Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

This paper derives freeze-out corrections to charm-hadron distributions that make computed yields independent of the charm diffusion coefficient and mark where fluid dynamics stops being valid.

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

2026-08-04 07:25 UTC pith:VWNZ3Z7E

load-bearing objection A genuinely useful extension of the authors' charm fluid-dynamics framework, with a clean freeze-out correction and honest positivity analysis, but the all-temperature hadronic assumption and an overclaimed abstract need attention before this can underpin D_s extraction. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2510.25601 v2 pith:VWNZ3Z7E submitted 2025-10-29 hep-ph nucl-th

Out-of-equilibrium contributions to charm hadrons in a fluid-dynamic approach

Rossana Facen , Federica Capellino , Eduardo Grossi , Andrea Dubla , Silvia Masciocchi This is my paper
classification hep-ph nucl-th
keywords charm quarksquark-gluon plasmaheavy-ion collisionsout-of-equilibrium correctionsspatial diffusion coefficientcharm hadron yieldstransverse momentum spectrafreeze-out
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 tries to establish that out-of-equilibrium corrections to charm-hadron distribution functions can be computed consistently inside a fluid-dynamic description of charm quarks in heavy-ion collisions. It derives an explicit freeze-out correction for each charm-hadron species and shows that including these corrections removes an unphysical dependence of the total charm-hadron yield on the spatial diffusion coefficient D_sT. It also shows that the transverse-momentum spectra become sensitive to D_sT, which is what future Bayesian fits would use to extract the coefficient. Finally, it identifies the transverse-momentum range in which the distribution function stays positive, marking the practical limits of the approach.

Core claim

The paper claims that charm-hadron out-of-equilibrium corrections at freeze-out are captured by a single first-order expression: the deviation δf_{i,p} from local equilibrium for each hadron species i is proportional to the equilibrium distribution times the total charm diffusion current contracted with momentum, with species-dependent coefficients fixed by the pressure and charge. Because every species correction is tied to one evolved total charm current, the framework avoids evolving a separate diffusion current for each hadron. With this correction included, the integrated D0 yield becomes flat in the spatial diffusion coefficient D_sT and matches the total charm quark number, whereas om

What carries the argument

The central object is Eq. (18), δf_{i,p} = f^(0)_{i,p} (1/P_i) κ̄_i ν_q^μ p_{<μ>}. It is a rank-1 moment expansion of the deviation from local equilibrium, truncated at the diffusion-current level, with coefficients set by the total charm diffusion current ν_q^μ. Its role is to make hadron multiplicities independent of D_sT and to encode D_sT dependence in the spectra. The supporting machinery is the multi-species decomposition of the charm fields into Hadron Resonance Gas species, the relaxation-type equation of motion for the total charm diffusion current derived from it, and the free-streaming initialization that produces a nonzero initial diffusion current. The initial current turns out

Load-bearing premise

The argument relies on using the charm Hadron Resonance Gas equation of state for the whole fireball temperature range, from QGP to freeze-out, because no interpolating charm equation of state exists; if charm's partonic-to-hadronic transition is not captured by this choice, all extracted transport coefficients inherit a bias.

What would settle it

Take the same framework but replace the charm Hadron Resonance Gas equation of state with one that transitions smoothly from partonic to hadronic charm degrees of freedom across the crossover; if the D_sT-flatness of the D0 yield does not survive, the paper's central consistency result is an artifact of that assumption.

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

If this is right

  • Including the freeze-out corrections makes the integrated charm-hadron yield independent of D_sT, restoring agreement with charm-number conservation across the whole explored range of D_sT.
  • Charm-hadron pT spectra become sensitive to D_sT, providing the observable needed for Bayesian extraction of the spatial diffusion coefficient.
  • The model's validity has a finite pT ceiling: beyond a D_sT-dependent crossing point the spectrum turns negative, and for J/ψ the range is already below its mass at moderate D_sT.
  • The free-streaming initialization generates a nonzero charm diffusion current at the start of hydrodynamics, but its impact on the evolution and final observables is small.
  • The framework assumes soft-scattering dominance; at high pT, where radiative processes dominate, it is not reliable even where the mathematical positivity condition holds.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Because the pT-crossing decreases monotonically with D_sT, the measured momentum up to which charm-hadron spectra are positive could itself serve as an observable bound on the diffusion coefficient.
  • The same multi-species correction scheme should transfer to bottom hadrons; larger masses would shift the positivity window and provide an independent transport-coefficient constraint.
  • If an interpolating charm equation of state became available, rerunning the same framework would test whether the HRGc assumption biases the extracted coefficients; the paper provides no dedicated test of that systematic.
  • A maximum-entropy reconstruction, which the paper mentions as future work, could be compared with the first-order correction to quantify the importance of neglected higher-order moments without waiting for new data.

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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper extends a previously developed fluid-dynamic description of charm quarks in heavy-ion collisions by computing out-of-equilibrium corrections to charm-hadron distribution functions. The authors introduce a free-streaming stage between charm production and hydrodynamic initialization, generating an initial diffusion current, and derive a multi-species out-of-equilibrium correction at freeze-out expressed in terms of the total charm diffusion current (Eq. 18). They show that including these corrections restores the expected independence of integrated charm-hadron yields on the spatial diffusion coefficient D_sT (Fig. 3), while the pT spectra become D_sT-dependent (Fig. 4). They also study the range of validity of the approach by requiring a positive distribution function and identify pT-crossings for various charm hadrons (Fig. 5). The paper claims this provides a basis for a systematic determination of charm transport coefficients and reports a preliminary compatibility with experimental data.

Significance. If valid, this work provides a complete and internally consistent treatment of out-of-equilibrium charm-hadron distributions in a fluid-dynamic framework, including a non-trivial moment algebra in Appendix A that reduces to the single-species limit. The yield-independence check (Fig. 3) is a genuine internal consistency test, and the positivity analysis in Sec. V honestly delimits the range of applicability. The manuscript also properly cites and builds upon prior work [1,2] and provides a public code repository. However, the central phenomenological claim that the model can be used to extract D_s rests on an unvalidated assumption—that the charm hadronic resonance gas description applies at all temperatures—and on a data comparison that is advertised in the abstract but not actually presented in the text. These issues need to be addressed before the paper can support its stated conclusions.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. IIB, Eqs. (22)-(24), Figs. 4-5] The use of the charm Hadron Resonance Gas (HRGc) transport coefficients for the entire temperature range is a load-bearing assumption that is not tested. At early times (T≈300-500 MeV), the sums in Eqs. (23)-(24) over hadron species with masses m_i≥1.8 GeV are exponentially suppressed, while the actual degrees of freedom are charm quarks with unsuppressed density. This biases the total relaxation time τ_q and the diffusion coefficient κ_q, thereby altering the evolution of ν_q^μ and the D_sT-dependent pT spectra (Fig. 4) and the pT-crossing (Fig. 5) that are supposed to encode D_s. The yield-independence check in Fig. 3 is not sufficient to validate this sector: once δf is expressed as the first moment of the conserved current, the integrated yield becomes independent of the transport coefficients by construction. The paper provides no dedicated sensitivity test, e.g., switching to charm
  2. [Abstract, Secs. IV-V] The abstract states: 'A preliminary comparison of our model with the available experimental data shows compatibility within uncertainties.' In the body of the paper, however, I could not find any direct comparison to experimental data. Figures 3-5 show model predictions and parameter ranges from lattice QCD and ALICE fits, but no data points for charm-hadron yields or pT spectra are plotted, and no quantitative measure (e.g., χ² or uncertainty bands) is reported. This claim in the abstract is therefore unsupported. Please either include the comparison or revise the abstract so that it does not overstate the empirical validation.
  3. [Sec. IIA, Eq. (7)] The temperature at which the equilibrium distribution f_p^(0) in Eq. (7) is evaluated is not specified. Equation (7) is written at the formation time τ_i = 0.1 fm/c, while the hydrodynamic medium is initialized at τ_0 = 0.4 fm/c. The paper does not state how T(τ_i) is obtained from the TRENTo entropy profile (e.g., via Bjorken scaling from τ_0), nor how the Landau matching condition is applied at the formation time. Without this prescription, the decomposition of the cross section in Eq. (6) into equilibrium and out-of-equilibrium parts is not uniquely defined, and the calculation is not fully reproducible.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. IIA, Eq. (9)] The quantity p^τ used in the argument of n_coll is not defined. In Milne coordinates it should be p^τ = m_T cosh(y-η) (with y=η at midrapidity); please define it explicitly.
  2. [Sec. III] The assumption that D_sT is constant throughout the entire fireball evolution is a significant simplification, especially since lattice QCD indicates a temperature dependence. This is a minor point in the present paper, but it should be flagged more prominently as a limitation when interpreting the eventual extraction of D_s.
  3. [Fig. 3 left panel] The out-of-equilibrium contribution to the yield is plotted in absolute value, which is potentially confusing. The caption should state explicitly that the correction is negative and that the absolute value is shown for visual comparison.
  4. [Eq. (18) vs Eq. (26)] The notation for the irreducible momentum projection is inconsistent: Eq. (18) uses p_{<μ>} while Eq. (26) uses p^μ. Although ν_q^μ is orthogonal to u^μ so the contraction is equivalent, please unify the notation.
  5. [Appendix B] The discussion of the integrand sign would benefit from a clearer explanation of why a negative integrand at low pT and low α (right panel of Fig. 6) does not affect the positivity of the final spectrum; the current text is somewhat implicit.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

Yield-independence 'validation' is a built-in moment-matching identity; the pT spectra remain independent outputs.

specific steps
  1. self definitional [Sec. IV (Fig. 3 discussion), Eqs. (16), (18), (25)]
    "By including the out-of-equilibrium corrections, the invariant yield is comparable with both the non-diffusive case and the total number of charm quarks in the QGP across the entire range of DsT. ... This agreement confirms the validity of the parametrization of the out-of-equilibrium corrections."

    Equation (18) is constructed from Eq. (16), which sets the rank-1 irreducible moment ρ_i^μ of δf_i,p equal to κ̄_i ν_q^μ. With P_i = n_i T for the non-relativistic charm hadrons, the first moment of (18) is exactly κ̄_i ν_q^μ, so the Cooper–Frye yield from f0 + δf carries the total charm current n_q u^μ + ν_q^μ by construction. The observed D_sT-independence of the integrated yield is therefore a consequence of current conservation plus the defining moment-matching, not an independent test of the physical content or coefficient choice in Eq. (18).

full rationale

The derivation is otherwise self-contained: the D_sT scan uses external ranges from lattice QCD and ALICE fits, the initial charm density uses FONLL and TRENTo, the bulk evolution uses FluiduM, and the HRGc species inputs are standard. No output quantity is fitted and then re-used as an input. The multi-species pT spectra, the D_sT sensitivity of their shapes, and the pT-crossing positivity limit are genuine outputs of the model. The 1/P_i coefficient in Eq. (18) is imported from the authors' previous Ref. [1] rather than re-derived here, but that is a published prior derivation and, by itself, not a circular step. The HRGc-employed-for-the-whole-temperature-range assumption is an acknowledged systematic limitation, not a circularity. The partial circularity identified above is confined to using the yield-independence check as 'confirmation' of the parametrization, because that check is algebraically guaranteed by the moment-matching construction in Eqs. (16) and (18).

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 7 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central derivation leans on a chain of established transport/fluid-dynamic ingredients plus four paper-specific modeling choices (same D_s for all species, HRGc over full T, Landau-matched decomposition of the production cross-section, free-streaming initialization). No new entities are introduced; no target data are used to fit parameters.

free parameters (3)
  • Spatial diffusion coefficient D_s T = scanned over 0–0.25; input range from HotQCD [15]
    Controls the magnitude of the diffusion current and hence the out-of-equilibrium correction; the paper does not fit it, but the central claim is a family of predictions parameterized by it.
  • Formation time τ_i and hydrodynamic start τ_0 = τ_i = 0.1 fm/c, τ_0 = 0.4 fm/c
    Set by uncertainty-principle estimate and free-streaming duration; determines initial diffusion current at τ_0.
  • Freeze-out temperature T_fo = 156 MeV
    Taken from Ref. [12]; sets the freeze-out hypersurface on which all hadron yields and pT spectra are computed.
axioms (7)
  • domain assumption Charm pairs are produced only in initial hard scatterings; thermal production and annihilation are negligible during QGP lifetime.
    Sec. I; this fixes conserved charm number and justifies no source terms in the diffusion equations.
  • domain assumption Charm-medium interaction obeys a Fokker-Planck equation with momentum-independent drag and diffusion coefficients related by the Einstein fluctuation-dissipation relation.
    Eqs. (11)-(12); underlies all relaxation-type equations for ν_i.
  • ad hoc to paper The spatial diffusion coefficient D_s is the same for charm quarks and every charm hadron, with Eq. (13) valid in both cases.
    Sec. IIB1; this is a modeling leap from quark-level transport to hadron-level transport without microphysical derivation.
  • ad hoc to paper Charm Hadron Resonance Gas is the correct EoS from the initial time through freeze-out.
    Sec. IIB; stated explicitly as a stopgap because no interpolating charm EoS exists.
  • ad hoc to paper Landau matching and the split of the FONLL production cross-section into equilibrium and out-of-equilibrium parts uniquely define the initial δf.
    Sec. IIA, Eqs. (6)-(8); different matching prescriptions would change the initial diffusion current.
  • domain assumption Navier-Stokes / first-order approximation is valid: rank-1 truncation, neglect of bulk/shear of the charm sector, and neglect of O(2) terms.
    Sec. IIB2 and Appendix A; the linear relation ρ_i = κ̄_i ν_q and the relaxation equation depend on this.
  • domain assumption Between τ_i and τ_0 charm quarks free-stream without interactions while the bulk medium does not free-stream; the initial flow is Bjorken.
    Sec. IIA and footnote 2; this generates the non-zero initial diffusion current and is justified only by citing moderate glasma effects [26,27].

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 14726 in / 16429 out tokens · 145347 ms · 2026-08-04T07:25:58.151014+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Building on previous studies that demonstrated the applicability of a fluid-dynamic description of charm quarks in the quark-gluon plasma, the present work extends the framework by computing the out-of-equilibrium contributions to the distribution function of charm hadrons. The analysis includes corrections arising from the initial out-of-equilibrium distribution of charm quarks after a free-streaming phase, as well as from the freeze-out surface within fluid dynamics. These results enable the exact computation of integrated yields and transverse momentum distributions of charm hadrons for different values of the spatial diffusion coefficient, thereby providing the basis for a systematic determination of the charm transport coefficients. A preliminary comparison of our model with the available experimental data shows compatibility within uncertainties. In addition, the limits of applicability of the approach are identified by determining the transverse-momentum region in which charm hadrons are described by a well-defined, positive distribution function.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2510.25601 by Andrea Dubla, Eduardo Grossi, Federica Capellino, Rossana Facen, Silvia Masciocchi.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: Radial diffusion current (left) and charm quark density profile (right) as a function of radius at the formation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: Radial diffusion current (left) and charm quark density profile (right) as a function of the radius for different [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3: Left panel: Integrated yield of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: Momentum distribution of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: Left panel: ratio between the out-of-equilibrium and the equilibrium contribution of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6: Integrand of the momentum spectrum of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_6.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Non-equilibrium Dynamical Attractors and Thermalisation of Charm Quarks in Nuclear Collisions at the LHC Energy

    hep-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Charm quarks develop dynamical attractors in expanding QGP but with lattice-QCD diffusion coefficients require ~5 fm to relax, leading to O(1) deviations from equilibrium already at pT ~ 3 GeV and incomplete thermaliz...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

42 extracted references · 32 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    The Fokker-Planck Equation Assuming small momentum exchange between charm hadrons and the light partons of the medium, and considering an isotropic medium, the dynamics of charm hadrons reduces to the well-known Fokker-Planck equation, pµ∂µfi,p =p 0 ∂ ∂pl Aiplfi,p +δ mlDi ∂ ∂pm fi,p ,(11) wherel, m= 1,2,3represent the three spatial components. The coeffic...

  2. [2]

    Charm-hadrons out-of-equilibrium corrections To study the out-of-equilibrium corrections of charm hadrons at freeze-out, and following Ref. [29], the irreducible moment of tensor ranklfor each hadron species is defined as a moment of the out-of-equilibrium distribution function, ρµ1...µl i ≡∆ µ1...µl ν1...νl Z dP pν1 ...pνl δfi,p.(14) It can be shown that...

  3. [3]

    SFB 1225 (ISOQUANT)

    Charm hadron transport coefficients The expression ofδf i,p reported in Eq. (18) is directly proportional to the diffusion coefficientκi of the charm hadron of speciesi. To obtain an expression for the charm-hadron transport coefficients, we consider successive moments of Eq. (11). The0th moment encodes the continuity equation for the hadroni. Taking the ...

    2023

  4. [4]

    Capellino, A

    F. Capellino, A. Beraudo, A. Dubla, S. Floerchinger, S. Masciocchi, J. Pawlowski, and I. Selyuzhenkov, Phys. Rev. D106, 034021 (2022), arXiv:2205.07692 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  5. [5]

    Capellino, A

    F. Capellino, A. Dubla, S. Floerchinger, E. Grossi, A. Kirchner, and S. Masciocchi, Phys. Rev. D108, 116011 (2023), arXiv:2307.14449 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  6. [6]

    Braun-Munzinger, J

    P. Braun-Munzinger, J. Phys. G34, S471 (2007), arXiv:nucl-th/0701093

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  7. [7]

    Bodeker and M

    D. Bodeker and M. Laine, JHEP07, 130, arXiv:1205.4987 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  8. [8]

    Prino and R

    F. Prino and R. Rapp, J. Phys. G43, 093002 (2016), arXiv:1603.00529 [nucl-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  9. [9]

    Caoet al., Phys

    S. Caoet al., Phys. Rev. C99, 054907 (2019), arXiv:1809.07894 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  10. [10]

    Acharyaet al.(ALICE), Phys

    S. Acharyaet al.(ALICE), Phys. Lett. B813, 136054 (2021), arXiv:2005.11131 [nucl-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  11. [11]

    Acharyaet al.(ALICE), JHEP10, 141, arXiv:2005.14518 [nucl-ex]

    S. Acharyaet al.(ALICE), JHEP10, 141, arXiv:2005.14518 [nucl-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  12. [12]

    A. M. Sirunyanet al.(CMS), Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 202301 (2018), arXiv:1708.03497 [nucl-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  13. [13]

    Acharyaet al.(ALICE), Eur

    S. Acharyaet al.(ALICE), Eur. Phys. J. C84, 813 (2024), arXiv:2211.04384 [nucl-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  14. [14]

    Hayrapetyanet al.(CMS), Phys

    A. Hayrapetyanet al.(CMS), Phys. Rept.1115, 219 (2025), arXiv:2405.10785 [nucl-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  15. [15]

    Andronic, P

    A. Andronic, P. Braun-Munzinger, M. K. Köhler, A. Mazeliauskas, K. Redlich, J. Stachel, and V. Vislavicius, JHEP07, 035, arXiv:2104.12754 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  16. [16]

    Andronic, P

    A. Andronic, P. Braun-Munzinger, H. Brunßen, J. Crkovská, J. Stachel, V. Vislavicius, and M. Völkl, JHEP10, 229, arXiv:2308.14821 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  17. [17]

    M. L. Sambataro, V. Minissale, S. Plumari, and V. Greco, Assessing the lattice QCD space diffusion coefficient and the thermalization time of charm quark by mean of D meson observables at LHC (2025), arXiv:2508.01024 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2025

  18. [18]

    Altenkort, O

    L. Altenkort, O. Kaczmarek, R. Larsen, S. Mukherjee, P. Petreczky, H.-T. Shu, and S. Stendebach (HotQCD), Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 231902 (2023), arXiv:2302.08501 [hep-lat]. 12

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  19. [19]

    Altenkort, D

    L. Altenkort, D. de la Cruz, O. Kaczmarek, R. Larsen, G. D. Moore, S. Mukherjee, P. Petreczky, H.-T. Shu, and S. Sten- debach (HotQCD), Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 051902 (2024), arXiv:2311.01525 [hep-lat]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  20. [20]

    G. S. Denicol, H. Niemi, E. Molnar, and D. H. Rischke, Phys. Rev. D85, 114047 (2012), arXiv:1202.4551 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  21. [21]

    Frixione, M

    S. Frixione, M. Cacciari, and P. Nason, Sci. Cult. Ser. -Phys.21, 437 (2002), arXiv:hep-ph/0107063

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  22. [22]

    Abelevet al.(ALICE), Phys

    B. Abelevet al.(ALICE), Phys. Rev. Lett.110, 032301 (2013), arXiv:1210.3615 [nucl-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  23. [23]

    P. M. Nadolsky, H.-L. Lai, Q.-H. Cao, J. Huston, J. Pumplin, D. Stump, W.-K. Tung, and C. P. Yuan, Phys. Rev. D78, 013004 (2008), arXiv:0802.0007 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  24. [24]

    Acharyaet al.(ALICE), Phys

    S. Acharyaet al.(ALICE), Phys. Rev. D105, L011103 (2022), arXiv:2105.06335 [nucl-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  25. [25]

    Acharyaet al.(ALICE), JHEP12, 086, arXiv:2308.04877 [hep-ex]

    S. Acharyaet al.(ALICE), JHEP12, 086, arXiv:2308.04877 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  26. [26]

    J. S. Moreland, J. E. Bernhard, and S. A. Bass, Phys. Rev. C92, 011901 (2015), arXiv:1412.4708 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  27. [27]

    J. D. Bjorken, Phys. Rev. D27, 140 (1983)

    1983

  28. [28]

    Gelis, E

    F. Gelis, E. Iancu, J. Jalilian-Marian, and R. Venugopalan, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.60, 463 (2010), arXiv:1002.0333 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  29. [29]

    Avramescu, V

    D. Avramescu, V. Greco, T. Lappi, H. Mäntysaari, and D. Müller, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 172301 (2025), arXiv:2409.10565 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  30. [30]

    Singh, M

    M. Singh, M. Kurian, B. Schenke, S. Jeon, and C. Gale, (2025), arXiv:2509.18647 [nucl-th]

    arXiv 2025

  31. [31]

    Romatschke and U

    P. Romatschke and U. Romatschke, Relativistic fluid dynamics in and out of equilibrium – ten years of progress in theory and numerical simulations of nuclear collisions (2019)

    2019

  32. [32]

    J. A. Fotakis, E. Molnár, H. Niemi, C. Greiner, and D. H. Rischke, Phys. Rev. D106, 036009 (2022), arXiv:2203.11549 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  33. [33]

    Svetitsky, Phys

    B. Svetitsky, Phys. Rev. D37, 2484 (1988)

    1988

  34. [34]

    Vermunt, Y

    L. Vermunt, Y. Seemann, A. Dubla, S. Floerchinger, E. Grossi, A. Kirchner, S. Masciocchi, and I. Selyuzhenkov, Phys. Rev. C108, 064908 (2023), arXiv:2308.16722 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  35. [35]

    Acharyaet al.(ALICE), Phys

    S. Acharyaet al.(ALICE), Phys. Rev. C101, 044907 (2020), arXiv:1910.07678 [nucl-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  36. [36]

    Floerchinger, E

    S. Floerchinger, E. Grossi, and J. Lion, Phys. Rev. C100, 014905 (2019), arXiv:1811.01870 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  37. [37]

    Floerchinger and E

    S. Floerchinger and E. Grossi, JHEP08, 186, arXiv:1711.06687 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  38. [38]

    Cooper and G

    F. Cooper and G. Frye, Phys. Rev. D10, 186 (1974)

    1974

  39. [39]

    Mazeliauskas, S

    A. Mazeliauskas, S. Floerchinger, E. Grossi, and D. Teaney, Eur. Phys. J. C79, 284 (2019), arXiv:1809.11049 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  40. [40]

    R. L. Workmanet al.(Particle Data Group), PTEP2022, 083C01 (2022)

    2022

  41. [41]

    Chattopadhyay, U

    C. Chattopadhyay, U. Heinz, and T. Schaefer, Phys. Rev. C108, 034907 (2023), arXiv:2307.10769 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  42. [42]

    Acharyaet al.(ALICE), JHEP01, 174, arXiv:2110.09420 [nucl-ex]

    S. Acharyaet al.(ALICE), JHEP01, 174, arXiv:2110.09420 [nucl-ex]. Appendix A: Equation of motion for the total-charm diffusion current In this section, we find an expression for the equation of motion obeyed by the total-charm diffusion currentνµ q. As reported in Eq. (16), under Navier-Stokes approximation, there exists a linear relation between the rank...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv