General features of the stellar matter equation of state from microscopic theory, new maximum-mass constraints, and causality

Francesca Sammarruca; Tomiwa Ajagbonna

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

General features of the stellar matter equation of state from microscopic theory, new maximum-mass constraints, and causality

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A two-stage stiffness pattern is forced on neutron-star matter by mass and causality.

desk verdict A modest, honest update to the chiral EFT neutron-star EoS program; the stiff-then-soft high-density feature is conditional on the softness of the baseline and should be framed as such, but the paper deserves peer review. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.00668 v2 pith:VXNKQE7F submitted 2024-12-31 nucl-th

Francesca Sammarruca , Tomiwa Ajagbonna This is my paper · ORCID

classification nucl-th

keywords neutronstarequationofstatechiraleffectivefieldtheorymaximummasscausalityspeedsoundpiecewisepolytropescoolingdirectUrca

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 paper tries to establish a general shape for the equation of state of neutron-star matter above nuclear saturation density, using only microscopic chiral effective field theory at moderate densities and two robust constraints at high densities: the speed of sound must stay below the speed of light, and the maximum neutron-star mass must reach the newly reported value of 2.35±0.17 solar masses. The paper argues that, because the chiral baseline is soft, the high-density continuation has to be stiffer than the baseline in a first piece, then soften in a second piece to keep causality. If that pattern is right, phase transitions or new degrees of freedom enter only near the highest central densities, and the speed of sound cannot rise monotonically toward the conformal limit. The paper also presents first cooling curves showing that more massive stars cool faster, consistent with direct Urca neutrino emission.

What carries the argument

The carrying object is a piecewise high-density extension of a chiral-EFT equation of state. At normal to moderately high densities the paper uses microscopic chiral effective field theory at N2LO and N3LO; above the matching density it first attaches a polytrope $P(\rho)=\alpha(\rho/\rho_0)^{\Gamma}$, then a speed-of-sound parametrization $(v_s/c)^2_i = 1 - c_1\exp[-(\rho_i-c_2)^2/w^2]$, with constants fixed by continuity of the speed of sound and its derivative at the matching point. The polytropic index $\Gamma$ controls how stiff the first segment is, and the Gaussian speed-of-sound form keeps the second segment causal by construction. Matching densities are chosen by requiring the chiral expansion parameter $Q$ to remain well below 1 at the first boundary and by following fitted-polytrope guidance for the second; the paper tests sensitivity to moving the second matching point and finds the effect on the mass-radius relation negligible.

What would settle it

A future determination of the neutron-star maximum mass below about 2.1 solar masses, for example from radio timing that revises the 2.35±0.17 solar-mass optical-lightcurve estimate, would remove the need for a stiff first polytrope. Conversely, a radius or tidal-deformability measurement of a 2.2-2.3 solar-mass star that is much larger than the paper's predicted branch (radius around 10-11 km at maximum mass) would indicate the second segment does not soften as claimed.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

In the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that "the first part of a piecewise extension needs to become stiffer in order to support current maximum mass constraints, while the next piece must soften to maintain causality." Using a chiral-EFT equation of state up to about twice saturation density, the authors attach a polytrope with adiabatic index around $\Gamma=3.3$ to $3.8$, followed by a speed-of-sound parametrization that is causal by construction. With the N3LO baseline this yields maximum masses between 2.26 and 2.49 solar masses, with canonical 1.4-solar-mass radii near 12 km. The paper concludes that a monotone speed of sound approaching the conformal limit is excluded by the need to support masses of 2 solar masses or more; instead the speed of sound must grow rapidly near a few times nuclear density and then fall back, which would signal a phase transition only at the highest densities.

Load-bearing premise

The two-stage picture rests on the chiral effective field theory baseline being soft and reliable up to the first matching density; the paper itself warns that fully consistent predictions currently exist only through N2LO, with unsatisfactory precision at that order, and N3LO three-nucleon forces are not yet symmetry-preserving.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

For the N3LO baseline with $\Gamma=3.3$, the predicted maximum mass is 2.26 solar masses with a radius of 10.70 km at maximum and $R_{1.4}=12.11$ km; with $\Gamma=3.8$ these become 2.49, 11.31, and 12.30 km.
First-segment adiabatic indices above about 3.8 violate causality at some central density, so the stiffening cannot be arbitrarily strong.
A non-monotonic speed of sound peaking around several times nuclear density and then falling back would place phase transitions or new species only at the highest densities, well above the central densities of most observed stars.
The preliminary cooling curves show faster cooling for more massive stars, reflecting onset of direct Urca at high proton fractions; the envelope composition changes the curves substantially, especially for low- and medium-mass stars.

Reading between the lines

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

Beyond the paper: if the stiff-first/soft-second pattern is generic, then tidal-deformability and radius measurements from a roughly 1.4-solar-mass merger probe mainly the first segment and normal-density physics, so they cannot directly test the high-density softening; only a high-mass merger near 2 solar masses can do that.
Beyond the paper: the claimed non-monotonic speed of sound implies the conformal limit is reached only in the most massive stars, and the paper notes that average superconformality, $\langle (v_s/c)^2 \rangle > 1/3$, would have implications for the trace of the energy-momentum tensor inside rotating neutron stars.
Beyond the paper: a direct way to test the picture is to build the same two-piece construction from a microscopic equation of state that is stiffer at normal density; if the stiff-first feature weakens, the conclusion is baseline-dependent.
Beyond the paper: future symmetry-preserving N3LO three-nucleon forces may change the normal-density pressure, and since the matching density is tied to the chiral expansion parameter, the entire extension should be re-derived with the renormalized forces.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Quick take: this is a modest but honest extension of the authors' chiral EFT neutron-star program. The new combination—polytropic first extension matched to a speed-of-sound-guided continuation, updated to the PSR J0952-0607 mass constraint—produces M(R) and first cooling curves. The central 'stiff-then-soft' feature is plausible, but it is not a model-independent consequence; it rides on the baseline being soft.

What the paper does well: the construction is clearly specified, the first matching density is physically motivated via the Fermi momentum, the authors test sensitivity to the second matching density, and they are transparent about the N3LO three-nucleon force regulator problem—they explicitly call the N2LO precision unsatisfactory. That is refreshing. The cooling curves are labeled proof-of-concept and omit pairing, which is stated plainly.

The main weak point is the generality claim. The stress-test concern is on target: the stiff-first-soft-second structure only appears because the chiral baseline is near its soft central value. The paper itself says this scenario is 'inherently related to the softness of the chiral predictions,' yet the conclusion still states that a monotone speed of sound 'seems to be excluded by mass constraints.' That is too strong. If the true equation of state at 1–2 rho0 sits near the upper edge of the truncation band (or matches stiffer microscopic calculations), a single polytrope or a monotone rise in the sound speed could satisfy both the 2.2 Msun threshold and causality without any peak-and-fall. The authors should either weaken the claim or show the feature persists across a plausible range of baselines.

Second, the uncertainty is not propagated. The chiral truncation errors from Eq. (3) and Fig. 1 are not carried into the M(R) curves or the speed-of-sound plots, so the reader can't tell how much of the stiff-first segment is driven by the central value versus the band. Third, the polytropic indices are tuned to hit the 2.2 Msun constraint, which makes Table II maximum masses conditioned on the fit rather than independent output. That is a mild circularity, not fatal, but it should be said.

Bottom line: this is a useful, honest contribution for the neutron-star EoS subfield. It deserves a serious referee, and with a revision that qualifies the 'excluded' language and adds a sensitivity test around the baseline uncertainty, it should be publishable.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper combines a chiral-EFT microscopic equation of state for beta-stable matter with a piecewise high-density extension: a polytrope (Eq. (4)) matched at rho1 = 0.277 fm^-3, followed by a speed-of-sound-guided continuation (Eqs. (10)-(11)) from rho2 = 0.563 fm^-3. It explores adiabatic indices Gamma_1 = 3.3 and 3.8 at N2LO and N3LO, reports maximum masses between 2.18 and 2.49 M_sun with corresponding radii and central densities in Table II, and concludes that a stiff first segment followed by a softening second segment is a general feature of the high-density equation of state, suggesting phase transitions or new species only at the highest densities. It also presents preliminary NSCool-based cooling curves for two of the constructed equations of state.

Significance. If the central inference were robust, the paper would provide an interesting qualitative constraint: the high-density EoS would need a non-monotonic speed-of-sound profile, with direct implications for phase transitions and the approach to the conformal limit. The manuscript is transparent about its inputs and contains useful technical elements, including explicit truncation-error estimates via Eq. (3), a quantitative justification of the first matching density via Eq. (12), and a sensitivity test for the second matching density. However, the central conclusion is conditional on the softness and reliability of the chiral baseline, which the paper itself qualifies in Sec. II.b, and it is drawn from a narrow family of extensions rather than a systematic scan. The paper is best read as demonstrating a possible general feature for one class of baselines and parametrizations, not as an established model-independent result.

major comments (3)

[Sec. II.b and Sec. V] The central 'stiff-first-soft-second' inference is not established independently of the softness of the chiral baseline. Section II.b states that N3LO three-nucleon forces currently violate chiral symmetry when regularized, that reliable predictions exist only at N2LO, NLO, and LO, and that 'the precision at N2LO is unsatisfactory.' Figure 1 shows visible N2LO/N3LO pressure differences, and Eq. (3) gives non-negligible truncation uncertainties. Because the polytropic indices in Table I and Fig. 4 are chosen to compensate for a soft baseline, a stiffer baseline at 1-2 rho0 (for example, near the upper edge of the N3LO truncation band or from local chiral quantum Monte Carlo calculations) could reduce the required Gamma_1 and allow a monotonically stiffening speed of sound while still reaching 2.2 M_sun and preserving causality. The manuscript should either quantify this sensitivity by repeating the construction with stiffer baselines or upper-edge truncation bands, or explicitly restrict the conclusion to the central chiral-baseline scenario.
[Sec. III, Table II] The maximum masses in Table II are imposed by construction rather than independently predicted. The text states that equations of state that cannot support at least 2.2 M_sun are discarded (and earlier in the paper, at least 2.01 M_sun), so the values in Table II are consequences of that threshold, not new constraints extracted from observations. In addition, the 'new maximum-mass constraint' relies on PSR J0952-0607, and the paper itself cautions that optical lightcurve modeling may be less accurate than radio observations, noting the J2215+5135 case where radio gives a significantly lower mass than optical. The framing should clearly distinguish input constraints from emergent properties, and the reported Mmax values should be labeled as minimum masses supported by the chosen family of extensions.
[Sec. V, Eqs. (10)-(11), Fig. 5] The statement that 'a monotone behavior of the speed of sound approaching the conformal limit seems to be excluded by mass constraints' is stronger than the calculation supports. The evidence is drawn from a specific family: a single polytrope followed by the Gaussian speed-of-sound parametrization of Eq. (10), with continuity conditions that fix the Gaussian parameters and force a particular approach toward c_s^2 = 1. No scan over monotone profiles that rise gradually toward the conformal value 1/3 is presented, and the tested parametrization cannot rule out such profiles because it does not include them. The conclusion should be rephrased as a property of the explored parametrizations unless a broader variational study over monotone c_s^2 profiles is added.

minor comments (4)

[Sec. II] The paragraph beginning 'Throughout the paper, we will show results at the (fully consistent) third order (N2LO)...' appears twice, once before Sec. II.a and once immediately after Sec. II.b; the duplicate should be removed.
[References] References [13] and [46] describe the same paper by Potekhin, Zyuzin, Yakovlev, Beznogov, and Shibanov on thermal luminosities of cooling neutron stars; one of the two entries should be deleted and the in-text citations unified.
[Sec. V] There is a typo in 'consistent with current astronomical obervations'; it should read 'observations.'
[Sec. III] The sentence 'The density rho2 is about two units of rho0 from the first matching point' is ambiguous; rho1 = 0.277 fm^-3 and rho2 = 0.563 fm^-3 differ by about 0.286 fm^-3, which is roughly 1.8 rho0, not exactly two units. Please rephrase with the numerical difference.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 5.0 of 10

Partial circularity: Table II maximum masses are selected for, and the non-monotone speed-of-sound conclusion is built into the Gaussian ansatz; the stiff-first requirement retains independent microscopic content.

fitted input called prediction [Sec. III, near Table II, after the text describing the search over piecewise parametrizations]
"We explored different piecewise parametrizations of the high-density EoS that preserve causality, while supporting masses at least as high as 2.2 M⊙."

The polytropic indices in Table II were selected so that the resulting EoS support Mmax at least 2.2 solar masses; the table then reports resulting maximum masses in the range 2.18-2.49 solar masses. These maximum-mass values are therefore outputs of a selection criterion that already contains the maximum-mass constraint, not independent predictions. The stiff-first-soft-second feature itself does not reduce to this fit because the soft microscopic baseline is fixed by the chiral calculation, but the specific Mmax numbers in Table II are forced by the construction.
self definitional [Sec. III, Eq. (10), and Sec. V conclusions]
"The speed of sound is parametrized as (vs/c)^2_i = 1 - c1 exp[-(rho_i - c2)^2/w^2]. ... A monotone behavior of the speed of sound approaching the conformal limit seems to be excluded by mass constraints, which require a rapid growth to allow masses of 2 M⊙ or above."

Equation (10) is a Gaussian-dip ansatz: after the matching density, the Gaussian term first grows with density, making the squared speed of sound decrease before rising toward 1. The peak-then-fall shape asserted in the conclusions is therefore an input of the chosen parameterization, not an output of the constraints. The paper reports no test of monotone speed-of-sound functions that rise rapidly and remain causal; the exclusion of monotone behavior reduces to the adopted ansatz rather than to causality and maximum-mass constraints alone.

full rationale

The microscopic chiral-EFT baseline is genuinely independent input, and the need for an initial stiff segment follows from combining that soft baseline with the 2.2-solar-mass constraint. However, two steps reduce by construction. First, the maximum masses in Table II are produced by discarding all EoS that cannot support at least 2.2 solar masses, so reporting those masses as predictions is a fitted-input-as-output. Second, the conclusion that a monotone speed of sound is excluded is an artifact of Eq. (10), whose Gaussian dip imposes the non-monotone behavior; the paper does not explore monotone causal alternatives. The stiff-first element is anchored in the independent soft baseline, so the paper is only partially circular rather than fully self-referential. The self-citations to the authors' previous chiral EoS work are not load-bearing in a circular way; they provide the independent microscopic input. The score reflects the two construction-dependent claims while acknowledging that the central qualitative feature is not purely a fit.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new particles, forces, or conserved quantities are introduced. The principal burden is carried by the free parameters of the extension, especially the polytropic indices and matching densities, and by the assumed reliability of the chiral baseline. The phase transitions and new species mentioned in the conclusions are speculative interpretations, not invented entities with falsifiable handles.

free parameters (5)

Polytropic adiabatic index Gamma_1 (first extension) = 3.3 (dashed curves) or 3.8 (solid curves); 3.1-3.3 in Table I
Chosen so the constructed EoS reaches the adopted maximum-mass target (about 2.2 solar masses) while preserving causality; the range is guided by Read et al. [28].
Polytropic adiabatic index Gamma_2 (second extension) = 2.7-2.8 in Table I; replaced by the speed-of-sound parametrization in Fig. 4
Selected to keep the EoS causal while achieving the target maximum mass.
First matching density rho_1 = 0.277 fm^-3
Chosen as the density where the chiral expansion parameter Q reaches 0.51, a hand-established cutoff for the microscopic EoS.
Second matching density rho_2 = 0.563 fm^-3
Placed about two saturation densities above rho_1, guided by Ref. [28] section VB; the authors tested sensitivity and found it negligible at higher densities.
Speed-of-sound Gaussian width w = not stated in the paper
Appears in Eq. (10); c1 and c2 are fixed by continuity, but w is a shape parameter that is not specified, making the black curve in Fig. 3 incompletely defined.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption The N2LO chiral EFT EoS is a trustworthy baseline for neutron-rich matter up to rho_1 = 0.277 fm^-3.
Sec. II.b concedes that N3LO three-nucleon forces with standard regulators violate chiral symmetry and that N2LO precision is unsatisfactory; the qualitative findings depend on this baseline's softness.
domain assumption PSR J0952-0607 has mass 2.35 +/- 0.17 solar masses and is a valid maximum-mass constraint.
Adopted in Sec. III despite the authors' own caveat that optical lightcurve masses can be overestimated, as illustrated by the J2215+5135 discrepancy.
domain assumption Causality, requiring the speed of sound not to exceed the speed of light, is an absolute constraint and truncates the M(R) curves.
Sec. III: dashed curves are cut at the central density where causality is violated, whether or not the maximum mass has been reached.
standard math The TOV equations and the NSCool cooling code provide the required stellar structure and cooling physics.
Sec. IV: standard general-relativistic structure equations and a public cooling package are assumed; no independent verification is offered in this paper.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of General features of the stellar matter equation of state from microscopic theory, new maximum-mass constraints, and causality." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/VXNKQE7F

@misc{pith2026250100668,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: General features of the stellar matter equation of state from microscopic theory, new maximum-mass constraints, and causality},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/VXNKQE7F}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.00668}
}

read the original abstract

The profile of a neutron star probes a very large range of densities, from the density of iron up to several times the density of saturated nuclear matter, and thus no theory of hadrons can be considered reliable if extended to those regions. We emphasize the importance of taking contemporary ab initio theories of nuclear and neutron matter as the baseline for any extension method, which will unavoidably involve some degree of phenomenology. We discuss how microscopic theory, on the one end, with causality and maximum-mass constraints, on the other, set strong boundaries to the high-density equation of state. We present our latest neutron star predictions where we combine polytropic extensions and parametrizations guided by speed of sound considerations. The predictions we show include our baseline neutron star cooling curves.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.00668 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2: M(R) relations obtained with piecewise polytropes [16]. Equations of state that cannot support a maximum mass of at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** FIG. 3: Several M(R) relations. The curves in color are obtained from a sequence of two polytropes with adiabatic indices [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (5 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4: M(R) curves at fourth order (N [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5: Speed of sound, in units of the speed of light, at N [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: FIG. 6: Effective temperature as a function of time, for different masses (colors). Left: N [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png]

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: FIG. 7: Photon luminosity as a function of time, for different masses (colors). Left: N [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png]

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: FIG. 8: As in Fig. 6, but with envelope model from Ref. [48]. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_8.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

Bayesian analysis of properties of nuclear matter with the FOPI experimental data
nucl-th 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Bayesian fits to FOPI Au+Au flow and stopping data yield m*/m0 around 0.78-0.88 and F around 0.75-0.88, while K0 remains unconstrained.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

51 extracted references · 35 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[1]

B. P. Abbott, et al., GW170817: Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Neutron Star Inspiral, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119 (16) (2017) 161101

2017
[2]

Abbott, B. P. and et al., Multi-messenger Observations of a Binary Neutron Star Merger, Astrophys. J. Lett. 848 (2) (2017) L12

work page 2017
[3]

Abbott, B. P. and et al., GW170817: Measurements of neutron star radii and equation of state, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121 (16) (2018) 161101

work page 2018
[4]

B. P. Abbott, et al., GWTC-1: A Gravitational-Wave Transient Catalog of Compact Binary Mergers Observed by LIGO and Virgo during the First and Second Observing Runs, Phys. Rev. X 9 (2019) 031040

2019
[5]

M. C. Miller, et al., PSR J0030+0451 mass and radius from NICER and implications for the properties of neutron star matter, Astrophys. J. Lett. 887 (2019) L24

2019
[6]

M. C. Miller, et al., The Radius of PSR J0740+6620 from NICER and XMM-Newton Data, Astrophys. J. Lett. 918 (2) (2021) L28

2021
[7]

Huth, et al., Constraining neutron-star matter with microscopic and macroscopic collisions, Nature 606 (2022) 276

S. Huth, et al., Constraining neutron-star matter with microscopic and macroscopic collisions, Nature 606 (2022) 276

work page 2022
[8]

C. Y. Tsang, et al., Determination of the equation of state from nuclear experiments and neutron-star observation, Nature Astron. 8 (2024) 328

work page 2024

Show all 51 references

[9]

P. J. Davis, et al., Inference of neutron star properties with unified crust-core equations of state for parameter estimation, Astronomy & Astrophysics 687 (2024) A44. 11

2024
[10]

Klausner, G

P. Klausner, G. Col´ o, X. Roca-Maza, E. Vigezzi, Impact of ground-state properties and collective excitations on the skyrme ansatz: a bayesian study, Phys. Rev. C 111 (2025) 014311

2025
[11]

Sammarruca, The neutron skin of 48Ca and 208Pb: A critical analysis, Symmetry 16 (2024) 34

F. Sammarruca, The neutron skin of 48Ca and 208Pb: A critical analysis, Symmetry 16 (2024) 34

2024
[12]

R. W. Romani, D. Kandel, A. V. Filippenko, T. G. Brink, W. Zheng, PSR J0952-0607: The Fastest and Heaviest Known Galactic Neutron Star, Astrophys. J. Lett. 934 (2022) L18

2022
[13]

Potekhin, D

A. Potekhin, D. Zyuzin, D. Yakovlev, M. Beznogov, Y. Shibanov, Thermal luminosities of cooling neutron stars, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 496 (2020) 5052

2020
[14]

Sammarruca, R

F. Sammarruca, R. Millerson, Analysis of the neutron matter equation of state and the symmetry energy up to fourth order of chiral effective field theory, Phys. Rev. C 104 (3) (2021) 034308

2021
[15]

Sammarruca, R

F. Sammarruca, R. Millerson, Overview of symmetric nuclear matter properties from chiral interactions up to fourth order of the chiral expansion, Phys. Rev. C 104 (6) (2021) 064312

2021
[16]

Sammarruca, R

F. Sammarruca, R. Millerson, The Equation of State of Neutron-Rich Matter at Fourth Order of Chiral Effective Field Theory and the Radius of a Medium-Mass Neutron Star, Universe 8 (2) (2022) 133

2022
[17]

Machleidt, F

R. Machleidt, F. Sammarruca, Recent advances in chiral eft based nuclear forces and their applications, Journal of Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics 137 (2024) 104117

2024
[18]

R. J. Furnstahl, N. Klco, D. R. Phillips, S. Wesolowski, Quantifying truncation errors in effective field theory, Phys. Rev. C 92 (2) (2015) 024005

2015
[19]

J. W. Negele, D. Vautherin, Neutron star matter at subnuclear densities, Nucl. Phys. A 207 (1973) 298–320

1973
[20]

Epelbaum, H

E. Epelbaum, H. Krebs, U. G. Meißner, Improved chiral nucleon-nucleon potential up to next-to-next-to-next-to-leading order, Eur. Phys. J. A 51 (5) (2015) 53. arXiv:1412.0142, doi:10.1140/epja/i2015-15053-8

2015 arXiv
[21]

D. R. Entem, R. Machleidt, Y. Nosyk, High-quality two-nucleon potentials up to fifth order of the chiral expansion, Phys. Rev. C 96 (2) (2017) 024004

2017
[22]

Epelbaum, H

E. Epelbaum, H. Krebs, P. Reinert, High-precision nuclear forces from chiral EFT: State-of-the-art, challenges and outlook, Front. in Phys. 8 (2020) 98

2020
[23]

Epelbaum, H

E. Epelbaum, H. Krebs, P. Reinart, Semi-local nuclear forces from chiral EFT: state-of-the-art and challenges, in: Tanihata, I., Toki, H., Kajino, T. (eds), Handbook of Nuclear Physics, Springer, Singapore
[24]

Bernard, E

V. Bernard, E. Epelbaum, H. Krebs, U.-G. Meissner, Subleading contributions to the chiral three-nucleon force. I. Long- range terms, Phys. Rev. C 77 (2008) 064004

2008
[25]

Bernard, E

V. Bernard, E. Epelbaum, H. Krebs, U. G. Meissner, Subleading contributions to the chiral three-nucleon force II: Short- range terms and relativistic corrections, Phys. Rev. C 84 (2011) 054001

2011
[26]

Krebs, E

H. Krebs, E. Epelbaum, Towards consistent nuclear interactions from chiral Lagrangians I: The path integral approach, arXiv:2311.10893 [nucl-th]

arXiv
[27]

Krebs, E

H. Krebs, E. Epelbaum, Towards consistent nuclear interactions from chiral Lagrangians II: Symmetry preserving regular- ization, arXiv:2312.13932 [nucl-th]

arXiv
[28]

J. S. Read, B. D. Lackey, B. J. Owen, J. L. Friedman, Constraints on a phenomenologically parameterized neutron-star equation of state, Phys. Rev. D 79 (2009) 124032

2009
[29]

Linares, S

M. Linares, S. T, J. Casares, Peering into the dark side: Magnesium lines establish a massive neutron star in PSR J2215+5135, ApJ 859
[30]

A. G. Sullivan, R. W. Romani, The Intrabinary Shock and Companion Star of Redback Pulsar J2215+5135. arXiv:2405.13889

arXiv
[31]

Fan, M.-Z

Y.-Z. Fan, M.-Z. Han, J.-L. Jiang, D.-S. Shao, S.-P. Tang, Maximum gravitational mass MT OV = 2.25+0.08 −0.07M⊙ inferred at about 3% precision with multimessanger data of neutron stars. arXiv:2309.12644v2

arXiv
[32]

Kanakis-Pegios, P

A. Kanakis-Pegios, P. S. Koliogiannis, C. C. Moustakidis, Probing the Nuclear Equation of State from the Existence of a ≈2.6 M⊙ Neutron Star: The GW190814 Puzzle , Symmetry 13 (2021) 183

2021
[33]

I. Tews, J. Carlson, S. Gandolfi, S. Reddy, Constraining the speed of sound inside neutron stars with chiral effective field theory interactions and observations, Astrophys. J. 860 (2) (2018) 149

2018
[34]

Fonseca, H

E. Fonseca, H. Cromartie, T. Pennucci, P. Ray, A. Y. Kirichenko, et al., Refined mass and geometric measurements of the high-mass psr j0740 + 6620, Astrophys. J. Lett. 915 (2021) L12

2021
[35]

Kumar, S

M. Kumar, S. Kumar, V. Thakur, R. Kumar, B. K. Agrawal, S. K. Dhiman, Crex- and prex-ii-motivated relativistic interactions and their implications for the bulk properties of nuclear matter and neutron stars, Phys. Rev. C 107 (2023) 055801

2023
[36]

Sammarruca, Contribution of isovector mesons to the symmetry energy in a microscopic model, Phys

F. Sammarruca, Contribution of isovector mesons to the symmetry energy in a microscopic model, Phys. Rev. C 84 (2011) 044307

2011
[37]

Grasso, Effective density functional beyond mean field, PPNP 106 (2019) 256

M. Grasso, Effective density functional beyond mean field, PPNP 106 (2019) 256

2019
[38]

Burrello, M

S. Burrello, M. Grasso, C. J. Yang, Towards a power counting in nuclear energy-density-functional theories through a perturbative analysis, Phys. Lett. B 811 (2020) 135938

2020
[39]

C. J. Yang, M. Grasso, D. Lacroix, From dilute matter to the equilibrium point in the energy-density-functional theory, Phys. Rev. C 94 (2016) 031301(R)

2016
[40]

J. B. Wei, G. F. Burgio, H.-J. Schulze, D. Zappal´ a, Cooling of hybrid neutron stars with microscopic equations of state, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 498 (2020) 344

2020
[41]

D. G. Yakovlev, A. D. Kaminker, O. Y. Gnedin, P. Haensel, Neutrino emission from neutron stars, Phys. Rept. 354 (2001) 1

2001
[42]

M. B. Richardson, H. M. van Horn, K. F. Ratcliff, R. C. Malone, Neutron star evolutionary sequences, ApJ 255 (1982) 12 624R

1982
[43]

Das, J.-B

H. Das, J.-B. Wei, G. Burgio, H.-J. Schulze, Neutron star cooling and mass distributions, Phys. Rev. D 109 (2024) 123018

2024
[44]

Gonzalez-Jimenez, C

N. Gonzalez-Jimenez, C. Petrovich, A. Reisenegger, Rotochemical heating of millisecond and classical pulsars with anisotropic and density-dependent superfluid gap models, MNRAS 447 (2015) 2073

2015
[45]

Gonzalez-Caniulef, S

D. Gonzalez-Caniulef, S. Guillot, A. Reisenegger, Neutron star radius measurement from the ultraviolet and soft x-ray thermal emission of psr j0437-4715, MNRAS 490 (2019) 5848

2019
[46]

A. Y. Potekhin, D. A. Zyuzin, D. G. Yakovlev, M. V. Beznogov, Y. A. Shibanov, Thermal luminosity of cooling neutron stars, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 496 (2020) 5052

2020
[47]

Potekhin, G

A. Potekhin, G. Chabrier, D. Yakovlev, Internal temperatures and cooling of neutron stars with accreted envelopes, A&A 323 (1997) 415

1997
[48]

Nomoto, S

K. Nomoto, S. Tsuruta, Cooling of neutron stars: Effects of the finite time scale of thermal conduction, ApJ 312 (1987) 711

1987
[49]

Krotscheck, P

E. Krotscheck, P. Papaconstantinou, J. Wang, Variational and parquet-diagram calculations for neutron matter. V. Triplet pairing, Phys. Rev. C 109 (2024) 015803

2024
[50]

A. Rios, A. Polls, W. H. Dickhoff, Pairing and short-range correlations in nuclear systems, J. Low Temp. Phys. 189 (5-6) (2017) 234–249

2017
[51]

R. F. P. Mendes, C. F. Sodr´ e, F. T. Falciano, Exceeding the conformal limit inside rotating neutron stars: Implication to modified theories of gravity, Phys. Rev. D 110 (2024) 104027

2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

B. P. Abbott, et al., GW170817: Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Neutron Star Inspiral, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119 (16) (2017) 161101

2017

[2] [2]

Abbott, B. P. and et al., Multi-messenger Observations of a Binary Neutron Star Merger, Astrophys. J. Lett. 848 (2) (2017) L12

work page 2017

[3] [3]

Abbott, B. P. and et al., GW170817: Measurements of neutron star radii and equation of state, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121 (16) (2018) 161101

work page 2018

[4] [4]

B. P. Abbott, et al., GWTC-1: A Gravitational-Wave Transient Catalog of Compact Binary Mergers Observed by LIGO and Virgo during the First and Second Observing Runs, Phys. Rev. X 9 (2019) 031040

2019

[5] [5]

M. C. Miller, et al., PSR J0030+0451 mass and radius from NICER and implications for the properties of neutron star matter, Astrophys. J. Lett. 887 (2019) L24

2019

[6] [6]

M. C. Miller, et al., The Radius of PSR J0740+6620 from NICER and XMM-Newton Data, Astrophys. J. Lett. 918 (2) (2021) L28

2021

[7] [7]

Huth, et al., Constraining neutron-star matter with microscopic and macroscopic collisions, Nature 606 (2022) 276

S. Huth, et al., Constraining neutron-star matter with microscopic and macroscopic collisions, Nature 606 (2022) 276

work page 2022

[8] [8]

C. Y. Tsang, et al., Determination of the equation of state from nuclear experiments and neutron-star observation, Nature Astron. 8 (2024) 328

work page 2024