Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 50 references

Electromagnetic Probes of the Quantum Chromodynamical Plasma

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This review argues that electromagnetic radiation from the quark-gluon plasma should be included in Bayesian model-to-data comparisons alongside hadronic and jet observables to constrain transport coefficients such as viscosity and…

desk verdict A competent review-and-outlook of EM probes for QGP Bayesian inference, with no new results; worth refereeing only as a review, not as a research paper. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.19868 v2 pith:F3TPNYG3 submitted 2024-11-29 nucl-th hep-ph

Gojko Vujanovic This is my paper · ORCID
classification nucl-thhep-ph PACS 25.75.-q25.75.Nq
keywords quark-gluonplasmaelectromagneticprobesdileptonsphotonstransportcoefficientsBayesianmodel-to-datacomparisonviscoushydrodynamicschiralsymmetryrestoration
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This review argues that electromagnetic radiation—photons and dileptons—is a uniquely direct probe of the quark-gluon plasma because, once produced, it leaves the medium nearly unaltered. The paper surveys recent theory: next-to-leading-order perturbative rates, lattice calculations of the electromagnetic spectral function, and viscous-hydrodynamic corrections that encode shear and bulk viscosity. Its central forward claim is that the next major step is Bayesian model-to-data comparisons that fit EM radiation together with hadronic and jet observables, constraining transport coefficients such as the specific shear viscosity and the jet transport coefficient $\hat{q}$. A sympathetic reader would care because such multi-messenger fits could also settle whether chiral symmetry is restored near the QCD transition and where the equation of state changes.

What carries the argument

The central object is the finite-temperature electromagnetic spectral function $\Pi_{\rm EM}(q,T)$, whose imaginary part fixes both real- and virtual-photon emission rates through Eq. (1). The paper's key methodological tool is the viscous-hydrodynamic multipole expansion: replace equilibrium distributions by $f^{(0)} + \delta f$, where $\delta f$ is a monopole deformation (bulk viscosity) plus a quadrupole deformation (shear viscosity), obtained from two standard kinetic-theory closures. This expansion is what lets theory connect measured photon and dilepton spectra to transport coefficients. A second load-bearing element is the comparison between next-to-leading-order perturbative and lattice computations of the spectral function, used to validate the equilibrium rates.

What would settle it

Compute photon and dilepton spectra from identical initial conditions using both full Boltzmann transport and viscous hydrodynamics with $\delta f$ closures, at conditions spanning the collision energies used in Bayesian fits; if the two predictions differ by more than the stated theoretical uncertainties in the momentum ranges that drive the fits, the closure assumption is violated.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims, on the strength of recent computations, that EM emission rates are now well enough understood—in thermal equilibrium via next-to-leading-order perturbative QCD and lattice QCD, and away from equilibrium via multipole $\delta f$ expansions—that photons and dileptons can act as thermometers, viscometers, and probes of jet-medium coupling. Its proposed next step is an integrated Bayesian analysis combining EM probes with soft hadronic and jet observables to quantify QGP transport coefficients, with theoretical systematic uncertainties in $\delta f$ closures explicitly included. In the same framework, Bayesian model selection would use dilepton data to discriminate whether calculations that include chiral symmetry restoration explain the low-mass spectrum better than those that do not.

Load-bearing premise

The paper's load-bearing premise is that off-equilibrium corrections to EM emission rates are accurately captured by the viscous-hydrodynamic multipole $\delta f$ closures; if those closures misrepresent the true momentum-space deformations, the transport coefficients extracted from Bayesian fits would be systematically biased.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If Bayesian fits include EM probes, constraints on shear and bulk viscosity of QGP matter should tighten considerably because photons and dileptons sample the full medium evolution.
  • Dilepton spectra in the intermediate invariant-mass range and their anisotropic flow should provide an independent handle on the jet transport coefficient $\hat{q}$, complementing jet-quenching measurements.
  • Low-mass dilepton measurements combined with Bayesian model selection can give a quantitative verdict on whether chiral symmetry restoration is needed to explain the data.
  • At lower collision energies, where hydrodynamics is less reliable, Boltzmann transport calculations of EM emission will become the primary source of predictions for the upcoming experiments.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same $\delta f$ closures carry hidden model uncertainty; a genuinely robust Bayesian fit would treat the choice of closure as a nuisance parameter rather than assuming one is correct.
  • Because the EM spectral function is a universal object, constraints from heavy-ion dileptons may transfer to other QCD environments such as neutron star mergers or early-universe conditions.
  • Photon and dilepton anisotropic flow may be combined to separate shear from bulk viscous effects, a discriminating power that hadronic observables alone do not offer.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. This paper is a concise review of recent theory and phenomenological developments concerning electromagnetic probes of the quark-gluon plasma. After introducing the relation between the EM spectral function and photon/dilepton rates, the author summarizes progress on NLO pQCD rates, lattice QCD comparisons, chiral symmetry restoration in spectral functions, and the extension of emission rates to include off-equilibrium corrections via Grad 14-moment and Chapman-Enskog closures. The phenomenological section discusses photon/dilepton thermometry and viscometry, sensitivity to the equation of state, dynamical quark production, jet-medium photon and dilepton production, and the role of Boltzmann transport at lower beam energies. The paper concludes with an outlook advocating Bayesian model-to-data comparisons that combine EM observables with hadronic and jet observables to constrain QGP transport coefficients.

Significance. As a review, the paper serves as a useful and accessible entry point to a broad and active literature. Its strengths are that it quotes the standard rate formulas correctly, cites key recent works (NLO pQCD, lattice QCD, JETSCAPE, Bayesian jet quenching), and identifies a plausible and important future direction in multi-messenger Bayesian analyses. The paper does not contain original calculations, and its central claim is an outlook; the main risk to that claim is the unquantified systematic uncertainty associated with δf closures, which the paper mentions in Section 4 but does not assess quantitatively in Sections 2.2 and 3. With targeted additions addressing that uncertainty, the review would be suitable for publication.

major comments (3)
  1. [§2.2 and §3] The claim in Section 3 that 'the overall off-equilibrium effects on photon production can be well captured by dissipative hydrodynamics' is supported only by the single hybrid calculation of Ref. [41], which concerns high-energy photons. Section 2.2 presents two different δf closures (Grad 14-moment and Chapman-Enskog) without quantitative comparison of the resulting photon and dilepton rates, and without discussing how scheme differences would propagate into Bayesian posterior estimates for η/s, ζ/s, or q̂. The paper concedes in Section 4 that theoretical systematic uncertainties such as those associated with δf calculations must be included, but it does not follow through by assessing or bounding them earlier. Because the central outlook is that Bayesian analyses of EM observables will yield robust transport-coefficient constraints, this closure-systematic is load-bearing. Please add a quantitative comparison or explicitly state the current magnitude of the scheme dependence and its implications for the proposed Bayesian program.
  2. [§3] The sentence 'a recent calculation [40] has shown that about 30% of photons in the 5 ≲ pT ≲ 8 GeV' is incomplete and unverifiable as written. Please complete the statement—presumably indicating the fraction of the photon yield arising from jet-medium interactions—and specify the kinematic and observable definition (e.g., direct photons, inclusive photons, central collisions) so that the result can be checked against the cited work.
  3. [§4] The Bayesian outlook in the conclusions would be more convincing if the paper briefly reviewed what already exists (or does not exist) in the way of Bayesian analyses of EM observables and what specific technical challenges must be overcome, such as correlated theoretical rate uncertainties, priors on normalization factors, and the treatment of model discrepancy for the δf closure. Without this, the statement that such an analysis is 'anticipated' is more speculative than the rest of the review warrants.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Throughout] There are numerous typographical errors, including 'guardupole' (should be 'quadrupole'), 'Funcional' (Functional), 'pseudo-critial' (pseudo-critical), 'plamsa' (plasma), 'vitrual' (virtual), 'perhaphs' (perhaps), and 'hardronic' (hadronic). These should be corrected before publication.
  2. [Title and affiliation] The title and author affiliation contain spurious spaces ('Pla sma', 'W ascana'); please check the source file and remove the unintended breaks.
  3. [Eq. (2)] Equation (2) contains a double multiplication sign and a somewhat tangled arrangement of phase-space factors; please clean up the typesetting so that the standard form of the rate integral is immediately readable.
  4. [§2.2] The term 'quadripole' is used inconsistently with 'quadrupole'; please unify the spelling throughout the text.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the paper is a review whose central claim is a forward-looking agenda, and it does not derive a prediction from a fitted or self-defined input.

full rationale

The paper makes no derivation chain that reduces to its own inputs. Its central assertion, in the Summary and Conclusions, is that 'a Bayesian analysis combining EM radiation with other nuclear media observables is anticipated' and that this should be included in 'the next generation of Bayesian model-to-data comparisons.' This is an outlook statement, not a computed result. The production-rate formulas in Section 2 are standard literature results (Eq. (1) from Ref. [10], Eq. (2) from Ref. [1]), and the off-equilibrium extension 'by replacing f_i^(0) -> f_i^(0) + delta f_i' is explicitly attributed to Refs. [22,23,24,4]; the paper does not re-derive those rates or fit any parameter to a target observable. Self-citations such as Refs. [4,24,30,32] appear as literature support for statements that EM spectra are thermometers and viscometers and for the first dilepton v2 calculation; those are prior independent calculations, and the review does not rely on them as an unverified uniqueness theorem or as a reason to forbid alternatives. The statement that 'the overall off-equilibrium effects on photon production can be well captured by dissipative hydrodynamics' is cited to the external SMASH/hydrodynamic study of Ref. [41], and even if that assessment were questioned, that would be a correctness or uncertainty concern, not an identity between premises and conclusion. No equation in the paper is fitted to a subset of data and then renamed a prediction, and no quantity is defined in terms of the result it is claimed to explain. The reviewer's skeptical point about unquantified delta-f closure systematics is a legitimate physics risk for future Bayesian analyses, but it does not make the present review circular. A self-contained non-finding is therefore appropriate, with score 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters, new entities, or ad hoc assumptions are introduced. The paper surveys existing literature; its structural assumptions are the standard finite-temperature field-theory framework and the viscous hydrodynamics modeling used in the cited works.

assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Electromagnetic emission rates are governed by the finite-temperature retarded electromagnetic spectral function and the relativistic detailed-balance factor, as expressed in Eq. (1).
    Inherited from finite-temperature field theory (Refs. [1,10]) and used without proof throughout Sections 2 and 3.
  • domain assumption The QGP medium is near local thermal equilibrium and its evolution is described by relativistic viscous hydrodynamics, with non-equilibrium corrections to emission rates parametrized by Grad 14-moment or Chapman-Enskog delta-f multipole expansions.
    Invoked in Section 2.2 and used in the phenomenological comparisons cited in Section 3; the reliability of this closure is the main external assumption of the review.
  • domain assumption Leading-order and, where available, next-to-leading-order matrix elements for partonic and hadronic reactions provide quantitatively useful emission rates when combined with the relevant distribution functions.
    Underlies Eq. (2) and the rate comparisons in Section 2.1; this is a controlled perturbative assumption inherited from the cited literature.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Electromagnetic Probes of the Quantum Chromodynamical Plasma." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/F3TPNYG3

@misc{pith2026241119868,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Electromagnetic Probes of the Quantum Chromodynamical Plasma},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/F3TPNYG3}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.19868}
}
read the original abstract

In relativistic heavy-ion collisions, electromagnetic (EM) radiation has been used as a sensitive probe of Quark Gluon Plasma (QGP) properties, owing to the smaller EM coupling relative to QCD coupling. To better understand the constraining power of EM emissions on transport properties of the QGP, a deeper understanding of both the theory and phenomenology of EM signals is required. A selection of recent developments in those two areas of QGP EM probes is discussed, with an outlook on how Bayesian model-to-data comparisons can help further quantify our understanding of QGP transport coefficients.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

50 extracted references · 14 canonical work pages

  1. [40]

    R. M. Y azdi, S. Shi, C. Gale, S. Jeon, Jet-medium Photons as a Probe of Parton Dynamics, Acta Phys. Polon. Supp. 16 (1) ( 2023) 1–A129. arXiv:2207.12513, doi:10.5506/APhysPolBSupp.16.1-A129

    arXiv 2023

  2. [41]

    Fan, et al., Multiscale evolution of charmed particl es in a nuclear medium, Phys

    W. Fan, et al., Multiscale evolution of charmed particl es in a nuclear medium, Phys. Rev. C 107 (5) (2023) 054901. arXiv:2208.00983, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.107.054901

    arXiv 2023

  3. [1]

    J. I. Kapusta, C. Gale, Finite-Temperature Field Theory , Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics, Cambridge University Press,

    work page

  4. [2]

    R. Rapp, J. Wambach, Chiral symmetry restoration and dil eptons in relativistic heavy ion collisions, Adv. Nucl. Phy s. 25 (2000) 1. arXiv:hep-ph/9909229

    arXiv 2000

  5. [3]

    Turbide, R

    S. Turbide, R. Rapp, C. Gale, Hadronic production of ther mal photons, Phys. Rev. C 69 (2004) 014903. arXiv:hep-ph/0308085, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.69.014903

    arXiv 2004

  6. [4]

    Exploring the influence of bulk viscosity of QCD on dilepton tomography

    G. Vujanovic, J.-F. Paquet, C. Shen, G. S. Denicol, S. Jeo n, C. Gale, U. Heinz, Exploring the influence of bulk viscosit y of QCD on dilepton tomography, Phys. Rev. C 101 (2020) 044904. arXiv:1903.05078, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.101.044904

    work page Pith review arXiv 2020

  7. [5]

    R. Rapp, J. Wambach, H. van Hees, The Chiral Restoration T ransition of QCD and Low Mass Dileptons, Landolt-Bornstein 23 (2010) 134

    work page 2010

  8. [6]

    Laine, NLO thermal dilepton rate at non-zero momentum , JHEP 1311 (2013) 120

    M. Laine, NLO thermal dilepton rate at non-zero momentum , JHEP 1311 (2013) 120. doi:10.1007/JHEP11(2013)120

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep11(2013)120 2013

Show all 50 references
  1. [7]

    Ghisoiu, M

    I. Ghisoiu, M. Laine, Interpolation of hard and soft dile pton rates, JHEP 1410 (2014) 83. doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2014)083

    2014 doi

  2. [8]

    Andronic, et al., Comparative study of quarkonium tra nsport in hot QCD matter, Eur

    A. Andronic, et al., Comparative study of quarkonium tra nsport in hot QCD matter, Eur. Phys. J. A 60 (4) (2024) 88. arXiv:2402.04366, doi:10.1140/epja/s10050-024-01306-6

    2024 arXiv

  3. [9]

    Paquet, Electromagnetic probes in heavy-ion coll isions: progress and open questions, PoS HardProbes2023 (2 024) 009

    J.-F. Paquet, Electromagnetic probes in heavy-ion coll isions: progress and open questions, PoS HardProbes2023 (2 024) 009. arXiv:2307.09967, doi:10.22323/1.438.0009

    arXiv

  4. [10]

    Geurts, R.-A

    F. Geurts, R.-A. Tripolt, Electromagnetic probes: The ory and experiment, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 128 (2023) 10400 4. arXiv:2210.01622, doi:10.1016/j.ppnp.2022.104004

    2023 arXiv

  5. [11]

    Ghiglieri, J

    J. Ghiglieri, J. Hong, A. Kurkela, E. Lu, G. D. Moore, D. T eaney, Next-to-leading order thermal photon production in a weakly coupled quark-gluon plasma, JHEP 05 (2013) 010. doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2013)010

    2013 doi

  6. [12]

    Ghiglieri, G

    J. Ghiglieri, G. D. Moore, Low Mass Thermal Dilepton Pro duction at NLO in a Weakly Coupled Quark-Gluon Plasma, JHEP 1 412 (2014)

    2014

  7. [13]

    Jackson, Two-loop thermal spectral functions with g eneral kinematics, Phys

    G. Jackson, Two-loop thermal spectral functions with g eneral kinematics, Phys. Rev. D 100 (11) (2019) 116019. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.100.116019

    2019 doi

  8. [14]

    Jackson, M

    G. Jackson, M. Laine, Testing thermal photon and dilept on rates, JHEP 11 (2019) 144. doi:10.1007/JHEP11(2019)144

    2019 doi

  9. [15]

    S. Ali, D. Bala, A. Francis, G. Jackson, O. Kaczmarek, J. Turnwald, T. Ueding, N. Wink, Lattice QCD estimates of thermal photon production from the QGP, Phys. Rev. D 110 (5) (2024) 054518. arXiv:2403.11647, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.110.054518

    2024 arXiv

  10. [16]

    Churchill, L

    J. Churchill, L. Du, C. Gale, G. Jackson, S. Jeon, Virtua l Photons Shed Light on the Early Temperature of Dense QCD Mat ter, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132 (17) (2024) 172301. arXiv:2311.06951, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.132.172301

    2024 arXiv

  11. [17]

    Churchill, L

    J. Churchill, L. Du, C. Gale, G. Jackson, S. Jeon, Dilept on production at next-to-leading order and intermediate in variant-mass observables, Phys. Rev. C 109 (4) (2024) 044915. arXiv:2311.06675, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.109.044915

    2024 arXiv

  12. [18]

    Churchill, L

    J. Churchill, L. Du, B. Forster, H. Gao, G. Jackson, S. Je on, C. Gale, Thermal dilepton production in heavy-ion collisions at beam-energy-scan (BES) energies, EPJ Web Conf. 296 (2024) 07006. arXiv:2312.10166, doi:10.1051/epjconf/202429607006

    2024 arXiv

  13. [19]

    P . M. Hohler, R. Rapp, Is ρ-Meson Melting Compatible with Chiral Restoration?, Phys. Lett. B 731 (2014) 103–109. doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2014.02.021

    2014 doi

  14. [20]

    C. Jung, F. Rennecke, R.-A. Tripolt, L. von Smekal, J. Wa mbach, In-Medium Spectral Functions of V ector- and Axial-V ector Mesons from the Functional Renormalization Group, Phys. Rev. D 95 (3) (2 017) 036020. arXiv:1610.08754, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.95.036020

    arXiv

  15. [21]

    Bazavov, et al., Chiral crossover in QCD at zero and no n-zero chemical potentials, Phys

    A. Bazavov, et al., Chiral crossover in QCD at zero and no n-zero chemical potentials, Phys. Lett. B 795 (2019) 15–21. arXiv:1812.08235, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2019.05.013

    2019 arXiv

  16. [22]

    Dion, J.-F

    M. Dion, J.-F. Paquet, B. Schenke, C. Y oung, S. Jeon, C. G ale, Viscous photons in relativistic heavy ion collisions, Phys. Rev. C 84 (2011) 064901. arXiv:1109.4405, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.84.064901

    2011 arXiv

  17. [23]

    Paquet, C

    J.-F. Paquet, C. Shen, G. S. Denicol, M. Luzum, B. Schenk e, S. Jeon, C. Gale, Production of photons in relativistic he avy-ion collisions, Phys. Rev. C 93 (4) (2016) 044906. arXiv:1509.06738, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.93.044906

    2016 arXiv

  18. [24]

    Vujanovic, C

    G. Vujanovic, C. Y oung, B. Schenke, R. Rapp, S. Jeon, C. G ale, Dilepton emission in high-energy heavy-ion collision s with viscous hydro- dynamics, Phys. Rev. C 89 (3) (2014) 034904. arXiv:1312.0676, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.89.034904

    2014 arXiv

  19. [25]

    Grad, On the kinetic theory of rarefied gases, Commun

    H. Grad, On the kinetic theory of rarefied gases, Commun. Pure Appl. Math. 2 (4) (1949) 331–407. doi:10.1002/cpa.3160020403

    1949 doi

  20. [26]

    Chapman, T

    S. Chapman, T. Cowling, The Mathematical Theory of Non- uniform Gases: An Account of the Kinetic Theory of Viscosity , Thermal Conduction and Di ffusion in Cambridge Mathematical Library, Cambridge University Pre ss, 1990. URL https://books.google.ca/books?id=Cbp5JP2OTrwC

    1990

  21. [27]

    R. Rapp, H. van Hees, Thermal Dileptons as Fireball Ther mometer and Chronometer, Phys. Lett. B 753 (2016) 586–590. arXiv:1411.4612, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2015.12.065. 5

    2016 arXiv

  22. [28]

    C. Shen, U. W. Heinz, J.-F. Paquet, C. Gale, Thermal phot ons as a quark-gluon plasma thermometer reexamined, Phys. R ev. C 89 (4) (2014) 044910. arXiv:1308.2440, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.89.044910

    2014 arXiv

  23. [29]

    doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2014)029

    2014 doi

  24. [30]

    Vujanovic, G

    G. Vujanovic, G. S. Denicol, M. Luzum, S. Jeon, C. Gale, I nvestigating the temperature dependence of the specific she ar viscosity of QCD matter with dilepton radiation, Phys. Rev. C 98 (1) (2018) 01 4902. arXiv:1702.02941, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.98.014902

    2018 arXiv

  25. [31]

    arXiv:2402.01998

    Temperature Measurement of Quark-Gluon Plasma at Di fferent Stages (2 2024). arXiv:2402.01998

    2024 arXiv

  26. [32]

    Vujanovic, J.-F

    G. Vujanovic, J.-F. Paquet, G. S. Denicol, M. Luzum, S. J eon, C. Gale, Electromagnetic radiation as a probe of the ini tial state and of viscous dynamics in relativistic nuclear collisions, Phys. Rev. C 94 (1) (2016) 014904. arXiv:1602.01455, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.94.014904

    2016 arXiv

  27. [33]

    C. Shen, U. W. Heinz, J.-F. Paquet, I. Kozlov, C. Gale, An isotropic flow of thermal photons as a quark-gluon plasma vis cometer, Phys. Rev. C 91 (2) (2015) 024908. arXiv:1308.2111, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.91.024908

    2015 arXiv

  28. [34]

    Gale, J.-F

    C. Gale, J.-F. Paquet, B. Schenke, C. Shen, Multimessen ger heavy-ion collision physics, Phys. Rev. C 105 (1) (2022) 014909. arXiv:2106.11216, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.105.014909

    2022 arXiv

  29. [35]

    F. Seck, T. Galatyuk, A. Mukherjee, R. Rapp, J. Steinhei mer, J. Stroth, M. Wiest, Dilepton signature of a first-order phase transition, Phys. Rev. C 106 (1) (2022) 014904. arXiv:2010.04614, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.106.014904

    2022 arXiv

  30. [36]

    Ehlers, et al., Bayesian Inference analysis of jet qu enching using inclusive jet and hadron suppression measure ments (8 2024)

    R. Ehlers, et al., Bayesian Inference analysis of jet qu enching using inclusive jet and hadron suppression measure ments (8 2024). arXiv:2408.08247

    2024

  31. [37]

    X.-Y . Wu, L. Du, C. Gale, S. Jeon, Probing the equilibrat ion of the QCD matter created in heavy-ion collisions with di leptons (7 2024). arXiv:2407.04156

    2024 arXiv

  32. [38]

    arXiv:2211.02491

    Letter of intent for ALICE 3: A next-generation heavy-i on experiment at the LHC (11 2022). arXiv:2211.02491

    2022 arXiv

  33. [39]

    T. Song, W. Cassing, P . Moreau, E. Bratkovskaya, Open charm and dileptons from relativistic heavy-ion collisions, Phys. Rev. C 97 (6) (2018) 064907. arXiv:1803.02698, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.97.064907

    2018 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Hirayama, H

    R. Hirayama, H. Elfner, Distinguishing the sources of d ielectron anisotropic flow at low beam energies (8 2024). arXiv:2408.16603

    2024 arXiv

  35. [43]

    G¨ otz, A

    N. G¨ otz, A. Sch¨ afer, O. Garcia-Montero, J.-F. Paquet , H. Elfner, C. Gale, Out-of-equilibrium photon production in the late stages of rel- ativistic heavy-ion collisions, Phys. Rev. C 105 (4) (2022) 044910, [Erratum: Phys.Rev.C 109, 049901 (2024)]. arXiv:2111.13603, doi:10...

    2022 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Endres, H

    S. Endres, H. van Hees, M. Bleicher, Energy, centrality and momentum dependence of dielectron production at collid er energies in a coarse- grained transport approach, Phys. Rev. C 94 (2) (2016) 02491 2. arXiv:1604.06415, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.94.024912

    2016 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Staudenmaier, J

    J. Staudenmaier, J. Weil, V . Steinberg, S. Endres, H. Pe tersen, Dilepton production and resonance properties with in a new hadronic transport approach in the context of the GSI-HADES experime ntal data, Phys. Rev. C 98 (5) (2018) 054908. arXiv:1711.10297, doi:10.1103/PhysRev...

    2018 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Ahdida, et al., Letter of Intent: the NA60 + experiment (12 2022)

    C. Ahdida, et al., Letter of Intent: the NA60 + experiment (12 2022). arXiv:2212.14452

    2022 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Agarwal, The compressed baryonic matter (CBM) exper iment at FAIR—physics, status and prospects, Phys

    K. Agarwal, The compressed baryonic matter (CBM) exper iment at FAIR—physics, status and prospects, Phys. Scripta 98 (3) (2023) 034006. doi:10.1088/1402-4896/acbca7

    2023 doi

  40. [48]

    M. R. He ffernan, C. Gale, S. Jeon, J.-F. Paquet, Bayesian quantificati on of strongly interacting matter with color glass condensa te initial conditions, Phys. Rev. C 109 (6) (2024) 065207. arXiv:2302.09478, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.109.065207. 6

    2024 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Everett, et al., Multisystem Bayesian constraints o n the transport coe fficients of QCD matter, Phys

    D. Everett, et al., Multisystem Bayesian constraints o n the transport coe fficients of QCD matter, Phys. Rev. C 103 (5) (2021) 054904. arXiv:2011.01430, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.103.054904

    2021 arXiv

  42. [2023]

    doi:10.1017/9781009401968

    doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.