Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 92 references

New axion contribution to the two-photon decays of neutral pions

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

Pith's one-line read Axion-pion mixing adds a missing one-loop term to the neutral pion's two-photon decay.

desk verdict A plausible and likely correct new axion-pion mixing correction to pi0 to gamma gamma, negligible for standard QCD axions; the MeV-scale optimism rests on an unverified mass relation and the abstract overstates the heavy-axion case. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.04060 v2 pith:CJLMJ2HK submitted 2025-02-06 hep-ph hep-ex

classification hep-phhep-ex
keywords axion-pionmixingneutralpiondecaytwo-photonchiralperturbationtheoryWess-Zumino-WittentermQCDaxionheavyO(p^6)correction
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 identifies a one-loop correction to the $\pi^0\to\gamma\gamma$ decay width that has been missing from all previous chiral perturbation theory calculations. It arises because the axion and the neutral pion mix through the $O(p^4)$ chiral Lagrangian, and this mixing feeds into the Wess-Zumino-Witten anomalous vertex. The correction is proportional to the axion mass squared and to the axion-photon coupling, so it is numerically tiny for the standard light QCD axion but can grow toward the MeV scale. Because the correction is so small for standard axions, the paper concludes that a standard QCD axion cannot explain the small mismatch between the chiral prediction and the measured pion lifetime.

What carries the argument

The central object is the axion-pion mass-mixing angle $\varepsilon$ that appears when the $(\pi_3, a)$ mass matrix generated by the $l_7$ low-energy constant is diagonalized. In the authors' basis, leading-order mixing is absent by construction, but the $l_7$ term of the $O(p^4)$ chiral Lagrangian reintroduces it; inserting the physical $\pi^0$ and axion states into the Wess-Zumino-Witten and axion-photon vertices then yields $\delta_{\mathrm{mix}}$ in closed form. The same $l_7$ coupling, together with the NLO relation $m_a^2 f_a^2 = \frac{z}{(z+1)^2} m_\pi^2 f_\pi^2 (1+\beta_m)$, converts the correction from a function of the axion decay constant into a function of the axion mass.

What would settle it

Calculate the QCD contribution to the axion mass as a function of $f_a$ at masses around 1-100 MeV from first principles, for example with lattice QCD or a controlled instanton computation; if $m_a^2 f_a^2$ deviates from the standard relation by more than the input errors, the plotted magnitude of $\delta_{\mathrm{mix}}$ in the heavy-mass region is not reliable. A second check would be a more precise measurement of the $\pi^0\to\gamma\gamma$ width: agreement with the standard NLO chiral prediction within a smaller experimental error would confirm that the correction is negligible for light axions.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The authors show that, in SU(2) chiral perturbation theory with the Wess-Zumino-Witten term, axion-pion mixing produces a new $O(p^6)$ correction to the $\pi^0\to\gamma\gamma$ amplitude, $$\delta_{\mathrm{mix}} = \frac{2 l_7 $m_a^{2}$}{f_\$pi^{2}$ (1+\beta_m)} \frac{1-z}{1+z}\left(\frac{E}{C} - \frac{2}{3}\frac{4+z}{1+z}\right),$$ which is Eq. (18) of the paper. This term is nonzero only through isospin breaking, since it carries the factor $(1-z)/(1+z)$ with $z=m_u/m_d$, and it vanishes when the axion-photon coupling tends to zero. For the standard QCD axion the term is extremely small, so the paper rules it out as an explanation of the tension between the chiral-theory prediction and the measured width. For heavy QCD axions with masses around or above the MeV scale, the same term can be comparable to the other one-loop contributions.

Load-bearing premise

The quantitative size of $\delta_{\mathrm{mix}}$ at MeV-scale axion masses assumes that the standard relation between the axion mass and its decay constant, $m_a^2 f_a^2 = \frac{z}{(z+1)^2} m_\pi^2 f_\pi^2 (1+\beta_m)$, continues to hold in the heavy-mass regime, even though the paper itself notes that an extra non-QCD mass source would modify that relation.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If Eq. (18) is correct, any chiral perturbation theory calculation of the neutral pion lifetime that includes an axion background must retain $\delta_{\mathrm{mix}}$; it is an unavoidable analytic contribution rather than a negligible higher-order artifact.
  • For the standard QCD axion with mass below about an MeV, $\delta_{\mathrm{mix}}$ is far too small to affect the decay width, so the measured pion lifetime cannot be explained by the standard QCD axion.
  • For heavy QCD axions in the MeV range, $\delta_{\mathrm{mix}}$ can be comparable to other one-loop corrections and should be included when comparing predictions with experimental pion-decay data or when deriving axion constraints from such data.
  • The same mixing mechanism extends to axion-like particles with MeV-scale masses, where the formula can be applied with model-dependent choices of the anomaly coefficients and the mass-decay-constant relation.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Extension: because $\delta_{\mathrm{mix}}$ is proportional to the same anomaly combination that enters the axion-photon coupling, mechanisms that enhance $g_{a\gamma\gamma}$ would also enhance the pion-decay correction, so $\pi^0\to\gamma\gamma$ could serve as an indirect probe of axion-photon interactions even in regions where direct axion searches are insensitive.
  • Extension: the factor $(1-z)/(1+z)$ ties the correction to the up-down quark mass difference; an independent high-precision determination of $z$ combined with a measured pion width could in principle isolate this mixing contribution from other isospin-breaking effects, a separation the paper does not attempt.
  • Extension: for axion-like particles, whose mass is not related to $f_a$ by Eq. (19), the numerical size of $\delta_{\mathrm{mix}}$ at a given mass is no longer fixed by the QCD relation; applying Eq. (18) to such particles would require treating $m_a$ and $f_a$ as independent inputs, which the paper leaves for future work.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. This paper studies the decay pi0 -> gamma gamma in SU(2) chiral perturbation theory with a background QCD axion field. The authors claim that axion-pion mixing at O(p^4) generates a new O(p^6) relative correction to the pi0 gamma gamma amplitude, given by Eq. (18), proportional to l7, (1-z)/(1+z), m_a^2/f_pi^2, and the axion-photon coupling combination E/C - (2/3)(4+z)/(1+z). Using the standard relation m_a^2 f_a^2 = z/(1+z)^2 m_pi^2 f_pi^2 (1+beta_m), Eq. (19), they plot |delta_mix| as a function of m_a up to the MeV scale for several E/C values, concluding that the correction is negligible for the classical QCD axion window but may become non-negligible for MeV-scale or heavier QCD axions. They further argue that, because delta_mix is tiny for the standard QCD axion, the standard axion cannot explain the possible discrepancy between the CHPT prediction and the PrimEx-II measurement of the pi0 lifetime.

Significance. If Eq. (18) is correct, the paper identifies a previously omitted contribution to the pi0 -> gamma gamma amplitude that is analytically unavoidable at O(p^6) in SU(2) CHPT. The derivation is not circular: the low-energy constants l7, z, f_pi, m_pi, and the mass relation are taken from external CHPT and lattice fits, and no parameter is adjusted to the PrimEx-II width. For the standard QCD axion the numerical smallness of delta_mix follows robustly, so the statement that the standard QCD axion cannot explain the PrimEx-II discrepancy is on solid ground. The quantitative extension to MeV-scale axions is weaker, however, because it relies on the mass-decay-constant relation in a regime where the paper itself shows that an extra mass source can invalidate that relation. The paper's explicit caveat in Sec. III that the MeV-scale estimate is a qualitative illustration is appropriate and should be made more prominent.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. III, Eq. (19), Fig. 2, Eq. (21)] The quantitative curves in Fig. 2 for MeV-scale masses are obtained by replacing the factor 1/f_a^2 in delta_mix with m_a^2 via Eq. (19). For the heavy QCD axion mechanisms cited in Sec. III, however, the axion mass receives an extra contribution M^2 from additional PQ-breaking sources, as the paper itself states in Eq. (21). Combining the original 1/f_a^2 form of delta_mix with Eq. (21) gives delta_mix proportional to (m_a^2 - M^2) up to constants, so when the extra mass source dominates, the true delta_mix is suppressed relative to the Fig. 2 curves by a factor (m_a^2 - M^2)/m_a^2. Since this suppression can be orders of magnitude in the heavy-QCD-axion scenarios invoked, the abstract's claim that the correction 'may not be negligible' for MeV or larger masses is not established by the plotted curves; at best they provide an upper bound. This is load-bearing for the secondary quantitative claim and should be addressed by either restricting the claim or explicitly presenting the curves as upper bounds with the caveat stated in the abstract.
  2. [Sec. III, Eq. (18)] The central new result, Eq. (18), is stated without showing the amplitude computation that produces it. The text says the correction can be derived from the merged effective Lagrangian, but neither the relevant Feynman rules for the axion-pion mixing vertex nor the algebraic steps leading to Eq. (18) are presented. Because Eq. (18) is the central claim of the paper, a derivation, or at least the key intermediate steps and the intermediate expression for the amplitude, should be included in the main text or Appendix A. This would also resolve possible normalization ambiguities and make the paper independently verifiable.
  3. [Abstract vs. Sec. III, last paragraph] The manuscript explicitly disclaims the MeV-scale estimate as 'just a qualitative illustration' and states that its plausibility at the MeV mass scale would require a convincingly precise formula for the QCD axion mass in that range. The abstract, however, presents the 'may not be negligible' conclusion for the MeV or larger mass range without this caveat. The abstract should be aligned with the body of the paper so that the heavy-mass statement is not overstated.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Fig. 1 caption] The caption lists two entries labeled (c): 'the tadpole diagram from WZW Lagrangian' and 'the diagram with one vertex from the WZW Lagrangian and the other from O(p^2) Lagrangian'; the second of these should be relabeled to avoid confusion with the subsequent (d) entry.
  2. [Sec. III, Eq. (15)] Before Eq. (15), the quantities delta_tree and delta_mix are introduced as relative corrections to the amplitude, but this is not stated explicitly; adding one sentence defining them as amplitude-level relative corrections would improve clarity.
  3. [Sec. III, discussion after Eq. (18)] The sentence 'the correction delta_mix tends to vanish as the axion-photon coupling constant approaches zero' is imprecise: the bracket in Eq. (18) vanishes at the specific point E/C = (2/3)(4+z)/(1+z), not as an asymptotic limit of the coupling going to zero, and this wording could be clarified.
  4. [Sec. III, input values, Eq. (22)] The input value l7 = (7 +/- 4) x 10^-3 has a very large relative uncertainty, and the combination h1^r - h3 - l4^r also has a sizable error; the resulting wide bands in Fig. 2 are acknowledged but a brief quantitative discussion of how these uncertainties propagate into the conclusions would be useful.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the new axion-pion mixing correction is derived from external CHPT inputs and is not fitted to the target width.

full rationale

The central result, Eq. (18), is a derived quantity: the mixing angle in Eq. (A4) follows from diagonalizing the axion-pion mass matrix (Eqs. (A1)-(A4)), and the axion-photon vertex is the standard O(p^4) coupling in Eq. (12). None of the numerical inputs in Eq. (22) (l7, z, f_pi, m_pi, h1-h3-l4) are fitted to delta_mix or to the experimental pi0 width; they come from external CHPT and lattice determinations. The paper even refuses to use the two-photon-fitted combinations of the cW_i couplings to evaluate the full width, so there is no fitted-input-called-prediction loop. The PrimEx-II measurement is used only as a comparison value, not as an input. Ref. [25] is a same-author citation for the axion-photon coupling, but Eq. (12) is a standard, parameter-free formula and is not the novel claim, so the citation is independent support rather than load-bearing circularity. The only substantive weakness is the heavy-axion extrapolation: Eq. (21) introduces an extra mass source M^2 that invalidates Eq. (19), and the text itself concedes that 'the estimate of delta_mix up to the MeV mass range is just a qualitative illustration.' That is a robustness/correctness caveat, not a circular reduction of Eq. (18) to its own inputs. Therefore no circularity is found.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central formula depends on four external inputs (l7, z, h1^r-h3-l4^r, E/C) and on the validity of the axion mass-decay constant relation in the heavy-mass regime. No new entities are introduced. The heavy-axion curve uses Eq. (19) even though Eq. (21) shows that relation is modified by M^2, which is the main internal tension.

free parameters (5)
  • l7 (NLO chiral low-energy constant) = 7 x 10^-3 central, with range +/- 4 x 10^-3
    Enters delta_mix linearly through the axion-pion mixing angle in Eq. (18); taken from the external fit in Ref. [24], not determined in this paper.
  • z = m_u / m_d = 0.48 +/- 0.03
    Controls isospin violation in the mixing term and the model-independent part of g_a_gamma_gamma; taken from Ref. [24].
  • h1^r - h3 - l4^r = (4.8 +/- 1.4) x 10^-3
    Enters the NLO correction beta_m in Eq. (20) used to relate m_a and f_a; taken from Ref. [24].
  • E/C (axion electromagnetic-color anomaly ratio) = 8/3, 0, 10 (illustrative values in Fig. 2)
    Model-dependent part of the axion-photon coupling; not fitted here, but varied to illustrate the correction. The size estimate depends on this model parameter.
  • M^2 (extra PQ-symmetry-breaking mass contribution) = not fixed; discussed for heavy QCD axion scenarios
    Introduced in Eq. (21) to model a heavy QCD axion mass from the hidden sector; not used in the Fig. 2 curves, which rely on Eq. (19).
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The QCD axion is a Goldstone boson of a global U(1)_PQ symmetry and is described by the SU(2) chiral Lagrangian with the WZW anomaly term.
    Basis of the entire calculation; introduced in Sec. II.
  • domain assumption At NLO, the only tree-level axion-pion mass mixing is the isospin-violating term proportional to l7 in the chosen Xa basis.
    Appendix A claims this choice precludes derivative mixing at LO; if derivative mixing or additional operators contribute at O(p^4), the mixing angle in Eq. (A4) and delta_mix would change.
  • standard math The one-loop diagrams (c) and (d) in Fig. 1 cancel exactly, as stated in Ref. [55].
    Used in Sec. III to discard all other one-loop contributions; the paper does not rederive this cancellation.
  • ad hoc to paper The relation m_a^2 f_a^2 = z/(z+1)^2 m_pi^2 f_pi^2 (1+beta_m), Eq. (19), remains valid for the axion masses considered, including the heavy-MeV region.
    Used to plot delta_mix versus m_a in Fig. 2; the paper simultaneously introduces Eq. (21) showing that an extra mass term M^2 modifies this relation for heavy QCD axions, so this assumption is internally inconsistent in the heavy-mass regime.
  • domain assumption The discrepancy between the LO chiral prediction and PrimEx-II is a real effect that could in principle be explained by an axion contribution.
    Underlies the concluding 'rules out' statement; the 7.802 +/- 0.117 eV measurement overlaps the 7.763 +/- 0.016 eV prediction within errors, so the 'discrepancy' is not statistically established.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of New axion contribution to the two-photon decays of neutral pions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CJLMJ2HK

@misc{pith2026250204060,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: New axion contribution to the two-photon decays of neutral pions},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CJLMJ2HK}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.04060}
}
abstract

The presence of axions introduces new diagrams at one-loop order to the two-photon decays of the neutral pion through axion-pion mixing. In this work, we calculate this correction, missing in all current calculations, in the framework of SU(2) chiral perturbation theory. We show that the correction is proportional to the axion-photon coupling and the square of axion mass, which in turn is strongly suppressed by the axion decay constant for the classical space window but may not be negligible for the QCD axion in the MeV or even larger mass range. On the other hand, in combination with the experimental measurement of the decay width of $\pi^0\rightarrow\gamma\gamma$ process, this result rules out the standard QCD axion as an explanation for the possible discrepancy between the chiral perturbation theory prediction and the experimental data.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.04060 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. The Feynman diagrams contribute to the anomalous decay of neutral pion: (a) axion-pion mass mixing, (b) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. The relative correction [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

92 extracted references · 29 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Neutral Pion Lifetime Measurements and the QCD Chiral Anomaly,

    A. M. Bernstein and Barry R. Holstein, “Neutral Pion Lifetime Measurements and the QCD Chiral Anomaly,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 85, 49 (2013), arXiv:1112.4809 [hep-ph]

  2. [2]

    Pions: the original Nambu–Goldstone bosons: An introduction and precision pion physics,

    B. Ananthanarayan, “Pions: the original Nambu–Goldstone bosons: An introduction and precision pion physics,” Eur. Phys. J. ST 231, 91–102 (2022)

  3. [3]

    50 Years of Quantum Chromodynam- ics,

    Franz Gross et al., “50 Years of Quantum Chromodynam- ics,” Eur. Phys. J. C 83, 1125 (2023), arXiv:2212.11107 [hep-ph]

  4. [4]

    Re- view of Particle Physics,

    R. L. Workman and Others (Particle Data Group), “Re- view of Particle Physics,” PTEP 2022, 083C01 (2022)

  5. [5]

    A New Light Boson?

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

  6. [6]

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

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

  7. [7]

    Opening the Axion Window,

    David B. Kaplan, “Opening the Axion Window,” Nucl. Phys. B 260, 215–226 (1985)

  8. [8]

    Axion couplings to electroweak gauge bosons,

    G. Alonso- ´Alvarez, M. B. Gavela, and P. Quilez, “Axion couplings to electroweak gauge bosons,” Eur. Phys. J. C 79, 223 (2019), arXiv:1811.05466 [hep-ph]

Show all 92 references
  1. [9]

    Cp conservation in the presence of instantons,

    R. D. Peccei and Helen R. Quinn, “Cp conservation in the presence of instantons,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 38, 1440–1443 (1977)

  2. [10]

    Constraints Imposed by CP Conservation in the Presence of Instantons,

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

  3. [11]

    A Simple Solution to the Strong CP Problem with a Harm- less Axion,

    Michael Dine, Willy Fischler, and Mark Srednicki, “A Simple Solution to the Strong CP Problem with a Harm- less Axion,” Phys. Lett. B 104, 199–202 (1981)

  4. [12]

    On Possible Suppression of the Axion Hadron Interactions. (In Russian),

    A. R. Zhitnitsky, “On Possible Suppression of the Axion Hadron Interactions. (In Russian),” Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 31, 260 (1980)

  5. [13]

    Weak Interaction Singlet and Strong CP Invariance,

    Jihn E. Kim, “Weak Interaction Singlet and Strong CP Invariance,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 43, 103 (1979)

  6. [14]

    Can Confinement Ensure Natural CP Invari- ance of Strong Interactions?

    Mikhail A. Shifman, A. I. Vainshtein, and Valentin I. Zakharov, “Can Confinement Ensure Natural CP Invari- ance of Strong Interactions?” Nucl. Phys. B166, 493–506 (1980)

  7. [15]

    Cos- mology of the Invisible Axion,

    John Preskill, Mark B. Wise, and Frank Wilczek, “Cos- mology of the Invisible Axion,” Phys. Lett. B 120, 127– 132 (1983)

  8. [16]

    Feebly-interacting particles: FIPs 2022 Workshop Report,

    C. Antel et al., “Feebly-interacting particles: FIPs 2022 Workshop Report,” Eur. Phys. J. C 83, 1122 (2023), arXiv:2305.01715 [hep-ph]. 7

  9. [17]

    Mi- crowave cavity searches for dark-matter axions,

    R. Bradley, J. Clarke, D. Kinion, L. J. Rosenberg, K. van Bibber, S. Matsuki, M. Muck, and P. Sikivie, “Mi- crowave cavity searches for dark-matter axions,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 75, 777–817 (2003)

  10. [18]

    The Low-Energy Frontier of Particle Physics,

    Joerg Jaeckel and Andreas Ringwald, “The Low-Energy Frontier of Particle Physics,” Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 60, 405–437 (2010), arXiv:1002.0329 [hep-ph]

  11. [19]

    Exploring the Role of Axions and Other WISPs in the Dark Universe,

    Andreas Ringwald, “Exploring the Role of Axions and Other WISPs in the Dark Universe,” Phys. Dark Univ. 1, 116–135 (2012), arXiv:1210.5081 [hep-ph]

  12. [20]

    Ex- perimental Searches for the Axion and Axion-Like Par- ticles,

    Peter W. Graham, Igor G. Irastorza, Steven K. Lam- oreaux, Axel Lindner, and Karl A. van Bibber, “Ex- perimental Searches for the Axion and Axion-Like Par- ticles,” Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 65, 485–514 (2015), arXiv:1602.00039 [hep-ex]

  13. [21]

    Invisible Axion Search Methods,

    Pierre Sikivie, “Invisible Axion Search Methods,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 93, 015004 (2021), arXiv:2003.02206 [hep- ph]

  14. [22]

    A Review of Axion Lasing in Astrophysics,

    Liang Chen and Thomas W. Kephart, “A Review of Axion Lasing in Astrophysics,” Universe 10, 24 (2024), arXiv:2311.16453 [hep-ph]

  15. [23]

    Axion dark matter: How to see it?

    Yannis K. Semertzidis and SungWoo Youn, “Axion dark matter: How to see it?” Sci. Adv. 8, abm9928 (2022), arXiv:2104.14831 [hep-ph]

  16. [24]

    The QCD ax- ion, precisely,

    Giovanni Grilli di Cortona, Edward Hardy, Javier Pardo Vega, and Giovanni Villadoro, “The QCD ax- ion, precisely,” JHEP 01, 034 (2016), arXiv:1511.02867 [hep-ph]

  17. [25]

    QCD θ-vacuum en- ergy and axion properties,

    Zhen-Yan Lu, Meng-Lin Du, Feng-Kun Guo, Ulf-G. Meißner, and Thomas Vonk, “QCD θ-vacuum en- ergy and axion properties,” JHEP 05, 001 (2020), arXiv:2003.01625 [hep-ph]

  18. [26]

    Axions and the Strong CP Problem,

    Jihn E. Kim and Gianpaolo Carosi, “Axions and the Strong CP Problem,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 82, 557–602 (2010), arXiv:0807.3125 [hep-ph]

  19. [27]

    Axion Cosmology,

    David J. E. Marsh, “Axion Cosmology,” Phys. Rept.643, 1–79 (2016), arXiv:1510.07633 [astro-ph.CO]

  20. [28]

    The landscape of QCD axion models,

    Luca Di Luzio, Maurizio Giannotti, Enrico Nardi, and Luca Visinelli, “The landscape of QCD axion models,” Phys. Rept. 870, 1–117 (2020), arXiv:2003.01100 [hep- ph]

  21. [29]

    Precision measurement of the neutral pion lifetime,

    I. Larin et al. (PrimEx-II), “Precision measurement of the neutral pion lifetime,” Science 368, 506–509 (2020)

  22. [30]

    Two-photon decay of the neutral pion in lattice QCD,

    Xu Feng, Sinya Aoki, Hidenori Fukaya, Shoji Hashimoto, Takashi Kaneko, Jun-ichi Noaki, and Eigo Shintani, “Two-photon decay of the neutral pion in lattice QCD,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 182001 (2012), arXiv:1206.1375 [hep-lat]

  23. [31]

    Pseudoscalar decays into photon-photon in chiral per- turbation theory,

    Johan Bijnens, Albert Bramon, and Fernando Cornet, “Pseudoscalar decays into photon-photon in chiral per- turbation theory,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 61, 1453 (1988)

  24. [32]

    Chiral sum rules for parameters of the order six Lagrangian in the W-Z sector and application to pi0, eta, eta-prime decays,

    B. Moussallam, “Chiral sum rules for parameters of the order six Lagrangian in the W-Z sector and application to pi0, eta, eta-prime decays,” Phys. Rev. D 51, 4939–4949 (1995), arXiv:hep-ph/9407402

  25. [33]

    De- cay π0 → γγ to next to leading order in chiral perturba- tion theory,

    J. L. Goity, A. M. Bernstein, and B. R. Holstein, “De- cay π0 → γγ to next to leading order in chiral perturba- tion theory,” Phys. Rev. D 66, 076014 (2002), arXiv:hep- ph/0206007

  26. [34]

    Two photon decays of pi0, eta and eta-prime,

    B. Borasoy and R. Nissler, “Two photon decays of pi0, eta and eta-prime,” Eur. Phys. J. A 19, 367–382 (2004), arXiv:hep-ph/0309011

  27. [35]

    Two photon decay of the pseudoscalars, the chiral symmetry breaking corrections,

    N. F. Nasrallah, “Two photon decay of the pseudoscalars, the chiral symmetry breaking corrections,” Phys. Rev. D 66, 076012 (2002)

  28. [36]

    Neutral pseudoscalar meson decays: π0 → γγ and η → γγ in su(3) limit,

    Johan Bijnens and Karol Kampf, “Neutral pseudoscalar meson decays: π0 → γγ and η → γγ in su(3) limit,” Nucl. Phys. B-Proc. Suppl. 207-208, 220–223 (2010), proceed- ings of the QCD 10: 15th High-Energy Physics Interna- tional Conference on Quantum Chromodynamics

  29. [37]

    Chiral expan- sions of the π0 lifetime,

    Karol Kampf and Bachir Moussallam, “Chiral expan- sions of the π0 lifetime,” Phys. Rev. D 79, 076005 (2009), arXiv:0901.4688 [hep-ph]

  30. [38]

    Axial anomaly and the precise value of the π0 → 2γ decay width,

    B. L. Ioffe and A. G. Oganesian, “Axial anomaly and the precise value of the π0 → 2γ decay width,” Phys. Lett. B 647, 389–393 (2007), arXiv:hep-ph/0701077

  31. [39]

    Search for a Dark-Matter- Induced Cosmic Axion Background with ADMX,

    T. Nitta et al. (ADMX), “Search for a Dark-Matter- Induced Cosmic Axion Background with ADMX,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 101002 (2023), arXiv:2303.06282 [hep- ex]

  32. [40]

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

    Sz. Borsanyi et al., “Calculation of the axion mass based on high-temperature lattice quantum chromodynamics,” Nature 539, 69–71 (2016), arXiv:1606.07494 [hep-lat]

  33. [41]

    QCD at fi- nite isospin density: chiral perturbation theory con- fronts lattice data,

    Prabal Adhikari and Jens O. Andersen, “QCD at fi- nite isospin density: chiral perturbation theory con- fronts lattice data,” Phys. Lett. B 804, 135352 (2020), arXiv:1909.01131 [hep-ph]

  34. [42]

    Condensates and pressure of two-flavor chi- ral perturbation theory at nonzero isospin and tempera- ture,

    Prabal Adhikari, Jens O. Andersen, and Martin A. Mojahed, “Condensates and pressure of two-flavor chi- ral perturbation theory at nonzero isospin and tempera- ture,” Eur. Phys. J. C 81, 173 (2021), arXiv:2010.13655 [hep-ph]

  35. [43]

    Equation of state of imbalanced cold mat- ter from chiral perturbation theory,

    Stefano Carignano, Andrea Mammarella, and Massimo Mannarelli, “Equation of state of imbalanced cold mat- ter from chiral perturbation theory,” Phys. Rev. D 93, 051503 (2016), arXiv:1602.01317 [hep-ph]

  36. [44]

    Topological Susceptibility and QCD Axion Mass: QED and NNLO corrections,

    Marco Gorghetto and Giovanni Villadoro, “Topological Susceptibility and QCD Axion Mass: QED and NNLO corrections,” JHEP 03, 033 (2019), arXiv:1812.01008 [hep-ph]

  37. [45]

    The QCD Axion at Finite Density,

    Reuven Balkin, Javi Serra, Konstantin Springmann, and Andreas Weiler, “The QCD Axion at Finite Density,” JHEP 07, 221 (2020), arXiv:2003.04903 [hep-ph]

  38. [46]

    θ-dependence of the lightest meson resonances in QCD,

    Neramballi Ripunjay Acharya, Feng-Kun Guo, Maxim Mai, and Ulf-G. Meißner, “ θ-dependence of the lightest meson resonances in QCD,” Phys. Rev. D 92, 054023 (2015), arXiv:1507.08570 [hep-ph]

  39. [47]

    Cumulants of the QCD topological charge distribution,

    Feng-Kun Guo and Ulf-G. Meißner, “Cumulants of the QCD topological charge distribution,” Phys. Lett. B749, 278–282 (2015), arXiv:1506.05487 [hep-ph]

  40. [48]

    Chiral Perturbation Theory to One Loop,

    J. Gasser and H. Leutwyler, “Chiral Perturbation Theory to One Loop,” Annals Phys. 158, 142 (1984)

  41. [49]

    Manifesting the Invisible Axion at Low-energies,

    Howard Georgi, David B. Kaplan, and Lisa Randall, “Manifesting the Invisible Axion at Low-energies,” Phys. Lett. B 169, 73–78 (1986)

  42. [50]

    Light Pseudoscalars, Particle Physics and Cosmology,

    Jihn E. Kim, “Light Pseudoscalars, Particle Physics and Cosmology,” Phys. Rept. 150, 1–177 (1987)

  43. [51]

    Non- abelian Anomaly and Vector Meson Decays,

    O. Kaymakcalan, S. Rajeev, and J. Schechter, “Non- abelian Anomaly and Vector Meson Decays,” Phys. Rev. D 30, 594 (1984)

  44. [52]

    Low-Energy Hadron Physics from Ef- fective Chiral Lagrangians with Vector Mesons,

    Ulf G. Meissner, “Low-Energy Hadron Physics from Ef- fective Chiral Lagrangians with Vector Mesons,” Phys. Rept. 161, 213 (1988)

  45. [53]

    Anomalies and WZW term of two fla- vor QCD,

    Roland Kaiser, “Anomalies and WZW term of two fla- vor QCD,” Phys. Rev. D 63, 076010 (2001), arXiv:hep- ph/0011377 [hep-ph]

  46. [54]

    The Anoma- lous chiral Lagrangian of order O(p6),

    J. Bijnens, L. Girlanda, and P. Talavera, “The Anoma- lous chiral Lagrangian of order O(p6),” Eur. Phys. J. C 8 23, 539–544 (2002), arXiv:hep-ph/0110400 [hep-ph]

  47. [55]

    Chiral Loops in pi0, eta0 — > gamma gamma and eta eta-prime Mixing,

    J. F. Donoghue, Barry R. Holstein, and Y. C. R. Lin, “Chiral Loops in pi0, eta0 — > gamma gamma and eta eta-prime Mixing,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 55, 2766–2769 (1985), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.Lett. 61, 1527–1527 (1988)]

  48. [56]

    Electromag- netic corrections in the anomaly sector,

    B. Ananthanarayan and B. Moussallam, “Electromag- netic corrections in the anomaly sector,” JHEP 05, 052 (2002), arXiv:hep-ph/0205232

  49. [57]

    Bose-Einstein Condensation of Dark Matter Axions,

    P. Sikivie and Q. Yang, “Bose-Einstein Condensation of Dark Matter Axions,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 111301 (2009), arXiv:0901.1106 [hep-ph]

  50. [58]

    Aiming for tops of ALPs with a muon collider,

    So Chigusa, Sudhakantha Girmohanta, Yuichiro Nakai, and Yufei Zhang, “Aiming for tops of ALPs with a muon collider,” JHEP 01, 077 (2024), arXiv:2310.11018 [hep- ph]

  51. [59]

    A viable QCD axion in the MeV mass range,

    Daniele S. M. Alves and Neal Weiner, “A viable QCD axion in the MeV mass range,” JHEP 07, 092 (2018), arXiv:1710.03764 [hep-ph]

  52. [60]

    Grand unification and heavy axion,

    V. A. Rubakov, “Grand unification and heavy axion,” JETP Lett. 65, 621–624 (1997), arXiv:hep-ph/9703409

  53. [61]

    Strong CP problem and mirror world: The Weinberg-Wilczek axion revisited,

    Zurab Berezhiani, Leonida Gianfagna, and Maurizio Gi- annotti, “Strong CP problem and mirror world: The Weinberg-Wilczek axion revisited,” Phys. Lett. B 500, 286–296 (2001), arXiv:hep-ph/0009290

  54. [62]

    Anomalous solutions to the strong CP problem,

    Anson Hook, “Anomalous solutions to the strong CP problem,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 141801 (2015), arXiv:1411.3325 [hep-ph]

  55. [63]

    Model of visible QCD axion,

    Hajime Fukuda, Keisuke Harigaya, Masahiro Ibe, and Tsutomu T. Yanagida, “Model of visible QCD axion,” Phys. Rev. D 92, 015021 (2015), arXiv:1504.06084 [hep- ph]

  56. [64]

    Strong CP and SUZ 2,

    Abdelhamid Albaid, Michael Dine, and Patrick Draper, “Strong CP and SUZ 2,” JHEP 12, 046 (2015), arXiv:1510.03392 [hep-ph]

  57. [65]

    Planck scale physics and the Peccei-Quinn mechanism,

    Marc Kamionkowski and John March-Russell, “Planck scale physics and the Peccei-Quinn mechanism,” Phys. Lett. B 282, 137–141 (1992), arXiv:hep-th/9202003

  58. [66]

    Planck scale corrections to axion models,

    Stephen M. Barr and D. Seckel, “Planck scale corrections to axion models,” Phys. Rev. D 46, 539–549 (1992)

  59. [67]

    In- stability of the invisible axion,

    S. Ghigna, Maurizio Lusignoli, and M. Roncadelli, “In- stability of the invisible axion,” Phys. Lett. B 283, 278– 281 (1992)

  60. [68]

    Solutions to the strong CP prob- lem in a world with gravity,

    Richard Holman, Stephen D. H. Hsu, Thomas W. Kephart, Edward W. Kolb, Richard Watkins, and Lawrence M. Widrow, “Solutions to the strong CP prob- lem in a world with gravity,” Phys. Lett. B 282, 132–136 (1992), arXiv:hep-ph/9203206

  61. [69]

    High Quality QCD Axion and the LHC,

    Anson Hook, Soubhik Kumar, Zhen Liu, and Raman Sundrum, “High Quality QCD Axion and the LHC,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 221801 (2020), arXiv:1911.12364 [hep-ph]

  62. [70]

    A heavy QCD axion and the mirror world,

    David I. Dunsky, Lawrence J. Hall, and Keisuke Hari- gaya, “A heavy QCD axion and the mirror world,” JHEP 02, 212 (2024), arXiv:2302.04274 [hep-ph]

  63. [71]

    A Computation of the Small Instanton Contribution to the Axion Poten- tial,

    Jonathan M. Flynn and Lisa Randall, “A Computation of the Small Instanton Contribution to the Axion Poten- tial,” Nucl. Phys. B 293, 731–739 (1987)

  64. [72]

    Mass Renor- malization by Instantons and the Strong CP Problem,

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

  65. [73]

    Small instanton contribution to the axion potential in supersymmetric models,

    Kiwoon Choi and Hyung Do Kim, “Small instanton contribution to the axion potential in supersymmetric models,” Phys. Rev. D 59, 072001 (1999), arXiv:hep- ph/9809286

  66. [74]

    Color unified dynamical axion,

    M. K. Gaillard, M. B. Gavela, R. Houtz, P. Quilez, and R. Del Rey, “Color unified dynamical axion,” Eur. Phys. J. C 78, 972 (2018), arXiv:1805.06465 [hep-ph]

  67. [75]

    The Axion Mass from 5D Small Instan- tons,

    Tony Gherghetta, Valentin V. Khoze, Alex Pomarol, and Yuri Shirman, “The Axion Mass from 5D Small Instan- tons,” JHEP 03, 063 (2020), arXiv:2001.05610 [hep-ph]

  68. [76]

    Heavy axion opportunities at the DUNE near detector,

    Kevin J. Kelly, Soubhik Kumar, and Zhen Liu, “Heavy axion opportunities at the DUNE near detector,” Phys. Rev. D 103, 095002 (2021), arXiv:2011.05995 [hep-ph]

  69. [77]

    Heavy QCD axion in b → s transition: Enhanced limits and projections,

    Sabyasachi Chakraborty, Manfred Kraus, Vazha Lo- ladze, Takemichi Okui, and Kohsaku Tobioka, “Heavy QCD axion in b → s transition: Enhanced limits and projections,” Phys. Rev. D 104, 055036 (2021), arXiv:2102.04474 [hep-ph]

  70. [78]

    First Constraints on Heavy QCD Axions with a Liquid Argon Time Projection Chamber Using the ArgoNeuT Experiment,

    R. Acciarri et al. (ArgoNeuT), “First Constraints on Heavy QCD Axions with a Liquid Argon Time Projection Chamber Using the ArgoNeuT Experiment,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 221802 (2023), arXiv:2207.08448 [hep-ex]

  71. [79]

    Searches for heavy QCD axions via dimuon final states,

    Raymond T. Co, Soubhik Kumar, and Zhen Liu, “Searches for heavy QCD axions via dimuon final states,” JHEP 02, 111 (2023), arXiv:2210.02462 [hep-ph]

  72. [80]

    Heavy QCD axion at Belle II: Displaced and prompt signals,

    Emilie Bertholet, Sabyasachi Chakraborty, Vazha Lo- ladze, Takemichi Okui, Abner Soffer, and Kohsaku To- bioka, “Heavy QCD axion at Belle II: Displaced and prompt signals,” Phys. Rev. D 105, L071701 (2022), arXiv:2108.10331 [hep-ph]

  73. [81]

    Consistent Treatment of Axions in the Weak Chiral Lagrangian,

    Martin Bauer, Matthias Neubert, Sophie Renner, Marvin Schnubel, and Andrea Thamm, “Consistent Treatment of Axions in the Weak Chiral Lagrangian,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 081803 (2021), arXiv:2102.13112 [hep-ph]

  74. [82]

    Axion production in the η → ππa decay within SU(3) chiral perturbation theory,

    Jin-Bao Wang, Zhi-Hui Guo, Zhun Lu, and Hai-Qing Zhou, “Axion production in the η → ππa decay within SU(3) chiral perturbation theory,” JHEP 11, 029 (2024), arXiv:2403.16064 [hep-ph]

  75. [83]

    Factoring the Strong CP Problem,

    Prateek Agrawal and Kiel Howe, “Factoring the Strong CP Problem,” JHEP 12, 029 (2018), arXiv:1710.04213 [hep-ph]

  76. [84]

    A Visible QCD Axion from an Enlarged Color Group,

    Tony Gherghetta, Natsumi Nagata, and Mikhail Shifman, “A Visible QCD Axion from an Enlarged Color Group,” Phys. Rev. D 93, 115010 (2016), arXiv:1604.01127 [hep-ph]

  77. [85]

    Selective enhancement of the QCD ax- ion couplings,

    Luc Darm´ e, Luca Di Luzio, Maurizio Giannotti, and Enrico Nardi, “Selective enhancement of the QCD ax- ion couplings,” Phys. Rev. D 103, 015034 (2021), arXiv:2010.15846 [hep-ph]

  78. [86]

    Window for preferred axion models,

    Luca Di Luzio, Federico Mescia, and Enrico Nardi, “Window for preferred axion models,” Phys. Rev. D 96, 075003 (2017), arXiv:1705.05370 [hep-ph]

  79. [87]

    Exploring the axion potential and axion walls in dense quark matter,

    Bonan Zhang, David E. A. Castillo, Ana G. Grunfeld, and Marco Ruggieri, “Exploring the axion potential and axion walls in dense quark matter,” Phys. Rev. D 108, 054010 (2023), arXiv:2304.10240 [hep-ph]

  80. [88]

    QCD topology and axion properties in an isotropic hot and dense medium,

    Hong-Fang Gong, Qi Lu, Zhen-Yan Lu, Lu-Meng Liu, Xun Chen, and Shu-Peng Wang, “QCD topology and axion properties in an isotropic hot and dense medium,” Eur. Phys. J. C 84, 1222 (2024), arXiv:2404.15136 [hep- ph]

  81. [89]

    Collider Probes of Axion-Like Particles,

    Martin Bauer, Matthias Neubert, and Andrea Thamm, “Collider Probes of Axion-Like Particles,” JHEP 12, 044 (2017), arXiv:1708.00443 [hep-ph]

  82. [90]

    The Low-Energy Effective Theory of Axions and ALPs,

    Martin Bauer, Matthias Neubert, Sophie Renner, Mar- vin Schnubel, and Andrea Thamm, “The Low-Energy Effective Theory of Axions and ALPs,” JHEP 04, 063 (2021), arXiv:2012.12272 [hep-ph]. 9

  83. [91]

    a → πππ decay at next-to-leading order in chiral perturbation theory,

    Luca Di Luzio and Gioacchino Piazza, “a → πππ decay at next-to-leading order in chiral perturbation theory,” JHEP 12, 041 (2022), arXiv:2206.04061 [hep-ph]

  84. [92]

    Axion-like particles in radiative quarkonia decays,

    Luca Di Luzio, Alfredo Walter Mario Guerrera, Xavier Ponce D ´ ıaz, and Stefano Rigolin, “Axion-like particles in radiative quarkonia decays,” JHEP 06, 217 (2024), arXiv:2402.12454 [hep-ph]

Pith tools

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