Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 39 references

Leptogenesis with triplet scalars at electroweak scale

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-08 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper argues that resonant leptogenesis from two near-degenerate electroweak-scale scalar triplets in an extended Georgi-Machacek model can produce the observed baryon asymmetry, with the lighter doubly charged scalar at 500 GeV and…

desk verdict Honest illustrative scan, but the missing |epsilon|max definition and unregulated CP asymmetry make Fig. 2 not reproducible; the abstract also oversells the VEV range. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.06729 v2 pith:RP72TERQ submitted 2025-02-10 hep-ph

Rituparna Ghosh , Biswarup Mukhopadhyaya , Utpal Sarkar This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-ph
keywords resonantleptogenesisGeorgi-MachacekmodelscalartripletsbaryonasymmetrydoublychargedscalarselectroweakscaleLHCsignaturesneutrinomass
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

The paper tries to establish that the observed baryon asymmetry of the universe, $\eta_B \approx 6.1\times 10^{-10}$, can be generated by leptogenesis at an energy scale low enough to be probed at the LHC. The specific mechanism is an extended Georgi-Machacek scalar sector---a doublet, a real triplet, and two complex triplets---whose near-degenerate doubly charged scalars generate a resonantly enhanced CP asymmetry. Decays of the lighter doubly charged state $H_2^{\pm\pm}$ at 500 GeV produce a lepton asymmetry that sphaleron processes convert into the baryon asymmetry. Scanning the couplings, the authors find that the observed asymmetry is obtained for triplet VEV $v_{\chi_2}$ between $10^{-6}$ and $10^{-2}$ GeV and trilinear coupling $\mu_2$ between $5\times 10^{-7}$ and $10^{-5}$ GeV once all decay channels are included, with only a small corner surviving the LHC same-sign dilepton search. A sympathetic reader would care because this would place the origin of cosmic matter within reach of a terrestrial collider instead of at scales of $10^{10}$ GeV or higher.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the resonant CP asymmetry generated by interference between the tree-level decay of $H_2^{\pm\pm}$ into $\ell^\pm\ell^\pm$ and the one-loop self-energy diagram in which $H_2^{\pm\pm}$ transitions to the near-degenerate $H_1^{\pm\pm}$ state. In potential parameters the asymmetry is written as $\epsilon = [|\mu_1||\mu_2|\sin(\alpha-\beta)\sum_k |y_{1kk}||y_2|]/[8\pi^2(m_2^2-m_1^2)] \times (m_2/\Gamma_2)$, and this single quantity decides, through the maximum value $|\epsilon|_{\rm max}$, whether a given $(\mu_2, v_{\chi_2})$ point can produce the observed baryon asymmetry. The second piece of machinery is the set of Boltzmann equations (11) that track the abundances of $H_2^{\pm\pm}$, the lepton asymmetry $\Delta_L$, and the singly charged scalar asymmetry $\Delta_{H_1}$, with sphaleron conversion fixing $\eta_B = -0.013\,\eta_L \approx 1.35\,\Delta_L$.

What would settle it

Compute the full one-loop CP asymmetry with finite-width propagators (or a resummed, density-matrix treatment) for $m_2 = 500$ GeV and $|m_1-m_2| \approx \Gamma_2/2$, and check whether $|\epsilon|$ can still reach the value needed, for example $1.8\times 10^{-7}$ for $|\mu_2|=1.2\times 10^{-6}$ GeV and $v_{\chi_2}=3.9\times 10^{-4}$ GeV. If the regulated asymmetry is smaller than this, the allowed regions in Fig. 2 disappear. Alternatively, a direct LHC search for a 500 GeV doubly charged scalar with a same-sign dilepton branching ratio above 10 percent would probe the surviving corner experimentally.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that resonant leptogenesis can be realized at the electroweak scale in a generalized Georgi-Machacek model with two complex scalar triplets. The mechanism is the CP-violating decay of the lighter doubly charged scalar $H_2^{\pm\pm}$, whose asymmetry is enhanced by its near-degeneracy with $H_1^{\pm\pm}$, allowing the decaying mass to be as low as 500 GeV. Using the CP asymmetry of Eq. (18) and the Boltzmann equations of Eq. (11), the authors identify the parameter regions that reproduce $\eta_B = 6.1\times 10^{-10}$; with all decay modes of $H_2^{\pm\pm}$ included, the viable region is $v_{\chi_2} \in [10^{-6}, 10^{-2}]$ GeV and $\mu_2 \in [5\times 10^{-7}, 10^{-5}]$ GeV (Fig. 2c). After imposing the LHC bound on same-sign dilepton decays of the doubly charged scalar, a small corner of this region survives (Fig. 2d), which the authors read as the scenario remaining collider-testable. The paper also constructs a corresponding allowed set of parameters $\mu_1$ and $v_{\chi_1}$ (Fig. 3) consistent with neutrino oscillation data at the $3\sigma$ level.

Load-bearing premise

The scan depends on the correctness of the resonant CP-asymmetry calculation in the near-degenerate mass limit: the asymmetry formula (18) has a bare $1/(m_2^2-m_1^2)$ denominator, the maximum allowed asymmetry $|\epsilon|_{\rm max}$ is never explicitly defined, and a finite-width treatment could make the allowed regions in Fig. 2 shrink or move.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Leptogenesis can be tested at colliders: the source of the baryon asymmetry is a 500 GeV doubly charged scalar that can be searched for at the LHC.
  • The triplet vacuum expectation value need not be as tiny as in minimal type-II seesaw leptogenesis; the extended Georgi-Machacek structure protects the $\rho$ parameter, allowing $v_{\chi_2}$ up to $10^{-2}$ GeV in the unconstrained scan.
  • The same couplings generate neutrino masses of order $10^{-2}$--$10^{-1}$ eV, linking the observed neutrino sector to the baryon asymmetry.
  • The LHC same-sign dilepton bound is a sharp probe: it excludes most of the low-triplet-VEV region and leaves only a small corner, so a stronger same-sign dilepton search would cover the remaining parameter space.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial inference: the abstract's statement that the triplet VEV lies in "a moderate range where it plays a nontrivial role in electroweak symmetry breaking" is stronger than what the figures show; the allowed $v_{\chi_2}$ values are at most $10^{-2}$ GeV, far below the 246 GeV doublet VEV, so the triplet's contribution to electroweak symmetry breaking is small even in the viable region.
  • Editorial inference: Eq. (18) has a bare $1/(m_2^2-m_1^2)$ denominator, while the scan explicitly operates in the resonant regime $|m_1-m_2| \le \Gamma_2/2$; a finite-width regulator would likely reduce $\epsilon$ and shrink the allowed regions, so the quoted parameter space should be read as an upper bound on the viable region.
  • Editorial inference: the same resonant-enhancement structure could be applied to other representations with two near-degenerate states in other extensions of the Standard Model, giving a generic recipe for low-scale leptogenesis, though the paper does not explore that generality.
  • Editorial inference: the conclusion notes that flavor constraints are not explicitly obtained, so a full flavor treatment could further reduce the allowed regions.
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.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies resonant leptogenesis in an extended Georgi-Machacek-type scalar sector containing two complex SU(2) triplet scalars, with the lighter doubly charged scalar H2±± at 500 GeV. The authors solve a system of Boltzmann equations for the number densities of the triplet and lepton asymmetries, adopt a CP asymmetry formula from the literature, and scan over the trilinear coupling µ2 and the triplet VEV vχ2 while imposing the observed baryon asymmetry, 3σ neutrino oscillation data, and LHC bounds on doubly charged scalars. The main quantitative result is an allowed region vχ2 ∈ [10^-6, 10^-2] GeV and µ2 ∈ [5×10^-7, 10^-5] GeV (Fig. 2c), with a small surviving corner after the LHC same-sign dilepton constraint (Fig. 2d). The paper also illustrates a benchmark solution with m2 = 500 GeV, |µ2| = 1.2×10^-6 GeV, vχ2 = 3.9×10^-4 GeV, and |ϵ| = 1.8×10^-7, and shows the corresponding allowed values of µ1 and vχ1 in Fig. 3b. The abstract claims that the triplet VEV can be at a 'moderate range' with a nontrivial role in electroweak symmetry breaking, but the results presented cap the leptogenesis-active vχ2 at 10^-2 GeV, several orders of magnitude below the electroweak scale.

Significance. If the quantitative results are correct, the paper would provide an interesting illustration that resonant leptogenesis from TeV-scale triplet scalars can be compatible with neutrino mass and current LHC constraints, with a conservative treatment of the collider bounds. The manuscript is honest in imposing the Planck BAU, neutrino oscillation fits, and the LHC doubly charged scalar search limit, and the Boltzmann-equation framework is taken from established literature. However, two load-bearing elements are not adequately specified: the maximum allowed CP asymmetry |ϵ|max used for acceptance is never defined, and the CP asymmetry formula in Eq. (18) contains a bare 1/(m2^2 - m1^2) denominator in the resonant regime, where a finite-width regulator is generally required. These issues make the boundaries in Fig. 2 and the inferred parameter pairs in Fig. 3b unverifiable as they stand. The abstract's 'moderate VEV' claim is also not supported by the paper's own figures. With a defined |ϵ|max, a regulated asymmetry formula, and a corrected abstract, the work could be a useful phenomenological study; at present the central quantitative claim needs substantial revision.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. IV (after Eq. (14))] The acceptance criterion for the scan uses a quantity called |ϵ|max, but this quantity is never defined. The text states 'we first obtain the maximum allowed value for |ϵ| which we denote as |ϵ|max' and then discards parameter points if the resulting baryon asymmetry is too small. Since the boundaries of Figs. 2c and 2d depend directly on this quantity, the scan is not reproducible without an explicit definition. Please specify the formula or physical origin of |ϵ|max, including any dependence on µ2, vχ2, Yukawa couplings, or decay widths.
  2. [Eq. (18) and Sec. II.A] The CP asymmetry formula in Eq. (18) has a bare 1/(m2^2 - m1^2) denominator, yet the scan operates in the resonant regime |m1 - m2| ≤ Γ2/2, which includes the degenerate limit m1 = m2 where the expression diverges. In standard treatments of resonant leptogenesis the denominator contains a finite-width regulator, e.g., (m2^2 - m1^2)^2 + (m2 Γ2)^2. For the quoted benchmark, Γ2 is very small because the leptonic partial width is set by y2 ~ mν/vχ2 ~ 10^-7 for vχ2 ~ 10^-4 GeV, so the regulator can change the asymmetry by orders of magnitude when m1 and m2 are closer than Γ2/2. This affects the allowed regions in Fig. 2 and the inversion to µ1 and vχ1 in Fig. 3b. Please either use a resummed, regulated asymmetry or justify explicitly why the bare formula remains valid in the parameter region scanned.
  3. [Abstract and Sec. I] The abstract and the introduction claim that the triplet VEV can be kept 'at a moderate range where it plays a nontrivial role in electroweak symmetry breaking', and Sec. I mentions testing triplet VEVs 'ranging from small values to tens of GeV'. However, the paper's own results cap the leptogenesis-active vχ2 at 10^-2 GeV (Fig. 2c) and the LHC-constrained region in Fig. 2d leaves only a small corner near the upper end of that range. A VEV of 10^-2 GeV is negligible for electroweak symmetry breaking compared with v = 246 GeV. The abstract and introduction should be revised to reflect the actual allowed parameter range, or the analysis should demonstrate how a moderate VEV (e.g., of order GeV) can be made compatible with BAU and collider data.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. II.A] There are several typographical errors: 'Mojorana' should be 'Majorana', 'hierarchial' should be 'hierarchical', and 'Fukugida' in the Introduction should be 'Fukugita'.
  2. [Eqs. (4) and (18)] The sign of the mass-squared difference in Eq. (4) is (m1^2 - m2^2), while in Eq. (18) it is (m2^2 - m1^2). Since m1 > m2, the overall sign is the same, but the notation should be made consistent to avoid confusion about the relative ordering.
  3. [Sec. IV, after Eq. (14)] The sentence 'one may ignore the contribution of ∆χ, the lepton asymmetry ∆H2 scales with ϵ' is unclear and appears to mix the definitions of ∆H2 and ∆L. Please rephrase to state precisely which asymmetry is being neglected and which scales with ϵ.
  4. [Fig. 2 caption and Sec. IV] The value O±24 = 10^-6 is stated only in the Fig. 2 caption; it should also be stated in the main text where the mixing is introduced, since Eqs. (7)-(8) depend on it.
  5. [Sec. V and references] The phrase 'in section 5 V' in the Introduction is a typo, and the reference list contains some formatting inconsistencies (e.g., extra URLs and incomplete titles). These should be cleaned up.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the observed BAU is an external benchmark and the parameter scan is a constraint exercise; the few self-citations are not load-bearing.

full rationale

The paper does not exhibit derivation-by-construction circularity. The target observable, ηB ≈ 6.1 × 10^-10, is an external benchmark taken from cosmology, not a quantity re-injected as an input and then re-derived from the same definition. The Boltzmann equations, sphaleron conversion factor, and dilution factor are adopted from independent references [27], [30], and [31], none authored by the present authors. The CP asymmetry formula in Eq. (18) is taken from Ref. [21], which shares an author (U. Sarkar), but this is a standard diagrammatic result that is also covered by the independent resonant-leptogenesis literature cited in [23]-[26] and [28]; the paper does not invoke it as an unverified uniqueness theorem or as an ansatz that smuggles in the desired conclusion. The scan procedure fixes the required |epsilon| from the observed BAU and then inverts Eq. (18) to obtain (mu1, vchi1): this is a legitimate parameter-constraint exercise rather than a prediction of a quantity already used as input. The undefined |epsilon|max and the unresummed 1/(m2^2 - m1^2) enhancement in the resonant regime are potential correctness or reproducibility flaws, but they do not make any step equivalent to its input by construction. The abstract's wording about a 'moderate range' for the triplet VEV is not supported by the paper's own Fig. 2c, but an overstatement is not circularity. Overall, the derivation chain is self-contained against external benchmarks and contains no circular step that can be exhibited as Eq. X = Eq. Y by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 8 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The computation rests on a stack of literature results and external data: the Ma-Sarkar CP asymmetry, the Hambye-Raidal-Strumia Boltzmann equations, standard sphaleron chemistry, the extended GM potential of [28], the Planck/WMAP baryon asymmetry, neutrino oscillation fits, and ATLAS/CMS doubly charged scalar bounds. The paper's own contributions are the phenomenological scan and the assumptions listed in Sec. IV. No new entities are invented: the two complex triplets and the real triplet all pre-exist in the cited literature. The free parameter count is dominated by neutrino-sector parameters fitted to oscillation data and by hand-set choices (O±24 = 10^-6, z = 2.5, m2 = 500 GeV) plus the never-defined |ϵ|max.

free parameters (8)
  • O±24 (doublet-triplet charged scalar mixing) = 10^-6
    Set by hand across the whole scan (Fig. 2 caption, Sec. IV); via eq. (8) it controls the H2±± -> W±H1± mode but is neither derived nor scanned.
  • z (normalized freeze-out epoch) = 2.5
    The lepton asymmetry is evaluated at z = m2/T = 2.5 (T ~ 200 GeV); the paper notes z = 2.5-5 as the window and picks 2.5 without a sensitivity scan (Sec. IV).
  • m2 (mass of the lighter doubly charged scalar) = 500 GeV
    Chosen as the illustrative leptogenesis scale (Sec. IV); collider bounds are applied relative to it.
  • y2 and vχ2 (leptogenesis-active Yukawa and VEV) = y2 ~ mν2/vχ2 with vχ2 in 10^-6-10^-2 GeV
    The neutrino mass mν2 = y2 vχ2 ~ 0.01-0.1 eV fixes the tiny common Yukawa that enters eq. (18); vχ2 is scanned and the allowed range is the output.
  • vχ1, y111, y122, y133, β1, β2 (χ1 sector neutrino parameters) = sets reproducing Δm²12, Δm²23 at 3σ
    Fitted to neutrino oscillation data [33] (Sec. IV, after eq. 17); legitimate fit to established data, then reused inside eq. (18).
  • |ϵ|max (maximum allowed CP asymmetry) = not stated in the text
    The acceptance/rejection of every (µ2, vχ2) point depends on |ϵ|max, but its defining formula is omitted (Sec. IV, after eq. 14).
  • µ2 (trilinear scalar coupling of χ2) = 5e-7 to 1e-5 GeV (surviving window)
    Scanned in Sec. IV; the surviving range in Fig. 2c-d depends on the scan bounds and the unstated |ϵ|max.
  • sin(α-β) (relative CP phase of µ and Yukawa couplings) = not specified
    Eq. (18) contains sin(α-β); the paper scans ϵ directly rather than fixing the phase, so the phase is effectively a free parameter absorbed in |ϵ|.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption Sphaleron processes convert a (B-L) asymmetry into baryon asymmetry with coefficient asph = 28/79 while in equilibrium above the electroweak phase transition.
    Eqs. (15)-(16) use asph = 28/79 and the dilution f = 2387/86 from Refs. [30],[31]; standard sphaleron chemistry.
  • domain assumption The Ma-Sarkar resonant CP asymmetry (eqs. (4) and (18)) gives the lepton asymmetry per decay, including its narrow-width 1/(m2²-m1²) form.
    Takes the formula from Ref. [21]; the paper adds phases but not a finite-width regulator, which matters at |m1-m2| ≤ Γ2/2.
  • domain assumption The Boltzmann system (eq. 11) from Hambye-Raidal-Strumia governs the asymmetry evolution, with decay/inverse-decay washout only.
    Eqs. (11)-(14) follow Ref. [27]; no ΔL=2 scattering washout or thermal corrections are included.
  • ad hoc to paper Mixing between the two complex triplets is negligible, and H1±± decays produce negligible asymmetry.
    Assumptions 1 and 2 at the start of Sec. IV; they define the mass eigenstates and make H2±± the sole source of the asymmetry.
  • domain assumption The extended GM scalar potential (eq. 6 from Ref. [28]) holds with unspecified quartic couplings, and the vacuum passes the ρ-parameter constraint of eq. (9).
    Sec. III; the paper states it uses a simplified form of the potential without listing all couplings.
  • domain assumption The LHC bound excludes a doubly charged scalar below 450 GeV when Br(H2±± -> ℓ±ℓ±) > 10%.
    Imposed as a flat recast in Sec. IV (Figs. 2b, 2d); run-dependent details of the actual searches are not modeled.
  • domain assumption Neutrino oscillation data constrain the model through Δm²12 and Δm²23 at 3σ.
    Uses Ref. [33] in Sec. IV (after eq. 17) to filter the vχ1, y111, y122, y133 parameter sets.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Leptogenesis with triplet scalars at electroweak scale." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/RP72TERQ

@misc{pith2026250206729,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Leptogenesis with triplet scalars at electroweak scale},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/RP72TERQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.06729}
}
abstract

Up until now the works regarding leptogenesis have discussed different mechanisms to explain the observed baryon asymmetry of the universe (BAU). The type-$II$ seesaw mechanism employing triplet scalars has been well studied in this context and the triplet vacuum expectation value (VEV) answering to the observed BAU is $(< 10^{-2} ~ GeV)$. On the contrary we are invoking an extended Georgi-Machacek type scenario, capable of generating BAU through leptogenesis while keeping the triplet VEV at a moderate range where it plays a nontrivial role in electroweak symmetry breaking (EWSB). In this study we have also considered the decaying scalar mass responsible for leptogenesis to be within a TeV and hence one can probe this possibility at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) itself via different kinds of signature corresponding to different triplet VEV region.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.06729 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Tree level and one loop level Feynman diagrams that participate in resonant leptogenesis [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Top left: Values of ϵ needed to generate observed BAU for different values of |µ2| and vχ2 , when only two decay modes of H2 ±± i.e, H2 ±± → ℓ ±ℓ ±, H± 1 H ± 1 has been taken into account. Top right: same as top left but with the constraint from the search for doubly charged scalar imposed. Bot￾tom left: Values of ϵ needed to generate observed BAU for different values of |µ2| and vχ2 , when all the decay modes of H2… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Left: The abundances Σχ2 and ∆L as a function of z for m2 = 500 GeV , |µ2| = 1.2 × 10−6 GeV , vχ2 = 3.9 × 10−4 GeV, |ϵ| = 1.8 × 10−7 and O± 24 = 10−6 . Right: Corresponding values of vχ1 and µ1. We point out below a few salient features extracted from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

39 extracted references · 20 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    B - violating interaction

    work page

  2. [2]

    So, naturally it becomes interesting to ask the question 2 above

    How much triplet VEV is consistent with leptogenesis, neutrino mass and collider data simultane- ously? In general, non-doublet VEV faces a severe constraint imposed by the ρ-parameter and cannot play much significant role in electroweak symmetry breaking. So, naturally it becomes interesting to ask the question 2 above. Moreover, depending on the values ...

    work page

  3. [3]

    Early models to generate baryon asymmetry were mostly based on the grand unified theories (GUT) which generate the B + L asymmetry [9]-[12]

    Departure from thermal equilibrium. Early models to generate baryon asymmetry were mostly based on the grand unified theories (GUT) which generate the B + L asymmetry [9]-[12]. Since baryon number B and lepton number L are not good symmetries of the SM once the higher order effects are taken into account, the net baryon number observed at BBN scale is a n...

    work page

  4. [4]

    Can leptogenesis scale be lowered by the resonant effect? If so, to what extent?

    work page

  5. [5]

    Mixing between two SU (2) triplets, i.e, χ1 and χ2, is negligible while the effect of mixing between the doublet and triplet has been considered

    work page

  6. [6]

    Unlike right-handed neutrinos, the triplet scalars are not self-conjugates, and hence, there exists 4 Boltzmann equations instead of 2

    The asymmetry generated by the heavier scalar, H ±± 1 is negligible and decays and inverse decays of the lighter scalar H ± 2 are entirely responsible for the generation of the observed BAU. Unlike right-handed neutrinos, the triplet scalars are not self-conjugates, and hence, there exists 4 Boltzmann equations instead of 2. We denote with np the number d...

    work page

  7. [7]

    Effective number of neutrinos and baryon asymmetry from BBN and WMAP

    V. Barger, J. P. Kneller, H. S. Lee, D. Marfatia and G. Steigman, “Effective number of neutrinos and baryon asymmetry from BBN and WMAP” , Phys. Lett. B 566, 8-18 (2003) [arXiv:hep-ph/0305075 [hep-ph]]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2003

  8. [8]

    D. N. Spergel et al. [WMAP], First year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) observations: Determination of cosmological parameters, Astrophys. J. Suppl. 148, 175-194 (2003) [arXiv:astro-ph/0302209 [astro-ph]]

    arXiv 2003

Show all 39 references
  1. [9]

    Komatsu et al

    E. Komatsu et al. [WMAP], Five-Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Cos- mological Interpretation, Astrophys. J. Suppl. 180, 330-376 (2009) [arXiv:0803.0547 [astro-ph]]

    2009 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Hinshaw et al

    G. Hinshaw et al. [WMAP], Five-Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Data Processing, Sky Maps, and Basic Results, https://doi.org/10.1088/0067-0049/180/2/225 Astrophys. J. Suppl. 180, 225-245 (2009) [arXiv:0803.0732 [astro-ph]]

    2009 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Dunkley et al

    J. Dunkley et al. [WMAP], Five-Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Like- lihoods and Parameters from the WMAP data , Astrophys. J. Suppl. 180, 306-329 (2009) [arXiv:0803.0586 [astro-ph]]

    2009 arXiv

  4. [12]

    P. A. R. Ade et al. [Planck], Planck 2015 results. XIII. Cosmological parameters , Astron. Astrophys. 594, A13 (2016) [arXiv:1502.01589 [astro-ph.CO]]

    2016 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Aghanim et al

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

    2020 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Violation of CP Invariance, C asymmetry, and baryon asymmetry of the universe

    A. D. Sakharov, “Violation of CP Invariance, C asymmetry, and baryon asymmetry of the universe”, Pisma Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 5, 32-35 (1967) JETP Letters 5, (1967)

    1967

  7. [15]

    Horizontal symmetry and masses of neutrinos

    T. Yanagida, “Horizontal symmetry and masses of neutrinos” , Proceedings of the Workshop on the Unified Theory and the Baryon Number in the Universe, KEK, Japan, 1979

    1979

  8. [16]

    Baryogenesis in grand unified theories

    S. M. Barr, “Baryogenesis in grand unified theories” Physics Reports 107, (1984). 18

    1984

  9. [17]

    Dine and A

    M. Dine and A. Kusenko ”The origin of the matter-antimatter asymmetry” Reviews of Modern Physics 76, (2004)

    2004

  10. [18]

    Georgi, ”The simple group SO(10) and baryon asymmetry of the universe” , Physics Letters B 83,(1979)

    H. Georgi, ”The simple group SO(10) and baryon asymmetry of the universe” , Physics Letters B 83,(1979)

    1979

  11. [19]

    On the Anomalous Electroweak Baryon Number Nonconservation in the Early Universe

    V. A. Kuzmin, V. A. Rubakov and M. E. Shaposhnikov, “On the Anomalous Electroweak Baryon Number Nonconservation in the Early Universe” Phys. Lett. B 155, 36 (1985)

    1985

  12. [20]

    Electroweak baryon number nonconservation in the early universe and in high-energy collisions

    V. A. Rubakov and M. E. Shaposhnikov, “Electroweak baryon number nonconservation in the early universe and in high-energy collisions” , Usp. Fiz. Nauk 166, 493-537 (1996) [arXiv:hep-ph/9603208 [hep-ph]]

    1996 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Baryogenesis through mixing of heavy Majorana neutrinos

    M. Flanz, E. A. Paschos, U. Sarkar and J. Weiss, “Baryogenesis through mixing of heavy Majorana neutrinos” Phys. Lett. B 389, 693-699 (1996) [arXiv:hep-ph/9607310 [hep-ph]]

    1996 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Baryogenesis through leptogenesis

    R. Barbieri, P. Creminelli, A. Strumia and N. Tetradis, “Baryogenesis through leptogenesis” Nucl. Phys. B 575, 61-77 (2000) [arXiv:hep-ph/9911315 [hep-ph]]

    2000 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Baryogenesis and lepton number violation

    M. Plumacher, “Baryogenesis and lepton number violation ” Z. Phys. C 74, 549-559 (1997) [arXiv:hep- ph/9604229 [hep-ph]]

    1997

  16. [24]

    CP violation and baryogenesis due to heavy Majorana neutrinos

    A. Pilaftsis, “CP violation and baryogenesis due to heavy Majorana neutrinos” Phys. Rev. D 56, 5431-5451 (1997) [arXiv:hep-ph/9707235 [hep-ph]]

    1997 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Baryogenesis from a lepton asymmetric universe

    M. Flanz, E. A. Paschos and U. Sarkar, “Baryogenesis from a lepton asymmetric universe” Phys. Lett. B 345, 248-252 (1995) [arXiv:hep-ph/9411366 [hep-ph]]

    1995 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Baryogenesis Without Grand Unification

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

    1986

  19. [27]

    Neutrino masses and leptogenesis with heavy Higgs triplets

    E. Ma and U. Sarkar, “Neutrino masses and leptogenesis with heavy Higgs triplets” , Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 5716-5719 (1998) [arXiv:hep-ph/9802445 [hep-ph]]

    1998 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Davidson and A

    S. Davidson and A. Ibarra, A lower bound on the right-handed neutrino mass scale from resonant leptogenesis, J. High Energy Phys. 02, 1–8 (2002) [arXiv:hep-ph/0111302 [hep-ph]]

    2002 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Pilaftsis, Resonant CP violation in lepton-number violating decays , Phys

    A. Pilaftsis, Resonant CP violation in lepton-number violating decays , Phys. Lett. B 435, 88–94 (1997)

    1997

  22. [30]

    L. Covi, M. Raidal, and K. Tamvakis, Resonant Leptogenesis and the Baryon Asymmetry of the Universe , J. High Energy Phys. 11, 1–19 (2002) [arXiv:hep-ph/0203240 [hep-ph]]

    2002 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Electroweak-scale resonant leptogenesis,

    A. Pilaftsis and T. E. J. Underwood, “Electroweak-scale resonant leptogenesis,” Phys. Rev. D 72, 113001 (2005) [arXiv:hep-ph/0506107 [hep-ph]]

    2005 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Resonant enhancement in leptogenesis,

    B. Dev, M. Garny, J. Klaric, P. Millington and D. Teresi, “Resonant enhancement in leptogenesis,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 33, 1842003 (2018) [arXiv:1711.02863 [hep-ph]]. 19

    2018 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Hambye, M

    T. Hambye, M. Raidal and A. Strumia, Efficiency and maximal CP-asymmetry of scalar triplet leptogenesis , Phys. Lett. B 632, 667-674 (2006) [arXiv:hep-ph/0510008 [hep-ph]]

    2006 arXiv

  26. [34]

    CP violation in a model with Higgs triplets

    T. K. Chen, C. W. Chiang and K. Yagyu, “CP violation in a model with Higgs triplets” , JHEP 06, 069 (2023) [erratum: JHEP 07, 169 (2023)] [arXiv:2303.09294 [hep-ph]]

    2023 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Review of Particle Physics

    R. L. Workman et al. [Particle Data Group], “Review of Particle Physics” , PTEP 2022, 083C01 (2022)

    2022

  28. [36]

    Leptogenesis for pedestrians

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

    2005 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Cosmological baryon and lepton number in the presence of elec- troweak fermion-number violation

    Jeffrey A. Harvey and Michael S. Turner, “Cosmological baryon and lepton number in the presence of elec- troweak fermion-number violation ” Phys. Rev. D 42, 3344 (1990)

    1990

  30. [38]

    The Early Universe,

    E. W. Kolb, “The Early Universe,” Front. Phys. 69, 1-547 (1990) Taylor and Francis, 2019, ISBN 978-0-429- 49286-0, 978-0-201-62674-2

    1990

  31. [39]

    Esteban, M

    I. Esteban, M. C. Gonzalez-Garcia, M. Maltoni, T. Schwetz and A. Zhou, The fate of hints: updated global analysis of three-flavor neutrino oscillations , JHEP 09, 178 (2020) [arXiv:2007.14792 [hep-ph]]

    2020 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.