Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 46 references

The trace-anomaly gap between symmetric and beta-equilibrated matter is a probe of the isovector coupling's density dependence, not a unique signal of exotic degrees of freedom.

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 17:50 UTC pith:L4D7WDPE

load-bearing objection Careful inverse-RMF analysis that turns the trace-anomaly splitting into an isovector diagnostic; the central correlation is plausible but needs a prior-predictive check before it is treated as data-driven. the 4 major comments →

arxiv 2607.17472 v1 pith:L4D7WDPE submitted 2026-07-20 nucl-th

Trace anomaly and isospin splitting in inverse-mapped relativistic mean-field theory

Wen-Jie Xie , Jun-Hua Guo This is my paper
classification nucl-th PACS 21.65.Mn26.60.-c24.10.Jv
keywords trace anomalysound speedrelativistic mean-field modelequation of statesymmetry energyisovector couplingneutron starsheavy-ion collisions
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.

The paper asks whether the trace anomaly—a dimensionless measure of how far dense matter is from conformal behavior—can identify which microscopic interaction channel drives the difference between heavy-ion-collision matter and neutron-star matter. Using a Bayesian ensemble of relativistic mean-field models mapped from macroscopic nuclear parameters, it finds that the difference in trace anomaly between symmetric nuclear matter and beta-equilibrated matter stays positive between two and five times nuclear saturation density. This splitting is most strongly correlated with the density derivative of the isovector-vector coupling, with bootstrap-stable Spearman coefficients around 0.91–0.92 at 2–3 n0, and only weakly with the beta-equilibrium proton fraction. The authors conclude that the splitting is a thermodynamic probe of the high-density symmetry sector, not a unique signature of exotic degrees of freedom.

Core claim

Within a uniform-matter inverse-mapped relativistic mean-field ensemble that reproduces flow-based symmetric-matter trace trends and neutron-star trace bands, the paper finds that Δ_SNM − Δ_β remains positive over 2–5 n0 with probability greater than 0.99, and that this splitting is most strongly correlated with the density derivative of the isovector coupling (r_s ≈ 0.91–0.92 at 2–3 n0). The correlation with the beta-equilibrium proton fraction is much weaker. The sound-speed splitting changes sign near 3.38 n0, and the derivative term −dΔ/d ln ε becomes sensitive to both scalar-vector and isovector responses above 4 n0. Data-combination tests show that the isovector separation is resolved

What carries the argument

The central object is the trace-anomaly splitting δ_isoΔ = Δ_SNM − Δ_β, computed on a posterior ensemble of density-dependent relativistic mean-field models generated by an inverse map from ten macroscopic nuclear parameters to uniform-matter couplings. The key identity is the decomposition c_s² = P/ε − dΔ/d ln ε, which separates the pressure-ratio term from the derivative term and allows the splitting to be assigned to coupling channels. The correlation analysis focuses on the density derivative of the isovector coupling, df_ρ/dn, as the leading posterior driver of the trace splitting at 2–3 n0.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the fixed rational functional form and the reduced branch of the inverse map are general enough that the posterior correlation between the trace splitting and dfρ/dn reflects the true isovector density dependence rather than an artifact of the parameterization; if a different functional form changed the channel attribution, the diagnostic would not be robust.

What would settle it

A concrete falsifier would be a finite-nucleus-calibrated relativistic mean-field fit, including ground-state data, that confronted with the same heavy-ion and neutron-star data yields a trace splitting uncorrelated with dfρ/dn, or a direct measurement of the high-density symmetry-energy slope (for example from π−/π+ yields in heavy-ion collisions) that contradicts the inferred dfρ/dn at 2–3 n0.

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

If this is right

  • The SNM–beta trace splitting can be used as an additional high-density constraint on the symmetry energy in future Bayesian EOS inferences.
  • The positive splitting at 2–5 n0 implies beta-equilibrated matter approaches conformality more slowly than symmetric matter, a feature that finite-nucleus-calibrated functionals would need to reproduce.
  • Because the splitting correlates with dfρ/dn rather than proton fraction, trace measurements carry information about isovector density dependence that is complementary to neutron-skin or isospin-diffusion observables.
  • The data-combination test indicates that neither heavy-ion flow nor neutron-star data alone resolves the isovector channel; both projections are needed, which matters for planning joint multimessenger analyses.
  • If trace-splitting information is included in a finite-nucleus-filtered refit, it could help break degeneracies in the high-density symmetry sector.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The reported correlation is established within a specific rational ansatz and a reduced branch of the inverse map; a natural extension is to test whether a more general functional form with additional density dependence in the isovector channel preserves the attribution, and if not, the diagnostic may be parameterization-dependent.
  • At fixed energy density, the trace-anomaly splitting crosses zero near ε/ε0 ≈ 4.17, suggesting that comparing HIC and neutron-star trace bands in the ε-plane without specifying composition could mislead; this projection effect deserves explicit attention in future work.
  • The controlled isovector perturbation shows a monotonic reduction of the splitting as the high-density departure of fρ is amplified; a direct experimental measure of the high-density symmetry-energy slope (for example from pion ratios in heavy-ion collisions) could empirically calibrate this relationship outside the RMF class.
  • The result that the isovector separation appears only when laboratory and astrophysical data are combined implies that future joint analyses should track the trace-anomaly splitting explicitly as a diagnostic channel, rather than only reporting EOS bands.

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 / 5 minor

Summary. The paper develops an inverse-mapped relativistic mean-field ensemble: ten macroscopic nuclear-matter parameters are sampled from uniform priors and mapped deterministically into density-dependent Typel-Wolter couplings for uniform matter, with a posterior combining chiral EFT, heavy-ion flow, and NICER mass-radius constraints. For each sample the trace anomaly Δ=1/3−P/ε and the sound speed are computed for symmetric and beta-equilibrated matter. The main claims are that the SNM–beta trace splitting Δ_SNM−Δ_β stays positive over 2–5 n0 with posterior probability >0.99; that it correlates most strongly with the density derivative of the isovector coupling (Spearman r_s≈0.91–0.93 at 2–3 n0) and only weakly with the proton fraction; and that this isovector channel attribution emerges only when laboratory and astrophysical constraints are combined. The paper is explicitly scoped as a uniform-matter inverse-map study, with caveats that the inverse is not globally unique, the flow-based trace anchors are exploratory, and finite-nucleus calibration is left to future work.

Significance. If the central claim holds, the SNM–beta trace splitting would provide a new thermodynamic probe of the high-density symmetry sector and a concrete channel interpretation of EOS-level trace constraints. The manuscript has genuine strengths: careful thermodynamic consistency checks (HVH residuals with median 5.8×10^-6), bootstrap uncertainties on the key correlations, a controlled isovector-channel perturbation, a data-combination diagnostic, and an unusually candid statement of scope and limitations. The missing prior-predictive control, however, leaves open that the strong correlations and the positive-splitting probability are inherited from the fixed inverse-map ansatz and prior volume rather than from the combined data. Because the deterministic inverse map makes the prior predictive readily computable, this is a fixable but load-bearing gap. The significance of the paper therefore depends on whether that control supports the data-driven interpretation.

major comments (4)
  1. [§4–§5; Eqs. (4)–(5)] The central quantitative claims—P(Δ_SNM−Δ_β>0)=1 over 2–5 n0 and r_s(δisoΔ, df_ρ/dn)=0.931 at 2 n0—are posterior diagnostics, but no prior-predictive baseline is shown. Because Eqs. (4)–(5) map every sampled macroscopic parameter vector deterministically to couplings and hence to all trace observables, the prior predictive of r_s and of P(δisoΔ>0) can be computed exactly using the same inverse map and trace-valid filters. The reported shrinkage of posterior widths (Section 2) addresses marginal parameter constraints, not correlations induced by the shared Typel-Wolter shape parameters. If the prior predictive already yields r_s≈0.9 and positive splitting with probability near one, the attribution of the effect to the combined likelihood would collapse. The authors should report prior-predictive distributions of the key correlation coefficients and of P(δisoΔ>0), ideally for each data com
  2. [§6, Fig. 7, Table 4] The statement that the isovector channel separation “is resolved only when laboratory and astrophysical projections are combined” is not supported by the evidence as presented. The data-combination runs vary the likelihood but keep the same prior and the same inverse map, so they cannot distinguish a likelihood-driven correlation from a prior/parameterization-driven one. The compatibility index I_A,B in Table 4 compares nested-sampling evidences; it speaks to data-set compatibility, not to the origin of the Spearman correlations. For each data combination the authors should report the prior-predictive value of the correlation; only a comparison showing that the full-posterior r_s is significantly larger than the prior-predictive r_s would justify the phrase “resolved only when combined.” Without this, the claim should be softened to “within the combined posterior, the strongest correlati
  3. [§5, Fig. 6] The weak correlation with the beta-equilibrium proton fraction (r_s=−0.04 at 2 n0 and 0.20 at 3 n0) is used to argue that the trace splitting is not a proxy for Y_p. However, Y_p and df_ρ/dn are both outputs of the same inverse map and are nonlinearly related within the chosen rational ansatz; a weak marginal Spearman correlation does not exclude a parameterization-induced link. The controlled λ_ρ perturbation in Fig. 6 changes f_ρ and therefore also changes the beta-matter composition, so it does not isolate the channel in the needed way. A partial correlation of δisoΔ with df_ρ/dn at fixed Y_p, or a prior-predictive comparison, would materially strengthen the channel claim. As it stands, the “isovector dominated” conclusion should be presented as a posterior diagnostic within the ansatz.
  4. [§2–§3, likelihood paragraph] The flow-based SNM trace points of Ref. [31] are described as exploratory laboratory anchors with transport-model uncertainties, yet the likelihood uses HIC flow as a Gaussian penalty on the SNM pressure band over 2≤n/n0≤4.5. The systematic uncertainty in the flow extraction is therefore not propagated into the posterior. Because the paper’s key data-combination claim is that the isovector separation appears when laboratory and astrophysical constraints are combined, a biased lab anchor could directly shape that conclusion. The authors should either include the flow-band systematics in the likelihood or perform a robustness run with a broadened or alternative flow band and show that the key correlations and P(δisoΔ>0) are stable.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§2, convergence paragraph] The convergence check and the reported posterior width shrinkages (0.309, 0.296, 0.278 of prior widths) are useful, but they do not substitute for the prior-predictive correlation analysis requested above. Also, bootstrap uncertainties on the Spearman coefficients are quoted from 2000 resamplings of the 3187 trace-valid samples; because nested-sampling samples are autocorrelated, the effective sample size should be reported.
  2. [§4] “P(Δ_SNM−Δ_β>0) is unity” is an empirical statement based on 3187 samples. Please phrase this as “all trace-valid posterior samples in our finite sample have positive splitting,” and give a formal lower bound or credibility statement consistent with the abstract’s “>0.99.”
  3. [Table 3] The Spearman coefficients in Table 3 are quoted without bootstrap intervals, although the text gives intervals for selected rows. Add intervals to all entries, and define the signed convention so that positive r_s means larger df_ρ/dn is associated with a larger splitting.
  4. [Fig. 2] In the fixed-energy-density panels, clarify whether ε0 is the saturation energy density of the respective composition (SNM or beta matter) or a common reference value. The interpretation of the crossing points (e.g., ε/ε0≈4.17) depends on this choice.
  5. [Eqs. (4)–(5)] The inverse-map construction relies on the “reduced Typel-Wolter branch” and sequential constraints from Ref. [39]. A self-contained appendix or supplementary derivation showing explicitly how f_σ, f_ω, and f_ρ are determined from the ten sampled parameters would improve reproducibility, since the paper is not checkable without that reference.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged

No construction-level circularity: the trace splitting is an in-sample posterior diagnostic within an openly acknowledged fixed ansatz; the main concerns are one load-bearing self-citation for the inverse map (Ref. [39]) and the absence of a prior-predictive baseline for the headline correlation and positivity probability.

specific steps
  1. self citation load bearing [Section 2 (Inverse-mapped RMF ensemble), Eqs. (4)-(5), Ref. [39]]
    "The inverse map follows the construction of Ref. [39]; we summarize the ingredients needed here. ... For the isoscalar shapes we use the same reduced Typel-Wolter branch as in Ref. [39]."

    The central method (the inverse-mapped DD-PC ensemble in which the whole analysis is set) is inherited from the authors' own prior work (Xie & Xia, arXiv:2603.06128). All channel-attribution conclusions live inside this self-cited construction, so the self-citation is load-bearing rather than decorative. It is only partially circular: the present paper restates the map's ingredients, supplies its own thermodynamic consistency checks (HVH residuals ~1e-6), and explicitly disclaims global uniqueness ('We do not claim a globally unique inverse of the RMF problem'). No uniqueness theorem is invoked, so this is a method citation, not a forbidden-competition argument.

  2. fitted input called prediction [Abstract; Sections 4-5 and 6; Eqs. (4)-(6); Table 3]
    "The resulting splitting, Δ_SNM−Δ_β, remains positive over 2–5n0 ... and is most strongly associated with the density derivative of the isovector coupling, with bootstrap-stable Spearman coefficients r_s≈0.91–0.92 at 2–3n0. ... Data-combination and controlled-isovector tests show that this channel separation is resolved only when laboratory and astrophysical projections are combined."

    Both δisoΔ and dfρ/dn are deterministic outputs of the same posterior-sampled parameter vector ('each accepted macroscopic parameter vector is mapped deterministically to a set of uniform matter couplings'), so r_s and P(δisoΔ>0)=1 are in-sample properties of the fitted ensemble, not independent predictions. The paper's claim that the combined data 'resolve' the isovector channel is an identification claim, but no prior-predictive distribution over r_s or the positivity probability is reported; the ansatz/prior contribution is therefore not separated from the likelihood contribution by construction of the analysis. The data-combination runs (fixed prior, varied likelihood) and the fixed DD-RMF comparison partially mitigate this, so the correlation is not shown to be forced; this is a parti

full rationale

The derivation chain is a standard Bayesian pipeline: 10 macroscopic parameters θ are sampled from uniform priors; the inverse map (Eqs. 4-6, following Ref. [39]) converts θ deterministically into DD-PC-like couplings; the EOS and beta equilibrium give Δ_SNM(n) and Δ_β(n); and the reported splitting δisoΔ plus the channel correlations are computed from the posterior. No step equates an output to an input by definition: the symmetry-sector prior inputs (E_sym, L, K_sym, f_ρ∞) do not by themselves fix the sign or magnitude of Δ_SNM−Δ_β or its correlation with df_ρ/dn. The by-definition link δisoΔ = −δiso(P/ε) (Eq. 1) is explicitly acknowledged ('We do not interpret Δ as statistically independent of the pressure ratio'), so it is not presented as a discovery. The paper repeatedly asserts its own limitations ('Within the chosen rational ansatz...', 'We use these points as exploratory laboratory anchors...', 'The main limitation is that the inverse ensemble used here is a uniform-matter ensemble'), and these passages weigh toward a low score. The two flagged concerns are: (1) the inverse-map machinery is taken from the authors' own Ref. [39]; this is load-bearing but restated and internally checked, and uniqueness is expressly disclaimed; (2) the headline correlation (r_s ≈ 0.93) and the P>0.99 positivity probability are in-sample posterior statistics with no prior-predictive baseline, so the strong claim that the combined data 'resolve' the isovector channel is only partially identified. The NS-only and χEFT-only runs, the λ_ρ perturbation, and the fixed DD-RMF comparison do provide partial evidence that the likelihood, not just the prior/ansatz, shapes the attribution. The external trace bands are also not fully independent of the likelihood inputs (flow trace points and NS GP bands derive from the same HIC/NICER data families), so agreement with them is a consistency check rather than out-of-sample validation. Net: no construction-level circularity; moderate in-sample and self-citation concerns justify a score of 3.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

10 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central result is an in-sample property of a Bayesian model with 10 free nuclear-matter parameters. No new particles or forces are introduced. The main axiomatic content is the choice of the RMF channel basis and the fixed branch of the inverse map; the paper acknowledges these restrictions.

free parameters (10)
  • K0
    Incompressibility at saturation, sampled from uniform prior 220–260 MeV; part of the 10-dimensional inverse-map input.
  • M*/M
    Dirac effective mass at saturation, prior 0.45–0.65.
  • n0
    Saturation density prior 0.145–0.170 fm^-3.
  • E0
    Binding energy prior -16.5 to -15.8 MeV.
  • Esym
    Symmetry energy prior 28.5–34.9 MeV.
  • L = 44.1 +19.4/-11.5 MeV
    Symmetry-energy slope, posterior median from full data set, prior 20–120.
  • Ksym = -76.2 +93.1/-54.9 MeV
    Symmetry incompressibility, posterior median, prior -400–100.
  • fσ∞
    Asymptotic scalar coupling ratio, prior 0.3–0.9.
  • fω∞
    Asymptotic vector coupling ratio, prior 0.3–1.4.
  • fρ∞
    Asymptotic isovector coupling ratio, prior 0.2–0.9.
axioms (5)
  • standard math Density-dependent RMF energy density Eq. (4) and rearrangement pressure Eq. (6) are thermodynamically consistent.
    The derivation of the EOS and the Hugenholtz-Van Hove check rely on this.
  • domain assumption Beta equilibrium and charge neutrality determine neutron-star composition; uniform matter without crust is used.
    The beta-equilibrated trace anomaly is computed under this assumption in Section 2.
  • domain assumption The Typel-Wolter rational form (Eq. 5) is an adequate representation of the density dependence of the couplings.
    The inverse map samples only this functional form; the channel attribution may depend on it.
  • ad hoc to paper The reduced Typel-Wolter branch and the deterministic inverse map fix the remaining shape parameters without multiplicity.
    The paper acknowledges 'we do not claim a globally unique inverse of the RMF problem', making this an a priori modeling choice.
  • domain assumption The three likelihood projections (chiral EFT pressure band, HIC flow pressure band, NICER mass-radius KDEs) correctly encode the underlying data.
    The posterior and all derived correlations depend on these likelihood representations, which are not fully tabulated in the paper.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 15343 in / 13093 out tokens · 111065 ms · 2026-08-01T17:50:26.828941+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Trace anomaly and sound speed provide EOS-level probes of dense-matter nonconformality, but do not by themselves identify the microscopic channels responsible for the response. We study this question with a uniform-matter inverse-mapped relativistic mean-field ensemble constrained by chiral effective field theory, heavy-ion flow information, and neutron-star mass-radius data. The ensemble reproduces the flow-based trace trend in symmetric nuclear matter, while beta-equilibrated matter approaches the neutron-star trace bands more slowly. The resulting splitting, \(\Delta_{\SNM}-\Delta_{\betaeq}\), remains positive over \(2--5\nzero\) and is most strongly correlated with the density derivative of the isovector-vector coupling, with bootstrap-stable Spearman coefficients \(r_s\simeq0.91--0.92\) at \(2--3\nzero\). Its correlation with the beta-equilibrium proton fraction is much weaker. The sound-speed splitting changes sign near \(3.38\nzero\), and the derivative term \(-\dd\Delta/\dd\ln\varepsilon\) becomes sensitive to both scalar-vector and isovector responses above \(4\nzero\). Data-combination and controlled-isovector tests show that this channel separation is resolved only when laboratory and astrophysical projections are combined. Thus, within the present inverse-mapped RMF space, the SNM--beta trace splitting acts as a thermodynamic probe of the high-density symmetry sector rather than as a unique signal of exotic degrees of freedom. A finite-nucleus-calibrated extension will be needed to test how much of this channel diagnostic survives in predictive covariant density functionals.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.17472 by Jun-Hua Guo, Wen-Jie Xie.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Inverse-RMF thermodynamic comparison. The left panel compares the SNM trace [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Isospin splitting of the inverse-RMF trace diagnostics. The top row shows di [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Representative microscopic correlations for the SNM–beta trace splitting. The strongest [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Fujimoto decomposition of the sound speed in the inverse-RMF ensemble. The deriva [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Signal-to-width ratio and channel association of the trace splitting. Left: posterior [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Controlled isovector-channel perturbation for 20 posterior samples with stable controlled [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Dependence of the inverse-RMF trace diagnostics on the data combination. The up [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Comparison with conventional CDF baselines. The gray bands show the inverse-RMF [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_8.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

46 extracted references · 4 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Danielewicz, R

    P. Danielewicz, R. Lacey, W. G. Lynch, Determination of the equation of state of dense matter, Science 298 (2002) 1592–1596. doi:10.1126/science.1078070

    doi:10.1126/science.1078070 2002

  2. [2]

    Sorensen, et al., Dense nuclear matter equation of state from heavy-ion collisions, Prog

    A. Sorensen, et al., Dense nuclear matter equation of state from heavy-ion collisions, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 134 (2024) 104080. doi:10.1016/j.ppnp.2023.104080

    arXiv 2024

  3. [3]

    Omana Kuttan, J

    M. Omana Kuttan, J. Steinheimer, K. Zhou, H. Stoecker, Qcd equation of state of dense nuclear matter from a bayesian analy- sis of heavy-ion collision data, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131 (2023) 202303. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.131.202303

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.131.202303 2023

  4. [4]

    C. Y . Tsang, et al., Constraints on the neutron-star equation of state from heavy-ion collisions, Nat. Astron. 8 (2024) 328–336. doi:10.1038/s41550- 023-02161-z

    doi:10.1038/s41550- 2024

  5. [5]

    Antoniadis, et al., A massive pulsar in a compact relativistic binary, Sci- ence 340 (2013) 1233232

    J. Antoniadis, et al., A massive pulsar in a compact relativistic binary, Sci- ence 340 (2013) 1233232. doi:10.1126/science.1233232. 20

    doi:10.1126/science.1233232 2013

  6. [6]

    H. T. Cromartie, et al., Relativistic shapiro delay measurements of an extremely massive millisecond pulsar, Nat. Astron. 4 (2020) 72–76. doi:10.1038/s41550-019-0880-2

    doi:10.1038/s41550-019-0880-2 2020

  7. [7]

    R. W. Romani, D. Kandel, A. V . Filippenko, T. G. Brink, W. Zheng, Psr j0952-0607: The fastest and heaviest known galactic neutron star, Astro- phys. J. Lett. 934 (2022) L17. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac8007

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac8007 2022

  8. [8]

    B. P. Abbott, et al., Gw170817: Observation of gravitational waves from a binary neutron star inspiral, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119 (2017) 161101. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.161101

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.119.161101 2017

  9. [9]

    B. P. Abbott, et al., Gw170817: Measurements of neutron star radii and equation of state, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121 (2018) 161101. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.121.161101

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.121.161101 2018

  10. [10]

    B. P. Abbott, et al., Properties of the binary neutron star merger gw170817, Phys. Rev. X 9 (2019) 011001. doi:10.1103/PhysRevX.9.011001

    doi:10.1103/physrevx.9.011001 2019

  11. [12]

    M. C. Miller, et al., Psr j0030+0451 mass and radius from nicer data and implications for the properties of neutron star matter, Astrophys. J. Lett. 887 (2019) L24. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab50c5

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab50c5 2019

  12. [13]

    T. E. Riley, et al., A nicer view of the massive pulsar psr j0740+6620 in- formed by radio timing and xmm-newton spectroscopy, Astrophys. J. Lett. 918 (2021) L27. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac0a81

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac0a81 2021

  13. [14]

    M. C. Miller, et al., The radius of psr j0740+6620 from nicer and xmm- newton data, Astrophys. J. Lett. 918 (2021) L28. doi:10.3847/2041- 8213/ac089b

    doi:10.3847/2041- 2021

  14. [15]

    Choudhury, et al., A nicer view of the nearest and brightest mil- lisecond pulsar: Psr j0437-4715, Astrophys

    D. Choudhury, et al., A nicer view of the nearest and brightest mil- lisecond pulsar: Psr j0437-4715, Astrophys. J. Lett. 971 (2024) L20. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad5a6f

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad5a6f 2024

  15. [16]

    Rutherford, et al., Constraining the dense matter equation of state with new nicer mass-radius measurements and chiral effective field theory, Astro- phys

    N. Rutherford, et al., Constraining the dense matter equation of state with new nicer mass-radius measurements and chiral effective field theory, Astro- phys. J. Lett. 971 (2024) L19. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad5f02. 21

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ad5f02 2024

  16. [17]

    Drischler, S

    C. Drischler, S. Han, J. M. Lattimer, M. Prakash, S. Reddy, T. Zhao, Limiting masses and radii of neutron stars and their implications, Phys. Rev. C 103 (2021) 045808. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.103.045808

    doi:10.1103/physrevc.103.045808 2021

  17. [18]

    Drischler, J

    C. Drischler, J. W. Holt, C. Wellenhofer, Chiral effective field theory and the high-density nuclear equation of state, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 71 (2021) 403–432. doi:10.1146/annurev-nucl-102419-041903

    doi:10.1146/annurev-nucl-102419-041903 2021

  18. [19]

    Keller, K

    J. Keller, K. Hebeler, A. Schwenk, Nuclear equation of state for arbi- trary proton fraction and temperature based on chiral effective field the- ory and a gaussian process emulator, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130 (2023) 072701. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.130.072701

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.130.072701 2023

  19. [20]

    Komoltsev, A

    O. Komoltsev, A. Kurkela, How perturbative qcd constrains the equation of state at neutron-star densities, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128 (2022) 202701. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.128.202701

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.128.202701 2022

  20. [21]

    Gorda, O

    T. Gorda, O. Komoltsev, A. Kurkela, Ab-initio qcd calculations impact the inference of the neutron-star-matter equation of state, JHEP 06 (2023) 002. doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2023)002

    doi:10.1007/jhep06(2023)002 2023

  21. [22]

    Gorda, O

    T. Gorda, O. Komoltsev, A. Kurkela, Neutron star equation of state from qcd at high densities, Astrophys. J. 950 (2023) 107. doi:10.3847/1538- 4357/acce3a

    doi:10.3847/1538- 2023

  22. [23]

    G. Raaijmakers, et al., Constraints on the dense matter equation of state and neutron star properties from nicer’s mass-radius estimate of psr j0740+6620 and multimessenger observations, Astrophys. J. Lett. 918 (2021) L29. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac089a

    doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ac089a 2021

  23. [24]

    Legred, K

    I. Legred, K. Chatziioannou, R. Essick, S. Han, P. Landry, Impact of the psr j0740+6620 radius constraint on the properties of high-density matter, Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021) 063003. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.104.063003

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.104.063003 2021

  24. [25]

    Huth, et al., Constraining neutron-star matter with microscopic and macroscopic collisions, Nature 606 (2022) 276–280

    S. Huth, et al., Constraining neutron-star matter with microscopic and macroscopic collisions, Nature 606 (2022) 276–280. doi:10.1038/s41586- 022-04750-w

    doi:10.1038/s41586- 2022

  25. [26]

    Brandes, W

    L. Brandes, W. Weise, N. Kaiser, Inference of dense-matter equation-of-state properties from neutron-star observations, Phys. Rev. D 107 (2023) 014011. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.107.014011. 22

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.107.014011 2023

  26. [27]

    Essick, P

    R. Essick, P. Landry, A. Schwenk, I. Tews, Detailed examination of astro- physical constraints on the symmetry energy and the neutron skin of pb- 208 with minimal modeling assumptions, Phys. Rev. C 107 (2023) 065804. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.107.065804

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.107.065804 2023

  27. [28]

    Jiang, C

    J.-L. Jiang, C. Ecker, L. Rezzolla, Bayesian analysis of neutron-star proper- ties with parameterized equations of state: The role of the likelihood, Astro- phys. J. 949 (2023) 11. doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acc4c7

    doi:10.3847/1538-4357/acc4c7 2023

  28. [29]

    P. T. H. Pang, I. Tews, M. W. Coughlin, M. Bulla, C. Van Den Broeck, T. Dietrich, Nuclear-physics multimessenger astrophysics constraints on the neutron-star equation of state, Nat. Commun. 15 (2024) 4099. doi:10.1038/s41467-024-48378-y

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-024-48378-y 2024

  29. [30]

    Fujimoto, K

    Y . Fujimoto, K. Fukushima, L. D. McLerran, M. Praszalowicz, Trace anomaly as signature of conformality in neutron stars, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129 (2022) 252702. arXiv:2207.06753, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.129.252702

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  30. [31]

    Li, Trace anomaly of cold dense matter constrained by collective flow, arXiv preprint (2026)

    B.-A. Li, Trace anomaly of cold dense matter constrained by collective flow, arXiv preprint (2026). arXiv:2601.13374, doi:10.1103/b2t4-km2r

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  31. [32]

    B. D. Serot, J. D. Walecka, The relativistic nuclear many-body problem, Adv. Nucl. Phys. 16 (1986) 1–327

    1986

  32. [33]

    Ring, Relativistic mean field theory in finite nuclei, Prog

    P. Ring, Relativistic mean field theory in finite nuclei, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 37 (1996) 193–263. doi:10.1016/0146-6410(96)00054-3

    doi:10.1016/0146-6410(96)00054-3 1996

  33. [34]

    Vretenar, A

    D. Vretenar, A. V . Afanasjev, G. A. Lalazissis, P. Ring, Relativistic hartree- bogoliubov theory: Static and dynamic aspects of exotic nuclear structure, Phys. Rep. 409 (2005) 101–259. doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2004.10.001

    doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2004.10.001 2005

  34. [35]

    Niksic, D

    T. Niksic, D. Vretenar, P. Ring, Relativistic nuclear energy density func- tionals: Mean-field and beyond, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 66 (2011) 519–548. doi:10.1016/j.ppnp.2011.01.055

    doi:10.1016/j.ppnp.2011.01.055 2011

  35. [36]

    Malik, M

    T. Malik, M. Ferreira, C. Providência, B. K. Agrawal, Bayesian infer- ence of the dense matter equation of state within relativistic mean field models using astrophysical observations, Phys. Rev. C 106 (2022) 045804. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.106.045804. 23

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevc.106.045804 2022

  36. [37]

    Salinas, J

    M. Salinas, J. Piekarewicz, B. K. Agrawal, Bayesian constraints on relativis- tic mean-field models from nuclear and neutron-star observables, Phys. Rev. C 107 (2023) 045801. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.107.045801

    doi:10.1103/physrevc.107.045801 2023

  37. [38]

    Typel, H

    S. Typel, H. H. Wolter, Relativistic mean field calculations with density- dependent meson-nucleon coupling, Nucl. Phys. A 656 (1999) 331–364. doi:10.1016/S0375-9474(99)00310-3

    doi:10.1016/s0375-9474(99)00310-3 1999

  38. [39]

    Xie, C.-J

    W.-J. Xie, C.-J. Xia, Inverse-mapped density-dependent relativistic mean- field inference of the neutron-star equation of state with multi-messenger constraints (2026). arXiv:2603.06128, doi:10.48550/arXiv.2603.06128

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2603.06128 2026

  39. [40]

    Feroz, M

    F. Feroz, M. P. Hobson, M. Bridges, Multinest: an efficient and ro- bust bayesian inference tool for cosmology and particle physics, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 398 (2009) 1601–1614. doi:10.1111/j.1365- 2966.2009.14548.x

    arXiv 2009

  40. [41]

    Buchner, A

    J. Buchner, A. Georgakakis, K. Nandra, L. Hsu, C. Rangel, M. Bright- man, A. Merloni, M. Salvato, J. Donley, D. Kocevski, X-ray spectral mod- elling of the agn obscuring region in the cdfs: Bayesian model selection and catalogue, Astron. Astrophys. 564 (2014) A125. doi:10.1051/0004- 6361/201322971

    doi:10.1051/0004- 2014

  41. [42]

    G. A. Lalazissis, T. Niksic, D. Vretenar, P. Ring, New relativistic mean-field interaction with density-dependent meson-nucleon couplings, Phys. Rev. C 71 (2005) 024312. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.71.024312

    doi:10.1103/physrevc.71.024312 2005

  42. [43]

    W. H. Long, J. Meng, N. Van Giai, S.-G. Zhou, New effective interactions in relativistic mean field theory with nonlinear terms and density-dependent meson-nucleon coupling, Phys. Rev. C 69 (2004) 034319. arXiv:nucl- th/0311031, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.69.034319

    arXiv 2004

  43. [44]

    Typel, G

    S. Typel, G. Röpke, T. Klähn, D. Blaschke, H. H. Wolter, Composition and thermodynamics of nuclear matter with light clusters, Phys. Rev. C 81 (2010) 015803. arXiv:0908.2344, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.81.015803

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  44. [45]

    Taninah, S

    A. Taninah, S. E. Agbemava, A. V . Afanasjev, P. Ring, Parametric cor- relations in energy density functionals, Phys. Lett. B 800 (2020) 135065. arXiv:1910.13007, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2019.135065. 24

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  45. [46]

    B. Wei, Q. Zhao, Z.-H. Wang, J. Geng, B.-Y . Sun, Y .-F. Niu, W.-H. Long, Novel relativistic mean field lagrangian guided by pseudo-spin symme- try restoration, Chinese Phys. C 44 (2020) 074107. doi:10.1088/1674- 1137/44/7/074107

    doi:10.1088/1674- 2020

  46. [47]

    Niksic, D

    T. Niksic, D. Vretenar, P. Finelli, P. Ring, Relativistic hartree-bogoliubov model with density-dependent meson-nucleon couplings, Phys. Rev. C 78 (2008) 034318. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.78.034318. 25

    doi:10.1103/physrevc.78.034318 2008