Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

In a holographic model with broken translational symmetry, chemical potential and magnetic field lower the barrier for Schwinger pair production while the disorder parameter raises it in the critical and supercritical regimes.

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

2026-08-04 09:41 UTC pith:UX56CJTZ

load-bearing objection Competent standard holographic calculation, but the main claim about the sign of α's effect is internally contradictory and the paper needs major revision before its conclusions can be trusted. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2510.13707 v2 pith:UX56CJTZ submitted 2025-10-15 hep-th

Holographic Schwinger effect with Translational Symmetry Breaking

Sara Tahery , Wenxing Cheng , Zi-qiang Zhang This is my paper
classification hep-th
keywords holographic Schwinger effecttranslational symmetry breakingmomentum relaxationchemical potentialmagnetic fieldpotential analysisvacuum instabilityNambu-Goto string
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 studies the Schwinger effect—spontaneous quark-antiquark pair production in an electric field—in a holographic model where translational symmetry is broken by massless scalars linear in the spatial directions. Using the potential-analysis method, it computes the total potential felt by a virtual pair as a function of the disorder strength α, the chemical potential μ, the magnetic field B, and the ratio β=E/E_c. The central result is a regime-dependent competition: in the subcritical regime both α and μ slightly lower the barrier, but near and above the critical field the two separate, with μ deepening the potential (enhancing pair production) and α raising it (suppressing it). A magnetic field lowers the barrier in all regimes, including the subcritical one, so magnetism and density act together against disorder. A sympathetic reader would care because this gives a concrete, qualitative picture of how disorder, density, and magnetic fields compete in controlling vacuum instability in strongly coupled systems.

Core claim

In the five-dimensional bulk with broken translational symmetry, the paper derives a dimensionless expression for the total potential V_tot(x) of a virtual quark-antiquark pair and identifies the critical electric field E_c at which the potential barrier flattens. It then shows, from plots of V_tot against pair separation, that for β=1 and β>1 increasing μ lowers the potential and steepens the negative well, increasing pair production, while increasing α shifts the potential upward and suppresses it; for β<1, both parameters lower the barrier slightly without enabling production. When a magnetic field is present, both parallel and perpendicular components raise E_c, with the perpendicular co

What carries the argument

The central object is the total potential V_tot = V_CP+SE - E x, where V_CP+SE is the Coulomb-plus-static-energy obtained from a Nambu-Goto string in the static gauge, and E x is the electric-field work. The string profile is fixed by the conserved worldsheet Hamiltonian and its turning point r_c; the critical field E_c is the value at which the barrier vanishes, and the magnetic field enters by rescaling E_c through parallel and perpendicular components. The final expression is a single dimensionless integral (eq. 34) over the ratio a = r_c/r_0, encoding all dependence on α, μ, B, and β.

Load-bearing premise

The conclusions assume that the height and shape of the static potential barrier computed from the Nambu-Goto string is a faithful proxy for the actual Schwinger pair-production rate; the paper never computes the decay rate itself, so if the barrier ordering does not match the rate ordering, the central claims would not follow.

What would settle it

Compute the imaginary part of the regularized Euclidean Nambu-Goto action for a worldsheet instanton in the same translational-symmetry-breaking background, at representative values of α, μ, B, and β, and compare the resulting decay rates with the barrier-height orderings shown in Figures 2-9; a rate that does not follow the barrier ordering in any regime would falsify the potential-analysis proxy.

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

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

If this is right

  • Increasing the chemical potential lowers the total potential and deepens the negative well at and beyond the critical field, so denser holographic systems should show enhanced vacuum pair production.
  • Increasing the disorder parameter raises the total potential and softens the well, so stronger momentum relaxation should raise the threshold for pair production and stabilize the vacuum.
  • At fixed β, a stronger magnetic field lowers the potential barrier in every regime, including β<1, so a magnetic field can trigger instability even where the electric field alone is subcritical.
  • Because the perpendicular magnetic component raises E_c more than the parallel one, the threshold for pair production is anisotropic with respect to magnetic-field orientation.
  • The opposite signs of the μ and α effects imply that the net vacuum-instability behavior is set by the balance of density and disorder, not by either alone.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper, a direct computation of the Euclidean worldsheet instanton (the imaginary part of the string action) in the same background would turn these barrier-height comparisons into actual rates and test whether the qualitative orderings survive.
  • The same potential-analysis machinery could be applied with a time-dependent electric field or at finite temperature; if the barrier ordering persists, the competition between μ and α would be a robust structural feature of translational-symmetry-breaking holography rather than an artifact of the static probe.
  • Since the magnetic field simultaneously lowers the barrier at fixed β and raises E_c, translating the paper's results to experiments with fixed bare electric field requires tracking the ratio β; the qualitative statements should be read as holding at fixed normalized field strength.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. This paper studies the holographic Schwinger effect in the Andrade–Withers translational-symmetry-breaking (TSB) background at finite chemical potential. Using the standard potential-analysis method, the authors compute the total potential V_tot for a quark–antiquark pair from a Nambu–Goto string, define the critical electric field E_c with and without a magnetic field, and examine how the potential barrier depends on the TSB parameter α, the chemical potential μ, the ratio β=E/E_c, and the magnetic field B. The paper claims that μ lowers the barrier while α raises it (except for a subcritical statement in the arXiv abstract), that B lowers the barrier in all regimes, and interprets these changes as enhancement or suppression of Schwinger pair production. The central derivation is a direct extension of existing holographic potential analyses.

Significance. If the conclusions were reliable, the paper would provide a concrete holographic example of how momentum relaxation/disorder, density, and magnetic fields compete in vacuum instability, with potential relevance for strongly coupled materials. The manuscript is self-contained: the Wilson-loop potential derivation follows standard steps, the critical-field formulas are explicit, and the analysis is organized systematically by β-regime and magnetic-field orientation. These strengths are, however, undercut by an internal contradiction in the sign of the α effect and by the use of parameter values that violate the T≥0 condition derived in the same paper. Because the paper's headline result is a sign statement about α, these issues must be resolved before the conclusions can be accepted.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract; §3.1.1; §3.1.3; §4] The sign of α's effect is inconsistent across the manuscript. The full-text abstract states that α acts oppositely to μ and suppresses pair production by strengthening the barrier; the arXiv abstract states that in the subcritical regime increasing α lowers the barrier; §3.1.1 (B=0, β<1) says 'increasing α lowers the barrier height'; §3.1.3 (B=0, β>1) contains a paragraph claiming that α 'phenomenologically reduces the height and width of the effective holographic potential barrier' and 'facilitates pair production'; and §4 says 'Increasing α consistently raises the potential barrier.' Since the central claim is a definite sign for α, these mutually contradictory statements make the paper's main result unassessable. The authors must either present a coherent regime-dependent sign and alter the abstract/summary accordingly, or correct the text if the numerics actually show a single sign.
  2. [Eq. (13) vs. Figs. 4–9] The temperature bound T≥0, Eq. (13), is 24 r_h^2 −3α^2 −4μ^2 ≥0. In the dimensionless variables of Eq. (33), with b=r_h/r0, α1=α/r0, μ1=μ/r0, this is 24b^2 −3α1^2 −4μ1^2 ≥0. The figures set b=0.4, so the allowed domain is 3.84 ≥ 3α1^2 +4μ1^2. Yet the text varies α and μ up to 1.2 (e.g., §3.1.3, §3.2.1), for which 3α1^2=4.32>3.84 and T<0. The reported barrier behavior in that part of parameter space is therefore not that of a physical black-hole background. Please restrict all plots to the T≥0 region or choose a larger b, and re-check that the qualitative conclusions survive.
  3. [Abstract; §4] The abstract claims that 'we qualitatively investigate the corresponding pair production rate through its relation to the total potential and find qualitative consistency between the rate behavior and the potential analysis.' However, no decay-rate computation appears in the body; the only object computed is V_tot, and statements about enhancement/suppression of pair production are inferred from barrier height and width. This mapping is assumed from [1,2], not derived. Either compute a rate (e.g., worldsheet instanton action) or explicitly and consistently state that the conclusions concern the potential barrier, not the actual rate.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Notation, Eq. (33)–(34)] The symbol b is used for r_h/r0, while B denotes the magnetic field; in places the text writes B=0.74 without specifying dimensionless conventions. Please define a dimensionless magnetic field (e.g., scaled by r0^2 T_F) and use it consistently in figures and equations.
  2. [§3.1.1, subplot (b)] The phrase 'reveals an opposite behavior: increasing α lowers the barrier height' is confusing because subplot (a) also shows the barrier being lowered by μ. Please clarify what 'opposite' refers to, or rephrase.
  3. [§3.1.3] The paragraph citing [23] is speculative and disconnected from the numerical results; it also contributes to the sign contradiction. Consider removing it or rewriting it so that it does not assert a physical effect opposite to the one reported in the rest of the section.
  4. [General presentation] There are several typos and formatting issues: 'magnetic filed' in Fig. 2 caption; 'the the external electric field' in the full-text abstract; reference [3] is malformed ('The European Physical Journal A5494 (2018)'). Also, the phrase 'two independent parameters' should be qualified because r_h (or b) is an additional background parameter.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: the total-potential derivation is self-contained given the Andrade–Withers background; the few self-citations are contextual, not load-bearing.

full rationale

The derivation chain from Eq. (1) to Eqs. (32)–(34) is a direct evaluation of the Nambu–Goto action for a static string in the quoted Andrade–Withers background; the parameters α and μ enter explicitly through f(r) and are varied numerically, with no parameter fitted to any target quantity. The ‘predicted’ β-dependence is defined by β = E/E_cr, where E_cr is computed from the same metric in Eqs. (28)–(29); this is a definition, not a fit, and no barrier-height result is re-imported as an input. The barrier-as-rate proxy is inherited from external prior literature [1,2] (Semenoff–Zarembo; Sato–Yoshida), and the self-citations ([4] chemical-potential Schwinger; [13] drag force) are contextual rather than load-bearing; no uniqueness theorem or prior ansatz by the same authors is invoked to force the conclusion. I therefore find no circular step. Separately, the manuscript contains an internal inconsistency in the sign of α’s effect: §3.1.1 says increasing α ‘lowers the barrier height’, the Abstract and §4 say α ‘acts oppositely’ to μ and ‘consistently raises the potential barrier’, and §3.1.3 says α makes the potential ‘less negative’ but then ‘phenomenologically reduces the height and width of the effective holographic potential barrier … facilitates pair production’. This is a consistency/correctness issue, not a circularity, and does not affect the circularity score.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

5 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

No quantities are fitted to external data. The model parameters (α, μ), the probe-brane/horizon ratio b, the electric-field ratio β, and the magnetic-field value B are chosen by hand for the plots; the conclusions are qualitative and may depend on these choices. The derivation inherits standard holographic dictionary assumptions and the barrier-as-rate proxy from [1,2].

free parameters (5)
  • b = r_h/r0 = 0.4
    Ratio of horizon radius to probe-brane position; fixed to 0.4 in all numerical plots. This choice is not derived and could affect quantitative comparisons.
  • α (TSB/disorder strength) = 0 to 1.2 in figures
    Background parameter from the Andrade–Withers model; plotted values chosen by hand. The sign claims about α depend on this range and on b=0.4.
  • μ (chemical potential) = 0 to 1.2 in figures
    Background chemical potential; plotted values chosen by hand. Conclusions are only established for this range.
  • β = E/E_c = <1, 1, 1.2
    Dimensionless electric-field ratio defining the subcritical, critical, and supercritical regimes.
  • B (external magnetic field) = 0 and 0.74
    One representative non-zero value used for the B≠0 plots; no systematic scan except in Figure 5.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption The holographic dictionary maps boundary pair production to a fundamental string ending on a probe D3-brane (Wilson-loop potential analysis).
    Invoked in Section 3; inherited from Semenoff–Zarembo [1] and Sato–Yoshida [2].
  • domain assumption The Andrade–Withers background with linear scalar fields ψ^I = α^I_a x^a is a valid holographic model of translational symmetry breaking / momentum relaxation.
    Used in Section 2 from reference [10].
  • domain assumption Probe approximation: the open string and the probe D3-brane do not backreact on the background.
    Used throughout Section 3; standard in potential analysis.
  • domain assumption Barrier height/shape of the static total potential is a valid qualitative proxy for the Schwinger pair-production rate.
    Used throughout to convert V_tot plots into statements about pair production; no decay rate is computed.
  • domain assumption The magnetic-field-dependent critical-field formula, eq. (29), is valid in the TSB background.
    Taken from references [14–16]; not re-derived for this background.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 10424 in / 16789 out tokens · 143102 ms · 2026-08-04T09:41:50.641293+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Holographic Schwinger effect with Translational Symmetry Breaking." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/UX56CJTZ

@misc{pith2026251013707,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Holographic Schwinger effect with Translational Symmetry Breaking},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/UX56CJTZ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2510.13707}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

We investigate the holographic Schwinger effect in a background with translational symmetry breaking (TSB) at finite chemical potential. The gravitational background is characterized by two independent parameters: the TSB parameter \(\alpha\), which controls momentum relaxation, and the chemical potential \(\mu\), which determines the finite density of the dual field theory. Using the potential analysis method, we derive the total potential governing the pair production process and examine its dependence on \(\alpha\), \(\mu\), the external magnetic field, and the ratio \(\beta=E/E_c\). Our results show that the effects of \(\alpha\) and \(\mu\) on the Schwinger process strongly depend on the dynamical regime. In the subcritical regime, increasing either \(\alpha\) or \(\mu\) lowers the potential barrier and facilitates pair production. However, near and above the critical electric field, the roles of these two parameters become qualitatively different. While increasing the chemical potential lowers the total potential and enhances the Schwinger pair production process, increasing the translational symmetry breaking parameter shifts the potential upward and suppresses the production process. We further show that the external magnetic field enhances the Schwinger effect by lowering the effective potential barrier and facilitating pair production. This enhancement persists in both the critical and supercritical regimes. In addition, we qualitatively investigate the corresponding pair production rate through its relation to the total potential and find qualitative consistency between the rate behavior and the potential analysis. Overall, our analysis provides a comprehensive picture of how translational symmetry breaking, finite density, and external magnetic fields influence holographic non-perturbative pair production.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2510.13707 by Sara Tahery, Wenxing Cheng, Zi-qiang Zhang.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: The string profile in the background geometry [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Total potential Vtot versus the virtual pair distance x, when the magnetic filed is off, B = 0, the parameter b = 0.4, β < 1, for a) α = 0 and b) µ = 0 α = 0, µ varies: Subplot (a) displays the impact of increasing µ while keeping α = 0 . As µ grows, the potential develops a negative well near the origin, signaling that the virtual pair can now materialize without tunneling. This behavior indicates that tr… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Total potential Vtot versus the virtual pair distance x, when the magnetic filed is off, B = 0, the parameter b = 0.4, β = 1, for a) α = 0 and b) µ = 0 α = 0, µ varies: In subplot (a), increasing µ leads to a more steeply negative potential, both near the origin and at large separations x. This indicates an enhanced rate of pair production due to the stronger symmetry breaking effects. In the holographic d… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Total potential Vtot versus the virtual pair distance x, when the magnetic filed is off, B = 0, the parameter b = 0.4, β = 1.2, for a) α = 0 and b) µ = 0 without necessitating an increase in the background electric field strength. This phase￾engineering mechanism, reminiscent of the Aharonov-Bohm effect, highlights how vacuum instability can be enhanced purely through modifications of the vacuum phase stru… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Total potential versus for various magnetic field values [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Critical electric field as a function of parallel and perpendicular magnetic fields [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Total potential Vtot versus the virtual pair distance x, in the presence of B = 0.74 the parameter b = 0.4, β < 1, for a) α = 0 and b) µ = 0 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Total potential Vtot versus the virtual pair distance x, in the presence of B = 0.74 the parameter b = 0.4, β = 1, for a) α = 0 and b) µ = 0 In figure 8 in the presence of an external magnetic field, we now examine the case β = 1, where the electric field equals its critical value. As displayed in the corresponding plots, the disorder parameter α and the chemical potential µ exhibit opposite influences on … view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Total potential Vtot versus the virtual pair distance x, in the presence of B = 0.74 the parameter b = 0.4, β > 1, for a) α = 0 and b) µ = 0 α = 0, µ varies: In sub plot (a) larger values of µ deepen the potential by driving it to more negative values, thereby amplifying the instability and enhancing the rate of pair production. 18 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_9.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Holographic Schwinger Effect In a Step Dilaton Background

    hep-th 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    A step dilaton background in holography yields sharper suppression of the pair-production barrier and greater sensitivity of the Schwinger effect to electric and magnetic fields than conventional soft-wall models.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

23 extracted references · 21 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Holographic Schwinger Ef- fect

    Gordon W. Semenoff, Konstantin Zarembo,“Holographic Schwinger Ef- fect”,Phys.Rev.Lett.107(2011) 171601 [arXiv: 1109.2920 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  2. [2]

    Potential Analysis in Holographic Schwinger Effect

    Yoshiki Sato, Kentaroh Yoshida,“ Potential Analysis in Holographic Schwinger Effect”, JHEP08(2013) 002 [arXiv: 1304.7917 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  3. [3]

    Holographic Schwinger Effect with Chemical Potential at Finite Temperature

    Le Zhang, De-Fu Hou, Jian Li,“Holographic Schwinger Effect with Chemical Potential at Finite Temperature ”,The European Physical Journal A5494 (2018)

    2018

  4. [4]

    Holographic Schwinger Effect in a Confining D3-Brane Background with Chemical Potential

    Zi-Qiang Zhang, De-Fu Hou, Yan Wu, Gang Chen,“Holographic Schwinger Effect in a Confining D3-Brane Background with Chemical Potential”,Adv.High Energy Phys 2016(2016) 9258106 [arXiv: 1604.00095 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  5. [5]

    Potential analysis in holographic Schwinger effect in Ein- stein–Maxwell–Gauss–Bonnet gravity

    Zi-qiang Zhang,“Potential analysis in holographic Schwinger effect in Ein- stein–Maxwell–Gauss–Bonnet gravity”,Nuc. Phys. B935(2018) 377

    2018

  6. [6]

    Holographic Schwinger Effect in the Dy- namical AdS/QCD Model

    Zhou-Run Zhu, Yang-Kang Liu, De-Fu Hou,“Holographic Schwinger Effect in the Dy- namical AdS/QCD Model”, [arXiv: 2108.05148 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  7. [7]

    On Holographic Non-relativistic Schwinger Effect

    Kazem Bitaghsir Fadafan, Fateme Saiedi,“On Holographic Non-relativistic Schwinger Effect ”,Eur. Phys. J. C75,612 (2015) [arXiv: 1504.02432 [hep-th]]. 20

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  8. [8]

    Holography without translational symmetry

    D. Vegh,“Holography without translational symmetry”,CERN-PH-TH/2013-357 (2013) [arXiv: 1301.0537 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  9. [9]

    Momentum relaxation in holographic massive gravity

    R. A. Davison,“Momentum relaxation in holographic massive gravity”,Phys. Rev. D 88,086003 (2013) [arXiv: 1306.5792 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  10. [10]

    A simple holographic model of momentum relaxation

    T. Andrade, B. Withers,“A simple holographic model of momentum relaxation ”,JHEP 05,(2014) 101 [arXiv: 1311.5157 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  11. [11]

    Generalized global symmetries in states with dy- namical defects: The case of the transverse sound in field theory and holography

    S. Grozdanov and N. Poovuttikul,“Generalized global symmetries in states with dy- namical defects: The case of the transverse sound in field theory and holography”,Phys. Rev. D97,106005 (2018) [arXiv: 1801.03199 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  12. [12]

    A Unified Description of Translational Symmetry Breaking in Holography

    M. Ammon, M. Baggioli, A. Jim´ enez-Alba,“A Unified Description of Translational Symmetry Breaking in Holography”,JHEP09,124 (2019) [arXiv: 1904.05785 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  13. [13]

    Holographic drag force with translational symmetry breaking

    Sara Tahery, Kazem Bitaghsir Fadafan, Sahar Mojarrad Lamanjouei,“Holographic drag force with translational symmetry breaking”,Eur. Phys. J. C84,1259 (2024) [arXiv: 2406.03220 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  14. [14]

    Holographic description of the Schwinger effect in electric and magnetic fields

    Yoshiki Sato, Kentaroh Yoshida,“ Holographic description of the Schwinger effect in electric and magnetic fields ”,JHEP04111 (2013) [arXiv: 1303.0112 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  15. [15]

    Comments on Critical Electric and Magnetic Fields from Holography

    S. Bolognesi, F. Kiefer, E. Rabinovici,“Comments on Critical Electric and Magnetic Fields from Holography ”,JHEP01174 (2013) [arXiv: 1210.4170 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  16. [16]

    Magnetic instability in AdS/CFT : Schwinger effect and Euler-Heisenberg Lagrangian of Supersymmetric QCD

    Koji Hashimoto, Takashi Oka, Akihiko Sonoda,“Magnetic instability in AdS/CFT : Schwinger effect and Euler-Heisenberg Lagrangian of Supersymmetric QCD ”,JHEP 06,085 (2014) [arXiv: 1403.6336 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  17. [17]

    Potential analysis of holographic Schwinger effect in the magnetized background

    Zhou-Run Zhu, De-fu Hou (CCNU), Xun Chen,“ Potential analysis of holographic Schwinger effect in the magnetized background ”,Eur. Phys. J. C80550 (2020) [arXiv: 1912.05806 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  18. [18]

    Holographic Schwinger Ef- fect in Flavor-Dependent Systems

    Sheng Lin, Xuan Liu, Xun Chen, Gen-Fa Zhang, Jing Zhou,“ Holographic Schwinger Ef- fect in Flavor-Dependent Systems”,Phys. Rev. D111046005 (2025) [arXiv: 2407.14828 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  19. [19]

    Schwinger Effect in a Twice Anisotropic Holographic Model

    Wen-Bin Chang,“Schwinger Effect in a Twice Anisotropic Holographic Model ”, [arXiv: 2506.16245 [hep-ph]]. 21

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  20. [20]

    The Large N limit of superconformal field theories and supergravity

    J. M. Maldacena,“The Large N limit of superconformal field theories and supergravity”, Adv. Theor. Math. Phys.2,(1998) 231 [arXiv: hep-th/9711200]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  21. [21]

    Holographic Polarons, the Metal-Insulator Transition and Massive Gravity

    Matteo Baggioli, Oriol Pujolas,“Holographic Polarons, the Metal-Insulator Transition and Massive Gravity”,Phys. Rev. Lett114,(2015) 251602 [arXiv: 1411.1003 [hep-th ]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  22. [22]

    Chiral Phase Transition and Schwinger Mechanism in a Pure Electric Field

    Gaoqing Cao, Xu-Guang Huang,“Chiral Phase Transition and Schwinger Mechanism in a Pure Electric Field”,Phys. Rev. D93(2015) [arXiv: 1510.05125 [nucl-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  23. [23]

    Controlling Schwinger tunneling via engineering of virtual particle phases in vacuum

    D.D. Su, B.F. Shen, Q.Z. Lv,“Controlling Schwinger tunneling via engineering of virtual particle phases in vacuum”, [arXiv: 2505.02882 [quant-ph]]. 22

    Pith/arXiv arXiv