- 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

Comparing strange and nonstrange quark stars within resummed QCD at NLO

Tulio E. Restrepo1,2,*, Jean-Loïc Kneur3,†, Constança Providência4,‡, and Marcus Benghi Pinto5,§

  • *Contact author: trestre2@central.uh.edu
  • †Contact author: jean-loic.kneur@umontpellier.fr
  • ‡Contact author: cp@uc.pt
  • §Contact author: marcus.benghi@ufsc.br
PDF

Phys. Rev. D 112, 054013 – Published 9 September, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/7x41-j7mv

Abstract

We employ the renormalization group optimized perturbation theory (RGOPT) resummation method to evaluate the equation of state (EoS) for strange (Nf=2+1) and nonstrange (Nf=2) cold quark matter at next-to-leading order. This allows us to obtain the mass-radius relation for pure quark stars and compare the results with the predictions from perturbative QCD (pQCD) at next-to-next-to-leading order. Choosing the renormalization scale to generate maximum star masses of order M=2−2.6M⊙, we show that the RGOPT can produce mass-radius curves compatible with the masses and radii of some recently observed pulsars, regardless of their strangeness content. The scale values required to produce the desired maximum masses are higher in the strange scenario since the EoS is softer in this case. The possible reasons for such behavior are discussed. Our results also show that, as expected, the RGOPT predictions for the relevant observables are less sensitive to scale variations than those furnished by pQCD.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (90)

  1. P. Demorest, T. Pennucci, S. Ransom, M. Roberts, and J. Hessels, A two-solar-mass neutron star measured using Shapiro delay, Nature (London) 467, 1081 (2010).
  2. E. Fonseca et al., The NANOGrav nine-year data set: Mass and geometric measurements of binary millisecond pulsars, Astrophys. J. 832, 167 (2016).
  3. J. Antoniadis et al., A massive pulsar in a compact relativistic binary, Science 340, 6131 (2013).
  4. R. W. Romani, D. Kandel, A. V. Filippenko, T. G. Brink, and W. Zheng, PSR J1810+1744: Companion darkening and a precise high neutron star mass, Astrophys. J. Lett. 908, L46 (2021).
  5. M. Oertel, M. Hempel, T. Klähn, and S. Typel, Equations of state for supernovae and compact stars, Rev. Mod. Phys. 89, 015007 (2017).
  6. Y. Lim and J. W. Holt, Bayesian modeling of the nuclear equation of state for neutron star tidal deformabilities and GW170817, Eur. Phys. J. A 55, 209 (2019).
  7. S. Traversi, P. Char, and G. Pagliara, Bayesian inference of dense matter equation of state within relativistic mean field models using astrophysical measurements, Astrophys. J. 897, 165 (2020).
  8. Z. Zhu, A. Li, and T. Liu, A Bayesian inference of a relativistic mean-field model of neutron star matter from observations of NICER and GW170817/AT2017gfo, Astrophys. J. 943, 163 (2023).
  9. T. Malik, M. Ferreira, B. K. Agrawal, and C. Providência, Relativistic description of dense matter equation of state and compatibility with neutron star observables: A Bayesian approach, Astrophys. J. 930, 17 (2022).
  10. T. Gorda, O. Komoltsev, A. Kurkela, and A. Mazeliauskas, Bayesian uncertainty quantification of perturbative QCD input to the neutron-star equation of state, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2023) 002.
  11. T. Malik, M. Ferreira, M. B. Albino, and C. Providência, Spanning the full range of neutron star properties within a microscopic description, Phys. Rev. D 107, 103018 (2023).
  12. J. Takatsy, P. Kovacs, G. Wolf, and J. Schaffner-Bielich, What neutron stars tell about the hadron-quark phase transition: A Bayesian study, Phys. Rev. D 108, 043002 (2023).
  13. P. Char, C. Mondal, F. Gulminelli, and M. Oertel, Generalized description of neutron star matter with a nucleonic relativistic density functional, Phys. Rev. D 108, 103045 (2023).
  14. M. Albino, T. Malik, M. Ferreira, and C. Providência, Hybrid star properties with NJL and MFTQCD model: A Bayesian approach, Phys. Rev. D 110, 083037 (2024).
  15. A. R. Bodmer, Collapsed nuclei, Phys. Rev. D 4, 1601 (1971).
  16. H. Terazawa, Quark shell model and superheavy hyper-nucleus, INS Report No. 336, University of Tokyo, 1979.
  17. E. Witten, Cosmic Separation of Phases, Phys. Rev. D 30, 272 (1984).
  18. N. K. Glendenning, Compact stars: Nuclear Physics, Particle Physics, and General Relativity, 2nd ed. (Springer, New York, 2000).
  19. B. Holdom, J. Ren, and C. Zhang, Quark matter may not be strange, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 222001 (2018).
  20. T. Zhao, W. Zheng, F. Wang, C.-M. Li, Y. Yan, Y.-F. Huang, and H.-S. Zong, Do current astronomical observations exclude the existence of nonstrange quark stars?, Phys. Rev. D 100, 043018 (2019).
  21. Y. Nambu and G. Jona-Lasinio, Dynamical model of elementary particles based on an analogy with superconductivity. I., Phys. Rev. 122, 345 (1961).
  22. Y. Nambu and G. Jona-Lasinio, Dynamical model of elementary particles based on an analogy with superconductivity. II., Phys. Rev. 124, 246 (1961).
  23. Q. Wang, C. Shi, and H. S. Zong, Nonstrange quark stars from an NJL model with proper-time regularization, Phys. Rev. D 100, 123003 (2019); 100, 129903(E) (2019).
  24. C. Zhang, Probing up-down quark matter via gravitational waves, Phys. Rev. D 101, 043003 (2020).
  25. J. Ren and C. Zhang, Quantum nucleation of up-down quark matter and astrophysical implications, Phys. Rev. D 102, 083003 (2020).
  26. Q. Wang, T. Zhao, and H. Zong, On the stability of two-flavor and three-flavor quark matter in quark stars within the framework of NJL model, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 35, 2050321 (2020).
  27. S.-S. Xu, QCD equation of state and the structure of up-down quark stars in NJL model, Nucl. Phys. B971, 115540 (2021).
  28. C. Zhang and R. B. Mann, Unified interacting quark matter and its astrophysical implications, Phys. Rev. D 103, 063018 (2021).
  29. W.-L. Yuan, A. Li, Z. Miao, B. Zuo, and Z. Bai, Interacting ud and uds quark matter at finite densities and quark stars, Phys. Rev. D 105, 123004 (2022).
  30. Z. Cao, L.-W. Chen, P.-C. Chu, and Y. Zhou, GW190814: Circumstantial evidence for up-down quark star, Phys. Rev. D 106, 083007 (2022).
  31. C.-J. Xia, J.-F. Xu, G.-X. Peng, and R.-X. Xu, Interface effects of quark matter: Light-quark nuggets and compact stars, Phys. Rev. D 106, 034016 (2022).
  32. T. E. Restrepo, C. Providência, and M. B. Pinto, Nonstrange quark stars within resummed QCD, Phys. Rev. D 107, 114015 (2023).
  33. P. de Forcrand, Simulating QCD at finite density, Proc. Sci. LAT2009 (2009) 010 [arXiv:1005.0539].
  34. G. Aarts, Introductory lectures on lattice QCD at nonzero baryon number, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 706, 022004 (2016).
  35. A. Kurkela, P. Romatschke, and A. Vuorinen, Cold quark matter, Phys. Rev. D 81, 105021 (2010).
  36. E. S. Fraga, A. Kurkela, and A. Vuorinen, Interacting quark matter equation of state for compact stars, Astrophys. J. Lett. 781, L25 (2014).
  37. E. S. Fraga, A. Kurkela, and A. Vuorinen, Neutron star structure from QCD, Eur. Phys. J. A 52, 49 (2016).
  38. E. Annala, T. Gorda, A. Kurkela, and A. Vuorinen, Gravitational-wave constraints on the neutron-star-matter equation of state, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 172703 (2018).
  39. E. S. Fraga and P. Romatschke, The role of quark mass in cold and dense perturbative QCD, Phys. Rev. D 71, 105014 (2005).
  40. E. S. Fraga, R. D. Pisarski, and J. Schaffner-Bielich, Small, dense quark stars from perturbative QCD, Phys. Rev. D 63, 121702(R) (2001).
  41. E. S. Fraga, R. D. Pisarski, and J. Schaffner-Bielich, New class of compact stars at high density, Nucl. Phys. A702, 217 (2002).
  42. J. C. Jiménez and E. S. Fraga, Radial oscillations of quark stars from perturbative QCD, Phys. Rev. D 100, 114041 (2019).
  43. J. C. Jiménez, J. M. Z. Pretel, E. S. Fraga, S. E. Jorás, and R. R. R. Reis, R2-gravity quark stars from perturbative QCD, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 07 (2022) 017.
  44. T. Gorda, A. Kurkela, P. Romatschke, S. Säppi, and A. Vuorinen, Next-to-next-to-next-to-leading order pressure of cold quark matter: Leading logarithm, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 202701 (2018).
  45. T. Gorda, A. Kurkela, R. Paatelainen, S. Säppi, and A. Vuorinen, Soft interactions in cold quark matter, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 162003 (2021).
  46. T. Gorda, A. Kurkela, R. Paatelainen, S. Säppi, and A. Vuorinen, Cold quark matter at N3LO: Soft contributions, Phys. Rev. D 104, 074015 (2021).
  47. T. Gorda, R. Paatelainen, S. Säppi, and K. Seppänen, Equation of state of cold quark matter to O(αs3lnαs), Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 181902 (2023).
  48. L. Fernandez and J.-L. Kneur, All order resummed leading and next-to-leading soft modes of dense QCD pressure, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 212001 (2022).
  49. J.-L. Kneur and A. Neveu, αS from Fπ and renormalization group optimized perturbation theory, Phys. Rev. D 88, 074025 (2013).
  50. J.-L. Kneur and A. Neveu, Chiral condensate from renormalization group optimized perturbation, Phys. Rev. D 92, 074027 (2015).
  51. J.-L. Kneur and A. Neveu, Chiral condensate and spectral density at full five-loop and partial six-loop orders of renormalization group optimized perturbation theory, Phys. Rev. D 101, 074009 (2020).
  52. J. L. Kneur and M. B. Pinto, Renormalization group optimized perturbation theory at finite temperatures, Phys. Rev. D 92, 116008 (2015).
  53. J. L. Kneur and M. B. Pinto, Scale invariant resummed perturbation at finite temperatures, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 031601 (2016).
  54. G. N. Ferrari, J.-L. Kneur, M. B. Pinto, and R. O. Ramos, Asymptotically free theory with scale invariant thermodynamics, Phys. Rev. D 96, 116009 (2017).
  55. L. Fernandez and J.-L. Kneur, Renormalization group optimized λϕ4 pressure at next-to-next-to-leading order, Phys. Rev. D 104, 096012 (2021).
  56. F. Karsch, A. Patkos, and P. Petreczky, Screened perturbation theory, Phys. Lett. B 401, 69 (1997).
  57. J. O. Andersen, E. Braaten, and M. Strickland, Screened perturbation theory to three loops, Phys. Rev. D 63, 105008 (2001).
  58. J. O. Andersen, E. Braaten, and M. Strickland, Hard thermal loop resummation of the free energy of a hot gluon plasma, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 2139 (1999).
  59. J. O. Andersen, E. Braaten, E. Petitgirard, and M. Strickland, HTL perturbation theory to two loops, Phys. Rev. D 66, 085016 (2002).
  60. E. Braaten and R. D. Pisarski, Simple effective Lagrangian for hard thermal loops, Phys. Rev. D 45, R1827 (1992).
  61. J.-L. Kneur, M. B. Pinto, and T. E. Restrepo, Renormalization group improved pressure for cold and dense QCD, Phys. Rev. D 100, 114006 (2019).
  62. J.-L. Kneur, M. B. Pinto, and T. E. Restrepo, Renormalization group improved pressure for hot and dense quark matter, Phys. Rev. D 104, 034003 (2021).
  63. J.-L. Kneur, M. B. Pinto, and T. E. Restrepo, QCD pressure: Renormalization group optimized perturbation theory confronts lattice, Phys. Rev. D 104, L031502 (2021).
  64. T. E. Riley et al., A NICER view of PSR J0030+0451: Millisecond pulsar parameter estimation, Astrophys. J. Lett. 887, L21 (2019).
  65. M. C. Miller et al., PSR J0030+0451 mass and radius from NICER data and implications for the properties of neutron star matter, Astrophys. J. Lett. 887, L24 (2019).
  66. T. E. Riley et al., A NICER view of the massive pulsar PSR J0740+6620 informed by radio timing and XMM-Newton spectroscopy, Astrophys. J. Lett. 918, L27 (2021).
  67. M. C. Miller et al., The radius of PSR J0740+6620 from NICER and XMM-Newton data, Astrophys. J. Lett. 918, L28 (2021).
  68. H. T. Cromartie et al. (NANOGrav Collaboration), Relativistic Shapiro delay measurements of an extremely massive erisecond pulsar, Nat. Astron. 4, 72 (2019).
  69. V. Doroshenko, V. Suleimanov, G. Pühlhofer, and A. Santangelo, A strangely light neutron star within a supernova remnant, Nat. Astron. 6, 1444 (2022).
  70. Y. Bai and T.-K. Chen, Approaching stable quark matter, arXiv:2410.19678.
  71. I. A. Akhiezer and S. V. Peletminskii, Use of the methods of quantum field theory for the investigation of the thermodynamical properties of a gas of electrons and photons, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 38, 1829 (1960).
  72. E. Farhi and R. L. Jaffe, Strange matter, Phys. Rev. D 30, 2379 (1984).
  73. K. G. Chetyrkin and J. H. Kuhn, Quartic mass corrections to Rhad, Nucl. Phys. B432, 337 (1994).
  74. P. A. Baikov and K. G. Chetyrkin, QCD vacuum energy in 5 loops, Proc. Sci. RADCOR2017 (2018) 025.
  75. N. Haque, M. G. Mustafa, and M. Strickland, Two-loop hard thermal loop pressure at finite temperature and chemical potential, Phys. Rev. D 87, 105007 (2013).
  76. A. Bazavov, N. Brambilla, X. Garcia i Tormo, P. Petreczky, J. Soto, and A. Vairo, Determination of αs from the QCD static energy, Phys. Rev. D 86, 114031 (2012).
  77. M. Tanabashi et al. (Particle Data Group), Review of particle physics, Phys. Rev. D 98, 030001 (2018).
  78. L. Fernandez and J.-L. Kneur, Cold quark matter: Renormalization group improvement at next-to-next-to leading order, Phys. Rev. D 111, 034020 (2025).
  79. A. Vuorinen, The pressure of QCD at finite temperatures and chemical potentials, Phys. Rev. D 68, 054017 (2003).
  80. M. I. Gorenstein and S.-N. Yang, Gluon plasma with a medium dependent dispersion relation, Phys. Rev. D 52, 5206 (1995).
  81. C. H. Lenzi, A. S. Schneider, C. Providência, and R. M. Marinho, Compact stars with a quark core within NJL model, Phys. Rev. C 82, 015809 (2010).
  82. J. R. Torres and D. P. Menezes, Quark matter equation of state and stellar properties, Europhys. Lett. 101, 42003 (2013).
  83. E. Annala, T. Gorda, E. Katerini, A. Kurkela, J. Nättilä, V. Paschalidis, and A. Vuorinen, Multimessenger constraints for ultradense matter, Phys. Rev. X 12, 011058 (2022).
  84. T. Gorda, O. Komoltsev, and A. Kurkela, Ab-initio QCD calculations impact the inference of the neutron-star-matter equation of state, Astrophys. J. 950, 107 (2023).
  85. I. Bombaci, A. Drago, D. Logoteta, G. Pagliara, and I. Vidaña, Was GW190814 a black hole–strange quark star system?, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 162702 (2021).
  86. C. E. Rhoades, Jr. and R. Ruffini, Maximum mass of a neutron star, Phys. Rev. Lett. 32, 324 (1974).
  87. B. Margalit and B. D. Metzger, Constraining the maximum mass of neutron stars from multi-messenger observations of GW170817, Astrophys. J. Lett. 850, L19 (2017).
  88. L. Rezzolla, E. R. Most, and L. R. Weih, Using gravitational-wave observations and quasi-universal relations to constrain the maximum mass of neutron stars, Astrophys. J. Lett. 852, L25 (2018).
  89. M. Ruiz, S. L. Shapiro, and A. Tsokaros, GW170817, general relativistic magnetohydrodynamic simulations, and the neutron star maximum mass, Phys. Rev. D 97, 021501 (2018).
  90. R. Abbott et al. (LIGO Scientific and Virgo Collaboration), GW190814: Gravitational waves from the coalescence of a 23 solar mass black hole with a 2.6 solar mass compact object, Astrophys. J. Lett. 896, L44 (2020).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 112, 054013– Published 9 September, 2025
  • Received 3 February 2025
  • Accepted 13 August 2025
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 SCOAP3.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation