Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

Stringy Constraints on Modular Flavor Models

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Perturbative heterotic string theory excludes the large modulus values modular flavor models use and disfavors tau = i at large volume.

desk verdict Systematic, honestly-labeled perturbativity bounds on heterotic moduli; the Swampland wording outruns the evidence. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.12392 v1 pith:F2WPYSCQ submitted 2025-08-17 hep-ph hep-th

Keiya Ishiguro , Takafumi Kai , Tatsuo Kobayashi , Hajime Otsuka This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-phhep-th
keywords modularflavormodelsheteroticstringtheorythresholdcorrectionstarget-spacesymmetryLambertWfunctionSwamplandmodulistabilizationorbifoldcompactification
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper tries to establish that string theory itself restricts which values of the moduli in modular flavor models are physically allowed, by demanding that one-loop threshold corrections do not overwhelm the tree-level gauge coupling in perturbative heterotic vacua. The resulting inequality, $16\pi^2 k_a \operatorname{Im} S > |\Delta_a|$, turns into explicit upper bounds on the imaginary part of the complex-structure modulus, solved with the Lambert W function. With the dilaton at $\operatorname{Im} S \sim 2$, level $k_a = 1$, and $\beta$-function coefficient $|b_a^{N=2}| \sim 10$, the bound is $\operatorname{Im} U \lesssim 34.3$ when the Kähler modulus is fixed at $\omega$. This matters because modular flavor models often place the modulus at $\tau \simeq i\infty$ or near $\tau = i$ to produce hierarchical Yukawa couplings; the paper argues those points lie in the Swampland or are disfavored in the large-volume regime.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the perturbativity inequality (5.2), $16\pi^2 k_a \operatorname{Im} S > |\Delta_a|$, evaluated at $\mu^2 \sim M_{\text{string}}^2$, where $\Delta_a$ is the one-loop moduli-dependent threshold correction to the gauge coupling. The paper uses the classification of these threshold corrections by target-space duality symmetries, $PSL(2,\mathbb{Z})$, $\Gamma_0(n)$, and $\Gamma^0(n)$, together with explicit forms built from Dedekind eta functions such as $\operatorname{Im} T\,|\eta(T)|^4 \operatorname{Im} U\,|\eta(U)|^4$. In the region $\operatorname{Im} U > 1$, the eta function is approximated by $q^{1/24}$, which turns the inequality into an equation solved by the Lambert W function, yielding closed-form bounds on $\operatorname{Im} U$ and $\operatorname{Im} T$ as functions of $\operatorname{Im} S$, $b_a^{N=2}$, and the ratio $T/U$.

What would settle it

Compute the full one-loop threshold correction $\Delta_a$ from Eq. (3.3), including all twisted sectors and Green-Schwarz contributions, for a concrete $T^6/\mathbb{Z}_4$ or $T^6/\mathbb{Z}_{6-II}$ vacuum with $\operatorname{Im} S = 2$, $k_a = 1$, $|b_a^{N=2}| = 10$, $T = \omega$, and $\operatorname{Im} U = 40$. If the resulting corrected gauge coupling $16\pi^2 k_a \operatorname{Im} S - |\Delta_a|$ remains positive, then inequality (5.2) is not necessary and the bound $\operatorname{Im} U \lesssim 34.3$ is evaded.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Within perturbative heterotic string theory on toroidal orbifolds, the paper's central claim is that perturbativity, meaning that the tree-level gauge coupling exceeds the one-loop moduli-dependent threshold correction, imposes necessary constraints on the modulus space of modular flavor models. Using threshold corrections classified by target-space duality symmetries $PSL(2,\mathbb{Z})$, $\Gamma_0(n)$, and $\Gamma^0(n)$, it derives bounds on $\operatorname{Im} U$ and $\operatorname{Im} T$ whose boundary is given by the Lambert W function. For representative values $\operatorname{Im} S \sim 2$, $k_a = 1$, and $|b_a^{N=2}| \sim 10$, fixing $T = \omega$ gives $\operatorname{Im} U \lesssim 34.3$; the constraints tighten as the dilaton decreases, the $\beta$-function coefficient increases, or the ratio $T/U$ grows. In the large-volume regime $T \gg 1$, almost all of the fundamental region is excluded and the allowed region concentrates near duality fixed points, with $\tau = i$ more strongly constrained than $\tau = \omega$; hence the paper concludes that $\tau \simeq i\infty$ lies in the Swampland and $\tau = i$ is disfavored.

Load-bearing premise

The whole derivation assumes that a heterotic vacuum is perturbatively valid exactly when the tree-level gauge coupling $16\pi^2 k_a \operatorname{Im} S$ exceeds the absolute value of the one-loop threshold correction $\Delta_a$, with $\Delta_a$ taken from the $N=2$ $\beta$-function sector only; if Green-Schwarz terms, other threshold sectors, or non-perturbative effects can cancel a large correction, the upper bounds do not follow.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The fixed point $\tau \simeq i\infty$, often used to generate hierarchical fermion masses, is not compatible with perturbative heterotic vacua at $\operatorname{Im} S \sim O(1)$ and $|b_a^{N=2}| \sim O(10)$.
  • Radiative moduli stabilization scenarios that fix the modulus at $\operatorname{Im} \tau \sim O(10)$ are difficult to realize inside the perturbative regime.
  • In the large-volume regime $T \gg 1$, almost all of the moduli space is excluded and the surviving region concentrates near an elliptic point of the duality group, with $\tau = \omega$ allowed and $\tau = i$ excluded for large enough volume.
  • Increasing $|b_a^{N=2}|$ strengthens the bounds; for $b_a^{N=2} \gtrsim 90$ with $T = 7U$ and $\operatorname{Im} S = 2$, no point of the $PSL(2,\mathbb{Z})$ fundamental region remains perturbatively valid.
  • The constraints depend on the ratio $T:U$; larger ratios of complex-structure to Kähler modulus give stronger bounds.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial inference: If the bounds hold, they give a top-down selection rule for modular flavor model building: among the fixed points $\tau = i\infty$, $i$, and $\omega$, only $\omega$ survives the large-volume limit, so models built near $\omega$ become the prime string-embedding candidates.
  • Editorial inference: The same perturbativity argument could be turned into a scan over heterotic orbifold gauge groups, since for each model's $b_a^{N=2}$ and dilaton value the Lambert-W bound gives the full allowed region in $(T,U)$, which could be combined with moduli stabilization to test specific vacua.
  • Editorial inference: A direct test would be to compute the exact one-loop threshold correction, not just the leading $N=2$ beta-function term, for a concrete orbifold near $\operatorname{Im} U \approx 34$; if the exact $\Delta_a$ stays below the tree-level coupling, the numerical cap is an artifact of the approximation.
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

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. This paper studies constraints on the moduli space of modular flavor models arising from one-loop moduli-dependent threshold corrections in perturbative heterotic string theory on toroidal orbifolds. After reviewing how modular flavor symmetries emerge from extra-dimensional wavefunctions, the authors import threshold formulas from Ref. [36] and group them into five classes according to target-space duality symmetries: PSL(2,Z) × PSL(2,Z), Γ0(2)-type groups, and Γ0(3)-type groups. The central step is inequality (5.2), which requires the tree-level dilaton contribution to the gauge coupling to dominate the one-loop threshold correction. Using the large-imaginary-part approximation for Dedekind eta functions, the authors derive analytic upper bounds on the imaginary parts of the complex-structure modulus U and the Kähler modulus T in terms of Lambert W functions, and they supplement these with numerical results in the region Im τ ≲ 1. The main quantitative claims are that for representative inputs (Im S = 2, k_a = 1, |b_a^{N=2}| = 10) the modulus is bounded by Im U ≲ 34.3 when T is fixed at the elliptic point ω, that larger ratios T/U and larger beta-function coefficients strengthen the bounds, and that in the large-volume regime the fixed point τ = i becomes disfavored while τ = ω remains allowed. The paper concludes with phenomenological implications for modular flavor model building and radiative moduli stabilization.

Significance. If the central inequality (5.2) were a necessary condition for perturbative heterotic vacua, the paper would provide a broadly useful top-down constraint on modular flavor model building, linking the modulus values used in bottom-up flavor fits to the validity of the string perturbation expansion. The paper has several genuine strengths: the Lambert W closed-form bounds are derived cleanly, the classification of threshold corrections into five duality-group classes is systematic, and the numerical analysis explicitly covers the region Im τ ≲ 1 where the analytic eta approximation fails. The authors are also transparent that the inputs Im S, k_a, and b_a^{N=2} are treated as scanned parameters rather than fitted to the output, so there is no disguised circularity. The main limitation is that the results are conditional on a specific model of the threshold corrections: the bounds are sufficient conditions for perturbativity under the retained N=2 threshold terms, not necessary string-theoretic constraints once Green-Schwarz constants and other one-loop sectors are included.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 5, Eq. (5.2)] The inequality 16π² k_a Im S > |Δ_a| is presented as the condition ensuring weak gauge couplings at the string scale, and it is then used to derive upper bounds such as Eq. (5.10). However, this condition is sufficient rather than necessary: the full one-loop threshold correction contains moduli-independent and dilaton-dependent Green-Schwarz terms, and footnote 2 on page 7 explicitly drops the numerical constants associated with the Green-Schwarz function. Moreover, even within the retained N=2 pieces, other one-loop sectors or additional threshold contributions could partially cancel the moduli-dependent term. Consequently, the statement in the abstract that τ ≃ i∞ 'lies in the Swampland' is stronger than what the derivation supports. The paper should reframe Eq. (5.2) as a sufficient perturbativity constraint under the assumption that the exhibited N=2 threshold terms dominate, and either quantify the dropped Green-Schwarz constants or restrict the claims to cases where those constants are known to be negligible.
  2. [Sec. 4.3, Eqs. (4.12)-(4.13)] For groups (4) and (5), the coefficient Rhat b_a of the (I,θ³) sector is set equal to b_a^{N=2} 'for simplicity'. This is a choice, not a derivation: the orbifold relation (4.7) fixes b_a^{N=2} = 4 b^{(I,θ²)}_a but leaves Rhat b_a independent. Since the constraints (5.17)-(5.20) depend on Rhat b_a through terms with different moduli dependence (T, Rhat T, and the η(ω) contribution in Eq. (4.13)), the reported bounds for these groups are model-dependent. The authors should either derive Rhat b_a for the specific orbifolds listed in Sec. 4.3 or present the bounds as functions of the ratio Rhat b_a / b_a^{N=2} and explicitly state which ranges are covered by the figures.
  3. [Sec. 5.1, Eq. (5.10) and Figs. 2-5] The headline numerical result Im U ≲ 34.3 is obtained for the representative inputs Im S = 2, k_a = 1, and |b_a^{N=2}| = 10. These values are taken from MSSM gauge-coupling unification and typical beta-function magnitudes, but they are not derived for any concrete heterotic vacuum; in a given orbifold the beta-function coefficients, modular levels, and dilaton VEV are correlated, and the relevant threshold formula may not be the group (1) form. The paper should therefore label the quantitative bounds and the associated phenomenological conclusions in Sec. 6 as illustrative rather than as universal string-theoretic constraints, and it should indicate how the bounds change when the parameters are varied within ranges actually realized in the orbifold models of Sec. 4.3.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Footnote 2, p. 7] The name 'Green-Shwarz' is a typo; it should be 'Green-Schwarz'.
  2. [Sec. 3, Eqs. (3.6)-(3.7)] The same symbol Rbar Γ0(n) is defined in two different ways, once with c ≡ 0 mod n and once with b ≡ 0 mod n; the notation should distinguish Rbar Γ₀(n) from Rbar Γ⁰(n) or use different symbols to avoid confusion.
  3. [Sec. 4.1 and Sec. 4.3] The target-space duality group is written as Γ0_T(2) × (Γ_U)0(2) in Sec. 4.1 and as Γ0_T(2) × (Γ_U)0(2) in Eq. (4.10); please unify the notation for the upper and lower congruence subgroups.
  4. [Sec. 5.1, Eq. (5.4)] The sentence 'the RHS can be calculated as follows' presents the numerical value 0.680... without specifying the minimizing point of T₂|η(T)|⁴ U₂|η(U)|⁴; adding that the minimum occurs at T = U = ω would make the derivation easier to follow.
  5. [Sec. 5.2, captions of Figs. 10 and 13] The captions 'These are the boundaries concerning 7T = U' and 'concerning 7T = U, Rhat T = T, Rhat U = T' are terse; please state explicitly that Im S = 2 is fixed and indicate which axis corresponds to the plotted modulus.
  6. [Sec. 6, Fig. 16] The claim that 'the larger the volume of extra dimensional space, the stronger the stringy constraints' is inferred from a few values T = 10i, 10.02i, 10.04i, 10.06i; please clarify whether this is a numerical trend observed in the plotted examples or an analytic property of Eq. (5.3).

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the modulus bounds are derived from external threshold formulas plus a stated perturbativity assumption, with all inputs scanned rather than fitted.

full rationale

The central derivation is self-contained against external benchmarks. The load-bearing inequality Eq. (5.2), 16 pi^2 k_a ImS > |Delta_a|, is introduced as an explicit assumption rather than as a fitted or predicted quantity; the paper states that it assumes gauge couplings are weak enough at the string scale, then derives the inequality from Eq. (3.2). The threshold corrections Delta_a are taken from external Refs. [33,34,36], and the five groups in Sec. 4.3 classify those existing formulas rather than introducing a new ansatz. The numerical inputs ImS ~ 2, k_a = 1, and |b_a^{N=2}| ~ O(10) are stated as typical or scanned values, and the figures vary them systematically; no parameter is fitted to the target bound and then renamed a prediction. The Lambert-W bounds in Eqs. (5.10)-(5.20) are algebraic rearrangements of the inequality, so they inherit the stated perturbativity assumption but do not reduce to the inputs by construction. The self-citations to Refs. [30,31,32] appear in the motivational discussion of flux landscapes, and the claimed exclusion of tau ~ i infinity and the large-volume disfavoring of tau = i do not rely on those citations. Two acknowledged modeling choices (footnote 2 dropping Green-Schwarz numerical constants; Sec. 4.3 setting the hatted coefficient equal to b_a^{N=2} for simplicity) weaken the string-theoretic necessity of the bounds but are stated assumptions, not disguised inputs. Hence the central claim has independent content and no circular step reduces to its own inputs by definition.

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

The constraints are derived from 1990s threshold correction formulas rather than from a new string computation. The main physical premise is that one-loop threshold corrections must be smaller than tree-level gauge couplings. Several numerical inputs, such as the dilaton, beta coefficient, and moduli ratios, are scanned rather than fitted, so the result is a family of inequalities. The Swampland language in the abstract goes beyond what the perturbativity condition proves.

free parameters (5)
  • beta-function coefficient |b^{N=2}_a| = 10 as typical, scanned up to 140
    Chosen as O(10) for MSSM-like spectra; the bounds depend directly on it. See Eq. (5.3) and Figs. 2 to 7.
  • dilaton ImS = 2 as benchmark, scanned 0.5 to 4
    ImS approximately 2 is estimated from MSSM gauge couplings around the grand unification scale. Used in Eq. (5.4) and Figs. 3 and 4.
  • Kac-Moody level k_a = 1
    Set to 1 for SU(3) and SU(2) gauge factors. Stated in Sec. 5.1.
  • ratio a in T = aU = scanned from 1 to 7
    Arbitrary relation between Kähler and complex-structure moduli; determines the bound in Eq. (5.12) and Figs. 5 and 15.
  • ratios b and c in group (4) = scanned from 1 to 3
    Parameterize differences between the (I, theta^2) and (I, theta^3) moduli sectors. See Eqs. (5.17) and (5.18) and Figs. 11 and 12.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Threshold correction formula Eq. (3.3) and the classified forms Eqs. (4.9) to (4.13) from Refs. [33,34,36] are correct for these orbifolds.
    Central input; the paper does not re-derive the string loop computation.
  • domain assumption Perturbativity demands 16 pi^2 k_a ImS > |Delta_a| at mu^2 ~ M_string^2, Eq. (5.2).
    This is the load-bearing criterion. It is a reasonable sufficient condition but is not proven necessary for a consistent quantum gravity vacuum.
  • ad hoc to paper Green-Schwarz numerical constants can be neglected; only beta-function coefficients matter in Delta_a.
    Footnote 2 states this simplification. It shifts the numerical bounds but likely not the qualitative behavior.
  • ad hoc to paper For groups (4) and (5), the hatted beta coefficient is set equal to b^{N=2}_a.
    Sec. 4.3 makes this choice for simplicity; the group (4) and (5) bounds depend on it.
  • domain assumption Dedekind eta q-series approximation Im tau |eta(tau)|^4 approximately Im tau exp(-pi Im tau / 3) for Im tau > 1, Eq. (5.7).
    Used for all Lambert W bounds; the paper checks the low Im tau region numerically in Figs. 6, 10, and 13.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Stringy Constraints on Modular Flavor Models." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/F2WPYSCQ

@misc{pith2026250812392,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Stringy Constraints on Modular Flavor Models},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/F2WPYSCQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.12392}
}
abstract

We investigate stringy constraints on moduli spaces in modular flavor models by analyzing moduli-dependent threshold corrections in heterotic string vacua. While moduli play a crucial role in determining the flavor structure of fermions predicted by modular flavor models, the parameter space in which their vacuum expectation values are allowed has not been fully explored. In this work, within the framework of perturbative heterotic string theory on toroidal orbifolds, we derive constraints on the moduli space and study their systematic behavior. We characterize the stringy constraints in terms of the dilaton, the beta-function coefficients, and the ratio between a complex-structure modulus and a K\"ahler modulus. It is found that the large value of the modulus controlling the flavor structure, i.e., $\tau\simeq i \infty$, lies in the Swampland, and the self-dual point $\tau=i$ is also disfavored in the large volume regime of toroidal backgrounds. In addition, we discuss the phenomenological implications of these stringy constraints.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2508.12392 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The shape of Imτ |η(τ )| 4 . Therefore, by choosing the moduli at the points where T2|η(T)| 4 U2|η(U)| 4 is maximized, we can obtain a minimum bound on the inequality in the moduli space. Then, we can find U = − 1 2 + i √ 3 2 and T = − 1 2 + i √ 3 2 numerically as these points. In addition, by assuming minimal supersymmetric Standard Model (MSSM) in the low-energy effective theory, the value of ImS can be found as I… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. This is the restriction imposed on the imaginary part of the complex-structure modulus while fixing the Kähler modulus to T = − 1 2 + i √ 3 2 . The red region is the parameter space where the perturbative description cannot be guaranteed. Below the red region in this result, we can guarantee the perturbative theory for N = 1 supersymmetric vacua of the heterotic string. From this result, we can reveal that the bigge… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. These are the boundaries when the dilaton is varied over the range of typical values O(0.1) − O(1) while fixing the Kähler modulus to T = − 1 2 + i √ 3 2 . Yellow, orange, red and dark red curves are respectively the boundaries with ImS = 0.5, ImS = 1, ImS = 2 and ImS = 4. The perturbative description is valid below these curves. Above each boundary in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (14 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: These are the boundaries concerning U = T when the dilaton is varied over the range of typical values O(0.1) − O(1). Yellow, orange, red and dark red curves are respectively the boundaries with ImS = 0.5, ImS = 1, ImS = 2 and ImS = 4. The perturbative description is va…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: These are the boundaries concerning T = aU and ImS = 2 when the parameter is varied over the range from a = 1 to a = 7. Green, dark green, blue and purple curves are respectively the boundaries with a = 1, a = 3, a = 5 and a = 7. The perturbative description is valid b…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: This is the constraint concerning T = 7U, b N=2 a = 60 and ImS = 2. The red region is the parameter space where the perturbative theory cannot be guaranteed. The region framed by the green curve is the fundamental region of P SL(2, Z). Almost all of the fundamental reg…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: These are the boundaries concerning T = 7U and ImS = 2. Dotted red, dash-dotted red, dashed red and solid red lines are respectively the boundaries with b N=2 a = 60, b N=2 a = 70, b N=2 a = 80 and b N=2 a = 90. The perturbative description is valid below these lines. …
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: These are the boundaries concerning T = aU and ImS = 2 when the parameter is varied over the range from a = 1 to a = 7. Green, dark green, blue and purple curves are respectively the boundaries with a = 1, a = 3, a = 5 and a = 7. The perturbative description is valid b…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: These are the boundaries concerning aT = U and ImS = 2 when the parameter is varied over the range from a = 1 to a = 7. Green, dark green, blue and purple curves are respectively the boundaries with a = 1, a = 3, a = 5 and a = 7. The perturbative description is valid b…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: These are the boundaries concerning 7T = U and ImS = 2. Dotted red, dash-dotted red, dashed red curves are respectively the boundaries with b N=2 a = 60, b N=2 a = 70, b N=2 a = 80 in the left panel, and solid red curve is the boundary with b N=2 a = 90 in the right p…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: These are the boundaries concerning T = aU, Tˆ = bU, Uˆ = bcU and ImS = 2 when the parameter a is varied over the range from a = 1 to a = 3 and the parameter b and c is varied over the range from a = 1 to a = 3. Green, dark green, blue and purple curves are respective…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: These are the boundaries concerning aT = U, Tˆ = bU, Uˆ = bcU and ImS = 2 when the parameter a is varied over the range from a = 1 to a = 3 and the parameter b and c is varied over the range from a = 1 to a = 3. Green, dark green, blue and purple curves are respective…
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: These are the boundaries concerning 7T = U, Tˆ = T, Uˆ = T and ImS = 2. Dotted red, dash-dotted red, dashed red and solid red curves are respectively the boundaries with b N=2 a = 60, b N=2 a = 70, b N=2 a = 80 and b N=2 a = 90. The region framed by the green curve is…
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: These are the boundaries concerning U = T when the dilaton is varied over the range of typical values O(0.1) − O(1). Yellow, orange, red and dark red curves are respectively the boundaries with ImS = 0.5, ImS = 1, ImS = 2 and ImS = 4. The dashed line describes the lin…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: For the phenomenological aspects, unlike the group (1), it can be seen that the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_9.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: These are the boundaries concerning T = aU and ImS = 2 when the parameter is varied over the range from a = 1 to a = 7. Green, dark green, blue and purple curves are respectively the boundaries with a = 1, a = 3, a = 5 and a = 7. The dashed line describes the line of …
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: These are the boundaries for the complex-structure modulus, which are based on b N=2 a = 60 and ImS = 2. Here, the complex-structure modulus and the Kähler modulus are regarded as the independent moduli and we consider the case of the large volume ImT > 1. Green, dark…

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Fibre Inflation Meets Quintessence: Implications of Perturbative Stabilisation

    hep-th 2025-11 reject novelty 5.0 of 10

    Adding a base-modulus redefinition to fibre inflation in perturbative LVS shifts (ns, r) into ACT-allowed territory and yields an axion quintessence companion.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

88 extracted references · 22 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [36]

    BAILIN, A

    D. BAILIN, A. LOVE, W. SABRA and S. THOMAS,String loop threshold corrections for zn coxeter orbifolds, Modern Physics Letters A09 (1994) 67–79

    work page 1994

  2. [1]

    Altarelli and F

    G. Altarelli and F. Feruglio,Discrete flavor symmetries and models of neutrino mixing, Reviews of Modern Physics82 (2010) 2701–2729

    2010

  3. [2]

    Ishimori, T

    H. Ishimori, T. Kobayashi, H. Ohki, Y. Shimizu, H. Okada and M. Tanimoto,Non-abelian discrete symmetries in particle physics, Progress of Theoretical Physics Supplement183 (2010) 1–163

    2010

  4. [3]

    King and C

    S.F. King and C. Luhn,Neutrino mass and mixing with discrete symmetry, Reports on Progress in Physics76 (2013) 056201

    2013

  5. [4]

    King,Models of neutrino mass, mixing and cp violation, 2015

    S.F. King,Models of neutrino mass, mixing and cp violation, 2015

    2015

  6. [5]

    Kobayashi, H

    T. Kobayashi, H. Ohki, H. Okada, Y. Shimizu and M. Tanimoto,An Introduction to Non-Abelian Discrete Symmetries for Particle Physicists(1, 2022), 10.1007/978-3-662-64679-3

    doi:10.1007/978-3-662-64679-3 2022

  7. [6]

    de Adelhart Toorop, F

    R. de Adelhart Toorop, F. Feruglio and C. Hagedorn,Finite Modular Groups and Lepton Mixing, Nucl. Phys. B 858 (2012) 437 [1112.1340]

    arXiv 2012

  8. [7]

    Feruglio,Are neutrino masses modular forms?, inFrom My Vast Repertoire ...: Guido Altarelli’s Legacy, A

    F. Feruglio,Are neutrino masses modular forms?, inFrom My Vast Repertoire ...: Guido Altarelli’s Legacy, A. Levy, S. Forte and G. Ridolfi, eds., pp. 227–266 (2019), DOI [1706.08749]

    arXiv 2019

Show all 88 references
  1. [8]

    Kobayashi and M

    T. Kobayashi and M. Tanimoto,Modular flavor symmetric models, 7, 2023 [2307.03384]

    2023 arXiv

  2. [9]

    Ding and S.F

    G.-J. Ding and S.F. King,Neutrino Mass and Mixing with Modular Symmetry, 2311.09282

    arXiv

  3. [10]

    Kobayashi, K

    T. Kobayashi, K. Tanaka and T.H. Tatsuishi,Neutrino mixing from finite modular groups, Phys. Rev. D98 (2018) 016004 [1803.10391]

    2018 arXiv

  4. [11]

    Penedo and S.T

    J.T. Penedo and S.T. Petcov,Lepton Masses and Mixing from ModularS4 Symmetry, Nucl. Phys. B 939 (2019) 292 [1806.11040]. – 29 –

    2019 arXiv

  5. [12]

    Novichkov, J.T

    P.P. Novichkov, J.T. Penedo, S.T. Petcov and A.V. Titov,Modular A5 symmetry for flavour model building, JHEP 04 (2019) 174 [1812.02158]

    2019 arXiv

  6. [13]

    Strominger and E

    A. Strominger and E. Witten,New Manifolds for Superstring Compactification, Commun. Math. Phys. 101 (1985) 341

    1985

  7. [14]

    Candelas,Yukawa couplings between (2, 1)-forms, Nuclear Physics B298 (1988) 458

    P. Candelas,Yukawa couplings between (2, 1)-forms, Nuclear Physics B298 (1988) 458

    1988

  8. [15]

    Dixon, V.S

    L.J. Dixon, V.S. Kaplunovsky and J. Louis,On effective field theories describing (2, 2) vacua of the heterotic string, Nuclear Physics B329 (1990) 27

    1990

  9. [16]

    Cremades, L.E

    D. Cremades, L.E. Ibanez and F. Marchesano,Computing Yukawa couplings from magnetized extra dimensions, JHEP 05 (2004) 079 [hep-th/0404229]

    2004 arXiv

  10. [17]

    Ferrara, D

    S. Ferrara, D. Lüst and S. Theisen,Target space modular invariance and low-energy couplings in orbifold compacifications, Physics Letters B233 (1989) 147

    1989

  11. [18]

    Ferrara, .D

    S. Ferrara, .D. Lust and S. Theisen,Target Space Modular Invariance and Low-Energy Couplings in Orbifold Compactifications, Phys. Lett. B233 (1989) 147

    1989

  12. [19]

    Lerche, D

    W. Lerche, D. Lust and N.P. Warner,Duality Symmetries inN = 2 Landau-ginzburg Models, Phys. Lett. B231 (1989) 417

    1989

  13. [20]

    Lauer, J

    J. Lauer, J. Mas and H.P. Nilles,Twisted sector representations of discrete background symmetries for two-dimensional orbifolds, Nucl. Phys. B 351 (1991) 353

    1991

  14. [21]

    Nilles, S

    H.P. Nilles, S. Ramos-Sanchez, A. Trautner and P.K.S. Vaudrevange,Orbifolds from Sp(4,Z) and their modular symmetries, Nucl. Phys. B 971 (2021) 115534 [2105.08078]

    2021 arXiv

  15. [22]

    Kobayashi and S

    T. Kobayashi and S. Nagamoto,Zero-modes on orbifolds: Magnetized orbifold models by modular transformation, Physical Review D96 (2017)

    2017

  16. [23]

    Kobayashi, S

    T. Kobayashi, S. Nagamoto, S. Takada, S. Tamba and T.H. Tatsuishi,Modular symmetry and non-Abelian discrete flavor symmetries in string compactification, Phys. Rev. D97 (2018) 116002 [1804.06644]

    2018 arXiv

  17. [24]

    Kobayashi and S

    T. Kobayashi and S. Tamba,Modular forms of finite modular subgroups from magnetized D-brane models, Phys. Rev. D99 (2019) 046001 [1811.11384]

    2019 arXiv

  18. [25]

    H. Ohki, S. Uemura and R. Watanabe,Modular flavor symmetry on a magnetized torus, Phys. Rev. D102 (2020) 085008 [2003.04174]

    2020 arXiv

  19. [26]

    Kikuchi, T

    S. Kikuchi, T. Kobayashi, S. Takada, T.H. Tatsuishi and H. Uchida,Revisiting modular symmetry in magnetized torus and orbifold compactifications, Phys. Rev. D102 (2020) 105010 [2005.12642]

    2020 arXiv

  20. [27]

    Kikuchi, T

    S. Kikuchi, T. Kobayashi, H. Otsuka, S. Takada and H. Uchida,Modular symmetry by orbifolding magnetizedT 2×T 2: realization of double cover ofΓN, JHEP 11 (2020) 101 [2007.06188]

    2020 arXiv

  21. [28]

    Kikuchi, T

    S. Kikuchi, T. Kobayashi and H. Uchida,Modular flavor symmetries of three-generation modes on magnetized toroidal orbifolds, Phys. Rev. D104 (2021) 065008 [2101.00826]

    2021 arXiv

  22. [29]

    Almumin, M.-C

    Y. Almumin, M.-C. Chen, V. Knapp-Pérez, S. Ramos-Sánchez, M. Ratz and S. Shukla, Metaplectic Flavor Symmetries from Magnetized Tori, JHEP 05 (2021) 078 [2102.11286]

    2021 arXiv

  23. [30]

    Ishiguro, T

    K. Ishiguro, T. Kobayashi and H. Otsuka,Landscape of Modular Symmetric Flavor Models, JHEP 03 (2021) 161 [2011.09154]. – 30 –

    2021 arXiv

  24. [31]

    Ishiguro, T

    K. Ishiguro, T. Kai, T. Kobayashi and H. Otsuka,Flux Landscape with enhanced symmetry not on SL(2,Z) elliptic points, JHEP 02 (2024) 099 [2311.12425]

    2024 arXiv

  25. [32]

    Ishiguro, T

    K. Ishiguro, T. Kai, T. Kobayashi, Y. Koga and H. Otsuka,Classification of Modular Symmetries in Type IIB Flux Landscape, 2502.20743

  26. [33]

    Kaplunovsky,One-loop threshold effects in string unification, 1992

    V. Kaplunovsky,One-loop threshold effects in string unification, 1992

    1992

  27. [34]

    Dixon, V

    L.J. Dixon, V. Kaplunovsky and J. Louis,Moduli dependence of string loop corrections to gauge coupling constants, Nucl. Phys. B 355 (1991) 649

    1991

  28. [35]

    Kaplunovsky and J

    V. Kaplunovsky and J. Louis,On gauge couplings in string theory, Nuclear Physics B444 (1995) 191–244

    1995

  29. [37]

    Kikuchi, T

    S. Kikuchi, T. Kobayashi, H. Otsuka, M. Tanimoto, H. Uchida and K. Yamamoto,4D modular flavor symmetric models inspired by a higher-dimensional theory, Phys. Rev. D106 (2022) 035001 [2201.04505]

    2022 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Ishiguro, T

    K. Ishiguro, T. Kobayashi and H. Otsuka,Spontaneous CP violation and symplectic modular symmetry in Calabi-Yau compactifications, Nucl. Phys. B 973 (2021) 115598 [2010.10782]

    2021 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Ishiguro, T

    K. Ishiguro, T. Kobayashi and H. Otsuka,Symplectic modular symmetry in heterotic string vacua: flavor, CP, and R-symmetries, JHEP 01 (2022) 020 [2107.00487]

    2022 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Ishiguro, T

    K. Ishiguro, T. Kobayashi, S. Nishimura and H. Otsuka,Modular forms and hierarchical Yukawa couplings in heterotic Calabi-Yau compactifications, JHEP 08 (2024) 088 [2402.13563]

    2024 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Abe, K.-S

    H. Abe, K.-S. Choi, T. Kobayashi and H. Ohki,Higher Order Couplings in Magnetized Brane Models, JHEP 06 (2009) 080 [0903.3800]

    2009 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Honda, T

    M. Honda, T. Kobayashi and H. Otsuka,Zero-mode product expansions and higher order couplings in gauge backgrounds, Phys. Rev. D100 (2019) 025015 [1812.03357]

    2019 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Ishiguro, H

    K. Ishiguro, H. Okada and H. Otsuka,Residual flavor symmetry breaking in the landscape of modular flavor models, JHEP 09 (2022) 072 [2206.04313]

    2022 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Novichkov, J.T

    P.P. Novichkov, J.T. Penedo and S.T. Petcov,Modular flavour symmetries and modulus stabilisation, JHEP 03 (2022) 149 [2201.02020]

    2022 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Knapp-Perez, X.-G

    V. Knapp-Perez, X.-G. Liu, H.P. Nilles, S. Ramos-Sanchez and M. Ratz,Matter matters in moduli fixing and modular flavor symmetries, Phys. Lett. B844 (2023) 138106 [2304.14437]

    2023 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Kobayashi, K

    T. Kobayashi, K. Nasu, R. Sakuma and Y. Yamada,Radiative correction on moduli stabilization in modular flavor symmetric models, Phys. Rev. D108 (2023) 115038 [2310.15604]

    2023 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Higaki, J

    T. Higaki, J. Kawamura and T. Kobayashi,Finite modular axion and radiative moduli stabilization, JHEP 04 (2024) 147 [2402.02071]

    2024 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Kobayashi and H

    T. Kobayashi and H. Otsuka,Challenge for spontaneousCP violation in Type IIB orientifolds with fluxes, Phys. Rev. D102 (2020) 026004 [2004.04518]

    2020 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Higaki, T

    T. Higaki, T. Kobayashi, K. Nasu and H. Otsuka,Spontaneous CP violation and partially broken modular flavor symmetries, JHEP 09 (2024) 024 [2405.18813]. – 31 –

    2024 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Novichkov, J.T

    P.P. Novichkov, J.T. Penedo, S.T. Petcov and A.V. Titov,Modular S4 models of lepton masses and mixing, JHEP 04 (2019) 005 [1811.04933]

    2019 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Novichkov, S.T

    P.P. Novichkov, S.T. Petcov and M. Tanimoto,Trimaximal Neutrino Mixing from Modular A4 Invariance with Residual Symmetries, Phys. Lett. B793 (2019) 247 [1812.11289]

    2019 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Ding, S.F

    G.-J. Ding, S.F. King, X.-G. Liu and J.-N. Lu,Modular S4 and A4 symmetries and their fixed points: new predictive examples of lepton mixing, JHEP 12 (2019) 030 [1910.03460]

    2019

  45. [53]

    Okada and M

    H. Okada and M. Tanimoto,Towards unification of quark and lepton flavors inA4 modular invariance, Eur. Phys. J. C81 (2021) 52 [1905.13421]

    2021 arXiv

  46. [54]

    King and Y.-L

    S.F. King and Y.-L. Zhou,Trimaximal TM1 mixing with two modularS4 groups, Phys. Rev. D 101 (2020) 015001 [1908.02770]

    2020 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Okada and M

    H. Okada and M. Tanimoto,Quark and lepton flavors with common modulusτ in A4 modular symmetry, Phys. Dark Univ.40 (2023) 101204 [2005.00775]

    2023 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Okada and M

    H. Okada and M. Tanimoto,Modular invariant flavor model ofA4 and hierarchical structures at nearby fixed points, Phys. Rev. D103 (2021) 015005 [2009.14242]

    2021 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Okada and M

    H. Okada and M. Tanimoto,Spontaneous CP violation by modulusτ in A4 model of lepton flavors, JHEP 03 (2021) 010 [2012.01688]

    2021 arXiv

  50. [58]

    Feruglio, V

    F. Feruglio, V. Gherardi, A. Romanino and A. Titov,Modular invariant dynamics and fermion mass hierarchies aroundτ =i, JHEP 05 (2021) 242 [2101.08718]

    2021 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Kobayashi, H

    T. Kobayashi, H. Otsuka, M. Tanimoto and K. Yamamoto,Modular symmetry in the SMEFT, Phys. Rev. D105 (2022) 055022 [2112.00493]

    2022 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Kobayashi, H

    T. Kobayashi, H. Otsuka, M. Tanimoto and K. Yamamoto,Lepton flavor violation, lepton (g − 2)µ,e and electron EDM in the modular symmetry, JHEP 08 (2022) 013 [2204.12325]

    2022 arXiv

  53. [61]

    Kobayashi, H

    T. Kobayashi, H. Okada and Y. Orikasa,Dark matter stability at fixed points in a modular A4 symmetry, Phys. Dark Univ.37 (2022) 101080 [2111.05674]

    2022 arXiv

  54. [62]

    Mayr and S

    P. Mayr and S. Stieberger,Threshold corrections to gauge couplings in orbifold compactifications, Nucl. Phys. B 407 (1993) 725 [hep-th/9303017]

    1993 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Erler and A

    J. Erler and A. Klemm,Comment on the generation number in orbifold compactifications, Communications in Mathematical Physics153 (1993) 579–604

    1993

  56. [64]

    Witten,Dimensional reduction of superstring models, Physics Letters B155 (1985) 151

    E. Witten,Dimensional reduction of superstring models, Physics Letters B155 (1985) 151

    1985

  57. [65]

    Kaplunovsky and J

    V. Kaplunovsky and J. Louis,Field dependent gauge couplings in locally supersymmetric effective quantum field theories, Nuclear Physics B422 (1994) 57–124

    1994

  58. [66]

    Mayr and S

    P. Mayr and S. Stieberger,Dilaton, antisymmetric tensor and gauge fields in string effective theories at the one-loop level, Nuclear Physics B412 (1994) 502–522

    1994

  59. [67]

    Kikuchi, T

    S. Kikuchi, T. Kobayashi, K. Nasu, S. Takada and H. Uchida,Quark mass hierarchies and CP violation in A4 × A4 × A4 modular symmetric flavor models, JHEP 07 (2023) 134 [2302.03326]

    2023 arXiv

  60. [68]

    Petcov and M

    S.T. Petcov and M. Tanimoto,A4 modular flavour model of quark mass hierarchies close to the fixed pointτ = i∞, JHEP 08 (2023) 086 [2306.05730]

    2023 arXiv

  61. [69]

    Y. Abe, T. Higaki, J. Kawamura and T. Kobayashi,Quark masses and CKM hierarchies fromS′ 4 modular flavor symmetry, Eur. Phys. J. C83 (2023) 1140 [2301.07439]. – 32 –

    2023 arXiv

  62. [70]

    Y. Abe, T. Higaki, J. Kawamura and T. Kobayashi,Quark and lepton hierarchies from S4’ modular flavor symmetry, Phys. Lett. B842 (2023) 137977 [2302.11183]

    2023 arXiv

  63. [71]

    Kikuchi, T

    S. Kikuchi, T. Kobayashi, K. Nasu, S. Takada and H. Uchida,Quark hierarchical structures in modular symmetric flavor models at level 6, Phys. Rev. D107 (2023) 055014 [2301.03737]

    2023 arXiv

  64. [72]

    Y. Abe, T. Higaki, J. Kawamura and T. Kobayashi,Fermion hierarchies inSU (5) grand unification fromΓ′ 6 modular flavor symmetry, JHEP 08 (2023) 097 [2307.01419]

    2023 arXiv

  65. [73]

    Hai, A.R

    M. Hai, A.R. Kamal, N.F. Shamma and M.S.J. Shuvo,Perturbative Kähler Moduli Inflation, 2506.08083

    arXiv

  66. [74]

    Feruglio,Universal Predictions of Modular Invariant Flavor Models near the Self-Dual Point, Phys

    F. Feruglio,Universal Predictions of Modular Invariant Flavor Models near the Self-Dual Point, Phys. Rev. Lett.130 (2023) 101801 [2211.00659]

    2023 arXiv

  67. [75]

    Feruglio, V

    F. Feruglio, V. Gherardi, A. Romanino and A. Titov,Modular invariant dynamics and fermion mass hierarchies aroundτ =i, Journal of High Energy Physics2021 (2021)

    2021

  68. [76]

    Novichkov, J.T

    P.P. Novichkov, J.T. Penedo and S.T. Petcov,Fermion mass hierarchies, large lepton mixing and residual modular symmetries, JHEP 04 (2021) 206 [2102.07488]

    2021 arXiv

  69. [77]

    Petcov and M

    S.T. Petcov and M. Tanimoto,A4 modular flavour model of quark mass hierarchies close to the fixed pointτ =ω, Eur. Phys. J. C83 (2023) 579 [2212.13336]

    2023 arXiv

  70. [78]

    de Medeiros Varzielas, M

    I. de Medeiros Varzielas, M. Levy, J.T. Penedo and S.T. Petcov,Quarks at the modular S4 cusp, JHEP 09 (2023) 196 [2307.14410]

    2023 arXiv

  71. [79]

    H. Abe, T. Kobayashi and H. Otsuka,Natural inflation with and without modulations in type IIB string theory, JHEP 04 (2015) 160 [1411.4768]

    2015 arXiv

  72. [80]

    Ding, S.-Y

    G.-J. Ding, S.-Y. Jiang and W. Zhao,Modular invariant slow roll inflation, JCAP 10 (2024) 016 [2405.06497]

    2024 arXiv

  73. [81]

    Baur, H.P

    A. Baur, H.P. Nilles, A. Trautner and P.K.S. Vaudrevange,Unification of Flavor, CP, and Modular Symmetries, Phys. Lett. B795 (2019) 7 [1901.03251]

    2019 arXiv

  74. [82]

    Baur, H.P

    A. Baur, H.P. Nilles, A. Trautner and P.K.S. Vaudrevange,A String Theory of Flavor and C P, Nucl. Phys. B 947 (2019) 114737 [1908.00805]

    2019 arXiv

  75. [83]

    Nilles, S

    H.P. Nilles, S. Ramos-Sánchez and P.K.S. Vaudrevange,Eclectic Flavor Groups, JHEP 02 (2020) 045 [2001.01736]

    2020 arXiv

  76. [84]

    Nilles, S

    H.P. Nilles, S. Ramos-Sanchez and P.K.S. Vaudrevange,Lessons from eclectic flavor symmetries, Nucl. Phys. B 957 (2020) 115098 [2004.05200]

    2020 arXiv

  77. [85]

    Nilles, S

    H.P. Nilles, S. Ramos–Sánchez and P.K.S. Vaudrevange,Eclectic flavor scheme from ten-dimensional string theory – I. Basic results, Phys. Lett. B808 (2020) 135615 [2006.03059]

    2020 arXiv

  78. [86]

    A. Baur, M. Kade, H.P. Nilles, S. Ramos-Sanchez and P.K.S. Vaudrevange,The eclectic flavor symmetry of theZ2 orbifold, JHEP 02 (2021) 018 [2008.07534]

    2021 arXiv

  79. [87]

    Nilles, S

    H.P. Nilles, S. Ramos–Sánchez and P.K.S. Vaudrevange,Eclectic flavor scheme from ten-dimensional string theory - II detailed technical analysis, Nucl. Phys. B 966 (2021) 115367 [2010.13798]

    2021 arXiv

  80. [88]

    Ishiguro, T

    K. Ishiguro, T. Kobayashi and H. Otsuka,Hierarchical structure of physical Yukawa couplings from matter field Kähler metric, JHEP 07 (2021) 064 [2103.10240]. – 33 –

    2021 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.