Chiral perturbation theory vs. Linear Sigma Model in a chiral imbalance medium

A. A. Andrianov; D. Espriu; V. A. Andrianov

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 22 references

Chiral perturbation theory vs. Linear Sigma Model in a chiral imbalance medium

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper argues that in a medium with chiral imbalance, chiral perturbation theory and the linear sigma model yield the same pion mass shell, and that charged pions stop decaying to muons once the chiral chemical potential reaches about…

desk verdict A plausible LSM–ChPT dictionary in a chiral medium, built on an unshown but checkable algebra step; the 160 MeV decay threshold is a real observable but the paper needs to show the derivation and quote its inputs. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.09118 v3 pith:WPOULZ7P submitted 2019-08-24 hep-th hep-ph

A. A. Andrianov , V. A. Andrianov , D. Espriu This is my paper · ORCID

classification hep-thhep-ph

keywords chiralchemicalpotentiallocalparitybreakingpionmassshellperturbationtheorylinearsigmamodelheavy-ioncollisionslargeN_cmuonsuppression

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 tries to establish that two standard low-energy descriptions of QCD—chiral perturbation theory, the effective field theory of pions, and the linear $\sigma$ model, a theory of pions coupled to a scalar $\sigma$ meson—describe the same pion physics once a chiral chemical potential $\mu_5$ (a bias between right- and left-handed quarks) is switched on, and that this correspondence produces a measurable signal in heavy-ion collisions. It derives the in-medium pion mass shell from the modified chiral Lagrangian and shows that in the large-$N_c$ count the resulting coefficients match the linear $\sigma$ model, with low-energy constants close to their empirical values. The concrete prediction is that charged-pion decay to a muon and neutrino shuts off at low pion momentum when $\mu_5$ reaches about 160 MeV, offering a direct probe of local parity breaking in the fireball. If correct, the paper turns a theoretical ambiguity—which effective theory to use—into a quantitative bridge between hadron observables and the size of the chiral imbalance.

What carries the argument

The engine of the argument is the covariant derivative of Eq. (1), $D_\nu = \partial_\nu - 2i I_q \mu_5 \delta_{\nu 0}$, which inserts a constant isosinglet axial-vector background into every derivative of the chiral Lagrangian. Applying this replacement before using the SU(2) trace identities—valid only when the trace of the chiral current $\langle j_\mu\rangle$ vanishes—produces the extra $\mu_5^2$ operators in Eq. (11) that change the coefficients of $p_0^2$, $|\mathbf{p}|^2$, and the mass term in the pion inverse propagator (Eq. (12)). The linear $\sigma$ model of Eq. (15), with $H=\xi\Sigma\xi$, supplies independent in-medium expressions for $F_\pi^2$, $m_\pi^2$, and the scalar masses, and matching the two theories determines the low-energy constants and the $a_0$ mass. The comparison is done in the large-$N_c$ counting, in which the dim=4 chiral operators reduce to the standard SU(2) low-energy form.

What would settle it

Measure the momentum spectrum of muons from charged-pion decays in central heavy-ion collisions, or compute $F_\pi(\mu_5)$ and $m_\pi(\mu_5)$ on the lattice at real or imaginary chiral chemical potential: if no low-momentum muon deficit appears in high-statistics data, or if the in-medium pion properties deviate from Eqs. (13) and (16), the claimed correspondence and threshold are falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the pion inverse propagator in a chirally imbalanced medium is fixed by replacing the ordinary derivative in the chiral Lagrangian with $D_\nu = \partial_\nu - 2i I_q \mu_5 \delta_{\nu 0}$, giving the mass shell of Eq. (12): $(F_0^2+48\mu_5^2(l_1+l_2))p_0^2 - (F_0^2+16\mu_5^2(l_1+l_2))|\mathbf{p}|^2 - (F_0^2+4l_4\mu_5^2)m_\pi^2(0)=0$. In the pion rest frame this yields $F_\pi^2(\mu_5) \simeq F_0^2 + 48\mu_5^2(l_1+l_2)$ and $m_\pi^2(\mu_5) \simeq \left[1 - \frac{4\mu_5^2}{F_0^2}(12(l_1+l_2)-l_4)\right] m_\pi^2(0)$. The paper shows that the linear $\sigma$ model with parameters fixed from vacuum scalar-meson spectra produces the same functional dependence in the large-$N_c$ count, with $l_1+l_2 \simeq 6.2\times 10^{-3}$ and $l_4 \simeq 3.7\times 10^{-2}$ and the relation $6(l_1+l_2)=l_4$, and that the implied $a_0$ mass is near 0.9 GeV. It then uses the modified mass shell to conclude that $\pi^+\to\mu^+\nu$ is closed at $|\mathbf{p}|^2\simeq 0$ for $\mu_5 \simeq 160$ MeV.

Load-bearing premise

The argument stands on the reliability of the vacuum linear-$\sigma$-model parameters $\lambda_1=16.4850$, $\lambda_2=-13.1313$, $c=-4.46874\times 10^4$ MeV$^2$, and $b=1.61594\times 10^5$ MeV$^2$, which are taken from earlier fits without quoted uncertainties and then used to set the in-medium pion properties, the $a_0$ mass, and the 160 MeV threshold.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

In a chirally imbalanced medium the pion decay constant increases and the pion mass decreases with $\mu_5$, according to Eq. (13), so pion physics itself shifts before any decay threshold is reached.
The comparison yields $l_1+l_2 \simeq 6.2\times 10^{-3}$ and $l_4 \simeq 3.7\times 10^{-2}$, consistent with the empirical low-energy constants, and gives $6(l_1+l_2)=l_4$ as a linear-sigma-model relation.
The isotriplet scalar meson mass follows from these constants and comes out near $0.9$ GeV, matching the measured $a_0$ mass within errors.
For $\mu_5 \gtrsim 160$ MeV the $\pi^+\to\mu^+\nu$ decay channel closes at low pion momentum, and below the threshold the muon yield is suppressed at sufficiently large momenta.
The quark condensate magnitude grows with $\mu_5$ (Eq. (14)), and the paper argues this tendency persists at temperatures around 150 MeV, in line with lattice results, so the spectral predictions are expected to survive at fireball temperatures.

Reading between the lines

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

Editorial extension: the mass-shell modification is flavor-blind, so the same threshold should affect $\pi^-\to\mu^-\bar{\nu}$ and, with a shifted value, $\pi\to e\nu$; a lepton-flavor ratio from the fireball would therefore be a more selective probe of chiral imbalance than the muon yield alone.
Editorial extension: if the chiral chemical potential is not constant but decays as the fireball expands, the suppression should appear as a momentum- and time-dependent muon deficit, and measuring the muon spectrum could in principle map $\mu_5(t)$.
Editorial extension: lattice QCD with a chiral chemical potential can test Eq. (16) directly by computing $F_\pi(\mu_5)$ and $m_\pi(\mu_5)$; agreement would confirm the low-energy-constant identification, while disagreement would localize where the correspondence fails.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Two things worth knowing. First, the paper’s core step — Eq. (11), the O(mu5^2) correction to the chiral Lagrangian — is stated without the algebra. The authors warn that the usual Gasser–Leutwyler basis is not valid when != 0, but they do not show how expanding the unreduced operators in (4) gives the coefficients 12(l1+l2), -4(l1+l2), -l4. The stress-test is on target: a sign error in the spatial term would change the dispersion relation (12) and spoil the comparison with the linear sigma model. This is the main soft spot, and it is fixable — they just need to show their work.

Second, the paper makes a genuinely new point: the reduction identities (5)–(6) fail in a medium with a chiral chemical potential, so the mu5 corrections must be computed from the large-N_c operators before reducing to the GL basis. That is a real insight, and it changes the medium pion mass and decay constant. The resulting relation 6(l1+l2) = l4 from the LSM is new, and the prediction that charged pions stop decaying to muons at mu5 ~ 160 MeV is sharp and testable in heavy-ion data.

What the paper does well: the dictionary between LSM and ChPT constants is a useful bridge, and the authors are honest about the limitations — they explicitly say thermal effects and detector acceptance are left out. The comparison to phenomenology, though, is stated as “satisfactory” without listing the empirical l_i values they are matching. That is a real gap. The LSM parameters are also self-cited fits with no error bars, so the quoted threshold carries an unknown uncertainty.

In proportion: these are presentation and documentation problems, not a broken argument. The central logic is clear and the physics is ordinary EFT. I would send this to a referee who can verify Eq. (11) by hand and check the numerical match. If the algebra holds, it is a useful paper for the chiral-imbalance community. If it does not, it is a quick reject. The authors should be asked to supply the derivation and the empirical constants before publication.

I would not cite it in my own work yet, but I would put it in the reading group as an example of where a compressed derivation makes a claim hard to trust.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies the effect of a constant chiral chemical potential μ5 on pion dynamics in two effective theories: chiral perturbation theory, through the modified covariant derivative of Eq. (1), and a linear sigma model. The central claim is that the μ5-dependent corrections to the dim-4 chiral Lagrangian, Eq. (11), lead to an in-medium pion dispersion relation, Eq. (12), whose coefficients match, in the large-Nc count, the predictions of the linear sigma model, Eqs. (17)-(21). The paper further derives a modified in-medium pion decay constant and mass, Eq. (13), and predicts a threshold for suppression of π+→μ+ν decays at μ5 ≈ 160 MeV, Eq. (22).

Significance. If the central derivation is correct, the paper gives a concrete mapping between ChPT and LSM in a chirally imbalanced medium and identifies a falsifiable observable: muon suppression from pion decays in a heavy-ion fireball. The paper is explicit that the reduction to the standard Gasser-Leutwyler operators is invalid once the chiral chemical potential is present, which is a conceptually important and often overlooked point. However, the numerical agreement with pion phenomenology is asserted rather than demonstrated, and the key algebraic step leading to Eq. (11) is not shown; the actual significance of the claimed correspondence therefore cannot be assessed from the manuscript as it stands.

major comments (4)

[Sec. 2, Eq. (11)] The central result of the paper is stated without derivation. Equation (11) gives the O(μ5^2) correction to the dim-4 chiral Lagrangian, and the coefficients of <j0j0>, <jkjk>, and <χ†U+U†χ> control the pion dispersion in Eq. (12), the in-medium constants in Eq. (13), and the decay threshold in Eq. (22). The authors themselves emphasize that the reduced Lagrangian (9) cannot be used when <j>≠0, yet the algebra that produces Eq. (11) from the unreduced operators (4) is not presented. In particular, the absence of odd powers of μ5 and the exact linear combination l1+l2 are nontrivial; a sign or factor error here would break the comparison with the LSM and shift the 160 MeV threshold. Please provide the explicit derivation, including the treatment of all trace identities in the presence of the shifted j0.
[Sec. 3, Eqs. (17)-(18)] The claim of 'satisfactory correspondence to the pion phenomenology [14]' is not quantified. The manuscript never lists the empirical Gasser-Leutwyler values of l1+l2 and l4 that are being compared, nor the scale at which they are taken. Without those numbers the central statement that ChPT and LSM agree 'remarkably well' cannot be checked. Please give the empirical values with uncertainties and show the comparison explicitly for the quoted LSM parameters.
[Sec. 3, parameter input and Eq. (22)] The numerical LSM inputs λ1 = 16.4850, λ2 = -13.1313, c = -4.46874×10^4 MeV^2, F0 = 92 MeV, and b = 1.61594×10^5 MeV^2 are quoted from the authors' own fits [16] without error bars or independent derivation. These constants determine the in-medium decay constant, pion mass, a0 mass, and the μ5 ≈ 160 MeV threshold. The Introduction itself criticizes exactly this kind of self-cited LSM extrapolation as having 'no reliable predictability', so the manuscript should explain why these input values can be trusted in the present context, or at least provide an uncertainty estimate and show how the threshold shifts under reasonable variations.
[Sec. 4, Eq. (22)] The decay threshold uses the relation 6(l1+l2) = l4, which is introduced in Sec. 3 as a relation 'following from the LSM' and is not a general ChPT result. This should be stated more prominently as an assumption, and the sensitivity of the derived threshold to deviations from this relation should be discussed. As written, the threshold is an LSM-model-dependent consequence rather than a robust outcome of the ChPT comparison alone.

minor comments (5)

[Sec. 2, Eq. (3)] The constant shift μ5^2 Nf F0^2 in Eq. (3) alters the vacuum energy but does not affect pion dynamics at O(p^2); it may be worth saying explicitly that the physical consequences enter only at O(μ5^2) through Eq. (11).
[Sec. 3, Eq. (16)] There is a typographical issue: the formula for mπ^2(μ5) appears as 'm2 π(µ5) = 2 b m Fπ' without a closing parenthesis or clearly separated approximation symbol; please correct the typesetting.
[References] In Ref. [7], the entry 'Xu-Guang Huang. Electromagnetic fields and anomalous transports in heavy-ion collisionsa pedagogical review. Rep. Prog. Phys. 2016, 79, 076302' appears twice; one duplicate should be removed.
[Sec. 5, Results] The bullet 'The resulting dispersion law for pions in the medium allows us reveal the threshold of decay' is missing a word ('to reveal'); please correct.
[Sec. 4, Eq. (22)] The decay condition assumes vacuum dispersion relations for the muon and neutrino, with in-medium effects on leptons suppressed by weak-interaction order; this assumption is reasonable but should be stated explicitly at the point where Eq. (22) is introduced.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the ChPT/LSM comparison is built from vacuum-fitted constants and external GL values, not from the in-medium quantities being predicted.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation chain is not circular. The in-medium ChPT results, Eqs. (12)-(13), follow from the covariant-derivative prescription of Eq. (1) applied to the vacuum chiral Lagrangian, with the LECs l1, l2, l4 taken from the external Gasser-Leutwyler phenomenology [14]. The LSM parameters quoted in Section 3 are fixed in prior work [16,17] from vacuum scalar-meson spectral characteristics, not from the chiral-imbalance observables under study, and the paper then uses those vacuum-fitted inputs to obtain the in-medium pion quantities and the threshold mu5 ~ 160 MeV. The comparison of the LSM-derived combinations (l1+l2) ~ 6.2e-3 and l4 ~ 3.7e-2 with the independent phenomenological GL values is therefore a genuine cross-check, not a fit renamed as a prediction. The relation 6(l1+l2) = l4 is imposed as a consequence of the LSM dictionary and is used in Eq. (22), but this is an explicit model assumption rather than a circular identification of the predicted quantity with an input of the same calculation. The self-citations in [13,16,17] supply the LSM parametrization and previous phenomenological fits; those fits are externally falsifiable vacuum inputs and do not contain the target result, so they do not make the argument circular. One technical caveat, not a circularity, is that Eq. (11), the pivotal O(mu5^2) correction, is asserted without a displayed derivation; an omitted proof is a completeness or correctness risk, but it is not a reduction of the output to the input by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

All free parameters are vacuum inputs from the authors' prior fits; no new entities are introduced. The central in-medium predictions depend on these self-cited constants, which carry no uncertainties.

free parameters (4)

lambda1 (LSM quartic coupling) = 16.4850
Fixed from vacuum scalar meson spectra in prior work [16,17]; no error bars shown. Determines in-medium F_pi shift via 1/(lambda1+lambda2) ~ 0.3.
lambda2 (LSM quartic coupling) = -13.1313
Same vacuum fit; enters denominator lambda1+lambda2 and pion mass relation.
c (LSM determinant coupling) = -4.46874e4 MeV^2
Fixed from vacuum scalar spectra; enters scalar masses and mu5 corrections in Eq. (16).
b = B0 F0 = 1.61594e5 MeV^2
Fixed from vacuum pion mass and condensate; used in m_pi^2(mu5) F_pi^2(mu5) relation.

assumptions (5)

domain assumption Covariant derivative replacement D_nu -> D_nu - 2i mu5 delta_{0nu} implements chiral imbalance in hadron Lagrangians (Eq. 1).
Assumes a constant axial-vector background survives hadronization and is equivalent to a chiral chemical potential.
domain assumption Quark-hadron continuity (ref [12]) permits carrying mu5 from quark fireball to hadron effective theory.
The paper relies on this to apply mu5 to pion and sigma fields.
domain assumption Large N_c count suppresses higher-dimension operators; only L2 and L4 from [15] are needed.
The comparison uses large-N_c ChPT and neglects O(p^6) and derivative corrections.
standard math Trace identities (5),(6) hold for SU(3)/SU(2) only when <j^mu>=0; when mu5 is present one must return to the unreduced operators (4).
Key technical point: using Eq. (9) would miss mu5-dependent terms.
domain assumption Leading order in mu5^2 is sufficient; O(mu5^4) and thermal effects are neglected.
All final relations are linearized in mu5^2; authors acknowledge thermal effects for real HIC conditions in Sec. 5.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Chiral perturbation theory vs. Linear Sigma Model in a chiral imbalance medium." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/WPOULZ7P

@misc{pith2026190809118,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Chiral perturbation theory vs. Linear Sigma Model in a chiral imbalance medium},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/WPOULZ7P}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.09118}
}

abstract

We compare Chiral Perturbation Theory (ChPT) and the Linear Sigma Model (LSM) as realizations of low energy QCD for light mesons in a chirally imbalanced medium. The relations between the low-energy constants of the Chiral Lagrangian and the corresponding constants of the Linear Sigma Model are established as well as the expressions for the decay constant of the $\pi$-meson in the medium and the mass of the $a_0$. In the large $N_c$ count taken from QCD the correspondence of ChPT and LSM is remarkably good and give a solid ground for search of chiral imbalance manifestation in pion physics. A possible experimental detection of chiral imbalance tracks (and therefore a phase with Local Parity Breaking) in the charged pion decays inside the fireball is outlined.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

22 extracted references · 22 canonical work pages

[14]

Annals Phys

Gasser J.; Leutwyler H. Annals Phys. 1984,158, 142-210; Bijnens J.; Ecker G. Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 2014, 64, 149-174

work page 1984
[16]

V.; Putilova A

Andrianov A.A.; Andrianov V.A.; Espriu D.; Iakubovich A. V.; Putilova A. E. QCD with Chiral Chemical Vector: Models Versus Lattices Phys. Part. Nucl. Lett.2018,15, 357-361 ; Putilova A. E.; Iakubovich A. V.; Andrianov A.A.; Andrianov V.A.; Espriu D. Exotic meson decays and polarization asymmetry in hadron en vironment with chiral imbalance. EPJ Web of Con...

work page 2018
[1]

Kharzeev D. E. The Chiral Magnetic Eﬀect and Anomaly-Indu ced Transport.Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 2014,75, 133-151

work page 2014
[2]

Parity violation in hot QCD: Why it can happen , and how to look for it

Kharzeev D. Parity violation in hot QCD: Why it can happen , and how to look for it. Phys.Lett. B 2006,633, 260-264; Kharzeev D. Topologically induced local P and CP violation i n QCD x QED. Ann. Phys. (NY) 2010, 325, 205 - 218; Kharzeev D. E.; McLerran L. D.; Warringa H. J. The Eﬀects of top ological charge change in heavy ion collisions: ’Event by event...

work page 2006
[3]

Andrianov A.A.; Espriu D. Phys. Lett. B 2008, 663, 450-455; Andrianov A.A.; Andrianov V.A.; Espriu D. Spontaneous P-vi olation in QCD in extreme conditions. Phys. Lett. B 2009, 678, 416-421

work page 2008
[4]

A bnormal dilepton yield from parity breaking in dense nuclear matter

Andrianov A.A.; Andrianov V.A.; Espriu D.; Planells X. A bnormal dilepton yield from parity breaking in dense nuclear matter. AIP Conf.Proc.2011, 1343 450-452

work page 2011
[5]

V.; Chernodub M

Buividovich P. V.; Chernodub M. N.; Luschevskaya E. V.; P olikarpov M. I. Nu- merical evidence of chiral magnetic eﬀect in lattice gauge th eory. Phys. Rev. D 2009, 80, 054503; Buividovich P. V.; Chernodub M. N.; Kharzeev D. E.; Kalaydzh yan T.; Luschevskaya E. V.; Polikarpov M. I. Magnetic-Field-Induc ed insulator-conductor transition in SU(2) quenched l...

work page 2009
[6]

Abelev B.I. et al. [STAR Collaboration]. Azimuthal Char ged-Particle Correlations and Possible Local Strong Parity Violation. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2009, 103, 251601; Voloshin S. A. Local strong parity violation and new possibi lities in experimental study of non-perturbative QCD. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2010230, 012021

work page 2009

Show all 22 references

[7]

Charge-Dependent Correlati ons in Relativistic Heavy Ion Collisions and the Chiral Magnetic Eﬀect

Bzdak A., Koch V., Liao J.F. Charge-Dependent Correlati ons in Relativistic Heavy Ion Collisions and the Chiral Magnetic Eﬀect. Lect. Notes Phys. 2013, 871, 503-536; Xu-Guang Huang. Electromagnetic ﬁelds and anomalous trans ports in heavy-ion collisionsa pedagogical review. Re...

2013
[8]

Rihan Haque for the ALICE Collaboration

Md. Rihan Haque for the ALICE Collaboration. Measuremen ts of the chiral mag- netic eﬀect in PbPb collisions with ALICE. Nucl.Phys. A 2019, 982, 543-546

2019
[9]

D ilepton excess from local parity breaking in baryon matter

Andrianov A.A.; Andrianov V.A.; Espriu D.; Planells X. D ilepton excess from local parity breaking in baryon matter. Phys. Lett. B 2012, 710, 230-235; Andri- anov A.A.; Andrianov V.A.; Espriu D.; Planells X. Implicati ons of local parity breaking in heavy ion collisions Proc. ...

2012
[10]

Adare A. et al. [PHENIX Collaboration]. Detailed measu rement of the e+e− pair continuum in p + p and Au+Au collisions at √ sN N = 200 GeV and implications for direct photon production. Phys. Rev. C 2010, 81, 034911. 10

2010
[11]

Braguta V. V. et al. Study of QCD Phase Diagram with Non-Z ero Chiral Chemical Potential. Phys. Rev. D 2016, 93, 034509; Braguta V. V.; Kotov A. Yu. Catalysis of Dynamical Chiral Sym metry Breaking by Chiral Chemical Potential Phys. Rev. D 2016,93, 105025

2016
[12]

The phase diagram of dense QCD

Fukushima K.; Hatsuda T. The phase diagram of dense QCD. Rept. Prog. Phys. 2011, 74, 014001

2011
[13]

QCD with Chir al Chemical Potential: Models Versus Lattice

Andrianov A.A.; Andrianov V.A.; Espriu D. QCD with Chir al Chemical Potential: Models Versus Lattice. Acta Phys. Polon. Supp. 2016,9, 515-521; ibid. Decays of light mesons triggered by chiral chemical potential. Acta Phys. Polon. Supp. 2017, 10, 977-982

2016
[15]

Large N(c) in chiral perturbati on theory

Kaiser R., Leutwyler H. Large N(c) in chiral perturbati on theory. Eur. Phys. J. C2000, 17, 623-649
[17]

An eﬀective QCD La grangian in the presence of an axial chemical potential

Andrianov A.A.; Espriu D.; Planells X. An eﬀective QCD La grangian in the presence of an axial chemical potential. Eur. Phys. J. C 2013, 73, 2294

2013
[18]

Tanabashi M. et al. (Particle Data Group). Phys. Rev. D 2018,98, 030001

2018
[19]

Charge d pions tagged with polarized photons probing strong CP violation in a chiral-i mbalance medium

Kawaguchi M.; Harada M.; Matsuzaki S.; Ouyang R. Charge d pions tagged with polarized photons probing strong CP violation in a chiral-i mbalance medium. Phys. Rev. C 2017, 95, 065204

2017
[20]

V.; Putilova A

Andrianov A.A.; Andrianov V.A.; Espriu D.; Iakubovich A. V.; Putilova A. E. Chiral imbalance in hadron matter : its manifestation in pho ton polarization asymmetries. Phys. Part. Nucl. Lett. 2019, 16, 493-497

2019
[21]

Phase diagram of chirally imbalanced QCD matter

Chernodub M.N.; Nedelin A.S. Phase diagram of chirally imbalanced QCD matter. Phys. Rev. D 2011, 83 , 105008; Ruggieri M.R. Critical end point of quantum chromodynamics detected by chirally imbalanced quark matter. Phys.Rev. D 2011, 84, 014011

2011
[22]

Therm odynamics of quark matter with a chiral imbalance

Farias R.L.S.; Duarte D.C.; Krein G.; R.O.Ramos. Therm odynamics of quark matter with a chiral imbalance. Phys. Rev. D 2016, 94, 074011. 11

2016

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [14]

Annals Phys

Gasser J.; Leutwyler H. Annals Phys. 1984,158, 142-210; Bijnens J.; Ecker G. Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 2014, 64, 149-174

work page 1984

[2] [16]

V.; Putilova A

Andrianov A.A.; Andrianov V.A.; Espriu D.; Iakubovich A. V.; Putilova A. E. QCD with Chiral Chemical Vector: Models Versus Lattices Phys. Part. Nucl. Lett.2018,15, 357-361 ; Putilova A. E.; Iakubovich A. V.; Andrianov A.A.; Andrianov V.A.; Espriu D. Exotic meson decays and polarization asymmetry in hadron en vironment with chiral imbalance. EPJ Web of Con...

work page 2018

[3] [1]

Kharzeev D. E. The Chiral Magnetic Eﬀect and Anomaly-Indu ced Transport.Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 2014,75, 133-151

work page 2014

[4] [2]

Parity violation in hot QCD: Why it can happen , and how to look for it

Kharzeev D. Parity violation in hot QCD: Why it can happen , and how to look for it. Phys.Lett. B 2006,633, 260-264; Kharzeev D. Topologically induced local P and CP violation i n QCD x QED. Ann. Phys. (NY) 2010, 325, 205 - 218; Kharzeev D. E.; McLerran L. D.; Warringa H. J. The Eﬀects of top ological charge change in heavy ion collisions: ’Event by event...

work page 2006

[5] [3]

Andrianov A.A.; Espriu D. Phys. Lett. B 2008, 663, 450-455; Andrianov A.A.; Andrianov V.A.; Espriu D. Spontaneous P-vi olation in QCD in extreme conditions. Phys. Lett. B 2009, 678, 416-421

work page 2008

[6] [4]

A bnormal dilepton yield from parity breaking in dense nuclear matter

Andrianov A.A.; Andrianov V.A.; Espriu D.; Planells X. A bnormal dilepton yield from parity breaking in dense nuclear matter. AIP Conf.Proc.2011, 1343 450-452

work page 2011

[7] [5]

V.; Chernodub M

Buividovich P. V.; Chernodub M. N.; Luschevskaya E. V.; P olikarpov M. I. Nu- merical evidence of chiral magnetic eﬀect in lattice gauge th eory. Phys. Rev. D 2009, 80, 054503; Buividovich P. V.; Chernodub M. N.; Kharzeev D. E.; Kalaydzh yan T.; Luschevskaya E. V.; Polikarpov M. I. Magnetic-Field-Induc ed insulator-conductor transition in SU(2) quenched l...

work page 2009

[8] [6]

Abelev B.I. et al. [STAR Collaboration]. Azimuthal Char ged-Particle Correlations and Possible Local Strong Parity Violation. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2009, 103, 251601; Voloshin S. A. Local strong parity violation and new possibi lities in experimental study of non-perturbative QCD. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2010230, 012021

work page 2009