Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 4 cited by

DiFfRG: A Discretisation Framework for functional Renormalisation Group flows

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read DiFfRG is an open framework for solving general functional renormalisation group flows.

desk verdict A genuinely useful open-source fRG toolkit with real end-to-end benchmarks; the FEM error-budget evidence is thinner than the abstract suggests, but it deserves a proper referee. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.13043 v1 pith:FRH3NRM6 submitted 2024-12-17 hep-ph cond-mat.stat-mechhep-thphysics.comp-phphysics.flu-dyn

Franz R. Sattler , Jan M. Pawlowski This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-phcond-mat.stat-mechhep-thphysics.comp-phphysics.flu-dyn
keywords functionalrenormalisationgroupfiniteelementmethodeffectivepotentialvertexexpansionQCDphasediagramspontaneoussymmetrybreakingcodegenerationGPUcomputing
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

DiFfRG is a C++ framework that solves functional Renormalisation Group (fRG) flows in very general truncation schemes. The paper's core claim is that fRG flows can be treated as convection-diffusion equations in field space, and that finite element methods, combined with efficient time-stepping and automatic code generation from a symbolic derivation step, make large fRG simulations straightforward to set up and run reliably. This matters because fRG studies of QCD phase structure and competing orders require both fully field-dependent quantities, such as the effective potential, and large momentum-dependent vertex expansions, which usually force researchers into writing dedicated, hard-to-test codes. The authors ship four complete, reproducible examples, namely finite-temperature O(N) theory, a quark-meson model, SU(3) Yang-Mills theory, and four-Fermi flows, and report a GPU speedup of up to 4.6 times on the Yang-Mills example.

What carries the argument

The central object is the general PDE Ansatz of Eq. (10): $m_i(\partial_t u,u,t,x)+\partial_{x_j}F_{ij}(u,t,x,\dots)+s_i(u,t,x,\dots)=0$, where $u$ holds the field-dependent quantities, $F_{ij}$ is the flux, $s_i$ is the source, and $m_i$ is the mass function. The paper casts fRG flows for field-dependent quantities into this convection-diffusion form and discretises field space with Legendre-basis finite elements of four types: continuous, discontinuous, direct discontinuous, and local discontinuous Galerkin. RG-time integration uses implicit differential-algebraic solvers for stiff flows and explicit multistep or Runge-Kutta methods for large momentum-dependent systems, with jacobians generated by automatic differentiation. A Mathematica-side package derives the flow equations and exports C++ integration kernels with both CPU and GPU back-ends.

What would settle it

Take a truncation with an analytic benchmark, such as the large-N O(N) effective potential with a flat regulator, run it with DiFfRG, and test whether the finite-element propagation matches the exact convexity-restoration front; if the front lags, oscillates, or fails to converge under mesh refinement, the claimed general stability of the convection-diffusion discretisation is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that DiFfRG, a modular open-source C++ framework, lets users build fRG simulations in very general truncation schemes: full field-dependent effective potentials handled by finite elements, large fully momentum-dependent vertex expansions, mixtures of both, and automatic code generation from a symbolic derivation step. This claim is supported by four shipped examples with complete code, namely finite-temperature O(N) theory, a quark-meson model, SU(3) Yang-Mills theory, and four-Fermi flows in the QCD phase diagram. The Yang-Mills example reproduces the expected gluon and ghost dressings and shows a GPU speedup of 4.6 times on the tested full truncation, and the framework's earlier results on the quark-meson effective potential become reproducible with the release.

Load-bearing premise

The paper's 'very general' applicability stands on the assumption that the fRG flow equations of interest can be written in the specific convection-diffusion form with mass, flux, and source terms, and that the included finite-element methods stay stable on those equations.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Full effective potentials with spontaneous symmetry breaking can be integrated reliably with implicit finite-element time stepping, including shock formation in field space.
  • Large momentum-dependent vertex expansions can be run on their own or simultaneously with field-dependent quantities, using extractors to pass equation-of-motion data between the two sectors.
  • The four shipped examples are claimed to be fully reproducible from the included code, making earlier DiFfRG-based physics results testable by any user.
  • GPU execution accelerates the flow evaluation by up to a factor of 4.6 in the tested Yang-Mills vertex expansion, with the same code running on CPU when no GPU is present.
  • The Mathematica-to-C++ pipeline automates the most error-prone parts of fRG work, so new truncations can be turned into running simulations without hand-deriving large systems.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper, the convection-diffusion formulation points to a direct transfer of the same finite-element machinery to real-time and Keldysh fRG flows, which also develop steep fronts in field space.
  • Beyond the paper, the implicit-explicit splitting suggests that momentum-dependent vertices could be stepped implicitly as well, potentially stabilising stiff mixed systems beyond the examples shown here.
  • Beyond the paper, extending the automatic code generation to emit complete application skeletons would lower the C++ entry barrier to near zero, widening access to fRG methods.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. The paper introduces DiFfRG, an open-source C++ framework for solving functional Renormalisation Group flows, and is written as a Computer Physics Communications software paper. The central features are finite-element discretisations of field-dependent quantities, large momentum-dependent vertex expansions, implicit and explicit time-stepping, Mathematica-based automatic code generation, and optional GPU support. The manuscript describes the theoretical setup, the structure of the code, and four included examples: finite-temperature O(N) theory, a four-Fermi QCD-motivated system, SU(3) Yang-Mills theory, and a Quark-Meson model in LPA'. The paper claims that DiFfRG is a comprehensive, extendable framework for very general truncation schemes and that its FEM treatment of field dependences is quantitatively reliable, with the Yang-Mills gluon propagator compared to lattice data and scaling exponents quoted as consistent with earlier work.

Significance. If the framework performs as advertised, DiFfRG would be a genuinely useful contribution to the open numerical fRG ecosystem: it combines FE discretisations of field space with vertex expansions, automated code generation, GPU acceleration, and four runnable examples. Important strengths are the concrete reproducibility claims, the availability of the full code, the automated Mathematica workflow, and the independent lattice comparison for the gluon propagator in Figure 4. The significance is tempered, however, by the fact that the quantitative reliability claim is not backed by convergence or error-budget tests for the FEM sector, and by the partly tuned or same-group nature of the other benchmarks. The paper is better supported as a description of a flexible and feature-rich framework than as a demonstration of quantitative precision across all advertised use cases.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 2.2, Section 3.1, Section 5.2.2] The central quantitative claim for the FEM sector is not demonstrated. The abstract advertises 'quantitatively reliable computations of field dependences', but none of the FE examples (O(N) in Section 3.1, Quark-Meson in Section 3.4) includes a mesh-refinement study, a polynomial-order convergence check, or an error budget. The only independent quantitative benchmark, the Yang-Mills gluon propagator comparison in Figure 4, exercises the variable/vertex sector rather than the FEM field-dependence sector. A revision should add a systematic convergence test for at least one FEM flow, e.g. a manufactured solution or a known O(N)/Yukawa benchmark with h- and p-refinement, and report the resulting discretisation error together with the production parameters used for Figures 1 and 8.
  2. [Section 2.2, Eq. (10); Section 5.2.2, Eq. (25)] The 'very general Ansatz' is an assumption, not an established characterisation. The text states: 'We make a very general Ansatz and assume that the flow equation of u in field space has the shape ...', and this structure underlies all four FEM assemblers. It is not shown that every truncation the paper intends to support, in particular derivative expansions beyond LPA' with fourth-order field derivatives or potentials over several coupled invariants, can be cast into this local convection-diffusion form and solved stably with the supplied CG/dDG/LDG discretisations. The revision should either soften the generality claims or add an explicit analysis or classification of the equations covered, including a concrete example that probes the boundaries of the Ansatz.
  3. [Sections 3.2, 3.3, 3.4] Several quantitative-sounding statements rest on tuned or same-group input. The four-Fermi example is explicitly called qualitative in the text and in the Figure 3 caption, and it uses vacuum input data from reference [9] without thermal or density corrections; the Quark-Meson initial conditions are tuned to m_pi = 140 MeV and m_q = 350 MeV; and the Yang-Mills gluon mass gap is tuned to the scaling solution. The independent lattice comparison in Figure 4 is a genuine strength, but it covers only the vertex sector. To support the abstract's overall claim of quantitative reliability, the paper should state for each example what is calibrated, what is independently verified, and what remains qualitative.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Program Summary] The word 'extremly' should be 'extremely'.
  2. [Section 5.2.2] The word 'consituting' should be 'constituting'; similar typos such as 'straight-forward' and 'adpative' in Appendix C should be corrected.
  3. [Section 3.1, Figure 1] The phase diagram is not accompanied by the numerical parameters used, such as mesh size, polynomial order, and tolerances; providing these in the text or in the shipped parameter files would improve reproducibility.
  4. [Section 3.2, Figure 3] Because the text states that the four-Fermi results are 'at best qualitative', the abstract's phrase 'four-Fermi flows in the QCD phase diagram' should make this caveat visible or label the example as schematic.
  5. [Section 5.3.2] The statement that the integration error of a medium-sized quadrature rule is of order 10^-4 should specify the test integral, the quadrature order, and the comparison method against which the error is measured.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the framework's claims rest on explicitly stated Ansätze, standard fRG derivations, and an independent lattice benchmark; self-citations are contextual, not load-bearing.

full rationale

The paper is a software/tooling paper, so its central claim is about what the code can solve rather than about a first-principles physical prediction. The O(N), Quark-Meson, and four-Fermi examples derive their flows from standard fRG equations via QMeS/FormTracer, with initial conditions tuned in the usual way; no fitted output is renamed a prediction. The Yang-Mills example reproduces the same group's earlier setup [33], but it is independently checked against lattice data [35]. Equation (10) is explicitly labelled 'a very general Ansatz', and the framework's applicability is therefore conditional on that stated structural assumption; this is a limitation, not a circular derivation. Self-citations appear mainly as contextual references, input data, or reproduction targets, and none is the sole support for a claim that would otherwise be unverified.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The framework relies on standard fRG equations, external numerical libraries, and two framework-specific modeling assumptions: the convection-diffusion structure (10) and the stability of the chosen FE fluxes. The example physics uses tuned initial conditions, but these do not bear on the framework's validity, so they are listed only for completeness.

free parameters (2)
  • Quark-Meson initial conditions tuned to m_pi=140 MeV and m_q=350 MeV in vacuum = m_pi=140 MeV, m_q=350 MeV
    These are tuning targets for the example model in Section 3.4; they affect the shown physics results but not the validity of the framework itself.
  • Yang-Mills gluon mass gap tuned to the scaling solution = not quoted numerically; described as tuned to scaling in Section 3.3
    The example fits the mass gap to reach the scaling solution, and the resulting exponent is fitted and compared to [33]. This is a benchmark parameter, not a parameter of the framework.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The Wetterich/generalised flow equation (3) correctly describes the renormalisation group flow of the effective action.
    Standard fRG background, taken from [25,30], used as the starting point for all generated flow equations.
  • domain assumption All fRG flows considered in DiFfRG can be written in the convection-diffusion form (10) with mass, flux, and source terms.
    This is the central modeling assumption of the framework, introduced in Section 2.2. The user is required to fit their equations into this structure.
  • domain assumption The finite element discretisations (CG, DG, dDG, LDG) with the provided numerical fluxes converge for the stiff, shock-forming flow equations.
    Underlies the claim of quantitative reliability; supported by prior work [12,18] but not proven in this paper.
  • standard math External libraries (deal.ii, SUNDIALS, autodiff, GSL) implement their documented numerical methods correctly.
    The framework builds on these libraries; correctness of the framework assumes they work as documented.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of DiFfRG: A Discretisation Framework for functional Renormalisation Group flows." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/FRH3NRM6

@misc{pith2026241213043,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: DiFfRG: A Discretisation Framework for functional Renormalisation Group flows},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/FRH3NRM6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.13043}
}
read the original abstract

We introduce DiFfRG (Discretisation Framework for functional Renormalisation Group flows), a comprehensive computational C++ framework for solving functional Renormalisation Group flows in very general truncation schemes. Its central features are threefold: Firstly, the use of Finite Element Methods (FEM) for efficient, easy to set up and quantitatively reliable computations of field dependences. Secondly, the (simultaneous) setup of large, fully momentum-dependent vertex expansions. Thirdly, efficient time-discretisation methods, incorporating insights from studies of solving theories which exhibit spontaneous symmetry breaking, going hand in hand with shocks and an exponential increase of the information flow velocity in field space. The framework provides a Mathematica package for automatic code generation of flow equations, finite and zero temperature integration routines with support for GPU hardware and extensive parallelisation capabilities. Detailed examples and tutorials are provided and discussed herein which showcase and introduce the framework to the user. We illustrate the capabilities of DiFfRG with four examples, with the complete codes fully included: finite temperature O(N) theory, a Quark-Meson model, SU(3) Yang-Mills theory and four-Fermi flows in the QCD phase diagram.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.13043 by the authors.

Figure 2
Figure 2. The derivative −2x∂xs(x) of the polynomial ex￾ponential regulator shape function given in (14). Note that k∂k = −2x∂x if x = p 2 /k 2 . We compare to the flat regulator, given by f(x) = (1/x − 1)Θ(1 − x). 3.1. Finite temperature O(N) model The full Mathematica and C++ code for this example is also provided in Examples/ONfiniteT. This example is meant to show the setup and performance of the available finite element … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. We show the relative sizes of the sigma-pion and the color-super-conducting (csc) channel in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Gluon dressing function 1/ZA in comparison to lattice results from [35] [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Propagator dressings of SU(3) Yang-Mills theory at the scaling solution. We fit a scaling Ansatz to the curves to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Vertex dressings of SU(3) Yang-Mills theory in the scaling solution. In the lower figures, the soft limits located at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: We show the RG-evolution of all flowing quantities of the Quark-meson model given by the Ansatz [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: A typical workflow for the setup and evaluation of an fRG model using the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Structure of a DiFfRG simulation. The chosen Time-stepper manages the overall data flow and requests residuals and jacobians from the Assembler, which are then used to advance the RG-flow. The assembler constructs these by calling the methods of a used-defined Numeric…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Relationship and data sharing between Variables, Extractors and FE functions. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_11.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

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

  1. Quantum critical fan and emergent relativistic symmetry of two-dimensional Dirac semimetals

    cond-mat.str-el 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A functional-RG calculation maps the chiral Ising Gross-Neveu-Yukawa phase diagram, confirming emergent relativistic symmetry at the quantum critical point and 2D Ising behavior at the finite-temperature transition.

  2. Solving Functional Renormalization Group Equations with Neural Networks

    hep-ph 2026-03 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A neural network that learns fRG flows from the equation residual, with a large-N analytic baseline, matches finite-difference and discontinuous-Galerkin solvers for O(N) models.

  3. On the Calculation of Pressure Derivatives in Mean-Field Thermal Field Theories

    hep-ph 2025-01 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A recursive Jacobian formula based on the implicit function theorem gives analytic expressions for arbitrary-order pressure derivatives in mean-field models, tested in the NJL model and its diquark extension.

  4. A beginner's guide to functional methods in particle physics

    hep-ph 2025-10 accept novelty 1.0 of 10

    A pedagogical review showing how Dyson-Schwinger, 3PI, and Bethe-Salpeter equations can be chained together to compute glueball masses in pure Yang-Mills theory, matching lattice QCD.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 13 canonical work pages · cited by 4 Pith papers

  1. [33]

    A. K. Cyrol, L. Fister, M. Mitter, J. M. Pawlowski, N. Strodthoff, Landau gauge Yang-Mills correlation functions, Phys. Rev. D94 (5) (2016) 054005. arXiv:1605.01856, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.94.054005. 52

    arXiv 2016

  2. [9]

    Ihssen, J

    F. Ihssen, J. M. Pawlowski, F. R. Sattler, N. Wink, Towards quantitative precision in functional QCD I (8 2024). arXiv:2408.08413

    arXiv 2024

  3. [1]

    Dupuis, L

    N. Dupuis, L. Canet, A. Eichhorn, W. Metzner, J. M. Pawlowski, M. Tissier, N. Wschebor, The nonperturbative functional renormalization group and its applications, Phys. Rept. 910 (2021) 1–114. arXiv:2006.04853, doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2021.01.001

    arXiv 2021

  4. [2]

    J. B. Profe, D. M. Kennes, L. Klebl, divERGe implements various Exact Renormalization Group ex- amples, SciPost Phys. Codebases (2024) 26 doi:10.21468/SciPostPhysCodeb.26. URL https://scipost.org/10.21468/SciPostPhysCodeb.26

    doi:10.21468/scipostphyscodeb.26 2024

  5. [3]

    N. Ritz, A. Ge, E. Walter, S. Aguirre, J. von Delft, F. B. Kugler, KeldyshQFT: A C++ codebase for real- frequency multiloop functional renormalization group and parquet computations of the single-impurity Anderson model, J. Chem. Phys. 161 (5) (2024) 054118. arXiv:2405.20996, doi:10.1063/5.0221340

    work page arXiv 2024

  6. [4]

    Ihssen, J

    F. Ihssen, J. M. Pawlowski, F. R. Sattler, N. Wink, Local Discontinuous Galerkin for the Functional Renormalisation Group (7 2022). arXiv:2207.12266

    arXiv 2022

  7. [5]

    J. M. Pawlowski, C. S. Schneider, N. Wink, QMeS-Derivation: Mathematica package for the symbolic derivation of functional equations, Comput. Phys. Commun. 287 (2023) 108711. arXiv:2102.01410, doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2023.108711

    work page Pith review arXiv 2023

  8. [6]

    A. K. Cyrol, M. Mitter, N. Strodthoff, FormTracer - A Mathematica Tracing Package Using FORM, Comput. Phys. Commun. 219 (2017) 346–352. arXiv:1610.09331, doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2017.05.024

    arXiv 2017

Show all 44 references
  1. [7]

    Geißel, J

    A. Geißel, J. Braun, J. M. Pawlowski, F. R. Sattler, Tensor structures and projectors in functional approaches (2024)

    2024

  2. [8]

    Ihssen, J

    F. Ihssen, J. M. Pawlowski, F. R. Sattler, N. Wink, Towards quantitative precision for QCD at large densities (9 2023). arXiv:2309.07335

    2023 arXiv

  3. [10]

    Grossi, N

    E. Grossi, N. Wink, Resolving phase transitions with discontinuous Galerkin methods, SciPost Phys. Core 6 (2023) 071. arXiv:1903.09503, doi:10.21468/SciPostPhysCore.6.4.071

    2023 arXiv

  4. [11]

    Wink, Towards the spectral properties and phase structure of QCD., Ph.D

    N. Wink, Towards the spectral properties and phase structure of QCD., Ph.D. thesis, U. Heidelberg, ITP (2020). doi:10.11588/heidok.00028503

    2020 doi

  5. [12]

    Grossi, F

    E. Grossi, F. J. Ihssen, J. M. Pawlowski, N. Wink, Shocks and quark-meson scatterings at large density, Phys. Rev. D 104 (1) (2021) 016028. arXiv:2102.01602, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.104.016028

    2021 arXiv

  6. [13]

    Koenigstein, M

    A. Koenigstein, M. J. Steil, N. Wink, E. Grossi, J. Braun, M. Buballa, D. H. Rischke, Numerical fluid dynamics for FRG flow equations: Zero-dimensional QFTs as numerical test cases. I. The O(N) model, Phys. Rev. D 106 (6) (2022) 065012. arXiv:2108.02504, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.1...

    2022 arXiv

  7. [14]

    Koenigstein, M

    A. Koenigstein, M. J. Steil, N. Wink, E. Grossi, J. Braun, Numerical fluid dynamics for FRG flow equations: Zero-dimensional QFTs as numerical test cases. II. Entropy production and irreversibility of RG flows, Phys. Rev. D 106 (6) (2022) 065013. arXiv:2108.10085, doi:10.1103/...

    2022 arXiv

  8. [15]

    M. J. Steil, A. Koenigstein, Numerical fluid dynamics for FRG flow equations: Zero-dimensional QFTs as numerical test cases. III. Shock and rarefaction waves in RG flows reveal limitations of the N →∞ limit in O(N)-type models, Phys. Rev. D 106 (6) (2022) 065014. arXiv:2108.04...

    2022 arXiv

  9. [16]

    Stoll, N

    J. Stoll, N. Zorbach, A. Koenigstein, M. J. Steil, S. Rechenberger, Bosonic fluctuations in the (1+ 1)- dimensional Gross-Neveu(-Yukawa) model at varyingµ and T and finite N (8 2021). arXiv:2108.10616. 51

    2021 arXiv

  10. [17]

    Ihssen, J

    F. Ihssen, J. M. Pawlowski, Functional flows for complex effective actions, SciPost Phys. 15 (2) (2023)

    2023

  11. [18]

    Ihssen, F

    F. Ihssen, F. R. Sattler, N. Wink, Numerical RG-time integration of the effective potential: Analysis and benchmark, Phys. Rev. D 107 (11) (2023) 114009. arXiv:2302.04736, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 107.114009

    2023 arXiv

  12. [19]

    Murgana, A

    F. Murgana, A. Koenigstein, D. H. Rischke, Reanalysis of critical exponents for the O(N) model via a hydrodynamic approach to the functional renormalization group, Phys. Rev. D 108 (11) (2023) 116016. arXiv:2303.16838, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.108.116016

    2023 arXiv

  13. [20]

    F. R. Sattler, J. M. Pawlowski, Diffrg, https://github.com/satfra/DiFfRG (2024)

    2024

  14. [21]

    Arndt, W

    D. Arndt, W. Bangerth, M. Bergbauer, M. Feder, M. Fehling, J. Heinz, T. Heister, L. Heltai, M. Kro- nbichler, M. Maier, P. Munch, J.-P. Pelteret, B. Turcksin, D. Wells, S. Zampini, The deal.II library, version 9.5, Journal of Numerical Mathematics 31 (3) (2023) 231–246. doi:10...

    2023 doi

  15. [22]

    A. C. Hindmarsh, P. N. Brown, K. E. Grant, S. L. Lee, R. Serban, D. E. Shumaker, C. S. Wood- ward, SUNDIALS: Suite of nonlinear and differential/algebraic equation solvers, ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software (TOMS) 31 (3) (2005) 363–396. doi:10.1145/1089014.1089020

    2005

  16. [23]

    D. J. Gardner, D. R. Reynolds, C. S. Woodward, C. J. Balos, Enabling new flexibility in the SUNDI- ALS suite of nonlinear and differential/algebraic equation solvers, ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software (TOMS) (2022). doi:10.1145/3539801

    2022 doi

  17. [24]

    A. M. M. Leal, autodiff, a modern, fast and expressive C++ library for automatic differentiation, https://autodiff.github.io (2018). URL https://autodiff.github.io

    2018

  18. [25]

    J. M. Pawlowski, Aspects of the functional renormalisation group, Annals Phys. 322 (2007) 2831–2915. arXiv:hep-th/0512261, doi:10.1016/j.aop.2007.01.007

    2007 arXiv

  19. [26]

    Ihssen, J

    F. Ihssen, J. M. Pawlowski, Physics-informed renormalisation group flows (9 2024). arXiv:2409.13679

    2024 arXiv

  20. [27]

    H. Gies, C. Wetterich, Renormalization flow of bound states, Phys. Rev. D65 (2002) 065001. arXiv: hep-th/0107221, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.65.065001

    2002 arXiv

  21. [28]

    Floerchinger, C

    S. Floerchinger, C. Wetterich, Exact flow equation for composite operators, Phys. Lett. B680 (2009) 371–376. arXiv:0905.0915, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2009.09.014

    2009 arXiv

  22. [29]

    F. J. Wegner, Some invariance properties of the renormalization group, J. Phys. C 7 (12) (1974) 2098. doi:10.1088/0022-3719/7/12/004

    1974 doi

  23. [30]

    Wetterich, Exact evolution equation for the effective potential, Phys

    C. Wetterich, Exact evolution equation for the effective potential, Phys. Lett. B301 (1993) 90–94. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(93)90726-X

    1993 doi

  24. [31]

    Polchinski, Renormalization and Effective Lagrangians, Nucl

    J. Polchinski, Renormalization and Effective Lagrangians, Nucl. Phys. B 231 (1984) 269–295. doi: 10.1016/0550-3213(84)90287-6

    1984 doi

  25. [32]

    A. K. Cyrol, M. Mitter, J. M. Pawlowski, N. Strodthoff, Nonperturbative quark, gluon, and meson correlators of unquenched QCD, Phys. Rev. D97 (5) (2018) 054006. arXiv:1706.06326, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.97.054006

    2018 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Eichmann, R

    G. Eichmann, R. Williams, R. Alkofer, M. Vujinovic, Three-gluon vertex in Landau gauge, Phys. Rev. D 89 (10) (2014) 105014. arXiv:1402.1365, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.89.105014

    2014 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Sternbeck, E

    A. Sternbeck, E. M. Ilgenfritz, M. M¨ uller-Preussker, A. Schiller, I. L. Bogolubsky, Lattice study of the infrared behavior of QCD Green’s functions in Landau gauge, PoS LAT2006 (2006) 076. arXiv: hep-lat/0610053, doi:10.22323/1.032.0076

    2006 arXiv

  28. [36]

    J. M. Pawlowski, F. Rennecke, Higher order quark-mesonic scattering processes and the phase structure of QCD, Phys. Rev. D 90 (7) (2014) 076002. arXiv:1403.1179, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.90.076002

    2014 arXiv

  29. [37]

    D. F. Litim, Optimization of the exact renormalization group, Phys. Lett. B486 (2000) 92–99. arXiv: hep-th/0005245, doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(00)00748-6

    2000 arXiv

  30. [38]

    T. A. Davis, Algorithm 832: Umfpack v4.3—an unsymmetric-pattern multifrontal method, ACM Trans. Math. Softw. 30 (2) (2004) 196–199. doi:10.1145/992200.992206. URL https://doi.org/10.1145/992200.992206

    2004

  31. [39]

    Borowka, G

    S. Borowka, G. Heinrich, S. Jahn, S. Jones, M. Kerner, J. Schlenk, Qmc, https://github.com/mppmu/ qmc (2021)

    2021

  32. [40]

    Braun, Y.-r

    J. Braun, Y.-r. Chen, W.-j. Fu, F. Gao, F. Ihssen, A. Geissel, C. Huang, J. M. Pawlowski, F. Rennecke, F. R. Sattler, B. Schallmo, J. Stoll, Y.-y. Tan, S. T¨ opfel, J. Turnwald, R. Wen, J. Wessely, N. Wink, S. Yin, N. Zorbach, fQCD collaboration (2024)

    2024

  33. [41]

    Shu, Discontinuous galerkin methods: General approach and stability, Numerical Solutions of Partial Differential Equations (01 2009)

    C.-W. Shu, Discontinuous galerkin methods: General approach and stability, Numerical Solutions of Partial Differential Equations (01 2009)

    2009

  34. [42]

    X. Feng, T. Lewis, M. Neilan, Discontinuous galerkin finite element differential calculus and applications to numerical solutions of linear and nonlinear partial differential equations, Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics 299 (2016) 68–91, recent Advances in Numer...

    2016 doi

  35. [43]

    W.-j. Fu, J. M. Pawlowski, Relevance of matter and glue dynamics for baryon number fluctuations, Phys. Rev. D92 (11) (2015) 116006. arXiv:1508.06504, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.92.116006. 53

    2015 arXiv

  36. [74]

    arXiv:2207.10057, doi:10.21468/SciPostPhys.15.2.074

    arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.