Comparison of heavy-ion transport simulations: Mean-field dynamics in a box

Colonna, M.; Zhang, Ying Xun; Wang, Yongjia; Cozma, Dan; Danielewicz, Paweł; Ko, Che Ming; Ono, Akira; Tsang, M.B.; Wang, Rui; Wolter, H.H.; Xu, Jing; Zhang, Zhen; Chen, Lie‐Wen; Cheng, Hui Gan; Elfner, Hannah; Feng, Z.; Kim, Myungkuk; Kim, Youngman; Jeon, Sangyong; Lee, Chang Hwan; Li, Bao An; Li, Qingfeng; Li, Zhu Xia; Mallik, S.; Oliinychenko, Dmytro; Su, Jun; Song, Taesoo; Sorensen, Agnieszka; Zhang, Feng-Shou

doi:10.1103/physrevc.104.024603

Cited by 58 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 102 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This method allows to investigate the different ingredients separately and compare them to exact limits. Several investigations of this kind have already been completed: a study of the mean-field propagation in a Vlasov calculation [41], a study of the treatment of the collision term in a cascade calculation [42], and a study of pion production also in the cascade mode [43]. Further investigations in a box are in progress of pion production in the presence of momentum-dependent mean fields [44].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Due to limitations in space, we gave some information on these strategies in Refs. [40][41][42][43]. However, this only gives limited information on the ideas of the code developers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In order to introduce fluctuations and further (many-body) correlations in the treatment of the reaction dynamics, two main avenues have been taken (see Refs. [12,35,41,55]). One is the class of molecular dynamics (MD) models [56][57][58][59][60][61][62][63][64], while the other is represented by stochastic extensions of mean-field approaches of the Boltzmann-Langevin type [65][66][67][68][69][70].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Transport Model Comparison Studies of Intermediate-Energy Heavy-Ion Collisions

Wolter,

Colonna,

Cozma

et al. 2022

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Transport models are the main method to obtain physics information on the nuclear equation of state and in-medium properties of particles from low to relativistic-energy heavy-ion collisions. The Transport Model Evaluation Project (TMEP) has been pursued to test the robustness of transport model predictions in reaching consistent conclusions from the same type of physical model. To this end, calculations under controlled conditions of physical input and set-up were performed with various participating codes. These included both calculations of nuclear matter in a box with periodic boundary conditions, which test separately selected ingredients of a transport code, and more realistic calculations of heavy-ion collisions. Over the years, five studies have been performed within this project. In this intermediate review, we summarize and discuss the present status of the project. We also provide condensed descriptions of the 26 participating codes, which contributed to some part of the project. These include the major codes in use today. After a compact description of the underlying transport approaches, we review the main results of the studies completed so far. They show, that in box calculations the differences between the codes can be well understood and a convergence of the results can be reached. These studies also highlight the systematic differences between the two families of transport codes, known under the names of Boltzmann-Uehling-Uhlenbeck (BUU) and Quantum Molecular Dynamics (QMD) type codes. However, when the codes were compared in full heavy-ion collisions using different physical models, as recently for pion production, they still yielded substantially different results. This calls for further comparisons of heavy-ion collisions with controlled models and of box comparisons of important ingredients, like momentum-dependent fields, which are currently underway. Our evaluation studies often indicate improved strategies in performing transport simulations and thus can provide guidance to code developers. Results of transport simulations of heavy-ion collisions from a given code will have more significance if the code can be validated against benchmark calculations such as the ones summarized in this review.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Due to limitations in space, we gave some information on these strategies in Refs. [40][41][42][43]. However, this only gives limited information on the ideas of the code developers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Transport Model Comparison Studies of Intermediate-Energy Heavy-Ion Collisions

Wolter,

Colonna,

Cozma

et al. 2022

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the model dependence of the constraints of symmetry energy [20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30] and inmedium N N cross sections [31][32][33][34][35][36] become apparent since the different conclusions could be drawn from the same data. The situations led to the idea of a systematic comparison and evaluation of transport codes under controlled conditions [37][38][39][40]. Previous studies along this direction were dedicated to the comparison of transport model predictions for Au+Au collisions [37], and for benchmarking the treatment of nucleon-nucleon collisions and Pauli blocking [38] and ∆ production [39] in box calculations with cascade mode.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous studies along this direction were dedicated to the comparison of transport model predictions for Au+Au collisions [37], and for benchmarking the treatment of nucleon-nucleon collisions and Pauli blocking [38] and ∆ production [39] in box calculations with cascade mode. The comparisons of the mean field have been done in box calculation with Vlasov mode [40]. Currently, the observed differences in the reaction path and corresponding observables are mainly resulted from differences in the initialization of the systems and in the treatment of Pauli blocking effects.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%