Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 2 cited by

Bubble dynamics in a QCD-like phase diagram

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper reports the first microscopic, holographic computation of bubble wall velocities in a phase diagram qualitatively mirroring QCD, finding slow walls with maximum speeds of about 0.126 c (supercooled) and 0.032 c (superheated)…

desk verdict A genuinely new finite-density holographic bubble dynamics computation with a clean superheated/supercooled asymmetry; referee it, but require convergence checks before the velocity magnitudes are quoted. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.09588 v1 pith:MZNEVZUT submitted 2024-12-12 hep-th hep-ph

Yago Bea , Mauro Giliberti , David Mateos , Mikel Sanchez-Garitaonandia , Alexandre Serantes , Miguel Zilhão This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-thhep-ph
keywords holographybubblewallvelocityfirst-orderphasetransitionQCDdiagramneutronstarmergersgravitationalwavessupercooledbubblessuperheated
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper reports the first microscopic computation of bubble-wall velocities in a holographic theory whose phase diagram qualitatively mirrors the conjectured QCD phase diagram at nonzero baryon density. It simulates bubbles of the stable phase growing inside metastable states in both directions—supercooled and superheated—and finds that in steady state the wall velocity is always small: at most about 0.126 times the speed of light for supercooled bubbles and 0.032 for superheated ones. The velocity rises monotonically with the amount of supercooling or superheating and with the distance from the critical point, and superheated walls are systematically slower than supercooled ones for comparable metastability. These results matter because the gravitational-wave signal expected from neutron star mergers is highly sensitive to the wall velocity, so the calculation sharpens predictions for what future detectors might see.

What carries the argument

The central object is the five-dimensional Einstein-scalar-Maxwell holographic model, in which a scalar field dual to a dimension-three operator and a Maxwell field dual to baryon number are chosen so the boundary theory has the desired phase diagram: a crossover at low chemical potential that turns into a line of first-order phase transitions at $\mu \gtrsim 1.09\Lambda$, ending at a critical point at $(T,\mu)=(0.34,1.09)\Lambda$, with well-defined metastable regions found from the Hessian of the free energy. The dynamics are produced by seeding a homogeneous metastable state with a localized Gaussian perturbation in the energy and charge densities, whose sign selects a superheated or supercooled bubble, and then evolving the full bulk equations in ingoing Eddington-Finkelstein coordinates with a nested time-integration scheme. The steady-state wall velocity is read off from the motion of the inflection point of the energy-density profile once the flow becomes self-similar. This setup is what makes the first microscopic, parameter-free extraction of $v_w$ possible in a QCD-like phase diagram.

What would settle it

A first-principles simulation of the same type in a holographic model quantitatively matched to QCD thermodynamics—or a future lattice determination of the QCD transition at high baryon density—that found superheated walls moving faster than supercooled walls at comparable metastability, or wall speeds above about half the speed of light in the most metastable states, would contradict the paper's central results.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central result is that, in a five-dimensional Einstein-scalar-Maxwell model chosen so the boundary theory has a line of first-order phase transitions ending in a critical point—like the conjectured QCD line at finite baryon chemical potential—expanding bubbles of the stable phase settle into slow, steady-state motion. For every metastable state studied, the wall reaches a terminal velocity, extracted from the inflection point of the energy-density profile, and this velocity grows monotonically with the degree of supercooling or superheating, vanishing at the first-order line and growing with distance from the critical point. The largest velocities found are $v_w^{\max} \simeq 0.126$ for supercooled bubbles and $v_w^{\max} \simeq 0.032$ for superheated bubbles, so superheated walls are markedly slower. Both types of bubbles are deflagrations: supercooled bubbles push fluid outward and leave an overdense shell ahead of the wall, while superheated bubbles absorb energy from the outside and leave an underdense shell. The paper also compares the simulated velocities with existing estimates, finding that the large-jump-in-degrees-of-freedom approximation underpredicts supercooled velocities by 35–70% and becomes unreliable for superheated bubbles in the regime probed.

Load-bearing premise

Everything said about QCD rests on the assumption that this particular holographic model—chosen for numerical tractability, with its specific superpotential and gauge coupling—mirrors the real QCD phase diagram closely enough that its bubble dynamics are representative, despite not being quantitatively matched to QCD.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Maximum steady-state bubble wall speeds are $v_w^{\max}\simeq 0.126$ for supercooled and $v_w^{\max}\simeq 0.032$ for superheated bubbles, so walls in this strongly coupled theory are slow compared with the speed of light.
  • Wall velocity increases monotonically with the amount of supercooling or superheating and with distance from the critical point, and it goes to zero at zero metastability.
  • Superheated bubbles are slower than supercooled bubbles for comparable metastability, and the two types produce opposite fluid-flow patterns: overdense shells for supercooled, underdense shells for superheated.
  • The large-jump-in-degrees-of-freedom approximation underestimates supercooled wall velocities by 35–70% in this model, with the error decreasing as the jump parameter $\delta$ decreases; the same approximation is not applicable to the simulated superheated regime.
  • Applied to neutron star mergers, the results imply gravitational-wave emission dominated by slow walls, with the peak frequency in the MHz range and an amplitude sensitive to the computed velocities.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If real QCD walls are as slow as these, the gravitational-wave strain from neutron star mergers could be smaller than estimates that assume relativistic walls, and the difference between the two directions implies the signal may distinguish heating from cooling phases of the merger.
  • The approximate linear relation between $v_w$ and $\Delta P/E$ (or its baryon-density generalization) holds only roughly in the supercooled data; the scatter suggests that a quantitative relation for superheated walls may require genuinely microscopic input rather than equilibrium quantities alone.
  • Because the model was selected for numerical tractability rather than quantitative QCD matching, the qualitative ordering—supercooled faster than superheated, monotonic growth with metastability—is the transferable content; the specific speeds would likely shift in a model calibrated to QCD thermodynamics.
  • A natural testable extension is to repeat the same holographic evolution for spherical bubbles and for bubble collisions, since the paper's planar isolated-bubble setup isolates $v_w$ but leaves the sound-wave and collision contributions to the gravitational-wave spectrum uncomputed.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. This paper uses a five-dimensional Einstein-scalar-Maxwell holographic model to study bubble dynamics in a theory whose equilibrium phase diagram contains a first-order transition line ending at a critical point, qualitatively resembling the conjectured QCD phase diagram at finite baryon density. The authors first construct the thermodynamic phase diagram, identify metastable regions, and then evolve planar bubbles for both supercooled and superheated cases, extracting terminal wall velocities from the steady-state profiles. They report maximum velocities v_w^max ≈ 0.126 for supercooled and ≈0.032 for superheated bubbles, claim a monotonic increase of the velocity with the amount of supercooling/superheating, and compare their results with a hydrodynamic large-jump approximation and with a linear relation between velocity and pressure difference. Implications for gravitational wave emission in neutron star mergers are discussed.

Significance. If the numerical results are robust, this is the first microscopic, strongly coupled computation of bubble wall velocities in a holographic model with a QCD-like phase diagram, thereby extending Ref. [30] to nonzero baryon chemical potential and to superheated bubbles. The qualitative messages — that the walls remain slow compared to the speed of light, that the velocity increases away from the transition line, and that superheated bubbles are markedly slower than supercooled ones — are interesting and potentially relevant for gravitational wave phenomenology. Strengths of the paper include the explicit derivation of the new Maxwell-sector equations in Appendix A, the use of equilibrium data in the comparisons, the self-similar-profile checks, and the systematic comparison with independent approximations. The principal weakness is that the central quantitative outputs are not yet supported by convergence tests, error estimates, or an equally thorough initial-condition independence check as in Ref. [30].

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 6, Eqs. (6.1)–(6.2); App. A] The central quantitative results — v_w^max ≈ 0.126 and 0.032, and the velocities shown in Figs. 17–20 — are reported without any resolution study, convergence test, or error estimate for the new Einstein-scalar-Maxwell system. The Maxwell extension changes the nested structure of the equations of motion (A.1): the equations for Ψ_t and F become coupled, and the dot variables φ̇, Ȧ_x and Ḃ are coupled, so the validation of the neutral Jecco code in Ref. [41] does not automatically transfer to this case. This is especially concerning for the superheated velocities, which are of order 0.03 and could be significantly biased by numerical dissipation or by finite-domain effects. I ask for at least a grid-refinement test and a domain-size test for representative supercooled and superheated simulations, with the resulting error bars propagated to all plotted velocities.
  2. [Sec. 5, initial conditions] The statement that the terminal velocity depends only on the metastable state outside the bubble is used to organize all the results in Section 6, but in this paper it is not tested with the same thoroughness as in Ref. [30]. The text explicitly says that the expected independence has been checked only in 'initial investigations' and that an analysis as exhaustive as Ref. [30] was not performed. Since the model now includes a charged sector and the perturbations are introduced in both a4 and At,2, the initial-data independence should be demonstrated for at least a few representative states by varying the amplitude and width of the Gaussian perturbation; otherwise the extracted v_w values could carry an undetermined dependence on the initial condition.
  3. [Sec. 6, Figs. 18–19] The wording 'the wall velocity increases monotonically with the amount of supercooling or superheating' is stronger than the evidence presented. The support consists of a small number of points without error bars, ordered by a Euclidean distance in (E/Λ^4, ρ/Λ^3) that the authors themselves describe as having no intrinsic physical meaning, and Fig. 20 shows considerable scatter around the linear fits. The monotonicity claim should either be presented with quantitative tolerances, including the scatter of all simulations and the sensitivity to the chosen ordering coordinate, or be softened to a monotonic trend.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Sec. 3] The sentence 'this multivalued region coincides exactly coincides with the region where metastable states exist' contains a duplicated word; it should read 'coincides exactly with'.
  2. [Fig. 16 caption] The caption contains 'as as a function of the self-similar parameter'; remove the duplicated 'as'.
  3. [References] Refs. [30] and [38] list the same paper and should be merged into a single reference.
  4. [Abstract] The phrase 'highly sensitively to the velocity' should be 'highly sensitive to the velocity'.
  5. [Sec. 6, Fig. 20] The horizontal axis of both panels in Fig. 20 is not labeled; please add the definition of the plotted variable to the figure.
  6. [Sec. 6, Fig. 21] The suggestion that the large-jump approximation becomes accurate for QCD because the error decreases with δ is an extrapolation: the data only reach δ ≈ 0.3, while the QCD estimate quoted is δ ≈ 0.1. Please phrase this as an extrapolation or add supporting data at smaller δ.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: bubble wall velocities are outputs of first-principles time evolution, not fitted inputs or self-citation reductions.

full rationale

The derivation chain is non-circular. The model is specified by fixed functions V(phi) (from superpotential (2.4)-(2.6)) and f(phi) (2.7); the phase diagram is computed from equilibrium black-brane solutions; the bubble dynamics is obtained by solving the coupled Einstein-scalar-Maxwell equations with the Jecco code; and v_w is read off from the late-time inflection-point trajectory. No free parameter is tuned to reproduce v_w, so the maximum velocities (6.1)-(6.2) and the monotonic dependence on supercooling/superheating are simulation outputs rather than fits. The theoretical comparisons in Section 6 use either the equilibrium-based relation (6.3)-(6.4) from earlier work or the large-jump approximation of Ref. [27] as independent benchmarks; they are checked against the simulation, not used to generate the reported values. Citations to Refs. [30], [40], [41], and [50] are self-citations for the numerical setup and for prior physical expectations, but the central result does not reduce to any of those cited inputs. The explicit caveats in the paper, such as the lack of an analysis as exhaustive as that of Ref. [30] for initial-condition independence and the open question about the linear trends, are limitations or robustness concerns, not circularity. The absence of a grid-convergence study is also a correctness concern rather than evidence of circular derivation.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central numbers are measured from dynamical simulations, not fitted, but the model definition has hand-chosen parameters. The two model parameters lambda4, lambda6 and the gauge coupling f(phi) are unconstrained by QCD data and qualitatively shape the phase diagram. The other assumptions are standard holographic or thermodynamic dictionary entries.

free parameters (2)
  • Superpotential coefficients lambda4, lambda6 = -0.206612, 0.1
    Chosen in Eq. (2.6) to fix the zero-density equation of state and the location and shape of the phase transition; not fitted to QCD data.
  • Gauge kinetic coupling f(phi) = e^{-3 phi/4} / 32
    Ad hoc choice in Eq. (2.7) that turns the zero-density crossover into a first-order line at non-zero baryon chemical potential; it sets all finite-density thermodynamics.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The 5D Einstein-scalar-Maxwell action (2.1) is the holographic dual of a strongly coupled gauge theory with a conserved baryon-number current.
    Section 2 identifies the bulk U(1) with baryon number; all holographic dictionary entries in Eq. (4.3) rely on this.
  • ad hoc to paper The chosen scalar potential and gauge coupling produce a phase diagram that qualitatively mirrors the conjectured QCD phase diagram, with a crossover, a critical point, and a first-order line.
    Section 2, last paragraph: the model is chosen for numerical tractability, not quantitative QCD matching; any QCD or gravitational-wave implication depends on this.
  • standard math Metastable, stable, and unstable states are classified by the Hessian of the free energy density in Eq. (3.2), and bubbles nucleate from metastable states.
    Section 3 uses the eigenvalues of the susceptibility matrix to label regions; standard equilibrium thermodynamics.
  • domain assumption The steady-state wall velocity is independent of the initial perturbation, and the planar bubble geometry is representative of the physics in a neutron star merger.
    Section 5 asserts independence following Ref. [30] and notes the check was not exhaustive; the extraction uses a planar wall.
  • domain assumption The nucleation rate Gamma/V = mu^4 e^{-S} and the criterion that Gamma tau^4 ~ 1 set the onset of the transition in a merger, with L ~ 1 km, tau ~ 1 ms, mu ~ 1 GeV.
    Section 2 imports the cosmological transition framework to neutron star mergers; the gravitational wave frequency and strain estimates rely on these inputs.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Bubble dynamics in a QCD-like phase diagram." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/MZNEVZUT

@misc{pith2026241209588,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Bubble dynamics in a QCD-like phase diagram},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/MZNEVZUT}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.09588}
}
read the original abstract

A line of first-order phase transitions is conjectured in the phase diagram of Quantum Chromodynamics at non-zero baryon density. If this is the case, numerical simulations of neutron star mergers suggest that various regions of the stars may cross this line multiple times. This results in the nucleation of bubbles of the preferred phase, which subsequently expand and collide. The resulting gravitational wave spectrum is highly sensitively to the velocity of the bubble walls. We use holography to perform the first microscopic simulation of bubble dynamics in a theory that qualitatively mirrors the expected phase diagram of Quantum Chromodynamics. We determine the wall velocity in the metastable regions and we compare it to theoretical estimates. We discuss implications for gravitational wave production.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Non-conformal obstructions to bubble expansion

    hep-th 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    Non-conformal equations of state introduce wall and flow obstructions that delete entire classes of bubble solutions and create 'shocked detonations', shrinking the allowed wall-velocity space and suppressing gravitat...

  2. Dilatonic states, phase transitions, and criticality in holography

    hep-th 2026-07 accept novelty 3.0 of 10

    A review of holographic examples indicating that a light dilaton appears near critical endpoints of first-order zero-temperature phase transitions, with explicit but lower-dimensional demonstrations.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

49 extracted references · 7 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Stephanov, QCD Phase Diagram and the Critical Point , Prog

    M.A. Stephanov, QCD Phase Diagram and the Critical Point , Prog. Theor. Phys. Suppl. 153 (2004) 139 [ hep-ph/0402115]

    arXiv 2004

  2. [2]

    Alford, A

    M.G. Alford, A. Schmitt, K. Rajagopal and T. Sch¨ afer,Color superconductivity in dense quark matter, Rev. Mod. Phys. 80 (2008) 1455 [ 0709.4635]. – 31 –

    arXiv 2008

  3. [3]

    Fukushima and T

    K. Fukushima and T. Hatsuda, The phase diagram of dense QCD , Rept. Prog. Phys. 74 (2011) 014001 [1005.4814]

    arXiv 2011

  4. [4]

    An overview of the QCD phase diagram at finite $T$ and $\mu$

    J.N. Guenther, An overview of the QCD phase diagram at finite T and µ, in 38th International Symposium on Lattice Field Theory , 1, 2022 [ 2201.02072]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2022

  5. [5]

    Casalderrey-Solana, D

    J. Casalderrey-Solana, D. Mateos and M. Sanchez-Garitaonandia, Mega-Hertz Gravitational Waves from Neutron Star Mergers , 2210.03171

    arXiv

  6. [6]

    Most, L.J

    E.R. Most, L.J. Papenfort, V. Dexheimer, M. Hanauske, S. Schramm, H. St¨ ocker and L. Rezzolla, Signatures of quark-hadron phase transitions in general-relativistic neutron-star mergers, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122 (2019) 061101 [ 1807.03684]

    arXiv 2019

  7. [7]

    E.R. Most, L. Jens Papenfort, V. Dexheimer, M. Hanauske, H. Stoecker and L. Rezzolla, On the deconfinement phase transition in neutron-star mergers , Eur. Phys. J. A 56 (2020) 59 [1910.13893]

    arXiv 2020

  8. [8]

    Ecker, M

    C. Ecker, M. J¨ arvinen, G. Nijs and W. van der Schee, Gravitational waves from holographic neutron star mergers , Phys. Rev. D 101 (2020) 103006 [ 1908.03213]

    arXiv 2020

Show all 49 references
  1. [9]

    Prakash, D

    A. Prakash, D. Radice, D. Logoteta, A. Perego, V. Nedora, I. Bombaci, R. Kashyap, S. Bernuzzi et al., Signatures of deconfined quark phases in binary neutron star mergers , Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021) 083029 [ 2106.07885]

    2021 arXiv

  2. [10]

    L.R. Weih, M. Hanauske and L. Rezzolla, Postmerger Gravitational-Wave Signatures of Phase Transitions in Binary Mergers , Phys. Rev. Lett. 124 (2020) 171103 [ 1912.09340]

    2020 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Tootle, C

    S. Tootle, C. Ecker, K. Topolski, T. Demircik, M. J¨ arvinen and L. Rezzolla, Quark formation and phenomenology in binary neutron-star mergers using V-QCD , SciPost Phys. 13 (2022) 109 [2205.05691]

    2022 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Fujimoto, K

    Y. Fujimoto, K. Fukushima, K. Hotokezaka and K. Kyutoku, Gravitational Wave Signal for Quark Matter with Realistic Phase Transition , Phys. Rev. Lett. 130 (2023) 091404 [2205.03882]

    2023 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Berlin, D

    A. Berlin, D. Blas, R. Tito D’Agnolo, S.A.R. Ellis, R. Harnik, Y. Kahn, J. Sch¨ utte-Engel and M. Wentzel, Electromagnetic cavities as mechanical bars for gravitational waves , Phys. Rev. D 108 (2023) 084058 [ 2303.01518]

    2023 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Espinosa, T

    J.R. Espinosa, T. Konstandin, J.M. No and G. Servant, Energy Budget of Cosmological First-order Phase Transitions, JCAP 06 (2010) 028 [ 1004.4187]

    2010 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Barni, S

    G. Barni, S. Blasi and M. Vanvlasselaer, The hydrodynamics of inverse phase transitions , JCAP 10 (2024) 042 [ 2406.01596]

    2024 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Y. Bea, J. Casalderrey-Solana, D. Mateos and M. Sanchez-Garitaonandia, Hydrodynamics of Relativistic Superheated Bubbles, 2406.14450

  9. [17]

    Moore and T

    G.D. Moore and T. Prokopec, How fast can the wall move? A Study of the electroweak phase transition dynamics, Phys. Rev. D 52 (1995) 7182 [ hep-ph/9506475]

    1995 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Dorsch, S.J

    G.C. Dorsch, S.J. Huber and T. Konstandin, Bubble wall velocities in the Standard Model and beyond, JCAP 12 (2018) 034 [ 1809.04907]

    2018 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Lewicki, M

    M. Lewicki, M. Merchand and M. Zych, Electroweak bubble wall expansion: gravitational waves and baryogenesis in Standard Model-like thermal plasma , JHEP 02 (2022) 017 [ 2111.02393]

    2022 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Laurent and J.M

    B. Laurent and J.M. Cline, First principles determination of bubble wall velocity , Phys. Rev. D 106 (2022) 023501 [ 2204.13120]. – 32 –

    2022 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Jiang, F.P

    S. Jiang, F.P. Huang and X. Wang, Bubble wall velocity during electroweak phase transition in the inert doublet model , Phys. Rev. D 107 (2023) 095005 [ 2211.13142]

    2023 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Caprini et al., Detecting gravitational waves from cosmological phase transitions with LISA: an update, JCAP 03 (2020) 024 [ 1910.13125]

    C. Caprini et al., Detecting gravitational waves from cosmological phase transitions with LISA: an update, JCAP 03 (2020) 024 [ 1910.13125]

    2020 arXiv

  15. [23]

    W.-Y. Ai, B. Laurent and J. van de Vis, Model-independent bubble wall velocities in local thermal equilibrium, JCAP 07 (2023) 002 [ 2303.10171]

    2023 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Barroso Mancha, T

    M. Barroso Mancha, T. Prokopec and B. Swiezewska, Field-theoretic derivation of bubble-wall force, JHEP 01 (2021) 070 [ 2005.10875]

    2021 arXiv

  17. [25]

    W.-Y. Ai, B. Garbrecht and C. Tamarit, Bubble wall velocities in local equilibrium , JCAP 03 (2022) 015 [ 2109.13710]

    2022 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Janik, M

    R.A. Janik, M. Jarvinen, H. Soltanpanahi and J. Sonnenschein, Perfect Fluid Hydrodynamic Picture of Domain Wall Velocities at Strong Coupling , Phys. Rev. Lett. 129 (2022) 081601 [2205.06274]

    2022 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Sanchez-Garitaonandia and J

    M. Sanchez-Garitaonandia and J. van de Vis, Prediction of the bubble wall velocity for a large jump in degrees of freedom , 2312.09964

    arXiv

  20. [28]

    W.-Y. Ai, B. Laurent and J. van de Vis, Bounds on the bubble wall velocity , 2411.13641

    arXiv

  21. [29]

    Ekstedt, O

    A. Ekstedt, O. Gould, J. Hirvonen, B. Laurent, L. Niemi, P. Schicho and J. van de Vis, How fast does the WallGo? A package for computing wall velocities in first-order phase transitions , 2411.04970

    arXiv

  22. [31]

    DeWolfe, S.S

    O. DeWolfe, S.S. Gubser and C. Rosen, A holographic critical point , Phys. Rev. D 83 (2011) 086005 [1012.1864]

    2011 arXiv

  23. [32]

    Bea and D

    Y. Bea and D. Mateos, Heating up Exotic RG Flows with Holography , JHEP 08 (2018) 034 [1805.01806]

    2018 arXiv

  24. [33]

    Attems, J

    M. Attems, J. Casalderrey-Solana, D. Mateos, I. Papadimitriou, D. Santos-Oliv´ an, C.F. Sopuerta, M. Triana and M. Zilh˜ ao,Thermodynamics, transport and relaxation in non-conformal theories, JHEP 10 (2016) 155 [ 1603.01254]

    2016 arXiv

  25. [34]

    Attems, J

    M. Attems, J. Casalderrey-Solana, D. Mateos, D. Santos-Oliv´ an, C.F. Sopuerta, M. Triana and M. Zilh˜ ao,Holographic Collisions in Non-conformal Theories , JHEP 01 (2017) 026 [1604.06439]

    2017 arXiv

  26. [35]

    Attems, Y

    M. Attems, Y. Bea, J. Casalderrey-Solana, D. Mateos, M. Triana and M. Zilhao, Phase Transitions, Inhomogeneous Horizons and Second-Order Hydrodynamics, JHEP 06 (2017) 129 [1703.02948]

    2017 arXiv

  27. [36]

    Bea, O.J.C

    Y. Bea, O.J.C. Dias, T. Giannakopoulos, D. Mateos, M. Sanchez-Garitaonandia, J.E. Santos and M. Zilhao, Crossing a large- N phase transition at finite volume , JHEP 02 (2021) 061 [2007.06467]

    2021 arXiv

  28. [37]

    F.R. Ares, M. Hindmarsh, C. Hoyos and N. Jokela, Gravitational waves from a holographic phase transition, JHEP 21 (2020) 100 [ 2011.12878]

    2020 arXiv

  29. [38]

    Y. Bea, J. Casalderrey-Solana, T. Giannakopoulos, D. Mateos, M. Sanchez-Garitaonandia and – 33 – M. Zilh˜ ao,Bubble wall velocity from holography , Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021) L121903 [2104.05708]

    2021 arXiv

  30. [39]

    Y. Bea, J. Casalderrey-Solana, T. Giannakopoulos, D. Mateos, M. Sanchez-Garitaonandia and M. Zilh˜ ao,Domain collisions , JHEP 06 (2022) 025 [ 2111.03355]

    2022 arXiv

  31. [40]

    Y. Bea, J. Casalderrey-Solana, T. Giannakopoulos, A. Jansen, S. Krippendorf, D. Mateos, M. Sanchez-Garitaonandia and M. Zilh˜ ao,Spinodal Gravitational Waves , 2112.15478

  32. [42]

    Critelli, J

    R. Critelli, J. Noronha, J. Noronha-Hostler, I. Portillo, C. Ratti and R. Rougemont, Critical point in the phase diagram of primordial quark-gluon matter from black hole physics , Phys. Rev. D 96 (2017) 096026 [ 1706.00455]

    2017 arXiv

  33. [43]

    Grefa, J

    J. Grefa, J. Noronha, J. Noronha-Hostler, I. Portillo, C. Ratti and R. Rougemont, Hot and dense quark-gluon plasma thermodynamics from holographic black holes , Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021) 034002 [ 2102.12042]

    2021 arXiv

  34. [44]

    Hippert, J

    M. Hippert, J. Grefa, T.A. Manning, J. Noronha, J. Noronha-Hostler, I. Portillo Vazquez, C. Ratti, R. Rougemont et al., Bayesian location of the QCD critical point from a holographic perspective, Phys. Rev. D 110 (2024) 094006 [ 2309.00579]

    2024 arXiv

  35. [45]

    H. Shah, M. Hippert, J. Noronha, C. Ratti and V. Vovchenko, Locating the QCD critical point from first principles through contours of constant entropy density , 2410.16206

  36. [46]

    Attems, J

    M. Attems, J. Casalderrey-Solana, D. Mateos, D. Santos-Oliv´ an, C.F. Sopuerta, M. Triana and M. Zilh˜ ao,Paths to equilibrium in non-conformal collisions , JHEP 06 (2017) 154 [1703.09681]

    2017 arXiv

  37. [47]

    Casalderrey-Solana, C

    J. Casalderrey-Solana, C. Ecker, D. Mateos and W. Van Der Schee, Strong-coupling dynamics and entanglement in de Sitter space , JHEP 03 (2021) 181 [ 2011.08194]

    2021 arXiv

  38. [48]

    Kim, Holographic Renormalization of Einstein-Maxwell-Dilaton Theories , JHEP 11 (2016) 044 [ 1608.06252]

    B.S. Kim, Holographic Renormalization of Einstein-Maxwell-Dilaton Theories , JHEP 11 (2016) 044 [ 1608.06252]

    2016 arXiv

  39. [49]

    Natsuume and T

    M. Natsuume and T. Okamura, The enhanced holographic superconductor: is it possible? , JHEP 08 (2013) 139 [ 1307.6875]

    2013 arXiv

  40. [50]

    Y. Bea, J. Casalderrey-Solana, T. Giannakopoulos, A. Jansen, D. Mateos, M. Sanchez-Garitaonandia and M. Zilh˜ ao,Holographic bubbles with Jecco: expanding, collapsing and critical , JHEP 09 (2022) 008 [ 2202.10503]

    2022 arXiv

  41. [51]

    Turisini, G

    M. Turisini, G. Amati and M. Cestari, LEONARDO: A Pan-European Pre-Exascale Supercomputer for HPC and AI Applications , arXiv e-prints (2023) arXiv:2307.16885 [2307.16885]. – 34 –

    2023 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.