Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 3 cited by

Attractors Without Scaling: Adiabatic Hydrodynamization With and Without Inelastic Scattering

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that hydrodynamization in an expanding gluon plasma is governed by the instantaneous spectrum of an effective Hamiltonian: first-order hydrodynamics becomes applicable precisely when a gap opens above a unique ground…

desk verdict The adiabatic-hydrodynamization story survives inelastic scattering and the late-time decoupling proof is solid; the coincident-gap claim, though, needs convergence tests before it can be fully trusted. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.21232 v1 pith:RAIVIU2J submitted 2025-07-28 hep-ph

Krishna Rajagopal , Bruno Scheihing-Hitschfeld , Rachel Steinhorst This is my paper
classification hep-ph
keywords adiabatichydrodynamizationquark-gluonplasmakinetictheoryboost-invariantexpansionattractorsinelasticscatteringeffectiveHamiltonian
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

This paper argues that the Adiabatic Hydrodynamization (AH) framework, which borrows the quantum-mechanical idea of an effective Hamiltonian with decaying excited states, explains the full sequence of attractor behavior and hydrodynamization in a simplified kinetic theory of gluons, with or without number-changing inelastic collisions. The central claim is that first-order hydrodynamics becomes applicable at exactly the time when a unique ground state emerges in the spectrum of the effective Hamiltonian that governs the rescaled distribution function. Before that time, the early attractor is better described as a surface: a nearly degenerate band of low-energy modes that evolves adiabatically while excited modes decay away. This picture holds even when the gluon distribution function shows no self-similar scaling, which has previously been regarded as the hallmark of pre-thermal attractors. If correct, it means the relevant question for hydrodynamization is not whether the distribution scales, but whether the instantaneous spectrum of the effective Hamiltonian has a gap separating one lowest mode from all others.

What carries the argument

The central object is the effective Hamiltonian $H(y)$ obtained by rewriting the boost-invariant Boltzmann equation for the rescaled distribution $w$ as $\partial_y w = -H(y) w$, with the rescaling chosen to make the evolution as adiabatic as possible. Its instantaneous eigenvalues and eigenstates replace the traditional scaling form (1.1) as the diagnostic of attractor behavior: a nearly degenerate low-energy band produces an attractor surface, and a gap above a unique lowest eigenstate marks hydrodynamization. The adiabaticity condition, measured by the band criterion (3.23), is what justifies the claim that excited modes decay away while the ground-state band evolves without mixing. At late times, linearizing around the isotropic equilibrium reduces $H$ to $\tau_I e^y D(y) L$, with $L$ a time-independent linear operator, which is the identity that produces the universal $\tau^{2/3}$ growth of all non-hydrodynamic eigenvalues.

What would settle it

Recompute the spectra for $\lambda=0.5$ and $\lambda=10$ with a substantially larger or differently adapted basis and check whether the time at which a gap opens above a unique ground state still coincides with the time at which first-order hydrodynamics becomes accurate; if the gap time moves or the gap disappears, the central claim is refuted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's discovery is that attractor behavior in an expanding gluon plasma is a spectral-gap phenomenon. Writing the Boltzmann equation for a suitably rescaled distribution $w$ as $\partial_y w = -H(y) w$, the authors find that with and without inelastic $1\leftrightarrow 2$ scattering the system first falls onto an attractor surface made of an approximately degenerate band of low-energy eigenstates of $H$, and later hydrodynamizes exactly when a gap opens above a single, unique ground state. At that moment the longitudinal pressure agrees with first-order hydrodynamics. This coincidence holds for both a moderately coupled theory ($\lambda = 0.5$) and a realistically coupled theory ($\lambda = 10$), and in the absence of any scaling of the form (1.1) during the pre-thermal epoch. The paper also proves a model-independent late-time result: in any boost-invariant kinetic theory of massless particles with an isotropic equilibrium solution whose effective temperature drops more slowly than $1/\tau$, all non-hydrodynamic eigenvalues of $H$ grow as $e^{(1-\delta)y}$, reducing to $\tau^{2/3}$ in ideal boost-invariant hydrodynamics, so non-hydrodynamic modes decouple with an exponentiated power-law decay.

Load-bearing premise

The results rest on the approximation that a 12-term mathematical basis can faithfully capture the low-energy spectrum of the effective Hamiltonian at the couplings studied; if that approximation fails, the coincident gap-opening and hydrodynamization times could be artifacts of the numerical method rather than real physics.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Pre-thermal attractor behavior does not require the distribution function to take a scaling form; scaling is sufficient but not necessary, so simulations that see attractor behavior without scaling need not be paradoxical.
  • Including inelastic scattering makes hydrodynamization happen on realistic timescales, reducing $\tau_{\rm hyd}$ from $\sim 10^{9-10}\tau_I$ to $\sim 10^4\tau_I$ at $\lambda=0.5$ and to $(10\text{--}20)\tau_I$ at $\lambda=10$.
  • Memory of the initial condition is lost in two sequential stages: first the excited modes decay leaving a within-band memory encoded in which low modes are occupied, then the opening of a gap above the unique ground state removes that remaining memory; the second stage does not repopulate the modes forgotten in the first.
  • Once hydrodynamization begins, all non-hydrodynamic modes decouple with an exponentiated power-law decay $e^{-\#\tau^{1-\delta}}$, so the hydrodynamic attractor becomes more attractive over time even if the linearized collision operator is gapless.
  • In the anisotropy-versus-occupancy plane, the equations with inelastic scattering produce the hook-shaped return to higher occupancy seen in QCD kinetic theory, connecting the dilute attractor surface to the hydrodynamizing attractor.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If this picture generalizes, a practical diagnostic suggests itself: in any simulation of the pre-equilibrium stage, one could compute the instantaneous spectrum of the effective Hamiltonian and read off the hydrodynamization time from the gap-opening time, rather than from scaling or viscous-hydro matching.
  • If the $\tau^{2/3}$ eigenvalue growth is generic, a droplet of quark-gluon plasma perturbed by a passing jet should re-equilibrate extremely rapidly at late times, because every non-hydrodynamic mode decays as an exponential of a power of $\tau$; this is testable in kinetic theory with a localized energy injection.
  • The analysis assumes strict boost invariance and no transverse gradients; extending the spectrum computation to a finite spacetime-rapidity width or to transverse inhomogeneities may slow the $\tau^{2/3}$ growth, and the paper flags this as open.
  • A theory with a conserved charge introduces a second dimensionful scale and a richer zero-mode structure; whether the 'unique ground state at hydrodynamization' criterion survives with a chemical potential is a direct extension of this paper's logic.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. This paper applies the Adiabatic Hydrodynamization (AH) framework to a boost-invariant, transversely homogeneous kinetic theory of massless gluons, using a simplified small-angle elastic kernel and a simplified soft inelastic 1↔2 kernel. The authors study two versions of the theory, with and without inelastic number-changing processes, across couplings from very weak (g_s=10^{-3}, 10^{-2}) to λ=0.5 and λ=10. They report that pre-thermal attractor behavior can occur even when the distribution function does not exhibit scaling; that a band of low-energy modes acts as an attractor surface; that hydrodynamization coincides with the opening of a gap above a unique ground state; and that inelastic collisions accelerate hydrodynamization, yielding realistic times at λ=10. In Section 4, they derive a late-time result that all non-hydrodynamic eigenvalues of the effective Hamiltonian H grow as e^{(1-δ)y}, reducing to τ^{2/3} under ideal boost-invariant hydrodynamics.

Significance. If the numerical claims are robust, the paper would provide a unified microscopic picture of pre-thermal attractors and hydrodynamization that does not rely on scaling of the distribution function, extending the AH framework to include number-non-conserving processes. The analytic result in Section 4 is a clear strength: it is explicit, self-contained, and, under the stated criteria, gives a model-independent explanation of the rapid decoupling of non-hydrodynamic modes in expanding kinetic theories. The paper is also honest about its limitations, particularly the simplified inelastic kernel and the weak-coupling breakdown. The main significance is conditional on the reliability of the 12-state truncated spectra used for the headline gap-opening claim, which is the central numerical evidence in the paper.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 3.1, 3.2, 3.3] The central numerical claim that the opening of the gap above a unique ground state coincides with the onset of first-order hydrodynamics at λ=0.5 and λ=10 is read off from spectra computed in a fixed 12-state basis (even l, n+l ≤ 6, Sec. 3.1), and no convergence test is presented. This is of particular concern because Sec. 3.2 explicitly reports that in the inelastic case at g_s=10^{-2} and 10^{-3} the calculation loses control before hydrodynamization, an effect the authors attribute to basis truncation. The authors should show how the gap-opening time, τ_hyd, and the spectra in Figs. 4 and 5 change with basis size (for example n+l ≤ 8 and ≤ 10), and should quantify the truncation error. Without such a study, the band-to-unique-ground-state interpretation could be an artifact of the truncated basis.
  2. [Sec. 4, Eq. (4.9)] The proof that all non-lowest eigenvalues of H grow as τ e^y D(y) implicitly assumes that the linearized collision operator L has a unique zero eigenvalue. For the number-conserving elastic-only theory of Sec. 3, the linearized small-angle collision operator in Eq. (3.10) conserves particle number and therefore has an additional zero mode. In that case, a mode in the extra zero-mode subspace would have its eigenvalue determined by K, not by τ e^y D(y)L, so the statement that all eigenvalues other than the lowest grow is not established by the derivation. The authors should either add a uniqueness criterion to the list of assumptions or explicitly identify extra zero modes as additional hydrodynamic modes and show that they are excluded from the claim, and check whether the no-inelastic spectra in Fig. 8 contain a non-growing mode.
  3. [Sec. 3.3] The coincidence between the opening of the gap and τ_hyd is assessed qualitatively by inspection of Re(ε_i) and the longitudinal-pressure curves. A quantitative criterion would make the central claim testable: for example, a definition of when a gap is 'open' in terms of the ratio of the gap to the band width or the adiabaticity measure, and a definition of hydrodynamization in terms of the deviation of P_L from the first-order hydrodynamic prediction. The late-time analytic result in Section 4 applies only after linearization around equilibrium, so it cannot by itself establish the coincidence claim; the numerical study needs a precise criterion to support it.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 3.2] The statement that the calculation 'lose[s] control of our description of the dynamics' should be made precise: the authors should state which diagnostic signals the loss of control (for example, negative distribution function, violation of energy conservation, or runaway eigenstate coefficients) and at which time this occurs for each coupling.
  2. [Eqs. (3.7) and (3.9)] The relation between the quantity g defined in Eq. (3.8) and the factor f(p=0) that appears in Eq. (3.9) should be clarified; as written, the g-dependent terms in Eq. (3.7) are dropped without comment in the passage to Eq. (3.9).
  3. [Eq. (3.23)] The exclusion of the two highest-eigenvalue modes from the band adiabaticity criterion δ^{(band i, band j)}_{max} should be justified; as written, it is unclear how sensitive the criterion is to this choice, particularly for the small basis used here.
  4. [Fig. 7] The curves for λ=1 and λ=5 are discussed in the caption but not defined in the main text; please state clearly that these are obtained from the same kinetic theory with inelastic processes and give the corresponding σ_0 and r_I values.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central claims are computed from the stated kinetic equations, and the fitted shear viscosity enters only the hydrodynamic comparison, not the spectral analysis.

full rationale

I find no circular step. The spectral analysis is self-contained: H in Eq. (3.14) is derived from the explicit Boltzmann equations (3.9)-(3.10), and the gap/ground-state results are read from diagonalizing that H, not imposed. The shear viscosity in the hydro comparison (Sec. 3.3) is fitted to the final energy-density slope, but it appears only in the comparison curves, not in H or in the eigenvalue calculation, so the 'gap opens at hydrodynamization' coincidence is not a fitted identity. Section 4 proves the late-time eigenvalue growth from explicitly stated criteria; its assumptions (massless particles, isotropic solution, D dropping slower than 1/tau) do not include the conclusion. Self-citations [41,43] provide the basis/scaling ansatz and earlier elastic-only results; the present paper re-derives H and computes new inelastic spectra, so the citation is methodological rather than load-bearing. The paper itself flags a truncation limitation in Sec. 3.2 ('we seem to lose control of our description of the dynamics... likely a limitation of the basis truncation'); this is a correctness/robustness concern for weak-coupling inelastic runs, not a circularity, since it does not show that any target equation was assumed as input.

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

The central claims rest on the AH reformulation of the Boltzmann equation, the simplified inelastic kernel, and a 12-state basis. The Section 4 proof rests on three explicit criteria (massless particles, scaling form of C, single slowly dropping scale) plus linearization around equilibrium. No new physical entities are introduced; the effective Hamiltonian is a mathematical operator, not a new particle or force.

free parameters (4)
  • shear viscosity eta_tilde = Not stated; one value per coupling
    Equation (3.22): for each choice of coupling, eta_tilde is chosen so that the first-order hydro energy slope matches the kinetic theory slope at the final time. This fitted quantity is used to identify the hydrodynamization time.
  • initial condition parameters r_I and sigma0 = r_I = sqrt(3) or 5, sigma0 = 1 or 4
    Equation (3.19) and Sections 3.2-3.3: these initial conditions are chosen by hand, not fitted to data. They are varied to test attractor behavior, but they set the occupancy and anisotropy of the plasma.
  • relaxation rate in the D(y) equation = 10
    Equation (3.16): the coefficient 10 controls how quickly the rescaling scale D approaches the effective temperature. It is chosen by hand and affects the adiabaticity of the effective Hamiltonian.
  • basis truncation = 12 states (even l, n + l <= 6)
    Section 3.1: all spectral results use this truncated basis. The paper reports loss of control at very weak coupling with inelastic scattering, indicating sensitivity to the truncation.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Adiabatic theorem analogue for non-Hermitian, nonlinear H
    Section 2: if H is gapped and slowly varying, excited states decay like e^{-epsilon delta t}; this is asserted by analogy to quantum mechanics and checked via the band adiabaticity criterion (3.23), not proven in full generality.
  • ad hoc to paper 12-state truncation of the basis captures the relevant spectrum
    Section 3.1: all results use n + l <= 6 with even l. The paper itself attributes the weak-coupling numerical breakdown to basis truncation, so the sufficiency of this truncation is load-bearing for the spectral claims.
  • domain assumption Late-time linearization around an isotropic equilibrium with one dimensionful scale
    Section 4, Eqs. (4.3)-(4.4): the derivation assumes Delta w is small, that C[f0] = 0, that the collision kernel has the scaling form (4.2), and that D(y) falls more slowly than 1/tau. These criteria are stated explicitly and used to derive the eigenvalue growth.
  • ad hoc to paper Simplified inelastic kernel omits hard branchings and Bose enhancement
    Equation (3.9): the 1 to 2 kernel is obtained from an O(epsilon) soft-splitting expansion of the BMSS kernel. The authors note that secondary hard splittings and Bose factors are absent, which affects quantitative comparison with QCD EKT.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Attractors Without Scaling: Adiabatic Hydrodynamization With and Without Inelastic Scattering." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/RAIVIU2J

@misc{pith2026250721232,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Attractors Without Scaling: Adiabatic Hydrodynamization With and Without Inelastic Scattering},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/RAIVIU2J}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.21232}
}
read the original abstract

We study the process of hydrodynamization in kinetic theories of gluons undergoing boost-invariant expansion using the Adiabatic Hydrodynamization (AH) framework. We study both number-conserving and non-conserving theories, and find that including number non-conserving inelastic scattering processes restores many qualitative features of hydrodynamization in QCD EKT despite the simplicity of our model. In particular, introducing inelastic scattering results in a more realistic hydrodynamization time. With or without number non-conservation, we find that first-order hydrodynamics becomes applicable at the same time that a unique ground state emerges in the dynamical evolution of the one-particle distribution function. Furthermore, we find a set of low-effective-energy attractor modes which evolve adiabatically long before hydrodynamization, and find that the emergence of a gap between these ground state modes and the excited modes coincides with the time at which the system falls onto an attractor surface. Strikingly, this is the case even in the absence of pre-thermal scaling of the gluon distribution function, which has previously been strongly associated with pre-thermal attractor behavior. Finally, motivated by a generic feature we observe in the spectrum, we show that as the system hydrodynamizes, the rapid decoupling of non-hydrodynamic modes in boost-invariant kinetic theory can be understood with the AH framework in a model-independent fashion.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Jet broadening and radiation in the early anisotropic plasma in heavy-ion collisions

    hep-ph 2025-09 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    The full angle-dependent jet-medium collision kernel is extracted from QCD kinetic theory for the pre-equilibrium plasma, revealing strong early-time anisotropy and up to 300% error in the isotropic splitting rates us...

  2. Attractodynamics in 0+1D

    hep-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Attractodynamics constructs a macroscopic closure around a nonthermal attractor; in the 0+1D BSY kinetic model, ideal and viscous truncations track the full kinetic evolution, with the viscous extension improving agre...

  3. Eigenstate Thermalization in 1+1-Dimensional SU(2) Lattice Gauge Theory Coupled with Dynamical Fermions

    hep-th 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Exact diagonalization shows 1+1D SU(2) lattice gauge theory with dynamical fermions satisfies ETH, including for non-local string operators that display a memory peak.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

63 extracted references · 20 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    P. M. Chesler and L. G. Yaffe, Horizon formation and far-from-equilibrium isotropization in supersymmetric Yang-Mills plasma , Phys. Rev. Lett. 102 (2009) 211601, [ arXiv:0812.2053]

    arXiv 2009

  2. [2]

    P. M. Chesler and L. G. Yaffe, Boost invariant flow, black hole formation, and far-from-equilibrium dynamics in N = 4 supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory , Phys. Rev. D 82 (2010) 026006, [ arXiv:0906.4426]

    arXiv 2010

  3. [3]

    P. M. Chesler and L. G. Yaffe, Holography and colliding gravitational shock waves in asymptotically AdS5 spacetime, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106 (2011) 021601, [ arXiv:1011.3562]. – 29 –

    arXiv 2011

  4. [4]

    M. P. Heller, R. A. Janik, and P. Witaszczyk, The characteristics of thermalization of boost-invariant plasma from holography, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108 (2012) 201602, [arXiv:1103.3452]

    arXiv 2012

  5. [5]

    M. P. Heller, R. A. Janik, and P. Witaszczyk, A numerical relativity approach to the initial value problem in asymptotically Anti-de Sitter spacetime for plasma thermalization - an ADM formulation , Phys. Rev. D 85 (2012) 126002, [ arXiv:1203.0755]

    arXiv 2012

  6. [6]

    M. P. Heller, D. Mateos, W. van der Schee, and D. Trancanelli, Strong Coupling Isotropization of Non-Abelian Plasmas Simplified , Phys. Rev. Lett. 108 (2012) 191601, [arXiv:1202.0981]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2012

  7. [7]

    van der Schee, Holographic thermalization with radial flow , Phys

    W. van der Schee, Holographic thermalization with radial flow , Phys. Rev. D 87 (2013), no. 6 061901, [arXiv:1211.2218]

    arXiv 2013

  8. [8]

    M. P. Heller, D. Mateos, W. van der Schee, and M. Triana, Holographic isotropization linearized, JHEP 09 (2013) 026, [ arXiv:1304.5172]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2013

Show all 63 references
  1. [9]

    Casalderrey-Solana, H

    J. Casalderrey-Solana, H. Liu, D. Mateos, K. Rajagopal, and U. A. Wiedemann, Gauge/String Duality, Hot QCD and Heavy Ion Collisions . Cambridge University Press, 2014

    2014

  2. [10]

    P. M. Chesler and W. van der Schee, Early thermalization, hydrodynamics and energy loss in AdS/CFT, Int. J. Mod. Phys. E 24 (2015), no. 10 1530011, [ arXiv:1501.04952]

    2015 arXiv

  3. [11]

    P. M. Chesler, N. Kilbertus, and W. van der Schee, Universal hydrodynamic flow in holographic planar shock collisions , JHEP 11 (2015) 135, [ arXiv:1507.02548]

    2015 arXiv

  4. [12]

    M. P. Heller, Holography, Hydrodynamization and Heavy-Ion Collisions , Acta Phys. Polon. B 47 (2016) 2581, [ arXiv:1610.02023]

    2016 arXiv

  5. [13]

    P. M. Chesler, Colliding shock waves and hydrodynamics in small systems , Phys. Rev. Lett. 115 (2015), no. 24 241602, [ arXiv:1506.02209]

    2015 arXiv

  6. [14]

    P. M. Chesler, How big are the smallest drops of quark-gluon plasma? , JHEP 03 (2016) 146, [arXiv:1601.01583]

    2016 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Grozdanov and W

    S. Grozdanov and W. van der Schee, Coupling Constant Corrections in a Holographic Model of Heavy Ion Collisions , Phys. Rev. Lett. 119 (2017), no. 1 011601, [ arXiv:1610.08976]

    2017 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Folkestad, S

    A. Folkestad, S. Grozdanov, K. Rajagopal, and W. van der Schee, Coupling Constant Corrections in a Holographic Model of Heavy Ion Collisions with Nonzero Baryon Number Density, JHEP 12 (2019) 093, [ arXiv:1907.13134]

    2019 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Pi˜ neiro Orioli, K

    A. Pi˜ neiro Orioli, K. Boguslavski, and J. Berges, Universal self-similar dynamics of relativistic and nonrelativistic field theories near nonthermal fixed points , Phys. Rev. D 92 (2015), no. 2 025041, [ arXiv:1503.02498]

    2015 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Berges, K

    J. Berges, K. Boguslavski, S. Schlichting, and R. Venugopalan, Universal attractor in a highly occupied non-Abelian plasma, Phys. Rev. D 89 (2014), no. 11 114007, [ arXiv:1311.3005]

    2014 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Berges, S

    J. Berges, S. Scheffler, and D. Sexty, Bottom-up isotropization in classical-statistical lattice gauge theory, Phys. Rev. D 77 (2008) 034504, [ arXiv:0712.3514]

    2008 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Berges, S

    J. Berges, S. Scheffler, and D. Sexty, Turbulence in nonabelian gauge theory , Phys. Lett. B 681 (2009) 362–366, [ arXiv:0811.4293]

    2009 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Berges, K

    J. Berges, K. Boguslavski, S. Schlichting, and R. Venugopalan, Turbulent thermalization – 30 – process in heavy-ion collisions at ultrarelativistic energies , Phys. Rev. D 89 (2014), no. 7 074011, [arXiv:1303.5650]

    2014 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Gelis, E

    F. Gelis, E. Iancu, J. Jalilian-Marian, and R. Venugopalan, The Color Glass Condensate , Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 60 (2010) 463–489, [ arXiv:1002.0333]

    2010 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Bjoraker and R

    J. Bjoraker and R. Venugopalan, From colored glass condensate to gluon plasma: Equilibration in high-energy heavy ion collisions , Phys. Rev. C 63 (2001) 024609, [hep-ph/0008294]

    2001 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Baier, A

    R. Baier, A. H. Mueller, D. Schiff, and D. T. Son, ’Bottom up’ thermalization in heavy ion collisions, Phys. Lett. B 502 (2001) 51–58, [ hep-ph/0009237]

    2001 arXiv

  17. [25]

    A. H. Mueller, Toward equilibration in the early stages after a high-energy heavy ion collision, Nucl. Phys. B 572 (2000) 227–240, [ hep-ph/9906322]

    2000 arXiv

  18. [26]

    A. H. Mueller, The Boltzmann equation for gluons at early times after a heavy ion collision , Phys. Lett. B 475 (2000) 220–224, [ hep-ph/9909388]

    2000 arXiv

  19. [27]

    A. H. Mueller and D. T. Son, On the Equivalence between the Boltzmann equation and classical field theory at large occupation numbers , Phys. Lett. B 582 (2004) 279–287, [hep-ph/0212198]

    2004 arXiv

  20. [28]

    P. B. Arnold, G. D. Moore, and L. G. Yaffe, Effective kinetic theory for high temperature gauge theories, JHEP 01 (2003) 030, [ hep-ph/0209353]

    2003 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Kurkela and E

    A. Kurkela and E. Lu, Approach to Equilibrium in Weakly Coupled Non-Abelian Plasmas , Phys. Rev. Lett. 113 (2014), no. 18 182301, [ arXiv:1405.6318]

    2014 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Kurkela and Y

    A. Kurkela and Y. Zhu, Isotropization and hydrodynamization in weakly coupled heavy-ion collisions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115 (2015), no. 18 182301, [ arXiv:1506.06647]

    2015 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Kurkela, A

    A. Kurkela, A. Mazeliauskas, J.-F. Paquet, S. Schlichting, and D. Teaney, Effective kinetic description of event-by-event pre-equilibrium dynamics in high-energy heavy-ion collisions , Phys. Rev. C 99 (2019), no. 3 034910, [ arXiv:1805.00961]

    2019 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Kurkela, A

    A. Kurkela, A. Mazeliauskas, J.-F. Paquet, S. Schlichting, and D. Teaney, Matching the Nonequilibrium Initial Stage of Heavy Ion Collisions to Hydrodynamics with QCD Kinetic Theory, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122 (2019), no. 12 122302, [ arXiv:1805.01604]

    2019 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Mazeliauskas and J

    A. Mazeliauskas and J. Berges, Prescaling and far-from-equilibrium hydrodynamics in the quark-gluon plasma , Phys. Rev. Lett. 122 (2019), no. 12 122301, [ arXiv:1810.10554]

    2019 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Boguslavski, A

    K. Boguslavski, A. Kurkela, T. Lappi, F. Lindenbauer, and J. Peuron, Limiting attractors in heavy-ion collisions, Phys. Lett. B 852 (2024) 138623, [ arXiv:2312.11252]

    2024 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Blaizot, F

    J.-P. Blaizot, F. Gelis, J.-F. Liao, L. McLerran, and R. Venugopalan, Bose–Einstein Condensation and Thermalization of the Quark Gluon Plasma , Nucl. Phys. A 873 (2012) 68–80, [arXiv:1107.5296]

    2012 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Blaizot, J

    J.-P. Blaizot, J. Liao, and L. McLerran, Gluon Transport Equation in the Small Angle Approximation and the Onset of Bose-Einstein Condensation , Nucl. Phys. A 920 (2013) 58–77, [arXiv:1305.2119]

    2013 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Tanji and R

    N. Tanji and R. Venugopalan, Effective kinetic description of the expanding overoccupied Glasma, Phys. Rev. D 95 (2017), no. 9 094009, [ arXiv:1703.01372]

    2017 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Kurkela, W

    A. Kurkela, W. van der Schee, U. A. Wiedemann, and B. Wu, Early- and Late-Time – 31 – Behavior of Attractors in Heavy-Ion Collisions , Phys. Rev. Lett. 124 (2020), no. 10 102301, [arXiv:1907.08101]

    2020 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Schlichting and D

    S. Schlichting and D. Teaney, The First fm/c of Heavy-Ion Collisions , Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 69 (2019) 447–476, [ arXiv:1908.02113]

    2019 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Berges, M

    J. Berges, M. P. Heller, A. Mazeliauskas, and R. Venugopalan, QCD thermalization: Ab initio approaches and interdisciplinary connections , Rev. Mod. Phys. 93 (2021), no. 3 035003, [arXiv:2005.12299]

    2021 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Brewer, B

    J. Brewer, B. Scheihing-Hitschfeld, and Y. Yin, Scaling and adiabaticity in a rapidly expanding gluon plasma , JHEP 05 (2022) 145, [ arXiv:2203.02427]

    2022 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Brewer, L

    J. Brewer, L. Yan, and Y. Yin, Adiabatic hydrodynamization in rapidly-expanding quark–gluon plasma , Phys. Lett. B 816 (2021) 136189, [ arXiv:1910.00021]

    2021 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Rajagopal, B

    K. Rajagopal, B. Scheihing-Hitschfeld, and R. Steinhorst, Adiabatic Hydrodynamization and the emergence of attractors: a unified description of hydrodynamization in kinetic theory , JHEP 04 (2025) 028, [ arXiv:2405.17545]

    2025 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Gavassino, Gapless nonhydrodynamic modes in relativistic kinetic theory , Phys

    L. Gavassino, Gapless nonhydrodynamic modes in relativistic kinetic theory , Phys. Rev. Res. 6 (2024), no. 4 L042043, [ arXiv:2404.12327]

    2024 arXiv

  37. [45]

    De Lescluze and M

    M. De Lescluze and M. P. Heller, Quasinormal modes of nonthermal fixed points , arXiv:2502.01622

    arXiv

  38. [46]

    Serreau and D

    J. Serreau and D. Schiff, Kinetic equilibration in heavy ion collisions: The Role of elastic processes, JHEP 11 (2001) 039, [ hep-ph/0104072]

    2001 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Jeon and L

    S. Jeon and L. G. Yaffe, From quantum field theory to hydrodynamics: Transport coefficients and effective kinetic theory , Phys. Rev. D 53 (1996) 5799–5809, [ hep-ph/9512263]

    1996 arXiv

  40. [48]

    P. B. Arnold, G. D. Moore, and L. G. Yaffe, Transport coefficients in high temperature gauge theories. 1. Leading log results , JHEP 11 (2000) 001, [ hep-ph/0010177]

    2000 arXiv

  41. [49]

    P. B. Arnold, G. D. Moore, and L. G. Yaffe, Transport coefficients in high temperature gauge theories. 2. Beyond leading log , JHEP 05 (2003) 051, [ hep-ph/0302165]

    2003 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Chapman and T

    S. Chapman and T. Cowling, The Mathematical Theory of Non-uniform Gases: An Account of the Kinetic Theory of Viscosity, Thermal Conduction and Diffusion in Gases . Cambridge Mathematical Library. Cambridge University Press, 1990

    1990

  43. [51]

    G. S. Denicol, T. Koide, and D. H. Rischke, Dissipative relativistic fluid dynamics: a new way to derive the equations of motion from kinetic theory , Phys. Rev. Lett. 105 (2010) 162501, [arXiv:1004.5013]

    2010 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Martinez and M

    M. Martinez and M. Strickland, Dissipative Dynamics of Highly Anisotropic Systems , Nucl. Phys. A 848 (2010) 183–197, [ arXiv:1007.0889]

    2010 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Florkowski and R

    W. Florkowski and R. Ryblewski, Highly-anisotropic and strongly-dissipative hydrodynamics for early stages of relativistic heavy-ion collisions , Phys. Rev. C 83 (2011) 034907, [arXiv:1007.0130]

    2011 arXiv

  46. [54]

    G. S. Denicol, H. Niemi, E. Molnar, and D. H. Rischke, Derivation of transient relativistic fluid dynamics from the Boltzmann equation , Phys. Rev. D 85 (2012) 114047, [arXiv:1202.4551]. [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 91, 039902 (2015)]

    2012 arXiv

  47. [55]

    G. S. Denicol and J. Noronha, Divergence of the Chapman-Enskog expansion in relativistic kinetic theory, arXiv:1608.07869. – 32 –

    arXiv

  48. [56]

    F. S. Bemfica, F. S. Bemfica, M. M. Disconzi, M. M. Disconzi, J. Noronha, and J. Noronha, Nonlinear Causality of General First-Order Relativistic Viscous Hydrodynamics , Phys. Rev. D 100 (2019), no. 10 104020, [ arXiv:1907.12695]. [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 105, 069902 (2022)]

    2019 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Kovtun, First-order relativistic hydrodynamics is stable , JHEP 10 (2019) 034, [arXiv:1907.08191]

    P. Kovtun, First-order relativistic hydrodynamics is stable , JHEP 10 (2019) 034, [arXiv:1907.08191]

    2019 arXiv

  50. [58]

    F. S. Bemfica, M. M. Disconzi, V. Hoang, J. Noronha, and M. Radosz, Nonlinear Constraints on Relativistic Fluids Far from Equilibrium , Phys. Rev. Lett. 126 (2021), no. 22 222301, [arXiv:2005.11632]

    2021 arXiv

  51. [59]

    F. S. Bemfica, M. M. Disconzi, and J. Noronha, First-Order General-Relativistic Viscous Fluid Dynamics , Phys. Rev. X 12 (2022), no. 2 021044, [ arXiv:2009.11388]

    2022 arXiv

  52. [60]

    P. B. Arnold, J. Lenaghan, and G. D. Moore, QCD plasma instabilities and bottom up thermalization, JHEP 08 (2003) 002, [ hep-ph/0307325]

    2003 arXiv

  53. [61]

    Bodeker, The Impact of QCD plasma instabilities on bottom-up thermalization , JHEP 10 (2005) 092, [ hep-ph/0508223]

    D. Bodeker, The Impact of QCD plasma instabilities on bottom-up thermalization , JHEP 10 (2005) 092, [ hep-ph/0508223]

    2005 arXiv

  54. [62]

    Kurkela and G

    A. Kurkela and G. D. Moore, Bjorken Flow, Plasma Instabilities, and Thermalization , JHEP 11 (2011) 120, [ arXiv:1108.4684]

    2011 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Brewer, W

    J. Brewer, W. Ke, and U. Sharell, How spatial gradients affect the thermalisation of the QGP in heavy ion collisions, poster by U. Sharell at Quark Matter 2025, Frankfurt, Germany , . – 33 –

    2025

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.