Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 52 references

New phases in QCD at finite temperature and chemical potential

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read QCD at moderate baryon density has four phases, not three

desk verdict Four-phase QCD diagram is a stimulating conjecture, but its baryon-condensation GWW mechanism rests on a stabilizer argument that ignores the color-singlet nature of baryons; still worth refereeing. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.04671 v2 pith:MCC7V2P7 submitted 2025-09-04 hep-th hep-lathep-phnucl-th

Masanori Hanada , Jack Holden , Hiromasa Watanabe This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-thhep-lathep-phnucl-th
keywords partialdeconfinementQCDphasediagramGross-Witten-WadiatransitionbaryoncondensationPolyakovloopVenezianolarge-Nlimitcriticalpointquarkyonic
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper argues that the partially deconfined phase of QCD splits into two distinct phases once baryon chemical potential is turned on, and the confined phase splits as well. The key move is to reinterpret the Gross-Witten-Wadia transition, the opening of a gap in the distribution of Polyakov-line phases, as a signal that can be caused by baryon condensation as well as by string condensation. A dense baryon condensate leaves almost no symmetry to stabilize the Polyakov phases, so the distribution becomes gapped even while color stays confined. If this is correct, there are two partially deconfined phases, PD-1 and PD-2, separated by the baryon-condensation gap, plus two confined phases, and their interplay produces a QCD critical point.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is the generalized Gross-Witten-Wadia (GWW) transition: opening a gap in the distribution of Polyakov-line phases. In this paper it is caused by either of two condensates. String condensation deconfines an SU(M_deconf) subsector, producing the usual gapped distribution associated with complete deconfinement. Baryon condensation, however, also removes the large stabilizer symmetry that keeps the phase distribution uniform, gapping the distribution while long strings remain uncondensed. The gap therefore counts 'active' color degrees of freedom—deconfined or baryon-condensed—and separates PD-1 from PD-2 and CC-1 from CC-2.

What would settle it

A direct calculation of the Polyakov-loop eigenvalue distribution and baryon density at fixed nonzero quark chemical potential in the same large-N_c limit: if a gap appears at T_B in a regime where long strings are not yet condensed, with nonzero baryon density but small Polyakov loop, the two-cause GWW picture is supported; if the gap opens only when string condensation begins, the central mechanism is refuted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that the GWW transition—the opening of a gap in the Polyakov-line eigenvalue distribution—is not reserved for deconfinement. In the Veneziano large-N_c limit at finite baryon chemical potential, baryon condensation alone can create the gap, because a condensate containing of order N_c baryons leaves only a negligibly small stabilizer in SU(N_c). Consequently the phase diagram has four phases at moderate chemical potential: complete confinement without baryon condensation, complete confinement with baryon condensation, partial deconfinement below the GWW temperature, and partial deconfinement above it, with complete deconfinement at higher temperature. A critical point appear

Load-bearing premise

The phase structure rests on the heuristic counting that many condensed baryons leave almost no color symmetry untouched, so the Polyakov phases open a gap on their own; if baryon condensation alone does not gap the distribution, CC-2 and PD-2 as defined do not exist and the predicted critical point loses its basis.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • At zero chemical potential the usual three-phase picture is recovered, with the GWW line coinciding with the partial-to-complete deconfinement transition.
  • At nonzero chemical potential the partially deconfined phase has two regimes: PD-1 with ungapped Polyakov phases and PD-2 with gapped phases while only M_deconf < N_c colors are deconfined.
  • At large chemical potential, baryons condense before deconfinement, creating the baryon-condensed confined phase CC-2, which the paper identifies with the quarkyonic phase.
  • The GWW line changes character from first-order (baryon-driven) to non-first-order (string-driven), and its crossing with the confinement/partial-deconfinement crossover gives a QCD critical point.
  • Crude estimates place that critical point near T ~ 175 MeV and mu_q ~ 155 MeV (mu_B ~ 465 MeV for N_c = 3).

Reading between the lines

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

  • If gap formation truly has two independent causes, the Polyakov-loop gap should not be used alone as a deconfinement order parameter in dense QCD; it measures active colors regardless of what activates them.
  • The same logic may apply in N=4 super-Yang-Mills, where fuzzy spheres or giant gravitons could play the baryon role; that would move the GWW transition away from the onset of partial deconfinement and could resolve the apparent mismatch with superconformal-index computations, a point the paper raises but leaves to future work.
  • A lattice or model test of the entropy formula for T_B could search for a sharp onset in baryon-number susceptibility at the predicted condensation temperature; deviations from the formula would shift the critical point along the paper's estimated parameter directions.
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

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies partial deconfinement in QCD in the Veneziano large-N_c limit at finite baryon chemical potential. It proposes that the Gross-Witten-Wadia transition, understood as the opening of a gap in the Polyakov-line phase distribution, can be driven either by string condensation or by baryon condensation. This leads to a conjectured phase diagram with the regimes CC-1, CC-2, PD-1, PD-2, and CD, separated by T_CC->PD, T_GWW, and T_PD->CD. At large mu_q, T_GWW is identified with the baryon-condensation temperature T_B; at mu_q=0, it coincides with T_PD->CD. A QCD critical point is proposed where the interpolating GWW line crosses T_CC->PD. The paper reviews the earlier partial-deconfinement framework, estimates T_B from baryon-species entropy, connects the SQGB proposal to the PD phase, and speculates about holographic realizations.

Significance. If the central mechanism were established, the proposal would be significant: it gives a unified interpretation of the GWW transition, introduces new candidate phases at finite density, and suggests a concrete mechanism for the QCD critical point. The paper is clearly written, self-contained, and honest about its qualitative character. It also names testable diagnostics, such as higher-representation Polyakov loops, instanton condensation, and chiral restoration, which could be checked in lattice or model calculations. However, the load-bearing step, baryon condensation as a GWW transition, is only supported by a heuristic stabilizer-counting argument, not by a controlled derivation. The phase diagram and the critical point are therefore conjectural, and the manuscript is best read as a proposal needing further support.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 4.1, Eq. (11)] The stabilizer argument for baryon condensation as a GWW transition is not under control. A physical baryon creation operator is a color singlet, invariant under the full SU(N_c), and a state containing many such baryons remains invariant under SU(N_c). The product stabilizer over SU(n_i,s) quoted in Sec. 4.1 is the stabilizer of an unprojected product of quark operators, not of the gauge-invariant baryon state. Therefore the group-integral enhancement in Eq. (11) does not automatically produce a gapped Polyakov-loop distribution for baryon-condensed states. Since the existence of PD-2 and CC-2 relies on this mechanism, the central claim needs an explicit finite-density construction or a solvable model in which the gap is actually shown to appear.
  2. [Sec. 4.2, Eq. (16)] The estimate of T_B, and hence of the critical point, is based on free baryon species counting. Baryon interactions, finite-N_c corrections, and back-reaction from partial deconfinement are not included. The paper acknowledges this, but then uses Eq. (16) quantitatively in Sec. 4.3 with assumed inputs m ~ 310 MeV, eta ~ 0.5-1, and lattice transition temperatures to locate the critical point at mu_q ~ 155 MeV. All inputs are assumed, and no sensitivity analysis is provided. The critical point is therefore an illustration of the proposed mechanism, not a robust prediction.
  3. [Sec. 4.3] The statement that there is a line of GWW transitions connecting the mu_q=0 string-condensation endpoint to the large-mu_q baryon-condensation endpoint is called a mild assumption, but it is a nontrivial global assumption. Nothing in the manuscript rules out a discontinuous jump, multiple transitions, or a line that does not cross T_CC->PD. Because the proposed QCD critical point is the crossing of this assumed line with T_CC->PD, its existence is not established by the presented analysis.
  4. [Sec. 4.4] The survival of partial deconfinement above the GWW transition is asserted rather than demonstrated. The text states that stringy excitations can be localized on the SU(M_deconf) subsector, but no construction is given of a state that is simultaneously baryon-condensed, string-condensed in only M_deconf colors, and consistent with gauge invariance. The claim that such states are not genuinely SU(N_c) symmetric appears to rely on treating the unprojected extended Hilbert space as physical, which is precisely the point that needs justification. Without this, the PD-2 phase is only a label.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Fig. 5 caption] The caption says that the solid line represents a first-order transition, but the GWW line is not first-order at mu_q=0; only the large-mu_q baryon-condensation part is expected to be first-order. The caption should distinguish these segments.
  2. [Table 1] The lattice data use unphysical quark masses, with m_pi/m_rho ~ 0.63. The text uses the extracted T_CC->PD ~ 175 MeV and T_PD->CD ~ 350 MeV as inputs for real-world estimates; this caveat should be stated more prominently.
  3. [Eq. (16)] The notation m for the baryon mass per quark is easy to confuse with the quark mass, especially in Sec. 4.2. The Appendix defines it, but the first use in the main text would benefit from an explicit reminder of the relation m_B = N_c m.
  4. [Footnote 7] The caveat about the complex saddle at mu_q != 0 is important. Consider moving it to the main text, or at least elaborating on why the identification with the usual GWW transition remains valid.
  5. [References [41]-[43]] The metadata for these references is inconsistent: some lack arXiv numbers and some have missing titles. Please normalize the reference list.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No construction-level circularity: the baryon-driven GWW mechanism is a new physical conjecture, not an input masquerading as a prediction; self-citations in transition-temperature inputs are not load-bearing for the central claim.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is: (i) the partial-deconfinement mechanism reviewed in Sec. 2.1; (ii) the Veneziano-limit zero-density phase structure with T_CC->PD and T_PD->CD estimated in refs. [9,10]; (iii) the Sec. 4.1 claim that baryon condensation opens a gap in the Polyakov-phase distribution, so it drives a GWW transition; and (iv) the classification into CC-1/CC-2 and PD-1/PD-2 with a critical point where the GWW line crosses T_CC->PD. None of these steps reduces to its input by construction. 'GWW transition' is explicitly defined as gap opening, and the statement that baryon condensation produces such a gap is a physical conjecture supported by a stabilizer-counting heuristic, not a tautology or a fit. The critical point is a topological consequence of assuming a continuous GWW line connecting T_B at large mu_q to T_PD->CD at mu_q=0 while T_CC->PD remains roughly constant; the paper labels the connecting assumption as 'mild' and the numerical estimate as crude, so it is a model prediction rather than a hidden restatement of the inputs. The reuse of the authors' own lattice estimates [9,10] for T_CC->PD and T_PD->CD is a self-citation, but it enters only into the numerical estimate of the critical point; the qualitative four-phase claim does not depend on those precise values, and the cited lattice analyses use external WHOT-QCD configurations and are externally falsifiable. The paper also openly states that the finite-density analysis is qualitative because of the sign problem and that the proposed phase diagram may be richer, which is an acknowledged limitation rather than evidence of circularity. Under the required standard—identifying a specific equation or construction that makes the output equivalent to the input—no such step is present.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 2 invented entities

The central proposal rests on the authors' earlier partial-deconfinement framework (extensive self-citation) plus a new heuristic mechanism (baryon-driven GWW transition). The quantitative estimate of the critical point is obtained by inserting assumed values for m and eta and transition temperatures from the authors' prior lattice analysis into eq (16). Independent support is limited to weak-coupling saddle-point results [29,30] and the WHOT-QCD data [24] used upstream.

free parameters (4)
  • N_f/N_c ratio eta = 0.5-1 (assumed)
    Chosen to mimic real-world QCD; enters s_B(eta) in eq (16) and thus T_B and the critical point location.
  • baryon mass per quark m = ~310 MeV (assumed)
    Taken 'to mimic the real world' in Sec. 4.2/4.3; used with eq (16) to get mu_q ~ 155 MeV at the critical point.
  • T_CC->PD = ~175 MeV from lattice refs [9,10]
    Transition temperature from complete confinement to partial deconfinement; taken from the authors' earlier lattice-based estimates; the critical point is placed at T ~ this value.
  • T_PD->CD = ~350 MeV from lattice refs [9,10]
    Transition temperature from partial to complete deconfinement; input for the critical point estimate and for the statement that GWW merges with PD->CD at mu=0.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption QCD in the Veneziano large-N_c limit (eta=N_f/N_c fixed) is an appropriate model for real-world QCD phase structure
    Central framework; the paper states real-world QCD is better described by Veneziano than 't Hooft limit (Sec. 1, Sec. 3).
  • domain assumption Partial deconfinement is characterized by a non-uniform ungapped Polyakov loop eigenvalue distribution, with an SU(M_deconf) sub-sector deconfined
    Review in Sec. 2.1; relies on the gauge-symmetry/stabilizer argument from the authors' prior work [11].
  • ad hoc to paper Gap opening in the Polyakov loop phase distribution (GWW transition) is caused either by string condensation or by baryon condensation
    Key observation asserted in Sec. 4.1 with a heuristic stabilizer argument; not derived. Load-bearing for splitting PD into PD-1/PD-2 and identifying CC-2.
  • domain assumption T_CC->PD and T_PD->CD are insensitive to mu_q
    Assumed in Sec. 4.2 because strings are not directly coupled to baryon chemical potential; used to draw the phase diagram and locate the critical point.
  • domain assumption The baryon condensation temperature is given by eq (16): T_B = (m - mu_q)/s_B(eta) with entropy s_B(eta) from counting baryon species
    Taken from ref [28] (Hidaka-McLerran-Pisarski); the paper notes it is only a crude estimate and may be modified by partial deconfinement.
  • ad hoc to paper A single line of GWW transitions connects the mu_q=0 point to the large-mu_q baryon condensation line, producing a QCD critical point at their crossing
    The 'most economical' scenario chosen in Sec. 4.1/4.3; the paper acknowledges the line could be non-monotonic or coincide with PD->CD over a range.
invented entities (2)
  • PD-2 phase (partial deconfinement above the GWW transition)
    purpose: Explains a partially deconfined state with gapped Polyakov loop distribution, required for the four-phase picture at finite mu
    New phase introduced on the basis of the heuristic baryon-driven GWW mechanism; no direct observational evidence, only the weak-coupling line-shape argument in [29,30].
  • CC-2 phase (baryon-condensed confined phase)
    purpose: Identifies the quarkyonic-like phase in the Veneziano limit with a gapped Polyakov distribution but no string condensation
    New phase inferred from the claim that baryon condensation gaps the distribution; not yet observed or computed from first principles.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of New phases in QCD at finite temperature and chemical potential." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/MCC7V2P7

@misc{pith2026250904671,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: New phases in QCD at finite temperature and chemical potential},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/MCC7V2P7}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.04671}
}
abstract

Understanding the phases of quantum chromodynamics (QCD) at finite temperature and baryon density is crucial for describing matter in heavy-ion collisions and the interior of neutron stars. While the transition from the confined phase to the deconfined phase has been extensively studied at vanishing chemical potential, recent theoretical work suggests the existence of intermediate phases with partial deconfinement, where only a subset of the color degrees of freedom is deconfined. In this paper, we study the generalization of partial deconfinement in QCD in the Veneziano large-$N_{\rm c}$ limit ($N_{\rm f}/N_{\rm c}$ fixed) to finite baryon chemical potential. We find that the partially deconfined phase has finer structure, and hence that there are four phases in QCD at finite temperature and moderately large chemical potential: complete confinement, complete deconfinement, and two kinds of partial deconfinement. A key ingredient is the refined understanding of the meaning of the 'Gross-Witten-Wadia point', i.e., the opening of a gap in the distribution of Polyakov line phases: either string condensation or baryon condensation causes the GWW transition. As a by-product, we observe the emergence of the QCD critical point from the interplay between baryon condensation and partial deconfinement. While our approach is necessarily qualitative due to the fermion sign problem, it provides a unified theoretical framework for understanding the rich phase structure of dense QCD matter and offers new perspectives on the location and nature of the QCD critical point.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.04671 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. In the partially deconfined phase, an SU( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Three basic patterns of confinement/deconfinement transition at zero chemical [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. QCD phase diagram proposed by Fujimoto, Fukushima, Hidaka, and McLerran. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (7 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The revised picture of partial deconfinement in finite-density QCD in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Locations of each phase in the T-µq plane. Three curves represent transition temperatures. The solid line represents a first-order transition. Note that CC→PD is likely to be a crossover, and the ‘transition line’ is only qualitative. Complete Confinement (CC): At low …
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Below the GWW transition temperature (T < TGWW), partial deconfinement occurs while maintaining some confined color degrees of freedom. The Polyakov loop distribution remains ungapped. We call this phase PD-1. Above the GWW transition temperature (T > TGWW), the system…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The relationship between the Polyakov line phase distribution and three phases [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Weakly coupled QCD. Strictly speaking, complete confinement ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Deconfinement of a pair of probe quark and anti-quark in pure Yang-Mills theory. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Speculative pictures of baryons in CC, PD, and CD phases. Blue and red points [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_10.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

52 extracted references · 13 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Anti-de Sitter space, thermal phase transition, and confinement in gauge theories,

    E. Witten, “Anti-de Sitter space, thermal phase transition, and confinement in gauge theories,” Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 2 (1998) 505–532, arXiv:hep-th/9803131

    arXiv 1998

  2. [2]

    Large N field theories, string theory and gravity,

    O. Aharony, S. S. Gubser, J. M. Maldacena, H. Ooguri, and Y. Oz, “Large N field theories, string theory and gravity,” Phys. Rept. 323 (2000) 183–386, arXiv:hep-th/9905111

    arXiv 2000

  3. [3]

    The Hagedorn transition, deconfinement and N=4 SYM theory,

    B. Sundborg, “The Hagedorn transition, deconfinement and N=4 SYM theory,” Nucl. Phys. B 573 (2000) 349–363, arXiv:hep-th/9908001. 27

    arXiv 2000

  4. [4]

    The Hagedorn - deconfinement phase transition in weakly coupled large N gauge theories,

    O. Aharony, J. Marsano, S. Minwalla, K. Papadodimas, and M. Van Raamsdonk, “The Hagedorn - deconfinement phase transition in weakly coupled large N gauge theories,” Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 8 (2004) 603–696, arXiv:hep-th/0310285

    arXiv 2004

  5. [5]

    A proposal of the gauge theory description of the small Schwarzschild black hole in AdS 5×S5,

    M. Hanada and J. Maltz, “A proposal of the gauge theory description of the small Schwarzschild black hole in AdS 5×S5,” JHEP 02 (2017) 012, arXiv:1608.03276 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2017

  6. [6]

    Submatrix deconfinement and small black holes in AdS,

    D. Berenstein, “Submatrix deconfinement and small black holes in AdS,” JHEP 09 (2018) 054, arXiv:1806.05729 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2018

  7. [7]

    Partial Deconfinement,

    M. Hanada, G. Ishiki, and H. Watanabe, “Partial Deconfinement,” JHEP 03 (2019) 145, arXiv:1812.05494 [hep-th]. [Erratum: JHEP 10, 029 (2019)]

    arXiv 2019

  8. [8]

    Global symmetries and partial confinement,

    M. Hanada, J. Holden, M. Knaggs, and A. O’Bannon, “Global symmetries and partial confinement,” JHEP 03 (2022) 118, arXiv:2112.11398 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2022

Show all 52 references
  1. [9]

    A New Perspective on Thermal Transition in QCD,

    M. Hanada, H. Ohata, H. Shimada, and H. Watanabe, “A New Perspective on Thermal Transition in QCD,” PTEP 2024 no. 4, (2024) 041B02, arXiv:2310.01940 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  2. [10]

    On Thermal Transition in QCD,

    M. Hanada and H. Watanabe, “On Thermal Transition in QCD,” PTEP 2024 no. 4, (2024) 043B02, arXiv:2310.07533 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Color confinement and Bose-Einstein condensation,

    M. Hanada, H. Shimada, and N. Wintergerst, “Color confinement and Bose-Einstein condensation,” JHEP 08 (2021) 039, arXiv:2001.10459 [hep-th]

    2021 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Possible Third Order Phase Transition in the Large N Lattice Gauge Theory,

    D. J. Gross and E. Witten, “Possible Third Order Phase Transition in the Large N Lattice Gauge Theory,” Phys. Rev. D21 (1980) 446–453

    1980

  5. [13]

    A Study of U(N) Lattice Gauge Theory in 2-dimensions,

    S. R. Wadia, “A Study of U(N) Lattice Gauge Theory in 2-dimensions,” arXiv:1212.2906 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  6. [14]

    Three regimes of QCD,

    L. Y. Glozman, “Three regimes of QCD,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 36 no. 25, (2021) 2044031, arXiv:1907.01820 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Large Nc QCD phase diagram at µB = 0,

    T. D. Cohen and L. Y. Glozman, “Large Nc QCD phase diagram at µB = 0,” Eur. Phys. J. A 60 no. 9, (2024) 171, arXiv:2311.07333 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  8. [16]

    A New State of Matter between the Hadronic Phase and the Quark-Gluon Plasma?,

    Y. Fujimoto, K. Fukushima, Y. Hidaka, and L. McLerran, “A New State of Matter between the Hadronic Phase and the Quark-Gluon Plasma?,” arXiv:2506.00237 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  9. [17]

    Phases of cold, dense quarks at large N(c),

    L. McLerran and R. D. Pisarski, “Phases of cold, dense quarks at large N(c),” Nucl. Phys. A 796 (2007) 83–100, arXiv:0706.2191 [hep-ph]. 28

    2007 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Some Aspects of a Unified Approach to Gauge, Dual and Gribov Theories,

    G. Veneziano, “Some Aspects of a Unified Approach to Gauge, Dual and Gribov Theories,” Nucl. Phys. B 117 (1976) 519–545

    1976

  11. [19]

    Simulating QCD at finite density,

    P. de Forcrand, “Simulating QCD at finite density,” PoS LAT2009 (2009) 010, arXiv:1005.0539 [hep-lat]

    2009 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Finite-density lattice QCD and sign problem: Current status and open problems,

    K. Nagata, “Finite-density lattice QCD and sign problem: Current status and open problems,” Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 127 (2022) 103991, arXiv:2108.12423 [hep-lat]

    2022 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Partial-Symmetry-Breaking Phase Transitions,

    M. Hanada and B. Robinson, “Partial-Symmetry-Breaking Phase Transitions,” Phys. Rev. D 102 no. 9, (2020) 096013, arXiv:1911.06223 [hep-th]

    2020 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Partial deconfinement in gauge theories,

    M. Hanada, G. Ishiki, and H. Watanabe, “Partial deconfinement in gauge theories,” PoS LATTICE2019 (2019) 055, arXiv:1911.11465 [hep-lat]

    2019 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Confinement/deconfinement transition of large N gauge theories with N(f) fundamentals: N(f)/N finite,

    H. J. Schnitzer, “Confinement/deconfinement transition of large N gauge theories with N(f) fundamentals: N(f)/N finite,” Nucl. Phys. B 695 (2004) 267–282, arXiv:hep-th/0402219

    2004 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Equation of state in 2+1 flavor QCD with improved Wilson quarks by the fixed scale approach,

    WHOT-QCD Collaboration, T. Umeda, S. Aoki, S. Ejiri, T. Hatsuda, K. Kanaya, Y. Maezawa, and H. Ohno, “Equation of state in 2+1 flavor QCD with improved Wilson quarks by the fixed scale approach,” Phys. Rev. D 85 (2012) 094508, arXiv:1202.4719 [hep-lat]

    2012 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Deconfinement transition as black hole formation by the condensation of QCD strings,

    M. Hanada, J. Maltz, and L. Susskind, “Deconfinement transition as black hole formation by the condensation of QCD strings,” Phys. Rev. D 90 no. 10, (2014) 105019, arXiv:1405.1732 [hep-th]

    2014 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Linear confinement in the partially-deconfined phase,

    V. Gautam, M. Hanada, J. Holden, and E. Rinaldi, “Linear confinement in the partially-deconfined phase,” JHEP 03 (2023) 195, arXiv:2208.14402 [hep-th]

    2023 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Is there still any Tc mystery in lattice QCD? Results with physical masses in the continuum limit III,

    Wuppertal-Budapest Collaboration, S. Borsanyi, Z. Fodor, C. Hoelbling, S. D. Katz, S. Krieg, C. Ratti, and K. K. Szabo, “Is there still any Tc mystery in lattice QCD? Results with physical masses in the continuum limit III,” JHEP 09 (2010) 073, arXiv:1005.3508 [hep-lat]

    2010 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Baryons and the phase diagram for a large number of colors and flavors,

    Y. Hidaka, L. D. McLerran, and R. D. Pisarski, “Baryons and the phase diagram for a large number of colors and flavors,” Nucl. Phys. A 808 (2008) 117–123, arXiv:0803.0279 [hep-ph]

    2008 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Weak coupling large-N transitions at finite baryon density,

    T. J. Hollowood, S. P. Kumar, and J. C. Myers, “Weak coupling large-N transitions at finite baryon density,” JHEP 11 (2011) 138, arXiv:1110.0696 [hep-th]

    2011 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Deconfinement transitions of large N QCD with chemical potential at weak and strong coupling,

    T. J. Hollowood and J. C. Myers, “Deconfinement transitions of large N QCD with chemical potential at weak and strong coupling,” JHEP 10 (2012) 067, arXiv:1207.4605 [hep-th]. 29

    2012 arXiv

  23. [31]

    The QCD phase diagram and Beam Energy Scan physics: A theory overview,

    L. Du, A. Sorensen, and M. Stephanov, “The QCD phase diagram and Beam Energy Scan physics: A theory overview,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. E 33 no. 07, (2024) 2430008, arXiv:2402.10183 [nucl-th]

    2024 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Anatomy of Deconfinement,

    M. Hanada, A. Jevicki, C. Peng, and N. Wintergerst, “Anatomy of Deconfinement,” JHEP 12 (2019) 167, arXiv:1909.09118 [hep-th]

    2019 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Structure of loop space at finite N,

    R. de Mello Koch and A. Jevicki, “Structure of loop space at finite N,” JHEP 06 (2025) 011, arXiv:2503.20097 [hep-th]

    2025 arXiv

  26. [34]

    From Symmetry to Structure: Gauge-Invariant Operators in Multi-Matrix Quantum Mechanics,

    R. de Mello Koch, M. Kim, and H. J. R. Van Zyl, “From Symmetry to Structure: Gauge-Invariant Operators in Multi-Matrix Quantum Mechanics,” arXiv:2507.01219 [hep-th]

  27. [35]

    Hilbert Space of Finite N Multi-matrix Models,

    R. de Mello Koch and A. Jevicki, “Hilbert Space of Finite N Multi-matrix Models,” arXiv:2508.11986 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  28. [36]

    Confined-deconfined interface tension and latent heat in SU( N ) gauge theory,

    T. Rindlisbacher, K. Rummukainen, and A. Salami, “Confined-deconfined interface tension and latent heat in SU( N ) gauge theory,” arXiv:2506.15509 [hep-lat]

  29. [37]

    Effective Matrix Model for Deconfinement in Pure Gauge Theories,

    A. Dumitru, Y. Guo, Y. Hidaka, C. P. K. Altes, and R. D. Pisarski, “Effective Matrix Model for Deconfinement in Pure Gauge Theories,” Phys. Rev. D 86 (2012) 105017, arXiv:1205.0137 [hep-ph]

    2012 arXiv

  30. [38]

    The large-n limit of superconformal field theories and supergravity,

    J. Maldacena, “The large-n limit of superconformal field theories and supergravity,” International Journal of Theoretical Physics 38 no. 4, (Apr., 1999) 1113–1133. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1026654312961

    1999 doi

  31. [39]

    An index for 4 dimensional super conformal theories,

    J. Kinney, J. Maldacena, S. Minwalla, and S. Raju, “An index for 4 dimensional super conformal theories,” Communications in Mathematical Physics 275 no. 1, (June, 2007) 209–254. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00220-007-0258-7

    2007 doi

  32. [40]

    Counting chiral primaries in , superconformal field theories,

    C. R¨ omelsberger, “Counting chiral primaries in , superconformal field theories,” Nuclear Physics B 747 no. 3, (July, 2006) 329–353. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2006.03.037

    2006 doi

  33. [41]

    Large ads black holes from qft,

    S. Choi, J. Kim, S. Kim, and J. Nahmgoong, “Large ads black holes from qft,” 2024. https://arxiv.org/abs/1810.12067

    2024 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Microscopic origin of the bekenstein-hawking entropy of supersymmetric ads5 black holes,

    A. Cabo-Bizet, D. Cassani, D. Martelli, and S. Murthy, “Microscopic origin of the bekenstein-hawking entropy of supersymmetric ads5 black holes,” Journal of High Energy Physics 2019 no. 10, (Oct., 2019) . http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/JHEP10(2019)062

    2019 doi

  35. [43]

    Black Holes in 4D N =4 Super-Yang-Mills Field Theory,

    F. Benini and E. Milan, “Black Holes in 4D N =4 Super-Yang-Mills Field Theory,” Phys. Rev. X 10 no. 2, (2020) 021037, arXiv:1812.09613 [hep-th]. 30

    2020 arXiv

  36. [44]

    The phase diagram of bps black holes in ads5,

    N. Ezroura, F. Larsen, Z. Liu, and Y. Zeng, “The phase diagram of bps black holes in ads5,” Journal of High Energy Physics 2022 no. 9, (Sept., 2022) . http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/JHEP09(2022)033

    2022 doi

  37. [45]

    The yang-mills duals of small ads black holes,

    S. Choi, S. Jeong, and S. Kim, “The yang-mills duals of small ads black holes,” Journal of High Energy Physics 2024 no. 7, (2024) 1–60

    2024

  38. [46]

    In preparation

    J. Holden, “In preparation.” 2025

    2025

  39. [47]

    Dielectric-branes,

    R. C. Myers, “Dielectric-branes,” Journal of High Energy Physics 1999 no. 12, (Dec.,

    1999

  40. [48]

    Invasion of the giant gravitons from anti-de sitter space,

    J. McGreevy, L. Susskind, and N. Toumbas, “Invasion of the giant gravitons from anti-de sitter space,” Journal of High Energy Physics 2000 no. 06, (June, 2000) 008–008. http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1126-6708/2000/06/008

    doi

  41. [49]

    SUSY and goliath,

    M. T. Grisaru, R. C. Myers, and O. Tafjord, “SUSY and goliath,” JHEP 08 (2000) 040, arXiv:hep-th/0008015

    2000 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Giant graviton expansion from eigenvalue instantons,

    Y. Chen, R. Mahajan, and H. Tang, “Giant graviton expansion from eigenvalue instantons,” 2024. https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.08155

    2024 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Complex eigenvalue instantons and the fredholm determinant expansion in the gross-witten-wadia model,

    D. S. Eniceicu, R. Mahajan, and C. Murdia, “Complex eigenvalue instantons and the fredholm determinant expansion in the gross-witten-wadia model,” 2024. https://arxiv.org/abs/2308.06320. 31

    2024 arXiv

  44. [1999]

    http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1126-6708/1999/12/022

    022–022. http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1126-6708/1999/12/022

    1999 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.