A Consistent Holographic Analysis of Anomaly-induced Charge Transport in the D3/D7 Model

Kensei Tanaka; Shin Nakamura

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 1 cited by

Allowing the D7-brane to rotate inside the five-sphere turns on the Wess-Zumino term and yields a dynamically determined axial chemical potential that enhances negative magnetoresistance in the D3/D7 model.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-02 20:55 UTC pith:6L6LV4PF

load-bearing objection A worthwhile scheme with a real gap: the steady-state condition that fixes μ5 conflicts with the paper's own Eq. (4.7) and footnote 7, so the central numerical claim needs a derivation before I'd rely on it. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2602.21769 v2 pith:6L6LV4PF submitted 2026-02-25 hep-th nucl-th

A Consistent Holographic Analysis of Anomaly-induced Charge Transport in the D3/D7 Model

Shin Nakamura , Kensei Tanaka This is my paper

classification hep-th nucl-th

keywords chiral anomalyD3/D7 modelholographynegative magnetoresistanceaxial chemical potentialWess-Zumino termchiral magnetic effectnon-equilibrium steady state

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper tries to establish a consistent way to include the chiral anomaly in the D3/D7 holographic model, which earlier analyses of nonlinear conductivity left out because their D7-brane ansatz did not wrap the internal five-sphere enough to activate the Wess-Zumino term. Its proposal is to let the D7-brane rotate in the X^8–X^9 plane, introducing Ψ=ωt+Φ(u); this switches on the Wess-Zumino term and promotes the axial chemical potential μ5=ω/2 from an external input to a quantity fixed dynamically by balancing anomaly-generated axial charge against its dissipation. As a demonstration, the paper recomputes the longitudinal resistivity with parallel electric and magnetic fields. It finds that a finite axial chemical potential is realized and that the negative magnetoresistance is stronger when the anomaly contribution is included, summarized in the explicit resistivity formula (4.40).

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that a consistent anomaly-aware calculation is possible in the D3/D7 model: with the rotating ansatz, the Wess-Zumino term contributes an axial-charge source E_x B_x cos^4 θ and a dissipation term proportional to μ5, and requiring the steady-state condition ∂μj5μ=0 fixes μ5 as a function of B_x, E_x, and the geometry. The resulting current has two parts, a chiral magnetic part proportional to μ5 B_x cos^4 θ(u*) and a conventional part, and the total resistivity decreases with B_x more rapidly than in the previous no-anomaly computation. In the massless limit the chiral magnetic term reproduces the standard formula j_CME = μ5 B/(2π^2).

What carries the argument

The central object is the rotating D7-brane configuration Ψ = ωt + Φ(u), with ω/2 identified as the axial chemical potential. This rotation makes the pullback of the Ramond-Ramond four-form C4 combine with F∧F, so the Wess-Zumino term w6(u)(ω a'_x + E_x Φ') is active rather than vanishing. The calculation is organized by the constants of motion C_x, C_y, C_z, C_φ, by the effective horizon u* where w1(u*) = 0, and by the conditions that the Legendre-transformed action stays real; together with the steady-state condition ∂μj5μ=0, these determine j_x and μ5.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing assumption is that balancing axial-charge production against dissipation can be imposed as a steady-state condition at the level of the conserved flux, and that the infrared endpoint supplies the dissipation term; because the flux is supposedly u-independent, this identification, not the equations themselves, is what actually fixes the axial chemical potential.

What would settle it

Compute ∂L/∂Φ′ along the numerical solutions used for Figure 2: if it is exactly u-independent, then the two boundary terms in (4.7) are equal and the equation ∂μj5μ=0 holds for any μ5, so μ5 remains undetermined and the plotted magnetoresistance would need another origin. A positive check would be to compare (4.37) with an independent calculation of the axial charge or with a probe of the boundary mass-oscillation frequency ω in a correlator.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

The no-anomaly negative magnetoresistance previously found in this model is not the full story: including anomaly effects through (4.40) gives a smaller resistivity at the same magnetic field.
A finite axial chemical potential can emerge dynamically in holographic flavor systems out of equilibrium, determined by the balance between anomaly production and dissipation rather than imposed by hand.
The same rotating-brane scheme can be used to compute other anomaly-sensitive transport coefficients, such as the chiral magnetic conductivity, in the D3/D7 model.
In the massless limit, the holographic chiral magnetic current reduces to the familiar μ5B/(2π^2) relation, connecting the calculation to analytic anomaly results.
The framework opens a route to studying nonequilibrium steady states in which both electric current and axial charge are being pumped, including possible current-driven phase transitions.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

A natural next step would be to extract the axial relaxation time from this setup and compare the holographic relation between μ5 and E·B with the weakly coupled formula n5 = τ E·B/(2π^2), which the paper does not do.
The rotating ansatz also induces a time-dependent fermion mass term m ψ̄ e^{iγ5ωt}ψ; the paper does not analyze whether this oscillating coupling modifies the steady state, and testing it would clarify the validity of the equilibrium-like interpretation.
Because the formula for the resistivity depends on the effective horizon u*, the same methods could be applied to compute magnetothermoelectric effects or to map the nonequilibrium phase boundaries in the (B_x, E_x) plane.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

A worthwhile scheme with a real gap: the steady-state condition that fixes μ5 conflicts with the paper's own Eq. (4.7) and footnote 7, so the central numerical claim needs a derivation before I'd rely on it.

read the letter

Bottom line: this is a plausible and clearly motivated extension, but the paper's central new equation — the steady-state condition that fixes μ5 — is not derived as written, and I would not trust the numerical claim until that is repaired.

What is actually new: the authors combine the rotating D7-brane ansatz from [16–19] with the D3/D7 magnetoresistance setup of [14]. Because Ψ=ωt makes the D7-brane wind the S5, the WZ term is on, and they obtain explicit expressions for jx and ρ that include both the chiral magnetic effect and a μ5-dependent correction, (4.39)–(4.40). The idea of fixing μ5 by balancing anomaly production against dissipation is physically sensible, and they deserve credit for not just inserting μ5 by hand. The numerical comparison in Fig. 2 — anomaly-enhanced negative magnetoresistance — is the expected qualitative effect.

The soft spot is the main one, and it is load-bearing. Eq. (4.7) says ∂μ j5μ equals twice the difference of ∂L/∂(∂uΨ) at the two boundaries. Footnote 7 says that quantity is conserved and u-independent. If both are right, the difference is identically zero. But §4.2 identifies ∂μ j5μ with 2N C̃φ, a generically nonzero conserved constant, and then imposes ∂μ j5μ=0 to solve for μ5, giving (4.37). Those statements cannot all be true. Unless the IR flux is explicitly treated as the dissipation term and the boundary difference is reinterpreted — which the text does not do — (4.37) is an extra condition imposed rather than a consequence of the equations of motion. Since μ5 enters u*, and u* enters ρ, Fig. 2 rests on this.

There are smaller issues: the m ψbar e^{iγ5ωt}ψ mass term is noted but its effect on the Ward identity is not analyzed; and the θ equation and shooting details are omitted, so Figs. 1 and 2 cannot be reproduced from the text. The citation pattern looks fair; the reliance on [18] for Ψ=ωt ↔ μ5 is standard, not circular.

If I were the editor, I would still send this to a referee, not desk reject, because the scheme and the direction are worth careful scrutiny. The referee report should center on one request: derive the steady-state condition cleanly, either by showing that the UV flux alone is the divergence or by relaxing the footnote claim. If that can be fixed, this becomes a useful paper for people working on anomalous transport in probe-brane models.

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper addresses the omission of the chiral anomaly in previous D3/D7 computations of magnetoresistance. It proposes a rotating brane ansatz Ψ=ωt+Φ(u) so that the Wess-Zumino term is active, introduces an axial chemical potential μ5=ω/2, computes nonlinear conductivity with parallel electric and magnetic fields, and determines μ5 by imposing the steady-state condition ∂μj5μ=0. The resulting resistivity (4.40) is evaluated numerically and compared with the no-anomaly result of [14]; the authors report that the anomaly contribution enhances the negative magnetoresistance (Fig. 2).

Significance. If the derivation were sound, this would be a substantial advance: it would give a top-down holographic model in which the anomaly contribution to magnetoresistance is not inserted by hand but follows from the Wess-Zumino action, and it would provide explicit analytic formulas (4.35)-(4.40) that can be compared with other holographic models and with phenomenological chiral transport. The paper is also commendable for separating the anomaly-driven current from the Ohmic contribution. However, the central derivation currently contains an unresolved contradiction in the identification of ∂μj5μ, and the time-dependent boundary source introduced by the rotating ansatz is not fully controlled. Until those issues are settled, the numerical prediction in Fig. 2 cannot be regarded as established.

major comments (3)

[§4.1–4.2, Eqs. (4.7), (4.15), (4.36)-(4.37)] Eq. (4.7) defines ∂μj5μ as 2[∂L/∂(∂uΨ)|_{u=0} − ∂L/∂(∂uΨ)|_{u=uIR}], and the text immediately after it states that ∂L/∂(∂uΨ) is the flow of axial charge; footnote 7 then says this quantity is a conserved quantity independent of u. If both statements are correct, the right-hand side of (4.7) vanishes identically. Yet Section 4.2 identifies ∂μj5μ with 2N \tilde C_φ, where \tilde C_φ is precisely the u-independent conserved quantity (4.15), and then imposes ∂μj5μ=0 to determine μ5 in (4.37). This is internally inconsistent: vanishing of an identically zero expression cannot fix μ5. The paper does not identify a separate IR flux or dissipation term that would reconcile the two expressions. Since μ5 enters the resistivity through (4.39)-(4.40) and Fig. 2, the central quantitative claim is unsupported unless this Ward-identity/current-divergence issue is resolved.
[§4.1, after Eq. (4.3)] The rotating ansatz Ψ=ωt produces a time-dependent boundary source, acknowledged as the mass term m \bar ψ e^{iγ5ωt}ψ. The bulk configuration is not static in the usual sense, and the steady-state condition ∂μj5μ=0 requires a notion of stationarity or time-averaging that is not provided. The paper should demonstrate that the relevant one-point functions are time-independent, or define the averaging procedure; otherwise the interpretation of μ5=ω/2 as a constant axial chemical potential and the extraction of DC resistivity remain ambiguous.
[§4.1, Eq. (4.5)] The definition jμ5 = 2∫du ∂L/∂(∂μΨ) is not derived from the standard GKP-Witten prescription. In the adopted ansatz the action does not contain ∂μΨ for μ=t,x,y,z as a variational derivative; the axial charge is conjugate to ω/2, not to a boundary value of ∂μΨ. A careful derivation of (4.5) is needed before it can be used to obtain (4.7). This issue is related to the first major comment, but it is worth stating separately because Eq. (4.5) is the starting point of the divergence analysis.

minor comments (3)

[§4.2, Eq. (4.38)] The explicit expression for u* is presented without derivation after (4.37). Since u* is central to the self-consistent solution, a derivation or an appendix should be provided.
[§4.3, numerical procedure] The shooting description says one extracts data where both m and Ex lie within a specified tolerance. Since Ex is an input parameter, the meaning of 'Ex falls within tolerance' is unclear and should be clarified.
[Footnote 7 and §4.1] The statement that 'the choice of uIR does not affect the subsequent discussions' because ∂L/∂(∂uΨ) is u-independent already implies that the boundary term in (4.7) vanishes. This is not a harmless remark; it is the source of the contradiction raised in Major Comment 1 and should be flagged in the revised text.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

The steady-state condition used to fix μ5 is vacuous by the paper's own Eq. (4.7) and footnote 7; the non-trivial μ5 is imposed via an inconsistent identification.

specific steps

self definitional [Section 4.1, Eq. (4.7) and footnote 7; Section 4.2, Eqs. (4.15), (4.36), (4.37)]
"(4.7): ∂_μj_5^μ = 2 [∂L/∂(∂_uΨ)|_{u=0} − ∂L/∂(∂_uΨ)|_{u=uIR}] ... [footnote 7] ∂L/∂(∂_uΨ) is a conserved quantity independent of u. ... We found that \tilde C_φ is related to ∂_μJ_5^μ in (4.7), and we identify ∂_μJ_5^μ = 2N\tilde C_φ. ... By imposing a steady-state condition ∂_μj_5^μ = 0 on (4.36) ... we obtain μ_5 = ..."

If ∂L/∂(∂_uΨ) is u-independent, the RHS of (4.7) vanishes identically, so the steady-state condition is automatically satisfied and cannot fix μ5. The paper nevertheless identifies ∂_μj_5^μ with 2N\tilde C_φ, i.e. with the same conserved canonical momentum, turning it into a non-trivial equation (4.36); setting this to zero is an extra boundary condition on a constant of motion, not a consequence of the Ward identity or the action. Therefore μ5 in (4.37) is an input imposed by the identification, not a derived prediction. Since μ5 enters the resistivity (4.40) and controls the anomaly enhancement in Fig. 2, the central claim reduces by construction to this unproven condition.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation fails a consistency check that is visible inside the manuscript itself. Eq. (4.7) defines the axial-current divergence as a difference of radial canonical momenta at the two ends of the bulk, and footnote 7 states that this canonical momentum is independent of u, making that difference vanish identically. Yet §4.2 identifies ∂_μj_5^μ with 2N\tilde C_φ, which is the same conserved momentum, and then uses ∂_μj_5^μ=0 as a non-trivial equation to fix μ5 (4.37). This is a self-definitional circular step: the condition used to determine μ5 is already satisfied by construction, so the finite value of μ5 is an extra boundary condition rather than a dynamically derived quantity. Because μ5 directly enters the resistivity (4.40) and drives the claimed anomaly-enhanced negative magnetoresistance (Fig. 2), the central numerical claim rests on this unproven identification. The calculation is otherwise largely self-contained: no parameters are fitted to external data, the WZ term is included from the action, and the comparison with the no-anomaly result [14] is an external benchmark. The rotating-brane/μ5 dictionary is taken from [17,18], but those are independent prior works, not self-citations. The acknowledged time-dependent mass term mψbar e^{iγ5ωt}ψ (after Eq. 4.3) is an additional unanalyzed limitation, but it is not itself a circular step.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 6 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central result rests on standard holographic inputs (N_c≫1, probe brane) and on domain-specific identifications from prior work (rotating Ψ ↔ μ5), plus one ad-hoc step (identifying the divergence with C~φ) that is the weakest point.

free parameters (1)

θ(u*) (shooting parameter) = not tabulated; adjusted numerically to match m=0.3 and E_x
The final resistivity (4.40) depends on θ(u*); the paper determines it by shooting the θ EOM but does not give the EOM, the horizon condition for θ'(u*), or the matching tolerance.

axioms (6)

domain assumption AdS/CFT correspondence and probe approximation: N=4 SYM as a heat bath and the D7-brane as the flavor sector, valid for N_c≫1 and λ≫1.
Invoked in Section 3.1 to justify using classical D7-brane action in the fixed AdS-Schwarzschild background.
domain assumption Holographic dictionary: expectation values of currents are read from the u^2 coefficients of the bulk gauge fields (GKP-Witten), Eqs. (3.16)-(3.17) and (4.16)-(4.19).
Used to identify integration constants with jx, jy, jz and with ∂μj5μ.
domain assumption U(1)_R rotation in the X8-X9 plane is the U(1)_A axial symmetry, and Ψ=ωt sources the axial chemical potential μ5=ω/2.
Taken from [17,18]; used in Section 4.1 to interpret the rotating D7-brane ansatz.
ad hoc to paper The Wess-Zumino term with P[C4] switches on when Ψ=ωt+Φ(u), and the resulting ∂μj5μ expression (4.36) is the correct operator-level anomaly/dissipation balance.
This identification is the paper's own scheme; it is not reconciled with the boundary-term formula (4.7) and is the load-bearing step for fixing μ5.
standard math Existence and regularity of the Legendre-transformed action: reality selects u* and conditions (4.26)-(4.27) and (4.34).
The reality conditions are the technical core of the derivation in Section 4.2.
domain assumption The numerical θ(u) equation of motion has a unique solution for given (E_x, B_x, m), with θ(u*) as a shooting parameter.
Assumed implicitly in Section 4.3; the equation itself and the horizon boundary condition are not displayed.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 14264 in / 24735 out tokens · 229915 ms · 2026-08-02T20:55:44.568306+00:00 · methodology

0 comments

read the original abstract

We propose a scheme to correctly incorporate the contribution of the chiral anomaly in the D3/D7 model to calculate chiral transport phenomena. To ensure the D7-brane wraps S^5 appropriately and the Wess-Zumino term is switched on, we allow the D7-brane to rotate in the compactified extra directions and perform the analysis accordingly. To demonstrate that this calculation procedure works well, we specifically compute the magnetoresistance in the D3/D7 model. We find that a finite axial chemical potential is realized and the negative magnetoresistance is enhanced by the anomaly contribution.

discussion (0)

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

Nonlinear response of the chiral magnetic effect in the D3/D7 holographic model
hep-th 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 4.0

Near the insulating-CME phase boundary in the D3/D7 model, the chiral magnetic current shows multi-valued dependence on magnetic field strength, while axial chemical potential and magnetic field cooperatively stabiliz...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

43 extracted references · 36 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

[1]

Son and B.Z

D.T. Son and B.Z. Spivak,Chiral Anomaly and Classical Negative Magnetoresistance of Weyl Metals,Phys. Rev. B88(2013) 104412 [1206.1627]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013
[2]

Adler,Axial-vector vertex in spinor electrodynamics,Phys

S.L. Adler,Axial-vector vertex in spinor electrodynamics,Phys. Rev.177(1969) 2426

1969
[3]

Bell and R

J.S. Bell and R. Jackiw,A PCAC puzzle:π 0 →γγin theσmodel,Nuovo Cim. A60(1969) 47

1969
[4]

Q. Li, D.E. Kharzeev, C. Zhang, Y. Huang, I. Pletikosic, A.V. Fedorov et al.,Observation of the chiral magnetic effect in ZrTe5,Nature Phys.12(2016) 550 [1412.6543]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016
[5]

Huang et al.,Observation of the Chiral-Anomaly-Induced Negative Magnetoresistance in 3D Weyl Semimetal TaAs,Phys

X. Huang et al.,Observation of the Chiral-Anomaly-Induced Negative Magnetoresistance in 3D Weyl Semimetal TaAs,Phys. Rev. X5(2015) 031023 [1503.01304]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015
[6]

Reis, M.O

R.D.d. Reis, M.O. Ajeesh, N. Kumar, F. Arnold, C. Shekhar, M. Naumann et al.,On the search for the chiral anomaly in weyl semimetals: the negative longitudinal magnetoresistance,New Journal of Physics18(2016) 085006. – 16 –

2016
[7]

Ong and S

N.P. Ong and S. Liang,Review of experiments on the chiral anomaly in Dirac-Weyl semimetals,Nature Rev. Phys.3(2021) 394 [2010.08564]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021
[8]

Nielsen and M

H.B. Nielsen and M. Ninomiya,The Adler-Bell-Jackiw anomaly and Weyl fermions in a crystal,Phys. Lett. B130(1983) 389

1983
[9]

Vilenkin,Equilibrium parity-violating current in a magnetic field,Phys

A. Vilenkin,Equilibrium parity-violating current in a magnetic field,Phys. Rev. D22(1980) 3080

1980
[10]

Fukushima, D.E

K. Fukushima, D.E. Kharzeev and H.J. Warringa,The Chiral Magnetic Effect,Phys. Rev. D 78(2008) 074033 [0808.3382]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008
[11]

Maldacena,The LargeNlimit of superconformal field theories and supergravity,Adv

J.M. Maldacena,The LargeNlimit of superconformal field theories and supergravity,Adv. Theor. Math. Phys.2(1998) 231 [hep-th/9711200]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998
[12]

Gubser, I.R

S.S. Gubser, I.R. Klebanov and A.M. Polyakov,Gauge theory correlators from noncritical string theory,Phys. Lett. B428(1998) 105 [hep-th/9802109]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998
[13]

Witten,Anti de Sitter space and holography,Adv

E. Witten,Anti de Sitter space and holography,Adv. Theor. Math. Phys.2(1998) 253 [hep-th/9802150]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998
[14]

Ammon, T.H

M. Ammon, T.H. Ngo and A. O’Bannon,Holographic Flavor Transport in Arbitrary Constant Background Fields,JHEP10(2009) 027 [0908.2625]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009
[15]

Baumgartner, A

A. Baumgartner, A. Karch and A. Lucas,Magnetoresistance in relativistic hydrodynamics without anomalies,JHEP06(2017) 054 [1704.01592]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017
[16]

O’Bannon,Toward a Holographic Model of Superconducting Fermions,JHEP01(2009) 074 [0811.0198]

A. O’Bannon,Toward a Holographic Model of Superconducting Fermions,JHEP01(2009) 074 [0811.0198]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009
[17]

S.R. Das, T. Nishioka and T. Takayanagi,Probe Branes, Time-dependent Couplings and Thermalization in AdS/CFT,JHEP07(2010) 071 [1005.3348]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010
[18]

Hoyos, T

C. Hoyos, T. Nishioka and A. O’Bannon,A Chiral Magnetic Effect from AdS/CFT with Flavor,JHEP10(2011) 084 [1106.4030]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011
[19]

Guo and S

E.-d. Guo and S. Lin,Quark mass effect on axial charge dynamics,Phys. Rev. D93(2016) 105001 [1602.03952]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016
[20]

Sakai and S

T. Sakai and S. Sugimoto,Low energy hadron physics in holographic QCD,Prog. Theor. Phys.113(2005) 843 [hep-th/0412141]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005
[21]

Sakai and S

T. Sakai and S. Sugimoto,More on a holographic dual of QCD,Prog. Theor. Phys.114 (2005) 1083 [hep-th/0507073]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005
[22]

Fukushima and A

K. Fukushima and A. Okutsu,Electric conductivity with the magnetic field and the chiral anomaly in a holographic QCD model,Phys. Rev. D105(2022) 054016 [2106.07968]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022
[23]

Landsteiner, Y

K. Landsteiner, Y. Liu and Y.-W. Sun,Negative magnetoresistivity in chiral fluids and holography,JHEP03(2015) 127 [1410.6399]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015
[24]

Jimenez-Alba, K

A. Jimenez-Alba, K. Landsteiner and L. Melgar,Anomalous magnetoresponse and the St¨ uckelberg axion in holography,Phys. Rev. D90(2014) 126004 [1407.8162]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014
[25]

Jimenez-Alba, K

A. Jimenez-Alba, K. Landsteiner, Y. Liu and Y.-W. Sun,Anomalous magnetoconductivity and relaxation times in holography,JHEP07(2015) 117 [1504.06566]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015
[26]

Sun and Q

Y.-W. Sun and Q. Yang,Negative magnetoresistivity in holography,JHEP09(2016) 122 [1603.02624]. – 17 –

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016
[27]

Gorbar, V.A

E.V. Gorbar, V.A. Miransky, I.A. Shovkovy and P.O. Sukhachov,Electronic properties of Dirac and Weyl semimetals, World Scientific (2021)

2021
[28]

Landsteiner,Notes on Anomaly Induced Transport,Acta Phys

K. Landsteiner,Notes on Anomaly Induced Transport,Acta Phys. Polon. B47(2016) 2617 [1610.04413]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016
[29]

Fukushima, D.E

K. Fukushima, D.E. Kharzeev and H.J. Warringa,Chiral magnetic effect,Phys. Rev. D78 (2008) 074033

2008
[30]

Karch and E

A. Karch and E. Katz,Adding flavor to AdS / CFT,JHEP06(2002) 043 [hep-th/0205236]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002
[31]

Kobayashi, D

S. Kobayashi, D. Mateos, S. Matsuura, R.C. Myers and R.M. Thomson,Holographic phase transitions at finite baryon density,JHEP02(2007) 016 [hep-th/0611099]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007
[32]

Karch and A

A. Karch and A. O’Bannon,Metallic AdS/CFT,JHEP09(2007) 024 [0705.3870]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007
[33]

Bitaghsir Fadafan, A

K. Bitaghsir Fadafan, A. O’Bannon, R. Rodgers and M. Russell,A Weyl semimetal from AdS/CFT with flavour,JHEP04(2021) 162 [2012.11434]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021
[34]

Kharzeev and H.-U

D.E. Kharzeev and H.-U. Yee,Chiral helix in AdS/CFT with flavor,Phys. Rev. D84(2011) 125011 [1109.0533]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011
[35]

Nakamura,Nonequilibrium Phase Transitions and Nonequilibrium Critical Point from AdS/CFT,Phys

S. Nakamura,Nonequilibrium Phase Transitions and Nonequilibrium Critical Point from AdS/CFT,Phys. Rev. Lett.109(2012) 120602 [1204.1971]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012
[36]

Ali-Akbari and A

M. Ali-Akbari and A. Vahedi,Non-equilibrium Phase Transition from AdS/CFT,Nucl. Phys. B877(2013) 95 [1305.3713]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013
[37]

Matsumoto and S

M. Matsumoto and S. Nakamura,Critical Exponents of Nonequilibrium Phase Transitions in AdS/CFT Correspondence,Phys. Rev. D98(2018) 106027 [1804.10124]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018
[38]

Vahedi and M

A. Vahedi and M. Shakeri,Non-Equilibrium Critical Phenomena From Probe Brane Holography in Schr¨ odinger Spacetime,JHEP01(2019) 047 [1811.05823]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019
[39]

Imaizumi, M

T. Imaizumi, M. Matsumoto and S. Nakamura,Current Driven Tricritical Point in Large- Nc Gauge Theory,Phys. Rev. Lett.124(2020) 191603 [1911.06262]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020
[40]

Matsumoto and S

M. Matsumoto and S. Nakamura,Current-induced inverse symmetry breaking and asymmetric critical phenomena at current-driven tricritical point,Phys. Rev. D106(2022) 026006 [2201.06894]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022
[41]

D. Endo, Y. Fukazawa, M. Matsumoto and S. Nakamura,Electric-field driven nonequilibrium phase transitions in AdS/CFT,JHEP03(2023) 173 [2302.13535]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023
[42]

Nakamura and F

S. Nakamura and F. Okabayashi,Proper effective temperature and order parameters in relativistic non-equilibrium steady states,JHEP08(2025) 069 [2502.19157]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025
[43]

Hoshino and S

H. Hoshino and S. Nakamura,Proper effective temperature of nonequilibrium steady state, PTEP2020(2020) 093B09 [1807.10132]. – 18 –

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

[1] [1]

Son and B.Z

D.T. Son and B.Z. Spivak,Chiral Anomaly and Classical Negative Magnetoresistance of Weyl Metals,Phys. Rev. B88(2013) 104412 [1206.1627]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

[2] [2]

Adler,Axial-vector vertex in spinor electrodynamics,Phys

S.L. Adler,Axial-vector vertex in spinor electrodynamics,Phys. Rev.177(1969) 2426

1969

[3] [3]

Bell and R

J.S. Bell and R. Jackiw,A PCAC puzzle:π 0 →γγin theσmodel,Nuovo Cim. A60(1969) 47

1969

[4] [4]

Q. Li, D.E. Kharzeev, C. Zhang, Y. Huang, I. Pletikosic, A.V. Fedorov et al.,Observation of the chiral magnetic effect in ZrTe5,Nature Phys.12(2016) 550 [1412.6543]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

[5] [5]

Huang et al.,Observation of the Chiral-Anomaly-Induced Negative Magnetoresistance in 3D Weyl Semimetal TaAs,Phys

X. Huang et al.,Observation of the Chiral-Anomaly-Induced Negative Magnetoresistance in 3D Weyl Semimetal TaAs,Phys. Rev. X5(2015) 031023 [1503.01304]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

[6] [6]

Reis, M.O

R.D.d. Reis, M.O. Ajeesh, N. Kumar, F. Arnold, C. Shekhar, M. Naumann et al.,On the search for the chiral anomaly in weyl semimetals: the negative longitudinal magnetoresistance,New Journal of Physics18(2016) 085006. – 16 –

2016

[7] [7]

Ong and S

N.P. Ong and S. Liang,Review of experiments on the chiral anomaly in Dirac-Weyl semimetals,Nature Rev. Phys.3(2021) 394 [2010.08564]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

[8] [8]

Nielsen and M

H.B. Nielsen and M. Ninomiya,The Adler-Bell-Jackiw anomaly and Weyl fermions in a crystal,Phys. Lett. B130(1983) 389

1983

[9] [9]

Vilenkin,Equilibrium parity-violating current in a magnetic field,Phys

A. Vilenkin,Equilibrium parity-violating current in a magnetic field,Phys. Rev. D22(1980) 3080

1980

[10] [10]

Fukushima, D.E

K. Fukushima, D.E. Kharzeev and H.J. Warringa,The Chiral Magnetic Effect,Phys. Rev. D 78(2008) 074033 [0808.3382]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

[11] [11]

Maldacena,The LargeNlimit of superconformal field theories and supergravity,Adv

J.M. Maldacena,The LargeNlimit of superconformal field theories and supergravity,Adv. Theor. Math. Phys.2(1998) 231 [hep-th/9711200]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

[12] [12]

Gubser, I.R

S.S. Gubser, I.R. Klebanov and A.M. Polyakov,Gauge theory correlators from noncritical string theory,Phys. Lett. B428(1998) 105 [hep-th/9802109]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

[13] [13]

Witten,Anti de Sitter space and holography,Adv

E. Witten,Anti de Sitter space and holography,Adv. Theor. Math. Phys.2(1998) 253 [hep-th/9802150]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

[14] [14]

Ammon, T.H

M. Ammon, T.H. Ngo and A. O’Bannon,Holographic Flavor Transport in Arbitrary Constant Background Fields,JHEP10(2009) 027 [0908.2625]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

[15] [15]

Baumgartner, A

A. Baumgartner, A. Karch and A. Lucas,Magnetoresistance in relativistic hydrodynamics without anomalies,JHEP06(2017) 054 [1704.01592]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

[16] [16]

O’Bannon,Toward a Holographic Model of Superconducting Fermions,JHEP01(2009) 074 [0811.0198]

A. O’Bannon,Toward a Holographic Model of Superconducting Fermions,JHEP01(2009) 074 [0811.0198]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

[17] [17]

S.R. Das, T. Nishioka and T. Takayanagi,Probe Branes, Time-dependent Couplings and Thermalization in AdS/CFT,JHEP07(2010) 071 [1005.3348]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

[18] [18]

Hoyos, T

C. Hoyos, T. Nishioka and A. O’Bannon,A Chiral Magnetic Effect from AdS/CFT with Flavor,JHEP10(2011) 084 [1106.4030]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

[19] [19]

Guo and S

E.-d. Guo and S. Lin,Quark mass effect on axial charge dynamics,Phys. Rev. D93(2016) 105001 [1602.03952]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

[20] [20]

Sakai and S

T. Sakai and S. Sugimoto,Low energy hadron physics in holographic QCD,Prog. Theor. Phys.113(2005) 843 [hep-th/0412141]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

[21] [21]

Sakai and S

T. Sakai and S. Sugimoto,More on a holographic dual of QCD,Prog. Theor. Phys.114 (2005) 1083 [hep-th/0507073]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

[22] [22]

Fukushima and A

K. Fukushima and A. Okutsu,Electric conductivity with the magnetic field and the chiral anomaly in a holographic QCD model,Phys. Rev. D105(2022) 054016 [2106.07968]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

[23] [23]

Landsteiner, Y

K. Landsteiner, Y. Liu and Y.-W. Sun,Negative magnetoresistivity in chiral fluids and holography,JHEP03(2015) 127 [1410.6399]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

[24] [24]

Jimenez-Alba, K

A. Jimenez-Alba, K. Landsteiner and L. Melgar,Anomalous magnetoresponse and the St¨ uckelberg axion in holography,Phys. Rev. D90(2014) 126004 [1407.8162]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

[25] [25]

Jimenez-Alba, K

A. Jimenez-Alba, K. Landsteiner, Y. Liu and Y.-W. Sun,Anomalous magnetoconductivity and relaxation times in holography,JHEP07(2015) 117 [1504.06566]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

[26] [26]

Sun and Q

Y.-W. Sun and Q. Yang,Negative magnetoresistivity in holography,JHEP09(2016) 122 [1603.02624]. – 17 –

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

[27] [27]

Gorbar, V.A

E.V. Gorbar, V.A. Miransky, I.A. Shovkovy and P.O. Sukhachov,Electronic properties of Dirac and Weyl semimetals, World Scientific (2021)

2021

[28] [28]

Landsteiner,Notes on Anomaly Induced Transport,Acta Phys

K. Landsteiner,Notes on Anomaly Induced Transport,Acta Phys. Polon. B47(2016) 2617 [1610.04413]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

[29] [29]

Fukushima, D.E

K. Fukushima, D.E. Kharzeev and H.J. Warringa,Chiral magnetic effect,Phys. Rev. D78 (2008) 074033

2008

[30] [30]

Karch and E

A. Karch and E. Katz,Adding flavor to AdS / CFT,JHEP06(2002) 043 [hep-th/0205236]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

[31] [31]

Kobayashi, D

S. Kobayashi, D. Mateos, S. Matsuura, R.C. Myers and R.M. Thomson,Holographic phase transitions at finite baryon density,JHEP02(2007) 016 [hep-th/0611099]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

[32] [32]

Karch and A

A. Karch and A. O’Bannon,Metallic AdS/CFT,JHEP09(2007) 024 [0705.3870]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

[33] [33]

Bitaghsir Fadafan, A

K. Bitaghsir Fadafan, A. O’Bannon, R. Rodgers and M. Russell,A Weyl semimetal from AdS/CFT with flavour,JHEP04(2021) 162 [2012.11434]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

[34] [34]

Kharzeev and H.-U

D.E. Kharzeev and H.-U. Yee,Chiral helix in AdS/CFT with flavor,Phys. Rev. D84(2011) 125011 [1109.0533]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

[35] [35]

Nakamura,Nonequilibrium Phase Transitions and Nonequilibrium Critical Point from AdS/CFT,Phys

S. Nakamura,Nonequilibrium Phase Transitions and Nonequilibrium Critical Point from AdS/CFT,Phys. Rev. Lett.109(2012) 120602 [1204.1971]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

[36] [36]

Ali-Akbari and A

M. Ali-Akbari and A. Vahedi,Non-equilibrium Phase Transition from AdS/CFT,Nucl. Phys. B877(2013) 95 [1305.3713]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

[37] [37]

Matsumoto and S

M. Matsumoto and S. Nakamura,Critical Exponents of Nonequilibrium Phase Transitions in AdS/CFT Correspondence,Phys. Rev. D98(2018) 106027 [1804.10124]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

[38] [38]

Vahedi and M

A. Vahedi and M. Shakeri,Non-Equilibrium Critical Phenomena From Probe Brane Holography in Schr¨ odinger Spacetime,JHEP01(2019) 047 [1811.05823]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

[39] [39]

Imaizumi, M

T. Imaizumi, M. Matsumoto and S. Nakamura,Current Driven Tricritical Point in Large- Nc Gauge Theory,Phys. Rev. Lett.124(2020) 191603 [1911.06262]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

[40] [40]

Matsumoto and S

M. Matsumoto and S. Nakamura,Current-induced inverse symmetry breaking and asymmetric critical phenomena at current-driven tricritical point,Phys. Rev. D106(2022) 026006 [2201.06894]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

[41] [41]

D. Endo, Y. Fukazawa, M. Matsumoto and S. Nakamura,Electric-field driven nonequilibrium phase transitions in AdS/CFT,JHEP03(2023) 173 [2302.13535]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

[42] [42]

Nakamura and F

S. Nakamura and F. Okabayashi,Proper effective temperature and order parameters in relativistic non-equilibrium steady states,JHEP08(2025) 069 [2502.19157]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

[43] [43]

Hoshino and S

H. Hoshino and S. Nakamura,Proper effective temperature of nonequilibrium steady state, PTEP2020(2020) 093B09 [1807.10132]. – 18 –

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020