Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Access by Xinjiang University

Sign problems, noise, and chiral symmetry breaking in a QCD-like theory

Dorota Grabowska1,*, David B. Kaplan1,†, and Amy N. Nicholson2,‡

  • 1Institute for Nuclear Theory, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, DC 98195-1550, USA
  • 2Department of Physics, Maryland Center for Fundamental Physics, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742-4111, USA

  • *grabow@uw.edu
  • dbkaplan@uw.edu
  • amynn@umd.edu

Phys. Rev. D 87, 014504 – Published 22 January, 2013

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.87.014504

Abstract

The Nambu-Jona-Lasinio model reduced to 2+1 dimensions has two different path integral formulations: at finite chemical potential one formulation has a severe sign problem similar to that found in QCD, while the other does not. At large N, where N is the number of flavors, one can compute the probability distributions of fermion correlators analytically in both formulations. In the former case one finds a broad distribution with small mean; in the latter one finds a heavy tailed positive distribution amenable to the cumulant expansion techniques developed in earlier work. We speculate on the implications of this model for QCD.

Article Text

References (26)

  1. S. Beane et al., arXiv:1206.5219.
  2. J.-W. Lee, M. G. Endres, D. B. Kaplan, and A. N. Nicholson, Proc. Sci. LATTICE2011 (2011) 203.
  3. M. G. Endres, D. B. Kaplan, J.-W. Lee, and A. N. Nicholson, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 201601 (2011).
  4. M. G. Endres, D. B. Kaplan, J.-W. Lee, and A. N. Nicholson, Proc. Sci. LATTICE2011 (2011) 017.
  5. Y. Nambu and G. Jona-Lasinio, Phys. Rev. 122, 345 (1961).
  6. A. Manohar and H. Georgi, Nucl. Phys. B234, 189 (1984).
  7. We will identify x1, 1, and γ1 with the Euclidean time direction; γ matrices satisfy {γμ,γν}=2δμν.

  8. P. E. Gibbs, GLASGOW, Report No. PRINT-86-0389, 1986 (unpublished).
  9. K. Splittorff and J. J. M. Verbaarschot, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 031601 (2007).
  10. K. Splittorff and J. J. M. Verbaarschot, Phys. Rev. D 75, 116003 (2007).
  11. P. Lepage, in Proceedings of the 1989 Theoretical Advanced Study Institute (TASI), Boulder, 1989, edited by T. DeGrand and D. Toussaint (World Scientific, Singapore, 1990).
  12. M. Savage (private communication).
  13. S. Chandrasekharan and U.-J. Wiese, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 3116 (1999).
  14. Although the theory given in Eq. (3) is often referred to as the Gross-Neveu model, it is not asymptotically free and chiral symmetry breaking requires a critical value for the coupling g as in the original NJL model in 4D, and unlike the original Gross-Neveu model at large-N in 2D; we will continue referring to it as the 3D NJL model at large N.

  15. S. Hands, A. Kocic, and J. B. Kogut, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 224, 29 (1993).
  16. B. Rosenstein, B. Warr, and S. Park, Phys. Rep. 205, 59 (1991).
  17. S. Hands, J. Kogut, and C. Strouthos, Phys. Lett. B 515, 407 (2001).
  18. S. Hands, S. Kim, and J. B. Kogut, Nucl. Phys. B442, 364 (1995).
  19. In this theory minimal subtraction MS means no subtraction, as there are no logarithmic divergences and hence no 1/(d3) poles.

  20. Since the functional X[ϕ] is typically nonlocal, by connected Feynman diagrams we mean neither conventional Feynman diagrams, nor conventionally connected. For example, expanding X[ϕ] to second order in ϕ might take the form (d3xF(x)ϕ(x))2 for some function F; this is treated as a fundamental 2-point vertex in our discussion.

  21. S. Chandrasekharan, Phys. Rev. D 82, 025007 (2010).
  22. S. Chandrasekharan and A. Li, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 140404 (2012).
  23. S. Chandrasekharan and A. Li, Phys. Rev. D 85, 091502 (2012).
  24. M. G. Endres, D. B. Kaplan, J.-W. Lee, and A. N. Nicholson, Phys. Rev. A 84, 043644 (2011).
  25. M. G. Endres, D. B. Kaplan, J.-W. Lee, and A. N. Nicholson, arXiv:1203.3169.
  26. T. DeGrand, Phys. Rev. D 86, 014512 (2012).

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation