- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review D

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Hot new early dark energy: Dark radiation matter decoupling

Mathias Garny1,*, Florian Niedermann2,†, Henrique Rubira3,4,5,‡, and Martin S. Sloth6,§

  • *Contact author: mathias.garny@tum.de
  • †Contact author: florian.niedermann@su.se
  • ‡Contact author: henrique.rubira@lmu.de
  • §Contact author: sloth@sdu.dk
PDF

Phys. Rev. D 114, 043532 – Published 17 August, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/787w-dpbz

Abstract

We present a microscopic model of the dark sector that resolves the Hubble tension within standard current datasets (Planck 2018, Pantheon+ and DESI DR2 BAO) based on well-known fundamental principles, gauge symmetry and spontaneous symmetry breaking. It builds on the hot new early dark energy (Hot NEDE) setup, featuring a dark SU(N) gauge symmetry broken to SU(N−1) in a supercooled phase transition that creates a thermal bath of self-interacting dark radiation in the epoch between big bang nucleosynthesis and recombination. Adding a fermion multiplet charged under the gauge symmetry provides a naturally stable component of dark matter that interacts with dark radiation. Spontaneous symmetry breaking predicts a decoupling of this interaction once the dark sector cools down, that we refer to as dark radiation matter decoupling (DRMD). We also provide a simplified DRMD model that captures the essential features of the full theory while retaining additional falsifiable predictions. Using the datasets stated above, we find agreement with the SH0ES determination of H0 at the 1.4σ level, compared to a 5.7σ tension in ΛCDM, thereby providing a resolution of the Hubble tension.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (111)

  1. A. G. Riess et al., A comprehensive measurement of the local value of the Hubble constant with 1  km s−1 Mpc−1 uncertainty from the Hubble Space Telescope and the SH0ES Team, Astrophys. J. Lett. 934, L7 (2022).
  2. L. Breuval, A. G. Riess, S. Casertano, W. Yuan, L. M. Macri, M. Romaniello, Y. S. Murakami, D. Scolnic, G. S. Anand, and I. Soszyński, Small magellanic cloud cepheids observed with the hubble space telescope provide a new anchor for the sh0es distance ladder, Astrophys. J. 973, 30 (2024).
  3. C. Vogl et al., No rungs attached: A distance-ladder-free determination of the Hubble constant through type II supernova spectral modelling, Astron. Astrophys. 702, A41 (2025).
  4. D. Scolnic, A. G. Riess, J. Wu, S. Li, G. S. Anand, R. Beaton, S. Casertano, R. I. Anderson, S. Dhawan, and X. Ke, CATS: The Hubble constant from standardized TRGB and type Ia supernova measurements, Astrophys. J. Lett. 954, L31 (2023).
  5. W. L. Freedman, B. F. Madore, T. J. Hoyt, I. S. Jang, A. J. Lee, and K. A. Owens, Status report on the Chicago-Carnegie Hubble Program (CCHP): Measurement of the Hubble constant using the Hubble and James Webb Space Telescopes, Astrophys. J. 985, 203 (2025).
  6. S. Birrer et al. (TDCOSMO Collaboration), TDCOSMO 2025: Cosmological constraints from strong lensing time delays, Astron. Astrophys. 704, A63 (2025).
  7. J. P. Blakeslee, J. B. Jensen, C.-P. Ma, P. A. Milne, and J. E. Greene, The Hubble constant from infrared surface brightness fluctuation distances, Astrophys. J. 911, 65 (2021).
  8. N. Aghanim et al. (Planck Collaboration), Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters, Astron. Astrophys. 641, A6 (2020); 652, C4(E) (2021).
  9. E. Di Valentino et al. (CosmoVerse Collaboration), The CosmoVerse white paper: Addressing observational tensions in cosmology with systematics and fundamental physics, Phys. Dark Universe 49, 101965 (2025).
  10. E. Camphuis et al. (SPT-3G Collaboration), SPT-3G D1: CMB temperature and polarization power spectra and cosmology from 2019 and 2020 observations of the SPT-3G main field, Phys. Rev. D 113, 083504 (2026).
  11. E. Calabrese et al. (Atacama Cosmology Telescope Collaboration), The Atacama Cosmology Telescope: DR6 constraints on extended cosmological models, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 11 (2025) 063.
  12. M. Abdul Karim et al. (DESI Collaboration), DESI DR2 results. II. Measurements of baryon acoustic oscillations and cosmological constraints, Phys. Rev. D 112, 083515 (2025).
  13. J. L. Bernal, L. Verde, and A. G. Riess, The trouble with H0, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 10 (2016) 019.
  14. L. Knox and M. Millea, Hubble constant hunter’s guide, Phys. Rev. D 101, 043533 (2020).
  15. G. Benevento, W. Hu, and M. Raveri, Can late dark energy transitions raise the Hubble constant?, Phys. Rev. D 101, 103517 (2020).
  16. F. Niedermann and M. S. Sloth, New early dark energy, Phys. Rev. D 103, L041303 (2021).
  17. F. Niedermann and M. S. Sloth, Resolving the Hubble tension with new early dark energy, Phys. Rev. D 102, 063527 (2020).
  18. F. Niedermann and M. S. Sloth, Hot new early dark energy: Towards a unified dark sector of neutrinos, dark energy and dark matter, Phys. Lett. B 835, 137555 (2022).
  19. F. Niedermann and M. S. Sloth, Hot new early dark energy, Phys. Rev. D 105, 063509 (2022).
  20. J. S. Cruz, F. Niedermann, and M. S. Sloth, Cold new early dark energy pulls the trigger on the H0 and S8 tensions: A simultaneous solution to both tensions without new ingredients, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 11 (2023) 033.
  21. M. Garny, F. Niedermann, H. Rubira, and M. S. Sloth, Hot new early dark energy bridging cosmic gaps: Supercooled phase transition reconciles stepped dark radiation solutions to the Hubble tension with BBN, Phys. Rev. D 110, 023531 (2024).
  22. F. Niedermann and M. S. Sloth, New early dark energy as a solution to the H0 and S8 tensions, in The Hubble Constant Tension, edited by E. di Valentino and D. Brout (Springer, Singapore, 2024).
  23. N. Schöneberg, G. Franco Abellán, A. Pérez Sánchez, S. J. Witte, V. Poulin, and J. Lesgourgues, The H0 Olympics: A fair ranking of proposed models, Phys. Rep. 984, 1 (2022).
  24. K. Freese and M. W. Winkler, Chain early dark energy: A Proposal for solving the Hubble tension and explaining today’s dark energy, Phys. Rev. D 104, 083533 (2021).
  25. I. J. Allali, M. P. Hertzberg, and F. Rompineve, Dark sector to restore cosmological concordance, Phys. Rev. D 104, L081303 (2021).
  26. E. I. Guendelman, R. Herrera, and P. Labrana, Connecting early dark energy to late dark energy by the diluting matter potential, Eur. Phys. J. C 86, 571 (2026).
  27. V. Poulin, T. L. Smith, T. Karwal, and M. Kamionkowski, Early dark energy can resolve the hubble tension, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 221301 (2019).
  28. V. Poulin, T. L. Smith, and T. Karwal, The ups and downs of early dark energy solutions to the Hubble tension: A review of models, hints and constraints circa 2023, Phys. Dark Universe 42, 101348 (2023).
  29. N. Kaloper, Dark energy, H0 and weak gravity conjecture, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 28, 1944017 (2019).
  30. K. S. Jeong and F. Takahashi, Self-interacting dark radiation, Phys. Lett. B 725, 134 (2013).
  31. M. A. Buen-Abad, G. Marques-Tavares, and M. Schmaltz, Non-Abelian dark matter and dark radiation, Phys. Rev. D 92, 023531 (2015).
  32. M. A. Buen-Abad, M. Schmaltz, J. Lesgourgues, and T. Brinckmann, Interacting dark sector and precision cosmology, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 01 (2018) 008.
  33. M. Archidiacono, S. Gariazzo, C. Giunti, S. Hannestad, and T. Tram, Sterile neutrino self-interactions: H0 tension and short-baseline anomalies, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 12 (2020) 029.
  34. N. Blinov and G. Marques-Tavares, Interacting radiation after Planck and its implications for the Hubble tension, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 09 (2020) 029.
  35. D. Aloni, A. Berlin, M. Joseph, M. Schmaltz, and N. Weiner, A step in understanding the Hubble tension, Phys. Rev. D 105, 123516 (2022).
  36. E. Witten, Cosmological consequences of a light Higgs boson, Nucl. Phys. B177, 477 (1981).
  37. S. R. Coleman and E. J. Weinberg, Radiative corrections as the origin of spontaneous symmetry breaking, Phys. Rev. D 7, 1888 (1973).
  38. J. Lesgourgues, G. Marques-Tavares, and M. Schmaltz, Evidence for dark matter interactions in cosmological precision data?, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 02 (2016) 037.
  39. H. Rubira, A. Mazoun, and M. Garny, Full-shape BOSS constraints on dark matter interacting with dark radiation and lifting the S8 tension, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 01 (2023) 034.
  40. L. G. van den Aarssen, T. Bringmann, and C. Pfrommer, Is dark matter with long-range interactions a solution to all small-scale problems of Lambda CDM cosmology?, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 231301 (2012).
  41. F.-Y. Cyr-Racine, K. Sigurdson, J. Zavala, T. Bringmann, M. Vogelsberger, and C. Pfrommer, ETHOS—an effective theory of structure formation: From dark particle physics to the matter distribution of the Universe, Phys. Rev. D 93, 123527 (2016).
  42. Z. Chacko, Y. Cui, S. Hong, T. Okui, and Y. Tsai, Partially acoustic dark matter, interacting dark radiation, and large scale structure, J. High Energy Phys. 12 (2016) 108.
  43. T. Binder, L. Covi, A. Kamada, H. Murayama, T. Takahashi, and N. Yoshida, Matter power spectrum in hidden neutrino interacting dark matter models: A closer look at the collision term, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 11 (2016) 043.
  44. M. Ibe, S. Matsumoto, and R. Sato, Mass splitting between charged and neutral winos at two-loop level, Phys. Lett. B 721, 252 (2013).
  45. D. Blas, J. Lesgourgues, and T. Tram, The Cosmic Linear Anisotropy Solving System (CLASS) II: Approximation schemes, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 07 (2011) 034.
  46. D. Brout et al., The Pantheon+analysis: Cosmological constraints, Astrophys. J. 938, 110 (2022).
  47. L. Herold, E. G. M. Ferreira, and E. Komatsu, New constraint on early dark energy from Planck and BOSS data using the profile likelihood, Astrophys. J. Lett. 929, L16 (2022).
  48. J. S. Cruz, S. Hannestad, E. B. Holm, F. Niedermann, M. S. Sloth, and T. Tram, Profiling cold new early dark energy, Phys. Rev. D 108, 023518 (2023).
  49. D. E. Kaplan, G. Z. Krnjaic, K. R. Rehermann, and C. M. Wells, Atomic dark matter, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 05 (2010) 021.
  50. F.-Y. Cyr-Racine and K. Sigurdson, Cosmology of atomic dark matter, Phys. Rev. D 87, 103515 (2013).
  51. F.-Y. Cyr-Racine, F. Ge, and L. Knox, Symmetry of cosmological observables, a mirror world dark sector, and the Hubble constant, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 201301 (2022).
  52. N. Blinov, G. Krnjaic, and S. W. Li, Toward a realistic model of dark atoms to resolve the Hubble tension, Phys. Rev. D 105, 095005 (2022).
  53. S. Bansal, J. Barron, D. Curtin, and Y. Tsai, Precision cosmological constraints on atomic dark matter, J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2023) 095.
  54. K. Greene and F.-Y. Cyr-Racine, Ratio-preserving approach to cosmological concordance, Phys. Rev. D 110, 043524 (2024).
  55. M. Joseph, D. Aloni, M. Schmaltz, E. N. Sivarajan, and N. Weiner, A step in understanding the S8 tension, Phys. Rev. D 108, 023520 (2023).
  56. M. A. Buen-Abad, Z. Chacko, C. Kilic, G. Marques-Tavares, and T. Youn, Stepped partially acoustic dark matter, large scale structure, and the Hubble tension, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2023) 012.
  57. M. A. Buen-Abad, Z. Chacko, C. Kilic, G. Marques-Tavares, and T. Youn, Stepped partially acoustic dark matter: Likelihood analysis and cosmological tensions, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 11 (2023) 005.
  58. I. J. Allali, F. Rompineve, and M. P. Hertzberg, Dark sectors with mass thresholds face cosmological datasets, Phys. Rev. D 108, 023527 (2023).
  59. N. Schöneberg, G. Franco Abellán, T. Simon, A. Bartlett, Y. Patel, and T. L. Smith, Comparative analysis of interacting stepped dark radiation, Phys. Rev. D 108, 123513 (2023).
  60. M. Vogelsberger, J. Zavala, F.-Y. Cyr-Racine, C. Pfrommer, T. Bringmann, and K. Sigurdson, ETHOS—An effective theory of structure formation: Dark matter physics as a possible explanation of the small-scale CDM problems, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 460, 1399 (2016).
  61. D. C. Hooper, N. Schöneberg, R. Murgia, M. Archidiacono, J. Lesgourgues, and M. Viel, One likelihood to bind them all: Lyman-α constraints on non-standard dark matter, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 10 (2022) 032.
  62. A. Mazoun, S. Bocquet, M. Garny, J. J. Mohr, H. Rubira, and S. M. L. Vogt, Probing interacting dark sector models with future weak lensing-informed galaxy cluster abundance constraints from SPT-3G and CMB-S4, Phys. Rev. D 109, 063536 (2024).
  63. A. Mazoun et al. (SPT and DES Collaborations), Interacting dark sector within ETHOS: Cosmological constraints from SPT cluster abundance with DES and HST weak lensing data, Phys. Rev. D 111, 083543 (2025).
  64. J. Lesgourgues et al. (Euclid Collaboration), Euclid preparation: LVI. Sensitivity to non-standard particle dark matter models, Astron. Astrophys. 693, A249 (2025).
  65. L. J. Hall, K. Jedamzik, J. March-Russell, and S. M. West, Freeze-in production of FIMP dark matter, J. High Energy Phys. 03 (2010) 080.
  66. M. Garny, M. Sandora, and M. S. Sloth, Planckian interacting massive particles as dark matter, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 101302 (2016).
  67. M. Garny, A. Palessandro, M. Sandora, and M. S. Sloth, Charged Planckian interacting dark matter, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 01 (2019) 021.
  68. J. Harz and K. Petraki, Radiative bound-state formation in unbroken perturbative non-Abelian theories and implications for dark matter, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2018) 096.
  69. T. Binder, K. Mukaida, B. Scheihing-Hitschfeld, and X. Yao, Non-Abelian electric field correlator at NLO for dark matter relic abundance and quarkonium transport, J. High Energy Phys. 01 (2022) 137.
  70. T. Binder, M. Garny, J. Heisig, S. Lederer, and K. Urban, Excited bound states and their role in dark matter production, Phys. Rev. D 108, 095030 (2023).
  71. G. F. Giudice, H. M. Lee, A. Pomarol, and B. Shakya, Nonthermal heavy dark matter from a first-order phase transition, J. High Energy Phys. 12 (2024) 190.
  72. G. D. Moore and D. Teaney, How much do heavy quarks thermalize in a heavy ion collision?, Phys. Rev. C 71, 064904 (2005).
  73. S. J. Huber and T. Konstandin, Gravitational wave production by collisions: More bubbles, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 09 (2008) 022.
  74. C. Caprini, R. Durrer, and G. Servant, Gravitational wave generation from bubble collisions in first-order phase transitions: An analytic approach, Phys. Rev. D 77, 124015 (2008).
  75. R. Jinno and M. Takimoto, Gravitational waves from bubble collisions: An analytic derivation, Phys. Rev. D 95, 024009 (2017).
  76. M. Hindmarsh, S. J. Huber, K. Rummukainen, and D. J. Weir, Gravitational waves from the sound of a first order phase transition, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 041301 (2014).
  77. M. Hindmarsh, S. J. Huber, K. Rummukainen, and D. J. Weir, Numerical simulations of acoustically generated gravitational waves at a first order phase transition, Phys. Rev. D 92, 123009 (2015).
  78. R. Jinno, T. Konstandin, H. Rubira, and I. Stomberg, Higgsless simulations of cosmological phase transitions and gravitational waves, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 02 (2023) 011.
  79. C. Caprini, R. Jinno, T. Konstandin, A. R. Pol, H. Rubira, and I. Stomberg, Gravitational waves from first-order phase transitions: from weak to strong, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2025) 217.
  80. J. Antoniadis et al. (EPTA and InPTA Collaborations), The second data release from the European Pulsar Timing Array: III. Search for gravitational wave signals, Astron. Astrophys. 678, A50 (2023).
  81. G. Agazie et al. (NANOGrav Collaboration), The NANOGrav 15 yr data set: Evidence for a gravitational-wave background, Astrophys. J. Lett. 951, L8 (2023).
  82. G. Elor, R. Jinno, S. Kumar, R. McGehee, and Y. Tsai, Finite bubble statistics constrain late cosmological phase transitions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 211003 (2024).
  83. N. Ramberg, W. Ratzinger, and P. Schwaller, One μ to rule them all: CMB spectral distortions can probe domain walls, cosmic strings and low scale phase transitions, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 02 (2023) 039.
  84. M. A. Buen-Abad, Z. Chacko, I. Flood, C. Kilic, G. Marques-Tavares, and T. Youn, Atomic dark matter, interacting dark radiation, and the Hubble tension, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2025) 084.
  85. D. Aloni, M. Joseph, M. Schmaltz, and N. Weiner, Dark radiation from neutrino mixing after big bang nucleosynthesis, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 221001 (2023).
  86. S. Roy Choudhury, S. Hannestad, and T. Tram, Updated constraints on massive neutrino self-interactions from cosmology in light of the H0 tension, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 03 (2021) 084.
  87. R. Z. Ferreira, A. Notari, O. Pujolas, and F. Rompineve, Gravitational waves from domain walls in pulsar timing array datasets, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 02 (2023) 001.
  88. K. Ichikawa, M. Kawasaki, K. Nakayama, M. Senami, and F. Takahashi, Increasing effective number of neutrinos by decaying particles, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 05 (2007) 008.
  89. W. Fischler and J. Meyers, Dark radiation emerging after big bang nucleosynthesis?, Phys. Rev. D 83, 063520 (2011).
  90. A. C. Sobotka, A. L. Erickcek, and T. L. Smith, Comprehensive constraints on dark radiation injection after BBN, Phys. Rev. D 109, 063538 (2024).
  91. N. Schöneberg and G. Franco Abellán, A step in the right direction? Analyzing the Wess Zumino dark radiation solution to the Hubble tension, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 12 (2022) 001.
  92. C.-P. Ma and E. Bertschinger, Cosmological perturbation theory in the synchronous and conformal Newtonian gauges, Astrophys. J. 455, 7 (1995).
  93. M.-X. Lin, G. Benevento, W. Hu, and M. Raveri, Acoustic dark energy: Potential conversion of the Hubble tension, Phys. Rev. D 100, 063542 (2019).
  94. N. Aghanim et al. (Planck Collaboration), Planck 2018 results: VIII. Gravitational lensing, Astron. Astrophys. 641, A8 (2020).
  95. B. Audren, J. Lesgourgues, K. Benabed, and S. Prunet, Conservative constraints on early cosmology: An illustration of the Monte python cosmological parameter inference code, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 02 (2013) 001.
  96. T. Brinckmann and J. Lesgourgues, montepython 3: Boosted MCMC sampler and other features, Phys. Dark Universe 24, 100260 (2019).
  97. A. Lewis, getdist: A python package for analysing Monte Carlo samples, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 08 (2025) 025.
  98. A. Gelman and D. B. Rubin, Inference from iterative simulation using multiple sequences, Stat. Sci. 7, 457 (1992).
  99. M. Raveri and W. Hu, Concordance and discordance in cosmology, Phys. Rev. D 99, 043506 (2019).
  100. T. Karwal, Y. Patel, A. Bartlett, V. Poulin, T. L. Smith, and D. N. Pfeffer, procoli: Profiles of cosmological likelihoods, arXiv:2401.14225.
  101. A. R. Khalife, M. B. Zanjani, S. Galli, S. Günther, J. Lesgourgues, and K. Benabed, Review of Hubble tension solutions with new SH0ES and SPT-3G data, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 04 (2024) 059.
  102. F. Beutler, M. Biagetti, D. Green, A. Slosar, and B. Wallisch, Primordial features from linear to nonlinear scales, Phys. Rev. Res. 1, 033209 (2019).
  103. A. Vasudevan, M. M. Ivanov, S. Sibiryakov, and J. Lesgourgues, Time-sliced perturbation theory with primordial non-Gaussianity and effects of large bulk flows on inflationary oscillating features, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 09 (2019) 037.
  104. T. Mergulhão, F. Beutler, and J. A. Peacock, Primordial feature constraints from BOSS+eBOSS, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 08 (2023) 012.
  105. D. Green, Y. Guo, J. Han, and B. Wallisch, Light fields during inflation from BOSS and future galaxy surveys, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 05 (2024) 090.
  106. M. Ballardini and N. Barbieri, Refining the nonlinear modelling of primordial oscillatory features, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 05 (2025) 059.
  107. T. Louis et al. (Atacama Cosmology Telescope Collaboration), The Atacama Cosmology Telescope: DR6 power spectra, likelihoods and ΛCDM parameters, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 11 (2025) 062.
  108. V. Poulin, T. L. Smith, R. Calderón, and T. Simon, Impact of ACT DR6 and DESI DR2 for early dark energy and the Hubble tension, Phys. Rev. D 113, 063519 (2026).
  109. A. R. Khalife et al. (SPT-3G Collaboration), SPT-3G D1: Axion early dark energy with CMB experiments and DESI observations, Phys. Rev. D 113, 103546 (2026).
  110. M. Garny, F. Niedermann, and M. S. Sloth, The end of the first act: Spectral running, interacting dark radiation, and the Hubble tension in light of ACT DR6 data, arXiv:2604.26541.
  111. M. Cicoli, M. Licheri, R. Mahanta, E. McDonough, F. G. Pedro, and M. Scalisi, Early dark energy in type IIb string theory, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2023) 052.

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 114, 043532– Published 17 August, 2026
  • Received 16 September 2025
  • Accepted 28 July 2026
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI. Funded by Bibsam.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation