pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.22311 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-24 · ✦ hep-th · hep-ph

Recognition: unknown

Five benefits of grand unified SU(5) brane world scenario

Masato Arai , Filip Blaschke , Minoru Eto , Masaki Kawaguchi
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-08 10:58 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-th hep-ph
keywords domain wallsSU(5) grand unified theorybrane worldJackiw-Rebbi mechanismdoublet-triplet splittingfermion localizationgeometric Higgs mechanismfive-dimensional spacetime
0
0 comments X

The pith

A single adjoint scalar and singlet form five domain walls that realize an economical SU(5) GUT brane world in five dimensions.

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

The paper constructs an SU(5) grand unified theory on domain walls in five-dimensional spacetime using only an adjoint scalar field and a singlet. These fields create five domain-wall solutions that together provide a dynamical brane world, localize chiral fermion zero modes via the Jackiw-Rebbi mechanism, break SU(5) to the Standard Model gauge group by a geometric Higgs mechanism, and trap gauge fields through a field-dependent kinetic term. The same scalars also localize the Higgs field to solve the doublet-triplet splitting problem. The authors derive the resulting four-dimensional effective theory and show that five-dimensional Yukawa couplings can be chosen so renormalization-group evolution reproduces the observed weak-scale Standard Model values.

Core claim

The authors show that an adjoint scalar and a singlet together produce five domain-wall solutions in five dimensions; these walls form dynamical branes, localize chiral fermions, break SU(5) to the Standard Model via geometric Higgsing, trap gauge fields with a field-dependent kinetic term, and localize the Higgs to resolve the doublet-triplet splitting, yielding an economical model whose four-dimensional effective theory matches Standard Model Yukawa couplings after renormalization-group running from suitable five-dimensional parameters.

What carries the argument

The five domain-wall solutions generated by the adjoint scalar and singlet, which simultaneously act as branes and carry out fermion localization, geometric symmetry breaking, gauge trapping, and Higgs localization.

If this is right

  • All essential GUT ingredients arise from the same two scalar fields, eliminating the need for separate sectors for branes, fermions, and Higgs fields.
  • The geometric Higgs mechanism breaks SU(5) to the Standard Model without introducing additional fundamental Higgs representations.
  • Chiral fermions and the Higgs doublet are automatically localized around the walls, producing a four-dimensional theory without bulk massless modes.
  • Two distinct realizations of the Higgs sector are possible, each leading to a different four-dimensional effective potential and spectrum.
  • The model derives a concrete four-dimensional Lagrangian whose Yukawa couplings evolve to match observations for appropriate five-dimensional input parameters.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the domain walls remain stable under small perturbations, the construction supplies a dynamical origin for the brane-world setup that could be embedded in a larger gravitational theory.
  • The two Higgs-sector realizations may produce different predictions for the Higgs self-coupling or for the masses of heavy GUT-scale particles after integrating out the extra dimension.
  • Extensions could compute the rate of proton decay by including higher-dimensional operators localized on the walls and running them down to the weak scale.

Load-bearing premise

Stable domain-wall solutions with the required localization and breaking properties must exist, and the five-dimensional parameters must be adjustable so that renormalization-group evolution exactly reproduces the observed weak-scale values.

What would settle it

An explicit demonstration that no choice of five-dimensional Yukawa couplings allows renormalization-group flow to reproduce the measured weak-scale fermion masses and mixings would falsify the model's ability to match the Standard Model.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.22311 by Filip Blaschke, Masaki Kawaguchi, Masato Arai, Minoru Eto.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Illustration of the 3-2 split configuration of domain walls. Here, v = Ω = 1 and the position moduli are given as R1 = R2 = R3 = −2, R4 = R5 = 2. 2-1-2, etc. As we will see in the next subsection, the 3-2 configuration is energetically favored compared to any other as V1 is switched. Furthermore, we will show that this remains true in a large region of the parameter space and hence represents a generic cas… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Comparison between effective potentails V 3-2 eff and V 4-1 eff showing that 3-2 splitting back￾ground is energetically preferable. Here, v = λ = 10α = 100µ 2 = 1. A furhter analysis can be made by considering more complicated configurations, such as 2-1-2 double-split background. Omitting the details, the effective potential shows that mini￾mum is achieved by collapsing one of the gaps, thus reaching 3-2 … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: The left panel shows δτ , and the right panel shows βH,3 and βH,2. This naturally leads to decomposing the 5-plet H into the colored triplet H3 and the elec￾troweak doublet H2 as H = ( H3, H2 ) T , (4.7) resulting in the decoupled equations of motion ∂M view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The quadratic mass terms U2 and U3 for the electroweak Higgs doublet (black and solid) and the colored Higgs triplet (red and dashed), respectively. potential for the triplet H3, there are no localized modes and a large mass gap of order ΩH without light modes. Therefore we only need to consider doublet H2 to find possible light or tachyonic modes, see view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Nine overlaps of the normalized fermion zero mode functions. view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We construct an $SU(5)$ Grand Unified Theory on domain walls in the five-dimensional space-time. In this setup, we introduce an adjoint scalar field and a singlet that together form a set of five domain-wall solutions, realizing a dynamical brane-world. The same scalar fields also localize chiral fermion zero modes around the walls via the Jackiw-Rebbi mechanism, break $SU(5)$ down to the Standard Model gauge group via geometric Higgs mechanism and simultaneously trap gauge fields through a field-dependent gauge kinetic term. Furthermore, they enable localization of the Higgs field, providing a novel solution to the doublet-triplet splitting problem. As a result, all essential ingredients of the model are realized by a single adjoint scalar field and a singlet, making the construction very economical. We propose two realizations of the Higgs sector, derive the four-dimensional effective theory, and demonstrate that the Standard Model Yukawa couplings at the weak scale can be reproduced from the five-dimensional Yukawa couplings by the renormalization group analysis with a suitable choice of parameters.

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

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript constructs an SU(5) grand unified theory in five-dimensional spacetime realized on five domain walls generated by a single adjoint scalar field and a singlet scalar. These fields are claimed to localize chiral fermion zero modes via the Jackiw-Rebbi mechanism, break SU(5) to the Standard Model gauge group through a geometric Higgs mechanism, trap gauge fields via a field-dependent kinetic term, localize the Higgs doublet while solving the doublet-triplet splitting problem, and permit reproduction of the observed weak-scale Yukawa couplings from five-dimensional Yukawa couplings through renormalization-group evolution with suitable parameter choices. Two Higgs sector realizations are proposed and the four-dimensional effective theory is derived.

Significance. If the domain-wall configuration can be shown to exist and satisfy all localization and symmetry-breaking conditions simultaneously, the construction would provide an unusually economical brane-world embedding of SU(5) GUT physics in which a single pair of scalars handles fermion localization, gauge trapping, geometric breaking, and the doublet-triplet problem. The RG matching to weak-scale Yukawas is a standard but parameter-dependent step that does not constitute an independent prediction.

major comments (3)
  1. [Scalar potential and domain-wall construction] The central construction asserts that a single scalar potential for the adjoint Φ and singlet σ produces exactly five domain-wall solutions whose asymptotic values simultaneously (i) break SU(5) geometrically to the SM, (ii) localize all required chiral fermion zero modes via Jackiw-Rebbi, (iii) permit a consistent field-dependent gauge kinetic term f(Φ,σ) without ghosts or loss of 5D gauge invariance, and (iv) localize the Higgs doublet while solving the doublet-triplet problem. No explicit form of the potential, no analytic or numerical profiles, and no verification that the same walls satisfy all four requirements at once are provided (see the description of the scalar fields and domain walls).
  2. [Renormalization-group analysis of Yukawa couplings] The reproduction of Standard Model Yukawa couplings is achieved by choosing five-dimensional Yukawa couplings and evolving them via the renormalization group until they match data at the weak scale. This procedure, described as working “with a suitable choice of parameters,” reduces the low-energy values to fitted inputs rather than independent predictions from the five-dimensional setup.
  3. [Gauge field localization] The field-dependent gauge kinetic term f(Φ,σ)F_{MN}^2 is invoked to trap the gauge fields on the walls, but no explicit functional form is given and no check is performed that the chosen f remains positive-definite and preserves 5D gauge invariance on the background of the five simultaneous domain walls.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Derivation of the four-dimensional effective theory] The matching conditions between the five-dimensional fields and the four-dimensional effective theory (zero-mode wave-function normalizations, effective couplings, etc.) would benefit from more explicit formulas.
  2. [Higgs sector realizations] A brief discussion of possible higher-dimensional operators or stability issues under quantum corrections would help assess the robustness of the geometric Higgs mechanism.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive comments. We address each major comment below and indicate planned revisions to improve the manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Scalar potential and domain-wall construction] The central construction asserts that a single scalar potential for the adjoint Φ and singlet σ produces exactly five domain-wall solutions whose asymptotic values simultaneously (i) break SU(5) geometrically to the SM, (ii) localize all required chiral fermion zero modes via Jackiw-Rebbi, (iii) permit a consistent field-dependent gauge kinetic term f(Φ,σ) without ghosts or loss of 5D gauge invariance, and (iv) localize the Higgs doublet while solving the doublet-triplet problem. No explicit form of the potential, no analytic or numerical profiles, and no verification that the same walls satisfy all four requirements at once are provided (see the description of the scalar fields and domain walls).

    Authors: We acknowledge that the current version does not supply an explicit scalar potential V(Φ, σ) or numerical profiles of the five domain walls. The individual mechanisms are standard, but their joint realization requires concrete demonstration. In the revised manuscript we will introduce a specific potential admitting five walls with the required asymptotic values and include a verification (analytic or numerical) that fermion localization, geometric SU(5) breaking, gauge trapping, and Higgs localization are simultaneously satisfied on the same background. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Renormalization-group analysis of Yukawa couplings] The reproduction of Standard Model Yukawa couplings is achieved by choosing five-dimensional Yukawa couplings and evolving them via the renormalization group until they match data at the weak scale. This procedure, described as working “with a suitable choice of parameters,” reduces the low-energy values to fitted inputs rather than independent predictions from the five-dimensional setup.

    Authors: The referee correctly observes that the RG matching relies on a suitable choice of 5D parameters and does not constitute an independent prediction. Our goal was to establish consistency of the 5D setup with weak-scale data. We will revise the text to state explicitly that the analysis demonstrates viability rather than predictive power, thereby removing any ambiguity. revision: partial

  3. Referee: [Gauge field localization] The field-dependent gauge kinetic term f(Φ,σ)F_{MN}^2 is invoked to trap the gauge fields on the walls, but no explicit functional form is given and no check is performed that the chosen f remains positive-definite and preserves 5D gauge invariance on the background of the five simultaneous domain walls.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit form for f(Φ, σ) together with a positivity and gauge-invariance check on the five-wall background is required. In the revision we will specify a concrete functional form built from SU(5) invariants of Φ and σ, and demonstrate that it remains positive definite while preserving 5D gauge invariance, thereby ensuring consistent gauge-field trapping. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity detected in claimed derivation

full rationale

The paper constructs an SU(5) brane-world model using one adjoint scalar and one singlet to realize domain walls, fermion localization via Jackiw-Rebbi, geometric breaking to SM, gauge trapping, and Higgs localization. It proposes two Higgs realizations, derives the 4D effective theory, and states that weak-scale Yukawa couplings can be reproduced from 5D Yukawas via RG flow with suitable parameter choices. No quoted step defines a result in terms of itself, renames a fitted quantity as an independent prediction, or relies on self-citation for a uniqueness theorem that forces the outcome. The Yukawa matching is explicitly conditional on parameter choice rather than asserted as a parameter-free prediction, and the central construction is presented as a direct proposal without reduction to prior inputs by definition.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 2 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on the existence of five stable domain-wall solutions, a field-dependent gauge kinetic term whose functional form is not derived from first principles, and the ability to choose five-dimensional Yukawa couplings so that RG flow matches data. These are introduced without independent evidence beyond the model’s internal consistency.

free parameters (3)
  • five-dimensional Yukawa couplings
    Chosen so that RG evolution reproduces observed weak-scale values
  • parameters of the scalar potential
    Required to produce the five domain-wall solutions
  • form of the field-dependent gauge kinetic term
    Introduced to trap gauge fields on the wall
axioms (2)
  • standard math Jackiw-Rebbi mechanism localizes chiral fermions on domain walls
    Invoked without re-derivation
  • domain assumption Five-dimensional spacetime with flat metric admits stable domain-wall solutions
    Assumed for the dynamical brane-world
invented entities (1)
  • geometric Higgs mechanism via domain walls no independent evidence
    purpose: Breaks SU(5) to SM gauge group
    New application of domain-wall geometry to symmetry breaking

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5485 in / 1729 out tokens · 38409 ms · 2026-05-08T10:58:45.741598+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

70 extracted references · 70 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [2]

    Antoniadis, N

    I. Antoniadis, N. Arkani-Hamed, S. Dimopoulos and G. R. Dvali, “New dimensions at a millimeter to a Fermi and superstrings at a TeV,” Phys. Lett. B436, 257 (1998) doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(98)00860-0 [hep-ph/9804398]

    work page doi:10.1016/s0370-2693(98)00860-0 1998

  2. [3]

    A Large Mass Hierarchy from a Small Extra Dimension

    L. Randall and R. Sundrum, “A Large mass hierarchy from a small extra dimension,” Phys. Rev. Lett.83, 3370 (1999) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.83.3370 [hep-ph/9905221]

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1103/physrevlett.83.3370 1999

  3. [4]

    Randall and R

    L. Randall and R. Sundrum, “An Alternative to compactification,” Phys. Rev. Lett.83, 4690 (1999) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.83.4690 [hep-th/9906064]. 51

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.83.4690 1999

  4. [5]

    Do We Live Inside a Domain Wall?,

    V. A. Rubakov and M. E. Shaposhnikov, “Do We Live Inside a Domain Wall?,” Phys. Lett.125B, 136 (1983). doi:10.1016/0370-2693(83)91253-4

    work page doi:10.1016/0370-2693(83)91253-4 1983

  5. [6]

    Solitons with Fermion Number 1/2,

    R. Jackiw and C. Rebbi, “Solitons with Fermion Number 1/2,” Phys. Rev. D13, 3398 (1976). doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.13.3398

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.13.3398 1976

  6. [7]

    Static domain walls in N=1 supergravity,

    M. Cvetic, S. Griffies and S. J. Rey, “Static domain walls in N=1 supergravity,” Nucl. Phys. B381, 301 (1992) doi:10.1016/0550-3213(92)90649-V [hep-th/9201007]

    work page doi:10.1016/0550-3213(92)90649-v 1992

  7. [8]

    Modeling the fifth-dimension with scalars and gravity,

    O. DeWolfe, D. Z. Freedman, S. S. Gubser and A. Karch, “Modeling the fifth-dimension with scalars and gravity,” Phys. Rev. D62, 046008 (2000) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.62.046008 [hep-th/9909134]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.62.046008 2000

  8. [9]

    Universal aspects of gravity localized on thick branes,

    C. Csaki, J. Erlich, T. J. Hollowood and Y. Shirman, “Universal aspects of gravity localized on thick branes,” Nucl. Phys. B581, 309 (2000) doi:10.1016/S0550-3213(00)00271-6 [hep- th/0001033]

    work page doi:10.1016/s0550-3213(00)00271-6 2000

  9. [10]

    Exactly solved BPS wall and winding number in N=1 supergravity,

    M. Eto, N. Maru, N. Sakai and T. Sakata, “Exactly solved BPS wall and winding number in N=1 supergravity,” Phys. Lett. B553, 87 (2003) doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(02)03187-8 [hep-th/0208127]

    work page doi:10.1016/s0370-2693(02)03187-8 2003

  10. [11]

    BPS Multi-walls in five-dimensional supergravity,

    M. Eto, S. Fujita, M. Naganuma and N. Sakai, “BPS Multi-walls in five-dimensional supergravity,” Phys. Rev. D69, 025007 (2004) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.69.025007 [hep- th/0306198]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.69.025007 2004

  11. [12]

    Solvable models of domain walls in N = 1 supergravity,

    M. Eto and N. Sakai, “Solvable models of domain walls in N = 1 supergravity,” Phys. Rev. D68, 125001 (2003) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.68.125001 [hep-th/0307276]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.68.125001 2003

  12. [14]

    (Quasi)localized gauge field on a brane: Dissipating cosmic radiation to extra dimensions?,

    G. R. Dvali, G. Gabadadze and M. A. Shifman, “(Quasi)localized gauge field on a brane: Dissipating cosmic radiation to extra dimensions?,” Phys. Lett. B497, 271 (2001) doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(00)01329-0 [hep-th/0010071]. 52

    work page doi:10.1016/s0370-2693(00)01329-0 2001

  13. [15]

    Buryak, P.D

    A. Kehagias and K. Tamvakis, “Localized gravitons, gauge bosons and chiral fermions in smooth spaces generated by a bounce,” Phys. Lett. B504, 38 (2001) doi:10.1016/S0370- 2693(01)00274-X [hep-th/0010112]

    work page doi:10.1016/s0370- 2001

  14. [16]

    On models of gauge field localization on a brane,

    S. L. Dubovsky and V. A. Rubakov, “On models of gauge field localization on a brane,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. A16, 4331 (2001) doi:10.1142/S0217751X01005286 [hep-th/0105243]

    work page doi:10.1142/s0217751x01005286 2001

  15. [17]

    Massive vector trapping as a gauge boson on a brane,

    K. Ghoroku and A. Nakamura, “Massive vector trapping as a gauge boson on a brane,” Phys. Rev. D65, 084017 (2002) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.65.084017 [hep-th/0106145]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.65.084017 2002

  16. [18]

    Dynamical localization of gauge fields on a brane,

    E. K. Akhmedov, “Dynamical localization of gauge fields on a brane,” Phys. Lett. B521, 79 (2001) doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(01)01176-5 [hep-th/0107223]

    work page doi:10.1016/s0370-2693(01)01176-5 2001

  17. [19]

    Multilocalization in multi- brane worlds,

    I. I. Kogan, S. Mouslopoulos, A. Papazoglou and G. G. Ross, “Multilocalization in multi- brane worlds,” Nucl. Phys. B615, 191 (2001) doi:10.1016/S0550-3213(01)00424-2 [hep- ph/0107307]

    work page doi:10.1016/s0550-3213(01)00424-2 2001

  18. [20]

    Field localization in warped gauge theo- ries,

    H. Abe, T. Kobayashi, N. Maru and K. Yoshioka, “Field localization in warped gauge theo- ries,” Phys. Rev. D67, 045019 (2003) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.67.045019 [hep-ph/0205344]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.67.045019 2003

  19. [21]

    Mangano, M

    M. Laine, H. B. Meyer, K. Rummukainen and M. Shaposhnikov, “Localization and mass generation for nonAbelian gauge fields,” JHEP0301, 068 (2003) doi:10.1088/1126- 6708/2003/01/068 [hep-ph/0211149]

    work page doi:10.1088/1126- 2003

  20. [22]

    Localized gauge multiplet on a wall,

    N. Maru and N. Sakai, “Localized gauge multiplet on a wall,” Prog. Theor. Phys.111, 907 (2004) doi:10.1143/PTP.111.907 [hep-th/0305222]

    work page doi:10.1143/ptp.111.907 2004

  21. [23]

    Yang-Mills Localization in Warped Space,

    B. Batell and T. Gherghetta, “Yang-Mills Localization in Warped Space,” Phys. Rev. D 75, 025022 (2007) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.75.025022 [hep-th/0611305]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.75.025022 2007

  22. [24]

    Gauge field localization on brane worlds,

    R. Guerrero, A. Melfo, N. Pantoja and R. O. Rodriguez, “Gauge field localization on brane worlds,” Phys. Rev. D81, 086004 (2010) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.81.086004 [arXiv:0912.0463 [hep-th]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.81.086004 2010

  23. [25]

    Gauge field localization on a dilatonic deformed brane,

    W. T. Cruz, M. O. Tahim and C. A. S. Almeida, “Gauge field localization on a dilatonic deformed brane,” Phys. Lett. B686, 259 (2010). doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2010.02.064 53

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2010.02.064 2010

  24. [26]

    A model to local- ize gauge and tensor fields on thick branes,

    A. E. R. Chumbes, J. M. Hoff da Silva and M. B. Hott, “A model to local- ize gauge and tensor fields on thick branes,” Phys. Rev. D85, 085003 (2012) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.85.085003 [arXiv:1108.3821 [hep-th]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.85.085003 2012

  25. [27]

    Spontaneous localization on a brane via a gravitational mechanism,

    C. Germani, “Spontaneous localization on a brane via a gravitational mechanism,” Phys. Rev. D85, 055025 (2012) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.85.055025 [arXiv:1109.3718 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.85.055025 2012

  26. [28]

    Localizing modes of massive fermions and a U(1) gauge field in the inflating baby-skyrmion branes,

    T. Delsate and N. Sawado, “Localizing modes of massive fermions and a U(1) gauge field in the inflating baby-skyrmion branes,” Phys. Rev. D85, 065025 (2012) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.85.065025 [arXiv:1112.2714 [gr-qc]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.85.065025 2012

  27. [29]

    Gauge field localization on the Bloch Brane,

    W. T. Cruz, A. R. P. Lima and C. A. S. Almeida, “Gauge field localization on the Bloch Brane,” Phys. Rev. D87, no. 4, 045018 (2013) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.87.045018 [arXiv:1211.7355 [hep-th]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.87.045018 2013

  28. [30]

    Localization of gauge fields in a tachyonic de Sitter thick braneworld,

    A. Herrera-Aguilar, A. D. Rojas and E. Santos-Rodriguez, “Localization of gauge fields in a tachyonic de Sitter thick braneworld,” Eur. Phys. J. C74, no. 4, 2770 (2014) doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-014-2770-1 [arXiv:1401.0999 [hep-th]]

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-014-2770-1 2014

  29. [31]

    U(1) gauge field localization on a Bloch brane with Chumbes-Holf da Silva-Hott mechanism,

    Z. H. Zhao, Y. X. Liu and Y. Zhong, “U(1) gauge field localization on a Bloch brane with Chumbes-Holf da Silva-Hott mechanism,” Phys. Rev. D90, no. 4, 045031 (2014) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.90.045031 [arXiv:1402.6480 [hep-th]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.90.045031 2014

  30. [32]

    Localization of abelian gauge fields on thick branes,

    C. A. Vaquera-Araujo and O. Corradini, “Localization of abelian gauge fields on thick branes,” Eur. Phys. J. C75, no. 2, 48 (2015) doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-014-3251-2 [arXiv:1406.2892 [hep-th]]

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-014-3251-2 2015

  31. [33]

    Gauge Field Local- ization on the Brane Through Geometrical Coupling,

    G. Alencar, R. R. Landim, M. O. Tahim and R. N. Costa Filho, “Gauge Field Local- ization on the Brane Through Geometrical Coupling,” Phys. Lett. B739, 125 (2014) doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2014.10.040 [arXiv:1409.4396 [hep-th]]

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2014.10.040 2014

  32. [34]

    Nonminimal couplings in Randall-Sundrum scenarios,

    G. Alencar, R. R. Landim, C. R. Muniz and R. N. Costa Filho, “Nonminimal couplings in Randall-Sundrum scenarios,” Phys. Rev. D92, no. 6, 066006 (2015) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.92.066006 [arXiv:1502.02998 [hep-th]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.92.066006 2015

  33. [35]

    Generalized nonminimal couplings in Randall-Sundrum scenarios,

    G. Alencar, I. C. Jardim, R. R. Landim, C. R. Muniz and R. N. Costa Filho, “Generalized nonminimal couplings in Randall-Sundrum scenarios,” Phys. Rev. D93, no. 12, 124064 (2016) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.124064 [arXiv:1506.00622 [hep-th]]. 54

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.93.124064 2016

  34. [36]

    Photon mass as a probe to extra dimensions,

    G. Alencar, C. R. Muniz, R. R. Landim, I. C. Jardim and R. N. Costa Filho, “Photon mass as a probe to extra dimensions,” Phys. Lett. B759, 138 (2016) doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2016.05.062 [arXiv:1511.03608 [hep-th]]

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2016.05.062 2016

  35. [37]

    Hidden conformal symmetry in Randall-Sundrum 2 model: Universal fermion localization by torsion,

    G. Alencar, “Hidden conformal symmetry in Randall-Sundrum 2 model: Universal fermion localization by torsion,” Phys. Lett. B773, 601 (2017) doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2017.09.014 [arXiv:1705.09331 [hep-th]]

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2017.09.014 2017

  36. [38]

    Stueckelberg-like Kaluza–Klein Modes in 6D Brane World,

    C. E. Fu and H. Guo, “Stueckelberg-like Kaluza–Klein Modes in 6D Brane World,” Sym- metry18(2026) no.2, 336 doi:10.3390/sym18020336

    work page doi:10.3390/sym18020336 2026

  37. [39]

    The SM on a domain-wall brane,

    R. Davies, D. P. George and R. R. Volkas, “The SM on a domain-wall brane,” Phys. Rev. D77, 124038 (2008) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.77.124038 [arXiv:0705.1584 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.77.124038 2008

  38. [40]

    SU(5) grand unification on a domain-wall brane from an E(6)-invariant action,

    A. Davidson, D. P. George, A. Kobakhidze, R. R. Volkas and K. C. Wali, “SU(5) grand unification on a domain-wall brane from an E(6)-invariant action,” Phys. Rev. D77, 085031 (2008) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.77.085031 [arXiv:0710.3432 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.77.085031 2008

  39. [41]

    SO(10) domain-wall brane models,

    J. E. Thompson and R. R. Volkas, “SO(10) domain-wall brane models,” Phys. Rev. D80, 125016 (2009) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.80.125016 [arXiv:0908.4122 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.80.125016 2009

  40. [42]

    Fermion masses and mixing in a 4+1- dimensional SU(5) domain-wall brane model,

    B. D. Callen and R. R. Volkas, “Fermion masses and mixing in a 4+1- dimensional SU(5) domain-wall brane model,” Phys. Rev. D83, 056004 (2011) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.83.056004 [arXiv:1008.1855 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.83.056004 2011

  41. [43]

    Non-Abelian Gauge Field Localized on Walls with Four- Dimensional World Volume,

    K. Ohta and N. Sakai, “Non-Abelian Gauge Field Localized on Walls with Four- Dimensional World Volume,” Prog. Theor. Phys.124(2010), 71-93 [erratum: Prog. Theor. Phys.127(2012), 1133] doi:10.1143/PTP.124.71 [arXiv:1004.4078 [hep-th]]

    work page doi:10.1143/ptp.124.71 2010

  42. [44]

    Almost no scale supergravity,

    M. A. Luty and N. Okada, “Almost no scale supergravity,” JHEP0304, 050 (2003) doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2003/04/050 [hep-th/0209178]

    work page doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2003/04/050 2003

  43. [45]

    Vacuum Polarization and the Absence of Free Quarks in Four-Dimensions,

    J. B. Kogut and L. Susskind, “Vacuum Polarization and the Absence of Free Quarks in Four-Dimensions,” Phys. Rev. D9, 3501 (1974). doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.9.3501

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.9.3501 1974

  44. [46]

    String-Like Phase in Yang-Mills Theory,

    R. Fukuda, “String-Like Phase in Yang-Mills Theory,” Phys. Lett.73B, 305 (1978) Erra- tum: [Phys. Lett.74B, 433 (1978)]. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(78)90521-X 55

    work page doi:10.1016/0370-2693(78)90521-x 1978

  45. [47]

    Stability of the vacuum and dielectric model of confinement in QCD,

    R. Fukuda, “Stability of the vacuum and dielectric model of confinement in QCD,” Mod. Phys. Lett. A24, 251 (2009). doi:10.1142/S0217732309030035

    work page doi:10.1142/s0217732309030035 2009

  46. [48]

    Derivation of Dielectric Model of Confinement in QCD,

    R. Fukuda, “Derivation of Dielectric Model of Confinement in QCD,” arXiv:0805.3864 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv

  47. [49]

    Matter Fields and Non-Abelian Gauge Fields Localized on Walls,

    M. Arai, F. Blaschke, M. Eto and N. Sakai, “Matter Fields and Non-Abelian Gauge Fields Localized on Walls,” PTEP2013, 013B05 (2013) doi:10.1093/ptep/pts050 [arXiv:1208.6219 [hep-th]]

    work page doi:10.1093/ptep/pts050 2013

  48. [50]

    Stabilizing matter and gauge fields localized on walls,

    M. Arai, F. Blaschke, M. Eto and N. Sakai, “Stabilizing matter and gauge fields localized on walls,” PTEP2013, no.9, 093B01 (2013) doi:10.1093/ptep/ptt064 [arXiv:1303.5212 [hep-th]]

    work page doi:10.1093/ptep/ptt064 2013

  49. [51]

    Grand Unified Brane World Scenario,

    M. Arai, F. Blaschke, M. Eto and N. Sakai, “Grand Unified Brane World Scenario,” Phys. Rev. D96, no.11, 115033 (2017) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.96.115033 [arXiv:1703.00351 [hep- th]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.96.115033 2017

  50. [52]

    Non-Abelian Gauge Field Localiza- tion on Walls and Geometric Higgs Mechanism,

    M. Arai, F. Blaschke, M. Eto and N. Sakai, “Non-Abelian Gauge Field Localiza- tion on Walls and Geometric Higgs Mechanism,” PTEP2017, no.5, 053B01 (2017) doi:10.1093/ptep/ptx047 [arXiv:1703.00427 [hep-th]]

    work page doi:10.1093/ptep/ptx047 2017

  51. [53]

    Localization of the Standard Model via the Higgs mechanism and a finite electroweak monopole from non-compact five dimensions,

    M. Arai, F. Blaschke, M. Eto and N. Sakai, “Localization of the Standard Model via the Higgs mechanism and a finite electroweak monopole from non-compact five dimensions,” PTEP2018, no.8, 083B04 (2018) doi:10.1093/ptep/pty083 [arXiv:1802.06649 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1093/ptep/pty083 2018

  52. [54]

    Standard model gauge fields localized on non-Abelian vortices in six dimensions,

    M. Arai, F. Blaschke, M. Eto, M. Kawaguchi and N. Sakai, “Standard model gauge fields localized on non-Abelian vortices in six dimensions,” PTEP2021, no.12, 123B07 (2021) doi:10.1093/ptep/ptab144 [arXiv:2105.06026 [hep-th]]

    work page doi:10.1093/ptep/ptab144 2021

  53. [55]

    Localized non-Abelian gauge fields in non- compact extra-dimensions,

    M. Arai, F. Blaschke, M. Eto and N. Sakai, “Localized non-Abelian gauge fields in non- compact extra-dimensions,” PTEP2018, no.6, 063B02 (2018) doi:10.1093/ptep/pty057 [arXiv:1801.02498 [hep-th]]

    work page doi:10.1093/ptep/pty057 2018

  54. [56]

    Localization of gauge bosons and the Higgs mech- anism on topological solitons in higher dimensions,

    M. Eto and M. Kawaguchi, “Localization of gauge bosons and the Higgs mech- anism on topological solitons in higher dimensions,” JHEP10, 098 (2019) doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2019)098 [arXiv:1907.04573 [hep-th]]. 56

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep10(2019)098 2019

  55. [57]

    Domain-Wall Standard Model in non-compact 5D and LHC phenomenology,

    N. Okada, D. Raut and D. Villalba, “Domain-Wall Standard Model in non-compact 5D and LHC phenomenology,” Mod. Phys. Lett. A34, no.10, 1950080 (2019) doi:10.1142/S0217732319500809 [arXiv:1712.09323 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1142/s0217732319500809 2019

  56. [58]

    Aspects of the Domain-Wall Standard Model,

    N. Okada, D. Raut and D. Villalba, “Aspects of the Domain-Wall Standard Model,” PTEP 2024, no.2, 023B01 (2024) doi:10.1093/ptep/ptad155 [arXiv:1801.03007 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1093/ptep/ptad155 2024

  57. [59]

    Fermion Mass Hierarchy and Phenomenology in the 5D Domain Wall Standard Model,

    N. Okada, D. Raut and D. Villalba, “Fermion Mass Hierarchy and Phenomenology in the 5D Domain Wall Standard Model,” JHEP10, 259 (2019) doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2019)259 [arXiv:1904.10308 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep10(2019)259 2019

  58. [60]

    Nambu–Goldstone boson phenomenol- ogy in domain-wall standard model,

    P. Das, N. Okada, D. Raut and D. Villalba, “Nambu–Goldstone boson phenomenol- ogy in domain-wall standard model,” Eur. Phys. J. C85(2025) no.12, 1424 doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-025-15132-7 [arXiv:2508.11346 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-025-15132-7 2025

  59. [61]

    Triplet doublet splitting, proton stability and extra dimension,

    Y. Kawamura, “Triplet doublet splitting, proton stability and extra dimension,” Prog. Theor. Phys.105, 999-1006 (2001) doi:10.1143/PTP.105.999 [arXiv:hep-ph/0012125 [hep- ph]]

    work page doi:10.1143/ptp.105.999 2001

  60. [62]

    Splitting triplet and doublet in extra dimensions,

    M. Kakizaki and M. Yamaguchi, “Splitting triplet and doublet in extra dimensions,” Prog. Theor. Phys.107, 433-441 (2002) doi:10.1143/PTP.107.433 [arXiv:hep-ph/0104103 [hep- ph]]

    work page doi:10.1143/ptp.107.433 2002

  61. [63]

    A Minimal S**1 / (Z(2) x Z-prime (2)) orbifold GUT,

    A. Hebecker and J. March-Russell, “A Minimal S**1 / (Z(2) x Z-prime (2)) orbifold GUT,” Nucl. Phys. B613, 3-16 (2001) doi:10.1016/S0550-3213(01)00374-1 [arXiv:hep-ph/0106166 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1016/s0550-3213(01)00374-1 2001

  62. [64]

    Doublet - triplet splitting and fat branes,

    N. Maru, “Doublet - triplet splitting and fat branes,” Phys. Lett. B522, 117-125 (2001) doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(01)01276-X [arXiv:hep-ph/0108002 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1016/s0370-2693(01)01276-x 2001

  63. [65]

    Light Higgs triplets in extra dimensions,

    N. Haba and N. Maru, “Light Higgs triplets in extra dimensions,” Phys. Lett. B532, 93-98 (2002) doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(02)01534-4 [arXiv:hep-ph/0201216 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1016/s0370-2693(02)01534-4 2002

  64. [66]

    Fat branes, orbifolds and doublet triplet splitting,

    N. Haba and N. Maru, “Fat branes, orbifolds and doublet triplet splitting,” Eur. Phys. J. C 33, no.3, 457-461 (2004) doi:10.1140/epjc/s2003-01578-4 [arXiv:hep-ph/0306229 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s2003-01578-4 2004

  65. [67]

    Orbifold modular GUT of flavor,

    F. J. de Anda and S. F. King, “Orbifold modular GUT of flavor,” Phys. Rev. D109, no.9, 095046 (2024) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.109.095046 [arXiv:2312.09010 [hep-ph]]. 57

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.109.095046 2024

  66. [68]

    A New Lepton–Quark Mass Relation in a Unified Theory,

    H. Georgi and C. Jarlskog, “A New Lepton–Quark Mass Relation in a Unified Theory,” Phys. Lett. B86, 297 (1979). doi:10.1016/0370-2693(79)90842-6

    work page doi:10.1016/0370-2693(79)90842-6 1979

  67. [69]

    Fermion Masses and Higgs Representations in SU(5),

    J. R. Ellis and M. K. Gaillard, “Fermion Masses and Higgs Representations in SU(5),” Phys. Lett. B88, 315 (1979). doi:10.1016/0370-2693(79)90476-3

    work page doi:10.1016/0370-2693(79)90476-3 1979

  68. [70]

    Proton decay signatures of orbifold GUTs,

    A. Hebecker and J. March-Russell, “Proton decay signatures of orbifold GUTs,” Phys. Lett. B539(2002), 119-125 doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(02)02072-5 [arXiv:hep-ph/0204037 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1016/s0370-2693(02)02072-5 2002

  69. [71]

    Updated estimate of running quark masses,

    H. Fusaoka and Y. Koide, “Updated estimate of running quark masses,” Phys. Rev. D57 (1998), 3986-4001 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.57.3986 [arXiv:hep-ph/9712201 [hep-ph]]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.57.3986 1998

  70. [72]

    Impacts of the Higgs mass on vacuum stability, running fermion masses and two-body Higgs decays,

    Z. z. Xing, H. Zhang and S. Zhou, “Impacts of the Higgs mass on vacuum stability, running fermion masses and two-body Higgs decays,” Phys. Rev. D86, 013013 (2012) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.86.013013 [arXiv:1112.3112 [hep-ph]]. 58

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.86.013013 2012