Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 3 cited by

The meV mass window for axions has matured from a theoretical guess into a coordinated programme of independent experiments that can cross-validate one another, and the coming decade should decisively test the meV QCD axion.

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

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-02 17:55 UTC pith:F66UFQ6R

load-bearing objection A solid, self-aware roadmap for meV axions, worth refereeing; just don't mistake its theory pillar for a settled preference. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2603.18167 v2 pith:F66UFQ6R submitted 2026-03-18 hep-ph astro-ph.HEhep-exhep-th

Axions at the meV Crossroads: Theory, Cosmology, Astrophysics, and Experiments

Michele Cicoli , Francesco D'Eramo , Luca Di Luzio , Damiano F. G. Fiorillo , Maurizio Giannotti , Alicia Gomez , Diego Guadagnoli , Mathieu Kaltschmidt
show 13 more authors
Bradley J. Kavanagh Alessandro Lella Giuseppe Lucente David J. E. Marsh Federico Mescia Alessandro Mirizzi Javier Redondo Nicole Righi Jaime Ruz Ken'ichi Saikawa Elisa Todarello Edoardo Vitagliano Su-Yang Xu
This is my paper
classification hep-ph astro-ph.HEhep-exhep-th PACS 14.80.Va95.35.+d97.60.Bw
keywords axionsmeV mass frontierQCD axiondark matterdark radiationhelioscopeshaloscopesaxion quasiparticles
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

This review argues that axions with masses around a few meV are the most accessible near-term target in the search for physics beyond the Standard Model. It assembles four independent lines of evidence—string-theory constructions and the Peccei-Quinn quality problem favouring decay constants around 5×10⁹ GeV, cosmological production channels making meV axions viable dark matter or dark radiation, astrophysical bounds currently sitting at 10–20 meV, and a new generation of experiments—and shows they all point to the same mass range. If the review is right, the coming decade will either discover the QCD axion in the meV window or exclude it, with enough overlap among probes that any signal can be cross-checked. The claim matters because it turns an abstract particle-physics question into a concrete, testable research programme.

Core claim

The review's central claim is that the meV frontier has matured from a theoretically motivated target into a well-defined experimental programme. Multiple independent approaches—helioscopes searching for solar axions, haloscopes and axion-quasiparticle detectors searching for dark matter, precision cosmology probing thermal relics, and astrophysical observations of supernovae and neutron stars—now probe overlapping regions of parameter space. This overlap offers the prospect of robust, cross-validated discovery or exclusion: if one channel sees a signal, the others can confirm its axion interpretation and measure its mass, couplings, and cosmological abundance. The coming decade, with BabyIA

What carries the argument

The central object is the meV-scale QCD axion, with mass in the 1–10 meV range and decay constant near 5×10⁹ GeV. The argument is carried by convergence among independent probes: helioscopes like CAST and BabyIAXO (solar axion conversion in a magnetized bore), haloscopes like CADEx (resonant cavity readout of dark-matter axions near 0.4 meV), axion quasiparticles in topological antiferromagnets (a collective magnon oscillation of the material's magnetoelectric coupling, observed in MnBi₂Te₄ at 0.18 meV), supernova axion detection via gamma-ray conversion in progenitor magnetic fields and via axion absorption producing pions in water Cherenkov detectors, and the predicted contribution to ΔNef

Load-bearing premise

The argument leans on the premise that meV-scale QCD axions are a generic, theoretically well-motivated outcome of ultraviolet completions. The review itself flags a severe challenge: the closed-string construction needs extra dimensions large enough that a companion scalar field (the volume modulus) decays after Big Bang nucleosynthesis, which forces either smaller extra dimensions—pushing the axion's interaction scale out of the meV window—or a non-generic late-time dilutio

What would settle it

A coordinated null result across all meV probes: if BabyIAXO's gas-phase run and CADEx together exclude the QCD axion band in the 0.1–10 meV range, the next galactic supernova within ~2 kpc produces neither a 100 MeV gamma-ray burst nor pion-initiated Cherenkov events in Hyper-Kamiokande, and CMB-S4 finds no ΔNeff, then the meV QCD axion hypothesis would be observationally excluded. A null in any single channel would not settle it, but the combined absence of signals across helioscopes, haloscopes, quasiparticle detectors, Cherenkov searches, and cosmology would.

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

If this is right

  • BabyIAXO's gas-phase scan and CADEx will cover parts of the QCD axion band in the meV range, making the window an experimentally accessible target rather than a purely theoretical one.
  • A galactic supernova within about 2 kpc would produce a detectable 100 MeV gamma-ray burst from axion–photon conversion, and Hyper-Kamiokande would see up to a few hundred pion-induced Cherenkov events; a more distant supernova would not.
  • Future CMB surveys, including the Simons Observatory and CMB-S4, will probe the thermal axion contribution to dark radiation in exactly the decay-constant range that corresponds to meV masses, complementing supernova bounds.
  • The axion-quasiparticle resonance in MnBi₂Te₄ is tunable by an external magnetic field across roughly 0.7–7 meV, offering a volume-independent resonant detection channel for dark-matter axions.
  • A coordinated null result across helioscopes, haloscopes, quasiparticle detectors, Cherenkov searches, and CMB observations would exclude the meV QCD axion as the solution to the strong CP problem, or push it into tuned or non-generic scenarios.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Weighting the paper's own caveats, the theoretical pillar is the weakest leg: the closed-string route requires a Calabi-Yau volume near 10¹⁵, which makes the volume modulus decay after BBN, forcing either a smaller volume (pushing f_QCD to 10¹³–10¹⁶ GeV, outside the meV window) or a non-generic dilution mechanism. The open-string route avoids this but relies on control of the effective field theor
  • A future discovery of a meV axion would therefore be evidence either for open-string constructions or for non-generic volume stabilization in closed-string models, making the low-energy measurement a diagnostic of string compactification details.
  • The axion-quasiparticle discovery in MnBi₂Te₄ is likely the first of a material class: any topological antiferromagnet with comparable anisotropy fields should host meV-scale axion quasiparticles, turning the meV range into a tunable condensed-matter laboratory for axion electrodynamics.
  • A testable extension of the supernova program: full-sky gamma-ray coverage during the next galactic supernova, especially of compact Type Ibc progenitors, could measure both axion mass and coupling from the burst spectrum, and its absence would tighten bounds without relying on uncertain progenitor magnetic fields.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. This manuscript is a comprehensive review of the physics case for axions in the meV mass range. It covers field-theoretic Peccei-Quinn quality arguments and string-theory constructions (closed-string and open-string axions), cosmological roles as cold dark matter and dark radiation, astrophysical probes from supernovae and neutron stars, and experimental strategies including helioscopes, haloscopes, and the recently reported condensed-matter axion quasiparticle in MnBi2Te4. The paper's central claim is that the meV window has matured from a theoretically motivated target into a coherent, cross-validated experimental programme, with overlapping sensitivity from several independent directions.

Significance. If the assessment is correct, the review is a valuable synthesis for the axion community. Its strengths are its breadth, its quantitative grounding in recent numerical and observational results, and its explicit acknowledgment of key uncertainties: the factor-of-a-few nuclear-physics uncertainties in supernova bounds, the extrapolation of the axion string spectrum from ℓ~9 to ℓ~70, the cosmological moduli problem in string constructions, and the model dependence of thermal ΔNeff predictions. The review also incorporates very recent developments, such as progenitor-magnetic-field axion-photon conversion and axion quasiparticles, which are not yet in older reviews. The main reservation concerns the robustness of the 'theoretical motivation' pillar: the string-theoretic support is conditional in ways that the abstract and conclusions do not fully convey.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. 1, p. 3; Sec. 7] The paper's thesis, stated in Sec. 1 (p. 3) and repeated in Sec. 7, is that the meV mass range is 'theoretically well motivated' and that string model building provides 'large classes of well-motivated ultraviolet completions.' This overstates the support given in the body of the paper. The closed-string construction that gives f_QCD ~ 5×10^9 GeV requires V ~ 10^15, but the text notes that this makes the volume mode mass m_τb ~ O(1) MeV and therefore creates a severe cosmological moduli problem. Avoiding the CMP through V ≲ 10^8 shifts f_QCD to ~10^13–10^16 GeV via Eq. (2.15), outside the meV window, unless one assumes a non-generic late-time dilution or a suppressed initial misplacement. The large-h^{1,1} statistical argument is made at the tip of the stretched Kähler cone and, as the text states, stabilizing all moduli at large h^{1,1} without a CMP 'is still an open question.' The ope
  2. [Sec. 1, p. 3; Sec. 7] The claim that the different approaches 'probe overlapping regions of parameter space' and offer 'robust, cross-validated discovery or exclusion' is plausible but not demonstrated. Helioscopes and haloscopes constrain g_aγ; Cherenkov detectors and neutron-star cooling constrain g_an; CMB experiments constrain the couplings entering ΔNeff; supernova gamma-ray searches depend on the product of production and conversion rates. The fact that several probes have sensitivity at meV masses does not by itself show that they can cross-validate the same QCD axion hypothesis, because the relation between mass and each coupling is model-dependent. Please add a figure or table showing, for representative KSVZ and DFSZ benchmarks, which experiments or foreseen sensitivities reach the relevant couplings at m_a ~ 0.1–10 meV, or soften the cross-validation wording accordingly.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Eq. (6.1)] The coherence condition is written with '≪', but this appears to be a resonance/detuning condition. Please clarify whether the intended meaning is approximate equality or a small-detuning inequality.
  2. [Eq. (2.15) and Sec. 2.2.2] The symbol M_p is used without specifying whether it is the reduced Planck mass or the ordinary Planck mass. This affects the numerical estimates of m_τb (e.g., V~10^8 gives m_τb ~ 10^6–10^7 GeV depending on convention). Please define M_p consistently.
  3. [Sec. 6.5.1 and Eq. (6.8)] The text states that the axion quasiparticle was observed and stable in B|| from 2 to 7 T, while Eq. (6.8) quotes a scanning range 1–10 T. Please specify whether the 1–10 T range is an extrapolation beyond the current measurement.
  4. [Fig. 14] The figure is dense and several experimental labels overlap (e.g., ADMX, CAPP, QUAX). Using a larger font or a separate legend would improve readability.
  5. [Sec. 2.2.1] There is a formatting issue in 'L VS' (should be 'LVS') at first use; the same applies elsewhere in the layout.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the paper is a review synthesizing independent, code-reproduced results; no prediction reduces to its own input.

full rationale

This is a review paper whose central claim is a synthesis of prior literature rather than a new derivation. I looked for the specific reduction patterns: definitions built from targets, fitted parameters later called predictions, self-citation chains used as the sole justification for a central premise, uniqueness theorems imported from the authors' own prior work, ansatze smuggled via citation, or renaming of known results. None of these is present in a load-bearing way. The PQ-quality argument (Sec. 2.1) is a standard boundary argument: minimizing the required operator dimension favors smaller f_a, and astrophysical limits set the lower boundary near f_a ~ 5e9 GeV, corresponding to meV masses. This is not circular; it uses external constraints and a standard formula (Eq. 2.3). The string-theory section (Sec. 2.2) is explicit about its own limitations, stating that the closed-string construction 'faces a severe challenge' from the cosmological moduli problem and that stabilizing all moduli at large h^{1,1} without a CMP is 'still an open question.' Such acknowledged caveats weaken the motivation but do not constitute circularity. The large-h^{1,1} statistical result cited to Refs. [10,11] is a numerical computation over the Kreuzer-Skarke database using the public CYTools package; its stated assumptions (tip of the stretched Kahler cone, EFT-control bound from Ref. [63]) do not include the meV target, and it is code-reproduced rather than an unsupported assertion. Although several authors of this review are also authors of those cited works, the independence conditions of the review rule are met. Similarly, the axion-quasiparticle section uses a measured mass m_Theta = 0.18 meV and DFT/measured inputs for detector projections; no fitted parameter is relabeled as a prediction. I found no uniqueness theorem or ansatz smuggled via self-citation. The paper is self-contained as a review: its claims are either external, falsifiable, or explicitly flagged as open. Thus the circularity score is 0.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 6 axioms · 1 invented entities

The review's central claim rests on domain assumptions inherited from the cited literature. The free parameters are inputs the review adopts (not fits performed here); the axioms are the modeling assumptions that must hold for the meV narrative to work. No genuinely new entity is introduced by this paper; the axion quasiparticle is an existing external experimental claim with a falsifiable handle but no independent replication.

free parameters (4)
  • Benchmark axion decay constant f_a = ≈ 5×10^9 GeV (m_a ≈ O(meV))
    The meV program is anchored to this scale (white-dwarf cooling hint / PQ-quality reasoning), adopted throughout Secs. 2, 3, and 5 as the mapping between mass and coupling. It is an input chosen from the literature, not derived in this paper.
  • LMA initial misalignment θ0 − π = ~10^−32 for m_a = 6 meV
    Sec. 3: for large-misalignment axions to be all of the CDM at meV masses, the initial angle must be exponentially tuned; the review itself flags this as finely tuned and constrained by isocurvature (Fig. 2).
  • String-network emission spectral index q (extrapolated to ℓ ~ 70) = q ≈ 1 (blue) vs q > 1 (orange) in Fig. 3
    The post-inflationary CDM mass range 50 µeV ≲ m_a ≲ 0.5 meV (Eq. (3.3)) and the 1–50% CDM contribution (Fig. 3) depend on extrapolating q from simulations at ℓ ≲ 9 to the physical ℓ ~ 70; the review flags the saturating q → 1 possibility as not excluded.
  • Axion-quasiparticle parameters (mΘ, fΘ, loss rates) = mΘ = 0.18 meV (measured); fΘ = 82 eV (DFT); Γρ/ω = 0.2×10^−3; Γm/ω = 0.7×10^−3
    Sec. 6.5.2's projected MnBi2Te4 haloscope sensitivity (Fig. 14) depends on these values, taken from Refs [264,274]; fΘ and loss rates remain experimentally unconfirmed, as the review notes.
axioms (6)
  • domain assumption Standard QCD axion mass–decay-constant relation (m_a f_a ≈ m_π f_π) holds for all models discussed.
    Throughout, meV masses are mapped to f_a ~ 5×10^9 GeV. Exceptions (heavy axions, ALPs) are noted only parenthetically in §2.1.
  • domain assumption PQ-breaking operator scaling of Eqs. (2.1)–(2.3), with Λ_UV = M_Pl and O(1) phase δ.
    The PQ-quality argument that singles out low f_a assumes Planck-suppressed, O(1)-phase PQ-breaking operators. Gauge-protected or extra-dimensional solutions listed in §2.1 would not imply the same mass preference.
  • domain assumption Post-inflationary string-network simulations can be extrapolated from ℓ ≲ 9 to physical ℓ ~ 70 to fix axion abundance.
    Sec. 3's CDM mass range relies on this extrapolation and on the debated spectral index q; the review states q → 1 saturation 'cannot be excluded' and different groups disagree.
  • domain assumption The axion-quasiparticle action (Eq. (6.4)) with Θ = 2πh/e² α correctly describes MnBi2Te4, and the measured 44 GHz mode is a dynamical magnetoelectric (axion) oscillation tunable by in-plane B.
    Sec. 6.5 assumes the measured mode is the AQ, that the identification interprets pump-probe Kerr rotation as Θ(t), and that the mass tunes across 0.7–7 meV for B = 1–10 T (Eq. (6.8)). This rests on a single experimental paper (Ref. [264]).
  • domain assumption Dilute instanton gas approximation for the finite-temperature axion potential (cos θ form) in LMA and kinetic-misalignment scenarios.
    Sec. 3's large-misalignment and kinetic-misalignment abundance estimates use the DIGA potential; deviations would change trapping and anharmonic dynamics.
  • domain assumption Type IIB flux-landscape statistics over the Kreuzer–Skarke database, sampled at the tip of the stretched Kähler cone, are a meaningful measure of the meV preference.
    Sec. 2.2.1's meV preference at large h1,1 depends on SKC-tip sampling and the volume bound V ≳ 10^−3.4 (h1,1)^7.2; the review concedes these results are valid only at the tip or along a ray from it.
invented entities (1)
  • Axion quasiparticle (AQ) in MnBi2Te4 independent evidence
    purpose: MeV-scale, B-field-tunable target for axion dark matter detection via AQ-polariton resonance (TOORAD-style haloscope, Eq. (6.5)–(6.8), Fig. 14).
    The claimed mass mΘ = 0.18 meV (44 GHz) from Ref. [264] is an external falsifiable handle, but as of this review it rests on a single published experiment with no cited independent replication.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 51888 in / 18394 out tokens · 185239 ms · 2026-08-02T17:55:40.306040+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

The meV mass range has emerged as a focal point in axion physics, where advances in theory, cosmology, astrophysics, and experimental techniques converge. Axions in this mass range are theoretically well motivated, can arise in ultraviolet-complete models, and can have significant cosmological impacts as dark matter or dark radiation. In parallel, their efficient production in stellar and supernova environments provides powerful astrophysical probes. Here, we provide a comprehensive overview of meV axions across these domains, highlighting both established results and open questions. We discuss the theoretical underpinnings of meV axions, their cosmological and astrophysical signatures, and the diverse experimental strategies -- ranging from helioscopes and haloscopes to quasiparticle systems and large-volume Cherenkov detectors -- that aim to explore this regime. The convergence of these approaches emphasizes the pivotal role of the meV mass range for axion discovery in the coming years, identifying meV axions as a key probe for testing beyond-Standard-Model physics. This review document is the direct outcome of the discussions at the dedicated workshop "The meV Mass Axion Frontier: Challenges and Opportunities", held at Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati (IT) on 27--28 October 2025, and organized by the EU funded COST Action "Cosmic WISPers in the Dark Universe: Theory, astrophysics, and experiments" (CA21106, https://www.cost.eu/actions/CA21106). Its aim is to provide an overview of current efforts in meV axion research, their motivations, and the research goals that animate the community involved in this search.

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Lights, Camera, Axion: Tracing Axions from Supernovae in the Diffuse $\gamma$-ray Sky

    hep-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Axions produced in supernovae generate a diffuse gamma-ray signal through conversion in magnetic fields, yielding competitive constraints on the axion-photon coupling from COMPTEL, EGRET, and Fermi-LAT data plus forec...

  2. Solar axion searches with RES-NOVA: projected sensitivity and first prototype limit

    hep-ex 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0

    RES-NOVA's projected 1 ton-year sensitivity reaches within a factor of ~2 of XENONnT on the solar-axion electron coupling, and a 32.4 g-day archaeological-lead prototype excludes new parts of the (g_ae, g_aγ) plane.

  3. Searching for axions with quantum interferometry

    hep-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Axion-photon coupling imprints measurable Aharonov-Bohm and Berry phases in superconducting circuits and interferometers, projecting sensitivity to g_aγγ ~ 7.8e-14 GeV^{-1} at m_a ~ 1e-10 eV.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

265 extracted references · 184 linked inside Pith · cited by 3 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Raffelt, J

    G.G. Raffelt, J. Redondo and N. Viaux Maira,The meV mass frontier of axion physics,Phys. Rev. D84(2011) 103008 [1110.6397]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  2. [2]

    Conlon,The QCD axion and moduli stabilisation,JHEP05(2006) 078 [hep-th/0602233]

    J.P. Conlon,The QCD axion and moduli stabilisation,JHEP05(2006) 078 [hep-th/0602233]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  3. [3]

    Cicoli, M

    M. Cicoli, M. Goodsell and A. Ringwald,The type IIB string axiverse and its low-energy phenomenology,JHEP10(2012) 146 [1206.0819]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  4. [4]

    Broeckel, M

    I. Broeckel, M. Cicoli, A. Maharana, K. Singh and K. Sinha,Moduli stabilisation and the statistics of axion physics in the landscape,JHEP08(2021) 059 [2105.02889]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  5. [5]

    Cicoli, A

    M. Cicoli, A. Hebecker, J. Jaeckel and M. Wittner,Axions in string theory — slaying the Hydra of dark radiation,JHEP09(2022) 198 [2203.08833]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  6. [6]

    Cicoli, D

    M. Cicoli, D. Klevers, S. Krippendorf, C. Mayrhofer, F. Quevedo and R. Valandro,Explicit de Sitter Flux Vacua for Global String Models with Chiral Matter,JHEP05(2014) 001 [1312.0014]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  7. [7]

    Cicoli, V.A

    M. Cicoli, V.A. Diaz, V. Guidetti and M. Rummel,The 3.5 keV Line from Stringy Axions, JHEP10(2017) 192 [1707.02987]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  8. [8]

    Petrossian-Byrne and G

    R. Petrossian-Byrne and G. Villadoro,Open string axiverse,JHEP07(2025) 049 [2503.16387]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  9. [9]

    Loladze, A

    V. Loladze, A. Platschorre and M. Reig,Higher axion strings,JHEP08(2025) 182 [2503.18707]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  10. [10]

    Mehta, M

    V.M. Mehta, M. Demirtas, C. Long, D.J.E. Marsh, L. Mcallister and M.J. Stott, Superradiance Exclusions in the Landscape of Type IIB String Theory,2011.08693

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  11. [11]

    Mehta, M

    V.M. Mehta, M. Demirtas, C. Long, D.J.E. Marsh, L. McAllister and M.J. Stott, Superradiance in string theory,JCAP07(2021) 033 [2103.06812]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  12. [12]

    Peccei and H.R

    R.D. Peccei and H.R. Quinn,CP Conservation in the Presence of Instantons,Phys. Rev. Lett. 38(1977) 1440

    1977

  13. [13]

    Peccei and H.R

    R.D. Peccei and H.R. Quinn,Constraints Imposed by CP Conservation in the Presence of Instantons,Phys. Rev. D16(1977) 1791

    1977

  14. [14]

    Weinberg,A New Light Boson?,Phys

    S. Weinberg,A New Light Boson?,Phys. Rev. Lett.40(1978) 223. – 47 –

    1978

  15. [15]

    Wilczek,Problem of StrongPandTInvariance in the Presence of Instantons,Phys

    F. Wilczek,Problem of StrongPandTInvariance in the Presence of Instantons,Phys. Rev. Lett.40(1978) 279

    1978

  16. [16]

    Kim,Weak Interaction Singlet and Strong CP Invariance,Phys

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

    1979

  17. [17]

    Shifman, A.I

    M.A. Shifman, A.I. Vainshtein and V.I. Zakharov,Can Confinement Ensure Natural CP Invariance of Strong Interactions?,Nucl. Phys. B166(1980) 493

    1980

  18. [18]

    Zhitnitsky,On Possible Suppression of the Axion Hadron Interactions

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

    1980

  19. [19]

    M. Dine, W. Fischler and M. Srednicki,A Simple Solution to the Strong CP Problem with a Harmless Axion,Phys. Lett. B104(1981) 199

    1981

  20. [20]

    Georgi, L.J

    H.M. Georgi, L.J. Hall and M.B. Wise,Grand Unified Models With an Automatic Peccei-Quinn Symmetry,Nucl. Phys. B192(1981) 409

    1981

  21. [21]

    Dine and N

    M. Dine and N. Seiberg,String Theory and the Strong CP Problem,Nucl. Phys. B273 (1986) 109

    1986

  22. [22]

    Barr and D

    S.M. Barr and D. Seckel,Planck scale corrections to axion models,Phys. Rev. D46(1992) 539

    1992

  23. [23]

    Kamionkowski and J

    M. Kamionkowski and J. March-Russell,Planck scale physics and the Peccei-Quinn mechanism,Phys. Lett. B282(1992) 137 [hep-th/9202003]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1992

  24. [24]

    Holman, S.D.H

    R. Holman, S.D.H. Hsu, T.W. Kephart, E.W. Kolb, R. Watkins and L.M. Widrow,Solutions to the strong CP problem in a world with gravity,Phys. Lett. B282(1992) 132 [hep-ph/9203206]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1992

  25. [25]

    Ghigna, M

    S. Ghigna, M. Lusignoli and M. Roncadelli,Instability of the invisible axion,Phys. Lett. B 283(1992) 278

    1992

  26. [26]

    Rubakov,Grand unification and heavy axion,JETP Lett.65(1997) 621 [hep-ph/9703409]

    V.A. Rubakov,Grand unification and heavy axion,JETP Lett.65(1997) 621 [hep-ph/9703409]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  27. [27]

    Berezhiani, L

    Z. Berezhiani, L. Gianfagna and M. Giannotti,Strong CP problem and mirror world: The Weinberg-Wilczek axion revisited,Phys. Lett. B500(2001) 286 [hep-ph/0009290]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  28. [28]

    Randall,Composite axion models and Planck scale physics,Phys

    L. Randall,Composite axion models and Planck scale physics,Phys. Lett. B284(1992) 77

    1992

  29. [29]

    Dobrescu,The Strong CP problem versus Planck scale physics,Phys

    B.A. Dobrescu,The Strong CP problem versus Planck scale physics,Phys. Rev. D55(1997) 5826 [hep-ph/9609221]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  30. [30]

    K.S. Babu, I. Gogoladze and K. Wang,Stabilizing the axion by discrete gauge symmetries, Phys. Lett. B560(2003) 214 [hep-ph/0212339]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  31. [31]

    Redi and R

    M. Redi and R. Sato,Composite Accidental Axions,JHEP05(2016) 104 [1602.05427]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  32. [32]

    Fukuda, M

    H. Fukuda, M. Ibe, M. Suzuki and T.T. Yanagida,A ”gauged”U(1)Peccei–Quinn symmetry, Phys. Lett. B771(2017) 327 [1703.01112]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  33. [33]

    Di Luzio, E

    L. Di Luzio, E. Nardi and L. Ubaldi,Accidental Peccei-Quinn symmetry protected to arbitrary order,Phys. Rev. Lett.119(2017) 011801 [1704.01122]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  34. [34]

    Bonnefoy, E

    Q. Bonnefoy, E. Dudas and S. Pokorski,Axions in a highly protected gauge symmetry model, Eur. Phys. J. C79(2019) 31 [1804.01112]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  35. [35]

    Lillard and T.M.P

    B. Lillard and T.M.P. Tait,A High Quality Composite Axion,JHEP11(2018) 199 [1811.03089]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  36. [36]

    Gavela, M

    M.B. Gavela, M. Ibe, P. Quilez and T.T. Yanagida,Automatic Peccei–Quinn symmetry,Eur. Phys. J. C79(2019) 542 [1812.08174]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  37. [37]

    Lee and W

    H.-S. Lee and W. Yin,Peccei-Quinn symmetry from a hidden gauge group structure,Phys. Rev. D99(2019) 015041 [1811.04039]. – 48 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  38. [38]

    M. Ardu, L. Di Luzio, G. Landini, A. Strumia, D. Teresi and J.-W. Wang,Axion quality from the (anti)symmetric of SU(N),JHEP11(2020) 090 [2007.12663]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  39. [39]

    Di Luzio,Accidental SO(10) axion from gauged flavour,JHEP11(2020) 074 [2008.09119]

    L. Di Luzio,Accidental SO(10) axion from gauged flavour,JHEP11(2020) 074 [2008.09119]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  40. [40]

    Yin,Scale and quality of Peccei-Quinn symmetry and weak gravity conjectures,JHEP10 (2020) 032 [2007.13320]

    W. Yin,Scale and quality of Peccei-Quinn symmetry and weak gravity conjectures,JHEP10 (2020) 032 [2007.13320]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  41. [41]

    Contino, A

    R. Contino, A. Podo and F. Revello,Chiral models of composite axions and accidental Peccei-Quinn symmetry,JHEP04(2022) 180 [2112.09635]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  42. [42]

    Di Luzio, G

    L. Di Luzio, G. Landini, F. Mescia and V. Susiˇ c,High-quality Peccei-Quinn symmetry from the interplay of vertical and horizontal gauge symmetries,2503.16648

    arXiv

  43. [43]

    Witten,Some Properties of O(32) Superstrings,Phys

    E. Witten,Some Properties of O(32) Superstrings,Phys. Lett. B149(1984) 351

    1984

  44. [44]

    Cicoli, C

    M. Cicoli, C. Mayrhofer and R. Valandro,Moduli Stabilisation for Chiral Global Models, JHEP02(2012) 062 [1110.3333]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  45. [45]

    Cicoli, F

    M. Cicoli, F. Muia and P. Shukla,Global Embedding of Fibre Inflation Models,JHEP11 (2016) 182 [1611.04612]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  46. [46]

    Cicoli, D

    M. Cicoli, D. Ciupke, V.A. Diaz, V. Guidetti, F. Muia and P. Shukla,Chiral Global Embedding of Fibre Inflation Models,JHEP11(2017) 207 [1709.01518]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  47. [47]

    Cicoli, A

    M. Cicoli, A. Grassi, O. Lacombe and F.G. Pedro,Chiral global embedding of Fibre Inflation with D3uplift,JHEP06(2025) 090 [2412.08723]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  48. [48]

    Cicoli, M

    M. Cicoli, M. Goodsell, J. Jaeckel and A. Ringwald,Testing String Vacua in the Lab: From a Hidden CMB to Dark Forces in Flux Compactifications,JHEP07(2011) 114 [1103.3705]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  49. [49]

    Allahverdi, M

    R. Allahverdi, M. Cicoli, B. Dutta and K. Sinha,Correlation between Dark Matter and Dark Radiation in String Compactifications,JCAP10(2014) 002 [1401.4364]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  50. [50]

    A. Hees, O. Minazzoli, E. Savalle, Y.V. Stadnik and P. Wolf,Violation of the equivalence principle from light scalar dark matter,Phys. Rev. D98(2018) 064051 [1807.04512]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  51. [51]

    Coughlan, W

    G.D. Coughlan, W. Fischler, E.W. Kolb, S. Raby and G.G. Ross,Cosmological Problems for the Polonyi Potential,Phys. Lett. B131(1983) 59

    1983

  52. [52]

    Banks, D.B

    T. Banks, D.B. Kaplan and A.E. Nelson,Cosmological implications of dynamical supersymmetry breaking,Phys. Rev. D49(1994) 779 [hep-ph/9308292]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1994

  53. [53]

    de Carlos, J.A

    B. de Carlos, J.A. Casas, F. Quevedo and E. Roulet,Model independent properties and cosmological implications of the dilaton and moduli sectors of 4-d strings,Phys. Lett. B318 (1993) 447 [hep-ph/9308325]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1993

  54. [54]

    Conlon and F.G

    J.P. Conlon and F.G. Pedro,Moduli Redefinitions and Moduli Stabilisation,JHEP06(2010) 082 [1003.0388]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  55. [55]

    Balasubramanian, P

    V. Balasubramanian, P. Berglund, J.P. Conlon and F. Quevedo,Systematics of moduli stabilisation in Calabi-Yau flux compactifications,JHEP03(2005) 007 [hep-th/0502058]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  56. [56]

    Cicoli, J.P

    M. Cicoli, J.P. Conlon and F. Quevedo,General Analysis of LARGE Volume Scenarios with String Loop Moduli Stabilisation,JHEP10(2008) 105 [0805.1029]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  57. [57]

    Cicoli, J.P

    M. Cicoli, J.P. Conlon and F. Quevedo,Systematics of String Loop Corrections in Type IIB Calabi-Yau Flux Compactifications,JHEP01(2008) 052 [0708.1873]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  58. [58]

    Blumenhagen, S

    R. Blumenhagen, S. Moster and E. Plauschinn,Moduli Stabilisation versus Chirality for MSSM like Type IIB Orientifolds,JHEP01(2008) 058 [0711.3389]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  59. [59]

    Chauhan, M

    A. Chauhan, M. Cicoli, S. Krippendorf, A. Maharana, P. Piantadosi and A. Schachner,Deep observations of the Type IIB flux landscape,JHEP07(2025) 271 [2501.03984]. – 49 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  60. [60]

    Kreuzer and H

    M. Kreuzer and H. Skarke,Complete classification of reflexive polyhedra in four-dimensions, Adv. Theor. Math. Phys.4(2000) 1209 [hep-th/0002240]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  61. [61]

    Demirtas, A

    M. Demirtas, A. Rios-Tascon and L. McAllister,CYTools: A Software Package for Analyzing Calabi-Yau Manifolds,2211.03823

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  62. [62]

    Fallon, J

    S.V.P. Fallon, J. Halverson, L. McAllister and Y. Zhu,F-theory Axiverse,2511.20458

    arXiv

  63. [63]

    Demirtas, C

    M. Demirtas, C. Long, L. McAllister and M. Stillman,The Kreuzer-Skarke Axiverse,JHEP 04(2020) 138 [1808.01282]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  64. [64]

    Raffelt,Astrophysical axion bounds,Lect

    G.G. Raffelt,Astrophysical axion bounds,Lect. Notes Phys.741(2008) 51 [hep-ph/0611350]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  65. [65]

    Caputo and G

    A. Caputo and G. Raffelt,Astrophysical Axion Bounds: The 2024 Edition,PoS COSMICWISPers(2024) 041 [2401.13728]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  66. [66]

    Gendler and D.J.E

    N. Gendler and D.J.E. Marsh,Possible Implications of QCD Axion Dark Matter Constraints from Helioscopes and Haloscopes for the String Theory Landscape,Phys. Rev. Lett.134 (2025) 081602 [2407.07143]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  67. [67]

    Gendler, D.J.E

    N. Gendler, D.J.E. Marsh, L. McAllister and J. Moritz,Glimmers from the axiverse,JCAP 09(2024) 071 [2309.13145]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  68. [68]

    Cicoli, D

    M. Cicoli, D. Ciupke, S. de Alwis and F. Muia,α ′ Inflation: moduli stabilisation and observable tensors from higher derivatives,JHEP09(2016) 026 [1607.01395]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  69. [69]

    Demirtas, N

    M. Demirtas, N. Gendler, C. Long, L. McAllister and J. Moritz,PQ axiverse,JHEP06 (2023) 092 [2112.04503]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  70. [70]

    Benabou, K

    J.N. Benabou, K. Fraser, M. Reig and B.R. Safdi,String theory and grand unification suggest a submicroelectronvolt QCD axion,Phys. Rev. D112(2025) 066003 [2505.15884]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  71. [71]

    Sheridan, F

    E. Sheridan, F. Carta, N. Gendler, M. Jain, D.J.E. Marsh, L. McAllister et al.,Fuzzy axions and associated relics,JHEP09(2025) 016 [2412.12012]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  72. [72]

    Cicoli, S

    M. Cicoli, S. Krippendorf, C. Mayrhofer, F. Quevedo and R. Valandro,D-Branes at del Pezzo Singularities: Global Embedding and Moduli Stabilisation,JHEP09(2012) 019 [1206.5237]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  73. [73]

    Cicoli, S

    M. Cicoli, S. Krippendorf, C. Mayrhofer, F. Quevedo and R. Valandro,D3/D7 Branes at Singularities: Constraints from Global Embedding and Moduli Stabilisation,JHEP07(2013) 150 [1304.0022]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  74. [74]

    Cicoli, I

    M. Cicoli, I. Garc ` ıa-Etxebarria, C. Mayrhofer, F. Quevedo, P. Shukla and R. Valandro,Global Orientifolded Quivers with Inflation,JHEP11(2017) 134 [1706.06128]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  75. [75]

    Cicoli, I.G

    M. Cicoli, I.G. Etxebarria, F. Quevedo, A. Schachner, P. Shukla and R. Valandro,The Standard Model quiver in de Sitter string compactifications,JHEP08(2021) 109 [2106.11964]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  76. [76]

    Choi, H.P

    K. Choi, H.P. Nilles, C.S. Shin and M. Trapletti,Sparticle Spectrum of Large Volume Compactification,JHEP02(2011) 047 [1011.0999]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  77. [77]

    Blumenhagen, J.P

    R. Blumenhagen, J.P. Conlon, S. Krippendorf, S. Moster and F. Quevedo,SUSY Breaking in Local String/F-Theory Models,JHEP09(2009) 007 [0906.3297]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  78. [78]

    Aparicio, M

    L. Aparicio, M. Cicoli, S. Krippendorf, A. Maharana, F. Muia and F. Quevedo,Sequestered de Sitter String Scenarios: Soft-terms,JHEP11(2014) 071 [1409.1931]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  79. [79]

    Ballesteros, J

    G. Ballesteros, J. Redondo, A. Ringwald and C. Tamarit,Standard Model—axion—seesaw—Higgs portal inflation. Five problems of particle physics and cosmology solved in one stroke,JCAP08(2017) 001 [1610.01639]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  80. [80]

    Arvanitaki, S

    A. Arvanitaki, S. Dimopoulos, M. Galanis, L. Lehner, J.O. Thompson and K. Van Tilburg, Large-misalignment mechanism for the formation of compact axion structures: Signatures from the QCD axion to fuzzy dark matter,Phys. Rev. D101(2020) 083014 [1909.11665]. – 50 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

Showing first 80 references.