Pith.

High Energy Physics - Phenomenology · arXiv:hep-ph/0403234 v2 · submitted 22 Mar 2004 · 26 references

Prethermalization

J. Berges, S. Borsanyi, C. Wetterich

PDF · arXiv · The abstract, sentence by sentence · Cite

The paper says

“Prethermalization of the equation of state and the kinetic temperature to their equilibrium values occurs on time scales dramatically shorter than the thermal equilibration time.”

more of the abstract

This is a crucial ingredient for the understanding of collisions of heavy nuclei or other nonequilibrium phenomena in complex quantum and classical many body systems. We also compare the chemical equilibration time with other characteristic time scales.

from the abstract

Pith says

Machine review · deepseek-v4.1-flash · 13 Nov 2026 · what was read was not recorded · not checked by a person

Reviewed in 2026 with later literature in view.

It can be wrong. Challenge this review or reply to it.

Holds up, with conditions. The in-model time-scale separation is solid and citable; the two most-quoted claims — that the plateau sits at the equilibrium value, and the sub-femtometer QCD number — are the least supported. This line is wrong

4 major objections · 8 minor

How often objections from reviews like this one are right: not yet measured

Are you an author? What you can do.

Not checked: figures, code, what the 26 references say.

The paper says, at Abstract (abstract:s0), Fig. 3, and footnote [24]

The review did not quote this passage.

Pith says: Objection 1 of 4 · major

The abstract claims prethermalization of the equation of state and the kinetic temperature 'to their equilibrium values'. The numerical support for the plateau value, as opposed to the mere existence of a plateau, is thinner than the wording suggests. Runs (A) and (B) of Fig. 1 are constructed to share the same energy density and therefore the same w_eq, and the Fig. 3 inset varies only h at fixed λ and fixed energy density.

more of objection 1

The manuscript therefore never varies the partition of energy between kinetic and potential (or, equivalently, the zero-mode amplitude) at fixed total energy density, which is precisely the direction in which a dephasing plateau could sit away from w_eq and drift toward it only on t_eq. A single control run with a potential- or zero-mode-dominated initial condition at the same ε, showing that w(t) still reaches the neighbourhood of w_eq on t_pt, would settle this. Absent that, the defensible statement is prethermalization to a time-independent, approximately thermal value for the initial conditions studied, and the abstract should be softened accordingly.

The paper says, at Eq. (3) and Fig. 4

The review did not quote this passage.

Pith says: Objection 2 of 4 · major

The kinetic temperature is defined as T_kin(t) = E_kin(t)/c_eq with c_eq = E_kin,eq/T_eq, so T_kin = T_eq at equilibrium by construction; the physical content is the empirical statement that the ratio E_kin/E reaches its thermal value quickly. The text acknowledges this in one sentence, but the abstract's phrasing 'prethermalization of ... the kinetic temperature to their equilibrium values' reads as a dynamical statement about a temperature rather than about an energy ratio.

more of objection 2

In addition, the manuscript never quotes the numerical value of T_kin(t_pt)/T_eq. The solid curve in Fig. 4 cannot be read to better than the line width, so the reader cannot tell whether the prethermalized value is 1.0, 1.1, or 1.2. Please state the number explicitly and, if it deviates from unity at t_pt, say so rather than leaving it to the figure.

The paper says, at Footnote [20], Fig. 2, and the dephasing argument

The review did not quote this passage.

Pith says: Objection 3 of 4 · major

The momentum cutoff is quoted as Λ/m = 2.86, while Fig. 2 displays mode temperatures out to p = 2.5 m, i.e. within roughly 15% of the cutoff. Since the prethermalization mechanism invoked in the text is dephasing over a dense frequency spectrum, and since the claim that all mode temperatures converge to a common T_eq is read off precisely these high-momentum points, the cutoff sensitivity is load-bearing for the interpretation of Fig. 2.

more of objection 3

Please state whether the plateau values of w and T_kin, and the value of t_pt, are stable under variation of Λ (for instance Λ/m = 2.0 versus 2.86), or restrict the mode-temperature plot to p ≲ 2 m where the cutoff is not felt.

The paper says, at Final paragraph and the 'less than 1 fm' estimate

The review did not quote this passage.

Pith says: Objection 4 of 4 · major

The estimate T t_pt ≈ 2–2.5 is extracted from a single model with h = λ = 1 and a scale set by the scalar thermal mass, and the transfer to the quark-gluon state is stated as 'We expect such a relation with a similar constant to hold', citing Ref.

more of objection 4

[25], which is a review by one of the authors rather than a QCD computation. The framing is honest, but the concluding sentence 'For T >~ 400−500 MeV we obtain a very short prethermalization time t_pt of somewhat less than 1 fm' reads as a result of this paper when it is an extrapolation. Please make the status of the constant explicit in that sentence, and state which features of the model (particle content, coupling, the identification of the relevant scale with T) the constant is expected to be insensitive to and which it is not.

8 minor objections

The paper says, at Fig. 1 caption and initial conditions

Pith says: minor objection 1 of 8

The two runs (A) and (B) are specified only qualitatively ('high initial particle number density in a narrow momentum range' versus 'closer to a thermal distribution'). Please give the actual initial parameters (zero-mode amplitude, occupation width and normalization, initial time) so that the comparison is reproducible, and state explicitly that both runs have the same energy density.

The paper says, at Eq. (2) and Fig. 2

Pith says: minor objection 2 of 8

The mode frequency ω_p(t) is defined through the peak of the spectral function. Please state the numerical uncertainty in locating that peak, since the late-time statement that all fermion and scalar mode temperatures agree to a common T_eq is being read off differences of order the symbol size in Fig. 2.

show 6 more

The paper says, at Energy conservation

Pith says: minor objection 3 of 8

The argument for a time-independent T_kin rests on total energy conservation ('Since total energy is conserved'). Please report the relative drift of the energy density over the full run as a check on the numerical solution of the 2PI equations, and state how vacuum contributions are subtracted in the energy-momentum tensor.

The paper says, at Footnote [24] and the definition of t_pt

Pith says: minor objection 4 of 8

The prethermalization time is defined by |w(t_pt) − w_eq|/w_eq < 0.2 for all t > t_pt. Since t_pt ~ m^-1 is the headline number, please state the criterion in the main text and give the sensitivity of t_pt to the threshold (for example 10% versus 20%).

The paper says, at Coupling independence

Pith says: minor objection 5 of 8

The statement that the main results are independent of the detailed values of the couplings is supported by the Fig. 3 inset, which varies h only while λ is held fixed. Please say so explicitly, or add the corresponding λ variation.

The paper says, at Fig. 4 legend

Pith says: minor objection 6 of 8

The caption identifies scalars as the upper curves and fermions as the lower curves, but the three (h, T_eq) combinations in the legend are not mapped onto individual curves. Please label the curves directly or add a marker scheme so the reader can associate each pair with its parameters.

The paper says, at Ref. [18] and t_damp

Pith says: minor objection 7 of 8

Ref. [18] is cited for the statement that t_damp depends on the interaction strength, but its stated content is the relation of the partial loss of memory to approximate fixed-point solutions of equal-time evolution equations. Please check that this is the intended citation, or add the reference that actually establishes the coupling dependence of t_damp.

The paper says, at Typographical

Pith says: minor objection 8 of 8

There are several typographical and consistency issues to fix: 'looses' for 'loses' (appears twice), inconsistent notation between t_ch and t_ch in the running text, and spacing artifacts in the abstract and author list of the source file.

What would settle it

Add a run C at the same total energy density but with a large initial potential-energy fraction (sigma displaced far from its minimum, small kinetic energy), and repeat at a lower temperature where w_eq deviates strongly from 1/3. Apply the footnote [24] criterion |w(t) - w_eq|/w_eq < 0.2 for t > t_pt. If w(t) reaches within 20% of w_eq by t of order a few m^-1 and stays, the concern does not land and abstract:s0 stands. If it plateaus at a different value and drifts toward w_eq only on t_eq, the 'to their equilibrium values' wording should be softened to 'to a time-independent value.'

from the skeptic's reading

How the review went

4 readings by deepseek-v4.1-flash · 13 Nov 2026

  1. Reader holds up, with conditions confidence moderate
  2. Skeptic partly agrees 2 min 38 s · 8,281 tokens read, 8,717 written
  3. Editor wrote the verdict above 47 s · 9,202 tokens read, 2,900 written
  4. Referee minor revision: 4 major objections, 8 minor 1 min 42 s · 8,503 tokens read, 5,885 written

Not run on this paper: the simulated authors' defence.

Pith did not check this review's objections against the paper.

The review in full

The review in brief, machine-written

Bottom line: the in-model result is solid and worth citing — a clean, quantitative demonstration that bulk quantities settle on a time scale two orders of magnitude shorter than thermal equilibration. The two claims that get quoted most, though, are the weakest supported: that the plateau sits at the equilibrium value, and the 'less than 1 fm' QCD number. What's actually new: they solve the two-loop 2PI equations for a quark-meson model with fermions, no further approximation, and show three well-separated scales — t_pt ~ m−1 for w = p/eps and T_kin, t_damp ~ 25-28 m−1 for mode occupancies, t_eq ~ 95 m−1 for full equilibration. Figs. 1 and 2 make the two-stage loss of memory visible directly. The chemical-temperature comparison in Fig. 4 is a useful addition. They also flag that pressure isotropization is left for future work, which is honest. Where it's soft. First, the stress-test point lands partially: 'prethermalization to their equilibrium values' is not stress-tested. Runs A and B share an energy density, hence the same w_eq, and the Fig. 3 inset varies only h. Footnote 24 defines t_pt by |w - w_eq|/w_eq < 0.2, so 'near w_eq' is built into the criterion rather than independently demonstrated across initial partitions of energy. The figure does show w climbing toward w_eq rather than sitting there, so it isn't trivial, but a potential-dominated start at fixed eps is the test that's missing. Second, the femtometer estimate is explicitly an expectation ('We expect...') resting on the authors' own review [25], not a QCD computation. It's honestly labeled, but it's the headline. Third, no error bars or truncation-order study on any time scale, and 'coupling independence' varies only h, not lambda. These are minor-to-moderate, not fatal. Who it's for: heavy-ion phenomenology and nonequilibrium field theory; anyone who needs a citable statement that hydrodynamization can precede thermalization. Recommendation: send it out. The core time-scale separation is sound and the extrapolations are flagged as such; a referee should press on the initial-condition robustness of the plateau value and on the QCD transfer, not on the in-model result.

The strongest objection

The abstract's central claim (abstract:s0) is prethermalization 'to their equilibrium values.' The paper's own mechanism — dephasing of oscillating modes with a dense spectrum — explains why a bulk ratio like w = p/epsilon becomes time-independent quickly; it does not by itself explain why the plateau value equals w_eq. The numerical evidence that the plateau sits near w_eq comes from runs A and B, which by construction share the same energy density and hence the same w_eq, and from the Fig. 3 inset, which varies only h at fixed lambda and fixed energy density. The paper therefore never varies the initial partition of energy between kinetic and potential at fixed total energy density. In a near-conformal regime w_eq is approximately 1/3 and a kinetic-dominated initial state also gives w approximately 1/3, so the observed agreement is easy and may not be diagnostic. If a potential-dominated initial state dephases to a plateau away from w_eq and only drifts there on t_eq, then 'prethermalization to equilibrium values' overstates the result; the defensible statement is prethermalization to a time-independent, approximately thermal value for the initial conditions studied. This is a robustness concern about the central claim, distinct from the reader's QCD-transfer concern.

The paper's in-model result is largely supported: a numerical two-loop 2PI solution with no further approximation shows w and T_kin flattening within a few m^-1 while mode quantities take roughly 25-28 m^-1 and full equilibration roughly 95 m^-1 (Figs. 1-4). The dephasing explanation is plausible and previously documented. The reader's identified weak point — the QCD transfer to 'less than 1 fm' — is real but is explicitly framed as an expectation ('We expect such a relation...') and does not bear on the in-model claim; a clearly-labeled extrapolation is not a hidden weakness of the central result. The sharper concern is internal to the in-model argument: the step from 'w becomes time-independent' to 'w reaches its equilibrium value' is the load-bearing one, and the shown evidence does not separate these because all displayed runs share one energy density (Fig. 1 caption; Fig. 4 shows T_kin only for Teq/m = 1.0). Secondary issues the reader notes — the 20% threshold in footnote [24], the single truncation with no order study, coupling independence tested only in h — are real but do not by themselves undermine the separation of scales. The paper's acknowledged limitation (pressure isotropization left for future work, footnote [26]) is stated, not hidden. My concern, if it lands, narrows the abstract's wording rather than overturning the time-scale separation, so the reader's CONDITIONAL verdict is appropriate and I would not move it.

The referee's report

The result is significant and, if it holds, directly relevant to the early-time description of heavy-ion collisions: it separates the requirement of a closure relation p = p(ε) from the much stronger requirement of local thermal equilibrium, and it does so with a first-principles (2PI) nonequilibrium calculation rather than a kinetic or near-equilibrium approximation. The strengths are concrete: the dynamics is solved numerically without further approximation beyond the two-loop 2PI truncation; the two-stage loss of memory is visible directly in the mode occupations of Fig. 1 and the mode temperatures of Fig. 2; the paper makes quantitative, falsifiable statements (t_damp, t_pt, t_eq, t_ch, and the product T t_pt ≈ 2–2.5) rather than qualitative ones; and the extrapolation to QCD is explicitly labelled as an expectation rather than presented as a derived result. The chemical-equilibration comparison adds a useful, model-internal ordering of time scales.

Pith's reading of the paper (a machine's summary, not the authors')

The paper argues that a far-from-equilibrium quantum field theory can acquire a usable equation of state and a global kinetic temperature long before it thermalizes. In a two-flavor quark-meson model evolved with a two-loop 2PI effective action, the ratio $w=p/$$$ and the kinetic temperature $T$$ approach their equilibrium values on a prethermalization time $t$$$ while full thermal equilibration takes $t$$ and chemical equilibration takes $t$$. At $t$$ the individual momentum-mode occupations are still visibly nonthermal, so the paper is separating bulk thermodynamic quantities from mode-by-mode distributions. The payoff is concrete: if $p=p($$ is already fixed, a hydrodynamic description can be closed much earlier than a strict thermalization argument would allow, which is the puzzle raised by early hydrodynamic behavior in heavy-ion collisions.

What carries the argument. The central machinery is a two-loop two-particle-irreducible (2PI) effective action for a two-flavor quark-meson model, a truncation that resums selected self-energy contributions and retains direct scattering, off-shell, and memory effects. The calculation evolves the quantum fields numerically from specified initial distributions and extracts mode occupation numbers $n$$, mode temperatures $T$$ via a Fermi-Dirac or Bose-Einstein form, the equation-of-state ratio $w=p/$$, a global kinetic temperature $T$$, and species chemical temperatures $T$$ from integrated number densities. The load-bearing mechanism is dephasing: bulk quantities average over many oscillating modes with a dense frequency spectrum, so phase memory is lost quickly, independently of the scattering strength that controls true thermalization. That separation between bulk and mode quantities is what allows the paper to define a prethermalization time and to compare it with $t$$, $t$$, and $t$$.

Core claim. The central claim is that prethermalization is a real, quantitatively early stage in a quantum field theory, not merely a classical artifact. For a two-flavor quark-meson model with Yukawa coupling $h$ and quartic coupling $$$, solved in the two-loop 2PI approximation, the paper finds that $w=p/$$ becomes almost time independent after $t$$ of order the inverse thermal mass $m$$; the inset comparing $h=1.0$ with $h=0.5$ shows this time is insensitive to interaction strength. A global kinetic temperature defined by $T$$ with $c$$ fixed by equilibrium, settles on the same short scale and approaches $T$$. By contrast, mode quantities lose initial-condition memory on $t$$ for fermions and scalars, and true thermal equilibration, where all mode temperatures agree, takes $t$$; chemical temperatures for scalars and fermions equalize only on the longer chemical time $t$$. The authors use the in-model relation $T t$$ to estimate $t$$ somewhat below $1$$ for temperatures above about $400$--$500$$, and argue this is consistent with early hydrodynamic behavior.

The premise it rests on. The load-bearing premise is that the separation of time scales found in the truncated two-loop quark-meson model, together with the numerical relation $T t$$, survives in QCD near $400$--$500$$; the in-model result alone does not establish the less-than-$1$$ heavy-ion estimate.

If the paper is right (Pith's inferences, not the authors')

A hydrodynamic description of a heavy-ion collision can be closed with $p=p($$ before local thermal equilibrium is established, because the equation of state is already approximately fixed at $t$$.

At temperatures above about $400$--$500$$, the prethermalization estimate is somewhat below $1$$, matching the observed early applicability of hydrodynamics.

Once the scalar and fermion chemical temperatures equalize, their common value coincides with $T$$, so a chemical freeze-out temperature can be compared meaningfully with the equilibrium critical temperature.

Observables that depend on individual momentum-mode occupations can remain out of equilibrium at times when bulk thermodynamic observables already look thermal.

Chemical equilibration remains a late, species-dependent process, so hadron-yield equilibration is not implied by the early constancy of the equation of state.

If the bulk-versus-mode separation is generic, other systems with dense frequency spectra and conserved total energy, such as classical lattice gauge theory, ultracold atomic gases, or spin chains, should show an early plateau in their equation of state even when their mode distributions are far from equilibrium.

A direct numerical test would initialize hydrodynamic simulations at $t$$ and at $t$$ and compare final observables; if they agree, that would turn prethermalization into a practical shortcut rather than a correction.

The relation $T t$$ suggests a dimensionless clock that could be checked across couplings, temperatures, and particle content in the same model, and eventually in QCD.

Experimental claims of early thermalization should specify which observable is meant; the paper's logic implies that bulk and mode observables can give different answers without contradiction.

Check this review

Pith stored no record of this review's passes and took no fingerprint of it. Reviews made by code from 13 Nov 2026 on carry both.

How often reviews like this one are right

Reviews like this one: written by deepseek-v4.1-flash, where what was read was not recorded.

How often objections from reviews like this one are right: not yet measured

Every value above, in the review's public record (JSON)

Reviews by people

This review was written by a machine. No person has reviewed this paper on Pith yet. A scientist listed on Pith can review it for a fee, and their review is published here whatever it concludes.

Request a human review

How Pith checks papers · The full audit of this paper

The paper

Abstract

Prethermalization of the equation of state and the kinetic temperature to their equilibrium values occurs on time scales dramatically shorter than the thermal equilibration time. This is a crucial ingredient for the understanding of collisions of heavy nuclei or other nonequilibrium phenomena in complex quantum and classical many body systems. We also compare the chemical equilibration time with other characteristic time scales.

The paper's own sentences, arranged, kept beside the review and separate from it. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

abstract compiled · 2026-09-23

The authors' main claim, as the classifier picked it out 1.00

“Prethermalization of the equation of state and the kinetic temperature to their equilibrium values occurs on time scales dramatically shorter than the thermal equilibration time.”

How the main claim is stated: asserted 1.00

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.03 · states limitation 0.06 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.08 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.07 · compares with prior results 0.24 · mentions code or data availability 0.02

The abstract, sentence by sentence

This table labels the abstract only (arXiv listing abstract v2). The number is the probability the classifier gave the label.

SentenceRoleThe authors' own workStates the main conclusionStrength
Prethermalization of the equation of state and the kinetic temperature to their equilibrium values occurs on time scales dramatically shorter than the thermal equilibration time. result 0.99 0.55 0.74 asserted 1.00
This is a crucial ingredient for the understanding of collisions of heavy nuclei or other nonequilibrium phenomena in complex quantum and classical many body systems. interpretation 0.96 0.08 0.13 asserted 1.00
We also compare the chemical equilibration time with other characteristic time scales. contribution 0.94 0.86 0.06 unclear 0.79

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: theoretical result 0.64 · evidence from simulation or computation 0.59

What was examined, and what was not

Sources read

  • arXiv listing abstract v2

Not examined

  • full text
  • figures and tables
  • references and citing sentences
  • relations to other papers

Levels run

  • P abstract

Not run

  • S sections
  • T body sentences
  • C citations
  • R cross-paper relations

How the labels were made

Compiled by classifier-1.13-20260917 via OpenRouter, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 2,876 input tokens, $0.0001 reported.

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. This record as JSON

Figures (4)
Figure 1 of the paper
Figure 1. FIG. 1: Fermion occupation number
Figure 4 of the paper
Figure 4. FIG. 4: Chemical temperatures for scalars (upper curves) an

Showing 2 of the paper's 4 figures. Figures are the authors', reproduced from the paper.

References (26)
  1. [25] To establish this would require the application of simi lar techniques to QCD [15] on Pith
  2. [1] R. Rapp, “Theory Highlights of Quark Matter 2004,” arXiv:nucl-th/0403048, and references therein on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  3. [2] J. Berges and J. Cox, Phys. Lett. B 517 (2001) 369. J. Berges, Nucl. Phys. A 699 (2002) 847 on Pith
  4. [3] F. Cooper, J. F. Dawson and B. Mihaila, Phys. Rev. D 67 (2003) 056003. B. Mihaila, F. Cooper and J. F. Dawson, Phys. Rev. D 63 (2001) 096003 on Pith
  5. [4] G. Aarts and J. Berges, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88 (2002) 041603 on Pith
  6. [5] J. Berges and J. Serreau, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91 (2003) 111601 on Pith
  7. [6] J. Berges, S. Borsanyi and J. Serreau, Nucl. Phys. B 660 (2003) 51 on Pith
  8. [7] G. F. Bonini and C. Wetterich, Phys. Rev. D 60 (1999) 105026. G. Aarts, G. F. Bonini and C. Wetterich, Phys. Rev. D 63 (2001) 025012 on Pith
  9. [8] S. Borsanyi, A. Patkos and D. Sexty, Phys. Rev. D 68 (2003) 063512 on Pith
  10. [9] F. Cooper, S. Habib, Y. Kluger and E. Mottola, Phys. Rev. D 55 (1997) 6471 on Pith
  11. [10] L. M. A. Bettencourt and C. Wetterich, Phys. Lett. B 430 (1998) 140 on Pith
  12. [11] G. Aarts, G. F. Bonini and C. Wetterich, Nucl. Phys. B 587 (2000) 403 on Pith
  13. [12] S. Borsanyi and Z. Szep, Phys. Lett. B 508 (2001) 109 on Pith
  14. [13] M. Salle, J. Smit and J. C. Vink, Nucl. Phys. B 625 (2002) 495 on Pith
  15. [14] P. Braun-Munzinger, K. Redlich and J. Stachel, arXiv:nucl-th/0304013 on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  16. [15] J. Berges, arXiv:hep-ph/0401172 on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  17. [16] F. Karsch and E. Laermann, arXiv:hep-lat/0305025 on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  18. [17] P. Braun-Munzinger, J. Stachel and C. Wetterich, arXiv:nucl-th/0311005 on PithPith's reviewarXiv
  19. [18] This partial loss of memory can be related to approxi- mate “fixed point” solutions for time evolution equations of equal-time correlators [10] on Pith
  20. [19] With the rescaling h →h/Nf this corresponds to a non- perturbative expansion of the 2PI effective action to next- to-leading order in Nf [2, 6] on Pith
show 6 more
  1. [20] The thermal mass m is evaluated in equilibrium. It is found to prethermalize very rapidly. The employed mo- mentum cutoff is Λ /m = 2.86 on Pith
  2. [21] This quantity is directly related to the expectation va lue of the vector component of the field commutator ⟨[ψ, ¯ψ]⟩ in Wigner coordinates and fulfills 0 ≤n(f) (t;p) ≤ 1 [6] on Pith
  3. [22] The rate 1 /tdamp(p) is determined by the spectral com- ponent of the self-energy [6] on Pith
  4. [23] For a relativistic plasma one has Ekin/N = ǫ/n = αT . As alternatives, one may consider the weighted average ¯T (t) = ∑n(t;p)T (t;p)/ ∑n(t;p) where the sum is over all modes, or a definition analogous to Eq. (4) on Pith
  5. [24] We define tpt by |w(tpt) −weq|/weq < 0.2 for t>t pt on Pith
  6. [26] Future work should investigate isotropization of pres sure on Pith
Cited by 19 Pith papers

Reviewed papers on Pith that cite this one. OpenAlex reports about 460 citations worldwide. The full citation record

  1. Critical spacetime crystals in continuous dimensions gr-qc · Feb 2026
  2. Angle of Null Energy Condition Lines in Critical Spacetimes gr-qc · Nov 2024
  3. Universal self-similar dynamics of relativistic and nonrelativistic field theories near nonthermal fixed points hep-ph · Mar 2015
  4. Quantum and classical thermal equilibrium for probabilistic classical fields hep-th · Nov 2026
  5. Double sine-Gordon class of universal coarsening dynamics in a spin-1 Bose gas cond-mat.quant-gas · Dec 2024
  6. Non-equilibrium dynamics of Goldstone excitation from holography hep-ph · Dec 2024
  7. Classicalization and unitarization of wee partons in QCD and Gravity: The CGC-Black Hole correspondence hep-th · Jun 2021
  8. Kinetic Equilibration after Preheating hep-ph · Aug 2019
  9. A New Semiclassical Picture of Vacuum Decay hep-th · Jun 2018
  10. Hamiltonian truncation approach to quenches in the Ising field theory cond-mat.stat-mech · Jul 2016
  11. Basin of attraction for turbulent thermalization and the range of validity of classical-statistical simulations hep-ph · Dec 2013
  12. Perturbative Non-Equilibrium Thermal Field Theory hep-ph · Nov 2012
  13. Equation of state and Beginning of Thermalization After Preheating hep-ph · Jul 2005
  14. Real-time simulation of the Schwinger effect with Matrix Product States hep-lat · Dec 2016
  15. Effect of the deformation operator in the D1D5 CFT hep-th · Oct 2014
  16. Reheating predictions in single field inflation astro-ph.CO · Feb 2015
  17. QCD thermalization: Ab initio approaches and interdisciplinary connections hep-th · May 2020
  18. Topics on Hydrodynamic Model of Nucleus-Nucleus Collisions hep-ph · Jul 2004
  19. Quantum Transport and Electroweak Baryogenesis hep-ph · Feb 2013
How later papers used it

165 later papers cite it

Evidence: substantial. 160 of the citing papers share no author with it, and 5 of those carry a confident label from Pith's citation classifier.

Pith read 11 of the 203 citing sentences, choosing only those whose citation markers point at this paper alone, and wrote the paraphrases from them. The summary, the counts, the evidence level, the links and the quotes come from code; the summary counts the papers listed below. A later paper is listed under a label when Pith's citation classifier gives one of its sentences that label at probability 0.8 or more (0.95 for support), Pith's reading finds that the citing paper itself did it, and a second check confirms the paraphrase against the sentence. This section lists uses only. It does not list criticism or disagreement, so their absence here says nothing about how the paper has been received. Papers that share an author with this one are listed apart, under "By the same authors". A quote is the citing authors' own sentence, shown when their paper's licence is CC BY, CC BY-SA or CC0. JSON

Uses its method or tool 1 of 2 papers with this label
How the literature uses it

35 arXiv papers cite this in 49 sentences

Each citing sentence is taken from the citing paper's LaTeX source and typed by Pith's classifier. A label appears at probability 0.8 or more (0.95 for support), a contest at 0.7 or more; the quoted words are the citing authors'. How each label was checked · JSON

Papers citing it · 35 sentences without a confident label

Cites it as support 1 paper
Cites it as background 12 papers

Challenges and discussion

Disagree with the review, or know something it missed? Leave a comment, or challenge this review formally: a challenge becomes a permanent entry in this paper's record, and its decision is published here.

No comments yet.

Sign in to comment