- 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

Energy loss of a heavy quark in a collisional quark-gluon plasma

Mingda Cai and Yun Guo*

  • Department of Physics, Guangxi Normal University, Guilin, 541004, China and Guangxi Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Technology, Guilin, 541004, China

  • *Contact author: yunguo@mailbox.gxnu.edu.cn
PDF

Phys. Rev. D 113, 094010 – Published 7 May, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/psm3-ggbf

Abstract

We extend our previous work on the energy loss of a heavy fermion in a QED plasma to the quark-gluon plasma, using the same Bhatnagar-Gross-Krook collisional kernel. The calculation is carried out with a theoretical method where the hard-thermal-loop resummed gluon propagator is used for arbitrary momentum transfer in the scattering processes. Encoding the collision effect in a self-consistent manner, the resummed gluon propagator regulates the infrared divergence in the scattering amplitude without introducing an artificial cutoff for the transferred momenta and makes the analysis on the hard and soft processes in a unified framework. To place our computation on a more solid foundation, we also explicitly demonstrate the gauge independence of the interaction rate as well as the elimination of unphysical gluon polarizations by the ghost field under the use of the resummed gluon propagator. In addition, with our complete QCD calculation by including both quark-quark and quark-gluon scatterings, we provide a quantitatively reliable result on the collisional energy loss of a heavy quark where the new contribution from quark-gluon scatterings accounts for a larger portion of the total energy loss. In general, collisions between the thermal partons result in an increased energy loss which becomes more pronounced with increasing gauge coupling. Considering a typical coupling constant in QCD, αs=0.3, the energy loss increases ∼8% at large incident velocities as compared to the collisionless limit. Such a collision-induced correction is still moderate, although it is slightly suppressed as compared to our previous estimate based on a QED calculation using couplings consistent with those expected to be generated in the quark-gluon plasma.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (50)

  1. J. D. Bjorken, Report No. FERMILAB-PUB-82-059-THY.
  2. M. Gyulassy and M. Plumer, Nucl. Phys. A527, 641 (1991).
  3. M. H. Thoma and M. Gyulassy, Nucl. Phys. B351, 491 (1991).
  4. S. Mrowczynski, Phys. Lett. B 269, 383 (1991).
  5. E. Braaten and M. H. Thoma, Phys. Rev. D 44, R2625 (1991).
  6. P. Romatschke and M. Strickland, Phys. Rev. D 69, 065005 (2004).
  7. P. Romatschke and M. Strickland, Phys. Rev. D 71, 125008 (2005).
  8. S. Peigne and A. Peshier, Phys. Rev. D 77, 014015 (2008).
  9. S. Peigne and A. Peshier, Phys. Rev. D 77, 114017 (2008).
  10. S. Carignano and C. Manuel, Phys. Rev. D 103, 116002 (2021).
  11. Q. Du, M. Du, and Y. Guo, Phys. Rev. D 110, 034011 (2024).
  12. S. Lin, R. D. Pisarski, and V. V. Skokov, Phys. Lett. B 730, 236 (2014).
  13. Y. L. Dokshitzer and D. E. Kharzeev, Phys. Lett. B 519, 199 (2001).
  14. B.-W. Zhang, E. Wang, and X.-N. Wang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 072301 (2004).
  15. M. G. Mustafa, Phys. Rev. C 72, 014905 (2005).
  16. S. Wicks, W. Horowitz, M. Djordjevic, and M. Gyulassy, Nucl. Phys. A784, 426 (2007).
  17. M. Gyulassy and X.-n. Wang, Nucl. Phys. B420, 583 (1994).
  18. R. Baier, Y. L. Dokshitzer, A. H. Mueller, S. Peigne, and D. Schiff, Nucl. Phys. B483, 291 (1997).
  19. B. G. Zakharov, JETP Lett. 63, 952 (1996).
  20. M. Gyulassy, P. Levai, and I. Vitev, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 5535 (2000).
  21. U. A. Wiedemann, Nucl. Phys. B588, 303 (2000).
  22. X.-N. Wang and X.-f. Guo, Nucl. Phys. A696, 788 (2001).
  23. P. B. Arnold, G. D. Moore, and L. G. Yaffe, J. High Energy Phys. 12 (2001) 009.
  24. P. B. Arnold, G. D. Moore, and L. G. Yaffe, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2002) 030.
  25. M. Djordjevic and M. Gyulassy, Nucl. Phys. A733, 265 (2004).
  26. G.-Y. Qin, J. Ruppert, C. Gale, S. Jeon, G. D. Moore, and M. G. Mustafa, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 072301 (2008).
  27. B. Schenke, C. Gale, and G.-Y. Qin, Phys. Rev. C 79, 054908 (2009).
  28. B. Schenke, C. Gale, and S. Jeon, Phys. Rev. C 80, 054913 (2009).
  29. E. Braaten and T. C. Yuan, Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 2183 (1991).
  30. M. Djordjevic, Phys. Rev. C 74, 064907 (2006).
  31. Y. Guo, L. Qiu, R. Zhao, and M. Strickland, Phys. Rev. D 109, 114025 (2024).
  32. M. Djordjevic and U. Heinz, Phys. Rev. C 77, 024905 (2008).
  33. I. Grishmanovskii, T. Song, C. Greiner, and E. Bratkovskaya, Phys. Rev. D 112, 014042 (2025).
  34. C. Faraday and W. A. Horowitz, Phys. Rev. C 111, 054911 (2025).
  35. C. Faraday and W. A. Horowitz, EPJ Web Conf. 316, 04001 (2025).
  36. C. Han, D.-f. Hou, B.-f. Jiang, and J.-r. Li, Eur. Phys. J. A 53, 205 (2017).
  37. S.-w. Shi, B.-f. Jiang, D.-f. Hou, and J.-r. Li, Nucl. Phys. A979, 265 (2018).
  38. M. Yousuf Jamal and V. Chandra, Eur. Phys. J. C 79, 761 (2019).
  39. M. Y. Jamal and B. Mohanty, Eur. Phys. J. Plus 136, 130 (2021).
  40. M. E. Carrington, T. Fugleberg, D. Pickering, and M. H. Thoma, Can. J. Phys. 82, 671 (2004).
  41. B. Schenke, M. Strickland, C. Greiner, and M. H. Thoma, Phys. Rev. D 73, 125004 (2006).
  42. R. Zhao, L. Qiu, Y. Guo, and M. Strickland, Phys. Rev. D 108, 034023 (2023).
  43. M. H. Thoma, Phys. Rev. D 49, 451 (1994).
  44. J. I. Kapusta, P. Lichard, and D. Seibert, Phys. Rev. D 44, 2774 (1991); 47, 4171(E) (1993).
  45. A. Dumitru, Y. Guo, Y. Hidaka, C. P. K. Altes, and R. D. Pisarski, Phys. Rev. D 83, 034022 (2011).
  46. A. Dumitru, Y. Guo, Y. Hidaka, C. P. K. Altes, and R. D. Pisarski, Phys. Rev. D 86, 105017 (2012).
  47. Y. Guo, J. High Energy Phys. 11 (2014) 111.
  48. Y. Guo and Z. Kuang, Phys. Rev. D 104, 014015 (2021).
  49. Y. Hidaka and R. D. Pisarski, Phys. Rev. D 78, 071501 (2008).
  50. H. Ren, Q. Du, and Y. Guo, Phys. Rev. D 113, 054040 (2026).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 113, 094010– Published 7 May, 2026
  • Received 5 January 2026
  • Accepted 17 April 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 SCOAP3.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation