Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 7 cited by

Super-critical primordial black hole formation via delayed first-order electroweak phase transition

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A delayed electroweak phase transition can leave false-vacuum regions that collapse into super-critical primordial black holes, and the threshold is set by a timescale comparison rather than by the conventional density contrast.

desk verdict Useful numerical check of super-critical PBH formation from delayed EWPTs, but the headline claim that the timescale criterion beats δ > δ_C is tested against δ(t_H), not δ_max, so that claim is not yet established. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.11040 v1 pith:EKD75NXS submitted 2025-01-19 hep-ph astro-ph.COgr-qc

Katsuya Hashino , Shinya Kanemura , Tomo Takahashi , Masanori Tanaka , Chul-Moon Yoo This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-phastro-ph.COgr-qc
keywords primordialblackholeselectroweakphasetransitionsuper-criticalPBHfalsevacuumdomainsthin-wallapproximationnearlyalignedHiggseffectivefieldtheorybubblewalldynamicsabundanceconstraints
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper argues that a sufficiently delayed first-order electroweak phase transition can leave isolated regions of the early universe stuck in the unbroken (false) vacuum, and that such regions can end up as primordial black holes of a special 'super-critical' kind. The authors solve the equation of motion for the boundary of such a false-vacuum domain, under a thin-wall, spherically symmetric, frictionless approximation, and find numerically that super-critical solutions exist when the initial domain radius is large enough. They conclude that the appropriate formation criterion is a timescale comparison, $t_V \lesssim t_H$, rather than the conventional density-contrast bound $\delta>\delta_C$. Using the nearly aligned Higgs effective field theory, they update the new-physics parameter regions that PBH observations can probe, obtaining typical super-critical PBH masses near $4\times10^{-5}M_\odot$.

What carries the argument

The central object is Eq. (16), the equation of motion for the comoving area radius $\chi$ of the false-vacuum domain boundary. It comes from Israel's junction conditions for a thin shell: the wall has surface energy $\sigma$, and the matching is simplified by the condition $[u^\mu\xi_\mu]_0=0$, which means the radiation fluid crosses the wall with no friction and therefore has no density jump across the boundary, so the density contrast is sourced entirely by vacuum energy. The same machinery supplies the Misner-Sharp mass used to set the initial comoving horizon radius and to estimate the PBH mass at formation. The dynamics are classified by whether the boundary radius grows (super-critical) or collapses (sub-critical), and the threshold is distilled into the timescale condition $t_V\lesssim t_H$, where $t_V$ is the vacuum-domination time inside the domain and $t_H$ is the horizon-crossing time.

What would settle it

Recompute Eq. (16) with a nonzero fluid-wall coupling, dropping the condition $[u^\mu\xi_\mu]_0=0$, or run a non-spherical numerical-relativity simulation of an ellipsoidal false-vacuum domain of comparable initial radius; if the threshold shifts substantially or super-critical solutions disappear even for $t_V\lesssim t_H$, the timescale criterion and the formation claim would be falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that super-critical PBH formation through a delayed electroweak phase transition happens whenever the false-vacuum domain's vacuum energy takes over the local expansion before the domain crosses the horizon. Solving the boundary equation (16) for the comoving area radius, the authors find an initial-radius threshold separating sub-critical solutions, whose boundary radius collapses to zero, from super-critical solutions, whose boundary radius grows without bound and which outside observers see as a baby universe inside a wormhole, i.e. a super-critical PBH. The threshold is numerically far better described by $t_V \lesssim t_H$ than by the widely used $\delta>\delta_C$ condition, because the timescale ratio is almost insensitive to the model parameters and wall velocity while the density fluctuation is not. For their naHEFT benchmarks the resulting PBHs have mass about $4\times10^{-5}M_\odot$, and the parameter regions accessible to PBH observations nearly coincide with those found in Ref. [23].

Load-bearing premise

The calculation assumes that the unbroken region is perfectly spherical at its boundary and that the boundary wall moves through the surrounding plasma with no friction; if either assumption fails, black hole formation could turn out to be harder than predicted.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Super-critical PBHs from a delayed EWPT would have masses around $4\times10^{-5}M_\odot$, lying in the window probed by HSC, OGLE, EROS and future Roman/PRIME microlensing searches.
  • The $t_V\lesssim t_H$ criterion gives model-builders a fast, parameter-insensitive check for whether a proposed phase transition can produce PBHs, without solving the boundary dynamics in full.
  • Because the naHEFT parameter regions are nearly unchanged when the super-critical dynamics are solved explicitly, earlier EFT-based predictions for PBH observability are corroborated rather than displaced.
  • PBH abundance is exponentially sensitive to the bubble-nucleation action, so PBH observations would constrain the nucleation rate strongly even though the PBH mass is fixed near the electroweak Hubble scale.
  • Combining PBH constraints with gravitational-wave spectra (LISA, DECIGO) and triple-Higgs-coupling measurements covers complementary regions of the naHEFT parameter space.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If wall-plasma friction is not actually negligible, the no-friction junction condition overstates the driving pressure, so the super-critical threshold would shift toward larger initial domain radii and lower PBH abundances than reported.
  • The same timescale comparison should apply to other deeply supercooled phase transitions beyond the electroweak one, so PBH bounds could be mapped onto any model with a sufficiently suppressed nucleation rate.
  • A numerical-relativity study of non-spherical false-vacuum domains would show how much of the favourable threshold comes from the spherical-symmetry assumption; until then, the formation rates should be read as upper estimates.
  • The near-invariance of the naHEFT parameter regions across formation criteria suggests that PBH observability is controlled mainly by the nucleation rate rather than by the boundary dynamics, so future probes of PBHs would be measuring the phase-transition action more directly than the geometry of collapse.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. This manuscript studies super-critical primordial black hole (PBH) formation from delayed first-order electroweak phase transitions. It derives an ordinary differential equation for the comoving area radius of a spherically symmetric false vacuum domain boundary from Israel's junction conditions under the thin-wall and no-friction approximations (Eq. (16), Appendix A), solves it numerically for benchmarks in the nearly-aligned Higgs effective field theory (naHEFT), and identifies supercritical versus subcritical solutions. The paper then proposes the timescale condition t_V ≲ t_H (Eq. (24)) as a criterion that is more appropriate than the conventional density-contrast criterion δ > δ_C, and uses the numerical solutions to estimate PBH masses and abundances and to map naHEFT parameter regions probed by microlensing, gravitational-wave, and collider experiments.

Significance. If the central comparison is established, this work would provide a quantitative validation of the timescale criterion for super-critical PBH formation and would strengthen the case for using PBH observations to probe supercooled electroweak phase transitions. The paper has clear strengths: the derivation of Eq. (16) is explicit and self-contained; the benchmark scans are internally consistent; the final parameter regions agree with earlier work (Ref. [23]), which is a useful cross-check; and the authors explicitly acknowledge the spherical-symmetry and thin-wall limitations in Sec. V. However, as detailed below, the headline claim that t_H/t_V is more appropriate than the conventional density-contrast criterion is not yet supported because the comparison uses δ(t_H) rather than δ_max.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. III B/C, Eq. (25), Fig. 2] The paper defines the conventional criterion as δ_max > δ_C and explicitly notes that δ depends on the time at which it is evaluated, but the numerical test in Fig. 2 compares t_H/t_V with δ(t_H), not with δ_max. During supercooling, ρ_R decays while ρ_V remains constant, so δ(t_H) is systematically smaller than δ_max; applying a fixed δ_C to δ(t_H) biases the comparison in favor of the timescale criterion. The authors should compute δ_max for the same threshold solutions obtained from Eq. (16) and test whether δ_max is approximately constant (~0.45) across the scanned (Λ, v_w) values. If it is approximately constant, the conventional criterion would perform comparably and the paper's central claim would be undermined; if not, the reasons should be stated explicitly.
  2. [Appendix A, Eq. (A18), Eq. (16)] The no-friction junction condition [u^μ ξ_μ]_0 = 0 forces [ρ_R]_0 = 0 and makes the density contrast come entirely from vacuum energy. For a supercooled electroweak phase transition with fast-moving walls, wall-plasma friction is not obviously negligible, and v_w is treated as a free parameter in Sec. II rather than being derived from the same wall dynamics. Since Eq. (16) and the extracted t_H/t_V threshold depend on ρ_V and σ, the authors should either justify this assumption for the parameter range considered or quantify the sensitivity of the threshold to wall-fluid friction. Without this, the quantitative validity of Eq. (24) for realistic electroweak phase transitions remains open.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Appendix A, Eq. (A21)] Equation (A21) contains "H ˙r" where Eq. (16) has "H ˙χ"; this appears to be a typographical error and should be corrected.
  2. [Sec. IV and Fig. 4] The text states that the gray region corresponds to the requirement for the validity of naHEFT Λ > v, while the Fig. 4 caption says the gray region is where the requirement (Λ < v) is not satisfied; these statements are inconsistent and should be reconciled.
  3. [Fig. 2] The caption says the red solid and dashed lines "indicate the requirement of the time ratio t_H/t_V" but does not state whether these are the threshold values at the supercritical boundary for each wall velocity; the threshold values and their extraction from the numerical solutions should be stated explicitly.
  4. [Sec. IV, Eqs. (28)-(29)] The quantity P(χ_in) is described as the probability for a given value of χ_in, but it is not clear whether this is a probability density or a probability for a fixed comoving radius; the authors should clarify the normalization and explain explicitly how χ_th is chosen from the numerical threshold when evaluating f_PBH.
  5. [Sec. III A] The text notes that the wall velocity v_w and χ̇ are independent variables, but a reader may wonder whether the FVD boundary speed should be related to the bubble wall speed; a brief clarification of the physical distinction would be helpful.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the formation claim is grounded in direct EoM integration, and the timescale criterion is validated against, not fitted to, that integration.

full rationale

The super-critical PBH claim is obtained by numerically integrating the boundary EoM (Eq. 16), which is derived in Appendix A from Israel's junction conditions; the sub/super-critical distinction is read off from whether R(t) grows or recollapses, not imposed. Equation (24) is introduced as an expectation from Ref. [8] and then explicitly tested against those EoM solutions ('The validity of this expectation will be verified numerically in the next section'), so the criterion functions as a check, not as a fitted input. The same-author citations for the naHEFT potential and the PBH abundance conversion (Refs. [20,23,88,89]) supply the particle-physics model and observational normalization, but the central formation dynamics is independently derived here. The paper's explicit simplifications—spherical symmetry, thin-wall boundary, and the no-friction junction condition [u^μξ_μ]_0=0 (Eq. A18)—are stated assumptions, not circular borrowings. The comparison of t_H/t_V with δ(t_H) rather than δ_max in Fig. 2 is a legitimate scientific concern about the strength of the 'more appropriate' conclusion, but it is a correctness/benchmarking issue, not a case where the prediction reduces to its input by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 8 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new particles or forces. Its free inputs are EFT parameters and initial conditions. The main load-bearing assumptions are geometric (spherical symmetry, thin wall), dynamical (no friction, initial rest state), and interpretive (diverging boundary means a PBH), all inherited or explicitly stated rather than derived from first principles.

free parameters (5)
  • wall velocity v_w = 0.6, 0.7, 0.95
    Appears in Eq. (10) for the bubble radius and determines t_in through F(t_in) = 0.7; treated as a free input and scanned in the analysis.
  • naHEFT parameter κ0 = 1 or 4
    Controls the degrees of freedom of new particles in the finite-temperature potential, Eq. (1); chosen by hand for benchmarks.
  • naHEFT parameter Λ = e.g., 570.8 GeV, 401 GeV
    Degenerate mass scale of integrated-out new particles; a free model parameter that sets the strength of the phase transition.
  • naHEFT parameter r = 1 or 0.5
    Non-decouplingness parameter in Eq. (5); scanned to produce the PBH fraction contours.
  • initial FVD radius ratio χ_in/χ_h = 1.0 to 1.3
    Initial comoving radius of the FVD boundary; scanning this ratio determines whether the solution is supercritical or subcritical.
assumptions (8)
  • domain assumption Israel junction conditions and the thin-wall approximation are applicable to the FVD boundary
    Used to derive Eq. (16) in Appendix A; the wall is treated as a thin shell with surface energy σ.
  • domain assumption The FVD is spherically symmetric
    Reduces the interior metric to FLRW and the exterior to a spherically symmetric metric; the authors note in Sec. V that non-spherical FVDs may suppress PBH formation.
  • ad hoc to paper No friction between the wall and the fluid, [u^μ ξ_μ]_0 = 0
    Eq. (A18) enforces smooth fluid flow through the boundary and implies [ρ_R]_0 = 0 (Eq. A19); no microphysical calculation justifies this for a supercooled EWPT plasma.
  • ad hoc to paper Initial boundary at rest, χ_dot(t_in) = 0
    Stated in Sec. III A; no derivation from bubble nucleation dynamics of FVDs.
  • domain assumption A supercritical, diverging FVD boundary is a PBH as seen by outside observers
    Adopted from Garriga, Vilenkin, and Zhang (Ref [8]) and used to map solutions of Eq. (16) to PBH formation.
  • domain assumption t_in is set by the percolation condition F(t_in) = 0.7
    Sec. III A; the choice of percolation threshold affects t_H and therefore the criterion.
  • domain assumption σ is treated as constant after being evaluated at t_in
    The surface energy is computed at the initial time via Eq. (17) and not evolved; this simplifies but may alter late-time wall dynamics.
  • domain assumption t_H is defined assuming a pure radiation-dominated background
    Eq. (20) uses 1/(2H_hc) with radiation-dominated scaling; the authors acknowledge that if vacuum energy is significant before horizon crossing, t_H can differ from the actual horizon crossing time.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Super-critical primordial black hole formation via delayed first-order electroweak phase transition." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/EKD75NXS

@misc{pith2026250111040,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Super-critical primordial black hole formation via delayed first-order electroweak phase transition},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/EKD75NXS}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.11040}
}
read the original abstract

The delay of the first-order electroweak phase transitions (EWPT) may lead to the emergence of baby universes inside wormhole structures due to the large vacuum energy density in false vacuum domains. Observers outside the false vacuum domains observe them as primordial black holes (PBHs), categorized as super-critical PBHs. We specifically investigate the dynamics of PBH formation due to delayed first-order EWPTs by solving the equations of bubble wall dynamics. We numerically confirm that such super-critical PBHs can be formed by the delayed first-order EWPT assuming spherically symmetric false vacuum domains with the thin-wall approximation for its boundary. Our numerical results show that a PBH formation criterion utilizing characteristic timescales is more appropriate than the conventional criterion based on density fluctuations. Employing our numerical results, we update the parameter regions of new physics models which can be explored by current and future constraints on the PBH abundance.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.11040 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Time evolution of the FVD boundary in the naHEFT. We take two benchmark points [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Density fluctuation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. The prediction on the fraction and mass of PBHs in the naHEFT with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Parameter regions explored by [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 7 Pith papers

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

  1. Can the universe be matter-dominated after a supercooled first-order phase transition?

    hep-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    After a supercooled first-order phase transition, the scalar field's equation of state is set by the bubble-wall Lorentz factor γ*, and matter domination is delayed until a/a* ≃ γ* in the free-streaming limit.

  2. Numerical simulations of primordial black hole formation via delayed first-order phase transitions

    gr-qc 2026-01 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Spherically symmetric numerical relativity shows false-vacuum domains from delayed first-order phase transitions form type B (baby-universe) or type A (direct-collapse) primordial black holes, separated by a robust t_...

  3. Complementarity of gravitational wave analyses and di-Higgs production in the exploration of the Electroweak Phase Transition dynamics in the RxSM

    hep-ph 2025-10 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    In the real singlet extension of the SM, strong first-order electroweak phase transitions split into singlet-driven transitions (loud in gravitational waves, quiet at colliders) and doublet-driven transitions (visible...

  4. Complementary Probes of Warped Extra Dimension: Colliders, Gravitational Waves and Primordial Black Holes from Phase Transitions

    hep-ph 2025-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    In Randall-Sundrum warped extra dimension models, the supercooled radion phase transition can form primordial black holes that account for all of dark matter for IR scales 10 TeV to 10^4 TeV, with correlated gravitati...

  5. Primordial Black Hole Formation via Inverted Bubble Collapse

    astro-ph.CO 2025-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Isolated bubbles from an incomplete phase transition, inverted into false-vacuum regions by a later bulk transition, collapse into nearly monochromatic primordial black holes up to about 10^-5 solar masses.

  6. Investigating a strong first-order electroweak phase transition in the RxSM at future linear $e^+e^-$ colliders and LISA

    hep-ph 2026-03 conditional novelty 5.5 of 10

    In the RxSM, singlet-driven SFOEWPTs yield strong LISA GW signals with SM-like Higgs couplings, while doublet-driven ones yield large κ_λ deviations visible at ILC1000 but weak GWs.

  7. PBH formation and Gravitational Waves as Multi-messenger Signals of First-order Phase Transitions

    hep-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    False-vacuum collapse during first-order phase transitions can form PBHs and emit GWs across a broad parameter range, and MeV-scale classically conformal U(1)_{B-L} symmetry breaking has the largest region where both ...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

109 extracted references · 11 canonical work pages · cited by 7 Pith papers

  1. [23]

    Kawana, T

    K. Kawana, T. Kim and P. Lu, PBH formation from overdensities in delayed vacuum transitions, Phys. Rev. D 108 (2023) 103531 [ 2212.14037]

    arXiv 2023

  2. [19]

    Jedamzik and J

    K. Jedamzik and J. C. Niemeyer, Primordial black hole formation during first order phase transitions, Phys. Rev. D 59 (1999) 124014 [ astro-ph/9901293]

    arXiv 1999

  3. [1]

    Super-critical: the radius of the FVD boundary never reaches zero

  4. [2]

    out” and “in

    Sub-critical: the radius of the FVD boundary becomes zero in a finite time For the super-critical case, the radius of the FVD boundary continues to increase follow- ing the accelerated expansion inside the wall, and a baby universe is realized in the local region inside the wall [4, 5]. The baby universe is connected to our Universe through an un- travers...

    2000

  5. [3]

    Hawking, Gravitationally collapsed objects of very low mass , Mon

    S. Hawking, Gravitationally collapsed objects of very low mass , Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 152 (1971) 75

    1971

  6. [4]

    B. J. Carr and S. W. Hawking, Black holes in the early Universe , Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 168 (1974) 399

    1974

  7. [5]

    B. J. Carr, The Primordial black hole mass spectrum , Astrophys. J. 201 (1975) 1

    1975

  8. [6]

    V. A. Berezin, V. A. Kuzmin and I. I. Tkachev, NEW V ACUUM FORMATION IN THE UNIVERSE, Phys. Lett. B 130 (1983) 23

    1983

Show all 109 references
  1. [7]

    V. A. Berezin, V. A. Kuzmin and I. I. Tkachev, THIN WALL V ACUUM DOMAINS EVOLUTION, Phys. Lett. B 120 (1983) 91

    1983

  2. [8]

    S. K. Blau, E. I. Guendelman and A. H. Guth, The Dynamics of False Vacuum Bubbles , Phys. Rev. D 35 (1987) 1747

    1987

  3. [9]

    Tanahashi and C.-M

    N. Tanahashi and C.-M. Yoo, Spherical Domain Wall Collapse in a Dust Universe , Class. Quant. Grav. 32 (2015) 155003 [ 1411.7479]

    2015 arXiv

  4. [10]

    Garriga, A

    J. Garriga, A. Vilenkin and J. Zhang, Black holes and the multiverse , JCAP 02 (2016) 064 [1512.01819]

    2016 arXiv

  5. [11]

    H. Deng, J. Garriga and A. Vilenkin, Primordial black hole and wormhole formation by domain walls , JCAP 04 (2017) 050 [ 1612.03753]

    2017 arXiv

  6. [12]

    Deng and A

    H. Deng and A. Vilenkin, Primordial black hole formation by vacuum bubbles , JCAP 12 (2017) 044 [ 1710.02865]

    2017 arXiv

  7. [13]

    Deng, Primordial black hole formation by vacuum bubbles

    H. Deng, Primordial black hole formation by vacuum bubbles. Part II , JCAP 09 (2020) 023 [2006.11907]. 20

    2020 arXiv

  8. [14]

    Gouttenoire and E

    Y. Gouttenoire and E. Vitagliano, Primordial black holes and wormholes from domain wall networks, Phys. Rev. D 109 (2024) 123507 [ 2311.07670]

    2024 arXiv

  9. [15]

    K. Sato, M. Sasaki, H. Kodama and K.-i. Maeda, Creation of Wormholes by First Order Phase Transition of a Vacuum in the Early Universe , Prog. Theor. Phys. 65 (1981) 1443

    1981

  10. [16]

    Kodama, M

    H. Kodama, M. Sasaki, K. Sato and K.-i. Maeda, Fate of Wormholes Created by First Order Phase Transition in the Early Universe , Prog. Theor. Phys. 66 (1981) 2052

    1981

  11. [17]

    Kodama, M

    H. Kodama, M. Sasaki and K. Sato, Abundance of Primordial Holes Produced by Cosmological First Order Phase Transition , Prog. Theor. Phys. 68 (1982) 1979

    1982

  12. [18]

    Maeda, K

    K.-i. Maeda, K. Sato, M. Sasaki and H. Kodama, Creation of De Sitter-schwarzschild Wormholes by a Cosmological First Order Phase Transition , Phys. Lett. B 108 (1982) 98

    1982

  13. [20]

    Lewicki, M

    M. Lewicki, M. Merchand and M. Zych, Electroweak bubble wall expansion: gravitational waves and baryogenesis in Standard Model-like thermal plasma , JHEP 02 (2022) 017 [2111.02393]

    2022 arXiv

  14. [21]

    J. Liu, L. Bian, R.-G. Cai, Z.-K. Guo and S.-J. Wang, Primordial black hole production during first-order phase transitions , Phys. Rev. D 105 (2022) L021303 [ 2106.05637]

    2022 arXiv

  15. [22]

    Hashino, S

    K. Hashino, S. Kanemura and T. Takahashi, Primordial black holes as a probe of strongly first-order electroweak phase transition, Phys. Lett. B 833 (2022) 137261 [ 2111.13099]

    2022 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Lewicki, P

    M. Lewicki, P. Toczek and V. Vaskonen, Primordial black holes from strong first-order phase transitions, JHEP 09 (2023) 092 [ 2305.04924]

    2023 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Hashino, S

    K. Hashino, S. Kanemura, T. Takahashi and M. Tanaka, Probing first-order electroweak phase transition via primordial black holes in the effective field theory , Phys. Lett. B 838 (2023) 137688 [ 2211.16225]

    2023 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Gouttenoire and T

    Y. Gouttenoire and T. Volansky, Primordial black holes from supercooled phase transitions , Phys. Rev. D 110 (2024) 043514 [ 2305.04942]

    2024 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Gouttenoire, Primordial black holes from conformal Higgs , Phys

    Y. Gouttenoire, Primordial black holes from conformal Higgs , Phys. Lett. B 855 (2024) 138800 [2311.13640]

    2024 arXiv

  20. [28]

    I. K. Banerjee and U. K. Dey, Spinning primordial black holes from first order phase 21 transition, JHEP 07 (2024) 006 [ 2311.03406]

    2024 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Conaci, L

    A. Conaci, L. Delle Rose, P. S. B. Dev and A. Ghoshal, Slaying Axion-Like Particles via Gravitational Waves and Primordial Black Holes from Supercooled Phase Transition , 2401.09411

  22. [30]

    Lewicki, P

    M. Lewicki, P. Toczek and V. Vaskonen, Black Holes and Gravitational Waves from Slow First-Order Phase Transitions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133 (2024) 221003 [ 2402.04158]

    2024 arXiv

  23. [31]

    M. M. Flores, A. Kusenko and M. Sasaki, Revisiting formation of primordial black holes in a supercooled first-order phase transition, Phys. Rev. D 110 (2024) 015005 [ 2402.13341]

    2024 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Kanemura, M

    S. Kanemura, M. Tanaka and K.-P. Xie, Primordial black holes from slow phase transitions: a model-building perspective, JHEP 06 (2024) 036 [ 2404.00646]

    2024 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Cai, Y.-S

    R.-G. Cai, Y.-S. Hao and S.-J. Wang, Primordial black holes and curvature perturbations from false vacuum islands , Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron. 67 (2024) 290411 [ 2404.06506]

    2024 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Gon¸ calves, A

    D. Gon¸ calves, A. Kaladharan and Y. Wu, Primordial Black Holes from First-Order Phase Transition in the xSM , 2406.07622

    arXiv

  27. [35]

    Arteaga, A

    M. Arteaga, A. Ghoshal and A. Strumia, Gravitational waves and black holes from the phase transition in models of dynamical symmetry breaking , 2409.04545

    arXiv

  28. [36]

    I. K. Banerjee, F. Rescigno and A. Salvio, Primordial Black Holes (as Dark Matter) from the Supercooled Phase Transitions with Radiative Symmetry Breaking , 2412.06889

    arXiv

  29. [37]

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

    1967

  30. [38]

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

    1985

  31. [39]

    Kajantie, M

    K. Kajantie, M. Laine, K. Rummukainen and M. E. Shaposhnikov, Is there a hot electroweak phase transition at mH >∼ mW ?, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77 (1996) 2887 [hep-ph/9605288]

    1996 arXiv

  32. [40]

    D’Onofrio, K

    M. D’Onofrio, K. Rummukainen and A. Tranberg, Sphaleron Rate in the Minimal Standard Model, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113 (2014) 141602 [ 1404.3565]

    2014 arXiv

  33. [41]

    D’Onofrio and K

    M. D’Onofrio and K. Rummukainen, Standard model cross-over on the lattice , Phys. Rev. D 93 (2016) 025003 [ 1508.07161]

    2016 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Turok and J

    N. Turok and J. Zadrozny, Dynamical generation of baryons at the electroweak transition , Phys. Rev. Lett. 65 (1990) 2331. 22

    1990

  35. [43]

    Turok and J

    N. Turok and J. Zadrozny, Electroweak baryogenesis in the two doublet model , Nucl. Phys. B 358 (1991) 471

    1991

  36. [44]

    J. M. Cline, K. Kainulainen and A. P. Vischer, Dynamics of two Higgs doublet CP violation and baryogenesis at the electroweak phase transition , Phys. Rev. D 54 (1996) 2451 [hep-ph/9506284]

    1996 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Carena, M

    M. Carena, M. Quiros, A. Riotto, I. Vilja and C. E. M. Wagner, Electroweak baryogenesis and low-energy supersymmetry , Nucl. Phys. B 503 (1997) 387 [ hep-ph/9702409]

    1997 arXiv

  38. [46]

    J. M. Cline, M. Joyce and K. Kainulainen, Supersymmetric electroweak baryogenesis in the WKB approximation, Phys. Lett. B 417 (1998) 79 [ hep-ph/9708393]

    1998 arXiv

  39. [47]

    J. M. Cline and G. D. Moore, Supersymmetric electroweak phase transition: Baryogenesis versus experimental constraints, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81 (1998) 3315 [ hep-ph/9806354]

    1998 arXiv

  40. [48]

    J. M. Cline and K. Kainulainen, A New source for electroweak baryogenesis in the MSSM , Phys. Rev. Lett. 85 (2000) 5519 [ hep-ph/0002272]

    2000 arXiv

  41. [49]

    J. M. Cline, M. Joyce and K. Kainulainen, Supersymmetric electroweak baryogenesis, JHEP 07 (2000) 018 [ hep-ph/0006119]

    2000 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Carena, J

    M. Carena, J. M. Moreno, M. Quiros, M. Seco and C. E. M. Wagner, Supersymmetric CP violating currents and electroweak baryogenesis , Nucl. Phys. B 599 (2001) 158 [hep-ph/0011055]

    2001 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Kainulainen, T

    K. Kainulainen, T. Prokopec, M. G. Schmidt and S. Weinstock, Semiclassical force for electroweak baryogenesis: Three-dimensional derivation, Phys. Rev. D 66 (2002) 043502 [hep-ph/0202177]

    2002 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Carena, M

    M. Carena, M. Quiros, M. Seco and C. E. M. Wagner, Improved Results in Supersymmetric Electroweak Baryogenesis, Nucl. Phys. B 650 (2003) 24 [ hep-ph/0208043]

    2003 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Fromme, S

    L. Fromme, S. J. Huber and M. Seniuch, Baryogenesis in the two-Higgs doublet model , JHEP 11 (2006) 038 [ hep-ph/0605242]

    2006 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Cirigliano, M

    V. Cirigliano, M. J. Ramsey-Musolf, S. Tulin and C. Lee, Yukawa and tri-scalar processes in electroweak baryogenesis, Phys. Rev. D 73 (2006) 115009 [ hep-ph/0603058]

    2006 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Y. Li, S. Profumo and M. Ramsey-Musolf, Bino-driven Electroweak Baryogenesis with highly suppressed Electric Dipole Moments , Phys. Lett. B 673 (2009) 95 [ 0811.1987]

    2009 arXiv

  48. [56]

    D. J. H. Chung, B. Garbrecht, M. J. Ramsey-Musolf and S. Tulin, Supergauge interactions and electroweak baryogenesis, JHEP 12 (2009) 067 [ 0908.2187]. 23

    2009 arXiv

  49. [57]

    J. M. Cline, K. Kainulainen and M. Trott, Electroweak Baryogenesis in Two Higgs Doublet Models and B meson anomalies , JHEP 11 (2011) 089 [ 1107.3559]

    2011 arXiv

  50. [58]

    T. Liu, M. J. Ramsey-Musolf and J. Shu, Electroweak Beautygenesis: From b \to s CP-violation to the Cosmic Baryon Asymmetry , Phys. Rev. Lett. 108 (2012) 221301 [1109.4145]

    2012 arXiv

  51. [59]

    J. M. Cline and K. Kainulainen, Electroweak baryogenesis and dark matter from a singlet Higgs, JCAP 01 (2013) 012 [ 1210.4196]

    2013 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Chiang, K

    C.-W. Chiang, K. Fuyuto and E. Senaha, Electroweak Baryogenesis with Lepton Flavor Violation, Phys. Lett. B 762 (2016) 315 [ 1607.07316]

    2016 arXiv

  53. [61]

    Jiang, L

    M. Jiang, L. Bian, W. Huang and J. Shu, Impact of a complex singlet: Electroweak baryogenesis and dark matter , Phys. Rev. D 93 (2016) 065032 [ 1502.07574]

    2016 arXiv

  54. [62]

    Vaskonen, Electroweak baryogenesis and gravitational waves from a real scalar singlet , Phys

    V. Vaskonen, Electroweak baryogenesis and gravitational waves from a real scalar singlet , Phys. Rev. D 95 (2017) 123515 [ 1611.02073]

    2017 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Guo, Y.-Y

    H.-K. Guo, Y.-Y. Li, T. Liu, M. Ramsey-Musolf and J. Shu, Lepton-Flavored Electroweak Baryogenesis, Phys. Rev. D 96 (2017) 115034 [ 1609.09849]

    2017 arXiv

  56. [64]

    Fuyuto, W.-S

    K. Fuyuto, W.-S. Hou and E. Senaha, Electroweak baryogenesis driven by extra top Yukawa couplings, Phys. Lett. B 776 (2018) 402 [ 1705.05034]

    2018 arXiv

  57. [65]

    Grzadkowski and D

    B. Grzadkowski and D. Huang, Spontaneous CP -Violating Electroweak Baryogenesis and Dark Matter from a Complex Singlet Scalar , JHEP 08 (2018) 135 [ 1807.06987]

    2018 arXiv

  58. [66]

    Modak and E

    T. Modak and E. Senaha, Electroweak baryogenesis via bottom transport, Phys. Rev. D 99 (2019) 115022 [ 1811.08088]

    2019 arXiv

  59. [67]

    J. M. Cline, A. Friedlander, D.-M. He, K. Kainulainen, B. Laurent and D. Tucker-Smith, Baryogenesis and gravity waves from a UV-completed electroweak phase transition , Phys. Rev. D 103 (2021) 123529 [ 2102.12490]

    2021 arXiv

  60. [68]

    Kainulainen, CP-violating transport theory for electroweak baryogenesis with thermal corrections, JCAP 11 (2021) 042 [ 2108.08336]

    K. Kainulainen, CP-violating transport theory for electroweak baryogenesis with thermal corrections, JCAP 11 (2021) 042 [ 2108.08336]

    2021 arXiv

  61. [69]

    Xie, Lepton-mediated electroweak baryogenesis, gravitational waves and the 4τ final state at the collider , JHEP 02 (2021) 090 [ 2011.04821]

    K.-P. Xie, Lepton-mediated electroweak baryogenesis, gravitational waves and the 4τ final state at the collider , JHEP 02 (2021) 090 [ 2011.04821]

    2021 arXiv

  62. [70]

    Enomoto, S

    K. Enomoto, S. Kanemura and Y. Mura, Electroweak baryogenesis in aligned two Higgs doublet models, JHEP 01 (2022) 104 [ 2111.13079]

    2022 arXiv

  63. [71]

    Enomoto, S

    K. Enomoto, S. Kanemura and Y. Mura, New benchmark scenarios of electroweak 24 baryogenesis in aligned two Higgs double models , JHEP 09 (2022) 121 [ 2207.00060]

    2022 arXiv

  64. [72]

    Aoki and H

    M. Aoki and H. Shibuya, Electroweak baryogenesis between broken phases in multi-step phase transition, Phys. Lett. B 843 (2023) 138041 [ 2302.11551]

    2023 arXiv

  65. [73]

    Basler, L

    P. Basler, L. Biermann, M. M¨ uhlleitner and J. M¨ uller,Electroweak baryogenesis in the CP-violating two-Higgs doublet model , Eur. Phys. J. C 83 (2023) 57 [ 2108.03580]

    2023 arXiv

  66. [74]

    M. Aoki, K. Enomoto and S. Kanemura, Electroweak baryogenesis in the three-loop neutrino mass model with dark matter , Phys. Rev. D 107 (2023) 115022 [ 2212.14786]

    2023 arXiv

  67. [75]

    Kanemura and Y

    S. Kanemura and Y. Mura, Electroweak baryogenesis via top-charm mixing , JHEP 09 (2023) 153 [ 2303.11252]

    2023 arXiv

  68. [76]

    Grojean, G

    C. Grojean, G. Servant and J. D. Wells, First-order electroweak phase transition in the standard model with a low cutoff , Phys. Rev. D 71 (2005) 036001 [ hep-ph/0407019]

    2005 arXiv

  69. [77]

    Kanemura, Y

    S. Kanemura, Y. Okada and E. Senaha, Electroweak baryogenesis and quantum corrections to the triple Higgs boson coupling , Phys. Lett. B 606 (2005) 361 [ hep-ph/0411354]

    2005 arXiv

  70. [78]

    Grojean and G

    C. Grojean and G. Servant, Gravitational Waves from Phase Transitions at the Electroweak Scale and Beyond , Phys. Rev. D 75 (2007) 043507 [ hep-ph/0607107]

    2007 arXiv

  71. [79]

    Kakizaki, S

    M. Kakizaki, S. Kanemura and T. Matsui, Gravitational waves as a probe of extended scalar sectors with the first order electroweak phase transition , Phys. Rev. D 92 (2015) 115007 [1509.08394]

    2015 arXiv

  72. [80]

    Hashino, M

    K. Hashino, M. Kakizaki, S. Kanemura and T. Matsui, Synergy between measurements of gravitational waves and the triple-Higgs coupling in probing the first-order electroweak phase transition, Phys. Rev. D 94 (2016) 015005 [ 1604.02069]

    2016 arXiv

  73. [81]

    Hashino, R

    K. Hashino, R. Jinno, M. Kakizaki, S. Kanemura, T. Takahashi and M. Takimoto, Selecting models of first-order phase transitions using the synergy between collider and gravitational-wave experiments, Phys. Rev. D 99 (2019) 075011 [ 1809.04994]

    2019 arXiv

  74. [82]

    Niikura et al., Microlensing constraints on primordial black holes with Subaru/HSC Andromeda observations, Nature Astron

    H. Niikura et al., Microlensing constraints on primordial black holes with Subaru/HSC Andromeda observations, Nature Astron. 3 (2019) 524 [ 1701.02151]

    2019 arXiv

  75. [83]

    Niikura, M

    H. Niikura, M. Takada, S. Yokoyama, T. Sumi and S. Masaki, Constraints on Earth-mass primordial black holes from OGLE 5-year microlensing events , Phys. Rev. D 99 (2019) 083503 [1901.07120]

    2019 arXiv

  76. [84]

    Astrophys

    EROS-2 collaboration, Limits on the Macho Content of the Galactic Halo from the EROS-2 Survey of the Magellanic Clouds , Astron. Astrophys. 469 (2007) 387 25 [astro-ph/0607207]

    2007 arXiv

  77. [85]

    Kondo, T

    I. Kondo, T. Sumi, N. Koshimoto, N. J. Rattenbury, D. Suzuki and D. P. Bennett, Prediction of planet yields by the prime-focus infrared microlensing experiment microlensing survey, The Astronomical Journal 165 (2023) 254

    2023

  78. [86]

    Fardeen, P

    J. Fardeen, P. McGill, S. E. Perkins, W. A. Dawson, N. S. Abrams, J. R. Lu et al., Astrometric Microlensing by Primordial Black Holes with the Roman Space Telescope , Astrophys. J. 965 (2024) 138 [ 2312.13249]

    2024 arXiv

  79. [87]

    Musco and J

    I. Musco and J. C. Miller, Primordial black hole formation in the early universe: critical behaviour and self-similarity , Class. Quant. Grav. 30 (2013) 145009 [ 1201.2379]

    2013 arXiv

  80. [88]

    Harada, C.-M

    T. Harada, C.-M. Yoo and K. Kohri, Threshold of primordial black hole formation , Phys. Rev. D 88 (2013) 084051 [ 1309.4201]

    2013 arXiv

  81. [89]

    Israel, Singular hypersurfaces and thin shells in general relativity , Nuovo Cim

    W. Israel, Singular hypersurfaces and thin shells in general relativity , Nuovo Cim. B 44S10 (1966) 1

    1966

  82. [90]

    Kanemura and R

    S. Kanemura and R. Nagai, A new Higgs effective field theory and the new no-lose theorem , JHEP 03 (2022) 194 [ 2111.12585]

    2022 arXiv

  83. [91]

    Kanemura, R

    S. Kanemura, R. Nagai and M. Tanaka, Electroweak phase transition in the nearly aligned Higgs effective field theory , JHEP 06 (2022) 027 [ 2202.12774]

    2022 arXiv

  84. [92]

    R. R. Florentino, S. Kanemura and M. Tanaka, Exploring loop-induced first-order electroweak phase transition in the Higgs effective field theory , Phys. Lett. B 856 (2024) 138940 [2406.03957]

    2024 arXiv

  85. [93]

    Postma and G

    M. Postma and G. White, Cosmological phase transitions: is effective field theory just a toy?, JHEP 03 (2021) 280 [ 2012.03953]

    2021 arXiv

  86. [94]

    Banta, A strongly first-order electroweak phase transition from Loryons , JHEP 06 (2022) 099 [2202.04608]

    I. Banta, A strongly first-order electroweak phase transition from Loryons , JHEP 06 (2022) 099 [2202.04608]

    2022 arXiv

  87. [95]

    A. D. Linde, Decay of the False Vacuum at Finite Temperature , Nucl. Phys. B 216 (1983) 421

    1983

  88. [96]

    Caprini et al., Science with the space-based interferometer eLISA

    C. Caprini et al., Science with the space-based interferometer eLISA. II: Gravitational waves from cosmological phase transitions , JCAP 04 (2016) 001 [ 1512.06239]

    2016 arXiv

  89. [97]

    Husdal, On Effective Degrees of Freedom in the Early Universe , Galaxies 4 (2016) 78 [1609.04979]

    L. Husdal, On Effective Degrees of Freedom in the Early Universe , Galaxies 4 (2016) 78 [1609.04979]

    2016 arXiv

  90. [98]

    J. R. Espinosa, T. Konstandin, J. M. No and G. Servant, Energy Budget of Cosmological 26 First-order Phase Transitions, JCAP 06 (2010) 028 [ 1004.4187]

    2010 arXiv

  91. [99]

    C. L. Wainwright, CosmoTransitions: Computing Cosmological Phase Transition Temperatures and Bubble Profiles with Multiple Fields , Comput. Phys. Commun. 183 (2012) 2006 [ 1109.4189]

    2012 arXiv

  92. [100]

    Enqvist, J

    K. Enqvist, J. Ignatius, K. Kajantie and K. Rummukainen, Nucleation and bubble growth in a first order cosmological electroweak phase transition , Phys. Rev. D 45 (1992) 3415

    1992

  93. [101]

    C. W. Misner and D. H. Sharp, Relativistic equations for adiabatic, spherically symmetric gravitational collapse, Phys. Rev. 136 (1964) B571

    1964

  94. [102]

    Yoo, The Basics of Primordial Black Hole Formation and Abundance Estimation , Galaxies 10 (2022) 112 [ 2211.13512]

    C.-M. Yoo, The Basics of Primordial Black Hole Formation and Abundance Estimation , Galaxies 10 (2022) 112 [ 2211.13512]

    2022 arXiv

  95. [103]

    Yagi and N

    K. Yagi and N. Seto, Detector configuration of DECIGO/BBO and identification of cosmological neutron-star binaries, Phys. Rev. D 83 (2011) 044011 [ 1101.3940]

    2011 arXiv

  96. [104]

    Klein et al., Science with the space-based interferometer eLISA: Supermassive black hole binaries, Phys

    A. Klein et al., Science with the space-based interferometer eLISA: Supermassive black hole binaries, Phys. Rev. D 93 (2016) 024003 [ 1511.05581]

    2016 arXiv

  97. [105]

    Cepeda et al., Report from Working Group 2: Higgs Physics at the HL-LHC and HE-LHC, CERN Yellow Rep

    M. Cepeda et al., Report from Working Group 2: Higgs Physics at the HL-LHC and HE-LHC, CERN Yellow Rep. Monogr. 7 (2019) 221 [ 1902.00134]

    2019 arXiv

  98. [106]

    Bambade et al., The International Linear Collider: A Global Project , 1903.01629

    P. Bambade et al., The International Linear Collider: A Global Project , 1903.01629

    1903 arXiv

  99. [107]

    M. S. Turner, E. J. Weinberg and L. M. Widrow, Bubble nucleation in first order inflation and other cosmological phase transitions , Phys. Rev. D 46 (1992) 2384

    1992

  100. [108]

    C.-M. Yoo, T. Harada and H. Okawa, Threshold of Primordial Black Hole Formation in Nonspherical Collapse , Phys. Rev. D 102 (2020) 043526 [ 2004.01042]

    2020 arXiv

  101. [109]

    Escriv` a and C.-M

    A. Escriv` a and C.-M. Yoo,Simulations of Ellipsoidal Primordial Black Hole Formation , 2410.03452. 27

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.