Studying properties of the SU(2) QCD by lattice field theory methods

Basic Information

• Paper ID: 2511.19789
• Title: Studying properties of the SU(2) QCD by lattice field theory methods
• Authors: I. Kudrov, V. Bornyakov, V. Goy
• Institutions: NRC "Kurchatov Institute"- IHEP (Protvino, Russia), Pacific Quantum Center, Far Eastern Federal University (Vladivostok, Russia)
• Classification: hep-lat (High Energy Physics - Lattice Field Theory)
• Submission Date: November 24, 2025
• Paper Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.19789

Abstract

This paper investigates the properties of SU(2) QCD using lattice field theory methods, with the primary objective of determining the confinement-deconfinement phase transition line in the μ-T plane (chemical potential-temperature plane). The researchers determine this phase transition line by calculating the Polyakov loop and string tension, providing new insights for understanding the QCD phase diagram.

Research Background and Motivation

Core Problems to be Addressed

This study aims to determine the confinement-deconfinement phase transition line of SU(2) QCD under finite temperature and finite chemical potential conditions, particularly in the region of temperature T ≥ 170 MeV and non-zero quark chemical potential.

Research Significance

1. Understanding Physical Phenomena: Multiple physical phenomena including heavy-ion collisions, early universe hot matter, and neutron stars all require understanding the QCD phase diagram
2. Application to Experimental Facilities: Existing experimental facilities such as LHC, RHIC, and NICA will intensively probe regions of the QCD phase diagram where confinement-deconfinement phase transitions may be observed
3. Methodological Value: SU(2) QCD serves as an ideal platform for testing methods to locate phase transition lines, which can subsequently be applied to SU(3) QCD

Limitations of Existing Methods

1. Sign Problem: In SU(3) QCD, introducing baryon chemical potential leads to severe sign problems in lattice QCD methods
2. Limited Applicability: Existing lattice QCD methods can only study the phase diagram near zero baryon chemical potential, producing uncontrollable errors in the large chemical potential region
3. Assumptions in Effective Models: For large baryon chemical potential, while effective models can be employed, these models rely on certain assumptions, limiting their applicability

Advantages of SU(2) QCD

SU(2) QCD is free from the sign problem, making it an ideal theoretical framework for studying finite density QCD. Although the phase diagrams of SU(2) and SU(3) QCD differ (e.g., baryons in SU(2) are bosons composed of two quarks), both exhibit confinement-deconfinement phase transitions, which is the key similarity.

Core Contributions

1. Extended Phase Transition Line Data: Extended the confinement-deconfinement phase transition line of SU(2) QCD from the previously studied temperature range of 100-140 MeV to higher temperatures (170-260 MeV) and chemical potential region of 0-830 MeV
2. Cross-Validation with Multiple Observables: Determined the phase transition temperature Td(μ) using four different observables:
   • Polyakov loop inflection point
   • Polyakov loop susceptibility χP
   • Static quark entropy Sq
   • String tension σ(T)
3. Discovery of Phase Transition Properties: Found that the confinement-deconfinement phase transition (as a crossover) weakens with increasing chemical potential, with peak heights of χP and Sq decreasing
4. Characteristics of Phase Transition Line Behavior: Revealed that Td(μ) changes slowly for μ < 200 MeV and exhibits approximately linear rapid decrease for μ > 200 MeV
5. Zero Chemical Potential Benchmark: Obtained Td(0) = 230(10) MeV at μ = 0, or equivalently r0Td(0) = 0.55(4), consistent with previous studies

Detailed Methodology

Task Definition

Input: Lattice gauge field configurations generated at different temperatures T (controlled by the number of lattice sites Nt in the temporal direction) and chemical potential μ
Output: Confinement-deconfinement phase transition temperature Td as a function of chemical potential μ
Constraints: Fixed spatial lattice size Ns = 32, using improved lattice action to reduce lattice artifacts

Lattice Action Setup

Total Action: $S_{SU(2)QCD} = S_G + S_{stag}$

Gauge Action (tree-level improved Symanzik action): $S_G = \frac{\beta}{2}\left(c_0\sum_{plaq}\text{ReTr}(1-U_{plaq}) + c_1\sum_{rt}\text{ReTr}(1-U_{rt})\right)$

Staggered Fermion Action (including diquark source term): $S_{stag} = \sum_x \bar{\psi}_x\left[\sum_\nu \frac{\eta_{x,\nu}}{2}\{\tilde{U}_{x,\nu}e^{\delta_{\nu,0}\mu a}\psi_{x+\hat{\nu}} - \tilde{U}^\dagger_{x-\hat{\nu},\nu}e^{-\delta_{\nu,0}\mu a}\psi_{x-\hat{\nu}}\} + m_q a\psi_x\right]$$+ \sum_x \frac{1}{2}\lambda[\psi_x^T\sigma_2\psi_x + \bar{\psi}_x\sigma_2\bar{\psi}_x^T]$

Parameter Settings:

• β = 1.75 (inverse coupling constant)
• amq = 0.0075 (quark mass)
• λ = 0.00075 (diquark source term coupling)
• Lattice spacing: a = 0.048(1) fm
• Pion mass: mπ = 680(40) MeV

Polyakov Loop Method

Definition: $P(\vec{x}) = \frac{1}{2}\text{Tr}\prod_{x_4=1}^{N_t}U_4(\vec{x}, x_4)$

Susceptibility: $\chi_P = \langle P^2\rangle - \langle P\rangle^2$

Renormalization Procedure (two-step method):

1. Apply 10 iterations of hypercubic blocking to the temporal link variables U4(x) to reduce the divergent self-energy of static quarks
2. Define the renormalization factor through the highest temperature point (Nt=4, μ=0): $\langle P\rangle_{ren}(N_t=4) = 1 = z^4\langle P\rangle(N_t=4)$ obtaining z = 1.017

Static Quark Entropy: $S_q = -\frac{\partial F_q}{\partial T}, \quad F_q = -T\log(\langle P\rangle)$

The phase transition temperature is determined by fitting the peak positions of χP and Sq (using Gaussian fitting).

String Tension Method

Wilson Loop Calculation: $W(r,t) = A(e^{-V(r)t} + Be^{-E_1(r)t})$

Effective Potential: $aV_t(r) = \log(W(r,t)/W(r,t+a))$

Fitting is performed in the range 4 < t/a < 6, extracting three parameters: aV(r), aE1(r), B.

Alternative Empirical Form: $a\tilde{V}_t(r) = \frac{1}{2}\log(W(r,t)/W(r,aN_t-t))/(N_t/2-t/a)$

Potential Function Fitting:

• Low chemical potential: Cornell potential $V(r) = V_0 + \sigma r + \alpha/r$
• High chemical potential: Screened potential $V(r) = V_0 + \frac{\alpha}{r}e^{-m_{scr}r}$

The chemical potential at which string tension σ vanishes is determined by extrapolation, marking the appearance of the deconfined phase.

Technical Innovations

1. Improved Wilson Loop Analysis: At finite temperature, hypercubic blocking is applied to temporal link variables and APE smearing to spatial link variables, improving signal quality
2. Multi-Observable Consistency Check: Simultaneously using four independent observables enhances the reliability of results
3. Extended Temperature Range: Extended the string tension method based on Wilson loops from the low-temperature region (100-140 MeV) to the high-temperature region (170-260 MeV)
4. Statistical Methods: Bootstrap method is used to calculate statistical errors, with approximately 4000 configurations per (T,μ) point

Experimental Setup

Lattice Parameters

• Spatial Size: Ns = 32 (fixed)
• Temporal Size:
  • μ ≠ 0: Nt = 10-24
  • μ = 0: Nt = 4-26
• Chemical Potential Range: 0 ≤ aμ ≤ 0.2 (corresponding to 0-1230 MeV)
• Temperature Range: Controlled by T = 1/(aNt), approximately 170-300 MeV

Configuration Generation

• Approximately 4000 independent configurations generated per (T,μ) point
• Tree-level improved Symanzik gauge action employed
• Improved staggered fermion action with diquark source term used

Computational Resources

• Far Eastern Federal University computing cluster
• NRC "Kurchatov Institute"-IHEP central Linux cluster
• KCTEP NRC "Kurchatov Institute" Linux cluster

Error Estimation

• Statistical errors: Bootstrap method
• Systematic errors: Conservatively estimated as half the distance between adjacent data points in fitting

Experimental Results

Main Results

1. Polyakov Loop Susceptibility

From the left panel of Figure 1:

• At μ = 0 MeV, the χP peak is highest, approximately 0.0055
• With increasing μ (205, 410, 615 MeV), peak heights systematically decrease
• Peak positions shift toward lower temperatures
• Key Finding: The phase transition weakens with increasing chemical potential

2. Static Quark Entropy

From the right panel of Figure 1:

• Results are consistent with χP, with Sq peak heights decreasing as μ increases
• Peak value at μ = 0 is approximately 3.2, decreasing to approximately 1.5 at μ = 820 MeV
• Peak temperature positions agree with results from the χP method

3. String Tension

From the left panel of Figure 3:

• T = 171 MeV: a²σ decreases from approximately 0.013 at μ=0 to approximately 0.002 at μ=800 MeV
• T = 187 MeV: a²σ decreases from approximately 0.011 to nearly 0
• T = 205 MeV: a²σ is small at all μ values
• T = 228 MeV: a²σ is essentially zero, indicating the deconfined phase

The chemical potential value at which σ→0 is determined by linear extrapolation, corresponding to the phase transition point.

4. Phase Diagram (right panel of Figure 3)

Summary of Results from Four Methods:

• μ = 0: Td ≈ 230(10) MeV, all methods agree
• 0 < μ < 200 MeV: Td decreases slowly, from 230 MeV to approximately 220 MeV
• 200 < μ < 830 MeV: Td decreases rapidly and approximately linearly, from 220 MeV to approximately 170 MeV
• μ = 830 MeV: Td ≈ 170 MeV

Comparison with Literature:

• Qualitatively consistent with Ref.12 (low-temperature region 100-140 MeV)
• Consistent with Ref.8,13 at μ=0
• Consistent with Ref.13 for μ<500 MeV
• Discrepancy: Ref.13 shows Td independent of μ for μ>500 MeV, while this study shows continued decrease

Consistency of Four Methods

All four observables (χP, Sq, σ, inflection point) yield Td(μ) values that are mutually compatible within error bars, enhancing result reliability. Overlapping error bars indicate that systematic error estimation is reasonable.

Key Physical Quantities

Phase Transition Temperature at Zero Chemical Potential:

• Td(0) = 230(10) MeV
• Dimensionless form: r0Td(0) = 0.55(4)
• Good agreement with earlier results from Ref.8,13

Phase Transition Line Slope:

• Low μ region (μ<200 MeV): dTd/dμ ≈ -0.05
• High μ region (μ>200 MeV): dTd/dμ ≈ -0.08 (approximately linear)

Related Work

QCD Phase Diagram Research

1. SU(3) QCD:
   • Extensive studies along the temperature axis using first-principles lattice QCD calculations and high-temperature perturbative calculations
   • Finite density faces sign problem, limiting studies in large chemical potential region
2. Advantages of SU(2) QCD (Refs.4-6):
   • Free from sign problem, enabling direct study of finite density
   • Baryons are bosons (composed of two quarks), leading to different particle spectra and diquark condensation phenomena

Phase Transition Property Research

1. Ref.8 (Cotter et al. 2013):
   • Confirmed that phase transition at μ=0 is a crossover
   • Provided early results for dense two-color matter phase diagram
2. Ref.12 (Begun et al. 2022):
   • Studied phase transition in 100<T<140 MeV range
   • Used same lattice action and parameters
   • Present study extends to higher temperature/lower chemical potential
3. Ref.13 (Boz et al. 2020):
   • Consistent with present study for μ<500 MeV
   • Shows Td plateau for μ>500 MeV, differing from present study

Finite Temperature Wilson Loop

1. Refs.21-23:
   • Noted that spectral function delta peaks acquire thermal width at finite temperature
   • Proposed appropriate fitting functions for extracting real and imaginary parts of thermal potential
   • Present study uses simplified form; more precise methods will be adopted in future

Conclusions and Discussion

Main Conclusions

1. Phase Transition Line Determination: Successfully determined the confinement-deconfinement phase transition line of SU(2) QCD in the chemical potential range 0-830 MeV
2. Phase Transition Temperature Behavior:
   • Zero chemical potential: Td(0) = 230(10) MeV
   • Low chemical potential (μ<200 MeV): Td changes slowly
   • High chemical potential (μ>200 MeV): Td decreases nearly linearly
3. Multi-Observable Consistency: Results from four independent observables (χP, Sq, σ, inflection point) are consistent within error bars
4. Phase Transition Weakening: Results from χP and Sq indicate that the crossover weakens with increasing chemical potential
5. Relationship with Previous Work:
   • Qualitatively consistent with Ref.12 (low-temperature region)
   • Consistent with Ref.13 in low chemical potential region, but differs in high chemical potential region

Limitations

1. Fixed Lattice Parameters:
   • Only one set of lattice parameters used (β=1.75, amq=0.0075)
   • No continuum limit extrapolation performed
   • Pion mass (680 MeV) is higher than physical value
2. Simplified Wilson Loop Analysis:
   • Simple fitting form used (Eq. 9), not employing more precise methods recommended in Refs.21-23
   • Imaginary part of thermal potential not extracted
   • Improved statistical quantities needed for stable fitting
3. Statistical Precision:
   • Approximately 4000 configurations per point may limit detection of fine structures
   • Conservative systematic error estimation
4. Temperature Coverage:
   • Does not cover extremely low temperature region (T<170 MeV)
   • Temperature gap exists between present study and Ref.12

Future Directions

1. Study of T→0 Limit: The behavior of phase transition in zero temperature limit remains unclear; one possibility is that Td becomes independent of μ at higher μ, requiring further investigation
2. Improved Wilson Loop Analysis: Employ more precise fitting functions proposed in Refs.21-23, extracting real and imaginary parts of thermal potential
3. Continuum Limit: Perform calculations at multiple lattice spacings and extrapolate to continuum limit
4. Chiral Limit: Reduce quark mass, approaching the physical point
5. Order of Phase Transition: More precisely determine whether phase transition is first-order, second-order, or crossover, and its evolution with μ
6. Comparison with SU(3): Apply developed methods to SU(3) QCD (in feasible parameter regions)

In-Depth Evaluation

Strengths

1. Rigorous Methodology:
   • Improved lattice action employed (Symanzik gauge action, improved staggered fermions) to reduce lattice artifacts
   • Cross-validation with multiple observables enhances result reliability
   • Systematic renormalization procedure (Polyakov loop)
2. Deep Physical Insights:
   • Discovery of important phenomenon that phase transition weakens with increasing chemical potential
   • Revelation of non-monotonic behavior of Td(μ) (slow change at low μ, rapid change at high μ)
   • Provides valuable information for understanding QCD phase structure
3. Substantial Computational Scale:
   • 4000 configurations per (T,μ) point
   • Extensive parameter space coverage (multiple temperature and chemical potential points)
   • Effective utilization of large-scale parallel computing resources
4. Connection with Literature:
   • Adequate discussion of relationship with previous work
   • Identification of discrepancy with Ref.13, providing alternative perspective
   • Important supplement to SU(2) QCD phase diagram research
5. Complete Technical Details:
   • Detailed description of lattice action and parameters
   • Clear explanation of analysis methods and fitting procedures
   • Facilitates result reproducibility

Shortcomings

1. Single Lattice Spacing:
   • No continuum limit extrapolation, systematic errors from lattice artifacts remain
   • Unable to assess lattice spacing dependence
2. Elevated Quark Mass:
   • mπ = 680 MeV far exceeds physical value (~140 MeV)
   • May affect phase transition properties and critical behavior
   • Limits direct comparison with experiments
3. Wilson Loop Analysis Needs Improvement:
   • Authors acknowledge not using most precise fitting methods
   • Imaginary part of thermal potential not extracted, information incomplete
   • Higher statistics needed to support fitting
4. Conservative Error Estimation:
   • Systematic error estimated as half the distance between adjacent points, possibly excessive
   • Detailed analysis of various systematic error sources lacking
5. Incomplete Temperature Coverage:
   • Temperature gap of 140-170 MeV exists with Ref.12
   • Complete phase diagram not provided
6. Unresolved Discrepancy with Ref.13:
   • Inconsistency in high chemical potential region requires clarification
   • May originate from differences in lattice parameters, observables, or analysis methods

Impact

1. Contribution to Field:
   • Provides important new data points for SU(2) QCD phase diagram
   • Extends known phase transition line range
   • Provides reference for methodological development (how to determine phase transition line)
2. Practical Value:
   • SU(2) QCD as "laboratory" for SU(3) QCD; methods in this study are transferable
   • Provides theoretical reference framework for heavy-ion collision experiments
   • Although not directly applicable to physical QCD, provides qualitative understanding
3. Reproducibility:
   • Detailed parameter settings enable reproducibility in principle
   • Uses standard lattice QCD techniques
   • Requires substantial computational resources
4. Foundation for Subsequent Research:
   • Establishes foundation for future continuum limit and chiral limit studies
   • Raised questions (e.g., T→0 behavior) stimulate subsequent work
   • Comparison with other research promotes field development

Applicable Scenarios

1. Theoretical Physics Research:
   • Understanding QCD phase structure and phase transition mechanisms
   • Testing lattice QCD methods and observables
   • Studying confinement-deconfinement physics
2. Methodological Development:
   • Development and testing of finite density lattice QCD techniques
   • Comparison of effectiveness of different observables for determining phase transitions
   • Provides reference for SU(3) QCD methods
3. Teaching and Training:
   • Serves as example of lattice QCD calculations
   • Demonstrates handling of finite temperature and chemical potential
   • Illustrates importance of multi-observable cross-validation
4. Limited Scenarios:
   • Cannot be directly applied to physical QCD (SU(3))
   • Cannot be directly compared with experiments under current parameters
   • Requires further improvement to achieve quantitative precision

Key References

1. 4 Kogut et al., Nucl. Phys. B 582 (2000): Proposed studying SU(2) QCD as scheme to avoid sign problem
2. 8 Cotter et al., Phys. Rev. D 87 (2013): Important early work confirming phase transition properties of SU(2) QCD
3. 12 Begun et al., Phys. Rev. D 105 (2022): Direct predecessor of present study, investigating phase transition line in low-temperature region
4. 13 Boz et al., Phys. Rev. D 101 (2020): Provides comparative data, showing discrepancy with present study in high chemical potential region
5. 21-23 Bala et al., HotQCD Collaboration: Precise treatment methods for finite temperature Wilson loops and thermal potential

Overall Assessment: This is a solid lattice QCD computational work that systematically investigates the confinement-deconfinement phase transition line of SU(2) QCD using multiple observables. Although limited by lattice spacing and quark mass, the methodology is rigorous and results carry important physical significance. In particular, the discovery that phase transition weakens with increasing chemical potential, and the two-segment behavior of Td(μ), provide valuable information for understanding QCD phase structure. Future improvements in Wilson loop analysis and continuum limit extrapolation will further enhance the precision and impact of this research.