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

Schwinger-Keldysh effective action for hydrodynamics with approximate symmetries

Masaru Hongo1,2,*, Noriyuki Sogabe3,†, Mikhail A. Stephanov3,4,‡, and Ho-Ung Yee3,4,§

  • *Contact author: hongo@phys.sc.niigata-u.ac.jp
  • †Contact author: nori.sogabe@gmail.com
  • ‡Contact author: misha@uic.edu
  • §Contact author: hyee@uic.edu

Phys. Rev. D 113, 014020 – Published 16 January, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/d6y8-q8dz

Abstract

We study hydrodynamic theories with approximate symmetries in the recently developed effective action approach on the Schwinger-Keldysh contour. We employ the method of spurious symmetry transformation for small explicit symmetry-breaking parameters to systematically constrain symmetry-breaking effects in the nonequilibrium effective action for hydrodynamics. We apply our method to the hydrodynamic theory of chiral symmetry in quantum chromodynamics at finite temperature and density and its explicit breaking by quark masses. We show that the spurious symmetry and the Kubo-Martin-Schwinger relation dictate that the Ward-Takahashi identity for the axial symmetry, i.e., the partial conservation of axial vector current (PCAC) relation, contains a relaxational term proportional to the axial chemical potential, whose kinetic coefficient is at least of the second order in the quark mass. In the phase where the chiral symmetry is spontaneously broken, and the pseudo-Nambu-Goldstone pions appear as hydrodynamic variables, this relaxation effect is subleading compared to the conventional pion mass term in the PCAC relation, which is of the first order in the quark mass. On the other hand, in the chiral symmetry restored phase, we show that our relaxation term, which is of the second order in the quark mass, becomes the leading contribution to the axial charge relaxation. Therefore, the leading axial charge relaxation mechanism is parametrically different in the quark mass across a chiral phase transition.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (63)

  1. Y. Nambu and G. Jona-Lasinio, Phys. Rev. 122, 345 (1961).
  2. J. Goldstone, Nuovo Cimento 19, 154 (1961).
  3. J. Goldstone, A. Salam, and S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. 127, 965 (1962).
  4. S. Weinberg, Physica (Amsterdam) 96A, 327 (1979).
  5. J. Gasser and H. Leutwyler, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 158, 142 (1984).
  6. J. Gasser and H. Leutwyler, Nucl. Phys. B250, 465 (1985).
  7. H. Georgi, Weak Interactions and Modern Particle Theory (Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Company, San Francisco, 1984).
  8. M. R. S. Stefan Scherer, A Primer for Chiral Perturbation Theory (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2011).
  9. M. Stephanov and Y. Yin, Phys. Rev. D 98, 036006 (2018).
  10. D. T. Son, Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 3771 (2000).
  11. D. T. Son and M. A. Stephanov, Phys. Rev. D 66, 076011 (2002).
  12. E. Grossi, A. Soloviev, D. Teaney, and F. Yan, Phys. Rev. D 102, 014042 (2020).
  13. Y. Nambu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 4, 380 (1960).
  14. M. Gell-Mann and M. Levy, Nuovo Cimento 16, 705 (1960).
  15. M. Crossley, P. Glorioso, and H. Liu, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2017) 095.
  16. P. Glorioso, M. Crossley, and H. Liu, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2017) 096.
  17. S. Endlich, A. Nicolis, R. A. Porto, and J. Wang, Phys. Rev. D 88, 105001 (2013).
  18. S. Grozdanov and J. Polonyi, Phys. Rev. D 91, 105031 (2015).
  19. P. Kovtun, G. D. Moore, and P. Romatschke, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2014) 123.
  20. F. M. Haehl, R. Loganayagam, and M. Rangamani, J. High Energy Phys. 01 (2016) 184.
  21. K. Jensen, N. Pinzani-Fokeeva, and A. Yarom, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2018) 127.
  22. H. Liu and P. Glorioso, Proc. Sci. TASI2017 (2018) 008 [arXiv:1805.09331].
  23. X. Chen-Lin, L. V. Delacrétaz, and S. A. Hartnoll, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 091602 (2019).
  24. M. J. Landry, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2020) 200.
  25. M. J. Landry, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2021) 213.
  26. M. Baggioli, Y. Bu, and V. Ziogas, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2023) 019.
  27. C. O. Akyuz, G. Goon, and R. Penco, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2024) 004.
  28. X. Huang, M. Qi, J.-H. Zhang, and A. Lucas, arXiv:2407.08760.
  29. A. Ota, Phys. Rev. B 111, 125147 (2025).
  30. Y. Minami and Y. Hidaka, Phys. Rev. E 97, 012130 (2018).
  31. L. M. Sieberer, M. Buchhold, and S. Diehl, Rep. Prog. Phys. 79, 096001 (2016).
  32. M. Hongo, S. Kim, T. Noumi, and A. Ota, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2019) 131.
  33. M. Hongo, S. Kim, T. Noumi, and A. Ota, Phys. Rev. D 103, 056020 (2021).
  34. Y. Hidaka and Y. Minami, Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys. 2020, 033A01 (2020).
  35. H. Li, X.-H. Yu, M. Nakagawa, and M. Ueda, Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 166001 (2025).
  36. P. Glorioso, L. V. Delacrétaz, X. Chen, R. M. Nandkishore, and A. Lucas, SciPost Phys. 10, 015 (2021).
  37. L. V. Delacrétaz, B. Goutéraux, and V. Ziogas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 141601 (2022).
  38. N. Sogabe, N. Yamamoto, and Y. Yin, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2021) 131.
  39. N. Abbasi, M. Kaminski, and O. Tavakol, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 131602 (2024).
  40. D.-f. Hou and S. Lin, Phys. Rev. D 98, 054014 (2018).
  41. D. Grabowska, D. B. Kaplan, and S. Reddy, Phys. Rev. D 91, 085035 (2015).
  42. A. Boyarsky, V. Cheianov, O. Ruchayskiy, and O. Sobol, Phys. Rev. D 103, 013003 (2021).
  43. U. C. Täuber, Critical Dynamics: A Field Theory Approach to Equilibrium and Non-Equilibrium Scaling Behavior (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 2014).
  44. P. C. Martin, E. D. Siggia, and H. A. Rose, Phys. Rev. A 8, 423 (1973).
  45. H.-K. Janssen, Z. Phys. B 23, 377 (1976).
  46. C. De Dominicis, Phys. Rev. B 18, 4913 (1978).
  47. K. Nishimura and N. Sogabe, Phys. Rev. D 109, 014028 (2024).
  48. J. Armas, A. Jain, and R. Lier, Phys. Rev. D 108, 086011 (2023).
  49. L. Onsager, Phys. Rev. 37, 405 (1931).
  50. L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz, Fluid Mechanics, Second Edition (Butterworth Heinemann, Oxford, 1987).
  51. H. Mori, Prog. Theor. Phys. 33, 423 (1965).
  52. R. Zwanzig, Nonequilibrium Statistical Mechanics (Oxford University Press, New York, 2001).
  53. T. Hayata and Y. Hidaka, Phys. Rev. D 91, 056006 (2015).
  54. D. N. Zubarev, A. V. Prozorkevich, and S. A. Smolyanskii, Theor. Math. Phys. 40, 821 (1979).
  55. F. Becattini, L. Bucciantini, E. Grossi, and L. Tinti, Eur. Phys. J. C 75, 191 (2015).
  56. T. Hayata, Y. Hidaka, T. Noumi, and M. Hongo, Phys. Rev. D 92, 065008 (2015).
  57. Y. Hidaka, S. Pu, Q. Wang, and D.-L. Yang, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 127, 103989 (2022).
  58. S. Grozdanov, A. Lucas, and N. Poovuttikul, Phys. Rev. D 99, 086012 (2019).
  59. S. Ishigaki and M. Matsumoto, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2021) 040.
  60. M. Ammon, D. Arean, M. Baggioli, S. Gray, and S. Grieninger, J. High Energy Phys. 03 (2022) 015.
  61. X. Cao, M. Baggioli, H. Liu, and D. Li, J. High Energy Phys. 12 (2022) 113.
  62. T. Schaefer and V. Skokov, Phys. Rev. D 106, 014006 (2022).
  63. J. Bhambure, R. Singh, and D. Teaney, Phys. Rev. C 111, 064909 (2025).

Outline

Information

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation