pith. sign in

arxiv: 2408.03649 · v4 · pith:4TWVNRJFnew · submitted 2024-08-07 · ✦ hep-ph · astro-ph.CO

Probing radiative electroweak symmetry breaking with colliders and gravitational waves

Wei Liu , Ke-Pan Xie This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-23 22:21 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph astro-ph.CO
keywords radiative electroweak symmetry breakinglogarithmic potentialfirst-order phase transitionsgravitational wavesscalar mixingconformal symmetry breakingthermal historycollider phenomenology
0
0 comments X

The pith

Radiative electroweak symmetry breaking via a logarithmic potential produces a light mixed scalar and first-order phase transitions whose signals future colliders and gravitational wave detectors can reach at scales up to 10^8 GeV.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper studies how radiative symmetry breaking explains the electroweak scale through a logarithmic potential that avoids fine-tuning. This setup creates a light scalar that mixes with the Higgs boson and drives supercooled first-order phase transitions in the early universe. The authors derive exact vacuum solutions, identify four thermal history patterns, and compute the resulting gravitational wave spectra. Combining collider searches for the mixed scalar with gravitational wave observations extends the testable range of the conformal breaking scale by many orders of magnitude.

Core claim

Radiative electroweak symmetry breaking realized through a logarithmic potential yields a relatively light scalar that mixes with the Higgs, generates four distinct patterns of cosmic thermal history, and produces first-order phase transitions whose gravitational wave signals can be calculated analytically; when these signals are combined with collider constraints on the scalar, the conformal symmetry breaking scale becomes accessible up to 10^5-10^8 GeV.

What carries the argument

The logarithmic-shaped potential from radiative symmetry breaking, which fixes the vacuum structure, scalar mixing angles, phase transition strength, and gravitational wave spectrum.

If this is right

  • Collider experiments can search for the light scalar mixed with the Higgs and set limits on the conformal breaking scale.
  • Gravitational wave observatories can detect signals from the supercooled first-order phase transitions driven by the logarithmic potential.
  • Four distinct thermal history patterns arise depending on the relative sizes of the electroweak and conformal scales.
  • The combination of the two experimental channels extends the probeable scale far beyond what either method achieves alone.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Confirmation would directly connect a solution to the hierarchy problem with observable early-universe dynamics at laboratory-accessible energies.
  • The framework could be extended by adding light degrees of freedom that modify the gravitational wave peak frequency while preserving the logarithmic potential shape.
  • A mismatch between the scalar mass and the gravitational wave amplitude would point to additional model-dependent thermal effects not captured in the minimal setup.

Load-bearing premise

The symmetry breaking proceeds exactly via the pure logarithmic potential without extra ultraviolet corrections that would change the scalar mixing, thermal evolution, or gravitational wave output.

What would settle it

Non-observation of the predicted light mixed scalar at future colliders together with a gravitational wave spectrum that deviates from the calculated supercooled first-order transition signals at the corresponding frequencies.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2408.03649 by Ke-Pan Xie, Wei Liu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Invariant mass of the di-jet system after the basic cuts for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Invariant mass of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. The field space trajectories of the possible cosmological thermal history. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: shows the parameter space of the gauge-induced scenario, scanning over (mϕ, θ) and plotting the contours of w (green), T∗ (blue), and Trh (red). Similar results for the scalar￾induced scenario are obtained. Due to the non-degeneracy between ϕ and h, we display the regions where mϕ < mh in the top panel and mϕ > mh in the bottom panel. The boundaries of different thermal history patterns are delineated with… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Illustrations of the GW spectra for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Current bounds and projected limits on the parameter space for the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Current bounds and projected limits on the parameter space [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Radiative symmetry breaking provides an appealing explanation for electroweak symmetry breaking and addresses the hierarchy problem. We present a comprehensive phenomenological study of this scenario, focusing on its key feature: the logarithmic-shaped potential. This potential gives rise to a relatively light scalar boson that mixes with the Higgs boson and leads to first-order phase transitions (FOPTs) in the early Universe. Our detailed analysis includes providing exact and analytical solutions for the vacuum structure and scalar interactions, classifying four patterns of cosmic thermal history, and calculating the supercooled FOPT dynamics and GWs. By combining future collider and gravitational wave experiments, we can probe the conformal symmetry breaking scales up to $10^5-10^8$ GeV.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 0 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents a phenomenological study of radiative electroweak symmetry breaking via a logarithmic-shaped potential. It supplies exact analytical solutions for the vacuum structure and scalar interactions, classifies four patterns of cosmic thermal history, computes the dynamics of supercooled first-order phase transitions together with the resulting gravitational-wave spectrum, and concludes that the combination of future collider and gravitational-wave experiments can probe conformal symmetry breaking scales in the range 10^5–10^8 GeV.

Significance. If the central results hold, the work would be significant because it supplies a concrete multi-messenger strategy for testing radiative symmetry breaking as a solution to the hierarchy problem. The explicit provision of exact analytical solutions for the vacuum structure and scalar mixing constitutes a clear strength that improves the internal consistency of the predictions within the stated model.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract and §1] Abstract and §1: the quoted sensitivity window of 10^5–10^8 GeV rests on the assumption that the effective potential remains exactly logarithmic, with no higher-dimensional operators or UV completions that would modify the scalar mixing angle, the barrier height, or the four thermal-history patterns. Because the analytical vacuum solutions and supercooled FOPT calculations are performed inside this pure-log model, any correction that shifts the mixing or the GW peak frequency/amplitude would directly erode the claimed reach; the manuscript does not quantify the size of such corrections or delineate the scale at which they become important.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and the constructive comment regarding the robustness of our sensitivity claims. We respond to this point below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and §1] Abstract and §1: the quoted sensitivity window of 10^5–10^8 GeV rests on the assumption that the effective potential remains exactly logarithmic, with no higher-dimensional operators or UV completions that would modify the scalar mixing angle, the barrier height, or the four thermal-history patterns. Because the analytical vacuum solutions and supercooled FOPT calculations are performed inside this pure-log model, any correction that shifts the mixing or the GW peak frequency/amplitude would directly erode the claimed reach; the manuscript does not quantify the size of such corrections or delineate the scale at which they become important.

    Authors: We agree that the quoted reach is obtained strictly within the pure logarithmic potential. This effective description isolates the leading radiative effects responsible for symmetry breaking. Higher-dimensional operators from a UV completion are parametrically suppressed by powers of the ratio between the electroweak vev and the cutoff scale (taken ≫10^8 GeV). We will revise the manuscript by adding a short paragraph in §1 and the conclusions that explicitly states the regime of validity of the log approximation and notes the expected parametric suppression of corrections to the mixing angle and barrier height. A model-by-model quantification of UV effects lies beyond the scope of this phenomenological study. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation is self-contained from the logarithmic potential

full rationale

The paper derives exact analytical solutions for vacuum structure and scalar interactions directly from the logarithmic-shaped potential, classifies four thermal history patterns from those solutions, computes supercooled FOPT dynamics and GW spectra as functions of the model parameters, and estimates experimental reach by combining the resulting collider and GW signals. No load-bearing step reduces a claimed prediction to a fitted input by construction, invokes a self-citation chain for uniqueness, or renames an input as an output; the 10^5-10^8 GeV sensitivity window is an output of the model's computed signals rather than tautological with the input assumptions.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The model rests on the domain assumption of a logarithmic potential for radiative breaking and introduces free parameters for the conformal scale and scalar mixing; no new invented entities are introduced in the abstract.

free parameters (2)
  • conformal symmetry breaking scale
    Central parameter setting the overall energy scale of the potential and the probe range quoted in the abstract.
  • scalar-Higgs mixing parameter
    Determines the coupling strength between the new scalar and the Higgs, affecting both collider signals and thermal evolution.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The scalar potential takes a logarithmic shape characteristic of radiative electroweak symmetry breaking.
    This is the defining feature invoked to generate the light scalar, mixing, and first-order transitions.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5644 in / 1412 out tokens · 57828 ms · 2026-05-23T22:21:00.514148+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Reviving primordial black hole formation in slow first-order phase transitions

    hep-ph 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Primordial black hole formation from slow first-order phase transitions remains viable if slow reheating after supercooling creates an early matter-dominated era allowing small overdensities to grow, producing black h...

  2. Reviving primordial black hole formation in slow first-order phase transitions

    hep-ph 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Slow reheating after a supercooled first-order phase transition allows an early matter-dominated era in which small curvature perturbations grow sufficiently to form primordial black holes.

  3. Dark matter in classically conformal theories: WIMP and supercooling

    hep-ph 2026-03 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Classically conformal SU(2)_X model with triplet dark scalar yields viable WIMP and supercooled DM parameter spaces whose production histories are set by the model's first-order phase transition, with gravitational wa...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

135 extracted references · 135 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers · 51 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    The EW symmetry remains preserved after the conformal FOPT

    Type-N1, T∗ > T ew. The EW symmetry remains preserved after the conformal FOPT. An EW crossover occurs at Tew where h shifts smoothly to v

    work page

  2. [2]

    The EWSB simultaneously occurs with the conformal FOPT, resulting in a joint conformal-EW FOPT at T∗

    Type-N2, T∗ < T ew. The EWSB simultaneously occurs with the conformal FOPT, resulting in a joint conformal-EW FOPT at T∗. If the decay rate is sufficiently low for the Universe to remain at (0, 0) until TQCD, then the QCD phase transition occurs first, a scenario we call inverted pattern history . In this case, the QCD phase transition takes place with si...

    work page

  3. [3]

    After the QCD-EW FOPT, a ϕ-direction FOPT occurs at T∗ ≈ Troll, which also induces the transition of h from vQCD to ∼ v

    Type-I1, TQCD > T roll. After the QCD-EW FOPT, a ϕ-direction FOPT occurs at T∗ ≈ Troll, which also induces the transition of h from vQCD to ∼ v

    work page

  4. [4]

    The ϕ-direction also gains a VEV at QCD-EW FOPT, thus this is in fact a joint QCD-EW-conformal FOPT at T∗ = TQCD

    Type-I2, TQCD < T roll. The ϕ-direction also gains a VEV at QCD-EW FOPT, thus this is in fact a joint QCD-EW-conformal FOPT at T∗ = TQCD. The field evolution trajectories of the four thermal history patterns are sketched in Fig. 3. The existence of the inverted pattern was proposed and studied in Refs. [54, 57], while Type-I2 has been discussed in detail ...

    work page

  5. [5]

    Observation of a new particle in the search for the Standard Model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC

    G. Aad et al. (ATLAS), Phys. Lett. B 716, 1 (2012), 1207.7214

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  6. [6]

    Observation of a new boson at a mass of 125 GeV with the CMS experiment at the LHC

    S. Chatrchyan et al. (CMS), Phys. Lett. B 716, 30 (2012), 1207.7235

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  7. [7]

    S. R. Coleman and E. J. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. D 7, 1888 (1973)

    work page 1973

  8. [8]

    Jackiw, Phys

    R. Jackiw, Phys. Rev. D 9, 1686 (1974)

    work page 1974

  9. [9]

    W. A. Bardeen, inOntake Summer Institute on Particle Physics (1995)

    work page 1995

  10. [10]

    K. A. Meissner and H. Nicolai, Phys. Lett. B 660, 260 (2008), 0710.2840

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  11. [11]

    de Boer, M

    T. de Boer, M. Lindner, and A. Trautner (2024), 2407.15920

    work page arXiv 2024

  12. [12]

    Frasca, A

    M. Frasca, A. Ghoshal, and N. Okada (2024), 2408.00093

    work page arXiv 2024

  13. [13]

    Scale invariance vs conformal invariance

    Y . Nakayama, Phys. Rept.569, 1 (2015), 1302.0884

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  14. [14]

    The Next-to-Minimal Coleman-Weinberg Model

    R. Hempfling, Phys. Lett. B 379, 153 (1996), hep-ph/9604278

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  15. [15]

    S. Iso, N. Okada, and Y . Orikasa, Phys. Lett. B676, 81 (2009), 0902.4050

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  16. [16]

    S. Iso, N. Okada, and Y . Orikasa, Phys. Rev. D 80, 115007 (2009), 0909.0128

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  17. [17]

    E. J. Chun, S. Jung, and H. M. Lee, Phys. Lett. B 725, 158 (2013), [Erratum: Phys.Lett.B 730, 357–359 (2014)], 1304.5815

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  18. [18]

    A. Das, N. Okada, and N. Papapietro, Eur. Phys. J. C 77, 122 (2017), 1509.01466

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  19. [19]

    V . V . Khoze and G. Ro, JHEP10, 075 (2013), 1307.3764

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  20. [20]

    Right-Handed Neutrinos as the Origin of the Electroweak Scale

    H. Davoudiasl and I. M. Lewis, Phys. Rev. D 90, 033003 (2014), 1404.6260

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  21. [21]

    Huang and K.-P

    P. Huang and K.-P. Xie, JHEP 09, 052 (2022), 2206.04691

    work page arXiv 2022

  22. [22]

    E. J. Chun, T. P. Dutka, T. H. Jung, X. Nagels, and M. Vanvlasselaer, JHEP09, 164 (2023), 2305.10759

    work page arXiv 2023

  23. [23]

    Dark matter in the classically conformal B-L model

    N. Okada and Y . Orikasa, Phys. Rev. D 85, 115006 (2012), 1202.1405

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  24. [24]

    Dynamical generation of the weak and Dark Matter scale

    T. Hambye and A. Strumia, Phys. Rev. D 88, 055022 (2013), 1306.2329

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  25. [25]

    Kang and J

    Z. Kang and J. Zhu, Phys. Rev. D 102, 053011 (2020), 2003.02465

    work page arXiv 2020

  26. [26]

    Conformal vector dark matter and strongly first-order electroweak phase transition

    S. Yaser Ayazi and A. Mohamadnejad, JHEP 03, 181 (2019), 1901.04168

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  27. [27]

    Mohamadnejad, Gravitational waves from scale-invariant vector dark matter model: Probing below the neutrino-floor , Eur

    A. Mohamadnejad, Eur. Phys. J. C 80, 197 (2020), 1907.08899

    work page arXiv 2020

  28. [28]

    V . V . Khoze and D. L. Milne, Phys. Rev. D 107, 095012 (2023), 2212.04784

    work page arXiv 2023

  29. [29]

    M. T. Frandsen, M. Heikinheimo, M. E. Thing, K. Tuominen, and M. Rosenlyst, Phys. Rev. D 108, 015033 (2023), 2301.00041

    work page arXiv 2023

  30. [30]

    Super-cool Dark Matter

    T. Hambye, A. Strumia, and D. Teresi, JHEP 08, 188 (2018), 1805.01473

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  31. [31]

    Strong gravitational radiation from a simple dark matter model

    I. Baldes and C. Garcia-Cely, JHEP 05, 190 (2019), 1809.01198

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  32. [32]

    Wong and K.-P

    X.-R. Wong and K.-P. Xie, Phys. Rev. D 108, 055035 (2023), 2304.00908

    work page arXiv 2023

  33. [33]

    Gouttenoire, Phys

    Y . Gouttenoire, Phys. Lett. B 855, 138800 (2024), 2311.13640

    work page arXiv 2024

  34. [34]

    Salvio, Phys

    A. Salvio, Phys. Lett. B 852, 138639 (2024), 2312.04628

    work page arXiv 2024

  35. [35]

    Salvio, JCAP 12, 046 (2023), 2307.04694

    A. Salvio, JCAP 12, 046 (2023), 2307.04694

    work page arXiv 2023

  36. [36]

    Conaci, L

    A. Conaci, L. Delle Rose, P. S. B. Dev, and A. Ghoshal (2024), 2401.09411

    work page arXiv 2024

  37. [37]

    I. K. Banerjee, U. K. Dey, and S. Khalil (2024), 2406.12518

    work page arXiv 2024

  38. [38]

    Gildener and S

    E. Gildener and S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. D 13, 3333 (1976)

    work page 1976

  39. [39]

    Systematic analysis of radiative symmetry breaking in models with extended scalar sector

    L. Chataignier, T. Prokopec, M. G. Schmidt, and B. ´Swie˙zewska, JHEP 08, 083 (2018), 1805.09292

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  40. [40]

    I. M. Lewis and M. Sullivan, Phys. Rev. D 96, 035037 (2017), 1701.08774

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  41. [41]

    Liu and K.-P

    W. Liu and K.-P. Xie, JHEP 04, 015 (2021), 2101.10469

    work page arXiv 2021

  42. [42]

    Li and K.-P

    S.-P. Li and K.-P. Xie, Phys. Rev. D 108, 055018 (2023), 2307.01086

    work page arXiv 2023

  43. [43]

    Gershtein, S

    Y . Gershtein, S. Knapen, and D. Redigolo, Phys. Lett. B 823, 136758 (2021), 2012.07864

    work page arXiv 2021

  44. [44]

    The Anatomy of Electro-Weak Symmetry Breaking. I: The Higgs boson in the Standard Model

    A. Djouadi, Phys. Rept. 457, 1 (2008), hep-ph/0503172

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  45. [45]

    Batell, N

    B. Batell, N. Blinov, C. Hearty, and R. McGehee, in Snowmass 2021 (2022), 2207.06905

    work page arXiv 2021

  46. [46]

    CP-even scalar boson production via gluon fusion at the LHC

    C. Anastasiou, C. Duhr, F. Dulat, E. Furlan, T. Gehrmann, F. Herzog, A. Lazopoulos, and B. Mistlberger, JHEP 09, 037 (2016), 1605.05761

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  47. [47]

    A. M. Sirunyan et al. (CMS), JHEP 06, 127 (2018), [Erratum: JHEP 03, 128 (2019)], 1804.01939

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  48. [48]

    J. P. Delahaye, M. Diemoz, K. Long, B. Mansoulié, N. Pas- trone, L. Rivkin, D. Schulte, A. Skrinsky, and A. Wulzer (2019), 1901.06150

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  49. [49]

    Aime et al

    C. Aime et al. (2022), 2203.07256

    work page arXiv 2022

  50. [50]

    Accettura et al., Eur

    C. Accettura et al., Eur. Phys. J. C 83, 864 (2023), [Erratum: Eur.Phys.J.C 84, 36 (2024)], 2303.08533

    work page arXiv 2023

  51. [51]

    T. Han, Y . Ma, and K. Xie, Phys. Rev. D103, L031301 (2021), 2007.14300

    work page arXiv 2021

  52. [52]

    FeynRules 2.0 - A complete toolbox for tree-level phenomenology

    A. Alloul, N. D. Christensen, C. Degrande, C. Duhr, and B. Fuks, Comput. Phys. Commun. 185, 2250 (2014), 1310.1921

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  53. [53]

    The automated computation of tree-level and next-to-leading order differential cross sections, and their matching to parton shower simulations

    J. Alwall, R. Frederix, S. Frixione, V . Hirschi, F. Maltoni, O. Mattelaer, H. S. Shao, T. Stelzer, P. Torrielli, and M. Zaro, JHEP 07, 079 (2014), 1405.0301

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  54. [54]

    A. D. Linde, Nucl. Phys. B 216, 421 (1983), [Erratum: Nucl.Phys.B 223, 544 (1983)]

    work page 1983

  55. [55]

    A. H. Guth and S. H. H. Tye, Phys. Rev. Lett. 44, 631 (1980), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.Lett. 44, 963 (1980)]

    work page 1980

  56. [56]

    A. H. Guth and E. J. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. D 23, 876 (1981)

    work page 1981

  57. [57]

    M. D. Rintoul and S. Torquato, Journal of physics a: mathematical and general 30, L585 (1997)

    work page 1997

  58. [58]

    Witten, Nucl

    E. Witten, Nucl. Phys. B 177, 477 (1981). 13

    work page 1981

  59. [59]

    Cosmological Consequences of Nearly Conformal Dynamics at the TeV scale

    T. Konstandin and G. Servant, JCAP 12, 009 (2011), 1104.4791

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  60. [60]

    Probing classically conformal $B-L$ model with gravitational waves

    R. Jinno and M. Takimoto, Phys. Rev. D 95, 015020 (2017), 1604.05035

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  61. [61]

    S. Iso, P. D. Serpico, and K. Shimada, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 141301 (2017), 1704.04955

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  62. [62]

    P. H. Ghorbani, Phys. Rev. D 98, 115016 (2018), 1711.11541

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  63. [63]

    Phase transition and vacuum stability in the classically conformal B-L model

    C. Marzo, L. Marzola, and V . Vaskonen, Eur. Phys. J. C 79, 601 (2019), 1811.11169

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  64. [64]

    L. Bian, W. Cheng, H.-K. Guo, and Y . Zhang, Chin. Phys. C 45, 113104 (2021), 1907.13589

    work page arXiv 2021

  65. [65]

    Gravitational wave energy budget in strongly supercooled phase transitions

    J. Ellis, M. Lewicki, J. M. No, and V . Vaskonen, JCAP06, 024 (2019), 1903.09642

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  66. [66]

    Ellis, M

    J. Ellis, M. Lewicki, and V . Vaskonen, JCAP 11, 020 (2020), 2007.15586

    work page arXiv 2020

  67. [67]

    Jung and K

    S. Jung and K. Kawana, PTEP 2022, 033B11 (2022), 2105.01217

    work page arXiv 2022

  68. [68]

    Kawana, Phys

    K. Kawana, Phys. Rev. D 105, 103515 (2022), 2201.00560

    work page arXiv 2022

  69. [69]

    Z. Zhao, Y . Di, L. Bian, and R.-G. Cai, JHEP 10, 158 (2023), 2204.04427

    work page arXiv 2023

  70. [70]

    Sagunski, P

    L. Sagunski, P. Schicho, and D. Schmitt, Phys. Rev. D 107, 123512 (2023), 2303.02450

    work page arXiv 2023

  71. [71]

    Ahriche, S

    A. Ahriche, S. Kanemura, and M. Tanaka, JHEP 01, 201 (2024), 2308.12676

    work page arXiv 2024

  72. [72]

    P. H. Ghorbani (2024), 2408.16475

    work page arXiv 2024

  73. [73]

    Chiral phase boundary of QCD at finite temperature

    J. Braun and H. Gies, JHEP 06, 024 (2006), hep-ph/0602226

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  74. [74]

    R. D. Pisarski and F. Wilczek, Phys. Rev. D 29, 338 (1984)

    work page 1984

  75. [75]

    Guan and S

    Y . Guan and S. Matsuzaki (2024), 2405.03265

    work page arXiv 2024

  76. [76]

    Ellis, M

    J. Ellis, M. Lewicki, and J. M. No, JCAP 04, 003 (2019), 1809.08242

    work page arXiv 2019

  77. [77]

    M. S. Turner, E. J. Weinberg, and L. M. Widrow, Phys. Rev. D 46, 2384 (1992)

    work page 1992

  78. [78]

    D. H. Lyth and E. D. Stewart, Phys. Rev. D 53, 1784 (1996), hep-ph/9510204

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  79. [79]

    Dutra and Y

    M. Dutra and Y . Wu, Phys. Dark Univ. 40, 101198 (2023), 2111.15665

    work page arXiv 2023

  80. [80]

    J. R. Espinosa, T. Konstandin, J. M. No, and G. Servant, JCAP 06, 028 (2010), 1004.4187

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

Showing first 80 references.