Domain walls in Nelson-Barr axion model

Kai Murai; Kazunori Nakayama

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Domain walls in Nelson-Barr axion model

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read A concrete Nelson-Barr model claims that the QCD-induced potential itself collapses the domain walls, dynamically selecting the CP-conserving vacuum; depending on the cutoff scale the same mechanism predicts all dark matter or the…

desk verdict A concrete Nelson-Barr UV completion where the QCD potential both masses the axion and biases the walls is genuinely new; the main quantitative gap is using an average bias when the slowest walls feel a much smaller one. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.19456 v1 pith:ADDL6EPX submitted 2024-12-27 hep-ph astro-ph.CO

Kai Murai , Kazunori Nakayama This is my paper · ORCID

classification hep-phastro-ph.CO

keywords strongCPproblemNelson-BarrmechanismspontaneousviolationdomainwallsaxiondarkmattergravitationalwavespulsartimingarraysQCD

topics Dark Matter The Strong CP Problem

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper builds a concrete Nelson-Barr model for the strong CP problem in which the small symmetry-breaking parameter is realized as the ratio of the vacuum expectation value of a complex scalar to the cutoff scale. The phase of this scalar, called the Nelson-Barr axion, receives both a tree-level potential from the discrete $Z_{4n}$ symmetry and a QCD instanton-induced potential, and both are minimized at the CP-conserving point. The paper argues that the QCD-induced potential acts as a bias that collapses the domain walls formed when the discrete symmetry breaks, so the universe dynamically ends up in the CP-conserving vacuum rather than relying on a $1/(4n)$ chance. For a cutoff near the Planck scale the collapse can produce all dark matter as Nelson-Barr axions; for a cutoff near $5\times 10^{11}$ GeV it produces a gravitational wave background peaking in the nHz band, matching the recent pulsar-timing-array signal. Because the wall bias comes from the same QCD potential that gives the axion mass, the construction does not require an extra source that would spoil the Nelson-Barr solution.

What carries the argument

The central object is the Nelson-Barr axion, the phase of the complex scalar whose vacuum expectation value spontaneously breaks the approximate $Z_{4n}$ symmetry. Its total potential is the sum of a tree-level term periodic in $4n a/f_a$ and a QCD instanton-induced term periodic in $k a/f_a$; the QCD term supplies the bias $\Delta V_j$ between neighboring domain walls. The dynamics is controlled by comparing the wall tension $\sigma$ with this pressure: the network collapses when $\rho_{\rm wall} \sim A\sigma/t_{\rm dec} \sim \langle \Delta V\rangle$, and that collapse temperature determines both the axion dark matter yield and the gravitational wave peak frequency. The essential feature is that the same QCD coupling that gives the axion mass also provides the wall bias, so no separately tuned bias potential is needed.

What would settle it

Compute the energy splitting between the degenerate vacua $a_j$ and $a_{4n-j}$ including all $S$-dependent operators and check whether walls separating them collapse before dominating the universe; if they survive, the model cannot dynamically reach the CP-conserving vacuum. Improved limits on $\bar{\theta}_s$ and CKM unitarity would also probe the gravitational wave branch directly.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that in a concrete realization of the modified BBP model with a complex scalar $\varphi$ carrying a $Z_{4n}$ charge, the phase $a \equiv f_a \theta_{\varphi}$ is a light Nelson-Barr axion whose total potential is $V_a = \chi(T)(1-\cos(k a/f_a)) + (m_a^2 f_a^2/(16 n^2))(1-\cos(4n a/f_a))$. The tree-level $Z_{4n}$ term produces the $4n$ vacua and the associated string-wall network, while the QCD-induced term is a potential bias that makes the CP-conserving vacuum $a=0$ the unique lowest-energy state when $k$ and $4n$ are coprime. The paper derives the collapse temperature $T_{\rm dec}$ by balancing the wall tension against this QCD pressure and then evaluates the axion and gravitational wave yields from the collapse. Depending on the cutoff scale, the collapse can account for the observed dark matter abundance as Nelson-Barr axions, or it can generate a gravitational wave background whose peak falls in the nHz band and matches the 15-year pulsar timing array data. The strong CP angle stays protected because the quark mass matrix has real determinant at tree level and the QCD potential, even when subdominant, still selects the CP-conserving minimum.

Load-bearing premise

The argument assumes that the exact degeneracy between the vacua $a_j$ and $a_{4n-j}$ does not leave behind a stable CP-odd wall network; the paper states this degeneracy is 'irrelevant in our cosmological scenario' without a quantitative analysis.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

For a cutoff near the Planck scale, with $k=1$ and $n=3,4,5$, axions emitted in the domain wall collapse can account for all of the observed dark matter.
For a cutoff near $5\times 10^{11}$ GeV, with $n=2$ and $k=1$, the gravitational wave background from the collapse peaks in the nHz band and fits the pulsar timing array signal.
The QCD potential dynamically selects the CP-conserving vacuum $a=0$, so the strong CP problem is solved without relying on the $1/(4n)$ initial probability.
The Nelson-Barr axion can be heavier than the conventional QCD axion band, making it accessible to axion searches in parameter regions not covered by QCD axion models.
In the gravitational wave branch the emitted axions decay on timescales shorter than $10^{-4}$ seconds, avoiding overproduction while still generating the signal.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The paper leaves implicit that choosing $k$ and $4n$ to be coprime is essential; scanning $n$ and $k$ would produce a family of gravitational wave spectra that future pulsar timing array upper limits could test.
A quantitative study of the $\epsilon^2$-suppressed $S$-dependent operators is needed to confirm that the degenerate pairs of vacua $a_j$ and $a_{4n-j}$ really collapse; this is the model's most delicate point.
The same QCD bias that collapses the walls also contributes to the axion mass, so a future measurement of the axion mass would fix the wall tension and sharpen the gravitational wave prediction.
This construction suggests a general route for spontaneous CP violation: if CP is broken by a discrete symmetry and the phase couples to QCD, the QCD potential can serve as a natural bias, linking strong CP solutions to nHz gravitational wave searches.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Dear Colleague,

The paper you asked about is a serious piece of work. The genuinely new thing is the concrete UV completion of the modified BBP model where the approximate Z4n symmetry is realized as the spontaneous breaking of a discrete symmetry by a complex scalar, and the phase of that scalar is the Nelson-Barr axion. The QCD instanton potential then does double duty: it gives the axion a mass and it biases the domain walls so the string-wall network collapses to the CP-conserving vacuum. That is a neat trick, because in most axion models an extra bias potential spoils the strong-CP solution; here the bias is the very same QCD potential, so the quality of the Nelson-Barr mechanism is preserved. The cosmology is worked out in a standard and transparent way: wall tension, collapse temperature, dark matter abundance, and gravitational wave spectra all follow from stated inputs, and the figures map out the parameter regions cleanly. For Λ near the Planck scale you get all of dark matter as Nelson-Barr axions; for Λ around 5e11 GeV the collapse produces nHz gravitational waves that overlap the NANOGrav band. The overlap is an allowed-region band, not a sharp prediction, but that is stated honestly.

I agree with the conditional verdict, but not for the reason the reader emphasized. The CP-conjugate degeneracy between a_j and a_{4n-j} is indeed irrelevant, because those vacua are not adjacent; every physical domain wall separates neighboring minima, so each wall feels a nonzero QCD pressure, and the unique lowest-energy vacuum is a=0. The real soft spot is that the collapse condition uses the typical bias <ΔV> = kχ/n. The actual bias per wall varies, and the walls closest to a=0, which are the last to disappear, feel a bias suppressed by roughly k^2 π^2/(8n^2). For n=5, k=1 that is a factor ~4; for larger n the suppression grows like ~n. If the final stage of collapse is controlled by the smallest bias, T_dec is lower than Eq. (21), and the dark-matter and gravitational-wave amplitudes shift accordingly. The O(1) parameters (A, epsilon_tilde, epsilon_GW) are also set to unity, and the paper does not propagate their uncertainty. These are order-one effects, not a fatal flaw, but they make the quantitative predictions fuzzier than the figures suggest.

The paper shows clear thinking, the derivations are consistent, and the self-citation to the earlier modified BBP paper is appropriate because this is the model being made concrete. I would bring it to the reading group and would cite it if I worked on Nelson-Barr models or axion domain walls. It deserves a serious referee: a good referee should dig into the bias-distribution issue and ask for a quantitative estimate of how the smallest per-wall bias modifies T_dec, ρ_dec, and Ω_GW. My recommendation is to send it to peer review.

Best,

[Your name]

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. This paper constructs a concrete UV completion of the modified Bento-Branco-Parada Nelson-Barr model by introducing a complex scalar φ with a Z_{4n} symmetry whose phase is the 'Nelson-Barr axion' a. The scalar potential has 4n degenerate CP-symmetric minima, and the QCD-induced potential V_QCD = χ(T)[1−cos(k a/f_a)] is added; both potentials are minimized at the CP-conserving point a=0. The paper studies the cosmology of the resulting string-wall network, arguing that the QCD potential acts as a bias that collapses the walls and dynamically selects a=0. It then computes the collapse temperature, the axion dark matter abundance from wall decay, and the gravitational wave spectrum, finding that a Planck-scale cutoff can produce all dark matter while Λ ≈ 5×10^11 GeV gives a GW peak in the NANOGrav band.

Significance. The main conceptual contribution is that the QCD potential plays a double role—providing the axion mass and providing the domain-wall bias—without introducing a separate explicit bias that would spoil the Nelson-Barr solution to the strong CP problem. This is an attractive and relatively novel feature. The analytic formulas in Secs. 2 and 3 are transparent and reproducible, and the model yields falsifiable predictions for (m_a0, g_{aγγ}) and for the GW spectrum, with the NANOGrav-compatible region lying close to existing constraints. The central caveat is that the quantitative collapse calculation relies on treating the multi-wall bias distribution through a single average value and on setting several O(1) parameters to unity, so the numerical predictions carry larger uncertainties than the presentation suggests.

major comments (3)

[§3, Footnote 6] The collapse criterion in Eq. (19) uses the average bias ⟨ΔV⟩ = kχ(T)/n, but Eq. (18) shows that the bias ΔV_j varies substantially from wall to wall. For the examples considered, the smallest nonzero bias is ΔV_min ≈ χ(T)[1−cos(kπ/(2n))] ≈ χ(T) k²π²/(8n²), which is smaller than ⟨ΔV⟩ by a factor ≈ 8n/(kπ²) (about 4 for n=5, k=1). Since the last walls to disappear control the collapse time, the use of the average bias may overestimate T_dec. Replacing ⟨ΔV⟩ by ΔV_min changes T_dec by a factor √(8n/(kπ²)) for T_dec<T_QCD and correspondingly shifts ρ_dec/s and Ω_GW through Eqs. (28) and (34). For the high-temperature all-DM case the shift is mild because T_dec ∝ ΔV^{1/(2+p)}, but for the n=2 GW case with T_dec<T_QCD the shift is O(1) and directly affects the NANOGrav comparison in Fig. 4. The authors should either use the minimum bias or provide a network-level argument—analytic or from simulations of 4n-wall networks with staggered bias—that the global collapse is governed by the average. Footnote 6 does not address this distribution effect.
[§3, Footnote 6] The treatment of the CP-conjugate minima a_j and a_{4n−j} is not sufficient. The statement that these degenerate minima are 'separated by the S domain wall' and therefore 'irrelevant in our cosmological scenario' needs a quantitative justification: the cosmological setup assumes the S field remains in a single vacuum (Footnote 5), so the a-network alone must be shown to reach a=0. Although no fundamental wall between adjacent a-vacua has exactly zero bias when gcd(k,4n)=1, a staged collapse could bring two CP-conjugate vacua into contact and leave a zero- or small-bias composite wall attached to strings. The manuscript should clarify the topology of such remnant walls and estimate their lifetime, or show explicitly that they cannot survive until the quoted collapse time.
[§3.1–3.2] The O(1) parameters A, \tilde{ϵ}, and ϵ_GW are introduced and then set to unity without propagating their plausible ranges. These parameters enter directly in the collapse condition, the emitted axion energy, and the GW amplitude; for example, ϵ_GW appears linearly in Ω_GW, and A appears in the collapse time. The central quantitative claims—the all-DM circles in Fig. 3 and the NANOGrav band in Fig. 4—depend on these choices. The authors should show how the predictions shift when A, \tilde{ϵ}, and ϵ_GW vary over the ranges suggested by simulations of multi-wall networks, so the reader can assess the robustness of the NANOGrav overlap and of the all-DM parameter region.

minor comments (4)

[§3, Footnotes 5 and 6] Footnote 5 states that S domain walls do not appear, while Footnote 6 invokes the S domain wall to separate degenerate a-minima. Please reconcile these two statements explicitly.
[§3.1, Eq. (25)] After Eq. (25) the text refers to '\tilde{ϵ}a' where the parameter \tilde{ϵ} is meant; please fix this typo and define the notation consistently.
[§3.3] The sentence that at the colored circles 'the contribution of V_QCD to the axion mass is not dominant' should be quantified. At the n=5 all-DM circle the tree-level and QCD contributions are comparable, so the statement is not immediately obvious and could affect the temperature dependence of the axion mass in the abundance estimate.
[§3.3, Figs. 3 and 5] It would be helpful to state explicitly whether the axion is cosmologically stable in the all-DM parameter region of Fig. 3, since in the NANOGrav region of Fig. 5 the axion decays on timescales much shorter than the Hubble time at collapse.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the domain-wall bias, axion abundance, and gravitational-wave spectrum are derived from the model and standard cosmology, with NANOGrav used only for comparison.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. The bias potential V_QCD = chi(T)(1 - cos(k a/fa)) follows from the phi-quark couplings in Eq. (7), and the total potential in Eq. (15) combines it with the tree-level Z_{4n} term; neither term is defined in terms of the cosmological outputs. The collapse condition (19) and T_dec (21) follow from the scaling-regime estimate rho_wall ~ A*sigma/t and H = 1/(2t) in a radiation-dominated universe, with A, epsilon_GW, epsilon_tilde, and gamma_phi declared O(1) inputs rather than fitted constants. The DM abundance (28) and GW spectrum (33)-(34) are obtained by integrating axion/GW emission over the standard cosmological history; the observed DM density and NANOGrav data appear only as comparison values (rho_dec/s = 0.44 eV; Fig. 4), not as inputs to the formulas. The use of the same authors' earlier model [48] for the bare Nelson-Barr construction and its quality constraints is a normal citation of a separate published derivation and does not smuggle in the present conclusions: the domain-wall collapse mechanism, the Nelson-Barr axion mass relation, and the DM/GW predictions are derived here from the Lagrangian and standard cosmology. The caveat that the bias varies among wall types (Eq. 18 vs. the average <Delta V> = k*chi/n) and the footnote 6 degeneracy remark are quantitative robustness concerns about whether collapse is as fast as claimed, but they do not make any derived quantity equal to an input by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central cosmological predictions rest on the QCD susceptibility inputs, the scaling-regime wall dynamics, the radiation-domination assumption, and the specific vacuum structure of the model. The main unquantified coefficients are A, \tilde{ϵ}, and ϵ_GW, each assumed O(1).

free parameters (7)

gamma_phi = 0.1 (chosen in figures)
Controls the tree-level axion mass m_a and hence the wall tension σ; the value 0.1 is an arbitrary O(1) choice, and the results scale as sqrt(γ_φ).
n (order of Z4n) = 2, 3, 4, 5 in figures
Number of degenerate minima of the tree-level potential; controls the number of walls, the bias and the abundance formulas; chosen for illustration.
k (QCD cosine index) = 1
Integer coupling of the axion to the heavy quark mass operator; required to be coprime to 4n; set to 1 throughout the numerical examples.
Lambda (cutoff) = M_Pl and 5×10^11 GeV
Determines the allowed ϵ range and hence the domain wall tension σ; the two values are chosen to illustrate the dark matter and gravitational wave regimes.
tilde_epsilon (mean axion energy factor) = 1
O(1) parameter in Eq. (25) relating the average energy of emitted axions to m_a; assumed constant; directly scales the dark matter abundance ρ_dec/s.
epsilon_GW = 1
Gravitational wave emission efficiency in Eq. (32); assumed O(1); directly scales Ω_GW.
A (area parameter) = 1
Number of domain walls per Hubble volume in the collapse condition Eq. (19); noted to evolve and depend on initial conditions, but set to 1.

assumptions (6)

domain assumption The QCD topological susceptibility follows Eq. (14) with chi0=(75.6 MeV)^4, T_QCD=153 MeV, p=8.16.
Used in the axion mass and in the bias potential; values taken from lattice QCD [63].
domain assumption A string-wall network with 4n walls per string reaches the scaling regime with rho_wall ~ sigma H and decays when the pressure exceeds sigma/t with area parameter A=O(1).
Basis for Eqs. (17)-(20); taken from simulations in Refs. [69,70,71], with A set to 1.
domain assumption The universe is radiation-dominated over the epochs considered.
Assumed at the start of Sec. 3; used to convert H to T via the Friedmann equation.
domain assumption The Z4n symmetry is restored after inflation and then spontaneously broken, while the Z4 (S) symmetry stays broken so no S domain walls appear.
Sets the cosmological initial condition for wall formation; stated in Sec. 3 and footnote 5.
domain assumption The QCD-induced potential is exactly chi(T)(1 - cos(k a/f_a)) with unit coefficient and no additional phase from the S field.
Used in Eqs. (13)-(15); follows from the mass matrix determinant arg det = -k theta_phi, but O(1) coefficients are not derived.
ad hoc to paper The CP-conjugate vacuum degeneracy between a_j and a_{4n-j} is irrelevant for the collapse because the degenerate minima are separated by the S domain wall.
Footnote 6 asserts this without quantitative analysis; the full collapse to a=0 depends on it.

invented entities (1)

Complex scalar phi with Z4n charge and its phase, the Nelson-Barr axion independent evidence
purpose: Spontaneously breaks Z4n to generate the small parameter epsilon = v_phi/Lambda and provides a light axion-like phase with a QCD-induced potential.
The phase has calculable mass and axion-photon coupling (Eq. 37) and produces dark matter and gravitational wave signals, giving falsifiable handles outside the paper.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Domain walls in Nelson-Barr axion model." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ADDL6EPX

@misc{pith2026241219456,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Domain walls in Nelson-Barr axion model},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ADDL6EPX}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.19456}
}

read the original abstract

We explore a concrete realization of a Nelson-Barr model addressing the strong CP problem with suppressed unfavorable corrections. This model has a scalar field that spontaneously breaks discrete symmetry, and its phase component can naturally be relatively light, which we call the Nelson-Barr axion. It has both a tree-level potential and the QCD instanton-induced potential like the QCD axion, each minimizing at the CP-conserving point. While one potential leads to domain wall formation, the other works as a potential bias. This model provides a natural setup for the collapse of the axion domain walls by a potential bias without spoiling a solution to the strong CP problem. We discuss the cosmological implications of domain wall collapses, including dark matter production and gravitational wave emission.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.19456 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** For example, when Λ = MPl and k = 1, the constraint on ϵ is given by 4.8 × 10−8 ≲ ϵ ≲ 1.8 × 10−4 . (12) 2.2.2 Appearance of Nelson-Barr axion In our model we have a complex scalar ϕ that couples to quarks. Thus its angular component obtains mass from the QCD effect. As a canonical degree of freedom, we define a ≡ faθϕ. Then, non-perturbative effects of the QCD induce a potential of VQCD = χ(T) 1 − cos k a fa … view at source ↗

**Figure 1.** Favored range of ϵ depending on Λ and k. The blue and red lines denote the lower and upper limits on ϵ, respectively. The solid, dashed, and dotted lines correspond to k = 1, 2, and 3, respectively. In the colored regions, ϵ does not satisfy the condition for k = 1. The horizontal gray line denotes Λ = MPl. we do not need to impose the CP symmetry to solve the strong CP problem. However, in our model, the strong CP … view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Dependence of Tdec, ρdec/s, fpeak,0, and Ωpeak GW,0 on σ. The red-solid, green-dashed, blue-dotted, and purple-dot-dashed lines correspond to n = 2, 3, 4, and 5, respectively. The horizontal gray lines denote Tdec = TQCD, Tdec = 10 MeV, and ρdec/s = 0.44 eV from top to bottom. The bottom plot shows the allowed region for σ under the limit on ϵ in Eq. (11). We use Λ = MPl and Λ = 5 × 1011 GeV for the lighter and dark… view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (3 more)

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: Mass and photon coupling of the axion for Λ = [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_3.png]

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Current power spectrum of the gravitational waves from the domain wall collapse. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_4.png]

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: In other words, future improvements of these observables may verify or falsify this [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

The absence of global anomalies of CP symmetry
hep-ph 2026-02 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

Gauged CP symmetry in four dimensions introduces no new global anomalies for connected, simply-connected gauge groups; the standard model matter content is anomaly-free under a gauged CP.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

79 extracted references · 23 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[1]

Axions and the Strong CP Problem,

J. E. Kim and G. Carosi, “Axions and the Strong CP Problem,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 82 (2010) 557–602, arXiv:0807.3125 [hep-ph]. [Erratum: Rev.Mod.Phys. 91, 049902 (2019)]

arXiv 2010
[2]

TASI Lectures on the Strong CP Problem and Axions,

A. Hook, “TASI Lectures on the Strong CP Problem and Axions,” PoS TASI2018 (2019) 004, arXiv:1812.02669 [hep-ph]

arXiv 2019
[3]

Measurement of the Permanent Electric Dipole Moment of the Neutron,

C. Abel et al. , “Measurement of the Permanent Electric Dipole Moment of the Neutron,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 124 no. 8, (2020) 081803, arXiv:2001.11966 [hep-ex]

arXiv 2020
[4]

INSTANTONS AND THE mu QUARK MASS,

H. Georgi and I. N. McArthur, “INSTANTONS AND THE mu QUARK MASS,”

work page
[5]

Current Mass Ratios of the Light Quarks,

D. B. Kaplan and A. V. Manohar, “Current Mass Ratios of the Light Quarks,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 56 (1986) 2004

work page 1986
[6]

Mass Renormalization by Instantons and the Strong CP Problem,

K. Choi, C. W. Kim, and W. K. Sze, “Mass Renormalization by Instantons and the Strong CP Problem,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 61 (1988) 794

work page 1988
[7]

Missing (up) mass, accidental anomalous symmetries, and the strong CP problem,

T. Banks, Y. Nir, and N. Seiberg, “Missing (up) mass, accidental anomalous symmetries, and the strong CP problem,” in 2nd IFT Workshop on Yukawa Couplings and the Origins of Mass , pp. 26–41. 2, 1994. arXiv:hep-ph/9403203

arXiv 1994
[8]

Up and down quark masses and corrections to Dashen’s theorem from lattice QCD and quenched QED,

Z. Fodor, C. Hoelbling, S. Krieg, L. Lellouch, T. Lippert, A. Portelli, A. Sastre, K. K. Szabo, and L. Varnhorst, “Up and down quark masses and corrections to Dashen’s theorem from lattice QCD and quenched QED,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 117 no. 8, (2016) 082001, arXiv:1604.07112 [hep-lat]

arXiv 2016

Show all 79 references

[9]

Ruling Out the Massless Up-Quark Solution to the Strong CPCPCP Problem by Computing the Topological Mass Contribution with Lattice QCD,

C. Alexandrou, J. Finkenrath, L. Funcke, K. Jansen, B. Kostrzewa, F. Pittler, and C. Urbach, “Ruling Out the Massless Up-Quark Solution to the Strong CPCPCP Problem by Computing the Topological Mass Contribution with Lattice QCD,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 125 no. 23, (2020) 232001, ar...

2020 arXiv
[10]

FLAG Review 2021,

Flavour Lattice Averaging Group (FLAG) Collaboration, Y. Aoki et al., “FLAG Review 2021,” Eur. Phys. J. C 82 no. 10, (2022) 869, arXiv:2111.09849 [hep-lat]

2022 arXiv
[11]

CP Conservation in the Presence of Instantons,

R. D. Peccei and H. R. Quinn, “CP Conservation in the Presence of Instantons,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 38 (1977) 1440–1443. 18

1977
[12]

Constraints Imposed by CP Conservation in the Presence of Instantons,

R. D. Peccei and H. R. Quinn, “Constraints Imposed by CP Conservation in the Presence of Instantons,” Phys. Rev. D 16 (1977) 1791–1797

1977
[13]

A New Light Boson?,

S. Weinberg, “A New Light Boson?,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 40 (1978) 223–226

1978
[14]

Problem of Strong P and T Invariance in the Presence of Instantons,

F. Wilczek, “Problem of Strong P and T Invariance in the Presence of Instantons,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 40 (1978) 279–282

1978
[15]

Strong P, T Noninvariances in a Superweak Theory,

M. A. B. Beg and H. S. Tsao, “Strong P, T Noninvariances in a Superweak Theory,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 41 (1978) 278

1978
[16]

Natural Suppression of Strong p and t Noninvariance,

R. N. Mohapatra and G. Senjanovic, “Natural Suppression of Strong p and t Noninvariance,” Phys. Lett. B 79 (1978) 283–286

1978
[17]

A Solution to the Strong CP Problem Without an Axion,

K. S. Babu and R. N. Mohapatra, “A Solution to the Strong CP Problem Without an Axion,” Phys. Rev. D 41 (1990) 1286

1990
[18]

Strong CP problem and parity,

S. M. Barr, D. Chang, and G. Senjanovic, “Strong CP problem and parity,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 67 (1991) 2765–2768

1991
[19]

A Model of Soft CP Violation,

H. Georgi, “A Model of Soft CP Violation,” Hadronic J. 1 (1978) 155

1978
[20]

Natural Suppression of Strong P and T Violations and Calculable Mixing Angles in SU(2) X U(1),

G. Segre and H. A. Weldon, “Natural Suppression of Strong P and T Violations and Calculable Mixing Angles in SU(2) X U(1),” Phys. Rev. Lett. 42 (1979) 1191

1979
[21]

A Superweak Gauge Theory of CP Violation,

S. M. Barr and P. Langacker, “A Superweak Gauge Theory of CP Violation,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 42 (1979) 1654

1979
[22]

Naturally Weak CP Violation,

A. E. Nelson, “Naturally Weak CP Violation,” Phys. Lett. B 136 (1984) 387–391

1984
[23]

Solving the Strong CP Problem Without the Peccei-Quinn Symmetry,

S. M. Barr, “Solving the Strong CP Problem Without the Peccei-Quinn Symmetry,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 53 (1984) 329

1984
[24]

A Minimal model with natural suppression of strong CP violation,

L. Bento, G. C. Branco, and P. A. Parada, “A Minimal model with natural suppression of strong CP violation,” Phys. Lett. B 267 (1991) 95–99

1991
[25]

Spontaneous CP violation and the strong CP problem,

L. Vecchi, “Spontaneous CP violation and the strong CP problem,” JHEP 04 (2017) 149, arXiv:1412.3805 [hep-ph]

2017 arXiv
[26]

Challenges for the Nelson-Barr Mechanism,

M. Dine and P. Draper, “Challenges for the Nelson-Barr Mechanism,” JHEP 08 (2015) 132, arXiv:1506.05433 [hep-ph]

2015 arXiv
[27]

Nelson-Barr relaxion,

O. Davidi, R. S. Gupta, G. Perez, D. Redigolo, and A. Shalit, “Nelson-Barr relaxion,” Phys. Rev. D 99 no. 3, (2019) 035014, arXiv:1711.00858 [hep-ph]

2019 arXiv
[28]

A grand-unified Nelson–Barr model,

J. Schwichtenberg, P. Tremper, and R. Ziegler, “A grand-unified Nelson–Barr model,” Eur. Phys. J. C 78 no. 11, (2018) 910, arXiv:1802.08109 [hep-ph]. 19

2018 arXiv
[29]

Solving the strong CP problem with non-conventional CP,

A. L. Cherchiglia and C. C. Nishi, “Solving the strong CP problem with non-conventional CP,” JHEP 03 (2019) 040, arXiv:1901.02024 [hep-ph]

2019 arXiv
[30]

Complete solution to the strong CP problem: Supersymmetric extension of the Nelson-Barr model,

J. Evans, C. Han, T. T. Yanagida, and N. Yokozaki, “Complete solution to the strong CP problem: Supersymmetric extension of the Nelson-Barr model,” Phys. Rev. D 103 no. 11, (2021) L111701, arXiv:2002.04204 [hep-ph]

2021 arXiv
[31]

Consequences of vector-like quarks of Nelson-Barr type,

A. L. Cherchiglia and C. C. Nishi, “Consequences of vector-like quarks of Nelson-Barr type,” JHEP 08 (2020) 104, arXiv:2004.11318 [hep-ph]

2020 arXiv
[32]

High quality Nelson-Barr solution to the strong CP problem with θ = π,

G. Perez and A. Shalit, “High quality Nelson-Barr solution to the strong CP problem with θ = π,” JHEP 02 (2021) 118, arXiv:2010.02891 [hep-ph]

2021 arXiv
[33]

Flavor constraints for a vector-like quark of Nelson-Barr type,

A. L. Cherchiglia, G. De Conto, and C. C. Nishi, “Flavor constraints for a vector-like quark of Nelson-Barr type,” JHEP 11 (2021) 093, arXiv:2103.04798 [hep-ph]

2021 arXiv
[34]

The CKM phase and θ in Nelson-Barr models,

A. Valenti and L. Vecchi, “The CKM phase and θ in Nelson-Barr models,” JHEP 07 no. 203, (2021) 203, arXiv:2105.09122 [hep-ph]

2021 arXiv
[35]

Super-soft CP violation,

A. Valenti and L. Vecchi, “Super-soft CP violation,” JHEP 07 no. 152, (2021) 152, arXiv:2106.09108 [hep-ph]

2021 arXiv
[36]

Baryon asymmetric Universe from spontaneous CP violation,

K. Fujikura, Y. Nakai, R. Sato, and M. Yamada, “Baryon asymmetric Universe from spontaneous CP violation,” JHEP 04 (2022) 105, arXiv:2202.08278 [hep-ph]

2022 arXiv
[37]

A natural model of spontaneous CP violation,

S. Girmohanta, S. J. Lee, Y. Nakai, and M. Suzuki, “A natural model of spontaneous CP violation,” JHEP 12 (2022) 024, arXiv:2203.09002 [hep-ph]

2022 arXiv
[38]

Reflections on Parity Breaking,

J. McNamara and M. Reece, “Reflections on Parity Breaking,” arXiv:2212.00039 [hep-th]

arXiv
[39]

Chiral Nelson-Barr models: Quality and cosmology,

P. Asadi, S. Homiller, Q. Lu, and M. Reece, “Chiral Nelson-Barr models: Quality and cosmology,” Phys. Rev. D 107 no. 11, (2023) 115012, arXiv:2212.03882 [hep-ph]

2023 arXiv
[40]

Automatic Nelson-Barr solutions to the strong CP puzzle,

P. F. Perez, C. Murgui, and M. B. Wise, “Automatic Nelson-Barr solutions to the strong CP puzzle,” Phys. Rev. D 108 no. 1, (2023) 015010, arXiv:2302.06620 [hep-ph]

2023 arXiv
[41]

CP issues in the SM from a viewpoint of spontaneous CP violation,

D. Suematsu, “CP issues in the SM from a viewpoint of spontaneous CP violation,” Phys. Rev. D 108 no. 9, (2023) 095046, arXiv:2309.04783 [hep-ph]

2023 arXiv
[42]

Closer look at the matching condition for radiative QCD θ parameter,

T. Banno, J. Hisano, T. Kitahara, and N. Osamura, “Closer look at the matching condition for radiative QCD θ parameter,” JHEP 02 (2024) 195, arXiv:2311.07817 [hep-ph]

2024 arXiv
[43]

Nelson-Barr ultralight dark matter,

M. Dine, G. Perez, W. Ratzinger, and I. Savoray, “Nelson-Barr ultralight dark matter,” arXiv:2405.06744 [hep-ph]. 20

arXiv
[44]

Reducing Complex Phases and other Subtleties of CP Violation,

J. F. Bastos and J. I. Silva-Marcos, “Reducing Complex Phases and other Subtleties of CP Violation,” arXiv:2407.07158 [hep-ph]

arXiv
[45]

Towards a complete theory of thermal leptogenesis in the SM and MSSM,

G. F. Giudice, A. Notari, M. Raidal, A. Riotto, and A. Strumia, “Towards a complete theory of thermal leptogenesis in the SM and MSSM,” Nucl. Phys. B 685 (2004) 89–149, arXiv:hep-ph/0310123

2004 arXiv
[46]

Leptogenesis for pedestrians,

W. Buchmuller, P. Di Bari, and M. Plumacher, “Leptogenesis for pedestrians,” Annals Phys. 315 (2005) 305–351, arXiv:hep-ph/0401240

2005 arXiv
[47]

Baryogenesis Without Grand Unification,

M. Fukugita and T. Yanagida, “Baryogenesis Without Grand Unification,” Phys. Lett. B 174 (1986) 45–47

1986
[48]

Revisiting the minimal Nelson-Barr model,

K. Murai and K. Nakayama, “Revisiting the minimal Nelson-Barr model,” JHEP 11 (2024) 098, arXiv:2407.16202 [hep-ph]

2024 arXiv
[49]

Cosmology and broken discrete symmetry,

J. Preskill, S. P. Trivedi, F. Wilczek, and M. B. Wise, “Cosmology and broken discrete symmetry,” Nucl. Phys. B 363 (1991) 207–220

1991
[50]

Dynamical supersymmetry breaking at low-energies,

M. Dine and A. E. Nelson, “Dynamical supersymmetry breaking at low-energies,” Phys. Rev. D 48 (1993) 1277–1287, arXiv:hep-ph/9303230

1993 arXiv
[51]

Low-Scale Leptogenesis and the Domain Wall Problem in Models with Discrete Flavor Symmetries,

F. Riva, “Low-Scale Leptogenesis and the Domain Wall Problem in Models with Discrete Flavor Symmetries,” Phys. Lett. B 690 (2010) 443–450, arXiv:1004.1177 [hep-ph]

2010 arXiv
[52]

Domain Walls and Gravitational Waves after Thermal Inflation,

T. Moroi and K. Nakayama, “Domain Walls and Gravitational Waves after Thermal Inflation,” Phys. Lett. B 703 (2011) 160–166, arXiv:1105.6216 [hep-ph]

2011 arXiv
[53]

NMSSM in gauge-mediated SUSY breaking without domain wall problem,

K. Hamaguchi, K. Nakayama, and N. Yokozaki, “NMSSM in gauge-mediated SUSY breaking without domain wall problem,” Phys. Lett. B 708 (2012) 100–106, arXiv:1107.4760 [hep-ph]

2012 arXiv
[54]

Quality of the Peccei-Quinn symmetry in the Aligned QCD Axion and Cosmological Implications,

T. Higaki, K. S. Jeong, N. Kitajima, and F. Takahashi, “Quality of the Peccei-Quinn symmetry in the Aligned QCD Axion and Cosmological Implications,” JHEP 06 (2016) 150, arXiv:1603.02090 [hep-ph]

2016 arXiv
[55]

Topological Defects and nano-Hz Gravitational Waves in Aligned Axion Models,

T. Higaki, K. S. Jeong, N. Kitajima, T. Sekiguchi, and F. Takahashi, “Topological Defects and nano-Hz Gravitational Waves in Aligned Axion Models,” JHEP 08 (2016) 044, arXiv:1606.05552 [hep-ph]

2016 arXiv
[56]

Anomalous Discrete Flavor Symmetry and Domain Wall Problem,

S. Chigusa and K. Nakayama, “Anomalous Discrete Flavor Symmetry and Domain Wall Problem,” Phys. Lett. B 788 (2019) 249–255, arXiv:1808.09601 [hep-ph]

2019 arXiv
[57]

Testing clockwork axion with gravitational waves,

C.-W. Chiang and B.-Q. Lu, “Testing clockwork axion with gravitational waves,” JCAP 05 (2021) 049, arXiv:2012.14071 [hep-ph]. 21

2021 arXiv
[58]

Gravitational waves from domain walls in Pulsar Timing Array datasets,

R. Z. Ferreira, A. Notari, O. Pujolas, and F. Rompineve, “Gravitational waves from domain walls in Pulsar Timing Array datasets,” JCAP 02 (2023) 001, arXiv:2204.04228 [astro-ph.CO]

2023 arXiv
[59]

Gravitational waves from domain wall collapse, and application to nanohertz signals with QCD-coupled axions,

N. Kitajima, J. Lee, K. Murai, F. Takahashi, and W. Yin, “Gravitational waves from domain wall collapse, and application to nanohertz signals with QCD-coupled axions,” Phys. Lett. B 851 (2024) 138586, arXiv:2306.17146 [hep-ph]

2024 arXiv
[60]

QCD-collapsed domain walls: QCD phase transition and gravitational wave spectroscopy,

Y. Bai, T.-K. Chen, and M. Korwar, “QCD-collapsed domain walls: QCD phase transition and gravitational wave spectroscopy,” JHEP 12 (2023) 194, arXiv:2306.17160 [hep-ph]

2023 arXiv
[61]

Axionic domain walls at Pulsar Timing Arrays: QCD bias and particle friction,

S. Blasi, A. Mariotti, A. Rase, and A. Sevrin, “Axionic domain walls at Pulsar Timing Arrays: QCD bias and particle friction,” JHEP 11 (2023) 169, arXiv:2306.17830 [hep-ph]

2023 arXiv
[62]

Hierarchy of Quark Masses, Cabibbo Angles and CP Violation,

C. D. Froggatt and H. B. Nielsen, “Hierarchy of Quark Masses, Cabibbo Angles and CP Violation,” Nucl. Phys. B 147 (1979) 277–298

1979
[63]

Calculation of the axion mass based on high-temperature lattice quantum chromodynamics,

S. Borsanyi et al., “Calculation of the axion mass based on high-temperature lattice quantum chromodynamics,” Nature 539 no. 7627, (2016) 69–71, arXiv:1606.07494 [hep-lat]

2016 arXiv
[64]

Trapping Effect for QCD Axion Dark Matter,

S. Nakagawa, F. Takahashi, and M. Yamada, “Trapping Effect for QCD Axion Dark Matter,” JCAP 05 (2021) 062, arXiv:2012.13592 [hep-ph]

2021 arXiv
[65]

Dark matter from an even lighter QCD axion: trapped misalignment,

L. Di Luzio, B. Gavela, P. Quilez, and A. Ringwald, “Dark matter from an even lighter QCD axion: trapped misalignment,” JCAP 10 (2021) 001, arXiv:2102.01082 [hep-ph]

2021 arXiv
[66]

Cosmological effects of Peccei-Quinn symmetry breaking on QCD axion dark matter,

K. S. Jeong, K. Matsukawa, S. Nakagawa, and F. Takahashi, “Cosmological effects of Peccei-Quinn symmetry breaking on QCD axion dark matter,” JCAP 03 no. 03, (2022) 026, arXiv:2201.00681 [hep-ph]

2022 arXiv
[67]

Axion dark matter from first-order phase transition, and very high energy photons from GRB 221009A,

S. Nakagawa, F. Takahashi, M. Yamada, and W. Yin, “Axion dark matter from first-order phase transition, and very high energy photons from GRB 221009A,” Phys. Lett. B 839 (2023) 137824, arXiv:2210.10022 [hep-ph]

2023 arXiv
[68]

Axion production via trapped misalignment from Peccei-Quinn symmetry breaking,

L. Di Luzio and P. Sørensen, “Axion production via trapped misalignment from Peccei-Quinn symmetry breaking,” JHEP 10 (2024) 239, arXiv:2408.04623 [hep-ph]

2024 arXiv
[69]

Axion cosmology with long-lived domain walls,

T. Hiramatsu, M. Kawasaki, K. Saikawa, and T. Sekiguchi, “Axion cosmology with long-lived domain walls,” JCAP 01 (2013) 001, arXiv:1207.3166 [hep-ph]. 22

2013 arXiv
[70]

On the estimation of gravitational wave spectrum from cosmic domain walls,

T. Hiramatsu, M. Kawasaki, and K. Saikawa, “On the estimation of gravitational wave spectrum from cosmic domain walls,” JCAP 02 (2014) 031, arXiv:1309.5001 [astro-ph.CO]

2014 arXiv
[71]

Stability of domain walls with inflationary fluctuations under potential bias, and gravitational wave signatures,

N. Kitajima, J. Lee, F. Takahashi, and W. Yin, “Stability of domain walls with inflationary fluctuations under potential bias, and gravitational wave signatures,” arXiv:2311.14590 [hep-ph]

arXiv
[72]

Axion dark matter from topological defects,

M. Kawasaki, K. Saikawa, and T. Sekiguchi, “Axion dark matter from topological defects,” Phys. Rev. D 91 no. 6, (2015) 065014, arXiv:1412.0789 [hep-ph]

2015 arXiv
[73]

Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters,

Planck Collaboration, N. Aghanim et al. , “Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters,” Astron. Astrophys. 641 (2020) A6, arXiv:1807.06209 [astro-ph.CO]. [Erratum: Astron.Astrophys. 652, C4 (2021)]

2020 arXiv
[74]

Review of particle physics,

Particle Data Group Collaboration, S. Navas et al. , “Review of particle physics,” Phys. Rev. D 110 no. 3, (2024) 030001

2024
[75]

The Temperature of the Cosmic Microwave Background,

D. J. Fixsen, “The Temperature of the Cosmic Microwave Background,” Astrophys. J. 707 (2009) 916–920, arXiv:0911.1955 [astro-ph.CO]

2009 arXiv
[76]

Primordial gravitational waves, precisely: The role of thermodynamics in the Standard Model,

K. Saikawa and S. Shirai, “Primordial gravitational waves, precisely: The role of thermodynamics in the Standard Model,” JCAP 05 (2018) 035, arXiv:1803.01038 [hep-ph]

2018 arXiv
[77]

cajohare/axionlimits: Axionlimits

C. O’Hare, “cajohare/axionlimits: Axionlimits.” https://cajohare.github.io/AxionLimits/, July, 2020

2020
[78]

The NANOGrav 15 yr Data Set: Evidence for a Gravitational-wave Background,

NANOGrav Collaboration, G. Agazie et al., “The NANOGrav 15 yr Data Set: Evidence for a Gravitational-wave Background,” Astrophys. J. Lett. 951 no. 1, (2023) L8, arXiv:2306.16213 [astro-ph.HE]

2023 arXiv
[79]

The strong coupling constant: state of the art and the decade ahead,

D. d’Enterria et al., “The strong coupling constant: state of the art and the decade ahead,” J. Phys. G 51 no. 9, (2024) 090501, arXiv:2203.08271 [hep-ph]. 23

2024 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Axions and the Strong CP Problem,

J. E. Kim and G. Carosi, “Axions and the Strong CP Problem,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 82 (2010) 557–602, arXiv:0807.3125 [hep-ph]. [Erratum: Rev.Mod.Phys. 91, 049902 (2019)]

arXiv 2010

[2] [2]

TASI Lectures on the Strong CP Problem and Axions,

A. Hook, “TASI Lectures on the Strong CP Problem and Axions,” PoS TASI2018 (2019) 004, arXiv:1812.02669 [hep-ph]

arXiv 2019

[3] [3]

Measurement of the Permanent Electric Dipole Moment of the Neutron,

C. Abel et al. , “Measurement of the Permanent Electric Dipole Moment of the Neutron,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 124 no. 8, (2020) 081803, arXiv:2001.11966 [hep-ex]

arXiv 2020

[4] [4]

INSTANTONS AND THE mu QUARK MASS,

H. Georgi and I. N. McArthur, “INSTANTONS AND THE mu QUARK MASS,”

work page

[5] [5]

Current Mass Ratios of the Light Quarks,

D. B. Kaplan and A. V. Manohar, “Current Mass Ratios of the Light Quarks,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 56 (1986) 2004

work page 1986

[6] [6]

Mass Renormalization by Instantons and the Strong CP Problem,

K. Choi, C. W. Kim, and W. K. Sze, “Mass Renormalization by Instantons and the Strong CP Problem,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 61 (1988) 794

work page 1988

[7] [7]

Missing (up) mass, accidental anomalous symmetries, and the strong CP problem,

T. Banks, Y. Nir, and N. Seiberg, “Missing (up) mass, accidental anomalous symmetries, and the strong CP problem,” in 2nd IFT Workshop on Yukawa Couplings and the Origins of Mass , pp. 26–41. 2, 1994. arXiv:hep-ph/9403203

arXiv 1994

[8] [8]

Up and down quark masses and corrections to Dashen’s theorem from lattice QCD and quenched QED,

Z. Fodor, C. Hoelbling, S. Krieg, L. Lellouch, T. Lippert, A. Portelli, A. Sastre, K. K. Szabo, and L. Varnhorst, “Up and down quark masses and corrections to Dashen’s theorem from lattice QCD and quenched QED,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 117 no. 8, (2016) 082001, arXiv:1604.07112 [hep-lat]

arXiv 2016