We investigate the thermodynamic properties, chiral phase transitions, and net-baryon number fluctuations in the two-flavor NJL and PNJL models from the perspective of renormalization group (RG) consistency. In effective field theories with a fixed vacuum cutoff Λ₀, finite-temperature medium effects require that high-momentum thermal fluctuations above the Matsubara scale (Λ π T) be adequately accounted for, which is practically achieved by taking an unrestricted thermal momentum integration (ΛT = kΛ₀ → ∞). This treatment partially restores RG consistency and ensures proper convergence toward the Stefan-Boltzmann limit at high temperatures. To systematically assess the regularization artifacts arising from finite thermal cutoffs commonly used in the literature, we introduce the truncation factor k not as an additional free model parameter, but as an exploratory diagnostic tool mapping the phase-space transition between the strictly truncated scheme ($k=1$) and the unregularized thermal continuum (k → ∞). Our analysis shows that while taking k → ∞ smoothly resolves causality violations (vₛ² > 1) in the standard NJL model by binding the speed of sound to the conformal limit $1/3$, the PNJL model exhibits a more intricate, non-monotonic sensitivity to k, wherein intermediate truncation scales (k ≈ 3) lead to a temporary overshoot of the conformal bound due to the non-trivial competition between Polyakov-loop confinement dynamics and thermal integration boundaries. Furthermore, while the unregularized (k → ∞) PNJL framework significantly improves the qualitative description of net-baryon number fluctuations (κσ²) relative to lattice QCD data at vanishing chemical potential, the pronounced amplification of fluctuation extrema at high baryon density underscores the model's sensitivity to high-momentum thermal modes. This work clarifies the role of thermal regularization and provides critical insights into the interplay between confinement dynamics and thermal boundaries in effective chiral theories.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tang et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: