Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 7 minor 35 references

Generalized Beth-Uhlenbeck Approach to the 2+1D Gross-Neveu Model

T0 review · 2 major / 7 minor · reviewed 2026-07-13 · grok-4.5

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

Pith's one-line read A generalized Beth-Uhlenbeck formula suppresses low-energy Landau damping in the 2+1D Gross-Neveu model while keeping bound-state effects, producing a sharper Mott-like crossover in entropy fractions.

desk verdict Solid numerical application of gBU entropy to the graphene GN model; sharper Mott-like crossover is real, incomplete gap back-reaction is already flagged by the authors. read the letter →

arxiv 2604.02246 v1 pith:RGRMVWOQ submitted 2026-04-02 cond-mat.mes-hall cond-mat.str-el

Biplab Mahato , David Blaschke This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mes-hallcond-mat.str-el
keywords Beth-UhlenbeckgeneralizedGross-NeveumodelentropydensityMotttransitionGaussianfluctuationsLandaudampingexcitons
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

The paper studies the thermodynamics of the graphene-inspired (2+1)D Gross-Neveu model, focusing on the entropy density of Gaussian fluctuations beyond mean field. Full momentum-dependent evaluation shows that these fluctuations can contribute as much as the mean field itself, largely from soft Landau-damping modes. The authors argue that back-reaction of the fluctuations onto the mean field must be included, and they implement this through a generalized Beth-Uhlenbeck entropy formula derived from the Φ-derivable approach. Relative to the ordinary Beth-Uhlenbeck expression, the generalized form damps small phase shifts while leaving the bound-state contribution intact. The resulting fractional entropy carried by bound excitons versus free fermions therefore exhibits a sharper crossover, matching the expected signature of Mott dissociation in two-dimensional materials.

What carries the argument

The generalized phase-shift weight δ − sin(2δ)/2 that appears in the entropy integral of the Φ-derivable approach; it automatically cancels continuum and soft Landau-damping contributions while leaving the π-jump of a bound state untouched.

What would settle it

Recompute the entropy fractions after solving a fully self-consistent gap equation that includes the fluctuation free energy; if the sharper Mott crossover disappears or the Landau-damping suppression fails, the central claim is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

When the entropy density of Gaussian fluctuations in the (2+1)D Gross-Neveu model is evaluated with the generalized Beth-Uhlenbeck formula (phase shift replaced by δ − sin(2δ)/2), the large low-energy Landau-damping contribution is strongly suppressed while the thermodynamics of bound excitons is preserved, so that the fractional entropy of bound states versus free fermions shows a markedly sharper Mott-like crossover than in the standard Beth-Uhlenbeck treatment.

Load-bearing premise

The correction term taken from the Φ-derivable approach is assumed to capture the full back-reaction even though the mean-field gap equation itself is still solved without any fluctuation contribution.

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

2 major / 7 minor

Summary. The manuscript studies the entropy density of Gaussian fluctuations in a graphene-inspired (2+1)D Gross–Neveu model, comparing the standard Beth–Uhlenbeck (BU) formula with a generalized Beth–Uhlenbeck (gBU) expression obtained from the Φ-derivable approach. Full in-medium, momentum-dependent phase shifts are used. The authors show that soft Landau-damping contributions, which can make the BU fluctuation entropy comparable to the mean field, are strongly suppressed by the replacement δ → δ − sin(2δ)/2, while bound-state poles are preserved. The resulting fractional entropy of bound excitons versus free fermions exhibits a sharper crossover, which they interpret as consistent with Mott-transition physics in two-dimensional materials. Numerical results are given for fixed model parameters (scale M, Λ = 5M, κ = 0.046 M²) with a collective-mode cutoff band [Λ, 2Λ]; the supporting code is public.

Significance. If the reported comparison holds, the paper supplies a concrete, reproducible demonstration that the gBU correction removes an unphysical overcounting of soft continuum modes in a renormalizable 2+1D four-fermion model relevant to Dirac materials, while leaving excitonic bound-state thermodynamics intact. That is a useful methodological clarification for the community applying Beth–Uhlenbeck-type thermodynamics to graphene-like and excitonic systems. Strengths that should be credited include: (i) public numerical code, (ii) explicit momentum-dependent phase-shift evaluation (including Landau damping and Mott momentum), and (iii) a composition analysis (entropy fractions) that can be compared with ionization-degree studies of 2D excitons. The work is incremental relative to the authors’ prior BU study of the same model and to the cited Φ-derivable derivation of the gBU formula, but the side-by-side BU vs gBU entropy and composition plots are new and of clear interest.

major comments (2)
  1. Abstract and §3 claim that the gBU formula is used “to treat this self-consistently,” yet §2 explicitly restricts the gap equation to the pure mean-field stationarity condition ∂Ω_mf/∂Φ_i = 0 and defers the fluctuation contribution; §5 lists “the effect of back-reaction on correcting the mean-field” as still needing to be addressed. The reported comparison of Eqs. (7) and (8) is therefore a corrected entropy functional evaluated on an uncorrected mean field, not a fully self-consistent Φ-derivable thermodynamics. This does not invalidate the BU vs gBU comparison, but the language of self-consistency overstates what is computed. Please rephrase the abstract, introduction, and §3 so that the scope is accurate (entropy-level gBU correction only), and expand §5 on how a fluctuation-corrected gap equation would be expected to shift the Mott temperature and the entropy fractions.
  2. §4 and Figs. 2–3: the collective-mode momentum cutoff is varied only in the band [Λ, 2Λ] following Ref. [26], and residual cutoff dependence remains visible (especially in BU). Because the central claim is that gBU yields a sharper, more physical crossover, the manuscript should quantify how sensitive that sharpness (e.g., the temperature width of the exciton-to-fermion entropy transfer in Fig. 4) is to the collective cutoff choice, and state whether any qualitative conclusion changes outside [Λ, 2Λ]. A short robustness check or a clearer statement that the sharper crossover survives the full band would strengthen the load-bearing claim.
minor comments (7)
  1. Front matter: the correspondence asterisk is placed on D. Blaschke but the email given is biplab.mahato@uwr.edu.pl. Please correct the corresponding-author designation.
  2. References: Rochev (2009) appears twice ([14] and [27]); Câmara Pereira & Costa / Pereira & Costa (2020) likewise ([15] and [28]). Deduplicate and renumber.
  3. Fig. 1 caption and §3: the generalized weight is written both as δ − sin(2δ)/2 and as δ/δ − sin(2δ)/2 in the figure labels; the latter is confusing. Use a single consistent notation matching Eq. (8).
  4. Fig. 4: the cutoff used is stated in the caption (Λ), but axis labels and a brief definition of the three fractions (scalar, pseudoscalar, fermions) in the figure itself would improve readability without the main text.
  5. §2, after Eq. (5): a one-sentence reminder that Π_i is evaluated with the medium-dependent mean-field mass and chemical potential would help readers who jump from the prior paper [13].
  6. §5: the statement that contact-interaction models “effectively incorporate a confinement-like mechanism” is useful but abrupt; a short pointer to how the vacuum bound state and the absence of a free two-body continuum at T → 0 arise in the GN gap equation would clarify the contrast with realistic dilute exciton gases.
  7. Typos / style: “HDZR” in the affiliations should be “HZDR”; “Plac Maxa Borna” is fine but check journal house style for Polish addresses; “the paper [12] the authors suggest” → “in Ref. [12] the authors suggest”.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: gBU entropy formula is applied as an external input and the BU vs gBU comparison is a direct numerical evaluation, not a result forced by construction.

  1. self citation load bearing [Section 3, Eq. (8) and citation [31]]
    "It is possible to cast the entropy density in a similar form as in equation (7) [31], Sfl, gBU = ∑i ∫ d2q/(2π)2 ∫∞−∞ dω/2π ∂g(ω)/∂T (δi(ω,q)−sin(2δi(ω,q))/2 ). The additional term −sin(2δ)/2 implements the desired correction due to back-reaction."

    The functional form that defines the entire gBU analysis is imported from a contemporaneous arXiv preprint co-authored by one of the present authors rather than re-derived or independently verified inside this manuscript. While the subsequent numerical comparison is not forced by that citation, the load-bearing justification for using precisely this correction rests on the self-citation.

full rationale

The paper's central comparison (standard BU entropy density Eq. 7 versus generalized gBU form Eq. 8) is a straightforward numerical evaluation of two different integrands on the same phase shifts obtained from the polarization functions of the (2+1)D GN model. The replacement δ → δ − sin(2δ)/2 is taken from the Φ-derivable construction (cited as [31], co-authored by one of the present authors) and is not re-derived or fitted inside this work; once adopted, the suppression of soft Landau-damping modes and the preservation of bound-state poles follow algebraically from the functional form of the correction term. Model parameters (g, Λ, κ) are fixed from the authors' prior GN study [13] and are not adjusted to produce the sharper crossover. The authors themselves flag the incomplete back-reaction (gap equation still solved without Ω_fl) as a limitation, so that incompleteness is not hidden circularity. Self-citations supply the model and the formula but do not force the reported numerical difference by construction. Score 1 reflects only the minor self-citation load for the gBU formula itself; the comparison result remains independent content.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the standard large-N mean-field plus Gaussian-fluctuation expansion of the GN model, the identification of the entropy with a phase-shift integral, and the specific Φ-derivable correction δ − sin(2δ)/2. All numerical scales are fixed by hand or taken from earlier work; no new dynamical entities are postulated.

free parameters (4)
  • renormalized coupling / mass scale M = π/|g|
    Sets the overall energy unit; chosen so that vacuum pseudoscalar mass is 0.1 M.
  • fermion cutoff Λ = 5 M
    3D sharp cutoff used to regulate the gap and polarization integrals.
  • explicit mass parameter κ = m0/G = 0.046 M²
    Fixed to produce the desired vacuum bound-state mass; not derived.
  • collective-mode momentum cutoff range [Λ, 2Λ]
    Ad-hoc regulator for the q-integral in the entropy density; produces the bands shown in the figures.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Thermodynamic potential is stationary under variations of the full propagators (Φ-derivable / Baym-Kadanoff condition).
    Invoked in §3 to justify the replacement of the ordinary phase shift by δ − sin(2δ)/2.
  • domain assumption Gaussian (one-loop) truncation of the fluctuation functional is sufficient for the entropy density.
    Standard large-N expansion used throughout §§2–4; higher-order diagrams are neglected.
  • ad hoc to paper Mean-field gap equation may be solved without the fluctuation contribution (back-reaction deferred).
    Explicitly stated restriction in §2; listed as a limitation in §5.
  • domain assumption Contact four-fermion interaction with equal couplings in the four graphene-inspired channels.
    Defines the model Lagrangian (1); taken from earlier graphene-GN literature.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Generalized Beth-Uhlenbeck Approach to the 2+1D Gross-Neveu Model." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/RGRMVWOQ

@misc{pith2026260402246,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Generalized Beth-Uhlenbeck Approach to the 2+1D Gross-Neveu Model},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/RGRMVWOQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2604.02246}
}
read the original abstract

We study the thermodynamics of the (2+1) dimensional Gross-Neveu model inspired from graphene. We focus on the entropy density of the Gaussian fluctuation beyond the mean field. The full in-medium, momentum-dependent evaluation reveals that the fluctuations give a substantial contribution, even comparable to that of the mean field. We argue that the back-reaction from the fluctuations to the mean field should be included, which reduces the contribution mainly coming from the Landau-damping region. To treat this self-consistently, we use the generalized version of the Beth-Uhlenbeck approach for the entropy density. Compared with the standard Beth-Uhlenbeck formulation, the generalized version suppresses the low-energy contributions while preserving the bound-state effects. The fractional entropy carried by bound excitons and free fermions reveals a sharper crossover of the degrees of freedom in the generalized version, which is consistent with Mott-transition physics in two-dimensional materials.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.02246 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Comparison of the contribution coming from the phase shift in the Beth-Uhlenbeck approach and in the generalized Beth-Uhlenbeck approach. The generalized version suppresses the small phase shift and enhances the phases near π. corrections to the mean field. This is termed the back-reaction, i.e., the effect of the correlation back to the mean field. There are several attempts to quantify such effects for the case of… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Entropy density fluctuations for pseudoscalar (a) and scalar (b) channels in the Beth-Uhlenbeck (blue) and the generalized Beth-Uhlenbeck (red) approach. 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 0 1 2 3 T /M Stot/T 2 MF MF + BU MF + gBU [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Total normalized (dimensionless) entropy density for the case of Beth-Uhlenbeck (blue) and generalized Beth-Uhlenbeck formalism (red). In figure 2 we show the entropy density fluctuations in Beth-Uhlenbeck (blue) (using equation (7)) and generalized Beth-Uhlenbeck (red) (using equation (8)) approaches for scalar (b) and pseudo-scalar channels (a). Both figures show a band for the entropy density, corresponding to th… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Fraction of the total entropy carried by the scalar, pseudo-scalar channels and the constituent fermions. The figure is shown for the collective mode cutoff of Λ. For the other cutoffs, the qualitative feature of the figure remains unchanged. The scalar modes only have…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

35 extracted references · 20 canonical work pages

  1. [26]

    Effect of mesonic off-shell correlations in the PNJL equation of state

    Maslov, K.; Blaschke, D. Effect of mesonic off-shell correlations in the PNJL equation of state.Phys. Rev. D 2023,107, 094010, [arXiv:hep-ph/2301.09882]. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.107.094010

    work page Pith review arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.107.094010 2023

  2. [1]

    Dynamical Symmetry Breaking in Asymptotically Free Field Theories.Phys

    Gross, D.J.; Neveu, A. Dynamical Symmetry Breaking in Asymptotically Free Field Theories.Phys. Rev. D 1974,10, 3235. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.10.3235

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.10.3235 1974

  3. [2]

    Dynamical Model of Elementary Particles Based on an Analogy with Supercon- ductivity

    Nambu, Y.; Jona-Lasinio, G. Dynamical Model of Elementary Particles Based on an Analogy with Supercon- ductivity. 1.Phys. Rev.1961,122, 345–358. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.122.345

    doi:10.1103/physrev.122.345 1961

  4. [3]

    A New Approach to Collective Phenomena in Superconductivity Models.Phys

    Eguchi, T. A New Approach to Collective Phenomena in Superconductivity Models.Phys. Rev. D1976, 14, 2755. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.14.2755

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.14.2755

  5. [4]

    Quantum Corrections in Superconductor Models.Prog

    Kikkawa, K. Quantum Corrections in Superconductor Models.Prog. Theor. Phys.1976,56, 947. https: //doi.org/10.1143/PTP .56.947

    doi:10.1143/ptp 1976

  6. [5]

    Thermodynamics of (2+1)-dimensional Four Fermi Models.Phys

    Rosenstein, B.; Warr, B.J.; Park, S.H. Thermodynamics of (2+1)-dimensional Four Fermi Models.Phys. Rev. D1989,39, 3088. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.39.3088

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.39.3088

  7. [6]

    The Four Fermi Theory Is Renormalizable in (2+1)-Dimensions.Phys

    Rosenstein, B.; Warr, B.J.; Park, S.H. The Four Fermi Theory Is Renormalizable in (2+1)-Dimensions.Phys. Rev. Lett.1989,62, 1433–1436. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.62.1433

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.62.1433 1989

  8. [7]

    A Planar Diagram Theory for Strong Interactions.Nucl

    ’t Hooft, G. A Planar Diagram Theory for Strong Interactions.Nucl. Phys. B1974,72, 461. https: //doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(74)90154-0

    doi:10.1016/0550-3213(74)90154-0

Show all 35 references
  1. [8]

    Electric Field Effect in Atomically Thin Carbon Films.Science2004,306, 666–669

    Novoselov, K.S.; Geim, A.K.; Morozov, S.V .; Jiang, D.; Zhang, Y.; Dubonos, S.V .; Grigorieva, I.V .; Firsov, A.A. Electric Field Effect in Atomically Thin Carbon Films.Science2004,306, 666–669. https://doi.org/10.1126/ science.1102896

  2. [9]

    Two-dimensional gas of massless Dirac fermions in graphene.Nature2005,438, 197, [cond- mat/0509330]

    Novoselov, K.S.; Geim, A.K.; Morozov, S.V .; Jiang, D.; Katsnelson, M.I.; Grigorieva, I.V .; Dubonos, S.V .; Firsov, A.A. Two-dimensional gas of massless Dirac fermions in graphene.Nature2005,438, 197, [cond- mat/0509330]. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature04233

    doi

  3. [10]

    Excitonic Insulators and Gross-Neveu Models.Physical Review B 2022,105, 165125, [arXiv:cond-mat/2112.07362]

    Lopes, N.; Continentino, M.A.; Barci, D.G. Excitonic Insulators and Gross-Neveu Models.Physical Review B 2022,105, 165125, [arXiv:cond-mat/2112.07362]. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.105.165125

    2022 doi arXiv

  4. [11]

    Ebert, D.; Blaschke, D. Thermodynamics of a generalized graphene-motivated (2+1) D Gross–Neveu model beyond the mean field within the Beth–Uhlenbeck approach.PTEP2019,2019, 123I01, [arXiv:cond-mat.mes- hall/1811.07109]. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptep/ptz110. 8 of 9

    2019 doi arXiv

  5. [12]

    Thermodynamics of a quark plasma beyond the mean field: A generalized Beth-Uhlenbeck approach.Annals Phys.1994,234, 225–244

    Hufner, J.; Klevansky, S.P .; Zhuang, P .; Voss, H. Thermodynamics of a quark plasma beyond the mean field: A generalized Beth-Uhlenbeck approach.Annals Phys.1994,234, 225–244. https://doi.org/10.1006/aphy.19 94.1080

    1994 doi

  6. [13]

    Beth-Uhlenbeck equation for the thermodynamics of fluctuations in a generalized (2+1)D Gross-Neveu model.Phys

    Mahato, B.; Blaschke, D.; Ebert, D. Beth-Uhlenbeck equation for the thermodynamics of fluctuations in a generalized (2+1)D Gross-Neveu model.Phys. Rev. D2025,112, 036013, [arXiv:cond-mat.mes- hall/2409.10507]. https://doi.org/10.1103/s5jq-tgz6

    doi arXiv

  7. [15]

    One-meson-loop NJL model: Effect of collective and noncollective excitations on the quark condensate at finite temperature.Phys

    Câmara Pereira, R.; Costa, P . One-meson-loop NJL model: Effect of collective and noncollective excitations on the quark condensate at finite temperature.Phys. Rev. D2020,101, 054025, [arXiv:hep-ph/2003.08430]. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.101.054025

    2003 doi arXiv

  8. [16]

    Variational path-integral approach to back-reactions of composite mesons in the Nambu–Jona-Lasinio model.Nucl

    Blaschke, D.; Ebert, D. Variational path-integral approach to back-reactions of composite mesons in the Nambu–Jona-Lasinio model.Nucl. Phys. B2017,921, 753–768, [arXiv:hep-ph/1703.08964]. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2017.06.013

    2017 doi arXiv

  9. [17]

    Conservation Laws and Correlation Functions.Phys

    Baym, G.; Kadanoff, L.P . Conservation Laws and Correlation Functions.Phys. Rev.1961,124, 287–299. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.124.287

    1961 doi

  10. [18]

    Particle clustering and Mott transition in nuclear matter at finite temperature (II).Nucl

    Röpke, G.; Schmidt, M.; Münchow, L.; Schulz, H. Particle clustering and Mott transition in nuclear matter at finite temperature (II).Nucl. Phys. A1983,399, 587–602. https://doi.org/10.1016/0375-9474(83)90265-8

    doi

  11. [19]

    Thermodynamics of quark matter with multiquark clusters in an effective Beth-Uhlenbeck type approach.Eur

    Blaschke, D.; Cierniak, M.; Ivanytskyi, O.; Röpke, G. Thermodynamics of quark matter with multiquark clusters in an effective Beth-Uhlenbeck type approach.Eur. Phys. J. A2024,60, 14, [arXiv:nucl-th/2308.07950]. https://doi.org/10.1140/epja/s10050-023-01229-8

    doi arXiv

  12. [20]

    The Influence of Pauli blocking effects on the properties of dense hydrogen.J

    Ebeling, W.; Blaschke, D.; Redmer, R.; Reinholz, H.; Ropke, G. The Influence of Pauli blocking effects on the properties of dense hydrogen.J. Phys. A2009,42, 214033, [arXiv:physics.plasm-ph/0810.3336]. https://doi.org/10.1088/1751-8113/42/21/214033

    doi arXiv

  13. [21]

    Ionization potential depression and Pauli blocking in degenerate plasmas at extreme densities.Phys

    Röpke, G.; Blaschke, D.; Döppner, T.; Lin, C.; Kraeft, W.D.; Redmer, R.; Reinholz, H. Ionization potential depression and Pauli blocking in degenerate plasmas at extreme densities.Phys. Rev. E2019,99, 033201, [arXiv:physics.plasm-ph/1811.12912]. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev...

    doi arXiv

  14. [22]

    AC conductivity of graphene: from tight-binding model to 2+1-dimensional quantum electrodynamics.Int

    Gusynin, V .P .; Sharapov, S.G.; Carbotte, J.P . AC conductivity of graphene: from tight-binding model to 2+1-dimensional quantum electrodynamics.Int. J. Mod. Phys. B2007,21, 4611–4658, [arXiv:cond-mat.mes- hall/0706.3016]. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217979207038022

    doi arXiv

  15. [23]

    The Phase Structure of a Generalized Gross–Neveu Model in (2+1)- Dimensional Space–Time.Moscow Univ

    Zhukovsky, V .C.; Klimenko, K.G. The Phase Structure of a Generalized Gross–Neveu Model in (2+1)- Dimensional Space–Time.Moscow Univ. Phys. Bull.2015,70, 466–472. https://doi.org/10.3103/S002713491 5060181

    2015 doi

  16. [24]

    Thermodynamics of a quark - meson plasma in the Nambu-Jona- Lasinio model.Nucl

    Zhuang, P .; Hufner, J.; Klevansky, S.P . Thermodynamics of a quark - meson plasma in the Nambu-Jona- Lasinio model.Nucl. Phys. A1994,576, 525–552. https://doi.org/10.1016/0375-9474(94)90743-9

    doi

  17. [25]

    On the uniqueness of the potential in a Schrodinger equation for a given asymptotic phase

    Levinson, N. On the uniqueness of the potential in a Schrodinger equation for a given asymptotic phase. Kgl. Danske Videnskab Selskab. Mat. Fys. Medd.1949,Vol: 25, No. 9

    1949

  18. [27]

    Meson Contributions in the Nambu-Jona-Lasinio Model.Theoretical and Mathematical Physics 2009,159, 488–498

    Rochev, V .E. Meson Contributions in the Nambu-Jona-Lasinio Model.Theoretical and Mathematical Physics 2009,159, 488–498. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11232-009-0039-x

    2009 doi

  19. [28]

    One-Meson-Loop NJL Model: Effect of Collective and Noncollective Excitations on the Quark Condensate at Finite Temperature.Physical Review D2020,101, 054025

    Pereira, R.C.; Costa, P . One-Meson-Loop NJL Model: Effect of Collective and Noncollective Excitations on the Quark Condensate at Finite Temperature.Physical Review D2020,101, 054025. https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevD.101.054025

  20. [29]

    Nonlocal PNJL Model beyond Mean Field and the QCD Phase Transition.Physical Review D2011,83, 116004, [arXiv:hep-ph/1012.0664]

    Radzhabov, A.; Blaschke, D.; Buballa, M.; Volkov, M. Nonlocal PNJL Model beyond Mean Field and the QCD Phase Transition.Physical Review D2011,83, 116004, [arXiv:hep-ph/1012.0664]. https://doi.org/10.1 103/PhysRevD.83.116004

    arXiv

  21. [30]

    Interacting Mesons as Degrees of Freedom in a Chiral Model.Physical Review D2025,111, 074029

    Kumar, R.; Grefa, J.; Maslov, K.; Wang, Y.; Kumar, A.; Rapp, R.; Ratti, C.; Dexheimer, V . Interacting Mesons as Degrees of Freedom in a Chiral Model.Physical Review D2025,111, 074029. https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevD.111.074029

  22. [31]

    Generalized Beth–Uhlenbeck entropy formula from the Φ−derivable approach2025

    Blaschke, D.; Röpke, G.; Baym, G. Generalized Beth–Uhlenbeck entropy formula from the Φ−derivable approach2025. [arXiv:nucl-th/2512.03876]

    arXiv

  23. [32]

    biplab37/PhaseGN: First Release, 2025

    Mahato, B. biplab37/PhaseGN: First Release, 2025. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16698543. 9 of 9

    2025 doi

  24. [33]

    Exciton–Mott Physics in Two-Dimensional Electron–Hole Systems: Phase Diagram and Single-Particle Spectra.Journal of the Physical Society of Japan2014,83, 084702

    Asano, K.; Yoshioka, T. Exciton–Mott Physics in Two-Dimensional Electron–Hole Systems: Phase Diagram and Single-Particle Spectra.Journal of the Physical Society of Japan2014,83, 084702. https://doi.org/10.7566/ JPSJ.83.084702

  25. [34]

    Exciton Fission in Monolayer Transition Metal Dichalcogenide Semiconductors.Nature Communications2017,8, 1166

    Steinhoff, A.; Florian, M.; Rösner, M.; Schönhoff, G.; Wehling, T.O.; Jahnke, F. Exciton Fission in Monolayer Transition Metal Dichalcogenide Semiconductors.Nature Communications2017,8, 1166. https://doi.org/10 .1038/s41467-017-01298-6

  26. [35]

    A Pair of 2D Quantum Liquids: Investigating the Phase Behavior of Indirect Excitons.ACS Nano2022,16, 15339–15346

    Wrona, P .R.; Rabani, E.; Geissler, P .L. A Pair of 2D Quantum Liquids: Investigating the Phase Behavior of Indirect Excitons.ACS Nano2022,16, 15339–15346. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.2c06947

    doi

  27. [36]

    Generalized Beth-Uhlenbeck Approach for Hot Nuclear Matter.Annals of Physics1990,202, 57–99

    Schmidt, M.; Röpke, G.; Schulz, H. Generalized Beth-Uhlenbeck Approach for Hot Nuclear Matter.Annals of Physics1990,202, 57–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-4916(90)90340-T. Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note:The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely ...

    doi

Pith tools

Reviewed July 13, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.