017. doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2017.03.002. arXiv:1608.02582

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  49. [49]

    and Lattimer, James M

    Prakash, Madappa and Bombaci, Ignazio and Prakash, Manju and Ellis, Paul J. and Lattimer, James M. and Knorren, Roland. Composition and structure of protoneutron stars. Phys. Rept. 1997. doi:10.1016/S0370-1573(96)00023-3. arXiv:nucl-th/9603042

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  50. [50]

    Landau, L. D. and Lifshitz, E. M. , year =. Statistical physics , edition =

  51. [51]

    and Satz, H

    Matsui, T. and Satz, H. J/ Suppression by Quark-Gluon Plasma Formation. Phys. Lett. B. 1986. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(86)91404-8

    doi:10.1016/0370-2693(86)91404-8 1986

  52. [52]

    Effects of the QCD phase transition on hadronic observables in relativistic hydrodynamic simulations of heavy-ion reactions in the FAIR/NICA energy regime

    Spieles, Christian and Bleicher, Marcus. Effects of the QCD phase transition on hadronic observables in relativistic hydrodynamic simulations of heavy-ion reactions in the FAIR/NICA energy regime. Eur. Phys. J. ST. 2020. doi:10.1140/epjst/e2020-000102-4. arXiv:2006.01220

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  53. [53]

    Stephanov, M. A. Non-Gaussian fluctuations near the QCD critical point. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2009. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.102.032301. arXiv:0809.3450

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  54. [54]

    Determination of the equation of state of dense matter

    Danielewicz, Pawel and Lacey, Roy and Lynch, William G. Determination of the equation of state of dense matter. Science. 2002. doi:10.1126/science.1078070. arXiv:nucl-th/0208016

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  55. [55]

    Pons, J. A. and Reddy, S. and Prakash, M. and Lattimer, J. M. and Miralles, J. A. Evolution of protoneutron stars. Astrophys. J. 1999. doi:10.1086/306889. arXiv:astro-ph/9807040

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  56. [56]

    Astrophysics with the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna

    Seoane, Pau Amaro and others. Astrophysics with the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna. Living Rev. Rel. 2023. doi:10.1007/s41114-022-00041-y. arXiv:2203.06016

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  57. [57]

    Free energy of QCD at high temperature

    Braaten, Eric and Nieto, Agustin. Free energy of QCD at high temperature. Phys. Rev. D. 1996. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.53.3421. arXiv:hep-ph/9510408

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  58. [58]

    and Fodor, Z

    Aoki, Y. and Fodor, Z. and Katz, S. D. and Szabo, K. K. The Equation of state in lattice QCD: With physical quark masses towards the continuum limit. JHEP. 2006. doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2006/01/089. arXiv:hep-lat/0510084

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  59. [59]

    and Cleymans, J

    Wheaton, S. and Cleymans, J. THERMUS: A Thermal model package for ROOT. Comput. Phys. Commun. 2009. doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2008.08.001. arXiv:hep-ph/0407174

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  60. [60]

    Measuring the Speed of Sound Using Cumulants of Baryon Number

    Sorensen, Agnieszka and Oliinychenko, Dmytro and McLerran, Larry and Koch, Volker. Measuring the Speed of Sound Using Cumulants of Baryon Number. Acta Phys. Polon. Supp. 2023. doi:10.5506/APhysPolBSupp.16.1-A48. arXiv:2209.04957

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  61. [61]

    Deconfining Phase Transition on Lattices with Boundaries at Low Temperature

    Bazavov, Alexei and Berg, Bernd A. Deconfining Phase Transition on Lattices with Boundaries at Low Temperature. Phys. Rev. D. 2007. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.76.014502. arXiv:hep-lat/0701007

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  62. [62]

    and Kodama, Takeshi and Palhares, Leticia F

    Fraga, Eduardo S. and Kodama, Takeshi and Palhares, Leticia F. and Sorensen, Paul. Finite-Size Effects and the Search for the Critical Endpoint of QCD. PoS. 2010. doi:10.22323/1.117.0017. arXiv:1106.3887

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  63. [63]

    and Stachel, J

    Braun-Munzinger, P. and Stachel, J. (Non)thermal aspects of charmonium production and a new look at J / psi suppression. Phys. Lett. B. 2000. doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(00)00991-6. arXiv:nucl-th/0007059

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  64. [64]

    and Petreczky, P

    Digal, S. and Petreczky, P. and Satz, H. Quarkonium feed down and sequential suppression. Phys. Rev. D. 2001. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.64.094015. arXiv:hep-ph/0106017

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  65. [65]

    Jet Quenching in Dense Matter

    Gyulassy, Miklos and Plumer, Michael. Jet Quenching in Dense Matter. Phys. Lett. B. 1990. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(90)91409-5

    doi:10.1016/0370-2693(90)91409-5 1990

  66. [66]

    Femtoscopy in relativistic heavy ion collisions

    Lisa, Michael Annan and Pratt, Scott and Soltz, Ron and Wiedemann, Urs. Femtoscopy in relativistic heavy ion collisions. Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 2005. doi:10.1146/annurev.nucl.55.090704.151533. arXiv:nucl-ex/0505014

    arXiv 2005

  67. [67]

    Particle interferometry for relativistic heavy ion collisions

    Wiedemann, Urs Achim and Heinz, Ulrich W. Particle interferometry for relativistic heavy ion collisions. Phys. Rept. 1999. doi:10.1016/S0370-1573(99)00032-0. arXiv:nucl-th/9901094

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  68. [68]

    and Jacak, Barbara V

    Heinz, Ulrich W. and Jacak, Barbara V. Two particle correlations in relativistic heavy ion collisions. Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 1999. doi:10.1146/annurev.nucl.49.1.529. arXiv:nucl-th/9902020

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  69. [69]

    2011 , url=

    Interacting bosons and fermions in three-dimensional optical lattice potentials : from atom optics to quantum simulation , author=. 2011 , url=

    2011

  70. [70]

    Experimental and theoretical challenges in the search for the quark gluon plasma: The STAR Collaboration's critical assessment of the evidence from RHIC collisions

    Adams, John and others. Experimental and theoretical challenges in the search for the quark gluon plasma: The STAR Collaboration's critical assessment of the evidence from RHIC collisions. Nucl. Phys. A. 2005. doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2005.03.085. arXiv:nucl-ex/0501009

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  71. [71]

    Back, B. B. and others. The PHOBOS perspective on discoveries at RHIC. Nucl. Phys. A. 2005. doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2005.03.084. arXiv:nucl-ex/0410022

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  72. [72]

    and others

    Adcox, K. and others. Formation of dense partonic matter in relativistic nucleus-nucleus collisions at RHIC: Experimental evaluation by the PHENIX collaboration. Nucl. Phys. A. 2005. doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2005.03.086. arXiv:nucl-ex/0410003

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  73. [73]

    Abelev, B. I. and others. Enhanced strange baryon production in Au + Au collisions compared to p + p at s(NN)**(1/2) = 200-GeV. Phys. Rev. C. 2008. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.77.044908. arXiv:0705.2511

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  74. [74]

    Multi-strange baryon production at mid-rapidity in Pb-Pb collisions at s_ NN = 2.76 TeV

    Abelev, Betty Bezverkhny and others. Multi-strange baryon production at mid-rapidity in Pb-Pb collisions at s_ NN = 2.76 TeV. Phys. Lett. B. 2014. doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2014.05.052. arXiv:1307.5543

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  75. [75]

    and Satow, Daisuke and Skokov, Vladimir V

    Gale, Charles and Hidaka, Yoshimasa and Jeon, Sangyong and Lin, Shu and Paquet, Jean-Fran c ois and Pisarski, Robert D. and Satow, Daisuke and Skokov, Vladimir V. and Vujanovic, Gojko. Production and Elliptic Flow of Dileptons and Photons in a Matrix Model of the Quark-Gluon Plasma. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2015. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.072301. arXiv:1409.4778

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  76. [76]

    The Physics and Astrophysics of Neutron Stars. 2018. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-97616-7

    doi:10.1007/978-3-319-97616-7 2018

  77. [77]

    Statistical thermodynamics of strong interactions at high-energies

    Hagedorn, R. Statistical thermodynamics of strong interactions at high-energies. Nuovo Cim. Suppl. 1965

    1965

  78. [78]

    and Menezes, D

    Dexheimer, V. and Menezes, D. P. and Strickland, M. The influence of strong magnetic fields on proto-quark stars. J. Phys. G. 2014. doi:10.1088/0954-3899/41/1/015203. arXiv:1210.4526

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  79. [79]

    and Mei ner, U

    Haidenbauer, J. and Mei ner, U. -G. and Nogga, A. Hyperon nucleon interaction within chiral effective field theory revisited. Eur. Phys. J. A. 2020. doi:10.1140/epja/s10050-020-00100-4. arXiv:1906.11681

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  80. [80]

    Son, D. T. and Stephanov, Misha A. QCD at finite isospin density. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2001. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.86.592. arXiv:hep-ph/0005225

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

Showing first 80 references.