Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 3 cited by

(Anti-)Stokes Scattering on the Domain Wall String

T0 review · 3 major / 6 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 A meson scattering off a domain wall string can excite or de-excite the wall's internal shape mode; this paper derives the leading-order quantum probabilities for both processes.

desk verdict A coherent leading-order computation of 2+1 domain-wall (anti-)Stokes scattering that genuinely extends the 1+1 kink program, but with an unresolved translation-mode normalization caveat that a referee should probe. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.13409 v1 pith:JFJZKNAO submitted 2024-12-18 hep-th

Hengyuan Guo , Hui Liu , Jarah Evslin This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-th PACS 11.27.+d
keywords domainwallstringStokesscatteringanti-Stokesshapemodedisplaced-fieldquantizationphi4double-wellmodelmeson-soliton2+1dimensions
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

The paper asks a concrete quantum question about topological solitons: when a single meson strikes a straight domain wall string in 2+1 dimensions, how likely is the wall's internal shape mode, an oscillation of its width, to be excited or de-excited in the collision? It argues that at first order in the coupling both probabilities are given by finite-dimensional integrals over normal modes, and it evaluates them explicitly for the $\phi^4$ double-well model, including the cases where the outgoing meson continues forward or reflects backward. The result is an analytic handle on how bulk radiation converts into internal shape-mode quanta on a domain wall string, a process that simulations have identified as important for string-network dynamics. If correct, the formulas provide a benchmark for classical and lattice studies and show that the scattering is strongest near threshold and falls off quickly at higher energies.

What carries the argument

The calculation rests on a displaced-field perturbation method: each domain-wall sector state is written as $D_f|\psi\rangle$ with $D_f$ the unitary shift by the classical wall profile $f(x)$, so that in the domain-wall frame the soliton Hamiltonian becomes an ordinary weakly coupled field Hamiltonian. Its quadratic part is diagonalized by the Sturm-Liouville normal modes $g_{k_x}(x)e^{-ik_y y}$ of the position-dependent potential $V''(\sqrt{\lambda} f(x))$; these modes are a translation zero mode, continuum radiation modes, and a discrete shape mode $g_S(x)$. The interaction that connects a one-meson state to a meson-plus-shape-mode state is then encoded in the cubic vertex $V_{S,k_2,-k_1} = \int dx\, V^{(3)}(\sqrt{\lambda} f(x))\, g_S(x)\,g_{k_2}(x)\,g_{-k_1}(x)$, together with Gaussian wave packets whose on-shell kinematics are enforced by delta functions and the asymptotic forms of the normal modes.

What would settle it

In a 2+1-dimensional lattice simulation of the $\phi^4$ model with $m=1$, send a nearly monochromatic meson packet with $k_0$ just below 1.575 into a straight ground-state wall and count events in which an outgoing meson accompanies a wall whose width oscillates. Observing any such event below the predicted threshold, or a differential probability in the shape-mode momentum $k_{Sy}$ that disagrees with Eq. (5.11), would falsify the Stokes formula; the anti-Stokes formula can be tested by preparing the wall's shape mode and comparing the total de-excitation probability with Eq. (5.14) at fixed $\sigma_0$.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that, in a general scalar field theory in 2+1 dimensions with degenerate minima and a stationary domain-wall solution $f(x)$, the leading-order probability density for Stokes scattering, one incoming meson producing one outgoing meson and one excited shape mode, is given by Eq. (3.27), and the anti-Stokes density, in which the meson de-excites a prepared shape mode, by Eq. (4.15). Both expressions are built from the same three-point vertex $\tilde{V}_{S,k_{2x},-k_{0x}}$ and a kinematic square root, and each contains one term for forward outgoing mesons and one for backward outgoing mesons. Specializing to the $\phi^4$ double-well model, where the shape-mode frequency is $\omega_S = \sqrt{3}\,m/2$, the formulas reduce to the closed expressions (5.11) and (5.14) involving hyperbolic-secant factors. The paper reports that Stokes scattering is kinematically forbidden below $k_0 = \sqrt{(3 + 4\sqrt{3})/4}\,m \approx 1.575\,m$, while anti-Stokes scattering has no threshold and its total probability is inversely proportional to the initial shape-mode wave-packet size $\sigma_0$.

Load-bearing premise

The calculation assumes that the perturbative counting survives after removing the infinite factors that translation symmetry introduces into the state normalizations, and that the ungapped collective wiggle of the whole wall is so unlikely to be excited at the length scales involved that it can be ignored; at finite coupling a long-wavelength wiggle actually has excitation probability of order one, so the formal probabilities may receive corrections at large distances.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • In the $\phi^4$ model at $m=1$, Stokes scattering turns on sharply at $k_0 \approx 1.575$ and its probability density is largest just above threshold, decreasing rapidly as $k_0$ grows.
  • Backward, reflected Stokes scattering becomes negligible already at $k_0 = 2m$, so above threshold the process is dominated by forward inelastic scattering.
  • Anti-Stokes scattering has no energy threshold, and for a nearly monochromatic incoming meson its probability diverges as the incoming momentum goes to zero before falling off with increasing $k_0$.
  • At large $k_0$, the Stokes probability is exponentially suppressed because converting energy into the shape mode requires a large x-momentum transfer to the wall, an exponentially suppressed process.
  • For oblique incidence, the total Stokes probability is independent of the incoming y-momentum $k_{0y}$, a consequence of boost invariance along the wall.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Inference: the same cubic vertex calculation can be adapted to meson multiplication and to excitation of the wall-translation mode; the paper notes the latter already has a $\lambda/(m|k_y|)$ divergence, so a complete treatment of wall-displacement excitations would need an infrared-sensitive resummation or wave packets.
  • Inference: the anti-Stokes probability, after integrating over impact parameter, should reproduce the classical energy-loss cross-section for a meson hitting an oscillating wall, so a direct classical simulation of the $\phi^4$ string would test Eq. (5.14) without the $\sigma_0$ normalization.
  • Inference: because the formulas are written in terms of the normal modes of any reflectionless potential, the same integrals should apply to $\phi^6$ and Sine-Gordon-type domain walls in 2+1 dimensions, with only the shape-mode data changed.
  • Inference: the sharp Stokes threshold at $k_0 \approx 1.575\,m$ is a direct lattice prediction; observing any shape-mode excitation below it would falsify Eq. (5.11) independently of the normalization subtleties.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper uses linearized soliton perturbation theory (LSPT) in the Schrödinger picture to compute leading-order O(λ) probability densities for Stokes scattering, in which a bulk meson excites the shape mode of a (2+1)-dimensional domain wall string, and for anti-Stokes scattering, in which a meson de-excites an initially excited shape mode. The authors derive finite-dimensional integral expressions (3.27) and (4.15), specialize them to the φ^4 double-well model in (5.11) and (5.14), and present numerical plots. The treatment explicitly separates the gapless translation-mode sector by an IR regulator ε→0 and delegates the normalization of infinite domain-wall inner products to the reduced inner product of Ref. [61].

Significance. If the normalization issue is resolved, this is a useful and nontrivial extension of the 1+1-dimensional kink results to the 2+1-dimensional string. The calculation is concrete: no parameter is fitted to data, the leading-order Dyson expansion is written out with explicit normal modes, and the φ^4 specialization is internally consistent. The distinction between forward and backward outgoing mesons and the threshold behavior of the probabilities are physically interesting and could be confronted with classical-field or lattice simulations. The main weakness is that the translation-quotient normalization, which is load-bearing for all numerical predictions, is cited rather than derived for the gapless continuum case.

major comments (3)
  1. [§2.3, Eqs. (3.21)–(3.26)] The probabilities are formed as ratios of matrix elements divided by the infinite inner product 0⟨0|0⟩0, using the reduced inner product of Ref. [61]. That procedure was developed for a 1+1-dimensional kink, where the translation sector is a single zero mode; here the translation mode is a gapless continuum with dispersion ω=|k_y|, so the quotient is a different mathematical object. The paper states after Eq. (3.26) that corrections from the non-diagonal translation action are subleading in √λ, but no derivation or consistency check is given. If the quotient introduces a k_y-dependent measure factor or a residual ε-dependence, the probability densities (3.27), (4.15), (5.11), and (5.14) are rescaled by an O(1) constant. This needs to be proven or at least made explicit before the central quantitative claims can be accepted.
  2. [§2.3, Eqs. (2.26)–(2.27)] The IR prescription sets ε=0 while the paper acknowledges that at any finite coupling long-wavelength translation modes have O(1) excitation probability, so the perturbative truncation is invalid at arbitrarily large |y|. This caveat is set aside, but the amplitudes in (3.22) and (4.10) are built on states that include the translation-mode vacuum, and the normalization/projector in (3.24)–(3.26) and (4.12)–(4.14) involves the translation sector. The ε→0 limit of the normalized amplitude is therefore part of the definition of the theory used here. The paper should show that this limit is finite and independent of how the cutoff is removed, rather than simply discarding the zero-mode contributions.
  3. [§6, final paragraph] The estimate that total translation-mode excitation probability is of order (λ/m) ln(ϵ/m) addresses soft translation-mode production, not the normalization of the domain-wall sector used in the Stokes/anti-Stokes amplitudes. Moreover, it is obtained by formally replacing ω_S by ω_B=0 in the Stokes formula, but the vertex V_{S,k2,-k1} in (3.9) is shape-mode-specific; the translation-mode vertex has a different x-profile, so the estimate is only heuristic. This material therefore does not resolve the concerns raised in the two previous comments.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract] The phrase “two process” should be “two processes”.
  2. [§4, Eq. (4.5)] The argument of the sine in the displayed time-evolution formula is typeset ambiguously; the intended factor appears to be ((ω_{k1}+ω_{kS}-ω_{k2})/2)t, and the parentheses should be clarified.
  3. [§3 and §5, after Eqs. (3.27) and (5.11)] The terms “forward” and “backward” are used for the sign of the outgoing k_{2x}; because k_{2y} is generally nonzero, a sentence defining “forward” as “continuing in the same x-direction” would prevent confusion.
  4. [§5.2, Figs. 1–4] The figures are described only via the text; adding axis labels and indicating the normalization m=1 directly on the plots would improve readability.
  5. [§3.3, after Eq. (3.26)] Because Ref. [61] is so heavily relied upon for the normalization, a brief summary of the reduced inner product construction, even in an appendix, would make the paper substantially more self-contained.
  6. [§5.1, after Eq. (5.12)] The claim that the total Stokes probability is independent of k0y is not displayed; a short derivation or a clear reference to a supplementary calculation would be helpful.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: Stokes/anti-Stokes probabilities follow from first-order Hamiltonian matrix elements; self-citations supply background formalism, not the target result.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. Equation (3.27) is obtained by taking the O(sqrt-lambda) interaction H_I derived from H'_3 in Eq. (3.9), evolving an initial wavepacket, imposing energy and y-momentum conservation via delta functions, squaring the resulting matrix element, and normalizing with the inner product (3.25); Eq. (4.15) follows the same pattern for anti-Stokes scattering. No constant is fitted to the predicted probabilities, and the phi4 specializations (5.11) and (5.14) are obtained by substituting the known normal modes and triple vertex (5.5)-(5.6), not by imposing the final scattering rates. The only self-citations are to the authors' LSPT framework and to Ref. [61] for the reduced inner product that gives meaning to the infinite normalization factors; these are background technical tools, not the target result. The paper explicitly states that corrections from the translation-group quotient are subleading by a power of sqrt(lambda), so the leading-order probabilities do not reduce to the quotient's detailed value. The acknowledged IR caveat about long-wavelength translation modes at finite coupling is a correctness/validity limitation, not circularity: the probabilities are not defined in terms of that caveat. No equation in the paper is equivalent by construction to its own input, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The computation introduces no new degrees of freedom. The only adjustable inputs are wave packet widths and the IR regulator, which are initial-condition and regulator choices rather than fitted constants. The central derivation rests on the completeness of normal modes, the leading-order dominance of H'_3, and the translation-group quotient for infinite inner products.

free parameters (3)
  • meson wave packet width sigma = taken large, sigma >> 1/m, then sigma to infinity in delta-function limit
    Defines the initial wave packet in Eq. (3.5). The Stokes probability density is independent of sigma after normalization, but the delta-function limit in Eq. (3.23) requires this parameter.
  • shape-mode wave packet width sigma_0 = taken large, sigma_0 >> 1/m, value unspecified
    Controls the anti-Stokes probability: PaS is proportional to 1/sigma_0 in Eq. (4.15). The paper interprets sigma_0 times PaS as a cross section up to an order-unity factor that is not fixed.
  • IR cutoff epsilon for translation modes = set to 0
    Introduced in Eqs. (2.26) and (2.27) to regulate soft translation modes. Set to zero because the computed shape-mode processes are IR finite, though Sec. 2.3 acknowledges the perturbative truncation fails at large |y|.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math The normal modes g_kx(x) of the Sturm-Liouville operator in Eq. (2.17) form a complete basis for expanding the domain wall sector fields.
    Invoked in Sec. 2.3 for the decomposition (2.22) and in the normalization conditions (2.19).
  • standard math Only the cubic interaction H'_3 in Eq. (2.36) contributes to the Stokes and anti-Stokes amplitudes at O(sqrt(lambda)).
    Used in Secs. 3.3 and 4.2 to select the leading-order interaction terms from the perturbative expansion of the Hamiltonian.
  • domain assumption At leading order the domain wall ground state is the simultaneous ground state of all normal-mode oscillators, including the massless translation mode, and the IR cutoff epsilon can be set to zero.
    Stated in Sec. 2.3 around Eqs. (2.27) through (2.30), together with the caveat that this fails at very large |y|.
  • domain assumption The infinite inner products in the domain wall sector are defined by dividing by the translation group as described in Ref. [61], with subleading corrections of order sqrt(lambda).
    Invoked in Sec. 3.3 after Eq. (3.26) to give meaning to 0<k1|k2>0 and 0<0|0>0 and to the probability normalization.
  • domain assumption The phi4 double-well potential is reflectionless, so the reflection coefficient C_k in Eq. (3.16) vanishes.
    Used in Sec. 5.1 to simplify V-tilde to V and to write the coupling in Eq. (5.8).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of (Anti-)Stokes Scattering on the Domain Wall String." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/JFJZKNAO

@misc{pith2026241213409,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: (Anti-)Stokes Scattering on the Domain Wall String},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/JFJZKNAO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.13409}
}
abstract

In a general (2+1)-dimensional scalar model, we consider the scattering of a single quantum of radiation off a domain wall string, which excites or de-excites the wall's internal shape mode. We refer to these two process as Stokes and anti-Stokes scattering. We calculate the probability densities for these processes to first order in quantum field theory, as a function of incoming momenta and angles. We include both the case in which the incident particle is transmitted and also that in which it bounces backward. Our results are given as finite-dimensional integrals of normal modes and elementary functions, and numerical results are presented in the particular case of the $\phi^4$ double-well model.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.13409 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The forward , backward and total probabilities [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The forward, backward and total probability densities [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The forward, backward and total probabilities [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The forward, backward and total probabilities [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. An Extended Soliton's Zero Modes

    hep-th 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    For infinitely extended solitons the translation zero mode can be given a normalizable wave function, and the resulting Stokes scattering probability for exciting a string's translation mode is computed.

  2. The Domain Wall String's Anti-Stokes Scattering Cross Section

    hep-th 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    The authors compute the anti-Stokes scattering cross section for a domain wall string shape mode in a scalar theory, yielding a wave-packet-independent analytic formula for arbitrary incident angle and impact parameter.

  3. The Domain Wall Soliton's Tension

    hep-th 2024-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    The one-loop domain wall tension in 3+1d phi^4 theory is computed as m^3/(3λ) + 0.0410959 m^3 under a chosen renormalization scheme.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

61 extracted references · 20 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers

  1. [61]

    A Reduced Inner Product for Kink States

    J. Evslin and H. Liu, “A reduced inner product for kink states,” JHEP 03 (2023), 070 doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2023)070 [arXiv:2212.10344 [hep-th]]. 37

    work page Pith review arXiv 2023

  2. [1]

    Scaling from gauge and scalar radiation in Abelian Higgs string networks,

    M. Hindmarsh, J. Lizarraga, J. Urrestilla, D. Daverio and M. Kunz, “Scaling from gauge and scalar radiation in Abelian Higgs string networks,” Phys. Rev. D 96 (2017) no.2, 023525 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.96.023525 [arXiv:1703.06696 [astro-ph.CO]]

    arXiv 2017

  3. [2]

    Abelian Higgs Cosmic Strings: Small Scale Structure and Loops,

    M. Hindmarsh, S. Stuckey and N. Bevis, “Abelian Higgs Cosmic Strings: Small Scale Structure and Loops,” Phys. Rev. D 79 (2009), 123504 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.79.123504 [arXiv:0812.1929 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2009

  4. [3]

    Excited Abelian-Higgs vortices: Decay rate and radiation emis- sion,

    A. Alonso-Izquierdo, J. J. Blanco-Pillado, D. Migu´ elez-Caballero, S. Navarro-Obreg´ on and J. Queiruga, “Excited Abelian-Higgs vortices: Decay rate and radiation emis- sion,” Phys. Rev. D 110 (2024) no.6, 065009 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.110.065009 [arXiv:2405.06030 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2024

  5. [4]

    Spontaneous emission from excited quantum kinks,

    J. Evslin and A. Garc ´ ıa Mart ´ ın-Caro, “Spontaneous emission from excited quantum kinks,” JHEP 12 (2022), 111 doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2022)111 [arXiv:2210.13791 [hep- th]]

    arXiv 2022

  6. [5]

    Exciting the Domain Wall Soliton

    J. J. Blanco-Pillado, D. Jim´ enez-Aguilar and J. Urrestilla, “Exciting the domain wall soliton,” JCAP 01 (2021), 027 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2021/01/027 [arXiv:2006.13255 [hep-th]]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2021

  7. [6]

    The dynam- ics of domain wall strings,

    J. J. Blanco-Pillado, D. Jim´ enez-Aguilar, J. M. Queiruga and J. Urrestilla, “The dynam- ics of domain wall strings,” JCAP 05 (2023), 011 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2023/05/011 [arXiv:2209.12945 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2023

  8. [7]

    Effective Actions for Domain Wall Dynamics,

    J. J. Blanco-Pillado, A. Garc ´ ıa Mart ´ ın-Caro, D. Jim´ enez-Aguilar and J. M. Queiruga, “Effective Actions for Domain Wall Dynamics,” [arXiv:2411.13521 [hep-th]]

    arXiv

Show all 61 references
  1. [8]

    On the Change of Refrangibility of Light,

    G. G. Stokes, “On the Change of Refrangibility of Light,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London 142 (1852) 463–562 doi/10.1098/rstl.1852.0022 32

  2. [9]

    The Negative Absorption of Radiation,

    C. V. Raman, K. S. Krishnan, “The Negative Absorption of Radiation,” Nature 122 (1928), 12–13 doi:10.1038/122012b0

    1928 doi

  3. [10]

    New Phenomenon in the Scattering of Light (pre- liminary report),

    G. S. Landsberg, L. I. Mandelstam, “New Phenomenon in the Scattering of Light (pre- liminary report),” Jour. of the Russ. Phys.-Chem. Soc., Phys. 60 (1928) 335

    1928

  4. [11]

    Topology of Cosmic Domains and Strings,

    T. W. B. Kibble, “Topology of Cosmic Domains and Strings,” J. Phys. A 9 (1976), 1387-1398 doi:10.1088/0305-4470/9/8/029

    1976 doi

  5. [12]

    Field-Theoretical Methods in Physics,

    N. N. Bogoliubov, “Field-Theoretical Methods in Physics,” Suppl. al Nuovo Cimento, Vol. IV, serie I (1966) 346-368

    1966

  6. [13]

    Cosmological Consequences of the Spontaneous Breakdown of Discrete Symmetry,

    Y. B. Zeldovich, I. Y. Kobzarev and L. B. Okun, “Cosmological Consequences of the Spontaneous Breakdown of Discrete Symmetry,” Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 67 (1974), 3-11 SLAC-TRANS-0165

    1974

  7. [14]

    Domain walls in strongly coupled theories,

    G. R. Dvali and M. A. Shifman, “Domain walls in strongly coupled theories,” Phys. Lett. B 396 (1997), 64-69 [erratum: Phys. Lett. B 407 (1997), 452] doi:10.1016/S0370- 2693(97)00131-7 [arXiv:hep-th/9612128 [hep-th]]

    1997 arXiv

  8. [15]

    Domain walls and fermion scattering in grand unified models,

    D. A. Steer and T. Vachaspati, “Domain walls and fermion scattering in grand unified models,” Phys. Rev. D 73 (2006), 105021 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.73.105021 [arXiv:hep- th/0602130 [hep-th]]

    2006

  9. [16]

    Cosmological scaling of precursor do- main walls,

    M. Mukhopadhyay, O. Pujolas and G. Zahariade, “Cosmological scaling of precursor do- main walls,” Phys. Rev. D 110 (2024) no.6, 063548 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.110.063548 [arXiv:2406.10330 [hep-th]]

    2024 arXiv

  10. [17]

    Numerical analysis of melting domain walls and their gravitational waves,

    I. Dankovsky, S. Ramazanov, E. Babichev, D. Gorbunov and A. Vikman, “Numerical analysis of melting domain walls and their gravitational waves,” [arXiv:2410.21971 [hep- ph]]

    arXiv

  11. [18]

    Cosmic Topological Defects from Holography,

    F. Bigazzi, A. L. Cotrone and A. Olzi, “Cosmic Topological Defects from Holography,” [arXiv:2411.19302 [hep-th]]

    arXiv

  12. [19]

    Skyrmion crystal phase on a magnetic domain wall in chiral magnets,

    Y. Amari and M. Nitta, “Skyrmion crystal phase on a magnetic domain wall in chiral magnets,” [arXiv:2409.07943 [cond-mat.mes-hall]]

    arXiv

  13. [20]

    Dark-soliton-like magnetic domain walls in a two-dimensional ferromagnetic superfluid,

    Yu. Xiaoquan, Blakie, P. B. “Dark-soliton-like magnetic domain walls in a two-dimensional ferromagnetic superfluid,” Phys. Rev. Res. 3 (2021),023-043 doi:10.1103/PhysRevResearch.3.023043 33

    2021 doi

  14. [21]

    Topological zero modes and bounded modes at smooth domain walls: Exact solutions and dualities,

    P. Marra and A. Nigro, “Topological zero modes and bounded modes at smooth domain walls: Exact solutions and dualities,” [arXiv:2408.16466 [hep-th]]

    arXiv

  15. [22]

    Bound States and Particle Production by Breather-Type Background Field Configurations,

    A. Rout and B. Altschul, “Bound States and Particle Production by Breather-Type Background Field Configurations,” [arXiv:2410.09273 [hep-th]]

  16. [23]

    Two types of domain walls in N = 1 super-QCD: how they are classified and counted,

    S. Chen, E. Ievlev and M. Shifman, “Two types of domain walls in N = 1 super-QCD: how they are classified and counted,” [arXiv:2411.16845 [hep-th]]

    arXiv

  17. [24]

    Topological solitons,

    N. S. Manton and P. Sutcliffe, “Topological solitons,” Cambridge Univer- sity Press, 2004, ISBN 978-0-521-04096-9, 978-0-521-83836-8, 978-0-511-20783-9 doi:10.1017/CBO9780511617034

    2004 doi

  18. [25]

    Deformation conjecture: deforming lower dimensional integrable systems to higher dimensional ones by using conservation laws,

    S. Y. Lou, X. z. Hao and M. Jia, “Deformation conjecture: deforming lower dimensional integrable systems to higher dimensional ones by using conservation laws,” JHEP 03 (2023), 018 doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2023)018 [arXiv:2211.06844 [nlin.SI]]

    2023 arXiv

  19. [26]

    Collision of two kinks with inner structure,

    Y. Zhong, X. L. Du, Z. C. Jiang, Y. X. Liu and Y. Q. Wang, “Collision of two kinks with inner structure,” JHEP 02 (2020), 153 doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2020)153 [arXiv:1906.02920 [hep-th]]

    2020 arXiv

  20. [27]

    Kink-antiKink colli- sion in a Lorentz-violating ϕ4 model,

    H. Yan, Y. Zhong, Y. X. Liu and K. i. Maeda, “Kink-antiKink colli- sion in a Lorentz-violating ϕ4 model,” Phys. Lett. B 807 (2020), 135542 doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2020.135542 [arXiv:2004.13329 [hep-th]]

    2020

  21. [28]

    Scattering of Kinks in the B φ4 model,

    M. Mohammadi and E. Momeni, “Scattering of Kinks in the B φ4 model,” Chaos Solitons and Fractals: the interdisciplinary journal of Nonlinear Science and Nonequi- librium and Complex Phenomena 165 (2022), 112834 doi:10.1016/j.chaos.2022.112834 [arXiv:2207.00655 [nlin.CD]]

    2022

  22. [29]

    Kink Col- lision in the Noncanonical φ6 Model: A Model with Localized Inner Structures,

    I. Takyi, S. Gyampoh, B. Barnes, J. Ackora-Prah and G. A. Okyere, “Kink Col- lision in the Noncanonical φ6 Model: A Model with Localized Inner Structures,” [arXiv:2209.05902 [hep-th]]

    arXiv

  23. [30]

    Sphalerons and resonance phenomenon in kink-antikink collisions,

    C. Adam, D. Ciurla, K. Oles, T. Romanczukiewicz and A. Wereszczynski, “Sphalerons and resonance phenomenon in kink-antikink collisions,” Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021) no.10, 105022 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.104.105022 [arXiv:2109.01834 [hep-th]]

    2021 arXiv

  24. [31]

    Scattering of kinks in coreless potentials,

    O. N. Karp ´ ıˇ sek, L. Rafaj and F. Blaschke, “Scattering of kinks in coreless potentials,” [arXiv:2407.14313 [hep-th]]. 34

    arXiv

  25. [32]

    Kink-antiKink collisions in the ϕ6 model,

    P. Dorey, K. Mersh, T. Romanczukiewicz and Y. Shnir, “Kink-antiKink collisions in the ϕ6 model,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 107 (2011), 091602 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.107.091602 [arXiv:1101.5951 [hep-th]]

    2011 arXiv

  26. [33]

    Mechanization of scalar field theory in 1+1 dimen- sions,

    F. Blaschke and O. N. Karp ´ ıˇ sek, “Mechanization of scalar field theory in 1+1 dimen- sions,” PTEP 2022 (2022) no.10, 103A01 doi:10.1093/ptep/ptac104 [arXiv:2202.05675 [hep-th]]

    2022 arXiv

  27. [34]

    A toy model to explain the missing bounce windows in the kink-antikink collisions,

    L. Long, X. Li and Y. Jiang, “A toy model to explain the missing bounce windows in the kink-antikink collisions,” Phys. Lett. B 854 (2024), 138763 doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2024.138763 [arXiv:2409.04008 [hep-th]]

    2024

  28. [35]

    Multikink scattering in the ϕ6 model revisited,

    C. Adam, P. Dorey, A. Garcia Martin-Caro, M. Huidobro, K. Oles, T. Romanczukiewicz, Y. Shnir and A. Wereszczynski, “Multikink scattering in the ϕ6 model revisited,” [arXiv:2209.08849 [hep-th]]

    arXiv

  29. [36]

    Inclusion of radiation in the collective coordinate method approach of the ϕ4 model,

    S. Navarro-Obreg´ on, L. M. Nieto and J. M. Queiruga, “Inclusion of radiation in the collective coordinate method approach of the ϕ4 model,” Phys. Rev. E 108 (2023) no.4, 044216 doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.108.044216 [arXiv:2305.00497 [hep-th]]

    2023

  30. [37]

    Spectral Walls in Soliton Collisions,

    C. Adam, K. Oles, T. Romanczukiewicz and A. Wereszczynski, “Spectral Walls in Soliton Collisions,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 122 (2019) no.24, 241601 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.122.241601 [arXiv:1903.12100 [hep-th]]

    2019 arXiv

  31. [38]

    Fermionic spectral walls in kink collisions,

    J. G. F. Campos, A. Mohammadi, J. M. Queiruga, A. Wereszczynski and W. J. Za- krzewski, “Fermionic spectral walls in kink collisions,” JHEP 01 (2023), 071 doi:10.1007/JHEP01(2023)071 [arXiv:2211.07754 [hep-th]]

    2023 arXiv

  32. [39]

    Spectral walls at one loop,

    J. Evslin, C. Halcrow, T. Romanczukiewicz and A. Wereszczynski, “Spectral walls at one loop,” Phys. Rev. D 105 (2022) no.12, 125002 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.105.125002 [arXiv:2202.08249 [hep-th]]

    2022 arXiv

  33. [40]

    Quantum Radiation of Oscillons,

    M. P. Hertzberg, “Quantum Radiation of Oscillons,” Phys. Rev. D 82 (2010), 045022 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.82.045022 [arXiv:1003.3459 [hep-th]]

    2010 arXiv

  34. [41]

    Quantum Evaporation of Classical Breathers,

    J. Oll´ e, O. Pujolas, T. Vachaspati and G. Zahariade, “Quantum Evaporation of Classical Breathers,” Phys. Rev. D 100 (2019) no.4, 045011 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.100.045011 [arXiv:1904.12962 [hep-th]]

    2019 arXiv

  35. [42]

    Quantum oscillons may be long- lived,

    J. Evslin, T. Roma´ nczukiewicz and A. Wereszczy´ nski, “Quantum oscillons may be long- lived,” JHEP 08 (2023), 182 doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2023)182 [arXiv:2305.18056 [hep-th]]. 35

    2023 arXiv

  36. [43]

    Nonperturbative Methods and Extended Hadron Models in Field Theory 1. Semiclassical Functional Methods,

    R. F. Dashen, B. Hasslacher and A. Neveu, “Nonperturbative Methods and Extended Hadron Models in Field Theory 1. Semiclassical Functional Methods,” Phys. Rev. D 10 (1974), 4114 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.10.4114

    1974 doi

  37. [44]

    Collective Coordinate Method for Quantization of Extended Systems,

    J. L. Gervais, A. Jevicki and B. Sakita, “Collective Coordinate Method for Quantization of Extended Systems,” Phys. Rept.23 (1976), 281-293 doi:10.1016/0370-1573(76)90049- 1

    1976 doi

  38. [45]

    Quantum Expansion of Soliton Solutions,

    N. H. Christ and T. D. Lee, “Quantum Expansion of Soliton Solutions,” Phys. Rev. D 12 (1975), 1606 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.12.1606

    1975 doi

  39. [46]

    Classical-Quantum Correspondence for Fields,

    T. Vachaspati and G. Zahariade, “Classical-Quantum Correspondence for Fields,” JCAP 09 (2019), 015 doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2019/09/015 [arXiv:1807.10282 [hep-th]]

    2019 arXiv

  40. [47]

    Quantum corrections to soliton energies,

    N. Graham and H. Weigel, “Quantum corrections to soliton energies,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 37 (2022) no.19, 2241004 doi:10.1142/S0217751X22410044 [arXiv:2201.12131 [hep-th]]

    2022 arXiv

  41. [48]

    Point Canonical Transformations in Path Integral,

    J. L. Gervais and A. Jevicki, “Point Canonical Transformations in Path Integral,” Nucl. Phys. B 110 (1976), 93-112 doi:10.1016/0550-3213(76)90422-3

    1976 doi

  42. [49]

    No saturation of the quantum Bogomolnyi bound by two-dimensional supersymmetric solitons,

    A. Rebhan and P. van Nieuwenhuizen, “No saturation of the quantum Bogomolnyi bound by two-dimensional supersymmetric solitons,” Nucl. Phys. B 508 (1997), 449- 467 doi:10.1016/S0550-3213(97)00625-1 [arXiv:hep-th/9707163 [hep-th]]

    1997 arXiv

  43. [50]

    Manifestly Finite Derivation of the Quantum Kink Mass,

    J. Evslin, “Manifestly Finite Derivation of the Quantum Kink Mass,” JHEP 11 (2019), 161 doi:10.1007/JHEP11(2019)161 [arXiv:1908.06710 [hep-th]]

    2019 arXiv

  44. [51]

    Two-Loop Scalar Kinks,

    J. Evslin and H. Guo, “Two-Loop Scalar Kinks,” Phys. Rev. D 103 (2021) no.12, 125011 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.103.125011 [arXiv:2012.04912 [hep-th]]

    2021 arXiv

  45. [52]

    (Anti-)Stokes scattering on kinks,

    J. Evslin and H. Liu, “(Anti-)Stokes scattering on kinks,” JHEP 03 (2023), 095 doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2023)095 [arXiv:2301.04099 [hep-th]]

    2023 arXiv

  46. [53]

    Meson production from kink-meson scattering,

    J. Evslin, H. Liu and B. Zhang, “Meson production from kink-meson scattering,” Phys. Rev. D 107 (2023) no.2, 025012 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.107.025012 [arXiv:2211.01794 [hep-th]]

    2023 arXiv

  47. [54]

    A (2+1)-dimensional domain wall at one-loop,

    K. Ogundipe, J. Evslin, B. Zhang and H. Guo, “A (2+1)-dimensional domain wall at one-loop,” JHEP 05 (2024), 098 doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2024)098 [arXiv:2403.14062 [hep-th]]. 36

    2024 arXiv

  48. [55]

    Universality in effective strings,

    S. Jaimungal, G. W. Semenoff and K. Zarembo, “Universality in effective strings,” JETP Lett. 69 (1999), 509-515 doi:10.1134/1.568059 [arXiv:hep-ph/9811238 [hep-ph]]

    1999 arXiv

  49. [56]

    Quantum Instabilities of Solitons,

    H. Weigel, “Quantum Instabilities of Solitons,” AIP Conf. Proc. 2116 (2019) no.1, 170002 doi:10.1063/1.5114153 [arXiv:1907.10942 [hep-th]]

    2019 arXiv

  50. [57]

    Mass Formulas for Static Solitons,

    K. E. Cahill, A. Comtet and R. J. Glauber, “Mass Formulas for Static Solitons,” Phys. Lett. B 64 (1976), 283-285 doi:10.1016/0370-2693(76)90202-1

    1976 doi

  51. [58]

    Vacuum Polarization Energy of a Proca Soliton,

    D. A. Petersen and H. Weigel, “Vacuum Polarization Energy of a Proca Soliton,” [arXiv:2411.18373 [hep-th]]

    arXiv

  52. [59]

    There are no Goldstone bosons in two-dimensions,

    S. R. Coleman, “There are no Goldstone bosons in two-dimensions,” Commun. Math. Phys. 31 (1973), 259-264 doi:10.1007/BF01646487

    1973 doi

  53. [60]

    A Finite Tension for the ϕ4 4 Domain Wall,

    J. Evslin, H. Liu, B. Zhang and H. Guo, “A Finite Tension for the ϕ4 4 Domain Wall,” [arXiv:2411.05406 [hep-th]]

    arXiv

Pith tools

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