Chiral symmetry and density wave in quark matter

E. Nakano; T. Tatsumi

REVIEW

Chiral symmetry and density wave in quark matter

E. Nakano, T. Tatsumi

High Energy Physics - Phenomenology · Submitted 27 Nov 2004 · 28 references

Pith's verdict: A careful mean-field existence proof for the dual chiral-density wave at one parameter set, with a genuine internal cross-check but no energy-margin number to tell you how robust the pocket is.

T0 · AI review

How this review was made: An AI referee (selfhosted/deepseek-v4.1-flash) read the paper on November 11, 2026 and answered a fixed list of questions about it. T0 is the starting level every paper gets. The levels describe how deeply Pith has checked the paper, never the authors.

T0 AI review An AI read the paper and answered a fixed list of questions.
T1 Audit Automatic checks that the references and files the paper relies on exist and match.
T2 Compute The paper's code or calculations re-run with the same results.
T3 Formal statement The claims written out in a formal math language a computer can read.
T4 Proof Those claims proved, and the proof checked by computer.

How Pith checks papers →

· 2 major objections · 9 minor · Ask about this paper · The compiled record · Read the full review →

Challenge this review Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗

Cite ▾

arXiv IDhep-ph/0411350 (version 5)

Pith IDDEYLN4ZH, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review

CitationE. Nakano, T. Tatsumi. "Chiral symmetry and density wave in quark matter." arXiv:hep-ph/0411350 (2004). https://pith.science/paper/DEYLN4ZH

Cite this reviewBibTeX for Pith's review of this paper

Claim paper

Why Pith says this

Highlight any text to comment on it.

Editor's note

read the letter

Worth your time if you work on the moderate-density corner of the QCD phase diagram, but read it as a mean-field existence proof at one parameter set, not as a prediction for real quark matter. The DCDW idea is the authors' own from hep-ph/0408294, and they say so in the Introduction; what is new here is the quantitative phase diagram, the coupling dependence in Fig. 7 (the window opens around G Lambda^2 ~ 4.72), the finite-T extension to Tc ~ 50 MeV, and the modulated magnetic moment in Sec. III.B. The classifier's record says no limitations were found; that is wrong. The authors explicitly flag at the end of Sec. III.A that the transition order may depend on G, Lambda, and the regularization scheme. They are not hiding it. The best part of the paper is Sec. III.C. The correlation-function route gives mu_t = 0.5320 Lambda and |k_t| = 1.498 k_F, against mu_c2 = 0.53254 Lambda and q = 1.469 k_F from full minimization. That is a real independent check within the model, and it is why the paper holds together. The stress-test note lands. Nowhere do they report Delta Omega = Omega(q=0, M_0) - Omega(q*, M*) at the DCDW minimum. Without that number you cannot judge whether the window survives the O(1/Nc) Fock corrections they defer in Appendix B, or a change of regularization. The cross-check in III.C uses the same model, parameters, and scheme, so it confirms consistency, not robustness. That is the one thing I would ask for in review: the energy margin, plus a second regularization at T = 0. Two smaller items. The prose in Sec. III.A assigns the wrong signs to beta_fer and beta_vac relative to Eqs. (17)-(18): by the equations beta_fer is negative and beta_vac positive, the text says the reverse. The conclusion is unaffected, but a reader following the argument will stumble; fix it in proof. And the flux estimate in Eq. (27) leans on a form factor that is never computed, with a cancellation caveat the authors themselves raise. Treat it as an order-of-magnitude remark, not a result. Send it out. It is a solid, honest mean-field study with a checkable derivation chain, and the referees should push on the margin question rather than the mechanism.

Referee report

Major objections (2)

[Sec. III.A, Eqs. (17)–(18)] The text states that the Fermi-sea coefficient β_fer 'is always positive' and that the Dirac-sea coefficient β_vac is 'negative,' but as printed Eq. (17) gives β_fer = −N_f N_c M²/(2π²) H(µ/M) < 0 (since H(x) = arccosh(x) > 0 for x > 1) and Eq. (18) gives β_vac = +N_f N_c Λ²/(2π²) J(M²/Λ²) > 0 (since J > 0). The printed equations are the physically expected ones — the Fermi sea is soft and favors the modulation, the Dirac sea is stiff and opposes it — so the adjectives in the text are reversed. This should be corrected, and the sentence 'In contrast, the Fermi sea favors it' should be made consistent with the sign of Eq. (17). The numerical conclusion that β_tot can become negative (Fig. 3) is unaffected, but the analytic motivation of Sec. III.A currently contradicts its own displayed equations.
[Sec. III.A and Fig. 4] The paper establishes that the DCDW minimum is the absolute minimum of Eq. (14) in µ_c1 ≤ µ ≤ µ_c2, but never reports the energy difference ΔΩ = Ω(q = 0, M_0) − Ω(q*, M*) at the DCDW minimum. This matters because the paper itself states in Sec. III.C that 'the potential barrier from DCDW to the normal phase at the critical point µ = µ_c2 is very small,' and because Appendix B estimates the omitted Fock exchange terms at O(1/N_c) ~ 1/3 of the direct terms while the end of Sec. III.A flags possible regularization-scheme dependence. Without ΔΩ — for instance its maximum over the window and its values at µ_c1 and µ_c2 — the reader cannot judge whether the window survives these corrections. Please report ΔΩ across the window and compare it with the estimated size of the Fock and scheme corrections; if ΔΩ is comparable to or smaller than these, the robustness claim should be softened accordingly.

Minor objections (9)

[Eq. (15)] The prefactor γ and the subtraction term Ω_ref are not defined in the main text; please state γ explicitly (presumably N_f N_c) and give Ω_ref, so that Eq. (15) can be checked against Eq. (A7).
[Sec. III.C, Eq. (29)] Eq. (29) is labelled Π⁰_s(|k|) = Π⁰_ps(|k|), but its content (the Λ² term and the fact that Fig. 8 plots [ΓΛ²]⁻¹ from it) indicates that it is actually Γ⁻¹ = (1 − 2GΠ⁰)/(2G), not Π⁰. Please relabel and clarify, and explain the factor 'i' in the term −2N_f N_c i k² I(k²).
[Sec. III.B, Eq. (27)] The flux estimate of Eq. (27) is quoted as O(10^16) G without derivation. Please show how the factor (2/3 − 1/3) and the 3ρ_B arise, and discuss whether the opposite modulations for u and d quarks (q ↔ −q from τ3) lead to cancellation in the bulk, leaving only the surface contribution mentioned in the text.
[Eq. (10)] In the two-flavor case the Weinberg factor should carry the isospin matrix, exp(−iτ3γ5 q·r/2), as it does in Eq. (19); Eq. (10) is written for a single flavor. Please state this explicitly to avoid confusion.
[Sec. III.A] For the adopted parameter set GΛ² = 6, Λ = 850 MeV, the text says only that the parameters are 'not far from those for the vacuum (µ = 0) [19].' Please quote the resulting vacuum values of M and f_π so the reader can judge how far the set is from the semi-empirical calibration.
[Fig. 10 and Sec. III.A] The phase diagram of Fig. 10 is presented for a single parameter set. The semi-empirical set GΛ² = 6.35, Λ = 660.37 MeV is mentioned in Sec. III.A but not used for the phase diagram; please show or at least state the location and width of the DCDW window for that set, since it lies above the threshold GΛ² ≈ 4.72 of Fig. 7.
[Sec. III.C] The agreement between the correlation-function route (µ_t = 0.5320Λ, |k_t| = 1.498 k_F) and the direct minimization (µ_c2 = 0.53254Λ, q = 1.469 k_F) is a valuable internal consistency check, but it uses the same model, parameters, and regularization. Please say so explicitly rather than presenting it as independent confirmation, and note that the cross-check assumes a second-order transition while the actual transition is first order.
[Fig. 2(c)] The caption states that for M ≤ q/2 and µ = q/2 + M 'the minor Fermi sea vanishes'; it would help to add that this is the condition under which the minimum of E_+(p) at p = 0, equal to M + q/2, reaches the chemical potential.
[Presentation] There are several typographical errors that should be corrected: 'Universit y' and 'J apan' in the author block, 'in stability' for 'instability' in Sec. I, 'imfor mations' for 'information' in Sec. III.C, 'transtion' for 'transition' in Sec. III.C, 'vav' for 'vac' in Eq. (A1), and 'schwinger's' for 'Schwinger's' in Appendix A. Reference [20] should read 'Nucl. Phys. A319 (1979) 323.'

How Pith checks papers → · Full audit of this paper →

The paper

The paper claims

Quark matter may host a standing wave that rotates the chiral condensate in space, opening a narrow window of density where the chiral phase survives beyond its usual boundary.

The reading

The paper asks whether quark matter at moderate density can lower its energy by letting the chiral condensate vary in space, not just in magnitude. Instead of the usual uniform $M$, the authors propose a dual chiral-density wave (DCDW): the scalar condensate oscillates as $M$ times a cosine and the pseudoscalar condensate as $M$ times a sine along one direction, so the order parameter traces a circle in the scalar-pseudoscalar plane while its magnitude stays fixed. The mechanism is deliberately borrowed from Overhauser's spin density wave in ordinary metals: the Fermi sea gains energy when the single-particle spectrum is deformed and split into two branches that cross, while the Dirac sea supplies the amplitude. Working in the two-flavor, three-color Nambu-Jona-Lasinio model at mean-field level, the authors find the DCDW is the absolute minimum of the thermodynamic potential in a finite chemical-potential window sitting just outside the ordinary chiral transition, and that this window survives at finite temperature. If correct, the chiral-broken phase of dense quark matter extends further in density and lower in temperature than the standard picture allows, and the wave leaves a spatially modulated magnetic moment behind.

What carries the argument

The DCDW order parameter itself is the load-bearing object: a standing wave in which the scalar and pseudoscalar condensates are out of phase on the chiral circle, $langle bar psi psi rangle = M cos(q cdot r)$ and $langle bar psi i gamma_5 tau_3 psi rangle = M sin(q cdot r)$, so that $langle bar psi psi rangle^2 + langle bar psi i gamma_5 tau_3 psi rangle^2 = M^2$. A Weinberg-type transformation $exp(-i gamma_5 q cdot r/2)$ converts the spatially modulated problem into a uniform one with shifted left- and right-handed momenta, which is what makes the spectrum calculable and shows the level crossing. The thermodynamic potential is evaluated with proper-time regularization of the Dirac sea, and the sign of the $q^2$ coefficient, $beta_{fer} + beta_{vac}$, decides whether the wave forms: the Fermi sea favors it, the Dirac sea opposes it.

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that in the NJL model with $N_f = 2$ and $N_c = 3$, the mean-field ansatz $M$ times a cosine for the scalar condensate and $M$ times a sine for the pseudoscalar condensate lowers the thermodynamic potential below both the uniform chiral-condensed state and the restored state over a range $mu_{c1} le mu le mu_{c2}$. The single-particle spectrum splits into two branches, $E_pm$, that exhibit a level crossing between left- and right-handed quarks, and the energy gain is a Fermi-sea effect while the amplitude comes from the Dirac sea. At zero temperature with $G Lambda^2 = 6$ and $Lambda = 850$ MeV, the window corresponds to baryon densities $rho_B/rho_0 = 3.62$ to $5.30$, with wavenumber ratio $q/k_F = 1.17$ to $1.47$; the wavenumber falls short of $2k_F$ because Fermi-surface nesting is incomplete in three dimensions. The transitions at both endpoints are first order, and the phase diagram on the $mu$-$T$ plane shows the DCDW region lying just outside the ordinary chiral-transition line, extending the chiral-condensed phase down to $T sim 50$ MeV.

Load-bearing premise

The claim depends on a mean-field NJL treatment with a specific proper-time regularization and a specific coupling, and the authors themselves note that the order of the transitions may depend on the parameter choice and the regularization scheme.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Dense quark matter should show a chiral-broken phase at baryon densities around 3.6 to 5.3 times nuclear saturation density, beyond where the uniform chiral transition would place it.
The phase diagram gains a shaded DCDW region bounded by two first-order lines, so the transition from chiral-broken to restored matter at these densities proceeds through a jump rather than a smooth crossover.
The DCDW state carries a spatially modulated magnetic moment, $langle bar psi sigma_{12} psi rangle = langle gamma_0 sigma_{12} rangle cos(q cdot r)$, with the tensor expectation value per quark estimated at 0.1 to 0.3 and the induced local flux at order $10^{16}$ Gauss.
The static scalar and pseudoscalar correlation functions have a minimum at finite external momentum around $1.5 k_F$, and the resulting critical density and wavenumber agree with the effective-potential result to within a few percent.
The DCDW window requires the dimensionless coupling $G Lambda^2$ to exceed about 4.72, so the effect is absent for weak interactions and appears only at moderate coupling.

Reading between the lines

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

Because the wavenumber is set by a balance between kinetic loss and interaction gain rather than by nesting, the same mechanism could plausibly operate in any three-dimensional fermion system with a strong particle-hole attraction in a channel that rotates an internal order parameter, not just in quark matter.
If the DCDW phase really persists to $T sim 50$ MeV, its low-lying collective modes would add to the specific heat of a quark core, which is the kind of effect that could show up in neutron-star cooling curves rather than in any direct scattering experiment.
The authors treat only Hartree terms; since the exchange (Fock) tensor channel couples to the very tensor expectation value the DCDW generates, a self-consistent Hartree-Fock treatment could shift the window boundaries in either direction, and that is the natural next calculation.
The paper's own caveat that the transition order may depend on the coupling and the regularization scheme suggests the robust prediction is the existence of a finite-momentum instability near the chiral boundary, not the precise first-order character or the exact window width.

Original abstract

A density wave in quark matter is discussed at finite temperature, which occurs along with the chiral condensation, and is described by a dual standing wave in scalar and pseudo-scalar condensates on the chiral circle. The mechanism is quite similar to that for the spin density wave suggested by Overhauser, and entirely reflects many-body effects. It is found that the chiral condensed phase with the density wave develops at a high-density region just outside the usual chiral-transition line in phase diagram. A magnetic property of the density wave is also elucidated.

The compiled record

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. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Compiled by classifier-1.13-20260917 via OpenRouter, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 3,577 input tokens, $0.0001 reported.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.03 · states limitation 0.05 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.04 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.04 · compares with prior results 0.73 · mentions code or data availability 0.01.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v5. Results and the main claim are underlined; show every role.

A density wave in quark matter is discussed at finite temperature, which occurs along with the chiral condensation, and is described by a dual standing wave in scalar and pseudo-scalar condensates on the chiral circle. The mechanism is quite similar to that for the spin density wave suggested by Overhauser, and entirely reflects many-body effects. It is found that the chiral condensed phase with the density wave develops at a high-density region just outside the usual chiral-transition line in phase diagram. A magnetic property of the density wave is also elucidated.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#	sentence	role	the authors' own work	states the main conclusion	strength
s0	A density wave in quark matter is discussed at finite temperature, which occurs along with the chiral condensation, and is described by a dual standing wave in scalar and pseudo-scalar condensates on the chiral circle.	contribution 0.88	0.66	0.36	asserted 1.00
s1	The mechanism is quite similar to that for the spin density wave suggested by Overhauser, and entirely reflects many-body effects.	interpretation 0.86	0.28	0.06	asserted 1.00
s2	It is found that the chiral condensed phase with the density wave develops at a high-density region just outside the usual chiral-transition line in phase diagram.	result 1.00	0.91	0.54	asserted 1.00
s3	A magnetic property of the density wave is also elucidated.	result 0.73	0.85	0.06	asserted 0.97

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: theoretical result 1.00 · evidence from proof or derivation 0.76.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read

arXiv listing abstract v5

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

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

Figures

**Figure 1.** FIG. 1: Two branches of the single-particle spectrum (5) are

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2: Fermi surfaces of the spectrum (5) for

**Figure 3.** (a), βtot never become negative for any value of M. It leads to a rough estimation of the critical coupling constant, GΛ 2 ≃ 4.63, which is the value to occur the usual chiral condensation (q = 0) at µ/Λ = 0.38 in the PTR scheme. The magnitudes of M and q are obtained from the minimum of the potential (14) at T = 0, and their values satisfy the stationary conditions, ∂Ωtot/∂M = ∂Ωtot/∂q = 0

**Figure 6.** FIG. 6: Baryon number density as a function of

**Figure 7.** FIG. 7: Critical chemical potentials

**Figure 10.** FIG. 10: A phase diagram obtained from the thermodynamic pot

Figures reproduced from arXiv:hep-ph/0411350 by the authors.

References

Works cited (28)

[1]

D. Bailin and A. Love, Phys. Rep. 107(1984) 325. For a recent review, M. Alford, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 51 ( 2001) 131

View on Pith 1984
[2]

M. Alford, K. Rajagopal, and F. Wilczek, Phys. Lett. B442 (1998) 247

View on Pith 1998
[3]

R. Rapp, T.Sch¨ afer, E. V. Shuryak, and M. Velkovsky, Phy s. Rev. Lett. 88 (1998) 53

View on Pith 1998
[4]

J. Madsen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85 (2000) 10, M. Prakash, Nucl. Phys. A698 (2002) 440, M. Prakash, J. M. Lattimer, A. W. Steiner, D. Page, Nucl. Phys . A715 (2003) 835

View on Pith 2000
[5]

T. Tatsumi, Phys. Lett. B489 (2000) 280

View on Pith 2000
[6]

E. Nakano, T. Maruyama and T. Tatsumi, Phys. Rev. D68 (2003) 105001

View on Pith 2003
[7]

A. Ni´ egawa, hep-ph/0404252

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[8]

E. Shuster and D. T. Son, Nucl. Phys. B573 (2000) 434

View on Pith 2000
[9]

B.-Y. Park, M.Rho, A.Wirzba and I.Zahed, Phys. Rev. D62 (2000) 034015. R. Rapp, E.Shuryak and I. Zahed, Phys. Rev. D63 (2001) 034008

View on Pith 2000
[10]

D.V. Deryagin, D. Yu. Grigoriev and V.A. Rubakov, Int. J . Mod. Phys. A7 (1992) 659

View on Pith 1992
[11]

S. Kagoshima, H. Nagasawa, and T. Sambongi, One Dimensional Conductors , Springer series in solid-state sciences, Vol. 72 (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1988); L. P. Gor’kov and G . Gr¨ uner,Charge Density waves in Solids , MODERN PROBLEMS IN CONDENSED MATTER SCIENCES. VOL. 25 (AMSTERDAM: North-Holland, 1989)

View on Pith 1988
[12]

R. E. Peierls, Quantum Theory of Solids (Oxford University Press, London, 1955)

View on Pith 1955
[13]

G. Gr¨ uner, Rev. Mod. Phys. 60 4 (1988)

View on Pith 1988
[14]

A.W. Overhauser, Phys. Rev. Lett. 4 462 (1960); Phys. Rev. 128 1437 (1962)

View on Pith 1960
[15]

G. Gr¨ uner, Rev. Mod. Phys. 66 1 (1994)

View on Pith 1994
[16]

T. Tatsumi and E. Nakano, hep-ph/0408294

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[17]

Y. Nambu and G. Jona-Lasinio, Phys. Rev. 122 345 (1961); 124 246 (1961)

View on Pith 1961
[18]

S. Weinberg, The quantum theory of ﬁeld II (Cambridge, 1996)

View on Pith 1996
[19]

S.P. Klevansky, Rev. Mod. Phys. 64 649 (1992)

View on Pith 1992
[20]

F. Dautry and E.M. Nyman, Nucl. Phys. 319 323 (1979). K. Takahashi and T. Tatsumi, Phys. Rev. C63 015205 (2000); Prog. Theor. Phys. 105 437 (2001). M. Kutschera, W. Broniowski and A. Kotlorz, Nucl. Phys. A516 566 (1990). M. Sadzikowski and W. Broniowski, Phys. Lett. 488 63 (2000). 16

View on Pith 1979
[21]

T Schaefer, Phys.Rev. D62 094007 (2000)

View on Pith 2000
[22]

J. Schwinger, Phys. Rev. 92 664 (1951)

View on Pith 1951
[23]

M. Asakawa and K. Yazaki, Nucl. Phys. A 504 668 (1989)

View on Pith 1989
[24]

T. Hatsuda and T. Kunihiro, Phys. Rep. 247 221 (1994)

View on Pith 1994
[25]

T. Maruyama and T. Tatsumi, Nucl. Phys. A693 710 (2001)

View on Pith 2001
[26]

C. Kouveliotou et al ., Nature (London) 393, 235 (1998); K. Hurley et al ., Astrophys. J. Lett. 510, L111 (1999)

View on Pith 1998
[27]

K. Ohwa, Phys. Rev. D65, 085040 (2002)

View on Pith 2002
[28]

Note that this conﬁguration is not unique, but in genera l more complicated cases can be considered, e.g., multi- standing waves such as ⟨ ¯ψψ⟩ = ∆ cos(q · r) and ⟨ ¯ψiγ5τiψ⟩ = ∆ sin(q · r)ei, where ei = {sin(p1 · r) cos(p2 · r), sin(p1 · r) sin(p2 · r), cos(p1 · r)}, and q, p1,2 are independent wavenumber vectors. This conﬁguration is a lso in the chiral...

View on Pith

Forward citations

Cited by 12 Pith papers

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

Constraining fermionic condensates
hep-lat 2024-12 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

A large-volume approximant for the constrained fermionic path integral is derived and tested in the chiral Gross-Neveu model, showing the chiral condensate appears as the edge of a flat disk in the constraint potential.
Critical point signatures in the cluster expansion in fugacities
hep-ph 2019-09 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

In the trivirial model, cluster expansion coefficients b_k have asymptotics b_k ~ A e^{-k μ_R/T} k^{-α} sin(...), switching behavior at the critical temperature, and fitting the first four coefficients to lattice data...
Has Quarkyonic Matter Been Seen in Lattice Simulations?
hep-ph 2026-11 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Dense lattice QCD systems and neutron star equations of state show thermodynamic and distribution-function features consistent with quarkyonic matter, but direct saturation measurements are still missing.
Robust Finite-Momentum Instabilities in Dense Matter
hep-ph 2026-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Applying the medium separation scheme to the two-flavor NJL model makes the finite-momentum chiral instability and moat regime nearly independent of the choice of ultraviolet regulator.
How neutron star properties disfavor a nuclear chiral density wave
nucl-th 2024-11 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Within this nucleon-meson model, a chiral density wave in neutron star cores is only stable for equations of state too soft to support observed two-solar-mass pulsars, predicting isotropic cores.

Show 7 more citing papers

Interweaving Chiral Spirals
hep-ph 2011-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Balancing condensation energy against Fermi-surface deformation and patch-boundary interference gives an optimal wedge angle scaling as (Lambda_QCD/p_F)^(3/5), so the number of interweaving chiral spirals grows with density.
Influence of vector interaction and Polyakov loop dynamics on inhomogeneous chiral symmetry breaking phases
hep-ph 2010-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

A repulsive vector interaction shifts the chiral critical point to lower temperature and eventually removes it, while the Lifshitz point stays at fixed temperature, so only a Lifshitz point survives in the phase diagram.
How many phases meet at the chiral critical point?
hep-ph 2009-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

In NJL-type models the Ginzburg-Landau expansion shows an inhomogeneous chiral phase reaching the chiral critical point, replacing the first-order transition with two second-order transitions.
Inhomogeneous phases in the Nambu-Jona-Lasino and quark-meson model
hep-ph 2009-06 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

In mean-field NJL and quark-meson models the first-order chiral transition line is replaced by an inhomogeneous phase bordered by two second-order lines, with the Lifshitz point coinciding with the critical point.
The phase diagram of nuclear and quark matter at high baryon density
hep-ph 2013-01 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

The review argues that a third regime, quarkyonic matter, sits between confined nuclear matter and deconfined quark matter in large-Nc QCD, with pressure scaling as O(Nc).
The phase diagram of dense QCD
hep-ph 2010-05 accept novelty 3.0 of 10

A structured survey of the QCD phase diagram that separates firmly established results (lattice QCD at small baryon density, weak-coupling colour superconductivity at asymptotically high density) from conjectured phas...
Inhomogeneous chiral condensates
hep-ph 2014-06 accept novelty 1.0 of 10

Spatially modulated chiral condensates are a robust prediction of mean-field chiral models in the density window where the homogeneous chiral transition is first order, but their survival beyond mean field remains untested.

How the literature uses it

50 arXiv papers cite this in 78 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 · 42 sentences without a confident label

Uses its method or tool 4 papers

To investigate the DCDW phase of quark matter, in this work, we use the NJL model [ref] (see Refs. [ref] for reviews), which was done in Refs. [ref] for early studies.

Dual chiral density wave induced oscillating Casimir effect · NJL model · 0.93
Such an analysis was already applied in [ref] .

Stability of homogeneous chiral phases against inhomogeneous perturbations in 2+1 dimensions · Detecting inhomogeneous phases via the momentum dependence of the bosonic two-point function · 0.80
This method, which has already been applied in $3+1$ dimensions to investigate inhomogeneous phases in the NJL model [ref] and the QM model [ref] , corresponds to searching for a sufficient, although not necessary, condition for an inhomogeneous phase: If the lowest homogeneous state turns out to be unstable against small inhomogeneous fluctuations, it is clear that the ground state must be inhomogeneous.

Regulator dependence of inhomogeneous phases in the 2+1-dimensional Gross-Neveu model · Continuum approach · 0.91

Compares with it 5 papers

In contrast, Nakano and Tatsumi report a weak first-order transition to the restored phase [ref] .

Inhomogeneous chiral condensates · Model results · 0.91
This effect is rather small, and it is analogous to the fact that the phase transition between the homogeneous chiral symmetry-broken phase to the inhomogeneous phase occurs at slightly smaller $μ$ than the first-order phase transition between the homogeneous chiral symmetry-broken and the restored phase [ref] .

Competition of inhomogeneous chiral phases and two-flavor color superconductivity in the NJL model · Results · 0.96
It is worth mentioning that the final result of $Ω_eff$ is comparable with the one derived in [ref] in the absence of rotation.

Chiral symmetry breaking and phase diagram of dual chiral density wave in a rotating quark matter · Finite temperature · 1.00

Cites it as support 1 paper

These arguments support the statement that the formation of an inhomogeneous chiral condensate is a medium-induced effect [ref] .

Inhomogeneous islands and continents in the Nambu--Jona-Lasinio model · The inhomogeneous continent · 1.00

Cites it as background 24 papers

are the dual chiral density wave (DCDW) [ref] and the real kink crystal (RKC) [ref] ; $M(z)= Δe^iqz$ for DCDW, and $M(z) = 2 Δ√(ν)/1+√(ν) sn ( 2 Δz/1+√(ν),ν)$ for RKC, where $Δ∈ℝ$ is a constant amplitude, $q ∈ℝ$ denotes a wave-number of the one-dimensional modulation in the $z$ direction and $sn(x,ν)$ denotes the Jacobi elliptic function with modulus $ν∈[0,1]$.

Anomalous Hall effect in dense QCD matter · Introduction · 0.81
In [ref] , in analogy to the static spin density waves, known from condensed matter physics, a density wave is introduced in quark matter at moderate densities which is referred to as the “dual chiral density wave”.

The magnetic dual chiral density wave phase in a rotating cold quark matter · Introduction · 0.97
Such a phase is a common feature in four-fermion and related Yukawa type models at non-zero quark chemical potential, e.g. the $1+1$-dimensional Gross-Neveu model [ref] or the $3+1$-dimensional Nambu-Jona-Lasinio (NJL) model [ref] .

Inhomogeneous phases in the 3+1-dimensional Nambu-Jona-Lasinio model and their dependence on the regularization scheme · Introduction · 0.98

Discussion

Disagree with the review, or know something it missed? Leave a comment, highlight any passage above to comment on it, or challenge this review formally.

[1] [1]

D. Bailin and A. Love, Phys. Rep. 107(1984) 325. For a recent review, M. Alford, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 51 ( 2001) 131

View on Pith 1984

[2] [2]

M. Alford, K. Rajagopal, and F. Wilczek, Phys. Lett. B442 (1998) 247

View on Pith 1998

[3] [3]

R. Rapp, T.Sch¨ afer, E. V. Shuryak, and M. Velkovsky, Phy s. Rev. Lett. 88 (1998) 53

View on Pith 1998

[4] [4]

J. Madsen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85 (2000) 10, M. Prakash, Nucl. Phys. A698 (2002) 440, M. Prakash, J. M. Lattimer, A. W. Steiner, D. Page, Nucl. Phys . A715 (2003) 835

View on Pith 2000

[5] [5]

T. Tatsumi, Phys. Lett. B489 (2000) 280

View on Pith 2000

[6] [6]

E. Nakano, T. Maruyama and T. Tatsumi, Phys. Rev. D68 (2003) 105001

View on Pith 2003

[7] [7]

A. Ni´ egawa, hep-ph/0404252

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[8] [8]

E. Shuster and D. T. Son, Nucl. Phys. B573 (2000) 434

View on Pith 2000

[9] [9]

B.-Y. Park, M.Rho, A.Wirzba and I.Zahed, Phys. Rev. D62 (2000) 034015. R. Rapp, E.Shuryak and I. Zahed, Phys. Rev. D63 (2001) 034008

View on Pith 2000

[10] [10]

D.V. Deryagin, D. Yu. Grigoriev and V.A. Rubakov, Int. J . Mod. Phys. A7 (1992) 659

View on Pith 1992

[11] [11]

S. Kagoshima, H. Nagasawa, and T. Sambongi, One Dimensional Conductors , Springer series in solid-state sciences, Vol. 72 (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1988); L. P. Gor’kov and G . Gr¨ uner,Charge Density waves in Solids , MODERN PROBLEMS IN CONDENSED MATTER SCIENCES. VOL. 25 (AMSTERDAM: North-Holland, 1989)

View on Pith 1988

[12] [12]

R. E. Peierls, Quantum Theory of Solids (Oxford University Press, London, 1955)

View on Pith 1955

[13] [13]

G. Gr¨ uner, Rev. Mod. Phys. 60 4 (1988)

View on Pith 1988

[14] [14]

A.W. Overhauser, Phys. Rev. Lett. 4 462 (1960); Phys. Rev. 128 1437 (1962)

View on Pith 1960

[15] [15]

G. Gr¨ uner, Rev. Mod. Phys. 66 1 (1994)

View on Pith 1994

[16] [16]

T. Tatsumi and E. Nakano, hep-ph/0408294

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[17] [17]

Y. Nambu and G. Jona-Lasinio, Phys. Rev. 122 345 (1961); 124 246 (1961)

View on Pith 1961

[18] [18]

S. Weinberg, The quantum theory of ﬁeld II (Cambridge, 1996)

View on Pith 1996

[19] [19]

S.P. Klevansky, Rev. Mod. Phys. 64 649 (1992)

View on Pith 1992

[20] [20]

F. Dautry and E.M. Nyman, Nucl. Phys. 319 323 (1979). K. Takahashi and T. Tatsumi, Phys. Rev. C63 015205 (2000); Prog. Theor. Phys. 105 437 (2001). M. Kutschera, W. Broniowski and A. Kotlorz, Nucl. Phys. A516 566 (1990). M. Sadzikowski and W. Broniowski, Phys. Lett. 488 63 (2000). 16

View on Pith 1979

[21] [21]

T Schaefer, Phys.Rev. D62 094007 (2000)

View on Pith 2000

[22] [22]

J. Schwinger, Phys. Rev. 92 664 (1951)

View on Pith 1951

[23] [23]

M. Asakawa and K. Yazaki, Nucl. Phys. A 504 668 (1989)

View on Pith 1989

[24] [24]

T. Hatsuda and T. Kunihiro, Phys. Rep. 247 221 (1994)

View on Pith 1994

[25] [25]

T. Maruyama and T. Tatsumi, Nucl. Phys. A693 710 (2001)

View on Pith 2001

[26] [26]

C. Kouveliotou et al ., Nature (London) 393, 235 (1998); K. Hurley et al ., Astrophys. J. Lett. 510, L111 (1999)

View on Pith 1998

[27] [27]

K. Ohwa, Phys. Rev. D65, 085040 (2002)

View on Pith 2002

[28] [28]

Note that this conﬁguration is not unique, but in genera l more complicated cases can be considered, e.g., multi- standing waves such as ⟨ ¯ψψ⟩ = ∆ cos(q · r) and ⟨ ¯ψiγ5τiψ⟩ = ∆ sin(q · r)ei, where ei = {sin(p1 · r) cos(p2 · r), sin(p1 · r) sin(p2 · r), cos(p1 · r)}, and q, p1,2 are independent wavenumber vectors. This conﬁguration is a lso in the chiral...

View on Pith