Arxiv:2011.13684V3 [Nucl-Th] 4 May 2021 Invariant Mass

Home , Chiral model

Quark-hadron crossover equations of state for neutron stars: constraining the chiral invariant mass in a parity doublet model

Takuya Minamikawa,1, ∗ Toru Kojo,2, † and Masayasu Harada1, ‡ 1Department of Physics, Nagoya University, Nagoya 464-8602, Japan 2Key Laboratory of Quark and Lepton Physics (MOE) and Institute of Particle Physics, Central China Normal University, Wuhan 430079, China (Dated: May 5, 2021) We construct an equation of state (EOS) for neutron stars by interpolating hadronic EOS at low density and quark EOS at high density. A hadronic model based on the parity doublet structure is used for hadronic matter and a quark model of Nambu–Jona-Lasinio type is for quark matter. We assume crossover between hadronic matter and quark matter in the the color-flavor locked phase. The nucleon mass of the parity doublet model has a mass associated with the chiral symmetry breaking, and a chiral invariant mass m0 which is insensitive to the chiral condensate. The value of m0 affects the nuclear EOSs at low density, and has strong correlations with the radii of neutron stars. Using the constraint to the radius obtained by LIGO-Virgo and NICER, we find that m0 is restricted as 600 MeV . m0 . 900 MeV.

I. INTRODUCTION matter. In particular, Ref. [23] showed that inclusion of a σ6 term reproduces the incompressibility of the em- Chiral symmetry and its spontaneous breaking is one pirical value K ≈ 240 MeV, which was much larger in of the most important properties in low-energy hadron previous analyses. In Ref. [24], the analyses were further physics. The spontaneous breaking is triggered by the extended to NS matter, and the chiral invariant mass is condensate of quarks and anti-quarks, which generates a restricted to be m0 & 600 MeV by the tidal deformability part of hadron masses and mass difference between chiral estimated from the NS merger GW170817 [32–34]. partners. The previous study in Ref. [24] based on the PDM In case of nucleon, Ref. [1] introduced a notion of the extrapolates the hadronic equations state to the baryon −3 chiral invariant mass in addition to the mass from the density nB ≈ 3n0 (n0 ' 0.16 fm : nuclear saturation spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking using a model density). However, as emphasized in Refs. [35–38], the based on the parity doublet structure. By regarding validity of pure hadronic descriptions at nB 2n0 are ∗ & N (1535) as the chiral partner to the ordinary nucleon questionable as nuclear many-body forces are very im- and using the decay width, the chiral invariant mass is portant, and this would imply that we need quark de- shown to be smaller than 500 MeV [2]. On the other scriptions even before the quark matter formation. In hand, analysis of nucleon mass at high temperature by this context it was proposed to construct EOS by in- lattice simulation [3] suggests a large value of the chiral terpolating EOS for hadronic matter at nB . 2n0 and invariant mass. the one for quark matter in the high-density region, There are many works to construct nuclear matter and nB & 5n0. For describing the quark matter, the authors neutron star (NS) EOS using hadronic models based on adopted a three flavor Nambu–Jona-Lasinio (NJL)-type the parity doublet structure (see, e.g., Refs. [4–29]). Typ- model which leads to the color-flavor locked (CFL) color- ical models are σ-ω type mean field models [30] in which superconducting matter, and examined effective inter- a nucleon acquires the mass from the σ condensate, while actions to satisfy the two-solar-mass (2M ) constraint. in parity doublet models (PDMs) nucleons are less sen- The hadronic EOSs were based on non-relativistic nu- sitive to the details of σ due to the presence of the chiral clear many-body calculations. In Refs. [20, 21], they arXiv:2011.13684v3 [nucl-th] 4 May 2021 invariant mass. construct an effective model combining a PDM and an There have been several refinements in the PDM to NJL-type model with two flavors assuming no color- account for the nucleon as well as nuclear matter prop- superconductivity. erties. The authors in Refs. [23] and [31] revisited the estimate of the decay width, and found that inclusion In the present analysis, we construct EOS for NSs of the derivative interactions, not included in Ref. [2], by interpolating the EOS constructed from the PDM proposed in Ref. [23], and the one from the NJL-type allows larger values of m0, and discussed that relatively model in Refs. [37, 38]. Through such a construction, we large values, 500 MeV ≤ m0 ≤ 900 MeV, are more rea- sonable to explain the saturation properties in nuclear will examine the properties of the PDM, especially the chiral invariant mass. Although the nuclear and quark EOS cover different density domains, in fact they constrain each other as the interpolation of these EOS must ∗ [email protected] satisfy the thermodynamic stability and causality con- † [email protected] straints. Our unified EOSs are subject to the follow- ‡ [email protected] ing NS constraints: the radius constraint obtained from 2 the NS merger GW170817 [32–34], the millisecond pul- where gL and gR are the elements of SU(2)L and SU(2)R sar PSR J0030+0451 [41, 42], and the maximum mass L,R groups, respectively. Two baryon fields ψi (i = 1, 2) constraint obtained from the millisecond pulsar PSR are defined as J0740+6620 [43]. In present analyses, the most notable correlations are L 1 R 1 ψi = (1 − γ5)ψi , ψi = (1 + γ5)ψi . (2) found between the chiral invariant mass and the radius 2 2 constraints. In the PDM, for a given m0 we arranged the We assign positive parity for ψ1 and negative parity for rest of parameters to fit the nuclear saturation proper- ψ : ties, but the density dependence of different sets of pa- 2 rameters can be very different. In particular the choice ψ1 → γ0ψ1 , ψ2 → −γ0ψ2 . (3) of m0 affects the balance between the attractive σ and P P repulsive ω interactions with nucleons; with smaller m , 0 The iso-singlet scalar meson σ and the iso-triplet pions we need a larger scalar coupling to account for the nu- are introduced through a 2 × 2 matrix field M which cleon mass, while it in turn demands a larger ω coupling transforms as for the saturation properties. As the density increases with the chiral restoration, the ω contributions become † M → gL M gR . (4) dominant, and EOSs for n0 . nB . 3n0 become stiffer. Too stiff low density EOSs lead to too large NS radii In the present analysis, following Ref. [23], we include that would contradict with the currently available up- vector mesons based on the framework of the HLS, by perbound. Based on this observation we will find the decomposing the M field as lowerbound for m0. Meanwhile too large m0 is not allowed by the nucleon mass, the lowerbound of NS radii, † M = ξL σ ξR , (5) and the 2M constraint. This paper is organized as follows: In section II, we where σ is the iso-singlet scalar meson field (not a ma- explain the formulation of the present analysis. Main trix), ξL,R are matrix fields including pions. The ξL,R results of the analysis are shown in section III. In sec- transform under the chiral symmetry and the HLS as tion IV, we show a summary and discussions. † † ξL → h ξL gL , ξR → h ξR gR , (6)

II. FORMULATION where h is an element of the U(2) group for the HLS. In the unitary gauge of the HLS, the ξL,R are parametrized as In this section, we explain our model to determine the EOS for NSs. In the low-density region, we use the parity −iπ/fπ iπ/fπ ξL = e , ξR = e , (7) doublet model to describe the hadronic matter. We use the hidden local symmetry (HLS) [44, 45] to introduce where π is a 2 × 2 matrix field for pions expressed as massive vector mesons with chiral symmetry. There are P a π = a=1,2,3 π Ta with Ta = τa/2 being the SU(2) gen- some equivalent method to the HLS [45]. erators and τa being the Pauli matrices. For constructing In the high-density region, on the other hand, we follow the Lagrangian, it is convenient to introduce the 1-forms Refs. [37, 38] and an NJL-type model with additional as vector and diquark pairing interactions. We interpolate the resultant hadronic and quark matter EOS assuming a smooth transition between them. k 1 h † † i αˆµ = (DµξR)ξR + (DµξL)ξL , 2i (8) 1 h i αˆ⊥ = (D ξ )ξ† − (D ξ )ξ† . µ 2i µ R R µ L L A. Parity Doublet Model In the above expression, the covariant derivatives are de- Here we briefly review an effective hadronic model fined as based on the parity doublet structure for nucleons [1, a ˜ 2, 23]. DµξL,R = (∂µ − igωωµT0 − igρρµTa)ξL,R − iξL,RVµ , In our model the excited nucleon N ∗(1535) is regarded (9) as a chiral partner to the ordinary nucleon N(939). For where T0 = 1/2 and Ta = τa/2 are the U(2) genera- expressing these nucleons, we introduce two baryon fields a tors, ωµ and ρ are the gauge fields for U(1) and SU(2) ψ1 and ψ2 which transform under the chiral symmetry as µ HLS, gω and gρ their gauge coupling constants. As usual, L L R R external gauge fields for the chiral symmetry, V˜ , is intro- ψ → gL ψ , ψ → gR ψ , µ 1 1 1 1 (1) L L R R duced to keep track the correspondence between the gen- ψ2 → gR ψ2 , ψ2 → gL ψ2 , erating functional of QCD and its effective Lagrangian of 3

vector hadronic fields. After using the correspondence to con- The vector mesons part LM is given by strain the form of the effective Lagrangian, we set the 2 values of the external fields as vector 1 µν mω h k i h µi LM = − ωµν ω + 2 tr αˆµ tr αˆk 4 2gω ˜ 1 µQ 0 0 Vµ = δµ . (10) 1 µν 2 0 −µQ − tr[ρ ρ ] 2 µν Our effective Lagrangian for hadrons consists of a nu- m2 h i 1 h i h i + ρ tr αˆk αˆµ − tr αˆk tr αˆµ , (19) cleon part and a meson part, 2 µ k µ k gρ 2 L = L + L . (11) PDM N M where mω and mρ are the masses of ω and ρ mesons, µ µ and ωµν and ρµν are the field strengths of ω and ρ re- The nucleon part is given by spectively. The second and forth terms include the mass terms for ωµ and ρµ as X ¯ µ LN = ψiiγ Dµψi i=1,2 h k i h µi 2 µ tr αˆµ tr αˆk = gωω ωµ , − g ψ¯LMψR + ψ¯RM †ψL 1 1 1 1 1 h i 1 h i h i 1 (20) ¯L † R ¯R L tr αˆk αˆµ − tr αˆk tr αˆµ = g2ρa ρµ + ··· , − g2 ψ2 M ψ2 + ψ2 Mψ2 µ k 2 µ k 2 ρ µ a − m (ψ¯LψR − ψ¯RψL − ψ¯LψR + ψ¯RψL) 0 1 2 1 2 2 1 2 1 where “··· ” stands for interaction terms. h ¯L † µ k L ¯R † µ k Ri + aVNN ψ1 ξLγ αˆµξLψ1 + ψ1 ξRγ αˆµξRψ1 In the present analysis, we calculate the thermody- h i namic potential in the mean field approximation as + a ψ¯Lξ† γµαˆk ξ ψL + ψ¯Rξ† γµαˆk ξ ψR VNN 2 R µ R 2 2 L µ L 2 h i µ µ µ µQ µ X ¯L µ k L ¯R µ k R hσi = σ , hω i = ωδ0 , hρ i = ρ − T3δ0 . + a0NN ψi γ tr αˆµ ψi + ψi γ tr αˆµ ψi , gρ i=1,2 (21) (12) Each mean field is assumed to be independent of the where the covariant derivatives on the nucleon fields are spatial coordinates. Mean field ρ is defined in such a way defined as that LM does not explicitly include µQ. L,R L,R It is convenient to introduce the effective chemical po- Dµψ1,2 = (∂µ − iVµ)ψ1,2 , (13) tentials of protons and neutrons as with 1 µ∗ = µ + µ − g ω − g ρ , p Q B ωNN 2 ρNN µB + µQ 0 0 (22) Vµ = δµ . (14) 1 0 µB µ∗ = µ − g ω + g ρ , n B ωNN 2 ρNN The meson part is given by where kin vector LM = L − VM − VSB + L , (15) M M gωNN = (aVNN + a0NN )gω , (23) kin gρNN = aVNN gρ . where LM , VM and VSB, are the kinetic term, the chiral symmetric potential and the potential including the ex- The thermodynamic potential in the hadronic matter plicit chiral symmetry breaking for the scalar and pseudo- vector is calculated as [23] scalar mesons, respectively, and LM includes the kinetic and mass terms for vector mesons. The kinetic and 1 1 potential terms for the scalar and pseudo-scalar mesons Ω = V (σ) − V (f ) − m2 ω2 − m2ρ2 PDM π 2 ω 2 ρ are expressed as [23] Z kF 3 X X d p ∗ i − 2 3 (µα − Ep) , (24) kin 1 µ † 1 µ 2 ⊥ µ (2π) L = tr D MD M = ∂ σ∂ σ + σ tr αˆ αˆ , i=1,2 α=p,n M 4 µ 2 µ µ ⊥ (16) where i = 1 labels the ordinary nucleon N(939) and i = 2 1 2 † 1 † 2 ∗ i p 2 2 VM = − µ¯ tr MM + λ4(tr MM ) the excited nucleon N (1535), Ep = p + mi is the en- 4 16 ergy of relevant particle with mass mi and momentum p. 1 † 3 In the integration above, the integral region is restricted − λ6 (tr MM ) , (17) p ∗ 2 2 48 as |p| < kF where kF = (µα) − mi is the fermi mo- 1 V = − m2 f trM + M † . (18) mentum for the relevant particle. We notice that we use SB 4 π π the so called no sea approximation, assuming that the 4

TABLE I: Physical inputs in vacuum in unit of MeV. TABLE II: Saturation properties used to determine the model parameters: the saturation density n0, the binding

mπ fπ mω mρ m+ m− energy B0, the incompressibility K0 and the symmetry 140 92.4 783 776 939 1535 energy S0.

−3 n0 [fm ] B0 [MeV] K0 [MeV] S0 [MeV] structure of the Dirac sea remains the same for the vac- 0.16 16 240 31 uum and medium. V (σ) is the potential of σ mean ﬁeld, 1 1 1 TABLE III: Values of model parameters determined for V (σ) = − µ¯2σ2 + λ σ4 − λ σ6 − m2 f σ . (25) 2 4 4 6 6 π π several choices of m0. The values of the slope parameter is also shown as output. In Eq. (24) we subtracted the potential in vacuum V (fπ), with which the total potential in vacuum is zero. m0 [MeV] 500 600 700 800 900 The total thermodynamic potential of the hadronic g 9.02 8.48 7.81 6.99 5.96 matter in NSs is obtained by including the eﬀects of lep- 1 tons as g2 15.5 14.9 14.3 13.4 12.4 µ¯2/f 2 22.7 22.4 19.3 11.9 1.50 X π ΩH = ΩPDM + Ωl , (26) λ4 41.9 40.4 35.5 23.1 4.43 2 l=e,µ λ6fπ 16.9 15.8 13.9 8.89 0.636

gωNN 11.3 9.13 7.30 5.66 3.52 where Ωl (l = e, µ) are the thermodynamic potentials for leptons given by gρNN 7.31 7.86 8.13 8.30 8.43 L0 [MeV] 93.76 86.24 83.04 81.33 80.08 Z kF d3p Ω = −2 (µ − El ) . (27) l (2π)3 l p for smaller chiral invariant mass, which leads to stronger Here, the mean ﬁelds are determined by the following attractive force mediated by σ contribution. The ω con- stationary conditions: tribution causing the repulsive force is also larger to satisfy the saturation properties at saturation density. This ∂Ω ∂Ω ∂Ω 0 = H , 0 = H , 0 = H . (28) ω contribution becomes larger in the high density region, ∂σ ∂ω ∂ρ while the σ contribution becomes smaller. The resulting In NSs, we impose the beta equilibrium and the charge large repulsive force makes the EOS stiﬀ. neutrality condition represented as

µe = µµ = −µQ , (29) B. Color-Superconductivity ∂ΩH = np − nl = 0 . (30) ∂µQ Following Ref. [38], we use an NJL-type eﬀective model of quarks including the 4-Fermi interactions which cause Finally, we obtain the pressure in the hadronic matter as the spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking and the color- superconductivity. The Lagrangian is given by PH = −ΩH . (31)

In the present analysis, following Ref. [23], we deter- LCSC = L0 + Lσ + Ld + LKMT + Lvec , (32) mine the model parameters from the following physical inputs for fixed values of the chiral invariant mass m0: where five masses of the relevant hadrons and the pion decay µ µ constant in vacuum as listed in Table I; saturation prop- L0 =q ¯(iγ ∂µ − mˆ q + γµAˆ )q , (33) erties of nuclear matter at the saturation density as in 8 X 2 2 Table II. We show the values of model parameters for Lσ = G (¯qτAq) + (¯qiγ5τAq) , (34) several typical choices of m0 in Table III. A=0 As is seen from Table III, the slope parameter in this X t t model is larger for a smaller chiral invariant mass. Al- Ld = H (¯qτAλBCq¯ )(q CτAλBq) though the higher order contributions in the expansion A,B=2,5,7 t t with respect to x = (nB − n0)/3n0 and δ = 2nI /nB be- + (¯qiγ5τAλBCq¯ )(q Ciγ5τAλBq) , (35) come important in the high density region nB & 2n0, the EOS from the present model is stiffer for smaller m as LKMT = −K det q¯(1 − γ5)q + det q¯(1 + γ5)q , (36) 0 f f we will show in the next section. This can be understood µ as follows: The Yukawa coupling of σ to nucleon is larger Lvec = −gV (¯qγ q)(¯qγµq) , (37) 5

µ and Aˆ is the external field. The chemical potentials are where Ωl is the thermodynamic potential for leptons introduced in the same way as the hadronic case by given in Eq. (27). The chiral condensates σj and the diquark condensates di are determined from the gap equa- ˆµ µ A = (µq + µ3λ3 + µ8λ8 + µQQ)δ0 , (38) tions, where λ are Gell-Mann matrices in color space and ∂ΩQ ∂ΩQ a 0 = = . (50) Q = diag(2/3, −1/3, −1/3) is a charge matrix in flavor ∂σi ∂di space. For coupling constants G and K, we chose the values of Hatsuda-Kunihiro parameters which success- To determine the relevant chemical potentials other than fully reproduce the hadron phenomenology at low energy the baryon number density, we use the beta equilibrium [37, 46]: GΛ2 = 1.835 and KΛ5 = 9.29 with Λ = 631.4 condition given in Eq. (29), and the conditions for elec- MeV. We introduce the mean fields as tromagnetic charge neutrality and color charge neutrality expressed as

σf = hq¯f qf i , (f = u, d, s) , (39) ∂ΩQ t nj = − = 0 , (51) dj = q Cγ5Rjq , (j = 1, 2, 3) , (40) ∂µj X D † E nq = qf qf , (41) where j = 3, 8,Q. The baryon number density nB is f=u,d,s three times of quark number density determined as where (R1,R2,R3) = (τ7λ7, τ5λ5, τ2λ2). Then, the ther- ∂ΩQ nq = − , (52) modynamic potential is calculated as ∂µq

0 ΩCSC = Ωs − Ωs[σf = σf , dj = 0, µq = 0] where µq is 1/3 of the baryon number chemical potential. Substituting the above conditions, we obtain the pressure + Ω − Ω [σ = σ0, d = 0] , (42) c c f f j of the system as where PQ = −ΩQ . (53) 18 Z Λ 3 X d p εi Ω = −2 , (43) s (2π)3 2 i=1 C. Interpolation of EOS X Ω = (2Gσ2 + Hd2) − 4Kσ σ σ − g n2 . (44) c i i u d s V q Here, we consider interpolation of two EOSs for i hadronic matter and quark matter which are constructed In Eq. (43), εi are energy eigenvalues obtained from the in previous subsections. Following Ref. [37], we assume following inverse propagator in Nambu-Gorkov basis that hadronic matter is realized in the low density region nB < 2n0, and use the pressure constructed in Eq. (31). µ 0 ! γ k − Mˆ + γ µˆ γ P ∆ R In the high density region nB > 5n0, on the other hand, S−1(k) = µ 5 i i i , (45) P ∗ µ ˆ 0 the pressure given in Eq. (53) of quark matter is used. −γ5 i ∆i Ri γµk − M − γ µˆ In the intermediate region 2n0 < nB < 5n0, we assume where that the pressure is expressed by a ﬁfth order polynomial of µB as M = m − 4Gσ + K| |σ σ , (46) i i i ijk j k 5 ∆ = −2Hd , (47) X i i i PI(µB) = CiµB , (54) µˆ = µq − 2gV nq + µ3λ3 + µ8λ8 + µQQ. (48) i=0 where C are six fee parameters to be determined from S−1(k) in Eq. (45) is 72 × 72 matrix in terms of the i the following boundary conditions, color, ﬂavor, spin and Nambu-Gorkov basis, which has n n 72 eigenvalues. Mu,d,s are the constituent masses of the d P d P I = H , u, d, s-quarks and ∆1,2,3 are the gap energies. In the n n (dµB) (dµB) present parameter choice, at n 5n they vary in the µBL µBL B & 0 n n range of M ≈ 50-100 MeV, M ≈ 250-300 MeV and d PI d PQ u,d s = , (n = 0, 1, 2) (55) (dµ )n (dµ )n ∆1,2,3 ≈ 200-250 MeV [37]. Note that the matix does B µBU B µBU not depend on the spin, and that the charge conjugation invariance relates two eigenvalues. Then, there are 18 where µBL is the chemical potential corresponding to independent eigenvalues at most. nB = 2n0 and µBU to nB = 5n0. The total thermodynamical potential is We show typical examples of the connected pressure in Fig. 1 and corresponding sound velocity calculated by X ΩQ = ΩCSC + Ωl , (49) 2 dP nB l=e,µ cs = = , (56) dε µBχB 6

350 300

300 250

250

] 200 ] 3 3 m m

f f 200 / / V V

e 150 e M M [ [

150 P P

100 100

50 50

PDM: m0 = 800 MeV PDM: m0 = 800 MeV 0 interpolated with CSC: (H/G, gV/G) = (1.45,1.0) 0 interpolated with CSC: (H/G, gV/G) = (1.45,1.2)

1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700

B [MeV] B [MeV]

(a) (H/G, gV /G) = (1.45, 1.0) (b) (H/G, gV /G) = (1.45, 1.2)

FIG. 1: Pressure P (µB ) of the PDM and the uniﬁed equations of state. For the PDM we chose m0 = 800 MeV, and for quark models we used (H/G, gV /G) = (1.45, 1.0) and (1.45, 1.2). The thick curves in the uniﬁed equations of state are used to mark the pure hadronic and quark parts.

1.0 1.0

0.8 0.8

0.6 0.6 2 2 s s c c

0.4 0.4

0.2 0.2

PDM: m0 = 800 MeV PDM: m0 = 800 MeV

interpolated with CSC: (H/G, gV/G) = (1.45,1.0) interpolated with CSC: (H/G, gV/G) = (1.45,1.2) 0.0 0.0 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700

B [MeV] B [MeV]

(a) (H/G, gV /G) = (1.45, 1.0) (b) (H/G, gV /G) = (1.45, 1.2)

2 FIG. 2: Squared speed of sound cs for (H/G, gV /G) = (1.45, 1.0) and (1.45,1.2). Curves are same as in Fig. 1.

dP d2P where nB = and χB = 2 in Fig. 2. We low density EOS softens for a large m0, and correspond- dµB dµB see that, although both plots 1(a) and 1(b) in Fig. 1 ingly smaller values of gV are favored for causal interpo- are smooth, Fig. 2 shows that the parameter set (b) lations. We note that the range of (H, gV ) is larger than violates causality. In this way, the parameter choice the previously used estimates, (H/G, gV /G) = (0.5, 0.5), based on the Fierz transformation (see e.g. Ref. [47]). (H/G, gV /G) = (1.45, 1.2) in quark matter is excluded Such choices were used in the hybrid hadron-quark mat- when m0 = 800 MeV in hadronic matter. ter EOS with ﬁrst order phase transitions, and tend to Figure 3 shows allowed combinations of (H, gV ) for sev- lead to the NS mass smaller than 2M . eral choices of m0. In all cases, the allowed values of H and gV have a positive correlation; for a larger gV we need to increase the value of H [38]. The details of this positive correlation depend on the low density constraint and the choice of m0. As we can see from Table.III, the 7

2.6 2.6

1.6 1.6 2.4 2.4

2.2 2.2 1.5 1.5

2.0 2.0 M M G G / / / / x x a a H H 1.4 m 1.4 m 1.8 M 1.8 M

1.6 1.6 1.3 1.3

1.4 1.4

1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2

gV/G gV/G

(a) m0 = 500 MeV (b) m0 = 600 MeV

2.6 2.6

1.6 1.6 2.4 2.4

2.2 2.2 1.5 1.5

2.0 2.0 M M G G / / / / x x a a H H 1.4 m 1.4 m 1.8 M 1.8 M

1.6 1.6 1.3 1.3

1.4 1.4

1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2

gV/G gV/G

2.6

1.6 2.4

2.2 1.5

2.0 M G / / x a H 1.4 m 1.8 M

1.6 1.3

1.4

1.2 1.2 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2

gV/G

(e) m0 = 900 MeV

FIG. 3: (Color online) Allowed combinations of (H, gV ) for (a) m0 = 500 MeV, (b) m0 = 600 MeV, (c) m0 = 700 MeV, (d) m0 = 800 MeV and (e) m0 = 900 MeV. Cross mark indicates that the combination of (H, gV ) is excluded by the causality constraint. Circle indicates that the combination is allowed. The color of the circle shows the maximum mass of NS obtained from the corresponding parameters, as indicated by a vertical bar at the right side of each ﬁgure. 8

2.5 PSR J0740+6620 PSR J0740+6620 2.0 2.0

1.5 GW170817 PSR J0030+0451 1.5 GW170817 PSR J0030+0451 M M / / M M

1.0 1.0

0.5 0.5

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 R [km] R [km]

(a) m0 = 500 MeV (b) m0 = 600 MeV

2.5 2.25 PSR J0740+6620 PSR J0740+6620 2.00 2.0 1.75

1.50 GW170817 PSR J0030+0451 1.5 GW170817 PSR J0030+0451 M M / / 1.25 M M

1.00 1.0

0.75

0.5 0.50

0.25

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 R [km] R [km]

PSR J0740+6620

2.00

1.75

PSR J0030+0451 1.50 GW170817

1.25 M / M 1.00

0.75

0.50

0.25 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 R [km]

(e) m0 = 900 MeV

FIG. 4: Several choices of mass-radius relations for each m0. (See main texts for detail.) 9

2.5 PSR J0740+6620 PSR J0740+6620 2.0 2.0

1.5 1.5 M M / / M M

1.0 1.0

0.5 0.5

1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

nc/n0 nc/n0

(a) m0 = 500 MeV (b) m0 = 600 MeV

2.5 2.25 PSR J0740+6620 PSR J0740+6620 2.00 2.0 1.75

1.50 1.5 M M / / 1.25 M M

1.00 1.0

0.75

0.5 0.50

0.25

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 2 4 6 8 10

nc/n0 nc/n0

2.25 PSR J0740+6620

2.00

1.75

1.50 M

/ 1.25 M

1.00

0.75

0.50

0.25 2 4 6 8

nc/n0

(e) m0 = 900 MeV

FIG. 5: Several choices of relations between mass and central density for each m0. (See main texts for detail.) 10

III. MASS-RADIUS RELATION relations by blue dashed curves do not exceed the lowest maximum mass. We also show the constraint to the In this section, we calculate mass-radius relations radius obtained from the LIGO-Virgo [32–34] by green 2 of NSs using the Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkoff (TOV) shaded areas on the middle left and from the NICER equation [48, 49]. The TOV equation for hydrostatic (Miller et al. [41] by red shaded areas on the middle right. equilibrium in general relativity is given by The inner contour of each area contains 68% of the pos- terior probability (1σ), and the outer one contains 95% dP (ε + P )(m + 4πr3P ) (2σ). These values (plus another NICER result of Riley = −G , 2 et al. [42]) are summarized in Table IV. dr r − 2Gmr (57) dm = 4πr2ε , dr TABLE IV: The radius constraints. where G is the Newton constant, r is the distance from the center of an NS, P , m and ε are the pressure, mass, and energy density as functions of r: radius [km] mass [M ] +2.0 +0.12 GW170817 (primary) 10.8−1.7 1.46−0.10 P = P (r) , m = m(r) , ε = ε(r) . (58) +2.1 +0.09 GW170817 (secondary) 10.7−1.5 1.27−0.09 J0030+0451 (NICER [41]) 13.02+1.24 1.44+0.15 To correctly estimate NS radii, we need to include the −1.06 −0.14 J0030+0451 (NICER [42]) 12.71+1.14 1.34+0.15 crust equations. We use the BPS EOS [50] for the outer −1.19 −0.16 1 −3 and inner crust parts at nB ≤ 0.1 fm , and at nB ≥ 0.1 fm−3 we use our unified EOS from nuclear liquid to quark matter. In the LIGO-Virgo results which are based only on Given the central density as an initial value, the corre- model-independent analyses, the radius of NS with ' sponding radius R and mass M of NS are obtained. The 1.4M is in the range of 9-13 km. If we require only our radius is determined by the condition that the pressure M-R curves to be within the 2σ band, we get the con- vanishes: P (R) = 0, and the mass is the value of m at straint m0 & 600 MeV irrespective to the quark EOS. If the radius: M = m(R). we further demand the M-R curves to be within the 1σ We show the resultant mass-radius relations in Fig. 4, band, we found that only few curves with m0 ≥ 700 MeV and relation between mass and central density in Fig. 5. meet the requirement, but those curves do not satisfy the Five panels in Figs. 4 and 5 correspond to five typical 2M constraints and must be rejected. We note that an- choices of m0. other analyses by the LIGO-Virgo suggests 11.9±1.4 km In each panel of Figs. 4 and 5, different curves are by utilizing particular parameterization of EOS and im- drawn for different combinations of (H, gV ) indicated by posing the 2M constraint. Meanwhile it is easier to rec- circles in Fig. 3. Thick curves in the low-mass region in oncile our modeling with the NICER constraints which Figs. 4 and 5 indicate that central density of the NS is suggest larger radii, and the range 500 ≤ m0[MeV] ≤ 900 smaller than 2n0, and that the NS is made only from are within the 1σ band and hence do not impose further hadronic matter. Thick curves in high-mass region, on constraints in addition to the LIGO-Virgo’s. Taking into the other hand, imply that central density is larger than account all these results, we decided to use the 2σ band of 5n0, and that core of the NS includes quark matter. Thin the LIGO-Virgo results, which are compatible with avail- curves show that the core is in the crossover domain. able constraints, and make conservative estimates on the For each combination of (H, gV ), the maximum mass chiral invariant mass as of a NS is determined, which are indicated by the color in Fig. 3. This shows that a larger g or a smaller H V 600 MeV . m0 . 900 MeV . (60) leads to a larger maximum mass. In this paper we use the mass of the millisecond pulsar We also note that the larger m leads to smaller slope PSR J0740+6620 [43] 0 parameter for the symmetry energy, 80.08 . L0 [MeV] . lowest +0.10 86.24, as one can read off from Table. III. MTOV = 2.14−0.09 M , (59) as the lowest maximum mass, which is shown by gray- shaded area in Figs. 4 and 5. Each red solid curve in these figures exhibits the mass-radius relation for which maximum mass is larger than the above lowest maxi- 2 More precisely, the LIGO-Virgo constrains the tidal deformabil- ˜ mum mass, while the maximum masses for mass-radius ity Λ which is the function of the tidal deformability of each NS (Λ1 and Λ2) and the mass ratio q = M2/M1. But for EOS which ˜ do not lead to large variation of radii for M & 1M , Λ is insensitive to q. In fact the NS radii and Λ˜ can be strongly correlated (for more details, see Ref.[39, 40]), and for our purposes it is 1 The BPS EOS is usually referred as EOS for the outer crust, but sufficient to directly use the estimates on the radii given in Ref. it also contains the BPP EOS [50] for the inner crust. [34], rather than Λ.˜ 11

ated with large m have more tensions with sufficiently 2.5 0 stiff quark EOS, setting the upperbound m0 . 900 PSR J0740+6620 MeV. This upperbound is close to the total nucleon mass m ≈ 939 MeV, and hence is not as remarkable as the 2.0 N radius constraint. We would like to note that, as one can see in Fig. 6, the cores of heavy NSs with M ≈ 2M includes quark 1.5 GW170817 PSR J0030+0451 M / matter as shown by thick curves in the heavy-mass re- M gion. On the other hand, the core of 1.4M NS is in the crossover domain of quark and hadronic matter. As 1.0 a result, variations in the radii of 1.4M NS are rather m0 = 600 MeV small, ∆R 0.5 km, in our crossover construction of m0 = 700 MeV . m = 800 MeV unified EOS. 0.5 0 m0 = 900 MeV In this analysis we assumed crossover between hadronic

10 11 12 13 14 matter and quark matter. As we see in Fig 3, our re- R [km] sult showed that the coupling H needs to be sufficiently large to satisfy the causality for smooth connection, as FIG. 6: Several choices of mass-radius relations which in Ref. [37]. Such large H’s (& 1.4G) is consistent with satisfy both the maximum mass and the radius constraints. the N-∆ splitting [53], and lead to the CFL phase for nB & 5n0. We note that, the previous studies as in Ref. [37] primarily referred to the constraint R . 13 km from IV. SUMMARY AND DISCUSSIONS GW170817, but then new NICER results appear, favor- ing the radii ≈ 13 km. We may relax the condition on We construct EOS for NS matter by interpolating the low density EOS and allow stiffer EOS, which broadens EOS obtained in the PDM and the one in the NJL-type the possibility of the first order phase transitions. In model. We obtain constraints to the model parameters this respect, it is interesting to explicitly implement the from thermodynamic stability, causality and the con- first order transition in the interpolated domain, as in straints on M-R curves. Refs. [20, 21], while taking quark and hadronic EOS as boundary conditions. Our primary purpose was to examine how neutron star The predicted values of the slope parameter L0 = observations constrain a hadronic EOS and the micro- 80 − 94 MeV (shown in Table III) are somewhat larger physics in it. Our hadronic EOS are tuned to reproduce than typical estimates L0 = 30 − 80 MeV, see e.g. Refs. the physics at the saturation density, but its extrapola- [51, 52]. But there are also estimates L0 = (109.56 ± tion toward higher density is sensitive to the chiral in- 36.41) MeV based on recent analyses of PREXII for the variant mass m0. The radii of 1.4 M NS are known neutron skin thickness [54], and we are not fully sure to have strong correlations with the stiffness of low den- which estimates should be taken. While in this study sity EOS beyond the saturation density, n = 1-2n , B 0 we focus on the variation of m0, the value of L0 can be and indeed we have obtained the nontrivial constraint, also adjusted by adding e.g. a term proportional to ω2ρ2 600 . m0 [MeV] . 900. At low density, the density into the hadronic part. Such modification may slightly dependence of the stiffness is sensitive to the balance be- decrease the lower bound and/or the upper bound of m0 tween the σ- and ω-exchanges, where the strength of the in Eq. (60). We leave such extensions of our PDM model former strongly depends on the fraction of the chiral vari- for future studies. ant component in the nucleon mass. Meanwhile, the maximum NS mass is known to have strong correlations with high density EOS, and con- ACKNOWLEDGEMENT strains quark model parameters (H, gV ). But these parameters are not independent of the hadronic sector, The work of M.H. is supported in part by JSPS KAK- since the high and low density EOS must have a causal ENHI Grant Number 20K03927. T. K. was supported and thermodynamically stable connection. The allowed by NSFC Grant No. 11875144. We thank C. Miller and range of (H, gV ) is sensitive to our choice of m0 or the G. Raaijmakers for providing us with numerical tables of stiffness of the hadronic EOS. Soft hadronic EOS associ- the NICER.

[1] C. E. Detar and T. Kunihiro, “Linear σ Model With doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.39.2805 Parity Doubling,” Phys. Rev. D 39, 2805 (1989). 12

[2] D. Jido, M. Oka and A. Hosaka, “Chiral symme- play between the chiral and the nuclear liquid-gas try of baryons,” Prog. Theor. Phys. 106, 873 (2001) transitions,” Phys. Rev. C 96, no. 2, 025205 (2017) doi:10.1143/PTP.106.873 [hep-ph/0110005]. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.96.025205 [arXiv:1611.10144 [3] G. Aarts, C. Allton, D. De Boni, S. Hands, B. Jäger, [nucl-th]]. C. Praki and J. I. Skullerud, “Light baryons below [16] D. Suenaga, “Examination of N ∗(1535) as a probe to and above the deconfinement transition: medium ef- observe the partial restoration of chiral symmetry in fects and parity doubling,” JHEP 1706, 034 (2017) nuclear matter,” Phys. Rev. C 97, no. 4, 045203 (2018) doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2017)034 [arXiv:1703.09246 [hep- doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.97.045203 [arXiv:1704.03630 lat]]. [nucl-th]]. [4] T. Hatsuda and M. Prakash, “Parity Doubling of the Nu- [17] Y. Takeda, Y. Kim and M. Harada, “Catalysis cleon and First Order Chiral Transition in Dense Mat- of partial chiral symmetry restoration by ∆ matter,” Phys. Lett. B 224, 11 (1989). doi:10.1016/0370- ter,” Phys. Rev. C 97, no. 6, 065202 (2018) 2693(89)91040-X doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.97.065202 [arXiv:1704.04357 [5] D. Zschiesche, L. Tolos, J. Schaffner-Bielich and [nucl-th]]. R. D. Pisarski, “Cold, dense nuclear matter in a SU(2) [18] A. Mukherjee, S. Schramm, J. Steinheimer and V. Dex- parity doublet model,” Phys. Rev. C 75, 055202 (2007) heimer, “The application of the Quark-Hadron Chi- doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.75.055202 [nucl-th/0608044]. ral Parity-Doublet Model to neutron star matter,” As- [6] V. Dexheimer, S. Schramm and D. Zschiesche, tron. Astrophys. 608, A110 (2017) doi:10.1051/0004- “Nuclear matter and neutron stars in a parity 6361/201731505 [arXiv:1706.09191 [nucl-th]]. doublet model,” Phys. Rev. C 77, 025803 (2008) [19] H. Abuki, Y. Takeda and M. Harada, “Dual chi- doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.77.025803 [arXiv:0710.4192 ral density waves in nuclear matter,” EPJ Web Conf. [nucl-th]]. 192, 00020 (2018) doi:10.1051/epjconf/201819200020 [7] V. Dexheimer, G. Pagliara, L. Tolos, J. Schaffner-Bielich [arXiv:1809.06485 [hep-ph]]. and S. Schramm, “Neutron stars within the SU(2) par- [20] M. Marczenko, D. Blaschke, K. Redlich and ity doublet model,” Eur. Phys. J. A 38, 105 (2008) C. Sasaki, “Parity Doubling and the Dense Mat- doi:10.1140/epja/i2008-10652-0 [arXiv:0805.3301 [nucl- ter Phase Diagram under Constraints from Multi- th]]. Messenger Astronomy,” Universe 5, no. 8, 180 (2019) [8] C. Sasaki and I. Mishustin, “Thermodynamics of dense doi:10.3390/universe5080180 [arXiv:1905.04974 [nucl- hadronic matter in a parity doublet model,” Phys. Rev. th]]. C 82, 035204 (2010) doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.82.035204 [21] M. Marczenko, D. Blaschke, K. Redlich and C. Sasaki, [arXiv:1005.4811 [hep-ph]]. “Toward a unified equation of state for multi-messenger [9] C. Sasaki, H. K. Lee, W. G. Paeng and M. Rho, astronomy,” doi:10.1051/0004-6361/202038211 “Conformal anomaly and the vector coupling in [arXiv:2004.09566 [astro-ph.HE]]. dense matter,” Phys. Rev. D 84, 034011 (2011) [22] M. Harada, contribution to the proceedings of doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.84.034011 [arXiv:1103.0184 [hep- HADRON 2019. “Dense nuclear matter based ph]]. on a chiral model with parity doublet structure,” [10] S. Gallas, F. Giacosa and G. Pagliara, “Nuclear matter doi:10.1142/9789811219313 0113. within a dilatation-invariant parity doublet model: the [23] Y. Motohiro, Y. Kim and M. Harada, “Asymmetric role of the tetraquark at nonzero density,” Nucl. Phys. nuclear matter in a parity doublet model with hid- A 872, 13 (2011) doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2011.09.008 den local symmetry,” Phys. Rev. C 92, no. 2, 025201 [arXiv:1105.5003 [hep-ph]]. (2015) Erratum: [Phys. Rev. C 95, no. 5, 059903 [11] J. Steinheimer, S. Schramm and H. Stocker, “The (2017)] doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.92.025201, 10.1103/Phys- hadronic SU(3) Parity Doublet Model for Dense Mat- RevC.95.059903 [arXiv:1505.00988 [nucl-th]]. ter, its extension to quarks and the strange equa- [24] T. Yamazaki and M. Harada, “Constraint to chiral tion of state,” Phys. Rev. C 84, 045208 (2011) invariant masses of nucleons from GW170817 in an doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.84.045208 [arXiv:1108.2596 [hep- extended parity doublet model,” Phys. Rev. C 100, ph]]. no. 2, 025205 (2019) doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.100.025205 [12] W. G. Paeng, H. K. Lee, M. Rho and C. Sasaki, “Dilaton- [arXiv:1901.02167 [nucl-th]]. Limit Fixed Point in Hidden Local Symmetric Par- [25] M. Harada and T. Yamazaki, “Charmed Mesons ity Doublet Model,” Phys. Rev. D 85, 054022 (2012) in Nuclear Matter Based on Chiral Effective doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.85.054022 [arXiv:1109.5431 [hep- Models,” JPS Conf. Proc. 26, 024001 (2019) ph]]. doi:10.7566/JPSCP.26.024001 [13] V. Dexheimer, J. Steinheimer, R. Negreiros and [26] S. Benic, I. Mishustin and C. Sasaki, “Effective S. Schramm, “Hybrid Stars in an SU(3) parity dou- model for the QCD phase transitions at finite baryon blet model,” Phys. Rev. C 87, no. 1, 015804 (2013) density,” Phys. Rev. D 91, no. 12, 125034 (2015) doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.87.015804 [arXiv:1206.3086 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.91.125034 [arXiv:1502.05969 [astro-ph.HE]]. [hep-ph]]. [14] W. G. Paeng, H. K. Lee, M. Rho and C. Sasaki, [27] M. Marczenko and C. Sasaki, “Net-baryon number “Interplay between ω-nucleon interaction and nu- fluctuations in the Hybrid Quark-Meson-Nucleon model cleon mass in dense baryonic matter,” Phys. Rev. at finite density,” Phys. Rev. D 97, no. 3, 036011 (2018) D 88, 105019 (2013) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.88.105019 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.97.036011 [arXiv:1711.05521 [arXiv:1303.2898 [nucl-th]]. [hep-ph]]. [15] A. Mukherjee, J. Steinheimer and S. Schramm, [28] M. L. Marczenko, D. Blaschke, K. Redlich and C. Sasaki, “Higher-order baryon number susceptibilities: inter- “Chiral symmetry restoration by parity doubling and 13

the structure of neutron stars,” Phys. Rev. D 98, ph.HE]]. no. 10, 103021 (2018) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.98.103021 [38] G. Baym, S. Furusawa, T. Hatsuda, T. Kojo and [arXiv:1805.06886 [nucl-th]]. H. Togashi, “New Neutron Star Equation of State with [29] W. G. Paeng, T. T. S. Kuo, H. K. Lee, Y. L. Ma Quark-Hadron Crossover,” Astrophys. J. 885, 42 (2019) and M. Rho, “Scale-invariant hidden local sym- doi:10.3847/1538-4357/ab441e [arXiv:1903.08963 [astro- metry, topology change, and dense baryonic mat- ph.HE]]. ter. II.,” Phys. Rev. D 96, no.1, 014031 (2017) [39] S. De, D. Finstad, J. M. Lattimer, D. A. Brown, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.96.014031 [arXiv:1704.02775 E. Berger and C. M. Biwer, “Tidal Deformabilities [nucl-th]]. and Radii of Neutron Stars from the Observation of [30] J. D. Walecka, “A Theory of highly condensed mat- GW170817,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, no.9, 091102 (2018) ter,” Annals Phys. 83, 491-529 (1974) doi:10.1016/0003- [erratum: Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, no.25, 259902 (2018)] 4916(74)90208-5 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.121.091102 [arXiv:1804.08583 [31] T. Yamazaki and M. Harada, “Chiral partner structure [astro-ph.HE]]. of light nucleons in an extended parity doublet model,” [40] D. Radice, A. Perego, F. Zappa and S. Bernuzzi, arXiv:1809.02359 [hep-ph]. “GW170817: Joint Constraint on the Neutron Star [32] B. P. Abbott et al. [LIGO Scientific and Virgo Col- Equation of State from Multimessenger Observa- laborations], “GW170817: Observation of Gravita- tions,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 852, no.2, L29 (2018) tional Waves from a Binary Neutron Star Inspi- doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aaa402 [arXiv:1711.03647 [astro- ral,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, no. 16, 161101 (2017) ph.HE]]. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.161101 [arXiv:1710.05832 [41] M. C. Miller, F. K. Lamb, A. J. Dittmann, S. Bog- [gr-qc]]. danov, Z. Arzoumanian, K. C. Gendreau, S. Guillot, [33] B. P. Abbott et al. [LIGO Scientific and Virgo and A. K. Harding, W. C. G. Ho and J. M. Lattimer, et Fermi GBM and INTEGRAL and IceCube and IPN and al. “PSR J0030+0451 Mass and Radius from NICER Insight-Hxmt and ANTARES and Swift and Dark Energy Data and Implications for the Properties of Neutron Camera GW-EM and DES and DLT40 and GRAWITA Star Matter,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 887, no.1, L24 (2019) and Fermi-LAT and ATCA and ASKAP and OzGrav doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab50c5 [arXiv:1912.05705 [astro- and DWF (Deeper Wider Faster Program) and AST3 ph.HE]]. and CAASTRO and VINROUGE and MASTER and J- [42] T. E. Riley, A. L. Watts, S. Bogdanov, P. S. Ray, GEM and GROWTH and JAGWAR and CaltechNRAO R. M. Ludlam, S. Guillot, Z. Arzoumanian, C. L. Baker, and TTU-NRAO and NuSTAR and Pan-STARRS and A. V. Bilous and D. Chakrabarty, et al. “A NICER KU and Nordic Optical Telescope and ePESSTO and View of PSR J0030+0451: Millisecond Pulsar Parameter GROND and Texas Tech University and TOROS and Estimation,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 887, no.1, L21 (2019) BOOTES and MWA and CALET and IKI-GW Follow- doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab481c [arXiv:1912.05702 [astro- up and H.E.S.S. and LOFAR and LWA and HAWC ph.HE]]. and Pierre Auger and ALMA and Pi of Sky and DFN [43] H. T. Cromartie, E. Fonseca, S. M. Ransom, P. B. De- and ATLAS Telescopes and High Time Resolution Uni- morest, Z. Arzoumanian, H. Blumer, P. R. Brook, verse Survey and RIMAS and RATIR and SKA South M. E. DeCesar, T. Dolch and J. A. Ellis, et al. “Relativis- Africa/MeerKAT Collaborations and AstroSat Cadmium tic Shapiro delay measurements of an extremely massive Zinc Telluride Imager Team and AGILE Team and 1M2H millisecond pulsar,” Nature Astron. 4, no.1, 72-76 (2019) Team and Las Cumbres Observatory Group and MAXI doi:10.1038/s41550-019-0880-2 [arXiv:1904.06759 [astro- Team and TZAC Consortium and SALT Group and ph.HE]]. Euro VLBI Team and Chandra Team at McGill Univer- [44] M. Bando, T. Kugo and K. Yamawaki, “Nonlinear Real- sity], “Multi-messenger Observations of a Binary Neu- ization and Hidden Local Symmetries,” Phys. Rept. 164, tron Star Merger,” Astrophys. J. 848, no. 2, L12 (2017) 217 (1988). doi:10.1016/0370-1573(88)90019-1 doi:10.3847/2041-8213/aa91c9 [arXiv:1710.05833 [astro- [45] M. Harada and K. Yamawaki, “Hidden local symmetry ph.HE]]. at loop: A New perspective of composite gauge boson [34] B. P. Abbott et al. [LIGO Scientific and Virgo Collab- and chiral phase transition,” Phys. Rept. 381, 1 (2003) orations], “GW170817: Measurements of neutron star doi:10.1016/S0370-1573(03)00139-X [hep-ph/0302103]. radii and equation of state,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, no. [46] T. Hatsuda and T. Kunihiro, “QCD phenomenology 16, 161101 (2018) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.121.161101 based on a chiral effective Lagrangian,” Phys. Rept. [arXiv:1805.11581 [gr-qc]]. 247, 221-367 (1994) doi:10.1016/0370-1573(94)90022-1 [35] K. Masuda, T. Hatsuda and T. Takatsuka, “Hadron- [arXiv:hep-ph/9401310 [hep-ph]]. Quark Crossover and Massive Hybrid Stars with [47] M. Buballa, “NJL model analysis of quark mat- Strangeness,” Astrophys. J. 764 (2013), 12 ter at large density,” Phys. Rept. 407, 205-376 doi:10.1088/0004-637X/764/1/12 [arXiv:1205.3621 (2005) doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2004.11.004 [arXiv:hep- [nucl-th]]. ph/0402234 [hep-ph]]. [36] K. Masuda, T. Hatsuda and T. Takatsuka, [48] R. C. Tolman, “Static solutions of Einstein’s field equa- “Hadron–quark crossover and massive hy- tions for spheres of fluid,” Phys. Rev. 55, 364-373 (1939) brid stars,” PTEP 2013 (2013) no.7, 073D01 doi:10.1103/PhysRev.55.364 doi:10.1093/ptep/ptt045 [arXiv:1212.6803 [nucl-th]]. [49] J. R. Oppenheimer and G. M. Volkoff, “On Mas- [37] G. Baym, T. Hatsuda, T. Kojo, P. D. Powell, Y. Song and sive neutron cores,” Phys. Rev. 55, 374-381 (1939) T. Takatsuka, “From hadrons to quarks in neutron stars: doi:10.1103/PhysRev.55.374 a review,” Rept. Prog. Phys. 81, no.5, 056902 (2018) [50] G. Baym, C. Pethick and P. Sutherland, “The Ground doi:10.1088/1361-6633/aaae14 [arXiv:1707.04966 [astro- state of matter at high densities: Equation of state 14

and stellar models,” Astrophys. J. 170, 299-317 (1971) certainties,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, no.20, 202702 (2020) doi:10.1086/151216 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.125.202702 [arXiv:2004.07232 [51] I. Tews, J. M. Lattimer, A. Ohnishi and E. E. Kolomeit- [nucl-th]]. sev, “Symmetry Parameter Constraints from a Lower [53] Y. Song, G. Baym, T. Hatsuda and T. Kojo, “Eﬀective Bound on Neutron-matter Energy,” Astrophys. J. repulsion in dense quark matter from nonperturbative 848, no. 2, 105 (2017) doi:10.3847/1538-4357/aa8db9 gluon exchange,” Phys. Rev. D 100 (2019) no.3, 034018. [arXiv:1611.07133 [nucl-th]]. [54] B. T. Reed, F. J. Fattoyev, C. J. Horowitz and [52] C. Drischler, R. J. Furnstahl, J. A. Melendez and J. Piekarewicz, “Implications of PREX-II on the equa- D. R. Phillips, “How Well Do We Know the Neutron- tion of state of neutron-rich matter,” [arXiv:2101.03193 Matter Equation of State at the Densities Inside Neu- [nucl-th]]. tron Stars? A Bayesian Approach with Correlated Un-