Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 114 references

Electroweak baryogenesis from charged current anomalies in $B$ meson decays

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-09 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read New physics behind B-meson flavor anomalies can also explain the universe's baryon asymmetry.

desk verdict A solid proof of principle that R(D(*))-fit lepton Yukawas can source the BAU, conditional on an uncomputed strong phase transition; worth refereeing, but needs the scalar potential work. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.00445 v1 pith:OCRDX7DK submitted 2025-02-01 hep-ph

Peter Athron , Michael J. Ramsey-Musolf , Cristian Sierra , Yongcheng Wu This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-ph
keywords electroweakbaryogenesisBmesonanomaliesR(D*)generaltwoHiggsdoubletmodelCPviolationelectronelectricdipolemomentchargedbosonleptonflavoruniversality
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 argues that a single piece of new physics can resolve two unrelated puzzles: the long-standing charged B-meson anomalies in $R(D^{(*)})$ and the origin of the observed baryon asymmetry of the universe. Working in the general two-Higgs-doublet model with a complex tau Yukawa coupling, it shows that the same CP-violating phase that fits the flavor data can generate electroweak baryogenesis, producing a baryon-to-entropy ratio $Y_B$ consistent with the measured value for benchmark parameters satisfying the electron-EDM bound. The central demonstration relies on a semiclassical WKB treatment of lepton transport at the bubble wall, with a new analytic approximation for the CP-violating source. The required strong first-order electroweak phase transition is assumed, with thermal parameters chosen from earlier 2HDM studies; deriving them from the scalar potential is left to future work.

What carries the argument

The engine is lepton-mediated electroweak baryogenesis in the G2HDM. The CP violation comes from a wall-position-dependent lepton mass matrix, with the tau-Yukawa phase $\theta$; as the bubble wall passes, the matrix element $\mathrm{Im}(A_{22})$—proportional to the Jarlskog invariant $\mathrm{Im}\,J_A = y_{\tau\tau}^2\sin\theta$, the standard rephasing-invariant measure of CP violation—acts as a semiclassical force in the WKB (Wentzel-Kramers-Brillouin) transport formalism. The resulting source term enters a single diffusion equation for the left-handed lepton number, obtained by decoupling the lepton-Higgs-quark system through the slow tau-Yukawa rate, and solved analytically with Green's functions. The same charged Higgs $H^\pm$ that mediates $b\to c\tau\nu$ and produces the $R(D^{(*)})$ deviation carries the phase that sources the asymmetry, which is why one model connects both observables.

What would settle it

A full computation of the electroweak phase transition for the benchmark point (charged-Higgs mass near $130$ GeV, $\tan\beta=0.6$, $c_{\beta-\alpha}=0.01$) that yields $\xi=v_n/T_n<1.5$ at nucleation or a wall thickness $L_w T_n<3$ would invalidate the predicted $Y_B\simeq 8.6\times10^{-11}$ for that point. Likewise, a null result from the next-generation electron-EDM experiment at sensitivity $\delta d_e \simeq 4\times10^{-31}\,e\,\mathrm{cm}$ would bound $|\tilde{\kappa}_\tau|\lesssim 0.0078$ and exclude most of the BAU-compatible parameter space shown in the paper.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the charged-current anomalies $R(D^{(*)})$ and the baryon asymmetry of the universe can both be explained by the lepton Yukawa sector of the general two-Higgs-doublet model. With the complex phase $\theta \simeq 2.15$, tau Yukawa $y_{\tau\tau}\simeq 0.05$, small off-diagonal muon-tau couplings, and a charged Higgs mass near $130$ GeV, the model passes the flavor and electron-EDM constraints and predicts $Y_B/Y_B^{\mathrm{obs}} = O(1)$ for strong first-order phase transition parameters $\xi = v_n/T_n \ge 1.5$ and $L_w T_n \ge 3$, with $\Delta\beta = 0.02$ and wall velocities around $0.25$–$0.4$. The paper emphasizes that the WKB source, being second order in derivatives, gives a conservative underestimate of the asymmetry compared with the VEV-resummation approach, so the quoted velocities are not meant as sharp bounds.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the G2HDM scalar sector actually undergoes a sufficiently strong first-order electroweak phase transition—the paper assumes $\xi = v_n/T_n \ge 1.5$, $L_w T_n \ge 3$, and $\Delta\beta = 0.02$ rather than deriving them; if the real transition is weaker or the bubble wall thicker, the predicted baryon asymmetry falls below the observed value.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A confirmed deviation in $R(D^{(*)})$ would cease to be merely a flavor puzzle and would instead imply that the electroweak phase transition was strongly first order and CP-violating.
  • At the best-fit point, the baryon asymmetry is reproduced for wall velocities near $v_w = 0.35$, with values above $v_w \simeq 0.4$ disfavored; lower velocities can be accommodated when other parameters vary.
  • The next-generation electron-EDM search can probe almost all of the BAU-compatible parameter region, while future Higgs factories measuring CP violation in $h\to\tau\tau$ can test the same CP-violating Yukawa coupling.
  • Because the WKB source underestimates the asymmetry relative to the VEV-resummation formalism, a less conservative transport calculation would generally allow smaller bubble-wall velocities and a wider allowed region.
  • Benchmark points with $m_{H^\pm}\simeq 130$ GeV connect the scenario to existing searches for a light charged Higgs decaying to $c\bar{b}$, giving a collider handle independent of the B-meson data.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The paper's proof-of-principle leaves one step undone: identifying which G2HDM scalar-potential parameters produce a strong first-order transition with $\xi\ge 1.5$, $L_w T_n \ge 3$, and $\Delta\beta=0.02$. A full calculation would turn the assumed thermal parameters into a model-level prediction and could shrink or eliminate the allowed region.
  • If the same tau-Yukawa phase is responsible for both anomalies, the model correlates several future measurements: the electron EDM, the CP asymmetry in $h\to\tau\tau$, and lepton-flavor-violating tau decays should all point to the same magnitude of CP violation; a null result in just one channel would put tension on the connection.
  • The mechanism does not require the neutral-current $b\to s\mu^+\mu^-$ anomalies, so a clean experimental test is the charged Higgs itself: discovering a $\sim130$ GeV $H^\pm$ with the predicted $b\to c\tau\nu$ couplings would independently confirm the flavor side of the connection, leaving the phase-transition strength as the remaining cosmological unknown.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper claims that the general two-Higgs-doublet model with complex lepton Yukawa couplings, in the parameter region that fits the R(D^(*)) anomalies and the electron EDM bound, can also explain the observed baryon asymmetry of the universe through electroweak baryogenesis. The BAU is computed in the WKB/semiclassical transport formalism, reduced to a single lepton diffusion equation, using an analytic approximation for the source terms documented in the End Matter. For the best-fit point (y_mumu=0.001, y_mutau=0.01, y_tautau=0.05, theta=2.15, c_beta-alpha=0.01, m_H+ about 130 GeV) and assumed strong first-order phase transition parameters (xi=v_n/T_n at least 1.5, L_w T_n about 3, Delta beta=0.02), the authors obtain Y_B close to the Planck value for bubble wall velocities around v_w=0.35, and they identify future eEDM and Higgs-factory probes.

Significance. If the missing phase-transition calculation is supplied, this would be a notable connection between the R(D^(*)) flavor anomalies and electroweak baryogenesis, with falsifiable predictions for future eEDM and Higgs-factory measurements. The transport calculation is documented in the End Matter, uses the WKB source (second order in derivatives, hence conservative compared to the VEV-resummation approach), and checks the single-species and equal-diffusion approximations against prior work. The BAU comparison is a post-fit overlay rather than part of the likelihood, so the analysis is not circular. The central caveat, which is stated openly in the paper, is that the quantitative match depends on hand-selected thermal parameters that are not derived from the scalar potential of the benchmark; this is the load-bearing point that needs work before the headline claim can be accepted as demonstrated.

major comments (3)
  1. [Results (thermal parameters paragraph) and Fig. 2] The central quantitative result, Y_B/Y_B^obs = 1, is obtained for hand-selected thermal parameters xi = v_n/T_n in {1.5, 2}, L_w T_n in {3, 8}, Delta beta = 0.02, with v_w treated as a free parameter, rather than computed from the G2HDM scalar potential at the benchmark point. Because Eq. (4) is directly proportional to the CP-violating source built from the bubble profiles in Eqs. (A1), (C1), and (C6), the agreement with the observed BAU is conditional on the existence of a strong first-order phase transition with these properties in the same parameter region that fits R(D^(*)) and the eEDM. Prior 2HDM studies [39-41] establish strong first-order transitions in other parts of parameter space, but they do not demonstrate overlap with m_H+ about 130 GeV, tan beta = 0.6, c_beta-alpha = 0.01, and the lepton-Yukawa texture of Eq. (C2). The paper explicitly acknowledges this ('we simply select reasonable choices... future work'), so the issue is not hidden, but it is load-bearing: without a demonstration that the flavor-fit benchmark also yields xi >= 1.5 and L_w T_n about 3, the headline claim is a conditional proof of principle rather than a demonstration. I request either a finite-temperature calculation or scan showing that a point satisfying all flavor, eEDM, and stability constraints has a sufficiently strong first-order phase transition with the assumed wall properties, or an explicit reframing of the central claim as conditional on such a transition.
  2. [End Matter, Eqs. (C4)-(C6)] The normalization of the source term relies on the identity Im(J_A) = y_tautau^2 sin(theta), stated after Eq. (C6). As written, J_A in Eq. (C5) involves the scalar potential parameters v_a, mu_bc, and mu_HB12, so this identity cannot hold for arbitrary values of those parameters. Since Im(J_A) enters directly in Im(A22) and hence in the source S_j through Eq. (C6), the predicted Y_B scales with the assumed value. Please derive this identity and state the required conditions on the scalar potential parameters (e.g., reality conditions or basis choices) under which the combination in Eq. (C5) reduces to y_tautau^2 sin(theta) for the texture of Eq. (C2).
  3. [Results, Fig. 2 and Fig. 3] The bubble wall velocity v_w is treated as a free parameter, and Fig. 3 quotes v_w = 0.35 for the best-fit point. Since v_w is not computed from the model's microphysics and the BAU has a non-monotonic dependence on v_w (including a sharp dip near v_w = 0.1), the quoted match is partly a parameter choice. This is not by itself an error, but it should be stated explicitly that the paper makes no prediction for v_w and that the quoted value is one of several possible choices; the current text sometimes reads as if v_w = 0.35 is a prediction of the model.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Eq. (1)] There is a typo in 'dropped the the subscript' — it should read 'dropped the subscript'.
  2. [Results, source term sentence] The text says 'We obtain the source term on the right hand side of Eq. (3)', but the CP-violating source S_l appears in Eq. (1); Eq. (3) has n_L as the source. Please correct the cross-reference.
  3. [Fig. 3 caption and color bar] The color-bar label 'L/Lmaxflavour +R(D(*)) +|de|JILA' is difficult to parse; please define the components of the likelihood more clearly in the caption.
  4. [Introduction and abstract] The abstract and introduction state that the paper 'demonstrate[s] for the first time' the connection, but the quantitative result is obtained under the explicit assumption of a sufficiently strong first-order phase transition with specific thermal parameters. The abstract does include the assumption, but the wording 'demonstrate' is stronger than what is computed; consider softening to 'show, under the assumption of...' to match the actual scope.
  5. [References] Ref. [98] is the 2013 Planck release; the central value Y_B^obs = 8.59e-11 is still used, but a more recent Planck value and reference would be appropriate.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the flavor-fit parameters are independent inputs and the observed BAU is a post-fit overlay, not a fitted target.

full rationale

Walking the derivation chain from the G2HDM lepton Yukawa texture (Eq. C2) through the WKB source (Eqs. C4, C6) to the baryon asymmetry (Eq. 4), I find no step in which a predicted quantity is equivalent by construction to an input, nor any load-bearing self-citation that smuggles in the BAU conclusion. The parameters y_tau_tau, y_mu_tau, and theta are fixed by a separate published GAMBIT global fit to R(D(*)) and other flavor observables plus the JILA eEDM bound; the observed BAU does not appear in that likelihood. Figure 3 overlays Y_B/Y_B^obs = 1 contours on the flavor/eEDM profile-likelihood plane, so the agreement is a post-fit demonstration rather than a statistical fit to the BAU. The paper's phrase 'we fit the observed BAU' is loose, but the profile likelihood L is explicitly defined as the sum of flavor and eEDM likelihoods, confirming that the BAU was not fitted. The thermal parameters (xi >= 1.5, L_w T_n ~ 3, Delta beta = 0.02) are hand-selected and the paper explicitly defers their derivation from the scalar potential to future work; this is an acknowledged provenance and robustness limitation, not a circular reduction of Y_B to its inputs. Self-citations to Refs. [16,17,41] are present, but [17] is an independent code-based global fit and [41] is a separate phase-transition study; neither is an unverified assertion that already contains the target result. No specific circular step can be exhibited, so the appropriate finding is no significant circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 11 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on fitted lepton Yukawa couplings and on hand-selected phase transition parameters that are not derived from the scalar potential. The paper is transparent about the latter, but the BAU result is conditional on them.

free parameters (11)
  • y_mumu = 0.001
    Best-fit value from the global flavor fit of Ref. [17]; enters the R(D(*)) formulas and the lepton mass texture; its smallness ensures the expansion in Eq. (C4).
  • y_mutau = 0.01
    Best-fit value; appears linearly in the A22 source and thus sets the scale of the CP-violating source.
  • y_tautau = 0.05
    Best-fit value; Im(JA) = y_tautau^2 sin(theta), so the BAU scales as its square.
  • theta = 2.15
    Complex phase fitted in the global fit; controls the size of CP violation and the eEDM prediction.
  • c_beta_minus_alpha = 0.01
    Alignment parameter from the global fit; enters the Higgs couplings and the effective tau Yukawa.
  • m_H+ (charged Higgs mass) = ~130 GeV
    Preferred by the fit to explain R(D(*)) and the ATLAS t -> b H+ -> b b c excess.
  • xi = vn/Tn = 1.5 or 2.0
    Hand-selected phase transition strength parameter; BAU is only sufficient for xi >= 1.5.
  • Lw Tn = 3 or 8
    Hand-selected bubble wall thickness; thinner walls (LwTn >= 3) enhance the BAU.
  • Delta beta = 0.02
    Hand-selected maximum variation of beta across the wall, taken near the middle of the range from Ref. [41].
  • vw (bubble wall velocity) = scanned, e.g., 0.35
    Not predicted; chosen as a free parameter. The matching of BAU to observation selects specific velocities.
  • vn = 200 GeV
    Fixed normalization; only the ratio vn/Tn matters.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The lepton-mediated EWBG transport can be reduced to a single diffusion equation for left-handed lepton density l_L, with l_L = -tau_R and equal diffusion constants Dl = 100/T, as established in Ref. [63].
    Used to derive the diffusion equation (1) and its analytic solution (2); Ref. [63] claims this is valid to about 10%.
  • domain assumption The WKB semiclassical method gives a valid CP-violating source term at second order in derivatives (Eq. C6).
    The paper uses the WKB source and notes it gives a conservative underestimate relative to the VEV-resummation approach; the BAU magnitude depends on the source term.
  • domain assumption The bubble wall profiles are tanh kinks with the form of Eq. (C1), and only the lepton Yukawa sector provides the CP violation (Delta beta fixed at 0.02).
    The source term depends on the profile combinations h1' h2 - h2' h1; alternative profiles could change the result.
  • ad hoc to paper The identity Im(JA) = y_tautau^2 sin(theta) (stated after Eq. C6) holds for the texture of Eq. (C2), implicitly fixing the scalar potential parameters (mu_ab, mu_HB12) that enter the Jarlskog invariant.
    The BAU scales with this combination; the paper does not specify the scalar potential parameters or check them against stability and perturbativity bounds.
  • domain assumption A sufficiently strong first-order electroweak phase transition with xi >= 1.5, LwTn >= 3 is realizable in the G2HDM parameter region that fits the flavor data.
    Explicitly deferred to future work in the Results and Outlook; if not realizable, the BAU prediction would be lower than observed.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Electroweak baryogenesis from charged current anomalies in $B$ meson decays." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/OCRDX7DK

@misc{pith2026250200445,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Electroweak baryogenesis from charged current anomalies in $B$ meson decays},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/OCRDX7DK}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.00445}
}
abstract

We demonstrate for the first time that new physics explaining the long standing charged $B$ meson anomalies, $R(D^{(*)})$, can be the source of CP violation that explains the observed baryon asymmetry of the universe (BAU). We consider the general two Higgs doublet model with complex Yukawa couplings and compute the BAU in the semiclassical formalism, using a novel analytic approximation for the latter. After imposing constraints from both flavor observables and the electron electric dipole moment (eEDM), we find that a significant BAU can still be generated for a variety of benchmark points in the parameter space, assuming the occurrence of a sufficiently strong first order electroweak phase transition. These scenarios, which explain both the $R(D^{(*)})$ flavor anomalies and the BAU, can be probed with future eEDM experiments and Higgs factories measurements.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.00445 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. is due to cancellations between terms with different signs in the WKB calculation [61, 71]. ★ GAMBIT 2.4, Diver 1.0.4, pippi 2.1 υw=0.25 υw=0.35 υw=0.4 0 π 4 π 2 3π 4 π |θ| L/Lmax flavour + R(D(∗)) + |de| JILA 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 |yτ τ | 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 FIG. 3. Profile likelihood ratios L/Lmax from all flavor con￾straints in [16] and the JILA-NIST bound on |de| [24]. The white star denotes the best fit point and… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

114 extracted references · 19 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

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

    1967

  2. [2]

    V.A.Kuzmin, V.A.Rubakov,andM.E.Shaposhnikov, On the Anomalous Electroweak Baryon Number Non- conservation in the Early Universe, Phys. Lett. B155, 36 (1985)

    1985

  3. [3]

    M. E. Shaposhnikov, Possible Appearance of the Baryon Asymmetry of the Universe in an Electroweak Theory, JETP Lett. 44, 465 (1986)

    1986

  4. [4]

    M. E. Shaposhnikov, Baryon Asymmetry of the Uni- verse in Standard Electroweak Theory, Nucl. Phys. B 287, 757 (1987)

    1987

  5. [5]

    J. M. Cline, Baryogenesis, in Les Houches Summer School - Session 86: Particle Physics and Cosmology: The Fabric of Spacetime(2006) arXiv:hep-ph/0609145

    arXiv 2006

  6. [6]

    D. E. Morrissey and M. J. Ramsey-Musolf, Elec- troweak baryogenesis, New J. Phys.14, 125003 (2012), arXiv:1206.2942 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2012

  7. [7]

    Chupp, P

    T. Chupp, P. Fierlinger, M. Ramsey-Musolf, and J. Singh, Electric dipole moments of atoms, molecules, nuclei, and particles, Rev. Mod. Phys. 91, 015001 (2019), arXiv:1710.02504 [physics.atom-ph]

    arXiv 2019

  8. [8]

    Curtin, P

    D. Curtin, P. Meade, and C.-T. Yu, Testing Electroweak Baryogenesis with Future Colliders, JHEP 11, 127, arXiv:1409.0005 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

Show all 114 references
  1. [9]

    M.J.Ramsey-Musolf,Theelectroweakphasetransition: a collider target, JHEP09, 179, arXiv:1912.07189 [hep- ph]. 6

    1912 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Capriniet al., Science with the space-based interfer- ometer eLISA

    C. Capriniet al., Science with the space-based interfer- ometer eLISA. II: Gravitational waves from cosmologi- cal phase transitions, JCAP04, 001, arXiv:1512.06239 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv

  3. [11]

    F. P. Huang, Y. Wan, D.-G. Wang, Y.-F. Cai, and X. Zhang, Hearing the echoes of electroweak baryoge- nesis with gravitational wave detectors, Phys. Rev. D 94, 041702 (2016), arXiv:1601.01640 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Beniwal, M

    A. Beniwal, M. Lewicki, J. D. Wells, M. White, and A. G. Williams, Gravitational wave, collider and dark matter signals from a scalar singlet electroweak baryo- genesis, JHEP 08, 108, arXiv:1702.06124 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  5. [13]

    N. S. Manton, Topology in the Weinberg-Salam Theory, Phys. Rev. D28, 2019 (1983)

    1983

  6. [14]

    F. R. Klinkhamer and N. S. Manton, A Saddle Point Solution in the Weinberg-Salam Theory, Phys. Rev. D 30, 2212 (1984)

    1984

  7. [15]

    Martinez, C

    R. Martinez, C. Sierra, and G. Valencia, Beyond R(D(∗)) with the general type-III 2HDM forb → cτ ν, Phys. Rev. D98, 115012 (2018), arXiv:1805.04098 [hep- ph]

    2018 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Crivellin and S

    A. Crivellin and S. Iguro, Accumulating hints for flavor- violating Higgs bosons at the electroweak scale, Phys. Rev. D 110, 015014 (2024), arXiv:2311.03430 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Athron, A

    P. Athron, A. Crivellin, T. E. Gonzalo, S. Iguro, and C. Sierra, Global fit to the 2HDM with generic sources of flavour violation using GAMBIT, JHEP 11, 133, arXiv:2410.10493 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  10. [18]

    Y. S. Amhiset al. (HFLAV), Averages of b-hadron, c- hadron, and τ-lepton properties as of 2021, Phys. Rev. D 107, 052008 (2023), arXiv:2206.07501 [hep-ex]

    2023 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Aaij et al

    R. Aaij et al. (LHCb), Measurement of CP-Averaged Observables in theB0 → K ∗0µ+µ− Decay, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 011802 (2020), arXiv:2003.04831 [hep-ex]

    2020

  12. [20]

    Angular analysis of theB0 → K ∗0(892)µ+µ− decay at√s = 13 TeV, Tech. Rep. (CERN, Geneva, 2024)

    2024

  13. [21]

    Greljo, J

    A. Greljo, J. Salko, A. Smolkovič, and P. Stangl, Rare b decays meet high-mass Drell-Yan, JHEP 05, 087, arXiv:2212.10497 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  14. [22]

    Algueró, A

    M. Algueró, A. Biswas, B. Capdevila, S. Descotes- Genon, J. Matias, and M. Novoa-Brunet, To (b)e or not to (b)e: no electrons at LHCb, Eur. Phys. J. C83, 648 (2023), arXiv:2304.07330 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Crivellin and B

    A. Crivellin and B. Mellado, Anomalies in Particle Physics, Nature Rev.Phys. 10.1038/s42254-024-00703-6 (2024), arXiv:2309.03870 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  16. [24]

    T.S.Roussy et al.,Animprovedboundontheelectron’s electric dipole moment, Science 381, adg4084 (2023), arXiv:2212.11841 [physics.atom-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  17. [25]

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

    2012 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Tulin and P

    S. Tulin and P. Winslow, Anomalous B meson mix- ing and baryogenesis, Phys. Rev. D84, 034013 (2011), arXiv:1105.2848 [hep-ph]

    2011 arXiv

  19. [27]

    J. M. Cline, K. Kainulainen, and M. Trott, Electroweak Baryogenesis in Two Higgs Doublet Models and B me- son anomalies, JHEP11, 089, arXiv:1107.3559 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  20. [28]

    A. E. Nelson and H. Xiao, Baryogenesis from B Me- son Oscillations, Phys. Rev. D 100, 075002 (2019), arXiv:1901.08141 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  21. [29]

    W.-S. Hou, G. Kumar, and T. Modak, Probing baryo- genesis with radiative beauty decay and electron elec- tric dipole moment, Phys. Rev. D109, L011701 (2024), arXiv:2302.08847 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Y.-Z. Li, M. J. Ramsey-Musolf, and J.-H. Yu, Does the Electron EDM Preclude Electroweak Baryogenesis ? (2024), arXiv:2404.19197 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Kajantie, M

    K. Kajantie, M. Laine, K. Rummukainen, and M. E. Shaposhnikov, Is there a hot electroweak phase transi- tion at mH ≳ mW?, Phys. Rev. Lett.77, 2887 (1996), arXiv:hep-ph/9605288

    1996 arXiv

  24. [32]

    G. C. Dorsch, S. J. Huber, and J. M. No, A strong electroweak phase transition in the 2HDM after LHC8, JHEP 10, 029, arXiv:1305.6610 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  25. [33]

    Basler, M

    P. Basler, M. Krause, M. Muhlleitner, J. Wittbrodt, and A. Wlotzka, Strong First Order Electroweak Phase Transition in the CP-Conserving 2HDM Revisited, JHEP 02, 121, arXiv:1612.04086 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  26. [34]

    Bernon, L

    J. Bernon, L. Bian, and Y. Jiang, A new insight into the phase transition in the early Universe with two Higgs doublets, JHEP 05, 151, arXiv:1712.08430 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  27. [35]

    G. C. Dorsch, S. J. Huber, K. Mimasu, and J. M. No, TheHiggsVacuumUplifted: RevisitingtheElectroweak Phase Transition with a Second Higgs Doublet, JHEP 12, 086, arXiv:1705.09186 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  28. [36]

    J. O. Andersen, T. Gorda, A. Helset, L. Niemi, T. V. I. Tenkanen, A. Tranberg, A. Vuorinen, and D. J. Weir, Nonperturbative Analysis of the Electroweak Phase Transition in the Two Higgs Doublet Model, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 191802 (2018), arXiv:1711.09849 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Kainulainen, V

    K. Kainulainen, V. Keus, L. Niemi, K. Rummukainen, T. V. I. Tenkanen, and V. Vaskonen, On the validity of perturbative studies of the electroweak phase transi- tion in the Two Higgs Doublet model, JHEP06, 075, arXiv:1904.01329 [hep-ph]

    1904 arXiv

  30. [38]

    W. Su, A. G. Williams, and M. Zhang, Strong first order electroweak phase transition in 2HDM con- fronting future Z & Higgs factories, JHEP 04, 219, arXiv:2011.04540 [hep-ph]

    2011 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Gonçalves, A

    D. Gonçalves, A. Kaladharan, and Y. Wu, Electroweak phase transition in the 2HDM: Collider and gravita- tional wave complementarity, Phys. Rev. D105, 095041 (2022), arXiv:2108.05356 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Biekötter, S

    T. Biekötter, S. Heinemeyer, J. M. No, M. O. Olea- Romacho, and G. Weiglein, The trap in the early Uni- verse: impact on the interplay between gravitational waves and LHC physics in the 2HDM, JCAP03, 031, arXiv:2208.14466 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  33. [41]

    Gonçalves, A

    D. Gonçalves, A. Kaladharan, and Y. Wu, Gravita- tional waves, bubble profile, and baryon asymmetry in the complex 2HDM, Phys. Rev. D108, 075010 (2023), arXiv:2307.03224 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  34. [42]

    A. G. Cohen, D. B. Kaplan, and A. E. Nelson, Sponta- neous baryogenesis at the weak phase transition, Phys. Lett. B 263, 86 (1991)

    1991

  35. [43]

    Joyce, T

    M. Joyce, T. Prokopec, and N. Turok, Efficient elec- troweak baryogenesis from lepton transport, Phys. Lett. B 338, 269 (1994), arXiv:hep-ph/9401352

    1994 arXiv

  36. [44]

    J. M. Cline, K. Kainulainen, and A. P. Vischer, Dynam- ics of two Higgs doublet CP violation and baryogenesis at the electroweak phase transition, Phys. Rev. D54, 2451 (1996), arXiv:hep-ph/9506284

    1996 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Fromme, S

    L. Fromme, S. J. Huber, and M. Seniuch, Baryogen- esis in the two-Higgs doublet model, JHEP 11, 038, 7 arXiv:hep-ph/0605242

    arXiv

  38. [46]

    Fromme and S

    L. Fromme and S. J. Huber, Top transport in electroweak baryogenesis, JHEP 03, 049, arXiv:hep- ph/0604159

  39. [47]

    Cirigliano, Y

    V. Cirigliano, Y. Li, S. Profumo, and M. J. Ramsey- Musolf, MSSM Baryogenesis and Electric Dipole Mo- ments: An Update on the Phenomenology, JHEP01, 002, arXiv:0910.4589 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  40. [48]

    G. C. Dorsch, S. J. Huber, T. Konstandin, and J. M. No, A Second Higgs Doublet in the Early Universe: Baryogenesis and Gravitational Waves, JCAP05, 052, arXiv:1611.05874 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  41. [49]

    Basler, L

    P. Basler, L. Biermann, M. Mühlleitner, and J. Müller, Electroweak baryogenesis in the CP-violating two- Higgs doublet model, Eur. Phys. J. C 83, 57 (2023), arXiv:2108.03580 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Enomoto, S

    K. Enomoto, S. Kanemura, and Y. Mura, Electroweak baryogenesis in aligned two Higgs doublet models, JHEP 01, 104, arXiv:2111.13079 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  43. [51]

    Enomoto, S

    K. Enomoto, S. Kanemura, and Y. Mura, New benchmark scenarios of electroweak baryogenesis in aligned two Higgs double models, JHEP 09, 121, arXiv:2207.00060 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  44. [52]

    D. J. H. Chung, B. Garbrecht, M. J. Ramsey-Musolf, and S. Tulin, Yukawa Interactions and Supersymmetric Electroweak Baryogenesis, Phys. Rev. Lett.102, 061301 (2009), arXiv:0808.1144 [hep-ph]

    2009 arXiv

  45. [53]

    D. J. H. Chung, B. Garbrecht, M. J. Ramsey-Musolf, and S. Tulin, Lepton-mediated electroweak baryogene- sis, Phys. Rev. D 81, 063506 (2010), arXiv:0905.4509 [hep-ph]

    2010 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Guo, Y.-Y

    H.-K. Guo, Y.-Y. Li, T. Liu, M. Ramsey-Musolf, and J. Shu, Lepton-Flavored Electroweak Baryogene- sis, Phys. Rev. D96, 115034 (2017), arXiv:1609.09849 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Chiang, K

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

    2016 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Fuyuto, W.-S

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

    2018 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Aad et al

    G. Aad et al. (ATLAS), Search for a light charged Higgs boson in t → H ±b decays, with H ± → cb, in the lepton+jets final state in proton-proton collisions at√s = 13TeV with the ATLAS detector, JHEP09, 004, arXiv:2302.11739 [hep-ex]

    arXiv

  50. [58]

    Donget al

    M. Donget al. (CEPC Study Group), CEPC Concep- tual Design Report: Volume 2 - Physics & Detector (2018), arXiv:1811.10545 [hep-ex]

    2018 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Abadaet al

    A. Abadaet al. (FCC), FCC-ee: The Lepton Collider: Future Circular Collider Conceptual Design Report Vol- ume 2, Eur. Phys. J. ST228, 261 (2019)

    2019

  52. [60]

    J. M. Cline, M. Joyce, and K. Kainulainen, Super- symmetric electroweak baryogenesis, JHEP 07, 018, arXiv:hep-ph/0006119

    arXiv

  53. [61]

    J. M. Cline and K. Kainulainen, Electroweak baryoge- nesis at high bubble wall velocities, Phys. Rev. D101, 063525 (2020), arXiv:2001.00568 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  54. [62]

    Kainulainen, CP-violating transport theory for elec- troweak baryogenesis with thermal corrections, JCAP 11 (11), 042, arXiv:2108.08336 [hep-ph]

    K. Kainulainen, CP-violating transport theory for elec- troweak baryogenesis with thermal corrections, JCAP 11 (11), 042, arXiv:2108.08336 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  55. [63]

    De Vries, M

    J. De Vries, M. Postma, and J. van de Vis, The role of leptons in electroweak baryogenesis, JHEP04, 024, arXiv:1811.11104 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  56. [64]

    Cirigliano, C

    V. Cirigliano, C. Lee, M. J. Ramsey-Musolf, and S. Tulin, Flavored Quantum Boltzmann Equations, Phys. Rev. D81, 103503 (2010), arXiv:0912.3523 [hep- ph]

    2010 arXiv

  57. [65]

    Cirigliano, C

    V. Cirigliano, C. Lee, and S. Tulin, Resonant Flavor Oscillations in Electroweak Baryogenesis, Phys. Rev. D 84, 056006 (2011), arXiv:1106.0747 [hep-ph]

    2011 arXiv

  58. [66]

    Huet and A

    P. Huet and A. E. Nelson, Electroweak baryogenesis in supersymmetric models, Phys. Rev. D53, 4578 (1996), arXiv:hep-ph/9506477

    1996 arXiv

  59. [67]

    C. Lee, V. Cirigliano, and M. J. Ramsey-Musolf, Reso- nant relaxation in electroweak baryogenesis, Phys. Rev. D 71, 075010 (2005), arXiv:hep-ph/0412354

    2005 arXiv

  60. [68]

    Cirigliano, M

    V. Cirigliano, M. J. Ramsey-Musolf, S. Tulin, and C. Lee, Yukawa and tri-scalar processes in elec- troweak baryogenesis, Phys. Rev. D73, 115009 (2006), arXiv:hep-ph/0603058

    2006 arXiv

  61. [69]

    Xie, Lepton-mediated electroweak baryogenesis, gravitational waves and the 4τ final state at the col- lider, JHEP 02, 090, [Erratum: JHEP 8, 052 (2022)], arXiv:2011.04821 [hep-ph]

    K.-P. Xie, Lepton-mediated electroweak baryogenesis, gravitational waves and the 4τ final state at the col- lider, JHEP 02, 090, [Erratum: JHEP 8, 052 (2022)], arXiv:2011.04821 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  62. [70]

    A. G. Cohen, D. B. Kaplan, and A. E. Nelson, Diffusion enhances spontaneous electroweak baryogenesis, Phys. Lett. B 336, 41 (1994), arXiv:hep-ph/9406345

    1994 arXiv

  63. [71]

    J. M. Cline and B. Laurent, Electroweak baryogenesis from light fermion sources: A critical study, Phys. Rev. D 104, 083507 (2021), arXiv:2108.04249 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  64. [72]

    P. B. Arnold, G. D. Moore, and L. G. Yaffe, Transport coefficients in high temperature gauge theories. 1. Lead- ing log results, JHEP11, 001, arXiv:hep-ph/0010177

    arXiv

  65. [73]

    Preliminary average of R(D) and R(D∗) for Moriond 2024

    “Preliminary average of R(D) and R(D∗) for Moriond 2024” at https://hflav-eos.web.cern. ch/hflav-eos/semi/moriond24/html/RDsDsstar/ RDRDs.html

    2024

  66. [74]

    G. M. de Divitiis, R. Petronzio, and N. Tantalo, Quenched lattice calculation of semileptonic heavy-light meson form factors, JHEP 10, 062, arXiv:0707.0587 [hep-lat]

    arXiv

  67. [75]

    J. F. Kamenik and F. Mescia, B → Dτ νBranching Ratios: Opportunity for Lattice QCD and Hadron Col- liders, Phys. Rev. D78, 014003 (2008), arXiv:0802.3790 [hep-ph]

    2008 arXiv

  68. [76]

    Mahmoudi, SuperIso: A Program for calculat- ing the isospin asymmetry of B →K* gamma in the MSSM, Comput

    F. Mahmoudi, SuperIso: A Program for calculat- ing the isospin asymmetry of B →K* gamma in the MSSM, Comput. Phys. Commun. 178, 745 (2008), arXiv:0710.2067 [hep-ph]

    2008 arXiv

  69. [77]

    Mahmoudi, SuperIso v2.3: A Program for calculat- ing flavor physics observables in Supersymmetry, Com- put

    F. Mahmoudi, SuperIso v2.3: A Program for calculat- ing flavor physics observables in Supersymmetry, Com- put. Phys. Commun.180, 1579 (2009), arXiv:0808.3144 [hep-ph]

    2009 arXiv

  70. [78]

    Mahmoudi, SuperIso v3.0, flavor physics observables calculations: Extension to NMSSM, Comput

    F. Mahmoudi, SuperIso v3.0, flavor physics observables calculations: Extension to NMSSM, Comput. Phys. Commun. 180, 1718 (2009)

    2009

  71. [79]

    Athron, C

    P. Athron, C. Balazs, T. E. Gonzalo, D. Jacob, F. Mah- moudi, and C. Sierra, Likelihood analysis of the flavour anomalies and g – 2 in the general two Higgs doublet model, JHEP 01, 037, arXiv:2111.10464 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  72. [80]

    Alonso-González, L

    J. Alonso-González, L. Merlo, and S. Pokorski, A new bound on CP violation in the τ lepton Yukawa cou- pling and electroweak baryogenesis, JHEP 06, 166, arXiv:2103.16569 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  73. [81]

    S.-F. Ge, G. Li, P. Pasquini, and M. J. Ramsey-Musolf, CP-violating Higgs Di-tau Decays: Baryogenesis and 8 Higgs Factories, Phys. Rev. D 103, 095027 (2021), arXiv:2012.13922 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  74. [82]

    Hisano, K

    J. Hisano, K. Tsumura, and M. J. S. Yang, QCD Corrections to Neutron Electric Dipole Moment from Dimension-six Four-Quark Operators, Phys. Lett. B 713, 473 (2012), arXiv:1205.2212 [hep-ph]

    2012 arXiv

  75. [83]

    Hisano, J

    J. Hisano, J. Y. Lee, N. Nagata, and Y. Shimizu, Reevaluation of Neutron Electric Dipole Moment with QCD Sum Rules, Phys. Rev. D 85, 114044 (2012), arXiv:1204.2653 [hep-ph]

    2012 arXiv

  76. [84]

    Engel, M

    J. Engel, M. J. Ramsey-Musolf, and U. van Kolck, Elec- tric Dipole Moments of Nucleons, Nuclei, and Atoms: The Standard Model and Beyond, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 71, 21 (2013), arXiv:1303.2371 [nucl-th]

    2013 arXiv

  77. [85]

    Bertolini, A

    S. Bertolini, A. Maiezza, and F. Nesti, Kaon CP vi- olation and neutron EDM in the minimal left-right symmetric model, Phys. Rev. D 101, 035036 (2020), arXiv:1911.09472 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  78. [86]

    Abelet al., Measurement of the Permanent Electric Dipole Moment of the Neutron, Phys

    C. Abelet al., Measurement of the Permanent Electric Dipole Moment of the Neutron, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 081803 (2020), arXiv:2001.11966 [hep-ex]

    2020 arXiv

  79. [87]

    Fuchs, M

    E. Fuchs, M. Losada, Y. Nir, and Y. Viernik,CP viola- tion from τ, t and b dimension-6 Yukawa couplings - in- terplay of baryogenesis, EDM and Higgs physics, JHEP 05, 056, arXiv:2003.00099 [hep-ph]

    2003 arXiv

  80. [88]

    D. G. Ang,Progress towards an improved measurement of the electric dipole moment of the electron, Ph.D. the- sis, Harvard U. (2023)

    2023

  81. [89]

    Kanemura and Y

    S. Kanemura and Y. Mura, Electroweak baryogenesis via top-charm mixing, JHEP09, 153, arXiv:2303.11252 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  82. [90]

    Navaset al.(Particle Data Group), Review of particle physics, Phys

    S. Navaset al.(Particle Data Group), Review of particle physics, Phys. Rev. D110, 030001 (2024)

    2024

  83. [91]

    Athronet al

    P. Athronet al. (GAMBIT Collaboration), GAMBIT: The Global and Modular Beyond-the-Standard-Model Inference Tool, Eur. Phys. J. C77, 784 (2017), [Adden- dum: Eur.Phys.J.C 78, 98 (2018)]., arXiv:1705.07908 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  84. [92]

    G. D. Martinez, J. McKay, B. Farmer, P. Scott, E. Roebber, A. Putze, and J. Conrad (GAMBIT), Com- parison of statistical sampling methods with Scanner- Bit, the GAMBIT scanning module, Eur. Phys. J. C 77, 761 (2017), arXiv:1705.07959 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  85. [93]

    F. U. Bernlochner et al. (GAMBIT Flavour Work- group), FlavBit: A GAMBIT module for computing flavour observables and likelihoods, Eur. Phys. J. C77, 786 (2017), arXiv:1705.07933 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  86. [94]

    Athron et al

    P. Athron et al. (GAMBIT Models Workgroup), SpecBit, DecayBit and PrecisionBit: GAMBIT mod- ules for computing mass spectra, particle decay rates and precision observables, Eur. Phys. J. C78, 22 (2018), arXiv:1705.07936 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  87. [95]

    Balázs et al

    C. Balázs et al. (GAMBIT), ColliderBit: a GAMBIT module for the calculation of high-energy collider ob- servables and likelihoods, Eur. Phys. J. C 77, 795 (2017), arXiv:1705.07919 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  88. [96]

    Eriksson, J

    D. Eriksson, J. Rathsman, and O. Stal, 2HDMC: Two-Higgs-Doublet Model Calculator Physics and Manual, Comput. Phys. Commun. 181, 189 (2010), arXiv:0902.0851 [hep-ph]

    2010 arXiv

  89. [97]

    Bhom and M

    J. Bhom and M. Chrzaszcz, HEPLike: an open source framework for experimental likelihood evalua- tion, Comput. Phys. Commun. 254, 107235 (2020), arXiv:2003.03956 [physics.data-an]

    2020 arXiv

  90. [98]

    P. A. R. Adeet al.(Planck), Planck 2013 results. XVI. Cosmological parameters, Astron. Astrophys.571, A16 (2014), arXiv:1303.5076 [astro-ph.CO]

    2014 arXiv

  91. [99]

    Blanke, A

    M. Blanke, A. Crivellin, S. de Boer, T. Kitahara, M. Moscati, U. Nierste, and I. Nišandžić, Impact of po- larization observables andBc → τ νon new physics ex- planations of the b → cτ νanomaly, Phys. Rev. D99, 075006 (2019), arXiv:1811.09603 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  92. [100]

    Chen and Y

    X. Chen and Y. Wu, Search for CP violation effects in the h → τ τdecay with e+e− colliders, Eur. Phys. J. C 77, 697 (2017), arXiv:1703.04855 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  93. [101]

    Chen and Y

    X. Chen and Y. Wu, Probing the CP-Violation effects in thehτ τcoupling at the LHC, Phys. Lett. B790, 332 (2019), arXiv:1708.02882 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  94. [102]

    Jeans and G

    D. Jeans and G. W. Wilson, Measuring the CP state of tau lepton pairs from Higgs decay at the ILC, Phys. Rev. D 98, 013007 (2018), arXiv:1804.01241 [hep-ex]

    2018 arXiv

  95. [103]

    M. M. Altakach, P. Lamba, F. Maltoni, K. Mawatari, and K. Sakurai, Quantum information and CP measure- ment in H→τ+τ- at future lepton colliders, Phys. Rev. D 107, 093002 (2023), arXiv:2211.10513 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  96. [104]

    A. V. Gritsanet al., Snowmass White Paper: Prospects of CP-violation measurements with the Higgs boson at future experiments (2022), arXiv:2205.07715 [hep-ex]

    2022 arXiv

  97. [105]

    Aryshev et al

    A. Aryshev et al. (ILC International Development Team), The International Linear Collider: Report to Snowmass 2021 (2022), arXiv:2203.07622 [physics.acc- ph]

    2022

  98. [106]

    de Vries, M

    J. de Vries, M. Postma, J. van de Vis, and G. White, Electroweak Baryogenesis and the Standard Model Ef- fective Field Theory, JHEP01, 089, arXiv:1710.04061 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  99. [107]

    Postma and J

    M. Postma and J. van de Vis, Source terms for electroweak baryogenesis in the vev-insertion ap- proximation beyond leading order, JHEP 02, 090, arXiv:1910.11794 [hep-ph]

    1910 arXiv

  100. [108]

    Enqvist, A.Riotto, andI.Vilja, Damping rates in the MSSM and electroweak baryogenesis, Phys

    P.Elmfors, K. Enqvist, A.Riotto, andI.Vilja, Damping rates in the MSSM and electroweak baryogenesis, Phys. Lett. B 452, 279 (1999), arXiv:hep-ph/9809529

    1999 arXiv

  101. [109]

    Herrero-Garcia, M

    J. Herrero-Garcia, M. Nebot, F. Rajec, M. White, and A. G. Williams, Higgs Quark Flavor Violation: Simpli- fied Models and Status of General Two-Higgs-Doublet Model, JHEP 02, 147, arXiv:1907.05900 [hep-ph]

    1907 arXiv

  102. [110]

    J. M. Moreno, M. Quiros, and M. Seco, Bubbles in the supersymmetric standard model, Nucl. Phys. B 526, 489 (1998), arXiv:hep-ph/9801272

    1998 arXiv

  103. [111]

    Funakubo and E

    K. Funakubo and E. Senaha, Electroweak phase tran- sition, critical bubbles and sphaleron decoupling con- dition in the MSSM, Phys. Rev. D79, 115024 (2009), arXiv:0905.2022 [hep-ph]

    2009 arXiv

  104. [112]

    Kainulainen, T

    K. Kainulainen, T. Prokopec, M. G. Schmidt, and S. Weinstock, Semiclassical force for electroweak baryo- genesis: Three-dimensionalderivation,Phys.Rev.D 66, 043502 (2002), arXiv:hep-ph/0202177

    2002 arXiv

  105. [113]

    Jarlskog, Commutator of the Quark Mass Matrices in theStandardElectroweakModelandaMeasureofMax- imal CP Nonconservation, Phys

    C. Jarlskog, Commutator of the Quark Mass Matrices in theStandardElectroweakModelandaMeasureofMax- imal CP Nonconservation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 55, 1039 (1985)

    1985

  106. [114]

    F. J. Botella and J. P. Silva, Jarlskog - like invariants for theories with scalars and fermions, Phys. Rev. D51, 3870 (1995), arXiv:hep-ph/9411288. 9 End Matter Diffusion equation. The explicit coefficients and source term of the diffusion equation in Eq.(1) are given by Dl =...

    1995 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 9, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.