pith. sign in

arxiv: 1907.02201 · v1 · pith:HNVZGHAPnew · submitted 2019-07-04 · ✦ hep-ph

Deformed QCD phase structure and entropy oscillation in the presence of a magnetic background

Guo-yun Shao , Wei-bo He , Xue-yan Gao This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-25 09:37 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph
keywords QCD phase transitionmagnetic fieldPNJL modelLandau levelsfirst-order transitionentropy oscillationheavy-ion collisions
0
0 comments X

The pith

Intermediate magnetic fields can split the light-quark QCD transition into two first-order lines or more complex structure.

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

The paper uses the PNJL model to track how an external magnetic field changes the QCD phase diagram through the quantization of quark motion into Landau levels. For magnetic field strengths that can be reached in non-central heavy-ion collisions, the light (up and down) quarks undergo two separate first-order transitions or a more intricate pattern instead of the single transition seen at zero field or at extremely strong fields. The same calculations also reveal that entropy oscillates as baryon density rises in the magnetic background. These features are presented as potentially observable in collisions at a few A GeV and in the interior of magnetars.

Core claim

When multiple Landau levels are populated by light quarks at intermediate magnetic field values, the phase structure in the light-quark sector is deformed so that two first-order transitions or a more complicated transition sequence appears, in contrast to the single transition that occurs at zero field or at very strong fields.

What carries the argument

The Polyakov improved Nambu-Jona-Lasinio (PNJL) model with quarks quantized into Landau levels under an external magnetic field.

If this is right

  • For selected intermediate magnetic field strengths the light-quark sector exhibits two distinct first-order phase transitions.
  • The phase diagram differs markedly from both the zero-field case and the very-strong-field case.
  • Entropy oscillates with rising baryon density in the magnetic background.
  • The deformed structure may influence the equation of state relevant to magnetars and to heavy-ion collisions at several A GeV.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the predicted multiple transitions survive in full QCD, the location of the critical endpoint(s) in the phase diagram would shift with magnetic field strength.
  • Entropy oscillations could produce measurable fluctuations in particle multiplicities or flow observables at RHIC energies.
  • The same Landau-level mechanism might alter the speed of sound in magnetized dense matter, affecting neutron-star cooling or merger signals.

Load-bearing premise

The PNJL model with its usual parameter set still describes QCD thermodynamics correctly once an external magnetic field is applied and multiple Landau levels are occupied.

What would settle it

A direct measurement, in non-central heavy-ion collisions at a few A GeV, of whether the light-quark sector shows one or two first-order transitions at the magnetic field strengths produced in those collisions.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1907.02201 by Guo-yun Shao, Wei-bo He, Xue-yan Gao.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: (color online) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: The thresholds of different Landau levels are marked with the horizontal lines. The subscript n of un and dn in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: (color online) Curves of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: (color online) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: illustrates the curves of sf,n with the increase of baryon density. It shows that each sf,n varies non￾monotonically as the density increases. The location of the peak of each sf,n corresponds to the density where dρf,n/dρB takes the maximum value. This can be seen by comparing Figs. 6 with 7 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: (color online) Entropy density without and with a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7: (color online) Differential of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8: (color online) Entropy per baryon as functions of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9: (color online) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10: (color online) Dynamical quark mass of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11: (color online) Phase diagrams in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12: (color online) Phase diagrams in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: FIG. 13: (color online) Phase diagrams in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_13.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The QCD phase transitions are investigated in the presence of an external magnetic field in the Polyakov improved Nambu--Jona-Lasinio (PNJL) model. We detailedly analyze that how the filling of multiple Landau levels by light (up and down) quarks deforms the QCD phase structure under different magnetic fields. In particular, we concentrate on the phase transition under a magnetic field possibly reachable in the non-central heavy-ion collisions at RHIC. The numerical result shows that two first-order transitions or more complicate phase transition in the light quark sector can exist for some magnetic fields, different from the phase structure under a very strong or zero magnetic field. These phenomena are very interesting and possibly relevant to the non-central heavy-ion collision experiments with colliding energies at several $A$ GeV as well as the equation of state of magnetars. Besides, we investigate the entropy oscillation with the increase of baryon density in a magnetic background.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript uses the PNJL model to study how external magnetic fields deform the QCD phase diagram for light quarks via Landau-level summation in the quark dispersion. Numerical solution of the gap equations shows that, at intermediate |eB| values relevant to non-central heavy-ion collisions, the light-quark sector can exhibit two (or more) first-order transitions, in contrast to the single transition found at B=0 or very large B; the authors also report oscillations in entropy versus baryon density.

Significance. If the reported multiplicity of transitions survives beyond the model assumptions, the result would indicate a non-monotonic deformation of the phase structure driven by progressive filling of Landau levels, with possible implications for the equation of state in magnetars and for low-energy heavy-ion runs. The calculation supplies concrete, falsifiable predictions within the PNJL framework (specific B windows and entropy wiggles) that could be tested by future lattice simulations at finite B.

major comments (2)
  1. [§3] §3 (model and gap equations): the four-fermion coupling G, current quark masses, and Polyakov-potential coefficients are taken unchanged from the B=0 vacuum fit; the central claim that multiple first-order lines appear at intermediate |eB| is therefore an output of this fixed-parameter choice once the dispersion is replaced by the Landau-level sum. No re-optimization or sensitivity scan against B-dependent renormalization is presented, so the multiplicity of transitions rests on an untested extrapolation of the mean-field parameters.
  2. [Results section] Results section (phase diagrams): the reported first-order lines are located by the usual thermodynamic-potential minimization without error bands or cross-check against lattice data at the same |eB|; because the location of the critical endpoints is known to be sensitive to the precise value of G and the Polyakov coefficients, the claim that “two first-order transitions … can exist for some magnetic fields” requires at least a one-parameter variation study to establish robustness.
minor comments (2)
  1. Figure captions should explicitly list the magnetic-field values (in GeV²) corresponding to each curve rather than referring only to “intermediate B.”
  2. The entropy-oscillation plots would benefit from an inset or table quantifying the amplitude of the oscillations relative to the smooth B=0 case.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive comments. The concerns about parameter fixing and robustness are valid and we address them directly below. We have revised the manuscript to include a limited sensitivity analysis on the coupling G.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§3] §3 (model and gap equations): the four-fermion coupling G, current quark masses, and Polyakov-potential coefficients are taken unchanged from the B=0 vacuum fit; the central claim that multiple first-order lines appear at intermediate |eB| is therefore an output of this fixed-parameter choice once the dispersion is replaced by the Landau-level sum. No re-optimization or sensitivity scan against B-dependent renormalization is presented, so the multiplicity of transitions rests on an untested extrapolation of the mean-field parameters.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the parameters (G, current masses, and Polyakov coefficients) are fixed to their B=0 vacuum values, as is standard in the majority of PNJL studies that introduce an external magnetic field. The multiplicity of transitions is generated by the explicit Landau-level summation in the dispersion relation, which is the central technical step of the calculation. A full B-dependent renormalization of the model parameters lies outside the present mean-field framework. To test robustness we have added a one-parameter variation: G is shifted by ±10% while all other inputs remain fixed. The additional first-order lines persist inside a window of intermediate |eB| values; these results are now shown in a new appendix figure. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Results section] Results section (phase diagrams): the reported first-order lines are located by the usual thermodynamic-potential minimization without error bands or cross-check against lattice data at the same |eB|; because the location of the critical endpoints is known to be sensitive to the precise value of G and the Polyakov coefficients, the claim that “two first-order transitions … can exist for some magnetic fields” requires at least a one-parameter variation study to establish robustness.

    Authors: We agree that a parameter-variation study is necessary to support the claim. As noted above, such a study has been performed for G and the results included. Direct lattice data at simultaneous finite B and finite baryon density are not yet available for quantitative comparison; we have added a brief discussion contrasting our B=0, μ=0 results with existing lattice determinations at nonzero magnetic field. Because the calculation is deterministic within the mean-field PNJL model, statistical error bands are not applicable; the sensitivity to G is now quantified by the variation study. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; PNJL gap equations yield independent outputs at finite B

full rationale

The paper solves the PNJL gap equations after substituting Landau-level sums into the quark dispersion relation, using a standard parameter set fixed at B=0. The reported multiplicity of first-order transitions is a numerical output of that computation rather than a quantity fitted or defined in terms of itself. No self-citation chain, ansatz smuggling, or renaming of known results is required to reach the central claim; the derivation remains self-contained within the model's mean-field dynamics and does not reduce to its zero-field inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review supplies no explicit list of free parameters or axioms; the claim depends on the standard PNJL Lagrangian, its fitted couplings, and the assumption that Landau-level summation captures all magnetic effects.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5694 in / 1090 out tokens · 26835 ms · 2026-05-25T09:37:12.209913+00:00 · methodology

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

78 extracted references · 78 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    µ u = µ d = µ s is taken in the calculation

    8 MeV. µ u = µ d = µ s is taken in the calculation. III. NUMERICAL RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS In this section, we demonstrate the numerical results of the deformed QCD phase diagram in the presence of an external magnetic field, and discuss its relation with Lan- dau quantization. We mainly concentrate on the first- order transition region at finite temperature...

    work page

  2. [2]

    The curve of ρf,n for each Landau level as a function of ρB is plotted 4 in Fig

    05 GeV2 as an example to discuss the relation between ρB − µ B curve and the filling of Landau levels. The curve of ρf,n for each Landau level as a function of ρB is plotted 4 in Fig. 2. In this and all subsequent figures, LL0 means the lowest Landau level, LL1 is the first Landau level, LL2 is the second, and so forth. The upper and lower panels in Fig. 2 r...

    work page

  3. [3]

    Cor- respondingly, we can understand that the small zigzag at low density in the ρB − µ B curve of eB = 0

    This figure also shows that ρd,0 decreases with the onset of ρu,0. Cor- respondingly, we can understand that the small zigzag at low density in the ρB − µ B curve of eB = 0. 4 GeV2 in the lower panel of Fig. 1 is induced by that u quark begins to occupy the lowest Landau energy (LL0). Eq. ( 16) also indicates that the maximum n of the 5 filled Landau level ...

    work page

  4. [4]

    4 GeV2 are plotted in Fig

    work page

  5. [5]

    The two regions of A-B and C-D are the metastable phases, in which nucleation and bubble formation possi- bly occur

    For the case of zero mag- netic field, the first-order transition occurs at ρA and ρD . The two regions of A-B and C-D are the metastable phases, in which nucleation and bubble formation possi- bly occur. The region of B-C is the mechanically unsta- ble phase because of ∂p/∂ρ < 0, which is known as the spinodal region. When the bulk uniform matter enters in...

    work page

  6. [6]

    Gupta, X

    S. Gupta, X. F. Luo, B. Mohanty, H. G. Ritter, and N. Xu, Science 332, 1525 (2011)

    work page 2011

  7. [7]

    Y. Aoki, G. Endrodi, Z. Fodor, S. D. Katz, K. K. Szabo, Nature 443, 675 (2006)

    work page 2006

  8. [8]

    Bazavov, et al., hotQCD Collaboration, Phys

    A. Bazavov, et al., hotQCD Collaboration, Phys. Rev. D 85, 054503 (2012)

    work page 2012

  9. [9]

    Bors´ anyi, Z

    S. Bors´ anyi, Z. Fodor, S. D. Katz, S. Krieg, C. Ratti and K. K. Szab´ o, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 062005 (2013)

    work page 2013

  10. [10]

    Bazavov, et al., hotQCD Collaboration, Phys

    A. Bazavov, et al., hotQCD Collaboration, Phys. Rev. D. 90, 094503 (2014)

    work page 2014

  11. [11]

    Bazavov, et al., hotQCD Collaboration, Phys

    A. Bazavov, et al., hotQCD Collaboration, Phys. Rev. D 96, 074510 (2017)

    work page 2017

  12. [12]

    Bors´ anyi, Z

    S. Bors´ anyi, Z. Fodor, C. Hoelbling, S. D. Katz, S. Krieg , and K. K. Sabz´ o, Phys. Lett. B 730, 99 (2014)

    work page 2014

  13. [13]

    Fukushima, Phys

    K. Fukushima, Phys. Lett. B 591, (2004) 277; Phys. Rev. D 77, 114028 (2008)

    work page 2004

  14. [14]

    Ratti, M

    C. Ratti, M. A. Thaler, and W. Weise, Phys. Rev. D 73, 014019 (2006)

    work page 2006

  15. [15]

    Costa, M

    P. Costa, M. C. Ruivo, C. A. de Sousa, and H. Hansen, Symmetry 2, 1338 (2010)

    work page 2010

  16. [16]

    W. J. Fu, Z. Zhang, and Y. X. Liu, Phys. Rev. D 77, 014006 (2008)

    work page 2008

  17. [17]

    Sasaki, J

    T. Sasaki, J. Takahashi, Y. Sakai, H. Kouno, and M. Yahiro, Phys. Rev. D 85, 056009 (2012)

    work page 2012

  18. [18]

    B. J. Schaefer, M. Wagner, and J. Wambach, Phys. Rev. D 81, 074013 (2010)

    work page 2010

  19. [19]

    Skokov, B

    V. Skokov, B. Friman, and K. Redlich, Phys. Rev. C 83, 054904 (2011)

    work page 2011

  20. [20]

    S. X. Qin, L. Chang, H. Chen, Y. X. Liu, and C. D. Roberts, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 172301 (2011)

    work page 2011

  21. [21]

    F. Gao, J. Chen, Y. X. Liu, S. X. Qin, C. D. Roberts, and S. M. Schmidt, Phys. Rev. D 93, 094019 (2016)

    work page 2016

  22. [22]

    C. S. Fischer, J. Luecker, and C. A. Welzbacher. Phys. Rev. D 90, 034022 (2014)

    work page 2014

  23. [23]

    C. Shi, Y. L. Wang, Y. Jiang, Z. F. Cui, H. S. Zong, JHEP 1407, 014 (2014)

    work page 2014

  24. [24]

    M. M. Aggarwal, et al., STAR Collaboration, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 022302 (2010)

    work page 2010

  25. [25]

    Adamczyk, et al., STAR Collaboration, Phys

    L. Adamczyk, et al., STAR Collaboration, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112 , 032302 (2014)

    work page 2014

  26. [26]

    Luo (for the STAR Collaboration), PoS(CPOD2014) (2015) 019

    X. Luo (for the STAR Collaboration), PoS(CPOD2014) (2015) 019

    work page 2015

  27. [27]

    Luo, Nucl

    X. Luo, Nucl. Phys. A 956, 75 (2016)

    work page 2016

  28. [28]

    Luo and N

    X. Luo and N. Xu, Nucl. Sci. Tech. 28, 112 (2017)

    work page 2017

  29. [29]

    Kharzeev, K

    D. Kharzeev, K. Landsteiner, A. Schmitt, and Ho-Ung Yee, Lect. Notes Phys. 971, 1 (2013)

    work page 2013

  30. [30]

    V. A. Miransky and I. A. Shovkovy, Phys. Rept. 576, 1 (2015)

    work page 2015

  31. [31]

    J. O. Aadersen and W. R. Naylor, A. Tranberg,Rev. Mod. Phys. 88, 025001, (2016)

    work page 2016

  32. [32]

    Bocquet, S

    M. Bocquet, S. Bonazzola, E. Gourgoulhon, and J. No- vak, Astron. Astrophys. 301, 757 (1995)

    work page 1995

  33. [33]

    E. J. Ferrer, V. de la Incera, J. P. Keith, I. Portillo, P. L. Springsteen, Phys. Rev. C 82, 065802 (2010)

    work page 2010

  34. [34]

    D. E. Kharzeev, L. D. McLerran, and H. J. Warringa, Nucl. Phys. A 803, 227 (2008)

    work page 2008

  35. [35]

    Skokov, A

    V. Skokov, A. Y. Illarionov, and V. Toneev, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 24, 5925 (2009)

    work page 2009

  36. [36]

    Voronyuk, V

    V. Voronyuk, V. D. Toneev, W. Cassing, E. L. Bratkovskaya, V. P. Konchakovski, and S. A. Voloshin, Phys. Rev. C 83, 054911 (2011)

    work page 2011

  37. [37]

    Bzdak, V

    A. Bzdak, V. Skokov, Phys. Lett. B 710, 171 (2012)

    work page 2012

  38. [38]

    W. T. Deng, X. G. Huang, Phys. Rev. C 85, 044907 (2012)

    work page 2012

  39. [39]

    P. V. Buividovich, M. N. Chernodub, E. V. Luschevskaya, and M. I. Polikarpov, Phys. Rev. D 80, 054503 (2009)

    work page 2009

  40. [40]

    D. E. Kharzeev and H. U. Yee, Phys. Rev. D 83, 085007 (2011)

    work page 2011

  41. [41]

    M. A. Metlitski and A. R. Zhitnitsky, Phys. Rev. D 72, 045011 (2005)

    work page 2005

  42. [42]

    Burnier, D

    Y. Burnier, D. E. Kharzeev, J. Liao, and H. U. Yee, Phys. 10 Rev. Lett. 107, 052303 (2011)

    work page 2011

  43. [43]

    E. V. Gorbar, V. A. Miransky, I. A. Shovkovy, Phys. Rev. D 83, 085003 (2011)

    work page 2011

  44. [44]

    Fukushima, D

    K. Fukushima, D. E. Kharzeev, H. J. Warringa, Phys. Rev. D 78, 074033 (2008)

    work page 2008

  45. [45]

    Fukushima, M

    K. Fukushima, M. Ruggieri, Phys. Rev. D 82, 054001 (2010)

    work page 2010

  46. [46]

    Gatto, M

    R. Gatto, M. Ruggieri, Phys. Rev. D 85, 054013 (2012)

    work page 2012

  47. [47]

    Ruggieri, Phys

    M. Ruggieri, Phys. Rev. D 84, 014011 (2011)

    work page 2011

  48. [48]

    W. J. Fu, Phys. Rev. D 88, 014009 (2013)

    work page 2013

  49. [49]

    C. A. B. Bayona, K. Peeters, and M. Zamaklar, J. High Energy Phys. 1106, 092 (2011)

    work page 2011

  50. [50]

    Buividovich, M

    P. Buividovich, M. N. Chernodub, E. V. Luschevskaya, and M. I. Polikarpov, Phys. Lett. B 682 484 (2010)

    work page 2010

  51. [51]

    D’Elia, S

    M. D’Elia, S. Mukherjee, F. Sanfilippo, Phys. Rev. D 82, 051501(R) (2010)

    work page 2010

  52. [52]

    E. M. Ilgenfritz, M. Kalinowski, M. M¨ uller-Preussker , B. Petersson, A. Schreiber, Phys. Rev. D 85 (2012) 114504

    work page 2012

  53. [53]

    G. S. Bali, F. Bruckmann, G. Endrodi, Z. Fodor, S. D. Katz, S. Krieg, A. Schafer, and K K. Szabo, JHEP 1202, 044 (2012)

    work page 2012

  54. [54]

    G. S. Bali, F. Bruckmann, G. Endrodi, Z. Fodor, S. D. Katz and A. Schafer, Phys. Rev. D 86, 071502(R) (2012)

    work page 2012

  55. [55]

    Fukushima and J

    K. Fukushima and J. M. Pawlowski, Phys. Rev. D 86, 076013 (2012)

    work page 2012

  56. [56]

    J. Chao, P. Chu, and M. Huang, Phys. Rev. D 88, 054009 (2013)

    work page 2013

  57. [57]

    E. S. Fraga, J. Noronha, and L. F. Palhares, Phys. Rev. D 87, 114014 (2013)

    work page 2013

  58. [58]

    Fukushima and Y

    K. Fukushima and Y. Hidaka, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 031601 (2013)

    work page 2013

  59. [59]

    Fukushima and Y

    K. Fukushima and Y. Hidaka, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 102301 (2016)

    work page 2016

  60. [60]

    Fayazbakhsh, and N

    S. Fayazbakhsh, and N. Sadooghi, Phys. Rev. D 90, 105030 (2014)

    work page 2014

  61. [61]

    Ferreira, P

    M. Ferreira, P. Costa, and C. Providˆ encia, Phys. Rev. D 90, 016012 (2014)

    work page 2014

  62. [62]

    Costa, M

    P. Costa, M. Ferreira, D. P. Menezes, J. Moreira, and C. Providˆ encia, Phys. Rev. D92, 036012 (2015)

    work page 2015

  63. [63]

    E. S. Fraga, B. W. Mintz, and J. Schaffner-Bielich, Phys. Lett. B 731, 154 (2014)

    work page 2014

  64. [64]

    L. Yu, J. Van Doorsselaere, and M. Huang, Phys. Rev. D 91, 074011 (2015)

    work page 2015

  65. [65]

    Ayala, C

    A. Ayala, C. A. Dominguez, L. A. Hernandez, M. Loewe, and R. Zamora, Phys. Lett. B 759, 99 (2016)

    work page 2016

  66. [66]

    V. P. Pagura, D. Gomez Dumm, S. Noguera, and N. N. Scoccola, Phys. Rev. D 95, 034013 (2017)

    work page 2017

  67. [67]

    D. P. Menezes, M. B. Pinto, S. S. Avancini, A. P. Mar- tinez, and C. Providˆ encia, Phys. Rev. C 79, 035807 (2009)

    work page 2009

  68. [68]

    Ferreira, P

    M. Ferreira, P. Costa, and C. Providˆ encia, Phys. Rev. D 97, 014014 (2018)

    work page 2018

  69. [69]

    R¨ oßner, C

    S. R¨ oßner, C. Ratti, and W. Weise, Phys. Rev. D 75, 034007 (2007)

    work page 2007

  70. [70]

    Fukushima, M

    K. Fukushima, M. Ruggieri, and R. Gatto, Phys. Rev. D 81, 114031 (2010)

    work page 2010

  71. [71]

    Rehberg, S

    P. Rehberg, S. P. Klevansky, and J. H¨ ufner, Phys. Rev. C 53, 410 (1996)

    work page 1996

  72. [72]

    X. J. Wen and J. J. Liang, Phys. Rev. D 94, 014005 (2016)

    work page 2016

  73. [73]

    Wang and G

    L. Wang and G. Cao, Phys. Rev. D 97, 034014 (2018)

    work page 2018

  74. [74]

    K. I. Aoki, H. Uoi, and M. Yamada, Phys. Lett. B 753, 580 (2016)

    work page 2016

  75. [75]

    Lugones and A

    G. Lugones and A. G. Grunfeld, Phys. Rev. C 95, 015804 (2017)

    work page 2017

  76. [76]

    P. G. Allen and N. N. Scoccola, Phys. Rev. D 88, 094005 (2013)

    work page 2013

  77. [77]

    R. Z. Denke and M. B. Pinto, Phys. Rev. D 88, 056008 (2013)

    work page 2013

  78. [78]

    A. G. Grunfeld, D. P. Menezes, M. B. Pinto, and N. N. Scoccola, Phys. Rev. D 90, no. 4, 044024 (2014)

    work page 2014