REVIEW 2 cited by
Chiral crossover vs chiral density wave in dense nuclear matter
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
We employ a model based on nucleonic and mesonic degrees of freedom to discuss the competition between isotropic and anisotropic phases in cold and dense matter. Assuming isotropy, the model exhibits a chiral phase transition which is of second order in the chiral limit and becomes a crossover in the case of a realistic pion mass. This observation crucially depends on the presence of the nucleonic vacuum contribution. Allowing for an anisotropic phase in the form of a chiral density wave can disrupt the smooth crossover. We identify the regions in the parameter space of the model where a chiral density wave is energetically preferred. A high-density re-appearance of the chiral density wave with unphysical behavior, as seen in previous studies, is avoided by a suitable renormalization scheme. A nonzero pion mass tends to disfavor the anisotropic phase compared to the chiral limit and we find that, within our model, the chiral density wave is only realized for baryon densities of at least about 6 times nuclear saturation density.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
How neutron star properties disfavor a nuclear chiral density wave
Within this nucleon-meson model, a chiral density wave in neutron star cores is only stable for equations of state too soft to support observed two-solar-mass pulsars, predicting isotropic cores.
-
Agentic AI and Retrieval-Augmented Models in Straight-Through Underwriting
On 635 synthetic BOP applications, multi-agent Agentic RAG reaches 86.5% decision accuracy versus 77.6% single-LLM and 76.9% naive RAG, with largest gains on multi-step and missing-information cases.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.