arxiv: 2605.01807 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-03 · ⚛️ nucl-th · hep-ph

Recognition: unknown

Relativistic BDNK MHD Evolution in a Boost-Invariant Medium and Its Impact on Dilepton Production

Ankit Kumar Panda, Rajesh Biswas

Pith reviewed 2026-05-09 16:12 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ nucl-th hep-ph

keywords relativistic magnetohydrodynamicsBDNK formulationboost-invariant expansiondilepton productiondissipative fluidsheavy-ion collisions

0 comments

The pith

Coupled temperature and magnetic field evolution in BDNK MHD suppresses low-mass dilepton spectrum

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

The paper investigates a causal first-order BDNK formulation of relativistic magnetohydrodynamics in a boost-invariant Bjorken medium. It derives coupled equations for the temperature and magnetic field evolution while keeping all relevant first-order gradients in (0+1)D dynamics. By varying transport coefficients, it shows that the magnetic field responds more strongly to temperature changes than the reverse, leading to enhanced cooling of the medium. This coupling modifies the number density and alters dilepton production through the relaxation time, resulting in a suppression of the low-mass dilepton spectrum compared to non-coupled scenarios.

Core claim

In the BDNK-type formulation of relativistic MHD, the coupled evolution of temperature and magnetic field in a boost-invariant background leads to the magnetic field being more sensitive to temperature gradients. This positive coupling enhances the cooling rate, which in turn suppresses the low-mass dilepton spectrum via changes in the emission rate determined by the relaxation time in a kinetic-theory approach.

What carries the argument

The coupled first-order evolution equations for temperature and magnetic field in the BDNK dissipative relativistic MHD, with magnetic field affecting the dilepton emission rate through the relaxation time.

Load-bearing premise

The BDNK-type formulation remains a valid causal and stable description of dissipative relativistic MHD when restricted to (0+1)D boost-invariant dynamics while retaining all relevant first-order gradients.

What would settle it

Calculating the low-mass dilepton spectrum without the temperature-magnetic field coupling and observing no difference in suppression compared to the coupled case would falsify the primary claim of enhanced cooling leading to suppression.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.01807 by Ankit Kumar Panda, Rajesh Biswas.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: FIG. 1. Evolution of the temperature and magnetic field view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: FIG. 2. Evolution of the temperature and magnetic field with view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4. Temperature and magnetic field evolution with all ex view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5. Evolution of the number density with initial con view at source ↗

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: FIG. 7. Mass spectra of dileptons at mid-rapidity ( view at source ↗

read the original abstract

In this work, we explore a Bemfica--Disconzi--Noronha--Kovtun (BDNK)-type formulation of relativistic magnetohydrodynamics, providing a causal and stable first-order description of dissipative fluids. We derive coupled evolution equations for the temperature and magnetic field in a boost-invariant Bjorken background, restricting to $(0+1)$D dynamics while retaining all relevant first-order gradients. By varying the transport coefficients, we disentangle the interplay and mutual backreaction between the thermal and electromagnetic sectors. We find that, for comparable transport coefficients, the magnetic field responds more strongly to changes in the temperature evolution, while its feedback on the temperature remains subleading. We further analyze the number density evolution, which is sensitive to both temperature gradients and magnetic-field dynamics. We also investigate implications for dilepton production, where the magnetic field modifies the emission rate via the relaxation time in a kinetic-theory framework. The coupled evolution leads to a suppression of the low-mass dilepton spectrum, primarily driven by enhanced cooling in the presence of positive coupling between temperature gradients and magnetic-field evolution, as compared to scenarios without such feedback.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper derives coupled temperature-magnetic equations in BDNK MHD under Bjorken flow and reports suppression of low-mass dileptons from enhanced cooling due to positive coupling, but does not verify that the reduced (0+1)D system preserves BDNK causality and stability.

read the letter

The main takeaway is that this work couples the thermal and magnetic sectors through BDNK dissipative terms in a boost-invariant setup, solves the resulting equations, and finds that positive transport-coefficient coupling speeds up cooling enough to suppress the low-mass dilepton yield relative to the decoupled case. The magnetic field reacts more strongly to temperature changes than the temperature does to the field, and the number-density evolution picks up both effects. They then feed the modified temperature and relaxation time into a kinetic-theory dilepton rate. That chain is the concrete new piece: an explicit back-reaction calculation rather than an assumed external magnetic field. It is useful for anyone who already runs viscous hydro with electromagnetic probes and wants to see how first-order dissipative MHD alters the electromagnetic observables in the simplest expanding geometry. The authors vary the transport coefficients systematically, which lets them separate the directions of influence, and they keep the full set of first-order gradients allowed by the symmetry. That is honest work on the interplay. The soft spot is the stability question. BDNK guarantees causality and stability only when the complete set of gradient terms satisfies certain inequalities on the coefficients. In (0+1)D boost-invariant flow some of those terms vanish or become dependent, so the original bounds may no longer apply at the coefficient values they use. The abstract and the reported results give no sign that the characteristic speeds or the entropy-production quadratic form were recomputed for the reduced system. If those checks fail, the evolution itself could be acausal even though the equations look well-behaved. The numerical implementation details and direct comparison to the non-dissipative or non-magnetic limits are also not visible in the summary, which makes it harder to judge how robust the suppression number is. This paper is for nuclear theorists who model electromagnetic signals in heavy-ion collisions and already know the BDNK literature. A reader who needs a concrete example of thermal-magnetic feedback in expanding plasma will find the calculation worth looking at. It is worth sending to referees because the question is well-posed and the approach is systematic; the stability verification and a few more validation plots would be the main items to request.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript develops a BDNK-type first-order relativistic MHD formulation restricted to (0+1)D boost-invariant Bjorken flow while retaining all relevant first-order gradients. It derives and numerically solves coupled evolution equations for temperature and magnetic field, varying transport coefficients to isolate thermal-electromagnetic backreaction. The central result is that positive coupling between temperature gradients and magnetic evolution produces enhanced cooling, which in turn suppresses the low-mass dilepton spectrum relative to the no-feedback case; the magnetic sector is reported to respond more strongly than the thermal feedback, and number-density evolution is shown to be sensitive to both sectors.

Significance. If the reduced BDNK system remains causal and stable at the coefficient values employed and the numerical solutions are robust, the work supplies a concrete illustration of how dissipative MHD feedback can modify electromagnetic probes in heavy-ion collisions. This is potentially relevant for interpreting dilepton spectra as signatures of the quark-gluon plasma, especially since the suppression is traced to a physically motivated cooling enhancement rather than an ad-hoc adjustment.

major comments (2)

[Derivation of coupled evolution equations (near the abstract claim of causality and stability)] The headline claim of dilepton suppression via enhanced cooling presupposes that the derived (0+1)D BDNK equations constitute a causal and stable description. The manuscript states that the BDNK formulation is causal and stable but does not recompute the characteristic speeds or the quadratic form of entropy production for the reduced system after dropping non-boost-invariant gradients while retaining the others. This verification is load-bearing for the central result because the original BDNK stability bounds can be violated by the truncation; without it, the reported suppression could be an artifact of an unstable evolution.
[Numerical results and dilepton production section] No explicit comparison is provided to standard limits (ideal Bjorken flow, non-MHD BDNK, or ideal MHD) that would confirm the numerical implementation recovers known analytic solutions when the coupling or dissipative coefficients are set to zero. Such benchmarks are necessary to establish that the observed suppression is genuinely due to the T-B feedback rather than a numerical artifact.

minor comments (2)

The abstract asserts that coupled equations were derived and solved but does not display the explicit forms of the evolution equations or the values of the transport coefficients used for the dilepton spectra; adding these (even in an appendix) would improve clarity.
Figure captions and axis labels for the dilepton spectra should explicitly state the range of transport coefficients and the reference (no-feedback) case for direct visual comparison.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading of our manuscript and for the constructive comments, which help strengthen the presentation of our results on the coupled BDNK MHD evolution and its implications for dilepton production. We address each major comment below and will incorporate the suggested revisions.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Derivation of coupled evolution equations (near the abstract claim of causality and stability)] The headline claim of dilepton suppression via enhanced cooling presupposes that the derived (0+1)D BDNK equations constitute a causal and stable description. The manuscript states that the BDNK formulation is causal and stable but does not recompute the characteristic speeds or the quadratic form of entropy production for the reduced system after dropping non-boost-invariant gradients while retaining the others. This verification is load-bearing for the central result because the original BDNK stability bounds can be violated by the truncation; without it, the reported suppression could be an artifact of an unstable evolution.

Authors: We agree that explicit verification of causality and stability for the reduced (0+1)D system is necessary, as the truncation to boost-invariant flow retains a subset of first-order gradients whose impact on the characteristic structure is not automatically guaranteed by the full BDNK analysis. In the revised manuscript we will add an appendix that recomputes the characteristic speeds of the coupled temperature and magnetic-field equations and verifies that the quadratic form of entropy production remains positive semi-definite for the range of transport coefficients employed in our numerical solutions. This will confirm that the reported enhanced cooling and dilepton suppression are not artifacts of an unstable evolution. revision: yes
Referee: [Numerical results and dilepton production section] No explicit comparison is provided to standard limits (ideal Bjorken flow, non-MHD BDNK, or ideal MHD) that would confirm the numerical implementation recovers known analytic solutions when the coupling or dissipative coefficients are set to zero. Such benchmarks are necessary to establish that the observed suppression is genuinely due to the T-B feedback rather than a numerical artifact.

Authors: We concur that direct benchmarks against known analytic limits are required to validate the numerical implementation. In the revised version we will include additional panels or a dedicated subsection that sets the dissipative coefficients or magnetic coupling to zero and demonstrates recovery of the expected solutions: the ideal Bjorken scaling T(τ) ∝ τ^{-1/3} for vanishing dissipation, the non-MHD BDNK temperature evolution, and the ideal MHD magnetic-field decay. These comparisons will establish that the observed suppression of the low-mass dilepton spectrum originates from the physical thermal-magnetic backreaction rather than a numerical artifact. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity; results obtained by solving derived evolution equations

full rationale

The paper starts from the established BDNK first-order dissipative MHD framework, restricts the equations to (0+1)D boost-invariant flow while retaining first-order gradients, derives the coupled temperature-magnetic field system, and numerically integrates it for varying transport coefficients. The reported suppression of the low-mass dilepton spectrum is the direct numerical output of this integration (enhanced cooling from the T-B coupling term) rather than any redefinition, fit to the spectrum itself, or renaming of an input. No self-citations are invoked to justify the central dynamical result or to forbid alternatives; BDNK causality/stability is imported from the original literature. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained and does not reduce to its own inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the BDNK formulation as a causal stable theory and on the boost-invariant background assumption; no new entities are introduced and transport coefficients are treated as free parameters that are varied.

free parameters (1)

transport coefficients
Varied independently to disentangle thermal and electromagnetic sectors; specific numerical values not supplied in abstract.

axioms (2)

domain assumption BDNK-type formulation provides a causal and stable first-order description of dissipative fluids
Invoked at the outset to justify the relativistic MHD model.
domain assumption Boost-invariant Bjorken background suffices for (0+1)D dynamics while retaining all relevant first-order gradients
Used to restrict the geometry and derive the coupled evolution equations.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5503 in / 1368 out tokens · 84573 ms · 2026-05-09T16:12:47.101223+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

88 extracted references · 76 canonical work pages

[1]

Romatschke and U

P. Romatschke and U. Romatschke, Phys. Rev. Lett.99, 172301 (2007), arXiv:0706.1522 [nucl-th]

work page arXiv 2007
[2]

H. Song, S. A. Bass, U. Heinz, T. Hirano, and C. Shen, Phys. Rev. Lett.106, 192301 (2011), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.Lett. 109, 139904 (2012)], arXiv:1011.2783 [nucl-th]

work page arXiv 2011
[3]

Collective flow and viscosity in relativistic heavy-ion collisions,

U. Heinz and R. Snellings, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.63, 123 (2013), arXiv:1301.2826 [nucl-th]

work page arXiv 2013
[4]

Heavy Ion Collisions: The Big Picture, and the Big Questions

W. Busza, K. Rajagopal, and W. van der Schee, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.68, 339 (2018), arXiv:1802.04801 [hep-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2018
[5]

Song and U

H. Song and U. W. Heinz, Phys. Rev. C77, 064901 (2008), arXiv:0712.3715 [nucl-th]

work page arXiv 2008
[6]

Z. Qiu, C. Shen, and U. Heinz, Phys. Lett. B707, 151 (2012), arXiv:1110.3033 [nucl-th]

work page arXiv 2012
[7]

Niemi, G

H. Niemi, G. S. Denicol, P. Huovinen, E. Molnar, and D. H. Rischke, Phys. Rev. Lett.106, 212302 (2011), arXiv:1101.2442 [nucl-th]

work page arXiv 2011
[8]

L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz,Fluid Mechanics, 2nd ed., Course of Theoretical Physics, Vol. 6 (Pergamon Press, Oxford, 1987)

1987
[9]

Eckart, Phys

C. Eckart, Phys. Rev.58, 919 (1940)

1940
[10]

W. A. Hiscock and L. Lindblom, Annals Phys.151, 466 (1983)

1983
[11]

W. A. Hiscock and L. Lindblom, Phys. Rev. D31, 725 (1985)

1985
[12]

W. A. Hiscock and L. Lindblom, Phys. Rev. D35, 3723 (1987)

1987
[13]

Muller, Z

I. Muller, Z. Phys.198, 329 (1967)

1967
[14]

Israel, Annals Phys.100, 310 (1976)

W. Israel, Annals Phys.100, 310 (1976)

1976
[15]

Israel and J

W. Israel and J. M. Stewart, Annals Phys.118, 341 (1979)

1979
[16]

Muronga, Phys

A. Muronga, Phys. Rev. Lett.88, 062302 (2002), [Er- ratum: Phys.Rev.Lett. 89, 159901 (2002)], arXiv:nucl- th/0104064

work page arXiv 2002
[17]

G. S. Denicol, H. Niemi, E. Molnar, and D. H. Rischke, Phys. Rev. D85, 114047 (2012), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 91, 039902 (2015)], arXiv:1202.4551 [nucl-th]

work page Pith review arXiv 2012
[18]

Relativistic viscous hydrodynamics, conformal invariance, and holography,

R. Baier, P. Romatschke, D. T. Son, A. O. Starinets, and M. A. Stephanov, JHEP04, 100, arXiv:0712.2451 [hep-th]

work page arXiv
[19]

Bhattacharyya, V

S. Bhattacharyya, V. E. Hubeny, S. Minwalla, and M. Rangamani, JHEP02, 045, arXiv:0712.2456 [hep-th]

work page arXiv
[20]

Jaiswal, Phys

A. Jaiswal, Phys. Rev. C88, 021903 (2013), arXiv:1305.3480 [nucl-th]

work page arXiv 2013
[21]

Grozdanov and N

S. Grozdanov and N. Kaplis, Phys. Rev. D93, 066012 (2016), arXiv:1507.02461 [hep-th]

work page arXiv 2016
[22]

G. S. Denicol, T. Kodama, T. Koide, and P. Mota, J. Phys. G35, 115102 (2008), arXiv:0807.3120 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2008
[23]

S. Pu, T. Koide, and D. H. Rischke, Phys. Rev. D81, 114039 (2010), arXiv:0907.3906 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2010
[24]

C. V. Brito and G. S. Denicol, Phys. Rev. D102, 116009 (2020), arXiv:2007.16141 [nucl-th]

work page arXiv 2020
[25]

F. S. Bemfica, M. M. Disconzi, V. Hoang, J. Noronha, and M. Radosz, Phys. Rev. Lett.126, 222301 (2021), arXiv:2005.11632 [hep-th]

work page arXiv 2021
[26]

Roy, Phys

V. Roy, Phys. Rev. C113, 034913 (2026), arXiv:2508.03265 [nucl-th]

work page arXiv 2026
[27]

F. S. Bemfica, M. M. Disconzi, and J. Noronha, Phys. Rev. D98, 104064 (2018), arXiv:1708.06255 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2018
[28]

F. S. Bemfica, F. S. Bemfica, M. M. Disconzi, M. M. Disconzi, J. Noronha, and J. Noronha, Phys. Rev. D 100, 104020 (2019), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 105, 069902 (2022)], arXiv:1907.12695 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2019
[29]

F. S. Bemfica, M. M. Disconzi, and J. Noronha, Phys. Rev. X12, 021044 (2022), arXiv:2009.11388 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2022
[30]

First-order relativistic hydrodynamics is stable,

P. Kovtun, JHEP10, 034, arXiv:1907.08191 [hep-th]

work page arXiv 1907
[31]

Is first-order relativistic hydrodynamics in a general frame stable and causal for arbitrary interactions?,

R. Biswas, S. Mitra, and V. Roy, Phys. Rev. D106, 11 L011501 (2022), arXiv:2202.08685 [nucl-th]

work page arXiv 2022
[32]

An expedition to the islands of stability in the first-order causal hydrodynamics,

R. Biswas, S. Mitra, and V. Roy, Phys. Lett. B838, 137725 (2023), arXiv:2211.11358 [nucl-th]

work page arXiv 2023
[33]

Pandya and F

A. Pandya and F. Pretorius, Phys. Rev. D104, 023015 (2021), arXiv:2104.00804 [gr-qc]

work page arXiv 2021
[34]

G. S. Rocha, G. S. Denicol, and J. Noronha, Phys. Rev. D106, 036010 (2022), arXiv:2205.00078 [nucl-th]

work page arXiv 2022
[35]

R. E. Hoult and P. Kovtun, JHEP06, 067, arXiv:2004.04102 [hep-th]

work page arXiv 2004
[36]

R. E. Hoult and P. Kovtun, Phys. Rev. D106, 066023 (2022), arXiv:2112.14042 [hep-th]

work page arXiv 2022
[37]

Abboud, E

N. Abboud, E. Speranza, and J. Noronha, Phys. Rev. D 109, 094007 (2024), arXiv:2308.02928 [hep-th]

work page arXiv 2024
[38]

R. E. Hoult and A. Shukla, JHEP04, 172, arXiv:2410.22855 [hep-th]

work page arXiv
[39]

Weickgenannt, Phys

N. Weickgenannt, Phys. Rev. D108, 076011 (2023), arXiv:2307.13561 [nucl-th]

work page arXiv 2023
[40]

Jain and P

A. Jain and P. Kovtun, JHEP01, 162, arXiv:2309.00511 [hep-th]

work page arXiv
[41]

Armas and F

J. Armas and F. Camilloni, JCAP10, 039, arXiv:2201.06847 [hep-th]

work page arXiv
[42]

R. E. Hoult and P. Kovtun, JHEP04, 009, arXiv:2411.04966 [hep-th]

work page arXiv
[43]

Skokov, A

V. Skokov, A. Y. Illarionov, and V. Toneev, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A24, 5925 (2009), arXiv:0907.1396 [nucl-th]

work page arXiv 2009
[44]

Bzdak and V

A. Bzdak and V. Skokov, Phys. Lett. B710, 171 (2012), arXiv:1111.1949 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2012
[45]

Deng and X.-G

W.-T. Deng and X.-G. Huang, Phys. Rev. C85, 044907 (2012), arXiv:1201.5108 [nucl-th]

work page arXiv 2012
[46]

Gursoy, D

U. Gursoy, D. Kharzeev, and K. Rajagopal, Phys. Rev. C89, 054905 (2014), arXiv:1401.3805 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2014
[47]

A. K. Panda, P. Bagchi, H. Mishra, and V. Roy, Phys. Rev. C110, 024902 (2024), arXiv:2404.08431 [nucl-th]

work page arXiv 2024
[48]

Dash and A

A. Dash and A. K. Panda, Phys. Lett. B848, 138342 (2024), arXiv:2304.12977 [hep-th]

work page arXiv 2024
[49]

V. Roy, S. Pu, L. Rezzolla, and D. Rischke, Phys. Lett. B750, 45 (2015), arXiv:1506.06620 [nucl-th]

work page arXiv 2015
[50]

S. Pu, V. Roy, L. Rezzolla, and D. H. Rischke, Phys. Rev. D93, 074022 (2016), arXiv:1602.04953 [nucl-th]

work page arXiv 2016
[51]

Mayer, A

M. Mayer, A. Dash, G. Inghirami, H. Elfner, L. Rezzolla, and D. H. Rischke, Phys. Rev. C111, 044907 (2025), arXiv:2403.08668 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2025
[52]

Hongo, Y

M. Hongo, Y. Hirono, and T. Hirano, Phys. Lett. B775, 266 (2017), arXiv:1309.2823 [nucl-th]

work page arXiv 2017
[53]

Inghirami, L

G. Inghirami, L. Del Zanna, A. Beraudo, M. H. Moghad- dam, F. Becattini, and M. Bleicher, Eur. Phys. J. C76, 659 (2016), arXiv:1609.03042 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2016
[54]

Inghirami, M

G. Inghirami, M. Mace, Y. Hirono, L. Del Zanna, D. E. Kharzeev, and M. Bleicher, Eur. Phys. J. C80, 293 (2020), arXiv:1908.07605 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2020
[55]

Siddique, R.-j

I. Siddique, R.-j. Wang, S. Pu, and Q. Wang, Phys. Rev. D99, 114029 (2019), arXiv:1904.01807 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2019
[56]

Pu and D.-L

S. Pu and D.-L. Yang, Phys. Rev. D93, 054042 (2016), arXiv:1602.04954 [nucl-th]

work page arXiv 2016
[57]

V. Roy, S. Pu, L. Rezzolla, and D. H. Rischke, Phys. Rev. C96, 054909 (2017), arXiv:1706.05326 [nucl-th]

work page arXiv 2017
[58]

Nakamura, T

K. Nakamura, T. Miyoshi, C. Nonaka, and H. R. Taka- hashi, Eur. Phys. J. C83, 229 (2023), arXiv:2211.02310 [nucl-th]

work page arXiv 2023
[59]

Mayer, A

M. Mayer, A. Dash, G. Inghirami, H. Elfner, L. Rezzolla, and D. H. Rischke, Phys. Rev. C111, 044908 (2025), arXiv:2403.08669 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2025
[60]

Hernandez and P

J. Hernandez and P. Kovtun, JHEP05, 001, arXiv:1703.08757 [hep-th]

work page arXiv
[61]

Grozdanov, D

S. Grozdanov, D. M. Hofman, and N. Iqbal, Phys. Rev. D95, 096003 (2017), arXiv:1610.07392 [hep-th]

work page arXiv 2017
[62]

Grozdanov, A

S. Grozdanov, A. Lucas, and N. Poovuttikul, Phys. Rev. D99, 086012 (2019), arXiv:1810.10016 [hep-th]

work page arXiv 2019
[63]

Grozdanov and N

S. Grozdanov and N. Poovuttikul, JHEP04, 141, arXiv:1707.04182 [hep-th]

work page arXiv
[64]

A. K. Panda, A. Dash, R. Biswas, and V. Roy, JHEP03, 216, arXiv:2011.01606 [nucl-th]

work page arXiv 2011
[65]

A. K. Panda, A. Dash, R. Biswas, and V. Roy, Phys. Rev. D104, 054004 (2021), arXiv:2104.12179 [nucl-th]

work page arXiv 2021
[66]

G. S. Denicol, X.-G. Huang, E. Moln´ ar, G. M. Monteiro, H. Niemi, J. Noronha, D. H. Rischke, and Q. Wang, Phys. Rev. D98, 076009 (2018), arXiv:1804.05210 [nucl-th]

work page arXiv 2018
[67]

G. S. Denicol, E. Moln´ ar, H. Niemi, and D. H. Rischke, Phys. Rev. D99, 056017 (2019), arXiv:1902.01699 [nucl- th]

work page arXiv 2019
[68]

Kushwah, G

K. Kushwah, G. S. Denicol, and C. V. P. de Brito, Phys. Rev. D113, 036021 (2026), arXiv:2511.14787 [physics.plasm-ph]

work page arXiv 2026
[69]

S. K. Singh, M. Kurian, and V. Chandra, Phys. Rev. D 110, 014004 (2024), arXiv:2403.13160 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2024
[70]

Tiwari and B

A. Tiwari and B. K. Patra, (2025), arXiv:2512.13824 [physics.flu-dyn]

work page arXiv 2025
[71]

Biswas, A

R. Biswas, A. Dash, N. Haque, S. Pu, and V. Roy, JHEP 10, 171, arXiv:2007.05431 [nucl-th]

work page arXiv 2007
[72]

Cordeiro, E

I. Cordeiro, E. Speranza, K. Ingles, F. S. Bemfica, and J. Noronha, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 091401 (2024), arXiv:2312.09970 [astro-ph.HE]

work page arXiv 2024
[73]

Hattori, M

K. Hattori, M. Hongo, and X.-G. Huang, Symmetry14, 1851 (2022), arXiv:2207.12794 [hep-th]

work page arXiv 2022
[74]

J. W. Harris and B. M¨ uller, Eur. Phys. J. C84, 247 (2024), arXiv:2308.05743 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2024
[75]

A. K. Panda, R. Gangadharan, and V. Roy, J. Phys. G 50, 075102 (2023), arXiv:2301.00632 [nucl-th]

work page arXiv 2023
[76]

A. K. Panda, J. Phys. G52, 055102 (2025), arXiv:2501.07240 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2025
[77]

Parida, S

T. Parida, S. Chatterjee, and S. Singha, arXiv:2503.04660 [nucl-th]

work page arXiv
[78]

Bagchi, A

P. Bagchi, A. Das, A. P. Mishra, and A. K. Panda, Mod. Phys. Lett. A41, 2650051 (2026)

2026
[79]

A. K. Panda, Pooja, M. L. Sambataro, S. Plumari, and S. K. Das, (2026), arXiv:2603.09636 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2026
[80]

L. D. McLerran and T. Toimela, Phys. Rev. D31, 545 (1985)

1985

Showing first 80 references.