logo

Transport properties of QGP within a Bayesian holographic QCD model

NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH

Transport properties of QGP within a Bayesian holographic QCD model

Bing Chen,
Liqiang Zhu,
Xun Chen,
De-Fu Hou,
Xu-Rong Chen
Nuclear Science and TechniquesVol.37, No.8Article number 153Published in print Aug 2026Available online 23 May 2026
18700

Using a holographic QCD model calibrated through Bayesian inference, we calculate key transport coefficients of the quark-gluon plasma (QGP)–including the drag force, jet quenching parameter, heavy quark diffusion coefficient, and shear and bulk viscosities–within a finite-temperature and finite-density Einstein–Maxwell–dilaton framework, with the phenomenological analysis presented here focused on zero chemical potential. Posterior parameter distributions at the 68% and 95% credible levels, as well as the maximum a posteriori (MAP) estimates, are employed to quantify uncertainties. Our findings indicate that the diffusion coefficient within the Bayesian credible regions aligns with lattice QCD results for to , and is consistent with ALICE experimental measurements near Tc. The jet quenching parameter derived from the posterior ensemble is compatible with RHIC and LHC data, while the extracted viscosity trends are consistent with representative phenomenological and holographic results. These results demonstrate the utility of Bayesian-calibrated holography for constraining the nonperturbative transport properties of QCD matter.

Holographic QCDJet quenching parameterDiffusion coefficient
1

Introduction

The study of high-energy nuclear collisions provides essential insights into the properties of the quark-gluon plasma (QGP), a strongly interacting state of matter believed to have existed shortly after the Big Bang. Among the most informative observables are jet-quenching phenomena, characterized by the suppression of high-energy partons traversing the medium, and the transport coefficients governing the medium’s response—such as shear viscosity, bulk viscosity, and diffusion coefficients [1-5]. The jet quenching parameter quantifies the transverse momentum broadening of energetic partons per unit length, serving as a critical probe of the medium density and coupling strength [6]. Various theoretical models have been developed to calculate this parameter [7-12].

Shear viscosity η measures the ability of a system to restore equilibrium after being subjected to a shear-mode perturbation. On a microscopic level, the ratio of shear viscosity to entropy density, η/s, is closely related to the interaction strength between particles in the system. Typically, a stronger interaction corresponds to a smaller η/s ratio. In the weak-coupling regime, perturbative QCD calculations show that [13], where is the strong coupling constant. When the coupling is strong, lattice QCD simulations reveal that η/s for a pure-glue plasma remains small, typically in the range 0.1–0.2 [14, 15]. Furthermore, studies based on the AdS/CFT correspondence [16-18] led to the conjectured lower bound for η/s as [19], a value closely aligned with that employed to fit the elliptic flow v2 data obtained at RHIC [20-22]. Therefore, it is widely recognized that the matter produced at RHIC and LHC behaves as a strongly coupled, nearly “perfect” fluid.

Bulk viscosity ζ, like shear viscosity, characterizes how quickly a system returns to equilibrium under uniform expansion. In the perturbative regime, ζ is very small, with its leading dependence on the strong coupling constant αs expressed as [23]. However, studies using various approaches—such as lattice QCD [24, 25], the linear sigma model [26], the Polyakov-loop linear sigma model [27], and the real scalar model [28]—demonstrate that the ratio rises sharply near the critical temperature Tc. This enhancement of bulk viscosity near the phase transition corresponds to the peak observed in the trace anomaly around Tc, reflecting a highly non-conformal equation of state [29] in this region. These microscopic insights are further elucidated through complementary studies, using distinct collision systems and probes [30-39]. These approaches provide a multi-scale perspective on QCD matter evolution under extreme conditions.

In strong-coupling scenarios, perturbative QCD is inadequate for describing the medium’s behavior [40, 41], leading researchers to employ lattice QCD methods to study the static equilibrium properties of this matter. Additionally, there is a non-perturbative approach known as the AdS/CFT correspondence [16, 18, 42-46] that provides a new perspective for investigating the dynamical properties of the QGP under strong-coupling conditions. This correspondence establishes a connection between SU(Nc) super-Yang-Mills theory and type IIB string theory in a combined AdS5×S5 space, offering a powerful tool for analyzing strongly interacting gauge theories when the number of colors Nc is large and the ’t Hooft coupling is also substantial. The original form of this duality linked asymptotically AdS space to a conformal gauge theory at absolute zero temperature. However, since the properties of the QGP are closely tied to temperature, researchers have sought to extend this duality to encompass holographic models that describe the QGP at non-zero temperatures. This extension has been explored through both top-down [47-51] and bottom-up [52-60, 60-69] approaches, leading to in-depth investigations in various studies.

One of the intriguing features of QCD is the confinement-deconfinement phase transition, which is strongly coupled in the vicinity of the crossover region [70-74]. These phenomena can be explored through the AdS/CFT correspondence and the development of various related holographic dual models [75-79]. Among the holographic models tailored for QCD, those constructed within the framework of Einstein-Maxwell-dilaton (EMD) gravity are particularly noteworthy [80-89]. In early studies [90, 91], the authors aimed to construct a five-dimensional gravity theory with black-hole solutions to mimic the properties of QCD, introducing an ansatz for the dilaton-field potential. These studies indicate that bottom-up holographic models can effectively capture the properties of sound speed and shear viscosity in the quark-gluon plasma.

Within the framework of the AdS/CFT correspondence, a heavy quark is modeled as a fundamental string attached to a flavor brane. The endpoint of the string corresponds to the quark in the boundary field theory, while the string itself represents the gluonic field surrounding the quark. The resistance encountered by a quark moving through the plasma is reflected in the momentum flux carried from the trailing end of the open string into the deeper bulk region [67, 92-110].

In this study, we extend a holographic QCD model with Bayesian inference to compute the drag force, jet quenching parameter, heavy quark diffusion coefficient, and viscosities in a finite-temperature and finite-density framework, while the phenomenological results shown below focus on zero chemical potential. Employing posterior parameter distributions at the 68% and 95% credible levels, together with the maximum a posteriori (MAP) estimate, we compare our results with lattice QCD, experimental data, and perturbative predictions, thereby providing a comprehensive analysis of the transport properties of the QGP [110-133].

Machine learning is increasingly being applied in high-energy physics [134-154] and gauge/gravity duality studies [62-64, 68, 69, 88, 155-166]. Recently, substantial research efforts are being directed toward extracting the temperature-dependent shear and bulk viscosities of the quark-gluon plasma (QGP) through large-scale model-to-data comparisons combined with Bayesian inference in high-dimensional parameter spaces. These efforts also aim to quantify uncertainties arising from variations in other aspects of the theoretical model [167-172]. Building on a holographic model that captures temperature and chemical potential dependence across QCD phases [68, 69], previous work calculated the heavy quark potential, Schwinger effect, and transport coefficients [173-177] and performed Bayesian inference [172]. In this paper, we further analyze QGP transport coefficients within this Bayesian-calibrated holographic framework.

The paper is organized as follows: Sect. 2 provides a brief review of the holographic QCD model based on EMD gravity developed in [68, 69]. Section 3 discusses the drag force experienced by a heavy quark in motion in this holographic framework. In Sect. 4, we calculate the diffusion coefficient of the heavy quark. Section 5 is devoted to the jet quenching parameter. Section 6 presents the temperature dependence of the bulk viscosity, and Sect. 7 investigates the temperature dependence of the shear viscosity with higher-order derivative corrections. Section 8 presents the overall summary and conclusions of the article.

2

Holographic Model via Einstein-Maxwell-Dilaton Gravity

We first review the five-dimensional EMD system of our model [68, 69, 172]. This system comprises a gravitational field , a Maxwell field , and a dilaton field ϕ. In the Einstein frame, its action is given bypic(1)Here, R is the Ricci scalar, is the Maxwell field strength, f(ϕ) is the gauge kinetic function, V(ϕ) is the dilaton potential, and G5 is the five-dimensional Newton constant. The explicit forms of f(ϕ) and V(ϕ) are determined self-consistently from the equations of motion (EOMs).

We propose the following metric ansatzpic(2)where z is the holographic radial coordinate in the fifth dimension and the AdS5 space radius L is conventionally set to one, i.e., L=1.

To obtain analytical solutions, we specify parametric forms for A(z) and f(ϕ). We take the warp factorpic(3)and the form of the gauge kinetic function f(z) aspic(4)A(z) is chosen to reproduce the entropy behavior and constrain the temperature dependence of the model. The function f(z) controls the baryon-density response of the model and is constrained by the baryon number susceptibility. The constant k corresponds to an overall constant rescaling of the Maxwell term near the conformal boundary. Such a constant prefactor does not change the gauge-invariant content and can be absorbed into a field redefinition of the bulk gauge potential. Then, we can derivepic(5)pic(6)pic(7)and the dilaton potential aspic(8)The determinant G is given bypicThe Hawking temperature and entropy of this black-hole solution are given by the following formulas,pic(9)pic(10)For the subsequent calculation of probe observables, we employ the metric in the string framepic(11)where .

There are three undetermined parameters a, b, and d in A(z), and two parameters c and k in f(z), along with the Newton constant G5, yielding a six-dimensional parameter space.

The six parameters used in our model are taken from Ref. [172]. That work employs a Bayesian analysis within the EMD framework, constrained by lattice QCD data for the thermodynamic quantities at zero chemical potential [178, 179], to determine the posterior distribution of the model parameters. The specific analytical procedure is as follows: first, the parameter inference framework is established based on Bayes’ theorem:pic(12)Within the Bayesian framework, the posterior distribution describes the probability distribution of the model parameters θ after incorporating the observed data. The prior distribution P(θ) represents the initial belief or existing knowledge about θ before observing the data. The likelihood function quantifies the plausibility of observing the current data given specific values of θ. Here, “data” specifically refers to lattice QCD data, including S/T3, , and , while θ corresponds to the six parameters in the EMD model.

Regarding the prior distribution P(θ), the parameter set for the EMD model was assigned prior ranges based on existing research [69, 172]. Following these ranges, we generated 300 parameter samples using the Latin Hypercube Sampling (LHS) [180, 181] method. These parameters were then substituted into the EMD model to compute the corresponding values of S/T3, , and . Subsequently, the results were subjected to dimensionality reduction via Principal Component Analysis (PCA) [183]. Finally, a Gaussian Process emulator [182] was constructed based on the 300 parameter sets and their corresponding PCA-reduced outputs. This emulator will be used to construct the likelihood function in subsequent steps (Table 1).

Table 1
The prior parameter ranges for the EMD model [172]
Prior
Parameter min max
a 0.110 0.310
b 0.005 0.031
c -0.280 -0.205
d -0.240 -0.110
k -0.910 -0.770
G5 0.375 0.430
Show more

Furthermore, for the likelihood function , we adopt a Gaussian form:pic(13)The term represents the lattice QCD results, while yi(θ) is the prediction from the EMD model, which is approximated by a Gaussian emulator to enhance computational efficiency. Here, σi encompasses the uncertainties from both the lattice QCD data and the Gaussian emulator. Finally, by sampling the posterior distribution via the Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) [184, 185], we obtained the posterior distributions for the EMD model parameters. The corresponding 95% credible intervals and the Maximum a Posteriori (MAP) estimates are presented in [172] (Table 2).

Table 2
In the 2+1 flavor QCD system, the distributions of the EMD model parameters after Bayesian inference, including the maximum a posteriori values and the 95% credible intervals [172]
Posterior 95% CL
Parameter min max MAP
a 0.229 0.282 0.252
b 0.019 0.027 0.023
c -0.261 -0.231 -0.245
d -0.143 -0.127 -0.135
k -0.871 -0.808 -0.843
G5 0.388 0.406 0.397
Show more
3

Heavy Quark Drag Force

In the holographic trailing-string approach, when a heavy quark moves through a strongly coupled medium at a constant velocity in some direction (for example, in the direction), it is represented by the endpoint of an open string attached to the boundary, while the remainder of the string trails into the bulk and develops an induced worldsheet horizon. As the quark moves at the boundary, it loses energy and momentum through the drag force , which can be computed through the conserved momentum flux along the trailing string [111]. For this EMD background, Ref. [176] shows that the heavy-quark drag force is given bypic(14)where is the ’t Hooft coupling. Following Ref. [176], the only additional parameter, α’, is fixed to 2 by matching the high-temperature behavior to NLO perturbative results. is the radial location of the string worldsheet horizon [111], which is obtained as the numerical solution of the following equation [176]pic(15)The drag force in the AdS/Schwarzschild background can be obtained as follows [94],pic(16)In Fig. 1, we examine the drag force as a function of temperature in the 2+1 flavor system at zero chemical potential and with the quark velocity set to . The gray region in Fig. 1(a) represents the range of drag force within the 95% credible interval, with the red curve showing the temperature dependence at the MAP values. In Fig. 1(b), the gray region represents the corresponding 68% credible interval. The figure clearly shows that the drag force increases with temperature, indicating stronger medium-induced momentum loss in a hotter plasma.

Fig. 1
(Color online) In a 2+1 flavor system at zero chemical potential with the quark velocity set to , the drag force as a function of temperature is shown. (a) The gray area represents the variation of drag force with temperature at the 95% credible interval; (b) the gray area represents the variation of drag force with temperature at the 68% credible interval. The red curve shows the variation of drag force with temperature at the MAP values
pic

In Fig. 2, the variation of drag force with velocity in the 2+1 flavor system at the critical temperature GeV and zero chemical potential is presented. The gray region in Fig. 2(a) represents the range of drag force within the 95% credible interval, while the red curve shows the change in drag force with velocity at the MAP values. In Fig. 2(b), the gray region represents the range of drag force within the 68% credible interval, with the red curve again depicting the change in drag force with velocity at the MAP values. The figure clearly indicates that the drag force increases with velocity, suggesting that in the 2+1 flavor system, the resistance faced by a moving quark increases as its velocity rises. This trend is consistent with the stronger momentum flux flowing down the trailing string at larger velocity.

Fig. 2
(Color online) In a 2+1 flavor system at zero chemical potential and at the critical temperature GeV, drag force as a function of velocity is investigated. (a) The gray area represents the variation of drag force with velocity at the 95% credible interval; (b) the gray area represents the variation of drag force with velocity at the 68% credible interval. The red curve shows the variation of drag force with velocity at the MAP values
pic

According to Eq. (14), we evaluate the momentum-loss rate and, equivalently, the energy loss per unit length, which allows us to study the relation between energy loss and momentum within the Bayesian analysis. Figure 3 illustrates the corresponding behavior for the bottom quark (mb=4.7 GeV) and charm quark (mc=1.3 GeV) in a 2+1 flavor system at zero chemical potential and temperature [38, 49]. Figure 4 shows the analogous relation for the bottom and charm quarks in a 2+1 flavor system at zero chemical potential and temperature , where the light-colored area represents the range of energy loss within the 68% and 95% credible intervals, and the curves indicate the energy-loss value at the MAP values. Figure 3(a) and 3(b) represent the 95% and 68% credible intervals, respectively, and the same applies to Fig. 4. From Figs. 3 and 4, it is evident that energy loss increases with momentum. The mass of the quarks also affects energy loss; lighter quarks undergo larger energy loss. Additionally, a comparison between Figs. 3 and 4 shows that temperature has a more significant impact on energy loss than quark mass, with higher temperatures leading to increased energy loss.

Fig. 3
(Color online) Energy loss of the bottom quark (mb=4.7 GeV) and charm quark (mc=1.3 GeV) as a function of momentum p (in GeV) at temperature . (a) The gray area represents the relationship between energy loss and momentum at the 95% credible interval. (b) The gray area represents the relationship between energy loss and momentum at the 68% credible interval. The red and blue curves show the results at the MAP values
pic
Fig. 4
(Color online) Energy loss of the bottom quark (mb=4.7 GeV) and charm quark (mc=1.3 GeV) as a function of momentum p (in GeV) at temperature . (a) The gray area represents the relationship between energy loss and momentum at the 95% credible interval. (b) The gray area represents the relationship between energy loss and momentum at the 68% credible interval. The red and blue curves show the results at the MAP values
pic
4

Heavy Quark Diffusion Coefficient

In the AdS/Schwarzschild background, the drag-force relation in Eq. (16) can be rewritten as [94]pic(17)where m denotes the mass of the heavy quark, is the drag coefficient, and is the momentum. The diffusion time is given by [94]pic(18)and the diffusion coefficient can be expressed as [94]pic(19)Eq. (14) can be rewritten aspic(20)The diffusion time t ispic(21)The diffusion coefficient D can be represented aspic(22)From Eq. (19) and Eq. (22), we can deducepic(23)From Fig. 5, it can be observed that in the 2+1 flavor system with a quark velocity of and zero chemical potential, the ratio of the diffusion coefficient to its conformal value in SYM theory increases with temperature. This growth indicates that the diffusive properties of the system become increasingly aligned with the behavior predicted by conformal field theory at higher temperatures. The figure also shows that under zero chemical potential, this ratio ultimately trends toward 1 as the temperature rises. The gray area in the graph represents D/DSYM within the 68% and 95% credible intervals, while the red curve indicates the D/DSYM result at the MAP values.

Fig. 5
(Color online) In the 2+1 flavor system at zero chemical potential, with the quark velocity set to , the variation of the scaled diffusion coefficient D/DSYM with temperature is shown. (a) The gray area represents the variation of D/DSYM with temperature at the 95% credible interval; (b) the gray area represents the variation of D/DSYM with temperature at the 68% credible interval. The red curve shows the variation of D/DSYM with temperature at the MAP values
pic

We compared the spatial heavy-quark diffusion coefficient, normalized by 2πT, with estimates from lattice QCD, ALICE experiments, and next-to-leading-order (NLO) perturbative predictions, as depicted in Fig. 6. It can be seen that our model’s 68% and 95% posterior bands together with the MAP curve largely fall within the error bars of the lattice data for Nf = 2+1 [186]. The gray uncertainty band represents the computed results using the posterior parameters within the 68% and 95% credible intervals, while the red curve corresponds to the result obtained from the MAP parameter set. The uncertainty in the gray band originates from the range of the posterior parameters. Because the present extraction is performed at fixed rather than in the strict static limit , the comparison with lattice and phenomenological determinations should be interpreted as semi-quantitative. Our results are also in very good agreement with the results from the ALICE experiment [187]. At high temperatures, our values of 2πTD are consistent with the NLO perturbative predictions [188]. Additionally, our Bayesian inference overlaps with the Duke hydro/transport model [189].

Fig. 6
(Color online) The scaled diffusion coefficient 2πTD as a function of T/Tc, with the quark velocity set to . The lattice data in the figure are results from Ref. [186]. The results of ALICE are from Ref. [187]. The orange dashed line represents the next-to-leading-order perturbative calculation with the renormalization scale set to , while the green dashed line represents the next-to-leading-order perturbative calculation with the renormalization scale set to [188]. The pink region represents Bayesian inference results from the Duke hydro/transport model [189]. The red curve and gray area represent the results of our model. (a) The gray area represents the variation of 2πTD with T/Tc at the 95% credible interval; (b) the gray area represents the variation of 2πTD with T/Tc at the 68% credible interval. The red curve shows the variation of 2πTD with temperature at the MAP values
pic
5

Jet Quenching Parameter

We now turn to the study of the jet quenching parameter. This quantity characterizes transverse momentum broadening and medium-induced energy loss for energetic partons traversing the hot dense medium. In Ref. [176], the authors conducted a detailed study on the temperature-dependent behavior of within this model.

According to Ref. [8], the relationship between the jet quenching parameter and the adjoint light-like Wilson loop is given by the equationpic(24)where is the Wilson loop in the adjoint representation, and C is a rectangular contour of size . The quark and antiquark are separated by a small L’ and propagate along L-.

The expectation value of the Wilson loop is dual to the classical value of the string Nambu-Goto action under the appropriate string configuration. The can be obtained as [176]pic(25)For supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory, in the large and large limit, Eq. (25) reduces to the analytic expression [8]pic(26)where Γ denotes the Gamma function. The finite ’t Hooft coupling correction to this jet-quenching parameter was obtained in Ref. [190], and the jet quenching parameter was found to be reduced due to worldsheet fluctuations by a factor .

To obtain the jet quenching parameter in the holographic QCD model, we performed numerical calculations at various temperatures with zero chemical potential. The resulting curves are illustrated in Fig. 7. It can be observed that the jet-quenching parameter increases with temperature, indicating stronger transverse-momentum broadening in a hotter medium. This trend is consistent with the expectation that jets traversing a higher-temperature plasma encounter more effective scattering centers. The posterior bands obtained in our model are consistent with the experimental results from RHIC and LHC [4].

Fig. 7
(Color online) The relationship between the jet quenching parameter and temperature in the holographic model at zero chemical potential. Error bars represent experimental values from RHIC and LHC [4]. (a) The gray area represents the variation of jet quenching parameter with temperature at the 95% credible interval; (b) the gray area represents the variation of jet quenching parameter with temperature at the 68% credible interval. The red curve shows the variation of jet quenching parameter with temperature at the MAP values
pic

In Fig. 8, we depict the curve of as a function of temperature. The gray area in the figure represents the 68% and 95% credible intervals, while the red curve indicates the MAP values. We observe that the curve reaches a peak above the phase transition temperature and then approaches the value in the pure AdS background. This behavior is distinctly different from the pure AdS background result, where remains constant at all temperatures. This indicates that dynamical holographic QCD encodes new features related to the deconfinement phase transition. In Fig. 9, we present the scaled jet transport parameter as a function of the initial temperature T for an initial quark jet with energy GeV in the most central collisions, with an initial time of fm/c, extracted by the JET Collaboration from experimental data on hadron suppression [4]. We compare the temperature dependence of with this result, and it can be observed that our model’s Bayesian inference is in good agreement with the HT-BW extraction and is compatible with most phenomenological results at low temperatures.

Fig. 8
(Color online) The relationship between and temperature T at zero chemical potential. (a) The gray area represents the variation of with temperature at the 95% credible interval; (b) the gray area represents the variation of with temperature at the 68% credible interval. The red curve shows the variation of with temperature at the MAP values
pic
Fig. 9
(Color online) The relationship for at zero chemical potential with temperature T. The plot (HT-BW and HT-M) of the scaled jet transport parameter as a function of the initial temperature T for an initial quark jet with energy GeV in the most central A+A collisions, with an initial time of fm/c, extracted by the JET Collaboration from experimental data on hadron suppression [4]. (a) The gray area represents the variation of with temperature at the 95% credible interval; (b) the gray area represents the variation of with temperature at the 68% credible interval. The red curve shows the variation of with temperature at the MAP values
pic

Figure 10 shows the ratio of the jet quenching parameter in the holographic QCD model to . It can be observed that at lower temperatures, the jet quenching parameter is below . This implies that, at lower temperatures, the quenching effect of the medium on high-energy jets predicted by the holographic QCD model is weaker than the theoretical prediction in the AdS/Schwarzschild background. However, as the temperature increases, the ratio of to first grows, indicating an intensification of the quenching effect, and then starts to decrease after reaching a certain threshold, suggesting a relative weakening of the quenching effect, ultimately approaching 1. This indicates that at higher temperatures, the quenching effect predicted by the holographic QCD model tends to converge to the theoretical prediction in the AdS/Schwarzschild background.

Fig. 10
(Color online) The ratio of the jet quenching parameter in the holographic QCD model to at zero chemical potential. (a) The gray area represents the variation of with temperature at the 95% credible interval; (b) the gray area represents the variation of with temperature at the 68% credible interval. The red curve shows the variation of with temperature at the MAP values. The unit of T is GeV
pic

The parameter λ (equivalently, α’) is the only new parameter in the paper. At the end of this section, we include Fig. 11 to illustrate two λ-sensitive quantities, namely the jet quenching parameter and the diffusion coefficient. As shown in the figure, increasing the value of λ leads to an enhancement of , while the diffusion coefficient decreases as λ increases.

Fig. 11
(Color online) The figure shows two λ-sensitive quantities: (a) the jet quenching parameter (b) and the diffusion coefficient D
pic
6

Bulk Viscosity

This section focuses on the temperature-dependent behavior of bulk viscosity. We briefly review how to extract the bulk viscosity from a graviton-dilaton system and present the results graphically. In four-dimensional field theory, extracting bulk viscosity using the Kubo formula is a viable approach. The Kubo formula relates transport coefficients, such as bulk viscosity, to the retarded Green’s functions of the stress-energy tensor. Specifically, the bulk viscosity (ζ) can be expressed aspic(27)where is the retarded Green’s function of the trace of the spatial stress-energy tensor. According to the holographic dictionary, the Green’s function of the stress tensor can be extracted through metric perturbations (e.g., ). When applying the Kubo formula, we choose the spatial momentum to satisfy and assume that depends only on time t and the holographic coordinate z, i.e., . These metric perturbation components should include , , and . We impose spatial rotational symmetry, which allows us to identify the metric perturbations in the three spatial directions as . Following this reasoning, the bulk viscosity can be extracted from the retarded Green’s function of the scalar mode. The imaginary part of the retarded Green’s function is related to the conserved flux viapic(28)For the metric of Eq. (2), the conserved flux takes the form:pic(29)We fix this residual gauge freedom by choosing the dilaton (radial) gauge, i.e. we use the background scalar to parametrize the holographic direction, which is equivalent to setting . With this gauge fixing, the physical scalar mode is entirely captured by the metric fluctuation hii, and its equation of motion decouples from the remaining perturbations. This procedure follows the standard treatment used, e.g., in Ref. [91] for the computation of bulk viscosity. A notable feature of the perturbation equations of motion is that the equation for the component decouples completely from and . The equation of motion for the perturbation takes the form:pic(30)The temperature dependence of the bulk-viscosity-to-entropy-density ratio is shown in Fig. 12. The pronounced peak of bulk viscosity around Tc could have important consequences for particle spectra and flow observables. In this figure, the gray band displays results derived from posterior parameters within the 95% credible interval, while the red curve is obtained from the MAP parameter estimate. The breadth of the gray band directly reflects the uncertainty propagated from the posterior parameter distribution. It can be observed that the model aligns well with the 90% CL of the JETSCAPE Bayesian model [191] at higher temperatures, as well as with the findings from the Duke University team [169].

Fig. 12
(Color online) The relationship between ζ/s and temperature T at zero chemical potential. The gray region corresponds to the 95% credible interval. The red curve depicts the temperature dependence of the bulk-viscosity-to-entropy-density ratio based on the MAP values. The blue region represents the 90% CL of the JETSCAPE Bayesian model [191], and the black dashed lines and curves indicate the results from the Duke University team [169]
pic
7

Shear viscosity with higher derivative corrections

The shear viscosity coefficient has been extensively studied in the context of Einstein gravity, demonstrating a universal ratio to entropy density . Currently, the shear viscosity coefficient has also been studied in some other models [192-195]. To introduce temperature dependence in the η/s ratio, higher-derivative gravitational corrections must be incorporated into Einstein gravity [196]. To obtain this temperature dependence, we introduce higher-derivative corrections in the following form:pic(31)The parameter β is a small dimensionless coupling. To compute the shear viscosity coefficient, it is necessary to introduce off-diagonal metric perturbations to obtain the two-point Green’s function of the energy-momentum tensor. The shear viscosity can be calculated via the Kubo formula:pic(32)As noted in [196], η/s depends solely on the background metric at the level. Therefore, we do not consider the corrections to the ratio arising from deformations of the background metric. Following the argument in [196], the calculation of the shear-viscosity-to-entropy-density ratio at the level can be expressed as:pic(33)Here, . When β=0.01 and , Fig. 13 shows the functional dependence of the η/s ratio on . It can be observed that the η/s ratio exhibits a dip near .

Fig. 13
(Color online) The functional dependence of the η/s ratio on . The blue band represents the 95% credible interval, while the black curve shows the functional dependence of the η/s ratio on at the MAP value. The symbols correspond to the LQCD (lattice QCD) results for pure SU(3) gauge theory: (black squares) [192], (green triangles and magenta circles) [14], and (cyan stars) [193]. The gray dash-dotted line represents the Kovtun-Son-Starinets (KSS) bound, [19]. The gray band denotes the model-averaged results from the Bayesian analysis of heavy-ion experimental data [191]. The red curve corresponds to the results from the DQPM (Dynamical QuasiParticle Model) [194], while the blue dashed line shows the parameterization of η/s employed in the MUSIC hydrodynamic simulations [195]. a Magnified view in the vicinity of the dip near T ≈ 1.2 Tc. b Wide-temperature-range view including all comparison data sets
pic

The temperature corresponding to this minimum value almost coincides with the temperature corresponding to the peak of the bulk viscosity. Near the transition region, the trace anomaly exhibits a pronounced peak and the speed of sound reaches a minimum, reflecting the strong breaking of conformal symmetry in QCD. These features enhance the interaction strength, which naturally drives η/s toward its minimum. This behavior is consistent with general expectations in strongly coupled gauge theories, where η/s approaches the KSS bound in the vicinity of the transition.

In Fig. 13, the blue band represents the results computed using posterior parameters at the 95% credible interval, while the black curve illustrates the functional dependence of the η/s ratio on at the MAP value. The uncertainty associated with the blue band originates from the range of the posterior parameters. We emphasize that this band does not include any additional uncertainty associated with the fixed higher-derivative couplings β and γ. Fig. 13(a) displays a magnified view of the results shown in Fig. 13(b), where our findings are compared with various model predictions [14, 19, 191-195].

8

Summary

In this work, we performed a comprehensive investigation of the transport properties of the quark–gluon plasma using a five-dimensional Einstein–Maxwell–dilaton (EMD) holographic model whose parameters are fully constrained by Bayesian inference. In contrast to previous holographic studies that rely on specifically chosen potentials or phenomenological inputs, our model incorporates the complete posterior distributions inferred from lattice QCD thermodynamics, thereby enabling a systematic and statistically controlled quantification of theoretical uncertainties for all transport observables. This Bayesian holographic framework provides a unified and nonperturbative approach to studying the strongly coupled dynamics of QCD matter.

We calculated several key transport coefficients—namely the heavy-quark drag force, the spatial diffusion coefficient, the jet quenching parameter, and the bulk and shear viscosities—at finite temperature, within a framework that also accommodates nonzero chemical potential. These observables probe complementary aspects of the QGP and jointly capture the interplay between thermal effects, nonconformality, and strong coupling.

The drag force was shown to increase monotonically with both temperature and quark velocity, consistent with a medium whose color charge density and interaction strength grow with temperature. The Bayesian uncertainty band demonstrates that this trend is robust against variations in the EMD model parameters and exhibits quantitative agreement with expectations from strongly coupled dynamics. Because the worldsheet horizon depends sensitively on the background metric, the drag force serves as a stringent probe of the gravitational dual and directly reflects the nonconformal structure encoded in the metric deformation.

For the diffusion coefficient, we demonstrated that the scaled quantity D/DSYM approaches unity at high temperature, indicating an emergent conformal behavior of the plasma in the regime. Near the transition region, however, the diffusion coefficient deviates substantially from its conformal value, signaling strong nonperturbative effects. Remarkably, our Bayesian credible intervals align well with lattice QCD calculations, ALICE experimental estimates, and next-to-leading-order perturbative predictions at high temperatures. This agreement demonstrates the predictive power of the Bayesian EMD model, although the present comparison should be interpreted with some caution because the extraction is performed at fixed velocity rather than strictly in the static limit.

The jet quenching parameter exhibits a pronounced peak slightly above the phase transition temperature. This behavior mirrors that found in earlier holographic studies but is now obtained with statistically meaningful uncertainty quantification. The peak provides direct evidence of enhanced transverse momentum broadening near Tc, where the medium’s color interaction strength is maximal. The magnitude and temperature dependence of derived from our model agree well with phenomenological extractions from RHIC and LHC data, as well as with the HT-BW and HT-M Bayesian extractions from the JET Collaboration.

The viscosities further illuminate the role of strong coupling in the transition region. Consistent with the nonconformal equation of state, we find a sharp peak in the bulk viscosity near Tc, accompanied by a minimum in the shear viscosity. The near coincidence of these extrema indicates that the rapid change in the trace anomaly around the phase transition significantly alters the dissipative properties of the medium. Once higher-derivative corrections are included, η/s acquires a temperature dependence with a well-defined dip, consistent with expectations from hydrodynamic modeling and with Bayesian extractions of from the JETSCAPE and Duke analyses. These results highlight that the EMD model—despite its relative simplicity—captures the essential dynamics underlying both conformal and nonconformal transport effects.

Taken together, our findings demonstrate that a Bayesian-calibrated holographic EMD model can consistently and simultaneously describe a wide range of transport coefficients across a broad temperature interval relevant to heavy-ion collisions. The ability to reproduce lattice QCD thermodynamics, match experimental constraints, and quantify theoretical uncertainties represents a significant advancement over traditional holographic approaches. Two limitations should nevertheless be kept in mind: the quantitative phenomenological comparisons shown here are restricted to , and the shear-viscosity analysis does not propagate uncertainty from the fixed higher-derivative couplings. This work therefore provides a robust and predictive nonperturbative framework for studying QCD matter and offers valuable insights into the microscopic mechanisms governing jet energy loss, heavy-quark dynamics, and viscous transport in the strongly coupled quark-gluon plasma. In the future, our results can be used as inputs to transport models, such as the Linear Boltzmann Transport model, to compute observables like RAA, v2, and others [197-199].

References
1. J. Adams, M.M. Aggarwal, Z. Ahammed et al. (STAR Collaboration),

Experimental and theoretical challenges in the search for the quark gluon plasma: the STAR Collaboration’s critical assessment of the evidence from RHIC collisions

. Nucl. Phys. A 757, 102–183 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2005.03.085
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
2. Z.B. Yin,

Elliptic flow of strange and multi-strange particles in Pb-Pb collisions at sNN=2.76 TeV measured with ALICE

. Acta Phys. Polon. Supp. 6, 479–484 (2013). https://doi.org/10.5506/APhysPolBSupp.6.479
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
3. G. Aad, B. Abbott, J. Abdallah et al. (ATLAS Collaboration),

Observation of a centrality-dependent dijet asymmetry in leadlead collisions at sNN=2.76 TeV with the ATLAS detector at the LHC

. Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 252303 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.105.252303
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
4. K.M. Burke et al.,

Extracting the jet transport coefficient from jet quenching in high-energy heavy-ion collisions

. Phys. Rev. C 90, 014909 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.90.014909
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
5. S. Chatrchyan et al.,

Observation and studies of jet quenching in PbPb collisions at nucleon-nucleon center-of-mass energy √= 2.76 TeV

. Phys. Rev. C 84, 024906 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.84.024906
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
6. F. D’Eramo, H. Liu, K. Rajagopal,

Transverse momentum broadening and the jet quenching parameter, redux

. Phys. Rev. D 84, 065015 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.84.065015
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
7. X.N. Wang, M. Gyulassy,

Gluon shadowing and jet quenching in A + A collisions at √s= 200 AGeV

. Phys. Rev. Lett. 68, 1480–1483 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.68.1480
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
8. H. Liu, K. Rajagopal, U.A. Wiedemann,

Calculating the jet quenching parameter from AdS/CFT

. Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 182301 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.97.182301
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
9. T. Renk, J. Ruppert, C. Nonaka et al.,

Jet-quenching in a 3D hydrodynamic medium

. Phys. Rev. C 75, 031902 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.75.031902
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
10. Z.F. Jiang, S. Cao, W.J. Xing et al.,

Probing the initial longitudinal density profile and electromagnetic field in ultrarelativistic heavy-ion collisions with heavy quarks

. Phys. Rev. C 105, 054907 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.105.054907
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
11. Z.F. Jiang, S. Cao, W.J. Xing et al.,

Interactions between heavy quarks and tilted QGP fireballs in 200 A GeV Au+Au collisions

. Chin. Phys. C 47, 024107 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1088/1674-1137/aca64f
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
12. W.J. Xing, S. Cao, G.Y. Qin et al.,

Flavor hierarchy of jet energy correlators inside the quark-gluon plasma

. Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 052301 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.134.052301
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
13. P.B. Arnold, G.D. Moore, L.G. Yaffe,

Transport coefficients in high temperature gauge theories. 1. Leading log results

. JHEP 11, 001 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1088/1126-6708/2000/11/001
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
14. A. Nakamura, S. Sakai,

Transport coefficients of gluon plasma

. Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 072305 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.94.072305
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
15. A. Ballon-Bayona, L.A.H. Mamani, A.S. Miranda et al.,

Effective holographic models for QCD: thermodynamics and viscosity coefficients

. Phys. Rev. D 104, 046013 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.104.046013
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
16. J.M. Maldacena,

The large N limit of superconformal field theories and supergravity

. Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 2, 231–252 (1998). https://doi.org/10.4310/ATMP.1998.v2.n2.a1
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
17. S.S. Gubser, I.R. Klebanov, A.M. Polyakov,

Gauge theory correlators from noncritical string theory

. Phys. Lett. B 428, 105–114 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0370-2693(98)00377-3
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
18. E. Witten,

Anti-de Sitter space and holography

. Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 2, 253–291 (1998). https://doi.org/10.4310/ATMP.1998.v2.n2.a2
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
19. P. Kovtun, D.T. Son, A.O. Starinets,

Viscosity in strongly interacting quantum field theories from black hole physics

. Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 111601 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.94.111601
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
20. H. Song, U.W. Heinz,

Extracting the QGP viscosity from RHIC data—a status report from viscous hydrodynamics

. J. Phys. G 36, 064033 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1088/0954-3899/36/6/064033
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
21. D. Teaney, J. Lauret, E.V. Shuryak,

Flow at the SPS and RHIC as a quark gluon plasma signature

. Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 4783–4786 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.86.4783
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
22. D. Teaney,

The Effects of viscosity on spectra, elliptic flow, and HBT radii

. Phys. Rev. C 68, 034913 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.68.034913
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
23. P.B. Arnold, C. Dogan, G.D. Moore,

The bulk viscosity of hightemperature QCD

. Phys. Rev. D 74, 085021 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.74.085021
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
24. F. Karsch, D. Kharzeev, K. Tuchin,

Universal properties of bulk viscosity near the QCD phase transition

. Phys. Lett. B 663, 217–221 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2008.01.080
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
25. H.B. Meyer,

A calculation of the bulk viscosity in SU(3) gluodynamics

. Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 162001 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.162001
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
26. K. Paech, S. Pratt,

Origins of bulk viscosity in relativistic heavy ion collisions

. Phys. Rev. C 74, 014901 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.74.014901. (Erratum: Phys.Rev.C 93, 059902 (2016))
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
27. H. Mao, J. Jin, M. Huang,

Phase diagram and thermodynamics of the Polyakov linear sigma model with three quark flavors

. J. Phys. G 37, 035001 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1088/0954-3899/37/3/035001
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
28. B.C. Li, M. Huang,

Non-conformality and non-perfectness of fluid near phase transition

. Phys. Rev. D 78, 117503 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.78.117503
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
29. G. Boyd, J. Engels, F. Karsch et al.,

Thermodynamics of SU(3) lattice gauge theory

. Nucl. Phys. B 469, 419–444 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(96)00170-8
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
30. L. Zhang, J. Chen, C. Zhang,

Energy dependence of transverse momentum fluctuations in Au+Au collisions from a multiphase transport model

. Phys. Rev. C 111, 024911 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.111.024911
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
31. H. Wang, J.H. Chen,

Anisotropy flows in Pb–Pb collisions at LHC energies from parton scatterings with heavy quark trigger

. Nucl. Sci. Tech. 33, 15 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41365-022-00999-y
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
32. H. Wang, J.H. Chen, Y.G. Ma et al.,

Charm hadron azimuthal angular correlations in Au + Au collisions at sNN=200 GeV from parton scatterings

. Nucl. Sci. Tech. 30, 185 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41365-019-0706-z
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
33. J. Chen et al.,

Properties of the QCD matter: review of selected results from the relativistic heavy ion collider beam energy scan (RHIC BES) program

. Nucl. Sci. Tech. 35, 214 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41365-024-01591-2
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
34. J. Wang, Y. Ma, G. Zhang et al.,

Initial fluctuation effect on elliptic flow in Au+Au collision at 1 GeV/A

. Nucl. Sci. Tech. 24, 30501 (2013). https://doi.org/10.13538/j.1001-8042/nst.2013.03.004
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
35. W.J. Xing, S.Q. Li, S. Cao et al.,

Bottom quark dynamics from nonprompt D0 and J/ψ production in Pb+Pb collisions at √=5.02 TeV

. Phys. Rev. C 110, 024903 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.110.024903
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
36. S.Q. Li, W.J. Xing, S. Cao et al.,

Quenching and flow of charm and bottom quarks via semi-leptonic decay of D and B mesons in Pb+Pb collisions at the LHC*

. Chin. Phys. C 48, 084106 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1088/1674-1137/ad4c59
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
37. J.H. Chen, J. Chen, F.K. Guo et al.,

Production of exotic hadrons in pp and nuclear collisions

. Nucl. Sci. Tech. 36, 55 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41365-025-01664-w
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
38. Y. Guo, L. Qiu, R. Zhao et al.,

Energy loss of a heavy fermion in a collisional QED plasma

. Phys. Rev. D 109, 114025 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.109.114025
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
39. Q. Du, M. Du, Y. Guo,

Collisional energy loss of a heavy quark in a semiquark-gluon plasma

. Phys. Rev. D 110, 034011 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.110.034011
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
40. R. Baier, Y.L. Dokshitzer, A.H. Mueller et al.,

Radiative energy loss of high-energy quarks and gluons in a finite volume quark - gluon plasma

. Nucl. Phys. B 483, 291–320 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0550-3213(96)00553-6
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
41. K.J. Eskola, H. Honkanen, C.A. Salgado et al.,

The Fragility of high-p(T) hadron spectra as a hard probe

. Nucl. Phys. A 747, 511–529 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2004.09.070
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
42. J. Casalderrey-Solana, H. Liu, D. Mateos et al., Gauge/String Duality, Hot QCD and Heavy Ion Collisions (Cambridge University Press, 2014). https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009403504
43. J. Probst,

Applications of the gauge/gravity duality

. Ph.D. thesis, U. Oxford (main), Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93967-4
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
44. R. Baier, P. Romatschke, D.T. Son et al.,

Relativistic viscous hydrodynamics, conformal invariance, and holography

. JHEP 04, 100 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1088/1126-6708/2008/04/100
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
45. S. Bhattacharyya, V.E. Hubeny, S. Minwalla et al.,

Nonlinear fluid dynamics from gravity

. JHEP 02, 045 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1088/1126-6708/2008/02/045
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
46. S.S. Gubser,

Breaking an Abelian gauge symmetry near a black hole horizon

. Phys. Rev. D 78, 065034 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.78.065034
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
47. J. Polchinski, M.J. Strassler,

The string dual of a confining fourdimensional gauge theory

. arXiv:hep-th/0003136
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
48. T. Sakai, S. Sugimoto,

Low energy hadron physics in holographic QCD

. Prog. Theor. Phys. 113, 843–882 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1143/PTP.113.843
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
49. N. Evans, A. Gebauer, M. Magou et al.,

Towards a holographic model of the QCD phase diagram

. J. Phys. G 39, 054005 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1088/0954-3899/39/5/054005
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
50. N. Evans, A. Gebauer, K.Y. Kim et al.,

Holographic description of the phase diagram of a chiral symmetry breaking gauge theory

. JHEP 03, 132 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP03(2010)132
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
51. S.W. Li, A. Schmitt, Q. Wang,

From holography towards realworld nuclear matter

. Phys. Rev. D 92, 026006 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.92.026006
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
52. S. He, S.Y. Wu, Y. Yang et al.,

Phase structure in a dynamical soft-wall holographic QCD model

. JHEP 04, 093 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP04(2013)093
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
53. Y. Yang, P.H. Yuan,

Confinement-deconfinement phase transition for heavy quarks in a soft wall holographic QCD model

. JHEP 12, 161 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP12(2015)161
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
54. U. Gursoy, E. Kiritsis, F. Nitti,

Exploring improved holographic theories for QCD: Part II

. JHEP 02, 019 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1088/1126-6708/2008/02/019
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
55. T. Alho, M. Järvinen, K. Kajantie et al.,

On finite-temperature holographic QCD in the Veneziano limit

. JHEP 01, 093 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP01(2013)093
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
56. M. Panero,

Thermodynamics of the QCD plasma and the large-N limit

. Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 232001 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.103.232001
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
57. D. Dudal, T.G. Mertens,

Radiation gauge in AdS/QCD: inadmissibility and implications on spectral functions in the deconfined phase

. Phys. Lett. B 751, 352–357 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2015.10.074
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
58. D. Dudal, D.R. Granado, T.G. Mertens,

No inverse magnetic catalysis in the QCD hard and soft wall models

. Phys. Rev. D 93, 125004 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.93.125004
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
59. R. Zöllner, B. Kämpfer,

Towards a warm holographic equation of state by an Einstein–Maxwell-Dilaton model

. Symmetry 16, 999 (2024). https://doi.org/10.3390/sym16080999
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
60. X. Cao, H. Liu,

Impact of the phase transition on quark-gluon plasma with an extremely strong magnetic field in holographic QCD

. Phys. Rev. D 111, 026008 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.111.026008
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
61. X.L. Wang, S.Q. Feng,

Rotation effect on the spectral function of heavy vector mesons in holographic QCD

. Phys. Rev. D 110, 086018 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.110.086018
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
62. R.G. Cai, S. He, L. Li, et al.,

Neural Ordinary Differential Equations for Mapping the Magnetic QCD Phase Diagram via Holography

. arXiv:2406.12772
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
63. B. Ahn, H.S. Jeong, K.Y. Kim et al.,

Holographic reconstruction of black hole spacetime: machine learning and entanglement entropy

. J. High Energ. Phys. 2025, 025 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP01(2025)025
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
64. B. Ahn, H.S. Jeong, K.Y. Kim et al.,

Deep learning bulk spacetime from boundary optical conductivity

. J. High Energ. Phys. 03, 141 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP03(2024)141
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
65. N. Jokela, M. Järvinen, A. Piispa,

Refining holographic models of the quark-gluon plasma

. Phys. Rev. D 110, 126013 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.110.126013
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
66. Y. Bea, R. Jimenez, D. Mateos et al.,

Gravitational duals from equations of state

. J. High Energ. Phys. 07, 087 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP07(2024)087
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
67. Z.R. Zhu, S.Q. Feng, Y.F. Shi et al.,

Energy loss of heavy and light quarks in holographic magnetized background

. Phys. Rev. D 99, 126001 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.99.126001
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
68. X. Chen, M. Huang,

Machine learning holographic black hole from lattice QCD equation of state

. Phys. Rev. D 109, L051902 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.109.L051902
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
69. X. Chen, M. Huang,

Flavor dependent Critical endpoint from holographic QCD through machine learning

. arXiv:2405.06179
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
70. A. Adare et al.,

J∕ψ production vs centrality, transverse momentum, and rapidity in Au+Au collisions at sNN=200 GeV

. Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 232301 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.98.232301
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
71. B.B. Abelev et al.,

Centrality, rapidity and transverse momentum dependence of J∕ψ suppression in Pb-Pb collisions at sNN=2.76 TeV

. Phys. Lett. B 734, 314–327 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2014.05.064
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
72. T. Matsui, H. Satz,

J∕ψ suppression by quark-gluon plasma formation

. Phys. Lett. B 178, 416–422 (1986). https://doi.org/10.1016/0370-2693(86)91404-8
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
73. O. Kaczmarek, F. Zantow,

Static quark anti-quark interactions in zero and finite temperature QCD. I. Heavy quark free energies, running coupling and quarkonium binding

. Phys. Rev. D 71, 114510 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.71.114510
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
74. K. Hashimoto, D.E. Kharzeev,

Entropic destruction of heavy quarkonium in non-Abelian plasma from holography

. Phys. Rev. D 90, 125012 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.90.125012
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
75. J.M. Maldacena,

Wilson loops in large N field theories

. Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 4859–4862 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.80.4859
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
76. S.J. Rey, J.T. Yee,

Macroscopic strings as heavy quarks in large N gauge theory and anti-de Sitter supergravity

. Eur. Phys. J. C 22, 379–394 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/s100520100799
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
77. K. Bitaghsir Fadafan, S.K. Tabatabaei,

Entropic destruction of a moving heavy quarkonium

. Phys. Rev. D 94, 026007 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.94.026007
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
78. I. Iatrakis, D.E. Kharzeev,

Holographic entropy and real-time dynamics of quarkonium dissociation in non-Abelian plasma

. Phys. Rev. D 93, 086009 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.93.086009
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
79. X. Chen, S.Q. Feng, Y.F. Shi et al.,

Moving heavy quarkonium entropy, effective string tension, and the QCD phase diagram

. Phys. Rev. D 97, 066015 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.97.066015
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
80. O. DeWolfe, S.S. Gubser, C. Rosen,

A holographic critical point

. Phys. Rev. D 83, 086005 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.83.086005
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
81. Y. Chen, D. Li, M. Huang,

The dynamical holographic QCD method for hadron physics and QCD matter

. Commun. Theor. Phys. 74, 097201 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1088/1572-9494/ac82ad
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
82. R. Rougemont, J. Grefa, M. Hippert et al.,

Hot QCD phase diagram from holographic Einstein–Maxwell–Dilaton models

. Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 135, 104093 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ppnp.2023.104093
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
83. M. Jarvinen,

Holographic dense QCD in the Veneziano limit

. EPJ Web Conf. 274, 08006 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1051/epjconf/202227408006
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
84. J. Knaute, R. Yaresko, B. Kämpfer,

Holographic QCD phase diagram with critical point from Einstein–Maxwell-dilaton dynamics

. Phys. Lett. B 778, 419–425 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2018.01.053
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
85. I.Y. Aref’eva, A. Hajilou, P. Slepov et al.,

Running coupling for holographic QCD with heavy and light quarks: isotropic case

. Phys. Rev. D 110, 126009 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.110.126009
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
86. D. Dudal, S. Mahapatra,

Interplay between the holographic QCD phase diagram and entanglement entropy

. J. High Energ. Phys. 07, 120 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP07(2018)120
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
87. D. Dudal, S. Mahapatra,

Thermal entropy of a quark-antiquark pair above and below deconfinement from a dynamical holographic QCD model

. Phys. Rev. D 96, 126010 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.96.126010
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
88. Q. Fu, S. He, L. Li, et al.,

Revisiting holographic model for thermal and dense QCD with a critical point

. arXiv:2404.12109
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
89. Z. Li, F. Wang,

Phase transition of hot dense QCD Matter from a refined holographic EMD model

. arXiv:2507.09113
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
90. S.S. Gubser, A. Nellore, S.S. Pufu et al.,

Thermodynamics and bulk viscosity of approximate black hole duals to finite temperature quantum chromodynamics

. Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 131601 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.101.131601
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
91. S.S. Gubser, A. Nellore,

Mimicking the QCD equation of state with a dual black hole

. Phys. Rev. D 78, 086007 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.78.086007
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
92. A.K. Mes, R.W. Moerman, J.P. Shock et al.,

Strongly coupled heavy and light quark thermal motion from AdS/CFT

. Annals Phys. 436, 168675 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aop.2021.168675
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
93. J. Peng, K. Yu, S. Li et al.,

Unraveling the collisional energy loss of a heavy quark in a quark-gluon plasma

. Phys. Rev. D 109, 096028 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.109.096028
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
94. S.S. Gubser,

Comparing the drag force on heavy quarks in N=4 super-Yang-Mills theory and QCD

. Phys. Rev. D 76, 126003 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.76.126003
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
95. E. Caceres, A. Guijosa,

Drag force in charged N=4 SYM plasma

. J. High Energ. Phys. 11, 077 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1088/1126-6708/2006/11/077
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
96. L. Cheng, X.H. Ge, S.Y. Wu,

Drag force of anisotropic plasma at finite U(1) chemical potential

. Eur. Phys. J. C 76, 256 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-016-4096-7
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
97. S.S. Gubser,

Drag force in AdS/CFT

. Phys. Rev. D 74, 126005 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.74.126005
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
98. T. Domurcukgul, R. Morad,

Holographic drag force in non-conformal plasma

. Eur. Phys. J. C 82, 304 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-022-10252-w
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
99. J. Grefa, M. Hippert, J. Noronha et al.,

Transport coefficients of the quark-gluon plasma at the critical point and across the firstorder line

. Phys. Rev. D 106, 034024 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.106.034024
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
100. D. Giataganas, H. Soltanpanahi,

Universal properties of the Langevin diffusion coefficients

. Phys. Rev. D 89, 026011 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.89.026011
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
101. Z. Zhang, K. Ma, D. Hou,

Drag force in strongly coupled supersymmetric Yang-Mills plasma in a magnetic field

. J. Phys. G 45, 025003 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6471/aaa097
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
102. X. Zhu, Z.Q. Zhang,

Light quark energy loss in a soft-wall AdS/ QCD model

. Eur. Phys. J. A 57, 96 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1140/epja/s10050-021-00418-7
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
103. O. Andreev,

Drag force on heavy quarks and spatial string tension

. Mod. Phys. Lett. A 33, 1850041 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217732318500414
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
104. J.X. Chen, D.F. Hou, H.C. Ren,

Drag force and heavy quark potential in a rotating background

. J. High Energ. Phys. 03, 171 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP03(2024)171
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
105. V. Mykhaylova, C. Sasaki,

Impact of quark quasiparticles on transport coefficients in hot QCD

. Phys. Rev. D 103, 014007 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.103.014007
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
106. S.S. Gubser, I.R. Klebanov, A.W. Peet,

Entropy and temperature of black 3-branes

. Phys. Rev. D 54, 3915–3919 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.54.3915
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
107. S.S. Gubser,

Heavy ion collisions and black hole dynamics

. Gen. Rel. Grav. 39, 1533–1538 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218271808012425
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
108. S.S. Gubser,

Using string theory to study the quark-gluon plasma: progress and perils

. Nucl. Phys. A 830, 657C-664C (2009). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2009.10.115
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
109. U. Gursoy, E. Kiritsis, G. Michalogiorgakis et al.,

Thermal transport and drag force in improved holographic QCD

. J. High Energ. Phys. 12, 056 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1088/1126-6708/2009/12/056
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
110. Q. Zhou, B.W. Zhang,

Holographic energy loss near critical temperature in an anisotropic background

. Commun. Theor. Phys. 75, 105301 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1088/1572-9494/acea23
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
111. R. Rougemont, A. Ficnar, S. Finazzo et al.,

Energy loss, equilibration, and thermodynamics of a baryon rich strongly coupled quark-gluon plasma

. J. High Energ. Phys. 04, 102 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP04(2016)102
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
112. Q. Zhou, B.W. Zhang,

R2 curvature-squared corrections on Langevin diffusion coefficients*

. Chin. Phys. C 49, 014105 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1088/1674-1137/ad8420
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
113. A. Buchel,

On jet quenching parameters in strongly coupled non-conformal gauge theories

. Phys. Rev. D 74, 046006 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.74.046006
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
114. C.P. Herzog, A. Karch, P. Kovtun et al.,

Energy loss of a heavy quark moving through N=4 supersymmetric Yang-Mills plasma

. J. High Energ. Phys. 07, 013 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1088/1126-6708/2006/07/013
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
115. D. Li, S. He, M. Huang,

Temperature dependent transport coefficients in a dynamical holographic QCD model

. J. High Energ. Phys. 06, 046 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP06(2015)046
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
116. J. Grefa, M. Hippert, R. Kunnawalkam Elayavalli et al.,

Holographic transport coefficients and jet energy loss for the hot and dense quark-gluon plasma

. EPJ Web Conf. 296, 14014 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1051/epjconf/202429614014
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
117. L. Apolinário, Y.J. Lee, M. Winn,

Heavy quarks and jets as probes of the QGP

. Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 127, 103990 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ppnp.2022.103990
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
118. J. Sadeghi, S. Heshmatian,

Jet quenching parameter with hyperscaling violation

. Eur. Phys. J. C 74, 3032 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-014-3032-y
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
119. L. Wang, S.Y. Wu,

Holographic study of the jet quenching parameter in anisotropic systems

. Eur. Phys. J. C 76, 587 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-016-4421-1
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
120. Y.L. Du,

Overview: jet quenching with machine learning

. in 11th International Conference on Hard and Electromagnetic Probes of High-Energy Nuclear Collisions: Hard Probes 2023. arXiv:2308.10035
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
121. W.A. Horowitz,

Fluctuating heavy quark energy loss in a strongly coupled quark-gluon plasma

. Phys. Rev. D 91, 085019 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.91.085019
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
122. S. Heshmatian, R. Morad, M. Akbari,

Jet suppression in nonconformal plasma using AdS/CFT

. J. High Energ. Phys. 03, 045 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP03(2019)045
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
123. K. Bitaghsir Fadafan, R. Morad,

Jets in a strongly coupled anisotropic plasma

. Eur. Phys. J. C 78, 16 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-018-5520-y
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
124. D. Li, J. Liao, M. Huang,

Enhancement of jet quenching around phase transition: result from the dynamical holographic model

. Phys. Rev. D 89, 126006 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.89.126006
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
125. Z. Zhang, D. Hou,

Light quark energy loss at finite ’t Hooft coupling from holography

. Eur. Phys. J. Plus 139, 230 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjp/s13360-024-05035-z
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
126. Z. Zhang, X. Zhu, D. Hou,

Light quark jet quenching in higherderivative gravity

. Eur. Phys. J. C 83, 389 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-023-11428-8
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
127. D. Hou, M. Atashi, K. Bitaghsir Fadafan et al.,

Holographic energy loss of a rotating heavy quark at finite chemical potential

. Phys. Lett. B 817, 136279 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2021.136279
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
128. W.J. Xing, S. Cao, G.Y. Qin et al.,

Heavy and light flavor jet quenching in heavy-ion collisions in a perturbative QCD approach

. Nucl. Phys. A 1005, 121829 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2020.121829
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
129. S.Q. Li, W.J. Xing, F.L. Liu et al.,

Heavy flavor quenching and flow: the roles of initial condition, pre-equilibrium evolution, and in-medium interaction

. Chin. Phys. C 44, 114101 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1088/1674-1137/abadee
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
130. R. Li, Y.L. Du, S. Cao,

Deep learning for jet modification in the presence of the QGP background

. arXiv:2508.20856
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
131. R. Pokhrel, T.K. Dey,

Hydrodynamical properties of baryon rich thermal plasma with flavour quarks

. arXiv:2410.14384
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
132. L. Zhu, Z. Gao, W. Ke, et al.,

Bayesian inference of the magnetic field and chemical potential on holographic jet quenching in heavy-ion collisions

. arXiv:2506.00340
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
133. Z. Li, D. Li, M. Huang,

Jet quenching and quark energy loss from holographic QCD

. Phys. Rev. D 111, 126019 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1103/52sx-qvy8
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
134. Y.G. Ma, L.G. Pang, R. Wang et al.,

Phase transition study meets machine learning

. Chin. Phys. Lett. 40, 122101 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1088/0256-307X/40/12/122101
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
135. W.B. He, Y.G. Ma, L.G. Pang et al.,

High-energy nuclear physics meets machine learning

. Nucl. Sci. Tech. 34, 88 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41365-023-01233-z
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
136. Y.J. Huang, Z. Meng, L.G. Pang, et al.,

A novel deep learning method for detecting nucleon-nucleon correlations

. arXiv:2504.00790
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
137. F.P. Li, L.G. Pang, G.Y. Qin,

QCD equation of state at finite μB using deep learning assisted quasi-parton model

. Phys. Lett. B 868, 139692 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2025.139692
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
138. L.G. Pang,

Studying high-energy nuclear physics with machine learning

. Int. J. Mod. Phys. E 33, 2430009 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1142/9789811294679_0008
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
139. K. Zhou, L. Wang, L.G. Pang et al.,

Exploring QCD matter in extreme conditions with machine learning

. Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 135, 104084 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ppnp.2023.104084
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
140. F.P. Li, H.L. Lü, L.G. Pang et al.,

Deep-learning quasi-particle masses from QCD equation of state

. Phys. Lett. B 844, 138088 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2023.138088
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
141. G. Aarts, K. Fukushima, T. Hatsuda et al.,

Physics-driven learning for inverse problems in quantum chromodynamics

. Nat. Rev. Phys. 7, 154–163 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s42254-024-00798-x
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
142. R. Li, S. Han, Z. Lin et al.,

Toward constraining QCD phase transitions in neutron star interiors: Bayesian inference with a Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkof linear response analysis

. Phys. Rev. D 111, 074026 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.111.074026
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
143. S. Soma, L. Wang, S. Shi et al.,

Reconstructing the neutron star equation of state from observational data via automatic differentiation

. Phys. Rev. D 107, 083028 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.107.083028
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
144. W. Zhang, W.J. Zhang, Z. Zhang et al.,

Machine learning unveils the power law of finite-volume energy shifts

. Chin. Phys. Lett. 42, 070202 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1088/0256-307X/42/7/070202
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
145. Z. Zhang, R. Ma, J. Hu et al.,

Approach the Gell-Mann-Okubo formula with machine learning

. Chin. Phys. Lett. 39, 111201 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1088/0256-307X/39/11/111201
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
146. K. Zhou, G. Endrődi, L.G. Pang et al.,

Regressive and generative neural networks for scalar field theory

. Phys. Rev. D 100, 011501 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.100.011501
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
147. L. Jiang, L. Wang, K. Zhou,

Deep learning stochastic processes with QCD phase transition

. Phys. Rev. D 103, 116023 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.103.116023
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
148. L. Wang, G. Aarts, K. Zhou,

Diffusion models as stochastic quantization in lattice field theory

. J. High Energ. Phys. 05, 060 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP05(2024)060
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
149. Y.L. Du, K. Zhou, J. Steinheimer et al.,

Identifying the nature of the QCD transition in relativistic collision of heavy nuclei with deep learning

. Eur. Phys. J. C 80, 516 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-020-8030-7
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
150. Y.L. Du, D. Pablos, K. Tywoniuk,

Deep learning jet modifications in heavy-ion collisions

. J. High Energ. Phys. 21, 206 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP03(2021)206
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
151. Y.L. Du, D. Pablos, K. Tywoniuk,

Jet tomography in heavyion collisions with deep learning

. Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 012301 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.128.012301
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
152. Y.L. Du, N. Su, K. Tywoniuk,

Discovering novel order parameters in the Potts model: a bridge between machine learning and critical phenomena

. arXiv:2505.06159
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
153. W. Kou, X. Chen,

Machine learning insights into quark-antiquark interactions: probing field distributions and string tension in QCD

. arXiv:2411.14902
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
154. W. Kou, X. Lin, B. Guo, et al.,

Physics-informed neural network approach to quark-antiquark color flux tube

. arXiv:2506.03513
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
155. K. Hashimoto, S. Sugishita, A. Tanaka et al.,

Deep learning and the AdS/CFT correspondence

. Phys. Rev. D 98, 046019 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.98.046019
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
156. K. Hashimoto, S. Sugishita, A. Tanaka et al.,

Deep learning and holographic QCD

. Phys. Rev. D 98, 106014 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.98.106014
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
157. T. Akutagawa, K. Hashimoto, T. Sumimoto,

Deep learning and AdS/QCD

. Phys. Rev. D 102, 026020 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.102.026020
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
158. K. Hashimoto, K. Ohashi, T. Sumimoto,

Deriving the dilaton potential in improved holographic QCD from the meson spectrum

. Phys. Rev. D 105, 106008 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.105.106008
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
159. K. Hashimoto, K. Matsuo, M. Murata et al.,

Machine-learning emergent spacetime from linear response in future tabletop quantum gravity experiments

. Mach. Learn. Sci. Tech. 6, 015030 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1088/2632-2153/adb09f
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
160. M. Song, M.S.H. Oh, Y. Ahn et al.,

AdS/Deep-Learning made easy: simple examples

. Chin. Phys. C 45, 073111 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1088/1674-1137/abfc36
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
161. B. Ahn, H.S. Jeong, C.W. Ji, et al.,

Deep learning-based holography for T-linear resistivity

. arXiv:2502.10245
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
162. W.B. Chang, D. Hou,

Heavy quarkonium spectral function in an anisotropic background

. Phys. Rev. D 109, 086010 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.109.086010
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
163. O.Y. Luo, X. Chen, F.P. Li et al.,

Neural network modeling of heavy-quark potential from holography

. Eur. Phys. J. C 85, 637 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-025-14319-2
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
164. W.C. Dai, O.Y. Luo, B. Chen, et al.,

Extracting transport properties of quark-gluon plasma from the heavy-quark potential with neural networks in a holographic model

. arXiv:2503.10213
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
165. X. Chen, Y. Chen, K. Zhou,

Data-Driven Einstein-Dilaton model for pure yang-mills thermodynamics and glueball spectrum

. arXiv:2507.06729
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
166. Y. Guo, R.X. Miao,

Gravity duality of networks

. arXiv:2506.21305
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
167. S. Pratt, E. Sangaline, P. Sorensen et al.,

Constraining the equation of state of super-hadronic matter from heavy-ion collisions

. Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 202301 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.202301
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
168. J.E. Bernhard, J.S. Moreland, S.A. Bass et al.,

Applying Bayesian parameter estimation to relativistic heavy-ion collisions: simultaneous characterization of the initial state and quark-gluon plasma medium

. Phys. Rev. C 94, 024907 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.94.024907
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
169. J.E. Bernhard, J.S. Moreland, S.A. Bass,

Bayesian estimation of the specific shear and bulk viscosity of quark–gluon plasma

. Nat. Phys. 15, 1113–1117 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41567-019-0611-8
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
170. D. Everett et al.,

Multisystem Bayesian constraints on the transport coefficients of QCD matter

. Phys. Rev. C 103, 054904 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.103.054904
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
171. J.E. Parkkila, A. Onnerstad, S.F. Taghavi et al.,

New constraints for QCD matter from improved Bayesian parameter estimation in heavy-ion collisions at LHC

. Phys. Lett. B 835, 137485 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2022.137485
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
172. L. Zhu, X. Chen, K. Zhou et al.,

Bayesian inference of the critical end point in a (2+1)-flavor system from holographic QCD

. Phys. Rev. D 112, 026019 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1103/wpts-lbtr
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
173. X. Guo, X. Chen, D. Xiang et al.,

Potential energy of heavy quarkonium in flavor-dependent systems from a holographic model

. Phys. Rev. D 110, 046014 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.110.046014
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
174. L. Zhu, O.Y. Luo, X. Chen, et al.,

Thermodynamics of heavy quarkonium in a Bayesian holographic QCD model

. arXiv:2508.2756
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
175. S. Lin, X. Liu, X. Chen et al.,

Holographic Schwinger effect in flavor-dependent systems

. Phys. Rev. D 111, 046005 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.111.046005
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
176. B. Chen, X. Chen, X. Li, et al.,

Exploring transport properties of quark-gluon plasma with a machine-learning assisted holographic approach

. arXiv:2404.18217
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
177. L. Zhang, L. Yin, G.D. Zhou et al.,

Light quark energy loss in the flavor-dependent systems from holography

. Phys. Rev. D 111, 126001 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1103/m6rx-vy32
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
178. A. Bazavov et al.,

Equation of state in (2+1)-flavor QCD

. Phys. Rev. D 90, 094503 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.90.094503
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
179. R. Bellwied, S. Borsanyi, Z. Fodor et al.,

Fluctuations and correlations in high temperature QCD

. Phys. Rev. D 92, 114505 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.92.114505
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
180. B. Tang,

Orthogonal array-based Latin hypercubes

. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 88, 1392–1397 (1993)
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
181. M.D. Morris, T.J. Mitchell,

Exploratory designs for computational experiments

. J. Stat. Plan. Infer. 43, 381–402 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-3758(94)00035-T
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
182. M.E. Tipping, C.M. Bishop,

Mixtures of probabilistic principal component analyzers

. Neural Comput. 11, 443–482 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1162/089976699300016728
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
183. C.E. Rasmussen, C.K.I. Williams, Gaussian processes for machine learning. (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2006)
184. D. Foreman-Mackey, D.W. Hogg, D. Lang et al.,

emcee: the MCMC hammer

. Publ. Astron. Soc. Pac. 125, 306–312 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1086/670067
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
185. J. Goodman, J. Weare,

Ensemble samplers with affine invariance

. Commun. Appl. Math. Comput. Sc. 5, 65–80 (2010). https://doi.org/10.2140/camcos.2010.5.65
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
186. L. Altenkort, O. Kaczmarek, R. Larsen et al.,

Heavy quark diffusion from 2+1 flavor lattice QCD with 320 MeV pion mass

. Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 231902 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.130.231902
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
187. S. Acharya et al.,

Prompt D0, D+, and D*+ production in Pb-Pb collisions at sNN=5.02 TeV

. J. High Energ. Phys. 01, 174 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP01(2022)174
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
188. S. Caron-Huot, G.D. Moore,

Heavy quark diffusion in perturbative QCD at next-to-leading order

. Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 052301 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.052301
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
189. Y. Xu, J.E. Bernhard, S.A. Bass et al.,

Data-driven analysis for the temperature and momentum dependence of the heavy-quark diffusion coefficient in relativistic heavy-ion collisions

. Phys. Rev. C 97, 014907 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.97.014907
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
190. Z. Zhang, D. Hou, H. Ren,

The finite ’t Hooft coupling correction on jet quenching parameter in a N=4 super Yang-Mills plasma

. J. High Energ. Phys. 2013, 32 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP01(2013)032
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
191. D. Everett et al.,

Phenomenological constraints on the transport properties of QCD matter with data-driven model averaging

. Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 242301 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.126.242301
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
192. N. Astrakhantsev, V. Braguta, A. Kotov,

Temperature dependence of shear viscosity of SU(3)-gluodynamics within lattice simulation

. J. High Energ. Phys. 04, 101 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP04(2017)101
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
193. H.B. Meyer,

A Calculation of the shear viscosity in SU(3) gluodynamics

. Phys. Rev. D 76, 101701 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.76.101701
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
194. O. Soloveva, P. Moreau, E. Bratkovskaya,

Transport coefficients for the hot quark-gluon plasma at finite chemical potential μB

. Phys. Rev. C 101, 045203 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.101.045203
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
195. C. Shen, S. Alzhrani,

Collision-geometry-based 3D initial condition for relativistic heavy-ion collisions

. Phys. Rev. C 102, 014909 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.102.014909
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
196. S. Cremonini, U. Gursoy, P. Szepietowski,

On the temperature dependence of the shear viscosity and holography

. J. High Energ. Phys. 2012, 167 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP08(2012)167
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
197. S.S. Gubser, S.S. Pufu, F.D. Rocha, et al., Energy loss in a strongly coupled thermal medium and the gauge-string duality. in Quark-Gluon Plasma 4, ed. by R.C. Hwa, X.-N. Wang (World Scientific, Singapore, 2010), pp. 1–59. https://doi.org/10.1142/9789814293297_0001
198. D.B. Walton, J. Rafelski,

Equilibrium distribution of heavy quarks in Fokker-Planck dynamics

. Phys. Rev. Lett. 84, 31–34 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.84.31
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
199. T. Bhattacharyya, E. Megias, A. Deppman,

Jet quenching of the heavy quarks in the quark-gluon plasma and the nonadditive statistics

. Phys. Lett. B 856, 138907 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2024.138907
Baidu ScholarGoogle Scholar
Footnote

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.