Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Adding thermal masses to the plasma calculation removes the artificial infrared enhancement of W-boson friction, making gauge-boson drag subleading in cosmological bubble-wall dynamics.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-02 00:49 UTC pith:3RGHHQDV

load-bearing objection Genuine step on IR gauge-boson friction, but the claimed sub-percent insensitivity to the ad hoc a=1/2 dispersion is unsubstantiated and controls the headline result. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.14867 v1 pith:3RGHHQDV submitted 2026-07-16 hep-ph astro-ph.COhep-th

Thermal Masses and Bubble-Wall Friction in Cosmological Phase Transitions

Carlo Branchina , Stefania De Curtis , Luigi Delle Rose , Alessio Notari , Giuliano Panico , Matthew Starbuck This is my paper
classification hep-ph astro-ph.COhep-th PACS 98.80.Cq
keywords thermal massesbubble-wall frictioncosmological phase transitionsBoltzmann equationcollision integralssinglet-extended Standard Modelinfrared enhancementwall velocity
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper argues that the large W-boson contribution to bubble-wall friction, found in previous Boltzmann-equation treatments, is largely an artifact of treating gauge bosons as massless. By including thermal masses consistently in both the Liouville source term and the collision integrals, the soft infrared modes are strongly suppressed and the dominant frictional momenta shift to scales of order the temperature. For top quarks, the thermal-mass effects on the source and on interaction rates largely cancel, changing wall velocities by only a few percent. In the singlet-extended Standard Model, the resulting wall velocities are close to those obtained from top-quark friction alone, and the calculation becomes considerably less sensitive to the poorly controlled infrared sector. If correct, this gives a firmer theoretical basis for predicting gravitational-wave spectra, baryogenesis, and other observables that depend on the bubble-wall velocity.

Core claim

The central claim is that thermal masses, implemented as constant effective masses in the equilibrium distributions and entering both the Liouville operator and the collision integrals, regulate the infrared sector of the plasma and remove the artificial enhancement of soft gauge bosons in bubble-wall friction. The paper demonstrates this in the singlet-extended Standard Model: once thermal masses are included, the W-boson friction integrand loses its low-momentum peak, the dominant momenta move to the scale of the temperature, and the W contribution becomes subleading compared with the top quark. The authors further find that for top quarks the reduction of the source term and the reduction

What carries the argument

The central object is the linearised Boltzmann equation for out-of-equilibrium plasma perturbations in the bubble-wall frame, with collision integrals treated by a spectral decomposition of the collision kernel into Hermitian operators (Legendre blocks, eigenvalues, and eigenfunctions). The new ingredient is the inclusion of thermal masses m_th ~ gT in the equilibrium distribution functions that enter both the Liouville source term and the collision integrals, using constant effective masses and massless kinematics, with the ad hoc energy interpolation p0 = |p| + a m (a = 1/2) used to preserve Hermiticity. This machinery lets the authors compute how thermal masses rescale the collision kerne

Load-bearing premise

The calculation treats thermal masses as constant and retains massless kinematics in the collision integrals, restoring Hermiticity with the ad hoc interpolation p0 = |p| + a m (a = 1/2); the physical accuracy of this prescription is not derived, and a materially different infrared dispersion could change the magnitude of the W suppression.

What would settle it

Repeat the Boltzmann computation using the full finite-temperature spectral functions for transverse and longitudinal W modes instead of constant thermal masses; if the W contribution then remains comparable to the top-quark contribution, the central claim of subleading gauge-boson friction would be refuted.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Gauge-boson friction becomes subleading once thermal masses are included, so wall velocities are close to those obtained from top-quark friction alone.
  • The dominant source of uncertainty from infrared gauge modes is removed, making friction predictions less sensitive to the poorly controlled infrared sector of the plasma.
  • The compensation between source and collision effects in the top sector means the massless top-only approximation remains a good proxy across the studied parameter space.
  • The parameter region admitting stationary deflagration solutions is enlarged by out-of-equilibrium friction, and thermal masses do not radically alter this topology.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If thermal masses shift dominant W momenta to scales of order T, the quasiparticle description used in kinetic treatments is on firmer ground, and the need for separate effective descriptions of soft modes (e.g., Langevin-type approaches) is reduced for the friction budget.
  • The near-cancellation in the top sector suggests a general pattern: for fermions with thermal mass small relative to T, the massless approximation remains reliable, while for any bosonic species with O(T) thermal masses, massless treatments may overestimate friction.
  • The ad hoc p0 = |p| + a m prescription is a testable handle: repeating the calculation with the full momentum-dependent thermal dispersion relations (for both transverse and longitudinal gauge modes) would show whether the magnitude of the W suppression is robust or depends on this interpolation.
  • The neglect of top-W cross terms in the Boltzmann system, justified a posteriori by the smallness of the W contribution, could be reexamined in regions of parameter space where the W contribution is not negligible.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper revisits the computation of bubble-wall friction in cosmological phase transitions, arguing that previous Boltzmann treatments artificially enhance the infrared gauge-boson contribution by using massless equilibrium distributions. It proposes to include thermal masses consistently in the local-equilibrium distributions entering both the Liouville source term and the collision integrals, while retaining massless kinematics and leading-log amplitudes for the scattering matrix elements. The technical framework is the spectral-decomposition method of Refs. [25,27], extended to massive-equilibrium kernels. Applied to the singlet-extended SM, the paper finds that thermal masses change top-quark friction by only a few percent because source and collision effects largely compensate, but they strongly suppress W-boson friction, shifting the dominant momenta from β|p|≈0.25 to ≈1 and rendering W subleading. As a result, the full (top+W) wall velocity is close to the top-only value across the parameter space (Figs. 7–13, Table 2).

Significance. If correct, the paper's central claim is significant: it would remove a longstanding infrared uncertainty in bubble-wall friction calculations—the artificial Bose-enhanced soft gauge-boson contribution—and justify the simpler top-only, massless approximation for the SSM to a few percent. The numerical work is substantial: the spectral decomposition of the collision kernels, the systematic separation of Liouville/collision effects, the two benchmarks, and the parameter scan give a fairly complete picture. The paper is honest about its approximations, but several of those approximations are not quantitatively controlled; the most important is the a=1/2 energy interpolation that regulates the W infrared occupancy. Because the headline suppression depends on that cutoff, the robustness of the result is not yet fully established. No fitted parameters are used to force the outcome, and the qualitative shift of the W peak away from β|p|∼0.25 is clearly demonstrated.

major comments (3)
  1. [§2.3, Eq. (2.30)] Eq. (2.30) introduces p0=|p|+a m with a=1/2 as a 'technical device' to preserve Hermiticity. The paper states that friction depends on a only at the sub-percent level, but no scan, derivation, or error estimate is given. This is load-bearing: the W suppression in Figs. 9–10 is driven by the infrared behaviour of f0. For m_W≈0.6T, a=1/2 makes the soft-mode weight exp(−β a m_W)≈e^{−0.3} rather than the physical exp(−β m_W)≈e^{−0.6}, and a also enters the momentum derivative of f0 in the Liouville source. A change from a=0.5 to a=1.0 can therefore alter the W source at the tens-of-percent level, not the claimed sub-percent level, and would change the size of the W correction to v_w in Table 2. Please demonstrate robustness by scanning a (e.g. 0≤a≤1) or by using the actual HTL dispersion for the infrared modes.
  2. [§2.2, p.7 (after Eq. 2.27)] The neglect of top–W cross terms in the bracket is justified 'a posteriori, since the out-of-equilibrium contribution of the W bosons is found to be significantly smaller than that of the top quarks once thermal masses are included.' This is circular for the paper's central conclusion: the smallness of the W contribution is precisely what the calculation is meant to establish. Cross terms coupling δf_t and δf_W could feed back into the W equation and change the size of the W perturbation. Please estimate their magnitude, for example by adding one representative t–W process to the bracket, or provide a kinematic argument that they are small independently of the final W OOE size.
  3. [§2.3/Sec. 3 (source term)] The equilibrium distributions used in the source term treat the top and W as having only thermal masses, with p0=|p|+a m_th; the z-dependent VEV mass m_i(z) enters only through the force (m_i^2)' in L, as in Eq. (2.29). The paper does not quantify the error from neglecting m_i(z) in f0. For the W, m_i(z) grows from 0 to about 80 GeV across the wall at T∼100 GeV, comparable to m_W^th, so using only m_th changes the Bose weight and the p_z-derivative of f0 in the wall region. This affects the source at O(1) and therefore the W friction. Please estimate this effect, e.g. by comparing with a source built from p0=sqrt(p^2+m_i(z)^2+m_th^2) in f0.
minor comments (5)
  1. [General/typos] Page 21: 'as sown in Fig. 11' should be 'as shown in Fig. 11'. The introduction also contains an unresolved placeholder '[?]' in the reference list [?, 1–37].
  2. [Notation, Eqs. (2.16)/(2.28)] The symbol m^2_q is used for the quark thermal mass in the propagators (Eq. 2.16) and again in Eq. (2.28) for the asymptotic quark mass; the two are defined with different coefficients (g_s^2/6 vs g_s^2/6? check: Eq. 2.28 gives m_q^2=g_s^2/6 T_n^2, same as Eq. 2.16 for quarks, but m_g differs). Please define the notation once and state which mass enters each amplitude in Table 1.
  3. [Sec. 2.3] The statement 'as we have explicitly checked' regarding moderate variations of the W thermal mass not altering the results would be much more useful as a figure or a quantitative bound. A short robustness paragraph with a number would remove a reader's doubt.
  4. [Fig. 1 and general figure captions] In several captions the labels 'massive'/'massless' and the abbreviations m_th,C, m_th,L, m_th,C+L are used without being defined in the caption; please define them in the captions or in a common table.
  5. [Sec. 2.3] The treatment treats transverse and longitudinal W polarizations identically with the same thermal mass (m_W^2=11/12 g_W^2 T_n^2). Since the longitudinal plasmon dispersion differs substantially at soft momenta, a one-sentence statement of why this does not affect the conclusion would be useful.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

Mild internal circularity in the a-posteriori justification for dropping top–W cross terms; the central thermal-mass suppression is otherwise an independent calculation.

specific steps
  1. other [Sec. 2.2, paragraph following Eq. (2.27)]
    "To avoid this additional complexity, we neglect the cross terms and instead describe the top quarks and W bosons through two independent Boltzmann equations. This approximation is justified a posteriori, since the out-of-equilibrium contribution of the W bosons is found to be significantly smaller than that of the top quarks once thermal masses are included."

    The approximation (decoupling the top and W Boltzmann equations by dropping their cross terms) is justified by the paper's own conclusion that W-boson friction is subleading after thermal masses are included. But that conclusion is obtained from precisely the equations in which the cross terms are absent. If the top–W cross terms were non-negligible, the W perturbation, and thus its friction, could differ; invoking the result to validate the approximation is a closed loop. This is a localized, secondary circularity: the main thermal-mass suppression in the Liouville source and collision kernels is computed independently of this assumption.

full rationale

The paper's central claim—that including thermal masses in both the Liouville operator and the collision integrals suppresses the infrared W-boson contribution and makes it subleading—is not produced by fitting a parameter to the final wall velocity. The thermal masses are computed from the standard couplings (Eq. 2.28), and the suppression follows from inserting them into the local-equilibrium distributions and the kernel construction. The Boltzmann machinery and spectral decomposition are taken from the same authors' prior work, but those citations are method references, not load-bearing uniqueness claims or forbidden alternatives. The only genuinely circular element is the a-posteriori justification for neglecting top–W cross terms (Sec. 2.2), which is a mild internal loop but does not reduce the derivation to its inputs. The ad hoc energy interpolation p0 = |p| + a m (Eq. 2.30), fixed at a = 1/2 with a claimed sub-percent sensitivity that is not demonstrated, is an acknowledged technical device and a legitimate approximation uncertainty; it controls the low-momentum cutoff of the W equilibrium distributions and could affect the quantitative size of the W suppression, but it is not circular because it is not fitted to the predicted friction. Overall, the central derivation is self-contained against the model inputs, so the circularity score is low.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 7 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central result rests on the assumption that thermal masses can be approximated by constant leading-order values with the ad hoc dispersion interpolation; no external data are fitted, and no new entities are introduced.

free parameters (1)
  • Interpolation parameter a = 1/2
    Introduced ad hoc in Eq. (2.30) as p0 = |p| + a m to restore Hermiticity of the collision kernels when thermal masses are included in the equilibrium distributions but kinematics are kept massless. Paper claims sub-percent sensitivity to a (Sec. 2.3).
axioms (7)
  • domain assumption Boltzmann equation and quasiparticle picture valid for relevant plasma modes; 2→2 processes dominate thermalisation
    Used throughout Sec. 2.1-2.3; the paper notes validity weakens in the IR, which is the motivation for thermal masses.
  • domain assumption Perturbative leading-order thermal masses for quarks, gluons and electroweak bosons (Eq. 2.28) approximate the true dispersion relations; for W bosons this is formally unreliable since m_W ~ T
    Sec. 2.3 final comment; the entire suppression of the W contribution rests on this.
  • ad hoc to paper Equilibrium energies can be approximated with the linear dispersion p0 = |p| + a m with a = 1/2
    Eq. (2.30); introduced to preserve kernel symmetry, not derived from finite-T field theory.
  • domain assumption Collision integrals evaluated with massless kinematics and external particles massless; thermal masses only in propagators of exchanged states
    Sec. 2.1-2.2 and Table 1; this is a leading-log approximation, not an exact computation.
  • domain assumption Top-quark and W-boson Boltzmann equations treated independently, neglecting cross terms in the collision operator
    Sec. 2.2; justified a posteriori by the finding that W contributions are subleading, which is itself the paper's central result.
  • domain assumption Constant thermal masses, with longitudinal and transverse W polarizations treated identically; U(1)_Y neglected, W/Z degenerate triplet
    Sec. 2.3 and footnote 2; the authors argue dominant modes have |p| ~ T where masses vary moderately.
  • domain assumption tanh profile ansatz and the hydrodynamic equations (Eqs. 4.5-4.10) describe the wall and plasma
    Sec. 4; standard in the literature, inherited from Refs. [20,33,49].

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 23468 in / 10579 out tokens · 88093 ms · 2026-08-02T00:49:29.542184+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Bubble-wall friction controls the dynamics of first-order cosmological phase transitions. In Boltzmann-equation approaches, a major uncertainty arises from infrared gauge bosons, whose contribution is artificially enhanced in the massless approximation. We study the impact of thermal masses by including them consistently in both the Liouville operator and the collision integrals. Thermal masses suppress the source term for out-of-equilibrium perturbations while also reducing interaction rates. These effects largely cancel for top quarks, giving only percent-level changes, but they strongly suppress the infrared gauge-boson contribution, shifting the dominant momenta to scales of order the temperature. As a result, gauge bosons become subleading and wall velocities are close to those obtained from top-quark friction alone. We illustrate this in the singlet-extended Standard Model. Our results show that thermal masses reduce the sensitivity of friction calculations to the poorly controlled infrared sector of the plasma.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.14867 by Alessio Notari, Carlo Branchina, Giuliano Panico, Luigi Delle Rose, Matthew Starbuck, Stefania De Curtis.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Left panel. Kernel function Q for the top (blue lines) and W bosons (orange lines) in the case where thermal masses are neglected (solid lines) and in the case where thermal masses are included in the collision operator (dashed lines). Right panel. Ratio between the “massive” and “massless” kernels for the top (blue line) and W bosons (orange line). The blue and orange dashed lines show the asymptotic valu… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Liouville decomposition of the annihilation (first row) and scattering (second row) kernels [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Liouville decomposition of the annihilation (first row) and scattering (second row) kernels [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Left panel. Eigenvalues of the top-quark kernel operator G t l for the first eleven Legendre blocks in the massless (black points) and massive (red points) cases. For each block, the first 100 eigenvalues λ t l,i, normalised to the largest one, λ t max ≡ λ t 0,0 , are shown. Right panel. Same as the left panel, but for the W-boson kernel operator G W l , with eigenvalues normalised to λW max ≡ λ W 0,0 . mt… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Left panel. Comparison between the first 100 eigenvalues of the massless (blue points) and massive (orange points) top-quark kernel operator G t l for the first (l = 0) and last (l = 10) Legendre blocks included in the computation. Gray points denote the massless eigenvalues rescaled by the factor Q + t,m/Q + t,0 , corresponding to the ratio between the asymptotic values of the kernel function Qt in the ma… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Left panel. Comparison between the first 100 eigenvalues of the top-quark and W-boson kernel operators, G t l (blue points) and G W l (orange points), for the first (l = 0) and last (l = 10) Legendre blocks in the massless case. Right panel. Same as the left panel, but for the massive case. tance of the top and W contributions to the friction. The final result depends on the interplay between the integral … view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Wall velocity for the benchmark points BP1 and BP2, for the different treatments of thermal [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Top-quark friction integrand f (OOE) t for BP1 (upper row) and BP2 (lower row), evaluated on the solutions obtained including only top-quark out-of-equilibrium contributions. The panels cor￾respond to positions in front of the wall (z/Lh = −1, left), at the wall centre (z/Lh = 0, centre), and behind the wall (z/Lh = 1, right). for the W bosons. In fact, thermal masses regulate the infrared Bose enhancement… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Friction integrands for BP1. The upper (lower) row shows the top-quark ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Same as Fig. 9, but for BP2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Profiles of the out-of-equilibrium friction [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Temperature profiles (left panels) and plasma-velocity profiles (right panels) for the two [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Wall velocity vw as a function of the portal coupling λhs for different values of the singlet mass ms and fixed self-coupling λs = 1. For the cases with mth ̸= 0, thermal masses are included in both C and L. The quantity vJ denotes the Jouguet velocity. The most important observation is that the qualitative picture found for the benchmark points persists throughout the parameter space explored. When we co… view at source ↗

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Theoretical uncertainties in reconstructing model parameters with gravitational waves from supercooled phase transitions

    hep-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0

    In the conformal U(1)_X model, the daisy-resummed nucleation scheme shifts LISA-reconstructed gauge couplings by O(10%) relative to the NLO effective-field-theory result, an order of magnitude above the Fisher-matrix ...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

51 extracted references · 43 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    G. D. Moore and T. Prokopec,Bubble wall velocity in a first order electroweak phase transition, Phys. Rev. Lett.75(1995), 777-780, arXiv:hep-ph/9503296 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  2. [2]

    G. D. Moore and T. Prokopec,How fast can the wall move? A Study of the electroweak phase transition dynamics, Phys. Rev. D52(1995), 7182-7204, arXiv:hep-ph/9506475 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  3. [3]

    G. D. Moore,Electroweak bubble wall friction: Analytic results, JHEP03(2000), 006, arXiv:hep-ph/0001274 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  4. [4]

    John and M

    P. John and M. G. Schmidt,Do stops slow down electroweak bubble walls?, Nucl. Phys. B 598(2001), 291-305 [erratum: Nucl. Phys. B648(2003), 449-452], arXiv:hep-ph/0002050 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  5. [5]

    J. M. Cline, M. Joyce and K. Kainulainen,Supersymmetric electroweak baryogenesis, JHEP07(2000), 018, arXiv:hep-ph/0006119 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  6. [6]

    Fromme and S

    L. Fromme and S. J. Huber,Top transport in electroweak baryogenesis, JHEP03(2007), 049, arXiv:hep-ph/0604159 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  7. [7]

    Megevand and A

    A. Megevand and A. D. Sanchez,Velocity of electroweak bubble walls, Nucl. Phys. B825 (2010), 151-176, arXiv:0908.3663 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  8. [8]

    S. J. Huber and M. Sopena,An efficient approach to electroweak bubble velocities, arXiv:1302.1044 [hep-ph]. 25

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  9. [9]

    Konstandin, G

    T. Konstandin, G. Nardini and I. Rues,From Boltzmann equations to steady wall veloci- ties, JCAP09(2014), 028, arXiv:1407.3132 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  10. [10]

    Kozaczuk,Bubble Expansion and the Viability of Singlet-Driven Electroweak Baryoge- nesis, JHEP10(2015), 135, arXiv:1506.04741 [hep-ph]

    J. Kozaczuk,Bubble Expansion and the Viability of Singlet-Driven Electroweak Baryoge- nesis, JHEP10(2015), 135, arXiv:1506.04741 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  11. [11]

    G. C. Dorsch, S. J. Huber and T. Konstandin,Bubble wall velocities in the Standard Model and beyond, JCAP12(2018), 034, arXiv:1809.04907 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  12. [12]

    J. M. Cline and K. Kainulainen,Electroweak baryogenesis at high bubble wall velocities,” Phys. Rev. D101(2020) no.6, 063525, arXiv:2001.00568 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  13. [13]

    Laurent and J

    B. Laurent and J. M. Cline,Fluid equations for fast-moving electroweak bubble walls, Phys. Rev. D102(2020) no.6, 063516, arXiv:2007.10935 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  14. [14]

    Friedlander, I

    A. Friedlander, I. Banta, J. M. Cline and D. Tucker-Smith,Wall speed and shape in singlet-assisted strong electroweak phase transitions, Phys. Rev. D103(2021) no.5, 055020, arXiv:2009.14295 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  15. [15]

    X. Wang, F. P. Huang and X. Zhang,Bubble wall velocity beyond leading-log approxima- tion in electroweak phase transition, arXiv:2011.12903 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  16. [16]

    G. C. Dorsch, S. J. Huber and T. Konstandin,On the wall velocity dependence of elec- troweak baryogenesis, JCAP08(2021), 020, arXiv:2106.06547 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  17. [17]

    J. M. Cline and B. Laurent,Electroweak baryogenesis from light fermion sources: A critical study, Phys. Rev. D104(2021) no.8, 083507, arXiv:2108.04249 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  18. [18]

    Lewicki, M

    M. Lewicki, M. Merchand and M. Zych,Electroweak bubble wall expansion: gravitational waves and baryogenesis in Standard Model-like thermal plasma, JHEP02(2022), 017, arXiv:2111.02393 [astro-ph.CO]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  19. [19]

    G. C. Dorsch, S. J. Huber and T. Konstandin,A sonic boom in bubble wall friction, JCAP 04(2022) no.04, 010 arXiv:2112.12548 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  20. [20]

    De Curtis, L

    S. De Curtis, L. Delle Rose, A. Guiggiani, ´A. G. Muyor and G. Panico,Bubble wall dynamics at the electroweak phase transition, JHEP03(2022), 163, arXiv:2201.08220 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  21. [21]

    Laurent and J

    B. Laurent and J. M. Cline,First principles determination of bubble wall velocity, Phys. Rev. D106(2022) no.2, 023501, arXiv:2204.13120 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  22. [22]

    De Curtis, L

    S. De Curtis, L. Delle Rose, A. Guiggiani, ´A. Gil Muyor and G. Panico,Dynamics of bubble walls at the electroweak phase transition, EPJ Web Conf.270(2022), 00035, arXiv:2209.06509 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  23. [23]

    De Curtis, L

    S. De Curtis, L. Delle Rose, A. Guiggiani, ´A. Gil Muyor and G. Panico,Bubble wall dynamics at the electroweak scale, PoSICHEP2022, 080

  24. [24]

    Jiang, F

    S. Jiang, F. P. Huang and X. Wang,Bubble wall velocity during electroweak phase transi- tion in the inert doublet model, Phys. Rev. D107(2023) no.9, 095005, arXiv:2211.13142 [hep-ph]. 26

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  25. [25]

    De Curtis, L

    S. De Curtis, L. Delle Rose, A. Guiggiani, ´A. Gil Muyor and G. Panico,Collision integrals for cosmological phase transitions, JHEP05(2023), 194, arXiv:2303.05846 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  26. [26]

    G. C. Dorsch and D. A. Pinto,Bubble wall velocities with an extended fluid Ansatz, JCAP 04(2024), 027, arXiv:2312.02354 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  27. [27]

    De Curtis, L

    S. De Curtis, L. Delle Rose, A. Guiggiani, ´A. Gil Muyor and G. Panico,Non-linearities in cosmological bubble wall dynamics, JHEP05(2024), 009, arXiv:2401.13522 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  28. [28]

    Kainulainen and N

    K. Kainulainen and N. Venkatesan,Systematic moment expansion for electroweak baryo- genesis, JCAP08(2024), 058, arXiv:2407.13639 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  29. [29]

    Branchina, A

    C. Branchina, A. Conaci, S. De Curtis, L. Delle Rose, A. Guiggiani, A. Gil Muyor and G. Panico,New calculation of collision integrals for cosmological phase transitions, EPJ Web Conf.314(2024), 00031, arXiv:2410.00766 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  30. [30]

    Ekstedt, O

    A. Ekstedt, O. Gould, J. Hirvonen, B. Laurent, L. Niemi, P. Schicho and J. van de Vis, How fast does the WallGo? A package for computing wall velocities in first-order phase transitions, JHEP04(2025), 101, arXiv:2411.04970 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  31. [31]

    W. Y. Ai, B. Laurent and J. van de Vis,Bounds on the bubble wall velocity, JHEP02 (2025), 119, arXiv:2411.13641 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  32. [32]

    G. C. Dorsch, T. Konstandin, E. Perboni and D. A. Pinto,Non-singular solutions to the Boltzmann equation with a fluid Ansatz, JCAP04(2025), 033, arXiv:2412.09266 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  33. [33]

    Branchina, A

    C. Branchina, A. Conaci, L. Delle Rose and S. De Curtis,Bubble wall velocity with out-of-equilibrium corrections, Phys. Rev. D113(2026) no.3, 035024, arXiv:2510.21942 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2026

  34. [34]

    Barni,Electroweak Baryogenesis with BARYONET: a self-contained review of the WKB approach, arXiv:2510.21915 [hep-ph]

    G. Barni,Electroweak Baryogenesis with BARYONET: a self-contained review of the WKB approach, arXiv:2510.21915 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  35. [35]

    van de Vis, P

    J. van de Vis, P. Schicho, L. Niemi, B. Laurent, J. Hirvonen and O. Gould,WallGo investigates: Theoretical uncertainties in the bubble wall velocity, JHEP04(2026), 041, arXiv:2510.27691 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2026

  36. [36]

    Ekstedt, T

    A. Ekstedt, T. Konstandin and J. van de Vis,Scalar damping in cosmological phase transitions, arXiv:2512.16663 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  37. [37]

    Krajewski, M

    T. Krajewski, M. Lewicki, M. Merchand, I. Nalecz and M. Zych,From friction scaling to an efficient method for estimating bubble wall velocity, arXiv:2603.24583 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv

  38. [38]

    P. B. Arnold, D. Son and L. G. Yaffe,The Hot baryon violation rate is O (alpha-w**5 T**4), Phys. Rev. D55(1997), 6264-6273, arXiv:hep-ph/9609481 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  39. [39]

    Huet and D

    P. Huet and D. T. Son,Long range physics in a hot nonAbelian plasma, Phys. Lett. B 393(1997), 94-102, arXiv:hep-ph/9610259 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  40. [40]

    D. T. Son,Effective nonperturbative real time dynamics of soft modes in hot gauge theo- ries, arXiv:hep-ph/9707351 [hep-ph]. 27

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  41. [41]

    Bodeker,On the effective dynamics of soft nonAbelian gauge fields at finite tempera- ture, Phys

    D. Bodeker,On the effective dynamics of soft nonAbelian gauge fields at finite tempera- ture, Phys. Lett. B426(1998), 351-360, arXiv:hep-ph/9801430 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  42. [42]

    Bodeker,Diagrammatic approach to soft nonAbelian dynamics at high temperature, Nucl

    D. Bodeker,Diagrammatic approach to soft nonAbelian dynamics at high temperature, Nucl. Phys. B566(2000), 402-422, arXiv:hep-ph/9903478 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  43. [43]

    Bodeker,From hard thermal loops to Langevin dynamics, Nucl

    D. Bodeker,From hard thermal loops to Langevin dynamics, Nucl. Phys. B559(1999), 502-538, arXiv:hep-ph/9905239 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  44. [44]

    P. B. Arnold, D. T. Son and L. G. Yaffe,Longitudinal subtleties in diffusive Langevin equations for nonAbelian plasmas, Phys. Rev. D60(1999), 025007, arXiv:hep-ph/9901304 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  45. [45]

    P. B. Arnold and L. G. Yaffe,Nonperturbative dynamics of hot nonAbelian gauge fields: Beyond leading log approximation, Phys. Rev. D62(2000), 125013, arXiv:hep- ph/9912305 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2000

  46. [46]

    M. L. Bellac,Thermal Field Theory, Cambridge University Press, 2011

    2011

  47. [47]

    Kraemmer, A

    U. Kraemmer, A. K. Rebhan and H. Schulz,Resummations in hot scalar electrodynamics, Annals Phys.238(1995), 286-331, arXiv:hep-ph/9403301 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  48. [48]

    H. A. Weldon,Effective Fermion Masses of Order gT in High Temperature Gauge Theories with Exact Chiral Invariance, Phys. Rev. D26(1982), 2789

    1982

  49. [49]

    Branchina, A

    C. Branchina, A. Conaci, L. Delle Rose and S. De Curtis,Electroweak phase transition and bubble wall velocity in local thermal equilibrium, Phys. Rev. D112(2025) no.9, 095008, arXiv:2504.21213 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  50. [50]

    W. Y. Ai, M. Carosi, B. Garbrecht, C. Tamarit and M. Vanvlasselaer,Bubble wall dy- namics from nonequilibrium quantum field theory, JHEP08(2025), 077, arXiv:2504.13725 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  51. [51]

    M. J. Ramsey-Musolf and J. Zhu,Bubble wall velocity from Kadanoff-Baym equations: fluid dynamics and microscopic interactions, arXiv:2504.13724 [hep-ph]. 28

    Pith/arXiv arXiv