arxiv: v3 [hep-ph] 13 Jul 2017

Transcription

1 Crossover-model approach to QCD phase diagram, equation of state and susceptibilities in the 2+ and 2++ flavor systems arxiv: v3 [hep-ph] 3 Jul 27 Akihisa Miyahara,, Masahiro Ishii,, iroaki Kouno, 2, and Masanobu Yahiro, Department of Physics, Graduate School of Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka , Japan 2 Department of Physics, Saga University, Saga , Japan (Dated: July 4, 27) We construct a simple model for describing the hadron-quark crossover transition by using lattice QCD () data in the 2+ flavor system, and draw the phase diagram in the 2+ and 2++ flavor systems through analyses of the equation of state (EoS) and the susceptibilities. In the present hadron-quark crossover () model, the entropy density s is defined by s = f s + ( f )s Q with the hadron-production probability f, where s is calculated by the hadron resonance gas model valid in low temperature (T ) and s Q is evaluated by the independent quark model that explains data on the EoS in the region 4 T 5 MeV for the 2+ flavor systems and 4 T MeV for the 2++ flavor system. The f is determined from data on s and susceptibilities for the baryon-number (B), the isospin (I) and the hypercharge (Y ) in the 2+flavor system. The model is successful in reproducing data on the EoS and the flavor susceptibilities χ for f, f =u, d, s in the 2++ flavor system, without changing the f. We define the hadron-quark transition temperature with f = /2. For the 2+ flavor system, the transition line thus obtained is almost identical in µ B T, µ I T, µ Y T planes, when the chemical potentials µ α (α = B, I, Y ) are smaller than 25 MeV. This BIY approximate equivalence persists also in the 2++ flavor system. We plot the phase diagram also in µ u T, µ d T, µ s T, µ c T planes in order to investigate flavor dependence of transition lines. In the 2++ flavor system, c quark does not aect the 2+ flavor subsystem composed of u, d, s. The flavor o-diagonal susceptibilities are good indicators to see how hadrons survive as T increases, since the independent quark model hardly contributes to them. T dependence of the o-diagonal susceptibilities and the f show that the transition region at µ α = is 7 T 4 MeV for both the 2+ and 2++ flavor systems. PACS numbers: 2.4.-y I. INTRODUCTION Lattice QCD () is the first-principle calculation of QCD, and has been providing a lot of information on hot QCD. Recently, the continuum and thermodynamic limits were taken in 2+ flavor simulations [], and it was confirmed that the chiral and deconfinement transitions are crossover at zero chemical potential. As an approach alternative to simulations, we can consider eective models. This approach is useful for the physical interpretation of data and the prediction of physical quantities that are diicult to calculate in simulations. Recently, the Polyakov-loop extended Nambu-Jona- Lasinio (PNJL) type models have been used extensively, since they can treat both the chiral and the deconfinement transitions [2 4]. In the PNJL-type models, the pseudocritical temperature of the deconfinement transition is almost equal to or lower than that of the chiral transition. For the 2 flavor system, the PNJL-type models well explain data [ 4], since the two transitions take place almost simultaneously in simulations. For the 2+ flavor system, however, shows that the chiral-transition temperature is considerably lower than the deconfinement-transition one [, 5]. For this reason, it is not easy for the PNJL-type models to ex- plain the chiral and deconfinement transitions simultaneously. It is thus important to construct a reasonable eective model for the 2+ flavor system. Now our discussion moves to the 2+ flavor system composed of up (u), down (d), strange (s) quarks. For low temperature (T ), the hadron resonance gas () model reproduces data on the equation of state (EoS) and the baryon-number (B) susceptibility [6 8]. In addition, below the chiral-transition temperature, the absolute value of chiral condensate is explained by +chiral perturbation theory (χpt) [9]. Recently, it was reported that the model also accounts for data on T dependence of the Polyakov loop [2]. These results suggest that the hadron degree of freedom is important in QCD phase transitions, although it is not treated explicitly in the PNJL-type models. Recently, the EoS, the baryon-number susceptibilities χ (n) B (n = 2 4) and the isospin (I) susceptibility χ I were well described by hadron-quark hybrid models [2, 22]. This model also reproduces qualitatively that the chiral-transition temperature is lower than the deconfinementtransition one [22]. In the hadron-quark hybrid model of Ref. [2], the pressure P is defined by P = f(t, {µ α })P (T, {µ α }) + [ f(t, {µ α })] P Q (T, {µ α }), () miyahara@ .phys.kyushu-u.ac.jp ishii@phys.kyushu-u.ac.jp kounoh@cc.saga-u.ac.jp yahiro@phys.kyushu-u.ac.jp where the µ α are the chemical potentials of quantum numbers α = B, I and hypercharge Y. The hadron piece P is calculated by the model with the excluded volume and the quark-gluon piece P Q is evaluated with perturbative

2 2 QCD [2]. ere, the fraction factor f(t, {µ α }) is determined so as to reproduce data on P and the interaction measure. The other thermal quantities are obtainable from P. Alternatively, one can start with the entropy density s = f (T, {µ α })s (T, {µ α }) + [ f (T, {µ α })] s Q (T, {µ α }) and calculate the other thermal quantities from s [23]. As an advantage of this approach, T dependence of s cannot be free. In fact, the T dependence should satisfy the thermodynamic inequality and the Nernst s theorem [24]: s(t, {µ α }) T >, s(t, {µ α }) T ={µα}= =. (3) {µα}= In this paper, this condition is automatically satisfied, since we use data as s. In Eq., the factor f means the hadron-production probability. When f (T, {µ α }) = (), the system is in the hadron (quark) phase composed of hadron (quark-gluon) matter only. In principle, the factor f is determinable from data on s, if s and s Q are given. The hadron-quark hybrid model of Ref. [22] takes Eq., and the hadron piece s is obtained by the model and the quarkgluon piece s Q is by the simple quark model in which an adjustable parameter is introduced so as to reproduce data [25] on s(t, ) at T = 3 MeV. The quark model is a simplified version of PNJL model: Namely, this model takes account of the coupling between the quark field and the homogeneous classical gauge field, but does not treat the quarkquark couplings that are expected to be not important above the chiral- and deconfinement-transition temperatures. We refer to the simple model as independent quark () model and the hadron-quark hybrid model of Ref. [22] as hadronquark crossover () model in this paper. Lately, state-of-art data on the EoS and the flavor diagonal and o-diagonal susceptibilities, χ, became available for the 2++ flavor system [25, 26] in addition to the case of the 2+ flavor system [25, 27], where f=u, d, s for the 2+ system and f=u, d, s, charm (c) for the 2++ flavor system. It is an interesting question how c quark behaves in the 2++ flavor system. When the current quark mass m is infinity, Z 3 symmetry is exact and the Polyakov loop is an order parameter of the spontaneous Z 3 symmetry breaking. Dynamical quark with finite m breaks Z 3 symmetry explicitly through the temporal boundary condition for quark. For the 2+ and 2++ flavor systems, it is not clear that the Polyakov loop is still a good order parameter of the confinement-deconfinement (hadronquark) transition. As a reasonable assumption, we define the hadron-quark transition temperature by the condition f = /2. Another interesting question is how the phase diagram is in µ B T, µ I T, µ Y T planes and also in µ u T, µ d T, µ s T, µ c T planes, where µ f (f =u, d, s, c) is the chemical potential for f quark. In this paper, we reconstruct the model by using new data [25, 27] in the 2+ flavor system, and draw the phase diagram in the 2+ and 2++ flavor systems through analyses of the equation of state (EoS) and the susceptibilities. In the previous work of Ref. [22], the model had the momentum cuto Λ T in the thermal quark-loop term of P Q. The cuto Λ T was introduced as an adjustable parameter to reproduce data [28] on s at T = 3 MeV, where the data were available in T 4 MeV. Recently, however, we found that the model begins to underestimate new data [25] as T increases from 4 MeV; here, data on s were deduced from new data [25] on P by dierentiating P with respect to T and thereby data on s became available in T 5 MeV. We then reformulate the model slightly so that the model can explain the new data in 4 T 5 MeV where the data is consistent with NNLO hard thermal loop (TL) perturbation [29]. In the model, f (T, {µ α }) is determined from data on s, the baryon-number susceptibility χ B, the isospin susceptibility χ I and the hypercharge (Y ) susceptibility χ Y in the 2+ flavor system, where α = B, I, Y. The model with the f (T, {µ α }) automatically reproduces data on the EoS and the χ in the 2+ flavor system. In particular, the o-diagonal susceptibilities χ (f f ) are good indicators to see how hadrons survive as T increases, since the model hardly contributes to the o-diagonal susceptibilities [3]. In practice, the upper limit of the transition region is clearly determined by the o-diagonal susceptibilities. We then determine the transition region for the 2+ flavor system with zero chemical potential from T dependence of f (T, ) and the o-diagonal susceptibilities. Next, we draw the phase diagram in µ B T, µ I T, µ Y T planes. The transition lines are almost identical in these planes, when µ α < 25 MeV. This property is referred to as BIY approximate equivalence in this paper. What is the nature of BIY approximate equivalence? This is discussed. We also plot the phase diagram in µ u T, µ d T, µ s T planes to see flavor dependence of hadron-quark transition lines. The model is applied to the EoS and the χ in the 2++ flavor system without changing the f (T, {µ α }). The model succeeds in reproducing data on the EoS and the χ for f, f =u, d, s, and explains χ cc qualitatively. We then determine the transition region for the 2++ flavor system with zero chemical potential from T dependence of f (T, ) and the o-diagonal susceptibilities, and investigate the role of c quark in the 2++ flavor system. Finally, we draw the phase diagram in µ B T, µ I T, µ Y T, µ Y T planes to see whether BIY approximate equivalence persists in the 2++ flavor system, and plot the diagram in µ u T, µ d T, µ s T, µ c T planes to investigate flavor dependence of hadron-quark transition lines. This paper is organized as follows. In Sec. II, we recapitulate the model and reformulate the model without the cuto Λ T. We review the model. Numerical results are shown in Sec III. Section IV is devoted to summary. II. MODEL BUILDING We reformulate the hadron-quark crossover () model of Ref. [22]. This model consists of the hadron resonance gas

3 3 () model reliable for small T and the independent quark () model reasonable for large T. For later convenience, we define several kinds of chemical potentials. For the 2+ flavor system, we represent the chemical potentials of u, d, s quarks by µ u, µ d and µ s, respectively. These potentials are related to the baryon-number (B) chemical potential µ B, the isospin (I) chemical potential µ I and the hypercharge (Y ) chemical potential µ Y as µ B = µ u + µ d + µ s, µ I = µ u µ d, µ Y = 2 (µ u + µ d 2µ s ) for the 2+ flavor system. As for µ I and µ Y, the righthand side of Eq. (4) stems from the diagonal elements of the matrix representation of Cartan algebra in the special unitary group SU(3); namely, µ I = (,, )(µ u, µ d, µ s ) t and µ Y = (/2)(,, 2)(µ u, µ d, µ s ) t. Equation (4) gives µ u = 3 µ B + 2 µ I + 3 µ Y, µ d = 3 µ B 2 µ I + 3 µ Y, µ s = 3 µ B 2 3 µ Y. The coeicients on the right-hand side of Eq. (5) correspond to the quantum numbers of u, d, s quarks. In this sense, the definition (4) is natural. Also in the 2++ flavor system, we can define the following relations by using Cartan algebra in the special unitary group SU(4) for µ I, µ Y and µ Yc : µ B = 3 4 (µ u + µ d + µ s + µ c ), µ I = µ u µ d, µ Y = 2 (µ u + µ d 2µ s ), µ Yc = 3 (µ u + µ d + µ s 3µ c ), where the quantum number Y c has been defined by Y c = (3/4)B C with charmness C. Equation (6) leads to µ u = 3 µ B + 2 µ I + 3 µ Y + 4 µ Y c, µ d = 3 µ B 2 µ I + 3 µ Y + 4 µ Y c, µ s = 3 µ B 2 3 µ Y + 4 µ Y c, µ c = 3 µ B 3 4 µ Y c. This final form is also natural, since the coeicients on the right-hand side of Eq. (7) are the quantum numbers of u, d, s, c quarks. Equation (6) is thus a natural extension of Eq. (4). A. adron resonance gas model For the hadron phase at low T, we use the model. In the model, the thermodynamic potential density Ω is described by free hadron gases. For convenience, Ω is divided into the baryonic piece Ω B and the mesonic one Ω M : (4) (5) (6) (7) Ω = Ω B + Ω M (8) with Ω B = and Ω M = i Baryon d B,i T d 3 p (2π) 3 { log( + e (E B,i µ B,i)/T ) + log( + e (EB,i+µB,i)/T ) } (9) j Meson d M,j T d 3 p (2π) 3 { log( e (E M,j µ M,j)/T ) + log( e (EM,j+µM,j)/T ) } () for E B,i = p 2 + m B,i2 and E M,j = p 2 + m M,j 2. ere, m B,i (m M,j ) and µ B,i (µ M,j ) is the mass and the chemical potential of the i-th baryon (j-th meson), respectively. In Eqs. (9) and (), all the hadrons listed in the Particle Data Table [3] are taken; note that hadrons composed of u, d, s (u, d, s, c) quarks are picked up for the 2+ (2++) flavor system. The pressure P and the entropy density s are obtained from Ω as P = P B + P M ; P B = Ω B, P M = Ω M, () s = s B + s M ; s B = P B T, s M = P M T. (2) Figure shows the entropy density s and the pressure P as a function of T for the 2+ flavor system with zero chemical potential. The model (dotted line) well reproduces data [25, 28] in T 7 MeV for s and T 9 MeV for P. The hadron phase is thus realized in T 7 MeV. Figure 2 is the same as Fig., but for 2++ flavor system with zero chemical potential. The model well explains data [25] in T 9 MeV for the pressure and T 7 MeV for the entropy density. We find from Fig. 2 that the hadron phase is realized in T 7 MeV. B. Independent quark model Next, we consider the quark phase that may appear in the region T 4 MeV where data is consistent with NNLO TL perturbation [29]. As shown later in Fig. 3, the entropy density calculated with simulations is about 8% of the Stefan-Boltzmann limit value even at T = 5 MeV. This means that the massless ideal-gas (massless-free-particle) model does not work. For this reason, we consider the PNJL model without any quark-quark direct interactions, since the interactions are expected to be not important above the hadron-quark transition temperature. In the model, quarks interact with the gluon field A µ by the gauge coupling g, but the spatial parts A i (i =, 2, 3) are neglected and only the temporal part A is treated as a stationary and uniform background field. In this sense, we call this model independent quark () model. As the gluonic action, we take the Polyakov-loop potential U used in the PNJL model. The Lagrangian density of this

4 4 5 (a) 2 (a) 5 s/t 3 s/t 3 P/T 4 5 (26) (22) (b) (26) (22) Fig. : T dependence of (a) the entropy density s and (b) the pressure P in the 2+ flavor system with zero chemical potential. The dotted line means the result of the model. data are taken from Refs. [25, 28]. In Ref. [25], data are available for P but not for s. The entropy density s is then evaluated by dierentiating P with respect to T. model is L Q = f { q f (iγ µ D µ m f )q f } U(T, Φ, Φ), (3) where m f is the current mass of f quark and D µ = µ iga a µ λa 2 δµ with the Gell-Mann matrix λ a in color space. In Eq. (3), the q f mean u, d, s quark fields for the 2+ flavor system and u, d, s, c quark fields for the 2++ flavor system. See Ref. [22] for the definition of the Polyakov-loop Φ and its conjugate Φ. Making the path integral over quark fields, the Lagrangian (3) yields the thermodynamic potential density, Ω Q = U(T, Φ, [ Φ) 2 f p Λ T ] d 3 p (2π) 3 (T log z+ f + T log z f ) for the quark matter. The functions z + f and z f z + f z f (4) are defined by = + 3 Φe (E f +µ f )/T + 3Φe 2(E f +µ f )/T +e 3(E f +µ f )/T, (5) = + 3Φe (E f µ f )/T + 3 Φe 2(E f µ f )/T +e 3(E f µ f )/T (6) P/T (b) Fig. 2: T dependence of (a) the entropy density s and (b) the pressure P in the 2++ flavor system with zero chemical potential. The dotted line means the result of the model. In Ref. [25], data are available for P but not for s. The entropy density s is then evaluated by dierentiating P with respect to T. with E f = p 2 + m 2 f. In Eq. (4), the vacuum term has been omitted, since the pressure calculated with simulations does not include the term. The pressure P Q and the entropy density s Q are obtained from Ω Q as P Q = Ω Q, (7) s Q = P Q T. (8) We take the Polyakov-loop potential of Ref. [7]: U(T, Φ, Φ) T 4 = a(t ) 2 Φ Φ +b(t ) log{ 6Φ Φ + 4(Φ 3 + Φ 3 ) 3(Φ Φ) 2 }; (9) ( ) ( ) 2 T T a(t ) = a + a + a 2, T T ( ) 3 T b(t ) = b 3. (2) T In Ref. [7], the parameters a, a, a 2, b 3 and T were fitted to data on the EoS in the pure gauge theory. In high T, the potential is dominated by the a term. For this reason, the value of a /2 is set to the Stefan-Boltzmann limit value (a = 3.5) in the pure gauge theory, but the U thus obtained overestimates new data [32] in 4 T 5 MeV.

5 5 In the 2+ flavor system with dynamical quarks, furthermore, the quarks may change the Polyakov-loop potential. In fact, even at high T such as T = 5 MeV, the pressure P calculated with simulations [25] is about 8 % of the Stefan-Boltzmann limit value in 2+ flavor system; see for example Fig. 3. The entropy density, obtained by dierentiating P with respect to T, also has the same property. This point is discussed below. In our previous work of Ref. [22] for the 2+ flavor system, the momentum cuto Λ T in the thermal quark-loop term of Ω Q was determined to reproduce data [28] on s at T = 3 MeV, where the data were available in T 4 MeV. owever, we found that the model result with the resulting value Λ T =.95 GeV begins to underestimate new data [25] as T increases from 4 MeV; here, we have evaluated the data on s from new data [25] on P measured in T 5 MeV by dierentiating P with respect to T. For this reason, we do not introduce Λ T in this paper: Namely, Λ T =. As mentioned above, in the 2+ flavor system, the entropy density s calculated with simulations underestimates the Stefan-Boltzmann limit value by about 2 % even at T = 5 MeV. We then change the parameter a so that the model result can reproduce the data at T = 4 MeV. The resulting value is a = = 2.457; see Table I for the values of parameters in U. The model result with a = well explains data on s in 4 T 5 MeV, as shown below. For the 2++ flavor system, we keep a = to hold the simplicity of model. a a a 2 b 3 T [MeV] TABLE I: Parameters in the Polyakov-loop potential. Figure 3 shows the entropy density s and the pressure P as a function of T for the 2+ flavor system with zero chemical potential. data are taken from Ref. [25] with large lattice. For the data, the entropy densities s have been obtained by dierentiating P with respect to T. data are smaller than the result of the ideal-gas model (the Stefan-Boltzmann limit; dotted line) by about 2% even at T = 5 MeV. The model with the original value a = 3.5 (dashed line) underestimates the Stefan-Boltzmann limit by about % at T = 5 MeV. Meanwhile, the model with a = (solid line) well explains data in the region 4 T 5 MeV. Thus, the quark phase may be realized in T 4 MeV. The lower limit of the quark phase is determinable > clearly with T dependence of χ (f f ). This analysis will be made later in Sec. III. Figure 4 shows the entropy density s and the pressure P as a function of T for the 2++ flavor system with zero chemical potential. calculations were done for P in Ref. [25]. The entropy density s is evaluated from the data by dierentiating P with respect to T. data are about 8% of the result of the ideal-gas model (the Stefan-Boltzmann limit; dotted line) at T = MeV. The model with the original value a = 3.5 (dashed line) reaches about 9% s/t 3 P/T (a) (b) a=2.457 a=3.5 ideal a=2.457 a=3.5 ideal Fig. 3: T dependence of (a) the entropy density s and (b) the pressure P for the 2+ flavor system with zero chemical potential. The dotted line is the result of the ideal-gas model (the Stefan-Boltzmann limit), the dashed line denotes the model with the original value a = 3.5, and the solid line corresponds to the model with a = data of Ref. [25] are denoted by dots. of the Stefan-Boltzmann limit value at T = MeV. The model with a = (solid line) reproduces data in 4 T MeV pretty well. Thus, the quark phase may be realized in T 4 MeV also for the 2++ flavor system. The lower limit > of the quark phase can be determined precisely with T dependence of χ (f f ). This analysis is also made in Sec. III. C. Quark-hadron crossover model Now we consider the model defined by Eq. in which s (T, {µ α }) is calculated by the model of Sec. II A and s Q (T, {µ α }) is by the model of Sec. II B, where {µ α } means {µ B, µ I, µ Y } for the 2+ flavor system and {µ B, µ I, µ Y, µ Yc } for the 2++ flavor system. This model is a natural extension of the model of Ref. [23] in which quarks and gluons are treated as ideal gases. The function f (T, {µ α }) means the hadron-production probability. When f (T, {µ α }) = (), the system consists of hadron matter (quark gluon matter) only, i.e., the system becomes the mixed phase in < f (T, {µ α }) <. In this paper, we consider P (T ) and s(t ) as the EoS and several kinds of second-order susceptibilities for the 2+ and 2++ flavor systems with zero chemical potential.

6 6 s/t 3 P/T (a) (b) a=2.457 a=3.5 ideal a=2.457 a=3.5 ideal Fig. 4: T dependence of (a) the entropy density s and (b) the pressure P for the 2++ flavor system with zero chemical potential. See Fig. 3 for the definition of lines. data (dots) are taken from Ref. [25]; see the text for further explanation.. 2+ flavor system We recapitulate the formalism of Ref. [22]. For the 2+ flavor system, the f (T, {µ α }) is expanded into a power series of {µ α } and is taken up to the second order: ( f (T, {µ α }) = f () (T ) + f,b (T ) µb +f,i (T ) ( µi +f,by (T ) ( µb ) 2 ) 2 ( + f,y (T ) µy ) ( µy ). ) 2 (22) where = 7 MeV [9, 33] is the hadron-quark transition temperature defined with the Polyakov loop. The form of Eq. (22) comes from two properties; (i) s is invariant under charge conjugation, i.e., the transformation (µ B, µ I, µ Y ) ( µ B, µ I, µ Y ), and (ii) the system is also invariant under the interchange µ u µ d, i.e., the transformation (µ B, µ I, µ Y ) (µ B, µ I, µ Y ). For µ B = µ I = µ Y =, Eq. reduces to s () (T )s (T ) + { f () (T )}s Q(T ). (23) The pressure P with no vacuum contribution is obtainable from s as = = P (T, {µ α }) dt s(t, {µ α }) dt s Q + = P Q (T, {µ α }) + dt f (s s Q ) dt f (s s Q ). (24) The second-order diagonal susceptibility χ α of quantum numbers α = B, I, Y is obtained as the second derivative of P with respect to the chemical potential µ α : χ α (T, {µ α })) = 2 µ 2 P (T, {µ α }) α = 2 µ 2 P Q (T, {µ α }) + α dt [ 2 f µ 2 (s s Q ) α ] +2 f µ α (s s Q ) µ α + f 2 (s s Q ) µ 2 α Particularly at µ B = µ I = µ Y =, it becomes χ α (T ) = 2 µ 2 α + P Q (T, {µ α }) {µα}= [ dt 2f,α (s s Q ) + f () Similarly, the BY correlation susceptibility is χ BY (T, {µ α}) 2 = P (T, {µ α }) µ B µ Y = 2 µ B µ Y P Q (T, {µ α }) + + f (s s Q ) + f (s s Q ) µ B µ Y µ Y µ ] B 2 (s s Q ) +f µ B µ Y for finite {µ α } and = χ BY (T ) 2. (25) 2 ] (s s Q ) µ 2. α (26) [ dt 2 f (s s Q ) µ B µ Y (27) P Q (T, {µ α }) {µα}= µ B µ Y [ + dt f,by (s s Q ) + f () 2 ] (s s Q ) µ B µ Y (28)

7 7 for {µ α } =. Using Eqs. (23), (26), (28), one can determine f (), f,α, f,by from data on s, χ α, χ BY at {µ α} =, respectively: Namely, f ().6.4 interpolation f () = s s Q s s Q (29) and f,γ = w(s s Q ) f () ( χ, γ T [ χ, γ T χ,q γ T χ,q γ T ) ] (3) Fig. 5: T dependence of f () (T ). The solid line is the smooth function obtained with the cubic spline interpolation. data on f () (dots) are deduced from those [25] on s by using Eq. (23). Figure 6 shows s(t ) and P (T ) as a function of T in the case of zero chemical potential. The model with the f () (T ) determined above should reproduce data automatically. This is satisfied, as shown by the solid line. for γ = α, BY, where the superscript means data, w = 2 for γ = α and w = for γ = BY, and χ,q α = 2 P Q µ 2 α {µα}=, χ,q BY = 2 P Q µ B µ Y {µα}=. (3) Figure 5 shows the f () (dots with error bars) deduced from data [25] on s by using Eq. (29). We make the cubic spline interpolation for the mean values of data in order to obtain the smooth function that passes through the mean values. ere, the mean values have been taken in 75 T 4 MeV where the mean values are smaller than, and have been set to in T > 4 MeV where the mean values are quite small. In T 7 MeV, data have large error bars and the mean values are not so reliable; in fact, the mean values are accidentally larger than in 4 < T 7 MeV. For this reason, we have replaced the mean values by in T 5 MeV and have neglected the mean values in 5 < T 7 MeV. The smooth function thus obtained (solid line) is consistent with data; note that the function is very close to in 5 < T 7 MeV. Figure 5 indicates that the mixed phase appears in a region 7 T 4 MeV for the case of zero chemical potential. ere, it should be noted that in Eq. the hadron piece f s contributes to s up to 4 MeV since s increases rapidly as T increases. The upper limit of the phase transition can be determined clearly from the o-diagonal susceptibilities. This will be shown later in Sec. III A. s/t 3 P/T 4 5 (a) (b) Fig. 6: T dependence of the entropy density s and the pressure P calculated by the model for the 2+ flavor system with zero chemical potential. The solid line is the result based on the (T ) determined in Fig. 5. The dotted line stands for the result of the model, the dashed line corresponds to that of the model. In Ref. [25], data are available for P but not for s. The entropy density s is then evaluated by dierentiating P with respect to T. f () We take the same procedure for f,γ (T ), where γ =

8 8 B, I, Y, BY. Namely, the f,γ (T ) are deduced from data [25] on χ γ (T ) by using Eq. (3), and the cubic spline interpolation is made for the mean values of the f,γ (T ). ere we have simply assumed f,γ (T ) = in T 27 MeV where data are not available. The resulting smooth lines are plotted in Fig. 7. All the f,γ (T ) are order O( ). In order to confirm the accuracy of the cubic spline interpolation, we compare the original data on χ γ (T ) with the corresponding result (solid line) in Fig. 8. As expected, good agreement is seen between them. Again, the model (dotted line) reproduces the data in T 7 MeV, while the model well explains the data around T = 4 MeV. One can see from Fig. 7 that the f,γ (T ) satisfy f,b (T ) f,y (T ) 3 4 f,i (T ) 3 4 f,by (T ) (32) around T = 2 MeV. The f,γ (T ) are thus close to each other around T = 2 MeV. This property plays an important role when we draw the QCD phase diagram in µ B T, µ I T µ Y T planes. This will be discussed later in Sec. III A..5 f -.5 f,b f,i -. f,y f,by Fig. 7: Results of the cubic spline interpolation for T dependence of f,γ that are deduced from data [25] on χ γ by using Eq. (3). The results are plotted by the solid line for f,b, the dashed line for f,i, the dotted line for f,y f,by., and the dot-dashed line for Throughout the analyses mentioned above, we have succeeded in determining f (T, {µ α }). The f can be described by µ f (f=u, d, s) by using Eq. (4): with f,uu,b (T ) + f,i (T ) + 4 f,y (T ) + 2 f,by (T ), (34) f,ss,b (T ) + f,y (T ) f,by (T ), (35) f,ud (T ) = 2f,B (T ) 2f,I (T ) + 2 f,y (T ) + f,by (T ), (36) f,us (T ) = 2f,B (T ) f,y (T ) 2 f,by (T ); (37) note that f,uu,dd (T ), f,ud,du (T ) and (T ). f,us,ds Figure 9 shows T dependence of the f, that are derived from the f,γ by using Eqs. (34) (37). We can see from this figure that f,uu (T ) 2.5f,ud (T ) 4f,ss (T ) f,us (T ) (38) around T = 2 MeV. Thus, the s-quark contribution is small in the f, and also in the f,γ. This property induces the approximate relation f,b (T ) f,y (T ) shown in Eq. (32), since f,b (T ) f,y (T ) = [ ] 3f,ss (T ) + 6f,us 9 (T ). (39).2. f f,uu f,ss f,ud f,us Fig. 9: T dependence of f, derived from f,γ. The results are plotted by the solid line for f,uu, the dashed line for f,ss, the dotted line for f,ud, and the dot-dashed line for f,us. f (T, {µ α }) = f () (T ) + f,f u,d,s f, (T ) ( µf ) ( ) µf (33) The flavor diagonal and o-diagonal susceptibilities χ (T, {µ α }) are obtained from P of Eq. (24) by using

9 χ B /T χ Y /T χ I /T χ BY /T Fig. 8: T dependence of the baryon-number B and the isospin I, the hypercharge Y and the BY correlation susceptibility for the 2+ flavor system with zero chemical potential. The result is drawn by the solid line. The dotted line stands for the result of the model, the dashed line corresponds to that of the model. date (dots) are taken from Ref [25]. Eq. (33) as f : = χ (T, {µ α }) 2 P Q (T, {µ α }) µ f µ f [ T + dt 2 f (s s Q ) + f (s s Q ) µ f µ f µ f µ f ] + f (s s Q ) 2 (s s Q ) + f (4) µ f µ f µ f µ f for finite {µ α } and χ (T ) = χ,q + (T, {µ α }) {µα}= [ dt wf, (s s Q ) + f () ] 2 (s s Q ) µ f µ f (4) for {µ α } =, where w = 2 for f = f and for f f. It is known that the o-diagonal flavor susceptibilities χ,q (T ) of the PNJL-type model are negligibly small [3]. ence, for simplicity of calculation, we put χ,q (T ) = for f f flavor system Also for the 2++ flavor system, the hadron-production probability can be described by f 2++ (T, {µ α }) = f 2++,() (T ) + f 2++,, (T ) f,f u,d,s,c ( µf ) ( µf ). (42) In order to keep the simplicity of our model, however, we assume that the f of Eq. (33) is applicable for the 2+ flavor subsystem of the 2++ flavor system, and that f 2++,,cf = for f = u, d, s, c. In this case, the model has no adjustable parameter for the 2++ flavor system. This assumption is justified later in Sec. III B. The procedure for obtaining the EoS and the flavor diagonal and o-diagonal susceptibilities is the same as in the 2+ flavor system. ereafter, we neglect the superscript 2++ in f 2++, when it does not induce any confusion. III. NUMERICAL RESULTS A. 2+ flavor system In general, the pseudocritical temperature (O) of hadronquark (confinement-deconfinement) crossover depends on observable O considered. The definition commonly used is the peak in the T derivative of the Polyakov loop Φ. Figure

10 shows T dependence of the Polyakov loop Φ. In the model, Φ is calculated by the model. data are available for the 2+ flavor system [9, 33]. Our model (solid line) reproduces the data pretty well. The pseudocritical temperature (Φ) = 2 MeV of our model is somewhat larger than result (Φ), = 7 ± 7 MeV. The model result (dashed line) for the 2++ flavor system is very close to that (solid line) for the 2+ flavor system. This indicates that c quark hardly aects the hadron-quark transition. In practice, this supports that the f (T, {µ α }) determined from the 2+ flavor data is applicable for the 2++ flavor system, if we do not mind χ,cf (f =u, d, s, c). Φ (2+) (2+) (2++) Fig. : T dependence of the Polyakov loop Φ in the 2+ and 2++ flavor systems with zero chemical potential. data are available for the 2+ flavor system [9, 33]. The solid and dashed lines are results of our model for the 2+ and 2++ flavor systems, respectively. As an alternative to (Φ), we may consider f (T, {µ α }) = /2 as a definition of. Our result is (f) = 27 MeV for {µ α } = and somewhat larger than the result (Φ) = 7 ± 7 MeV [9, 33]. Figure shows the QCD phase diagram in µ B T, µ I T, µ Y T planes. The symbol (µ α ) denotes the pseudocritical temperature of the hadron-quark transition in µ α T plane, where the pseudocritical temperature is defined by f = /2. In virtue of Eq. (32), the three transition lines almost agree with each other. Thus, the relation (µ B ) (µ I ) (µ Y ) (43) is satisfied in µ α < 25 MeV. We call this relation BIY approximate equivalence in the present paper. As for the µ B direction, we can evaluate the fourth-order term f (4),B from data on χ (4) (4) B. We have confirmed that the f,b does not aect (µ B ) in µ B < 25 MeV. BIY approximate equivalence comes from the property of Eq. (32). As already mentioned in Sec. II C, the approximate relation f,b (T ) f,y (T ) in Eq. (32) comes from the fact that the s-quark contribution is small in the f,γ (T ) (γ = B, I, Y, BY ). Meanwhile, the relation f,b (T ) 3f,Y (T )/4 in Eq. (32) is a remnant of the fact that in the (µ B ) (µ I ) (µ Y ) µ α [MeV] Fig. : Phase diagram in µ B T, µ I T, µ Y T planes. 2 flavor system (µ B ) = (µ I ) when these are expressed up to (µ α /T ) 2 (α = B, I) [34]. Next, we consider the flavor dependence of the pseudocritical temperature of the hadron-quark transition. Figure 2 shows the QCD phase diagram in µ f T planes. The symbol (µ f ) denotes the pseudocritical temperature in µ f T plane. Note that (µ u ) = (µ d ) for µ u = µ d, because of f,uu,dd (T ) and f,us,ds (T ). We then draw (µ u ) and (µ s ) only in Fig. 2. The transition takes place at higher T in µ s T plane than in µ u T plane. This may stem from the fact that m s m u = m d. Further discussion will be made in Sec. III B (µ u ) (µ s ) µ f [MeV] Fig. 2: Phase diagram in µ u T and µ s T planes. Note that (µ u) = (µ d ) µ u = µ d because of f,uu,dd (T ) and f,us,ds (T ). Figure 3 shows the flavor diagonal and o-diagonal susceptibilities, χ, as a function of T in the 2+ flavor system with zero chemical potential. The solid line is the result of the model. The model should reproduce data on the χ automatically. This is satisfied. Just for comparison, the results of the and models are denoted by dashed and dotted lines, respectively. As already mentioned in Sec. II C, the model has no contribution for the odiagonal susceptibilities. Noting χ ud 5χ us, one can see from T dependence of the o-diagonal susceptibilities that most of hadrons disappear at T = 4 MeV. The hadronquark transition thus ends up with T 4 MeV.

11 .8.6 χ uu /T χ ss /T χ ud /T χ us /T Fig. 3: T dependence of diagonal and o-diagonal susceptibilities, χ, in the 2+ flavor system with zero chemical potential. The result is drawn by the solid line. The dotted line stands for the result of the model, the dashed line corresponds to that of the model. data are taken from Ref. [27]. s/t 3 P/T (a) (b) B. 2++ flavor system Figure 4 shows s and P as a function of T in the 2++ flavor system with zero chemical potential. Good agreement is seen between the results (solid line) and data. Comparing the results with the and ones, we can see that the transition region is 7 T 4 MeV. The upper limit of the phase transition can be determined more clearly with the o-diagonal susceptibilities, as shown below. Figure 5 shows the flavor diagonal and o-diagonal susceptibilities, χ, as a function of T in the 2++ flavor system with zero chemical potential. One can see good agree- ment between data and the results for the 2+ flavor sector, i.e., χ uu, χ ud, χ ss, χ us. This supports the statement that c quark does not aect the 2+ flavor subsystem composed of u, d, s quarks, together with the fact that χ uu, χ ud, χ ss, χ us in the 2++ flavor system are close to the corresponding susceptibilities in the 2+ flavor system. Noting χ ud 5χ us χ uc, we can consider from T dependence of the o-diagonal susceptibilities that most of hadrons disappear at T = 4 MeV. Also for the 2++ flavor system, the hadron-quark transition thus ends up with T 4 MeV. ence, the transition region is 7 T 4 MeV also for the 2++ flavor system with zero chemical potential. The present model neglects µ c -dependence in f (T, {µ α }), but reproduces data qualitatively for χ cc. As for χ uc, both and the model show the correlation between u and c quarks is negligible in the transition region 7 T 4 MeV. Fig. 4: T dependence of s and P in the 2++ flavor system with zero chemical potential. The solid line is the result of the model. data are taken from Ref. [25]. The result of the () model is denoted by a dashed (doted) line.

12 2.8.6 χ uu /T χ ss /T χ ud /T2 -.2 χ us /T χ cc /T χ uc /T Fig. 5: T dependence of flavor diagonal and o-diagonal susceptibilities, χ, in the 2++ flavor system with zero chemical potential. The solid line denotes the result, while the chain line is the result. The dotted line stands for the result of the model, the dashed line corresponds to that of the model. (dots) date are taken from Ref [25]. Finally, we discuss the phase diagram in µ B T, µ I T, µ Y T, µ Yc T planes. For this purpose, we have evaluated f,cc from χ cc, but f,cc f,ss / around T = 2 MeV. This justifies our assumption that f,cc is negligible in f, if we do not analyze χ cc itself. ere, note that f,cu is even smaller than f,cc. Using the assumption f,cu = f,su = f,cc = in f, we draw the phase diagram in Fig. 6. BIY approximate equivalence still persists in the 2++ flavor system, but the transition line (µ Yc ) in µ Yc T plane is slightly higher than in the other planes. This is because the dierence, f,y c f,b, has the f,uu that is rather larger than the others around T = 2 MeV. Figure 7 shows the phase diagram in µ u T, µ d T, µ s T, µ c T planes; here note that (µ u ) = (µ d ) when µ u = µ d. In this analysis, the transition line in µ c T plane is (µ c ) = 27 MeV, because of f,cc (T ) =. We can find that (µ u ) < (µ s ) < (µ c ) when µ u = µ s = µ c. This result indicates that the hadron-quark transition takes place at higher T for heavier quark. This is quite reasonable. In the nonrelativistic limit that is a good approximation for c quark, the QCD partition function is a function of µ c m c and thereby the eect of µ c is sizably reduced with large m c. IV. SUMMARY We reconstructed the hadron-quark crossover () model of Ref. [22] by using new data [25, 27] in the 2+ fla-

13 (µ B ) (µ I ) (µ Y ) (µ Yc ) µ α [MeV] Fig. 6: Phase diagram in µ B T, µ I T, µ Y T, µ Yc T planes (µ u ) (µ s ) (µ c ) µ f [MeV] Fig. 7: Phase diagram in µ u T, µ s T, µ s T planes. Note that (µ u) = (µ d ) for µ u = µ d because of f,uu,dd (T ) and f,us,ds (T ). vor system, and we drew the phase diagram in the 2+ and 2++ flavor systems through analyses of the EoS and the susceptibilities. The model is defined by Eq. in which s (T, {µ α }) is calculated by the hadron resonance gas () model valid in low T and s Q (T, {µ α }) is by the independent quark () model reasonable in high T, where {µ α } = (µ B, µ I, µ Y ). As mentioned above, the present version of the model is rather reliable, since it explains data on the EoS in 4 T 5 MeV for the 2+system and in 4 T MeV the 2++system where data is consistent with NNLO TL perturbation [29]. The hadron-production probability f (T, {µ α }) was determined from data on s and the susceptibilities χ γ for γ = B, I, Y, BY in the 2+ flavor system. ence, the present model automatically reproduces data on the EoS and the χ in the 2+ flavor system. In particular, the odiagonal susceptibilities χ (f f ) are good indicators to see how hadrons survive as T increases, since the model hardly contributes to the o-diagonal susceptibilities. In fact, the o-diagonal susceptibilities show that most of hadrons disappear above T = 4 MeV. In practice, the upper limit of the transition region is clearly determined by the o-diagonal susceptibilities. We then determined, from T dependence of f () (T ) and the o-diagonal susceptibilities, that the transition region is 7 T 4 MeV for the 2+ flavor system with zero chemical potential. In the present paper, we defined the hadron-quark transition temperature by f (T, {µ α }) = /2. For the 2+ flavor system with zero chemical potential, the transition temperature is (f) = 27 MeV and somewhat larger than result (Φ), = 7 ± 7 MeV. This result (f) = 27 MeV is common between the 2+ and 2++ flavor systems, because f () (T ) is the same between the two systems. As mentioned above, the model well simulates data on the EoS and the χ in the 2+ flavor system. We then drew the phase diagram in µ B T, µ I T, µ Y T planes. We found BIY approximate equivalence : Namely, the transition lines (µ α ) are almost identical in these planes, when the µ α are less than 25 MeV. The relation (µ B ) (µ Y ) comes from the fact that the s-quark contribution is small in the f,γ (T ) for γ = B, I, Y, BY. The relation (µ B ) (µ I ) may be a remnant of the fact that in the 2 flavor system (µ B ) = (µ I ) when these are expressed up to (µ B /T ) 2 and (µ I /T ) 2 [34]. The model was applied to the 2++ flavor system without changing the f. The model well reproduces data on the EoS and the χ for f, f =u, d, s. This result indicates that transition region at {µ α } = is 7 T 4 MeV also for the 2++ flavor system, since between the 2+ and 2++ flavor systems the f () is the same and the χ for f, f =u, d, s are close to each other. In addition, T dependence of Φ is almost identical between the 2+ and 2++ flavor systems. These results show that c quark does not aect the 2+ flavor subsystem composed of u, d, s quarks. This statement is supported by the fact that χ ud 5χ us χ uc in the transition region. The present model has no µ c -dependence in f (T, {µ α }), but reproduces data qualitatively for χ cc. As for χ uc, both and the model show the correlation between u and c quarks is negligible in the transition region 7 T 4 MeV. Finally, we plotted the phase diagram both in µ B T, µ I T, µ Y T, µ Yc T planes and in µ u T, µ d T, µ s T, µ c T planes. BIY approximate equivalence still persists in the 2++ flavor system, but the transition line (µ Yc ) in µ Yc T plane is slightly higher than in the other planes. We also found that (µ u ) < (µ s ) < (µ c ) when µ u = µ s = µ c. This result indicates that the hadron-quark transition takes place at higher T for heavier quark. This is quite natural. In the nonrelativistic limit that is a good approximation for c quark, the QCD partition function is a function of µ c m c, so that the eect of µ c is greatly reduced with large m c. Acknowledgments The authors thank Atsushi Nakamura, Kouji Kashiwa, Junichi Takahashi, Junpei Sugano, Shuichi Togawa,Yuhei Tori-

14 4 goe and Takehiro irakida for useful discussions. M. Y. and. K. were supported by Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (No and No ) from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS). [] Y. Aoki, G. Endrödi, Z. Fodor, S. D. Katz and K. K. Szabó, Nature 443, 675 (26). [2] P. N. Meisinger, and M. C. Ogilvie, Phys. Lett. B 379, 63 (996). [3] A. Dumitru, and R. D. Pisarski, Phys. Rev. D 66, 963 (22). [4] K. Fukushima, Phys. Lett. B 59, 277 (24); Phys. Rev. D 77, 428 (28). [5] C. Ratti, M. A. Thaler, and W. Weise, Phys. Rev. D 73, 49 (26); C. Ratti, S. Rößner, M. A. Thaler, and W. Weise, Eur. Phys. J. C 49, 23 (27). [6] E. Megías, E. R. Arriola, and L. L. Salcedo, Phys. Rev. D 74, 655 (26). [7] S. Rößner, C. Ratti, and W. Weise, Phys. Rev. D 75, 347 (27). [8] B. -J. Schaefer, J. M. Pawlowski, and J. Wambach, Phys. Rev. D 76, 7423 (27). [9]. Abuki, R. Anglani, R. Gatto, G. Nardulli, and M. Ruggieri, Phys. Rev. D 78, 3434 (28). [] K. Kashiwa,. Kouno, M. Matsuzaki, and M. Yahiro, Phys. Lett. B 662, 26 (28). [] Y. Sakai, T. Sasaki,. Kouno, and M. Yahiro, Phys. Rev. D 82, 763 (2). [2] R. Gatto, and M. Ruggieri, Phys. Rev. D 83, 346 (2). [3] T. Sasaki, Y. Sakai,. Kouno, and M. Yahiro, Phys. Rev. D 84, 99 (2). [4] K. Kashiwa, T. ell, and W. Weise, Phys. Rev. D 84, 56 (2). [5] Y. Aoki, A. Fodor, S. D. Katz, and K. K. Szabó, Phys. Lett. B 643, 46 (26). [6] S. Borsányi, Z. Fodor, C. oelbling, S. D. Katz, S. Krieg, C. Ratti, and K. K. Szabo, arxiv:5.358 [hep-lat] (2). [7] S. Borsányi, Z. Fodor, C. oelbling, S. D. Katz, S. Krieg, C. Ratti, and K. K. Szabo, Phys. Lett. B 73, 99 (24). [8] J. Steinheimer, and S. Schramm, [arxiv:4.45 [nucl-th]] (24). [9] S. Borsányi, Z. Fodor, C. oelbling, S. D. Katz, S. Krieg, C. Ratti, and K. K. Szabo, JEP 9, 73 (2). [2] E. Megías, E. R. Arriola, and L. L. Salcedo, Phys. Rev. Lett. 9, 56 (22). [2] M. Albright, J. Kapusta and C. Young, Phys. Rev. C 9, 2495 (24) [arxiv: [nucl-th]]. [22] A. Miyahara, Y. Torigoe,. Kouno and M. Yahiro, Phys. Rev. D 94, 63 (26) [arxiv:64.52 [hep-ph]]. [23] M. Asakawa, T. atsuda, Phys. Rev. D 55, 4488 (997). [24] L. Landau and E. Lifshitz, Statistical Physics (Pergamon, New York, 98). [25] S. Borsányi et al., Nature 539, 69 (26) [arxiv: [hep-lat]]. [26] R. Bellwied, S. Borsányi, Z. Fodor, S. D. Katz, A. Pasztor, C. Ratti and K. K. Szabo, Phys. Rev. D 92, 455 (25) [arxiv: [hep-lat]]. [27] S. Borsányi, Z. Fodor, S. D. Katz, S. Krieg, C. Ratti, and K. K. Szabo, JEP, 38 (22). [28] S. Borsányi, G. Endrödi, Z. Fodor, S. D. Katz, S. Krieg, C. Ratti, and K. K. Szabo, JEP 8, 53 (22). [29] N. aque, J. O. Andersen, M. G. Mustafa, M. Strickland and N. Su, Phys. Rev. D 89, 67 (24) [arxiv: [hep-ph]]; N. aque, A. Bandyopadhyay, J. O. Andersen, M. G. Mustafa, M. Strickland and N. Su, JEP 45, 27 (24) [arxiv: [hep-ph]]. [3]. Kouno, T. Makiyama, T. Sasaki, Y. Sakai, and M. Yahiro, J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys. 4, 953 (23). [3] K. V. Olive et al. (Particle Data Group), Chin. Phys. C 38, 9 (24). [32] S. Borsányi, G. Endrodi, Z. Fodor, A. Jakovac, S. D. Katz and K. K. Szabo, JEP 7, 56 (22). [33] Y. Aoki, S. Borsányi, S. Dürr, Z. Fodor, S. D. Katz, S. Krieg, and K. K. Szabó, JEP 6, 88 (29). [34] S. Ejiri, Phys. Rev. D 77, 458 (28) [arxiv: [hep-lat]].