Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 4 minor 7 cited by

A High-Quality Axion from Exact SUSY Chiral Dynamics

T0 review · 1 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A supersymmetric SU(10) chiral gauge theory with anomaly-mediated supersymmetry breaking is claimed to have an exactly calculable vacuum whose spontaneously broken U(1) Peccei-Quinn symmetry produces a high-quality composite QCD axion with

desk verdict Real composite-axion construction with a calculable vacuum and strong discrete-symmetry protection; the 'exact' label is optimistic because the minimum relies on an unproven canonical Kähler metric and the global-SUSY AMSB potential. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.21813 v1 pith:LXSNKSWY submitted 2025-08-29 hep-ph

T. Gherghetta , H. Murayama , B. Noether , P. Quílez This is my paper
classification hep-ph
keywords compositeaxionstrongCPproblemqualitysupersymmetricchiralgaugetheoryanomaly-mediatedsupersymmetrybreakingPeccei-QuinnsymmetrydiscreteSO(10)grandunification
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 sets out to show that a single strongly coupled supersymmetric theory can solve the strong CP problem, the axion quality problem, and (at the 100 TeV scale) the Higgs hierarchy problem at once. The construction is an $SU(10)$ chiral gauge theory with massless matter, perturbed by anomaly-mediated supersymmetry breaking; the paper claims the resulting nonsupersymmetric vacuum can be solved exactly. In that vacuum a $U(1)$ global symmetry, identified with the Peccei-Quinn symmetry, is spontaneously broken, giving a composite QCD axion whose decay constant is a calculable function of the strong-coupling and supersymmetry-breaking scales. A discrete gauge symmetry $\mathbb{Z}_{16}$ (or its subgroups) forbids the Planck-scale operators that usually spoil axion quality, and an $SU(14)$ extension embeds $SO(10)$ grand unification with the unification scale equal to the axion scale. A sympathetic reader would care because the model makes concrete predictions — an axion-photon coupling ratio, colored pseudoscalar states, and a specific axion scale — that experiments can probe.

What carries the argument

The exact non-perturbative superpotential $W = \left(\Lambda^{23}_{10}(\mathrm{Pf} A)(\mathrm{Pf} A \bar{F} \bar{F})\right)^{1/3}$ combined with the anomaly-mediated supersymmetry-breaking potential $V = m(\phi_i \frac{\partial W}{\partial \phi_i} - 3W) + \text{c.c.}$ is the machine: it turns the runaway direction of the supersymmetric theory into a stable minimum at $b = c = a/\sqrt{2} = \Lambda\left(\frac{17\Lambda}{138m}\right)^{3/20}$, fixing the Peccei-Quinn breaking scale and hence the composite axion's decay constant. The second mechanism is the discrete symmetry $\mathbb{Z}_{16}$, the largest anomaly-free discrete subgroup of the chiral $U(1)$ symmetries; because it can be gauged, it forbids the Planck-suppressed operators that would otherwise spoil the axion solution.

What would settle it

Detect the axion and measure its photon coupling: the $SU(10)$ construction predicts $E/N = \frac{4}{3}$ (or $\frac{2}{3}$ for the alternative hypercharge assignment) and the $SU(14)$ GUT version predicts $E/N = \frac{8}{3}$, where $E/N$ is the ratio of electromagnetic to color anomaly coefficients. A measured value outside this discrete set would rule out the model's identification of the axion. Independently, a collider search for the colored pseudo-Nambu-Goldstone bosons must find octet and triplet states with masses in the ratio $9:4$; finding them with a different ratio would falsify the spectrum.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that a supersymmetric $SU(10)$ chiral gauge theory with one antisymmetric and six antifundamental chiral superfields, perturbed by anomaly-mediated supersymmetry breaking, has a stable nonsupersymmetric vacuum that can be solved exactly in the limit where the supersymmetry-breaking scale $m$ is much smaller than the dynamical scale $\Lambda$. The exact non-perturbative superpotential $W = \left(\Lambda^{23}_{10}(\mathrm{Pf} A)(\mathrm{Pf} A \bar{F} \bar{F})\right)^{1/3}$ normally drives a runaway; the anomaly-mediated term $V = m(\phi_i \frac{\partial W}{\partial \phi_i} - 3W) + \text{c.c.}$ stabilizes it at $b = c = a/\sqrt{2} = \Lambda\left(\frac{17\Lambda}{138m}\right)^{3/20}$. Around this vacuum, the global $SU(6) \times U(1)_{PQ}$ symmetry is broken to $Sp(6)$ — which contains QCD color — and the U(1

Load-bearing premise

The argument depends on the energy formula used for the vacuum being exact along the whole valley of field values; if additional corrections to the field kinetic terms or to the supersymmetry-breaking term appear, the predicted axion scale moves.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The axion decay constant is fixed by the strong dynamics, fa ≈ 0.17 Λ(Λ/m)^{3/20}, so once m is known from colliders, the axion mass and couplings become predictions rather than free parameters.
  • The gauged discrete symmetries set concrete upper bounds on fa: Z4 gives fa ≲ 3.7×10^10 GeV, Z8 gives 6.7×10^14 GeV, and Z16 gives 4.5×10^16 GeV, with corresponding axion-photon couplings in reach of proposed experiments.
  • Below O(m) the model contains colored pseudo-Nambu-Goldstone bosons with octet and triplet masses in the ratio 9:4; they decay to gluons, either promptly or with displaced vertices, and could be searched for at future colliders.
  • The SU(14) × Z12 extension unifies SO(10) grand unification with the axion, identifying the unification scale with fa and predicting E/N = 8/3 for the axion-photon coupling, a sharp target for axion experiments.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the exact vacuum calculation is right, the same recipe — an exact non-perturbative superpotential stabilized by anomaly-mediated supersymmetry breaking — could be applied to other chiral gauge theories to generate composite axions with different discrete-symmetry protection and different phenomenological spectra.
  • The two hypercharge options in the SU(10) version give distinct E/N values (4/3 and 2/3), so a precise axion-photon measurement could in principle distinguish not only this model from others but also which charge assignment is realized.
  • In the GUT version, fa ~ 10^16 GeV puts the axion in the regime where the misalignment mechanism overproduces dark matter unless the initial angle is tuned; this suggests the model's cosmology may select a particular discrete symmetry or require a nonstandard thermal history, a question the paper leaves open.
  • The long-lived colored states, if they exist, are a candidate for strongly interacting dark matter with distinctive signatures; whether QCD-scale recoupling depletes them enough to evade heavy-isotope bounds is a quantitative question worth pursuing.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

1 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper constructs a composite axion model from a supersymmetric SU(10) chiral gauge theory with one antisymmetric tensor and six antifundamentals, perturbed by anomaly-mediated supersymmetry breaking (AMSB). Using the exact nonperturbative superpotential and the AMSB scalar potential, the authors find a stable non-SUSY vacuum that spontaneously breaks a U(1) Peccei-Quinn symmetry, producing a QCD axion with a calculable decay constant. A discrete Z16 (or Z4, Z8) symmetry is shown to be anomaly-free and gauged, suppressing PQ-violating operators up to high dimension. The paper also presents an SU(14) extension with SO(10) grand unification, where the axion decay constant is identified with the unification scale, and discusses collider and cosmological signatures of colored pseudo-Nambu-Goldstone bosons.

Significance. If the central dynamical calculation is correct, this is an attractive model-building step: it simultaneously addresses the strong CP problem, the axion quality problem, and (at 100 TeV) the hierarchy problem, with an axion decay constant that is not a free parameter but is determined by the dynamical scale and the SUSY-breaking scale. The use of exact supersymmetric chiral dynamics is a genuine strength, as are the explicit discrete-anomaly checks and the falsifiable predictions for E/N and the colored NGB spectrum. The SU(14) GUT variant is a natural and interesting extension. The main risk is that the advertised quantitative control of the vacuum and of fa depends on assumptions about the Kähler potential and the AMSB form that are not fully defended; if that concern is resolved, the paper would be a valuable contribution.

major comments (1)
  1. [Appendix A.1, Eq. (A.7)] The solution b=c=a/√2 is called a 'stable ground state', but only a stationary point of (A.6) is exhibited. Since the supersymmetric limit has a runaway to v→∞, the global stability of this AMSB minimum and the absence of other deeper minima should be established, for example by giving the Hessian along all moduli. This is a central point for the claim that the model has a calculable, stable vacuum.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Eq. (A.10)] The term '426|c|^2' appears to be a typographical error for 4^2 × 6 |c|^2. Please clarify the notation and confirm the coefficient used in f_PQ^2 below it.
  2. [Section IV] The text says 'The SU(10) model in section IV' but should refer to Section III. Also, the antifundamental index range 'i=1,...,14' is inconsistent with the stated ten antifundamentals; presumably it should be i=1,...,10.
  3. [Figure 1 and Eq. (III.5)] The figure labels the SU(10) model as E/N=4/3, but Eq. (III.5) gives E/N=2/3 for q_F=-1/3 and E/N=8/3 for q_F=2/3. Please reconcile the figure label with the text.
  4. [Eq. (III.10)] The integer n in the quality bound is not defined in the text. It should be related explicitly to the dimension of the PQ-violating operator.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central axion quantities are derived from input scales, not fitted, and the exact-vacuum calculation is re-derived in the appendix.

full rationale

The central quantitative claim is Eq. (A.12): fa = (sqrt(42)/40) a with a = Λ10 (17 Λ10 / (138 m))^{3/20}. This is obtained by minimizing the effective potential (A.6), which is built from the exact superpotential (A.4) and the standard AMSB term (A.5). The only inputs are the dynamical scale Λ10 and the supersymmetry-breaking scale m; no axion observable or fitted parameter is used to set fa. The PQ charges in Table II are fixed by requiring the U(1)PQ to be SU(10)-anomaly-free and QCD-anomalous, not by matching axion couplings; N=80 is then a derived anomaly coefficient. The discrete Z16 symmetry and the operator-dimension bounds in (III.7)-(III.11) are obtained from anomaly-freeness computations in Appendices B and C, not assumed to produce the quality bounds. Self-citations to Refs. [26,27] supply general exact results for SUSY chiral dynamics, but the appendix re-derives the relevant superpotential and minimization, so the argument does not reduce to those citations. The main vulnerability identified by the skeptic - the assumption of a canonical Kähler metric and the global-SUSY AMSB form at large VEVs - is a correctness/robustness caveat, not a circularity: the output fa is not equivalent to an input assumption by construction. Therefore no circular step can be exhibited.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the exact SUSY/AMSB dynamics from prior work, the canonical Kahler assumption, the weakly-gauged QCD assumption, and the anomaly-free discrete symmetry construction. Free parameters include the strong scales Lambda10/Lambda14, the AMSB scale m, the operator coefficient cPQ, and the hypercharge assignment; these set the axion scale but are not fitted to axion data. No new fundamental entities are introduced beyond the A and Fbar superfields; the axion and colored NGBs are composite states with predicted observable signatures.

free parameters (6)
  • Lambda10
    SU(10) dynamical scale; free input that sets the axion decay constant via Eq. (A.12).
  • m = ~100 TeV
    AMSB supersymmetry-breaking scale; chosen near 100 TeV for collider and hierarchy reasons, enters the fa formula.
  • c_PQ = ~0.1
    Overall coefficient of Planck-suppressed PQ-violating operators; quality bounds in Eqs. (III.10)-(III.11) assume cPQ ~ 0.1.
  • q_Fbar = +2/3 or -1/3
    Hypercharge assignment for the Fbar field, chosen to avoid fractionally charged stable relics; fixes the E/N ratio.
  • discrete subgroup choice = Z4/Z8/Z16
    Choice of which anomaly-free subgroup of Z16 is gauged; determines the maximal allowed fa.
  • Lambda14
    SU(14) dynamical scale in the GUT extension; free input analogous to Lambda10.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The non-perturbative superpotential W = (Lambda10^23 (Pf A)(Pf A Fbar Fbar))^{1/3} is exact and determined by symmetry.
    Invoked in Eq. (A.4) as the exact low-energy superpotential from gaugino condensation; no loop corrections beyond it are considered.
  • domain assumption The AMSB potential V_AMSB = m(phi_i dW/dphi_i - 3W) + c.c. is the exact supersymmetry-breaking correction for m << Lambda.
    Eq. (A.5), taken from [26], assumes UV insensitivity and no other soft terms contribute.
  • domain assumption The Kahler potential is canonical along the D-flat direction used in the calculation.
    Used implicitly in Eq. (A.10) to extract f_PQ from kinetic terms; strong-dynamics corrections to the Kahler metric are neglected.
  • domain assumption The condensate pattern <A Fbar_i Fbar_j> proportional to J_ij and <Pf A> nonzero (Eq. III.1) follows from the exact SUSY results of [27] and remains valid after AMSB perturbation.
    This determines which global symmetries break, including U(1)_PQ, and is the basis for identifying the axion.
  • domain assumption QCD SU(3)_c is weakly gauged inside the unbroken Sp(6)_Fbar global symmetry and does not significantly back-react on the strong dynamics.
    Used in Section III B to compute the NGB spectrum, axion couplings, and the E/N ratio.
  • domain assumption Discrete gravitational anomalies of Z16 can be canceled by spectator fields without affecting the axion potential.
    Appendix C argues spectators can cancel Z16 x [grav]^2 anomalies; relies on spectators staying VEV-less so PQ-violating operators they allow do not shift the axion minimum.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A High-Quality Axion from Exact SUSY Chiral Dynamics." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/LXSNKSWY

@misc{pith2026250821813,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A High-Quality Axion from Exact SUSY Chiral Dynamics},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/LXSNKSWY}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.21813}
}
abstract

We use supersymmetric chiral dynamics perturbed by anomaly-mediated supersymmetry breaking to obtain a high-quality, composite axion that solves the strong CP problem. The strong dynamics arises from a supersymmetric SU(10) chiral gauge theory with massless matter chiral superfields. This leads to a stable, nonsupersymmetric vacuum, calculated exactly, where a spontaneously broken $U(1)$ global symmetry, identified with the Peccei-Quinn symmetry, gives rise to a composite QCD axion. The chiral gauge theory also admits a discrete $\mathbb{Z}_{4}$ (or $\mathbb{Z}_{8,16}$) gauge symmetry that forbids PQ-violating operators up to dimension eight. An extension to an $SU(14)\times \mathbb{Z}_{12}$ chiral gauge theory incorporates $SO(10)$ grand unification where the unification scale is identified with the PQ-breaking scale and PQ-violating operators are forbidden up to dimension 20. The supersymmetry breaking scale, near 100 TeV, ameliorates the Higgs hierarchy problem, while colored NGBs may be detected at future colliders via decays to gluons or form heavy isotopes.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2508.21813 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_1.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 7 Pith papers

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

  1. The Holographic QCD Axion in Five Dimensions

    hep-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0 of 10

    A 5D holographic QCD axion model identifies bulk modes for the axion and eta prime, traces the quality problem to insufficient compositeness, and finds the physical axion mostly in the bulk gauge field when quality is high.

  2. Specially Embedding a Composite Axion Model

    hep-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    Special embedding of the composite axion and QCD gauge groups into a larger product gauge group reduces the domain wall number to unity and induces a controlled bias term from UV instantons that destabilizes the walls.

  3. Accidental Peccei-Quinn Symmetry from Chiral Gauge Symmetry and Mirror QCD

    hep-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    A chiral U(1) gauge symmetry generates an accidental Peccei-Quinn symmetry broken by mirror QCD, solving the strong CP problem without a light axion while supplying WIMP dark matter, stochastic gravitational waves, an...

  4. Axion Quality in Warped Extra-Dimension

    hep-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0 of 10

    Warped extra-dimensional Wilson-line axions can achieve high quality when non-QCD potential contributions from charged bulk fields are parametrically suppressed by geometry and brane effects.

  5. Axion Quality in Warped Extra-Dimension

    hep-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0 of 10

    Warped extra-dimensional axion models achieve high quality when nonlocal U(1)-charged field effects are sufficiently suppressed by the warp factor and orbifold structure.

  6. Axion Quality Problem: Keep Calm and Baryon

    hep-ph 2025-10 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    The QCD axion can be the Goldstone boson of baryon number in a minimal N_c=N_f supersymmetric QCD sector, with PQ-breaking effects suppressed by dimension N_c+2 operators.

  7. Rich Phenomenology from Simple Ingredients: A Review of Confining Dark Sectors

    hep-ph 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 2.0 of 10

    Review of confining dark sectors summarizing dark matter candidates, abundance mechanisms, discovery channels, and applications to the abundance similarity puzzle.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

63 extracted references · 30 canonical work pages · cited by 6 Pith papers

  1. [56]

    Dark Matter,

    M. Cirelli, A. Strumia, and J. Zupan, “Dark Matter,” arXiv:2406.01705 [hep-ph]. 8

    arXiv

  2. [1]

    The flat direction v and its scalar and fermionic partners of mass O(m),

    work page

  3. [2]

    The SU (6) ¯F /Sp(6) ¯F NGBs of mass O( gs 2π m) together with the scalar and fermionic part- ners of mass O(m), in the 8 + 3 + ¯3 repre- sentations under SU (3)c, and

    work page

  4. [3]

    gaug- ing

    The almost massless axion together with its real scalar and fermionic partner of mass O(m). All of their mass spectra can be worked out exactly despite the strong dynamics as long as m ≪ Λ10, even though it is unnecessary in this paper. Impor- tantly, the U (1)PQ symmetry is anomalous with re- spect to QCD and therefore the axion will obtain the usual QCD...

    work page 2020

  5. [4]

    run- away

    The SU (10) case In the supersymmetric limit, the SU (10) the- ory introduced in section IV is known to have “run- away” behavior, namely that the non-perturbative dynamics forces the bosonic fields to turn on and run to the infinite expectation values. The deriva- tion starts from the observation that the scalar (or D-term) potential has the form VD = 1 ...

    work page

  6. [5]

    (A.15) The axion decay constant is then calculated to be fa = fP Q N ≈ 0.17 Λ14 Λ14 m 3/28 , (A.16) where the color anomaly coefficient is N = 168 in this theory

    The SU (14) case For the SU (14) theory, the analogous calcula- tion gives the minimum b = c = a/ √ 2 =Λ14 25 Λ14 25/393 m 3/28 , (A.13) and thus, using the PQ charges qA = −5 and q ¯F = +6 from Table III we obtain f 2 P Q=2 125 |a|2 + 50 |b|2 + 360 |c|2 , (A.14) fP Q≈ 27.9 Λ14 Λ14 m 3/28 . (A.15) The axion decay constant is then calculated to be fa = fP ...

    work page

  7. [6]

    CP Conservation in the Presence of Instantons,

    R. D. Peccei and H. R. Quinn, “CP Conservation in the Presence of Instantons,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 38 (1977) 1440–1443. [,328(1977)]. 1

    work page 1977

  8. [7]

    A New Light Boson?,

    S. Weinberg, “A New Light Boson?,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 40 (1978) 223–226. 1

    work page 1978

Show all 63 references
  1. [8]

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

    F. Wilczek, “Problem of Strong P and T Invariance in the Presence of Instantons,” Phys. Rev. Lett.40 (1978) 279–282. 1

    1978

  2. [9]

    Grand Unified Models with an Automatic Peccei-Quinn Symmetry,

    H. M. Georgi, L. J. Hall, and M. B. Wise, “Grand Unified Models with an Automatic Peccei-Quinn Symmetry,” Nucl. Phys. B192 (1981) 409–416. 1

    1981

  3. [10]

    Planck Scale Physics and the Peccei-Quinn Mechanism,

    M. Kamionkowski and J. March-Russell, “Planck Scale Physics and the Peccei-Quinn Mechanism,” Phys. Lett. B282 (1992) 137–141, arXiv:hep-th/9202003 [hep-th]

    1992 arXiv

  4. [11]

    Solutions to the Strong CP Problem in a World with Gravity,

    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) 132–136, arXiv:hep-ph/9203206 [hep-ph]

    1992 arXiv

  5. [12]

    Gravity and global symmetries,

    R. Kallosh, A. D. Linde, D. A. Linde, and L. Susskind, “Gravity and global symmetries,” Phys. Rev. D52 (1995) 912–935, arXiv:hep-th/9502069

    1995 arXiv

  6. [13]

    Planck Scale Corrections to Axion Models,

    S. M. Barr and D. Seckel, “Planck Scale Corrections to Axion Models,” Phys. Rev. D46 (1992) 539–549

    1992

  7. [14]

    Instability of the Invisible Axion,

    S. Ghigna, M. Lusignoli, and M. Roncadelli, “Instability of the Invisible Axion,” Phys. Lett. B283 (1992) 278–281

    1992

  8. [15]

    Wormholes and masses for Goldstone bosons,

    R. Alonso and A. Urbano, “Wormholes and masses for Goldstone bosons,” arXiv:1706.07415 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  9. [16]

    The axion quality problem: global symmetry breaking and wormholes,

    J. Alvey and M. Escudero, “The axion quality problem: global symmetry breaking and wormholes,” JHEP 01 (2021) 032, arXiv:2009.03917 [hep-ph]. 1

    2021 arXiv

  10. [17]

    A Supersymmetry primer,

    S. P. Martin, “A Supersymmetry primer,” Adv. Ser. Direct. High Energy Phys.18 (1998) 1–98, arXiv:hep-ph/9709356. 1

    1998 arXiv

  11. [18]

    A Composite Invisible Axion,

    J. E. Kim, “A Composite Invisible Axion,” Phys. Rev. D31 (1985) 1733. 1

    1985

  12. [19]

    Dynamical Axion,

    K. Choi and J. E. Kim, “Dynamical Axion,” Phys. Rev. D32 (1985) 1828. 1

    1985

  13. [20]

    Composite axion models and Planck scale physics,

    L. Randall, “Composite axion models and Planck scale physics,” Phys. Lett. B284 (1992) 77–80. 1

    1992

  14. [21]

    Peccei-Quinn Symmetry from Dynamical Supersymmetry Breaking,

    K. Harigaya, M. Ibe, K. Schmitz, and T. T. Yanagida, “Peccei-Quinn Symmetry from Dynamical Supersymmetry Breaking,” Phys. Rev. D 92 no. 7, (2015) 075003, arXiv:1505.07388 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  15. [22]

    Composite Accidental Axions,

    M. Redi and R. Sato, “Composite Accidental Axions,” JHEP 05 (2016) 104, arXiv:1602.05427 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  16. [23]

    A High Quality Composite Axion,

    B. Lillard and T. M. P. Tait, “A High Quality Composite Axion,” arXiv:1811.03089 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  17. [24]

    A High-Quality Composite Pati-Salam Axion,

    T. Gherghetta, H. Murayama, and P. Qu ´ ılez, “A High-Quality Composite Pati-Salam Axion,” arXiv:2505.08866 [hep-ph]. 1

    arXiv

  18. [25]

    Automatic Peccei–Quinn symmetry,

    M. B. Gavela, M. Ibe, P. Quilez, and T. T. Yanagida, “Automatic Peccei–Quinn symmetry,” Eur. Phys. J.C79 no. 6, (2019) 542, arXiv:1812.08174 [hep-ph]. 1, 2, 3

    2019 arXiv

  19. [26]

    Axion quality from the (anti)symmetric of SU( N ),

    M. Ardu, L. Di Luzio, G. Landini, A. Strumia, D. Teresi, and J.-W. Wang, “Axion quality from the (anti)symmetric of SU( N ),” JHEP 11 (2020) 090, arXiv:2007.12663 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  20. [27]

    Chiral models of composite axions and accidental Peccei-Quinn symmetry,

    R. Contino, A. Podo, and F. Revello, “Chiral models of composite axions and accidental Peccei-Quinn symmetry,” JHEP 04 (2022) 180, arXiv:2112.09635 [hep-ph]. 1

    2022 arXiv

  21. [28]

    A Holographic Perspective on the Axion Quality Problem,

    P. Cox, T. Gherghetta, and M. D. Nguyen, “A Holographic Perspective on the Axion Quality Problem,” JHEP 01 (2020) 188, arXiv:1911.09385 [hep-ph]. 1

    2020 arXiv

  22. [29]

    A common origin for the QCD axion and sterile neutrinos from SU(5) strong dynamics,

    P. Cox, T. Gherghetta, and A. Paul, “A common origin for the QCD axion and sterile neutrinos from SU(5) strong dynamics,” JHEP 12 (2023) 180, arXiv:2310.08557 [hep-ph]. 1, 4

    2023 arXiv

  23. [30]

    Naturalness, chiral symmetry, and spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking,

    G. ’t Hooft, “Naturalness, chiral symmetry, and spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking,” NATO Sci. Ser. B59 (1980) 135–157. 1

    1980

  24. [31]

    Some Exact Results in QCD-like Theories,

    H. Murayama, “Some Exact Results in QCD-like Theories,” Phys. Rev. Lett.126 no. 25, (2021) 251601, arXiv:2104.01179 [hep-th]. 1, 4, 11

    2021 arXiv

  25. [32]

    Some exact results in chiral gauge theories,

    C. Cs´ aki, H. Murayama, and O. Telem, “Some exact results in chiral gauge theories,” Phys. Rev. D 104 no. 6, (2021) 065018, arXiv:2104.10171 [hep-th]. 2, 4

    2021 arXiv

  26. [33]

    More exact results on chiral gauge theories: The case of the symmetric tensor,

    C. Cs´ aki, H. Murayama, and O. Telem, “More exact results on chiral gauge theories: The case of the symmetric tensor,” Phys. Rev. D105 no. 4, (2022) 045007, arXiv:2105.03444 [hep-th]. 1

    2022 arXiv

  27. [34]

    Discrete Gauge Symmetry in Continuum Theories,

    L. M. Krauss and F. Wilczek, “Discrete Gauge Symmetry in Continuum Theories,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 62 (1989) 1221. 2

    1989

  28. [35]

    Local Discrete Symmetry and Quantum Mechanical Hair,

    J. Preskill and L. M. Krauss, “Local Discrete Symmetry and Quantum Mechanical Hair,” Nucl. Phys. B341 (1990) 50–100. 2

    1990

  29. [36]

    Stabilizing the axion by discrete gauge symmetries,

    K. S. Babu, I. Gogoladze, and K. Wang, “Stabilizing the axion by discrete gauge symmetries,” Phys. Lett. B560 (2003) 214–222, arXiv:hep-ph/0212339 [hep-ph]. 2

    2003 arXiv

  30. [37]

    Discrete R symmetries for the MSSM and its singlet extensions,

    H. M. Lee, S. Raby, M. Ratz, G. G. Ross, R. Schieren, K. Schmidt-Hoberg, and P. K. S. Vaudrevange, “Discrete R symmetries for the MSSM and its singlet extensions,” Nucl. Phys. B 15 850 (2011) 1–30, arXiv:1102.3595 [hep-ph]

    2011 arXiv

  31. [38]

    Peccei-Quinn symmetry from a gauged discrete R symmetry,

    K. Harigaya, M. Ibe, K. Schmitz, and T. T. Yanagida, “Peccei-Quinn symmetry from a gauged discrete R symmetry,” Phys. Rev. D88 no. 7, (2013) 075022, arXiv:1308.1227 [hep-ph]

    2013 arXiv

  32. [39]

    High-quality axions in solutions to the µ problem,

    P. N. Bhattiprolu and S. P. Martin, “High-quality axions in solutions to the µ problem,” Phys. Rev. D104 no. 5, (2021) 055014, arXiv:2106.14964 [hep-ph]. 2

    2021 arXiv

  33. [40]

    Sparticle masses from the superconformal anomaly,

    A. Pomarol and R. Rattazzi, “Sparticle masses from the superconformal anomaly,” JHEP 05 (1999) 013, arXiv:hep-ph/9903448. 5

    1999 arXiv

  34. [41]

    Soft supersymmetry breaking in deformed moduli spaces, conformal theories, and N=2 Yang-Mills theory,

    M. A. Luty and R. Rattazzi, “Soft supersymmetry breaking in deformed moduli spaces, conformal theories, and N=2 Yang-Mills theory,” JHEP 11 (1999) 001, arXiv:hep-th/9908085. 5

    1999 arXiv

  35. [42]

    Low-energy Supersymmetry Breaking Without the Gravitino Problem,

    A. Hook and H. Murayama, “Low-energy Supersymmetry Breaking Without the Gravitino Problem,” Phys. Rev. D92 no. 1, (2015) 015004, arXiv:1503.04880 [hep-ph]. 5

    2015 arXiv

  36. [43]

    CHAMP Cosmic Rays,

    D. Dunsky, L. J. Hall, and K. Harigaya, “CHAMP Cosmic Rays,” JCAP 07 (2019) 015, arXiv:1812.11116 [astro-ph.HE]. 6

    2019 arXiv

  37. [44]

    Higgs Parity, Strong CP, and Dark Matter,

    D. Dunsky, L. J. Hall, and K. Harigaya, “Higgs Parity, Strong CP, and Dark Matter,” JHEP 07 (2019) 016, arXiv:1902.07726 [hep-ph]. 6

    2019 arXiv

  38. [45]

    Line Operators in the Standard Model,

    D. Tong, “Line Operators in the Standard Model,” JHEP 07 (2017) 104, arXiv:1705.01853 [hep-th]. 6

    2017 arXiv

  39. [46]

    Discrete gauge symmetry anomalies,

    L. E. Ibanez and G. G. Ross, “Discrete gauge symmetry anomalies,” Phys. Lett. B260 (1991) 291–295. 6

    1991

  40. [47]

    Discrete gauge symmetries and the origin of baryon and lepton number conservation in supersymmetric versions of the standard model,

    L. E. Ibanez and G. G. Ross, “Discrete gauge symmetries and the origin of baryon and lepton number conservation in supersymmetric versions of the standard model,” Nucl. Phys. B368 (1992) 3–37

    1992

  41. [48]

    More about discrete gauge anomalies,

    L. E. Ibanez, “More about discrete gauge anomalies,” Nucl. Phys. B398 (1993) 301–318, arXiv:hep-ph/9210211. 6

    1993 arXiv

  42. [49]

    Revised experimental upper limit on the electric dipole moment of the neutron,

    J. M. Pendlebury et al., “Revised experimental upper limit on the electric dipole moment of the neutron,” Phys. Rev. D92 no. 9, (2015) 092003, arXiv:1509.04411 [hep-ex]. 6

    2015 arXiv

  43. [50]

    An Improved experimental limit on the electric dipole moment of the neutron,

    C. A. Baker et al., “An Improved experimental limit on the electric dipole moment of the neutron,” Phys. Rev. Lett.97 (2006) 131801, arXiv:hep-ex/0602020. 6

    2006 arXiv

  44. [51]

    cajohare/axionlimits: Axionlimits

    C. O’Hare, “cajohare/axionlimits: Axionlimits.” https://cajohare.github.io/AxionLimits/, July, 2020. 7

    2020

  45. [52]

    A search for pair-produced resonances in four-jet final states at √s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector,

    A TLASCollaboration, M. Aaboud et al., “A search for pair-produced resonances in four-jet final states at √s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector,” Eur. Phys. J. C78 no. 3, (2018) 250, arXiv:1710.07171 [hep-ex]. 7

    2018 arXiv

  46. [53]

    Search for heavy charged long-lived particles in the ATLAS detector in 36.1 fb −1 of proton-proton collision data at √s = 13 TeV,

    A TLASCollaboration, M. Aaboud et al., “Search for heavy charged long-lived particles in the ATLAS detector in 36.1 fb −1 of proton-proton collision data at √s = 13 TeV,” Phys. Rev. D99 no. 9, (2019) 092007, arXiv:1902.01636 [hep-ex]. 7

    2019 arXiv

  47. [54]

    Search for superheavy hydrogen in sea water,

    P. Verkerk, G. Grynberg, B. Pichard, M. Spiro, S. Zylberajch, M. E. Goldberg, and P. Fayet, “Search for superheavy hydrogen in sea water,” Phys. Rev. Lett.68 (1992) 1116–1119. 8

    1992

  48. [55]

    Colored Dark Matter,

    V. De Luca, A. Mitridate, M. Redi, J. Smirnov, and A. Strumia, “Colored Dark Matter,” Phys. Rev. D 97 no. 11, (2018) 115024, arXiv:1801.01135 [hep-ph]. 8

    2018 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Opening the Window on Strongly Interacting Dark Matter,

    G. D. Starkman, A. Gould, R. Esmailzadeh, and S. Dimopoulos, “Opening the Window on Strongly Interacting Dark Matter,” Phys. Rev. D 41 (1990) 3594. 8

    1990

  50. [58]

    Axion Couplings to Matter. 1. CP Conserving Parts,

    M. Srednicki, “Axion Couplings to Matter. 1. CP Conserving Parts,” Nucl. Phys. B260 (1985) 689–700. 9

    1985

  51. [59]

    Axion couplings in grand unified theories,

    P. Agrawal, M. Nee, and M. Reig, “Axion couplings in grand unified theories,” JHEP 10 (2022) 141, arXiv:2206.07053 [hep-ph]. 9

    2022 arXiv

  52. [60]

    A Solution to the Strong CP Problem Without an Axion,

    K. S. Babu and R. N. Mohapatra, “A Solution to the Strong CP Problem Without an Axion,” Phys. Rev. D41 (1990) 1286. 9

    1990

  53. [61]

    QCD axion from chiral gauge theories,

    R. Sato and S. Takeshita, “QCD axion from chiral gauge theories,” to appear(2025) . 10

    2025

  54. [62]

    Note on discrete gauge anomalies,

    T. Banks and M. Dine, “Note on discrete gauge anomalies,” Phys. Rev. D45 (1992) 1424–1427, arXiv:hep-th/9109045 [hep-th]. 13

    1992 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Discrete anomaly matching,

    C. Cs´ aki and H. Murayama, “Discrete anomaly matching,” Nucl. Phys. B515 (1998) 114–162, arXiv:hep-th/9710105. 13

    1998 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.