Minimal dark matter in $SU(5)$ grand unification

Takashi Toma

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 50 references

Minimal dark matter in $SU(5)$ grand unification

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A nonsupersymmetric SU(5) theory can host the 14 TeV quintuplet dark matter if two pairs of colored sextet fermions sit near 4.3 TeV.

desk verdict A solid, honest GUT embedding of quintuplet minimal dark matter with a new unification mechanism, but the headline sextet mass relation needs threshold corrections before it can be trusted. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.19660 v2 pith:ZYTKUH6E submitted 2024-12-27 hep-ph hep-exhep-th

Takashi Toma This is my paper · ORCID

classification hep-phhep-exhep-th

keywords minimaldarkmatterSU(5)grandunificationgaugecouplingquintupletfermioncoloredsextetR-hadronthermalrelicabundancetwo-loopbetafunction

topics Dark Matter

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 proposes that the SU(2)$_L$ quintuplet fermion -- the standard 'minimal dark matter' candidate, whose mass is fixed near 14 TeV by the thermal relic abundance -- can live inside a 200-dimensional fermion representation of nonsupersymmetric SU(5) grand unification. It argues that the quintuplet alone cannot unify the gauge couplings, but adding two pairs of colored sextet fermions from the 15F and $\overline{15}_F$ representations with geometric mean mass $\sqrt{M_6 \tilde{M}_6} \approx 4.3$ TeV makes the couplings meet at $M_U = 2.1 \times 10^{18}$ GeV, very close to the reduced Planck scale, with unified coupling $\alpha_U^{-1} \approx 9.0$. This matters because it gives a testable grand-unified home for the best-known stable dark matter candidate without supersymmetry: the sextets become metastable R-hadrons (bound states with quarks and gluons), searchable at colliders, while the quintuplet is probed by gamma-ray and direct-detection experiments. The price is a tuned spectrum in which all other components of the 200F and of the 15F/$\overline{15}_F$ pairs sit at the unification scale.

What carries the argument

The machinery is two-loop renormalization-group running of the SM gauge couplings through new fermion thresholds. The 200F representation contains the SU(2)$_L$ quintuplet $(1,5)_0$, but its $\beta$-function contributions by themselves drive the theory away from unification; adding two pairs of $(6,1)_{\mp 2/3}$ sextets from 15F and $\overline{15}_F$ shifts the $b_1$ and $b_3$ coefficients so that all three couplings converge near $2.1 \times 10^{18}$ GeV. The pivot is minimization of $\Delta = \sqrt{\Delta\alpha_{12}^{-2} + \Delta\alpha_{23}^{-2}}$ over the two sextet masses, which yields the geometric-mean condition $\sqrt{M_6 \tilde{M}_6} \approx 4.3$ TeV. The light-particle spectrum is controlled by Clebsch-Gordan coefficients for the mass operators $M_{200}\, \mathbf{200}_F \mathbf{200}_F$ and $Y_{200}\, \mathbf{24}_H \mathbf{200}_F \mathbf{200}_F$; the quintuplet remains at 14 TeV through the tuned combination $M_{200} - Y_{200}\langle \mathbf{24}_H\rangle = 14$ TeV, and analogous splittings isolate the sextets.

What would settle it

Searches for long-lived colored particles at a high-luminosity LHC or a future collider that exclude metastable sextet fermions throughout the 1–10 TeV range, while gamma-ray or direct-detection experiments confirm a 14 TeV quintuplet, would falsify this unification mechanism. Alternatively, measuring both sextet masses and finding $\sqrt{M_6 \tilde{M}_6}$ far from about 4.3 TeV, or high-scale measurements showing the couplings do not converge, would rule out the central relation.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that nonsupersymmetric SU(5) grand unification can accommodate the quintuplet minimal dark matter if the spectrum is arranged so that only the quintuplet and two sextet pairs are light. Embedding the quintuplet in the 200F representation and integrating the two-loop renormalization-group equations, the paper finds that the SM gauge couplings fail to unify with the quintuplet alone, and that adding the $(6,1)_{\mp 2/3}$ sextets restores unification precisely when $\sqrt{M_6 \tilde{M}_6} \approx 4.3$ TeV. With that choice the unified scale is $M_U \approx 2.1 \times 10^{18}$ GeV and $\alpha_U^{-1} \approx 9.0$, giving a proton lifetime of roughly $3.9 \times 10^{39}$ years, far beyond Super-Kamiokande's bound. The light sextets are metastable because their decay interactions are suppressed by the unification scale, and collider data already push their common mass above about 1.58 TeV.

Load-bearing premise

The calculation assumes that all components of the 200F representation except the quintuplet, and all components of the 15F/$\overline{15}_F$ pairs except the two sextets, are at the unification scale, which requires a precise cancellation between the tree-level mass and the adjoint-Higgs coupling for the 14 TeV quintuplet and similar tunings for the sextets.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Gauge coupling unification in this model happens without supersymmetry, near the Planck scale, so proton decay is predicted to be far beyond upcoming experiments.
The colored sextet fermions are metastable R-hadrons with masses allowed in the few-TeV range; the current LHC bound is about 1.58 TeV, and dedicated searches can distinguish them from gluinos by production cross section.
A future Cherenkov Telescope Array can see the 14 TeV quintuplet annihilation signal, and LZ is close to the predicted direct-detection cross section, so the combined dark matter and R-hadron searches can confirm or exclude the model.
If quintuplet dark matter is confirmed, known string-theory constructions, which have no isolated high-dimensional representation of this kind, would need modification.
The geometric-mean relation means that a measurement of one sextet mass predicts the other, and the unified coupling is essentially fixed at $\alpha_U^{-1} \approx 9.0$.

Reading between the lines

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

Editorial inference: because $M_U$ is within a factor of two of the reduced Planck scale and the unitarity scale $E_{\rm new} \approx 2.7 \times 10^{18}$ GeV is only slightly higher, quantum-gravity threshold corrections could shift the preferred sextet masses; the 4.3 TeV condition is best read as an approximate target.
Editorial inference: the same 200F setup supports a wino-like variant with a $(1,3)_0$ fermion, an $(8,1)_0$ fermion, and a $(1,3)_0$ scalar at the TeV scale, so the unification trick is not unique to quintuplet dark matter.
Editorial inference: if the dark matter and one or both sextets are discovered, the prediction becomes over-constrained; measuring both masses and checking $\sqrt{M_6 \tilde{M}_6} \approx 4.3$ TeV would provide a sharp test.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Quick take: this is a genuine, clean GUT embedding of the quintuplet minimal dark matter, and the unification mechanism with two sextet pairs is new as far as I know. The two-loop RGE work is standard and the paper is honest about its assumptions. But Eq. (21) — the sqrt(M6 M6tilde) = 4.3 TeV relation — is not yet a solid prediction, because threshold corrections from the split 200F spectrum are omitted and they are probably not small.

What I like: the representation choices are motivated, the decomposition in Eq. (2) and the Clebsch-Gordan coefficients in Tables I-II look right, and the paper does not oversell the dark matter side. It explicitly flags the fine-tuning needed to keep the quintuplet and sextets light (Section V), and it gives concrete collider targets for the sextets. The point about string theory implications is speculative but clearly labeled.

The soft spots, in order of size. First, the threshold corrections. The stress-test note is right: with one adjoint VEV the heavy components of the 200F end up spread from roughly M200/2 to a few times M200 (the Ci coefficients in Table I range from -7/12 to 1), and many of them have large Dynkin indices. Their log corrections to alpha_i^-1 are of order (T_i/2pi) ln(M_i/MU), which can be several tenths or larger—certainly not tiny compared to Delta ~ 0.03. The paper explicitly says this is beyond scope, but for the claimed unification at this precision, that is a load-bearing omission. A referee should ask for a one-loop threshold calculation, even approximate, to see whether Eq. (21) survives.

Second, the predictive framing of the sextet masses is partly circular. M6 and M6tilde are adjusted to minimize Delta, so the O(1-10) TeV range is a condition for unification, not an independent output. That's fine as an existence proof, but the abstract's phrasing 'we find that two pairs... are required' is doing some work.

Third, the 14 TeV quintuplet mass is taken from earlier relic calculations, which is legitimate, but it means the paper's 'prediction' is really a consequence of the input.

The citation pattern looks fine; I don't see obvious missing references. The math is internally consistent as far as I can tell from the RGEs and group theory. Some 'checked' claims, like the Landau pole statement about additional SU(2)L fields, are not documented, but that's minor.

Bottom line: this is a worthwhile model-building contribution and it should go to peer review. It won't be the last word, but it's a coherent proposal with a testable signature. I'd ask the referee to make threshold corrections the focus.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper embeds the SU(2)_L quintuplet minimal dark matter fermion into a nonsupersymmetric SU(5) grand unified theory via the 200_F representation. It computes two-loop renormalization-group running including a 14 TeV quintuplet and one vectorlike pair of colored sextet fermions from 15_F plus 15bar_F, and finds that gauge coupling unification is achieved for sqrt(M6 * M6tilde) ≈ 4.3 TeV, with M_U ≈ 2.1 × 10^18 GeV and alpha_U^{-1} ≈ 9.0. The paper also discusses collider, indirect-detection, and direct-detection tests, estimates the proton lifetime, and sketches an SO(10)-based mechanism to address the required mass splittings. The central numerical result is obtained under the assumption that all other components of 200_F, 15_F, and 15bar_F lie exactly at the unification scale, with no threshold corrections included.

Significance. If the result holds, it provides a concrete, nonsupersymmetric GUT completion of a well-motivated thermal dark matter candidate, with a falsifiable prediction of TeV-scale colored sextets and a proton lifetime far above current bounds. The paper's strengths are the explicit two-loop RGE treatment, the use of a quantitative unification measure, the group-theoretic decomposition of the 200_F representation, and the transparent acknowledgment of both the required fine-tuning and the omitted threshold corrections. However, because the advertised sextet mass scale is fitted rather than derived from independent constraints, and because GUT-scale threshold corrections are not computed, the quantitative claim in Eq. (21) is not yet established.

major comments (3)

[Sec. III, Eq. (21) and the text after Eq. (21)] The statement that threshold corrections from heavy particles are beyond the scope of the work is not adequate, because the heavy spectrum is not degenerate. With the mass formula below Eq. (22) and the Clebsch-Gordan coefficients in Table I, the condition M200 - Y200 <24H> = 14 TeV forces the other 200_F components to masses ranging from roughly (5/6) M200 to (19/12) M200. Each such state contributes a threshold correction of order (T_i / 2 pi) ln(M_i / M_U) to alpha_i^{-1}; for example, the (6,3)_{±5/3} components have a U(1)_Y beta coefficient of order 20, so the corrections to alpha_1^{-1} can be O(1), far larger than the achieved Delta ≈ 0.03. Until these corrections are computed, Eq. (21) and the claimed unification are not established.
[Abstract and Sec. III] The paper announces two pairs of colored sextet fermions, but the calculation in Eqs. (14)-(17) and (23) uses a single 15_F and a single 15bar_F, i.e., one vectorlike pair, with two masses M6 and M6tilde. The beta-function coefficients in Eq. (16) correspond to one (6,1)_{-2/3} plus one (6,1)_{2/3}. If the literal claim of two pairs is intended, the beta-function coefficients and the fitted relation in Eq. (21) would change. Please clarify the number of pairs and correct the abstract accordingly.
[Sec. V, Eq. (22) and Table I] The embedding relies on the condition M200 - Y200 <24H> = 14 TeV while all other components of the 200_F remain near M200; this requires a cancellation between two quantities whose natural scale is of order 10^16 GeV. The paper acknowledges this fine-tuning and sketches a Dimopoulos-Wilczek mechanism in SO(10), but no concrete model is provided. As it stands, the mass spectrum underpinning the unification calculation is not natural, and the claim that the quintuplet is embedded in SU(5) should be softened or supported by an explicit realization.

minor comments (4)

[Eqs. (14)-(15) and Table II] The conjugate 15bar_F is typeset as 15F in several places; please fix the missing bar.
[Header] The PACS numbers and Keywords fields are empty in the manuscript header.
[Sec. III] The statement that no additional SU(2)_L fields can be introduced, even for the lowest dimensional representation, is asserted without derivation; a brief argument or reference would help.
[Sec. IV] The LHC bound of 1.58 TeV for the sextet fermions is quoted from gluino searches; please specify the assumed production cross-section ratio and state explicitly that this is an approximate translated bound.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: Eq. (21) is a derived consistency constraint from two-loop RGE analysis, the 14 TeV dark-matter mass is an explicitly stated external input, and the paper's self-citations are peripheral rather than load-bearing.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is self-contained against external benchmarks and does not reduce to its inputs. The quantitative result sqrt(M6*M6tilde) ≈ 4.3 TeV (Eq. (21)) is obtained by numerically integrating standard two-loop RGEs (Eqs. (3)-(19), with beta functions computed using the public code SARAH) from PDG inputs, then minimizing the unification measure Delta defined in Eq. (20). The sextet masses M6 and M6tilde are free Lagrangian parameters, and Eq. (21) is an output of the minimization scan shown in Fig. 1, not a parameter fitted to data and then re-reported as a success. The abstract's statement that sextets are 'required at the O(1-10) TeV scale' and Sec. IV's wording 'Our model predicts the presence of sextet fermions at the energy scale of O(1-10) TeV' are presentation of the unification-favored window; the content is testable (LHC long-lived searches bound m > 1.58 TeV, gray region in Fig. 1), so the predictive statement has genuine falsifiable content even though the mass scale is constrained rather than independently predicted. The dark-matter mass M5 = 14 TeV is explicitly imported from the external thermal-relic calculation of Ref. [13] and stated as an assumption ('we assume that the scale of new light particles in the multiplets is fixed by the dark matter mass, approximately 14 TeV'); this is legitimate use of an independent external result, not a self-referential reduction. Self-citations ([4] and [28,29]) appear only as introductory examples and a footnote on Planck-scale neutrino masses and are not load-bearing for the unification claim. The main genuine gaps are the omission of GUT-scale threshold corrections from the split 200F spectrum, which the paper explicitly acknowledges as 'beyond the scope of this work,' and the acknowledged fine-tuning required for the mass splittings (Eq. (22) and Table I); both are completeness and robustness concerns rather than circular steps. Under the hard rule that circularity must be exhibited as a specific reduction of an equation to itself or a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction, no such reduction is present here.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 3 invented entities

The model rests on a small number of new matter fields: the quintuplet dark matter, the two sextet pairs, and the completion of the 200F representation. The biggest cost is the fine-tuned mass spectrum that keeps only specific components light. Several numerical inputs, including M5 and the gauge couplings at mZ, are imported from prior measurements or calculations, while M6 and M6tilde are fitted to achieve unification.

free parameters (4)

Quintuplet mass M5 = 14 TeV
Input fixed by thermal relic abundance with Sommerfeld enhancement and bound state effects from Ref. [13]; not derived in this paper. It sets the threshold above which the quintuplet contributes to the RGEs.
Sextet mass pair M6, M6tilde = sqrt(M6 M6tilde) = 4.3 TeV; example M6=2 TeV, M6tilde=9.7 TeV
Free parameters chosen to minimize the gauge coupling unification measure Delta in Eq. (20). The paper presents the resulting O(1-10) TeV range as a prediction, but it is a fitted condition.
Mass-splitting combination M200 - Y200 <24_H> = 14 TeV for the quintuplet
Required to keep only the quintuplet light while all other 200F components sit at the GUT scale. This is an extreme cancellation of order 10^14, acknowledged as fine-tuning in Section V.
Sextet decay Yukawa couplings Y and Ytilde = unspecified, assumed suppressed by the unification scale
These couplings in Eq. (23) are needed to make the sextets metastable, but no numerical values or constraints are given; the paper states a check that they are suppressed.

assumptions (6)

standard math The two-loop RGEs for gauge couplings, top Yukawa, and Higgs quartic, with the SARAH-computed beta function contributions, are correct.
The equations are stated in Section III and follow standard results, but the SARAH-generated terms are not independently verified in the text.
standard math The SU(5) branching rules and Clebsch-Gordan coefficients for 200F, 15F, and 15bar are correct.
Used to decompose representations and to compute mass splittings; relies on LieART and GroupMath, with tables in Section V.
ad hoc to paper Only the SU(2)L quintuplet and the two sextet pairs are light; all other components of 200F, 15F, and 15bar are at the unification scale.
This is the central mass-spectrum assumption, acknowledged in Section V as requiring fine-tuning. If other components are light, the beta functions change and the unification picture fails.
domain assumption Threshold corrections from heavy GUT-scale states do not significantly alter the running.
The paper notes in Section III that threshold corrections could influence the running but says they are beyond the scope of the work.
domain assumption The thermal relic mass M5 = 14 TeV from Ref. [13] remains valid when the quintuplet is embedded in SU(5).
The relic abundance calculation is not redone for the GUT embedding; the extra heavy states and any new interactions are assumed not to change the freeze-out dynamics.
domain assumption Quantum gravity effects at MU near 2.1 x 10^18 GeV are negligible for the unification analysis.
The paper estimates E_new = 2.7 x 10^18 GeV, slightly above MU, but does not model gravitational corrections to the RGEs.

invented entities (3)

SU(2)L quintuplet fermion chi in (1,5)0 of SU(5) independent evidence
purpose: Minimal dark matter candidate with mass around 14 TeV
A known minimal dark matter candidate; here embedded in the 200F representation. It is testable through gamma-ray observations, direct detection, and potentially collider signatures.
Colored sextet fermion pairs (6,1)-2/3 and (6,1)2/3 independent evidence
purpose: Restore gauge coupling unification in the presence of the quintuplet
Predicted near the TeV scale as metastable particles forming R-hadrons, giving a concrete collider search target via large ionization energy loss.
Full 200F fermion representation with GUT-scale components
purpose: Host the SU(2)L quintuplet under SU(5) grand unification
All non-quintuplet components are assumed to sit near the unification scale with no direct experimental access; the representation is inferred from unification consistency rather than independently observed.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Minimal dark matter in $SU(5)$ grand unification." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZYTKUH6E

@misc{pith2026241219660,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Minimal dark matter in $SU(5)$ grand unification},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZYTKUH6E}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.19660}
}

abstract

Minimal dark matter is an attractive candidate for dark matter because it is stabilized without the need to impose additional symmetries. It is known that the $SU(2)_L$ quintuplet fermion can serve as a minimal dark matter candidate, with its mass predicted to be around $14~\mathrm{TeV}$, based on the thermal production mechanism. In this work, we embed the quintuplet dark matter within nonsupersymmetric $SU(5)$ grand unified theories. We find that two pairs of colored sextet fermions are required at the $\mathcal{O}(1-10)~\mathrm{TeV}$ scale to achieve gauge coupling unification, with the unification scale near the reduced Planck scale. These colored sextet fermions become metastable because their interactions are suppressed by the unification scale. Our model can be tested through comprehensive searches for colored sextet fermions in collider experiments, as well as through indirect and direct detection methods for minimal dark matter. Once the minimal dark matter scenario has been experimentally confirmed, it will have implications for modifying string theories.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.19660 by the authors.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

50 extracted references · 22 canonical work pages

[1]

First Dark Matter Search Results from the LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) Experiment,

LZ Collaboration, J. Aalbers et al., “First Dark Matter Search Results from the LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) Experiment,” Phys. Rev. Lett.131 no. 4, (2023) 041002, arXiv:2207.03764 [hep-ex]

arXiv 2023
[2]

New Dark Matter Search Results from the LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) Experiment,

S. Haselschwardt, “New Dark Matter Search Results from the LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) Experiment,” https: //indico.uchicago.edu/event/427/contributions/ 1325/attachments/359/548/lz_results_tevpa.pdf

work page
[3]

Minimal dark matter,

M. Cirelli, N. Fornengo, and A. Strumia, “Minimal dark matter,” Nucl. Phys. B753 (2006) 178–194, arXiv:hep-ph/0512090

arXiv 2006
[4]

Cancellation Mechanism for Dark-Matter–Nucleon Interaction,

C. Gross, O. Lebedev, and T. Toma, “Cancellation Mechanism for Dark-Matter–Nucleon Interaction,” Phys. Rev. Lett.119 no. 19, (2017) 191801, arXiv:1708.02253 [hep-ph]

arXiv 2017
[5]

On dark matter models with uniquely spin-dependent detection possibilities,

M. Freytsis and Z. Ligeti, “On dark matter models with uniquely spin-dependent detection possibilities,” Phys. Rev. D 83 (2011) 115009, arXiv:1012.5317 [hep-ph]

arXiv 2011
[6]

Loop corrections to dark matter direct detection in a pseudoscalar mediator dark matter model,

T. Abe, M. Fujiwara, and J. Hisano, “Loop corrections to dark matter direct detection in a pseudoscalar mediator dark matter model,” JHEP 02 (2019) 028, arXiv:1810.01039 [hep-ph]

arXiv 2019
[7]

Unity of All Elementary Particle Forces,

H. Georgi and S. L. Glashow, “Unity of All Elementary Particle Forces,” Phys. Rev. Lett.32 (1974) 438–441

work page 1974
[8]

SO(10) Grand Unification with Minimal Dark Matter and Color Octet Scalars

G.-C. Cho, K. Hayami, and N. Okada, “SO(10) grand unification with minimal dark matter and color octet scalars,” Phys. Rev. D105 no. 1, (2022) 015027, arXiv:2110.03884 [hep-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2022

Show all 50 references

[9]

SO(10) paths to dark matter,

S. Ferrari, T. Hambye, J. Heeck, and M. H. G. Tytgat, “SO(10) paths to dark matter,” Phys. Rev. D99 no. 5, (2019) 055032, arXiv:1811.07910 [hep-ph]

2019 arXiv
[10]

Explosive dark matter annihilation,

J. Hisano, S. Matsumoto, and M. M. Nojiri, “Explosive dark matter annihilation,” Phys. Rev. Lett.92 (2004) 031303, arXiv:hep-ph/0307216

2004 arXiv
[11]

Non-perturbative effect on dark matter annihilation and gamma ray signature from galactic center,

J. Hisano, S. Matsumoto, M. M. Nojiri, and O. Saito, “Non-perturbative effect on dark matter annihilation and gamma ray signature from galactic center,” Phys. Rev. D 71 (2005) 063528, arXiv:hep-ph/0412403

2005 arXiv
[12]

Non-perturbative effect on thermal relic 7 abundance of dark matter,

J. Hisano, S. Matsumoto, M. Nagai, O. Saito, and M. Senami, “Non-perturbative effect on thermal relic 7 abundance of dark matter,” Phys. Lett. B646 (2007) 34–38, arXiv:hep-ph/0610249

2007 arXiv
[13]

Cosmological Implications of Dark Matter Bound States,

A. Mitridate, M. Redi, J. Smirnov, and A. Strumia, “Cosmological Implications of Dark Matter Bound States,” JCAP 05 (2017) 006, arXiv:1702.01141 [hep-ph]

2017 arXiv
[14]

Finite-Dimensional Lie Algebras and Their Representations for Unified Model Building,

N. Yamatsu, “Finite-Dimensional Lie Algebras and Their Representations for Unified Model Building,” arXiv:1511.08771 [hep-ph]

arXiv
[15]

LieART 2.0 – A Mathematica application for Lie Algebras and Representation Theory,

R. Feger, T. W. Kephart, and R. J. Saskowski, “LieART 2.0 – A Mathematica application for Lie Algebras and Representation Theory,” Comput. Phys. Commun.257 (2020) 107490, arXiv:1912.10969 [hep-th]

2020 arXiv
[16]

GroupMath: A Mathematica package for group theory calculations,

R. M. Fonseca, “GroupMath: A Mathematica package for group theory calculations,” Comput. Phys. Commun. 267 (2021) 108085, arXiv:2011.01764 [hep-th]

2021 arXiv
[17]

Two Loop Renormalization Group Equations in a General Quantum Field Theory. 1. Wave Function Renormalization,

M. E. Machacek and M. T. Vaughn, “Two Loop Renormalization Group Equations in a General Quantum Field Theory. 1. Wave Function Renormalization,” Nucl. Phys. B222 (1983) 83–103

1983
[18]

Two Loop Renormalization Group Equations in a General Quantum Field Theory. 2. Yukawa Couplings,

M. E. Machacek and M. T. Vaughn, “Two Loop Renormalization Group Equations in a General Quantum Field Theory. 2. Yukawa Couplings,” Nucl. Phys. B 236 (1984) 221–232

1984
[19]

Two Loop Renormalization Group Equations in a General Quantum Field Theory. 3. Scalar Quartic Couplings,

M. E. Machacek and M. T. Vaughn, “Two Loop Renormalization Group Equations in a General Quantum Field Theory. 3. Scalar Quartic Couplings,” Nucl. Phys. B249 (1985) 70–92

1985
[20]

Renormalization group study of the standard model and its extensions. 1. The Standard model,

H. Arason, D. J. Castano, B. Keszthelyi, S. Mikaelian, E. J. Piard, P. Ramond, and B. D. Wright, “Renormalization group study of the standard model and its extensions. 1. The Standard model,” Phys. Rev. D 46 (1992) 3945–3965

1992
[21]

Two loop renormalization group equations in the standard model,

M.-x. Luo and Y. Xiao, “Two loop renormalization group equations in the standard model,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 90 (2003) 011601, arXiv:hep-ph/0207271

2003 arXiv
[22]

Staub, “SARAH,” arXiv:0806.0538 [hep-ph]

F. Staub, “SARAH,” arXiv:0806.0538 [hep-ph]

arXiv
[23]

SARAH 4 : A tool for (not only SUSY) model builders,

F. Staub, “SARAH 4 : A tool for (not only SUSY) model builders,” Comput. Phys. Commun.185 (2014) 1773–1790, arXiv:1309.7223 [hep-ph]

2014 arXiv
[24]

Gauge Coupling Unification without Supersymmetry,

J. Schwichtenberg, “Gauge Coupling Unification without Supersymmetry,” Eur. Phys. J. C79 no. 4, (2019) 351, arXiv:1808.10329 [hep-ph]

2019 arXiv
[25]

Review of Particle Physics,

Particle Data GroupCollaboration, R. L. Workman et al., “Review of Particle Physics,” PTEP 2022 (2022) 083C01

2022
[26]

Phenomenological cornucopia of SU(3) exotica,

L. M. Carpenter, T. Murphy, and T. M. P. Tait, “Phenomenological cornucopia of SU(3) exotica,” Phys. Rev. D 105 no. 3, (2022) 035014, arXiv:2110.11359 [hep-ph]

2022 arXiv
[27]

Planck scale unification in a supersymmetric Standard Model,

R. Howl and S. F. King, “Planck scale unification in a supersymmetric Standard Model,” Phys. Lett. B652 (2007) 331–337, arXiv:0705.0301 [hep-ph]

2007 arXiv
[28]

Neutrino masses from Planck-scale lepton number breaking,

A. Ibarra, P. Strobl, and T. Toma, “Neutrino masses from Planck-scale lepton number breaking,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 122 no. 8, (2019) 081803, arXiv:1802.09997 [hep-ph]

2019 arXiv
[29]

Two-loop renormalization group equations for right-handed neutrino masses and phenomenological implications,

A. Ibarra, P. Strobl, and T. Toma, “Two-loop renormalization group equations for right-handed neutrino masses and phenomenological implications,” Phys. Rev. D102 no. 5, (2020) 055011, arXiv:2006.13584 [hep-ph]

2020 arXiv
[30]

Scale of quantum gravity,

T. Han and S. Willenbrock, “Scale of quantum gravity,” Phys. Lett. B616 (2005) 215–220, arXiv:hep-ph/0404182

2005 arXiv
[31]

Search for proton decay via p → e+π0 and p → µ+π0 with an enlarged fiducial volume in Super-Kamiokande I-IV,

Super-Kamiokande Collaboration, A. Takenaka et al., “Search for proton decay via p → e+π0 and p → µ+π0 with an enlarged fiducial volume in Super-Kamiokande I-IV,” Phys. Rev. D102 no. 11, (2020) 112011, arXiv:2010.16098 [hep-ex]

2020
[32]

Construction status and prospects of the Hyper-Kamiokande project,

Hyper-Kamiokande Collaboration, Y. Itow, “Construction status and prospects of the Hyper-Kamiokande project,” PoS ICRC2021 (2021) 1192

2021
[33]

Colored Resonant Signals at the LHC: Largest Rate and Simplest Topology,

T. Han, I. Lewis, and Z. Liu, “Colored Resonant Signals at the LHC: Largest Rate and Simplest Topology,” JHEP 12 (2010) 085, arXiv:1010.4309 [hep-ph]

2010 arXiv
[34]

Simulation of Sextet Diquark Production,

P. Richardson and D. Winn, “Simulation of Sextet Diquark Production,” Eur. Phys. J. C72 (2012) 1862, arXiv:1108.6154 [hep-ph]

2012 arXiv
[35]

Search for metastable heavy charged particles with large ionization energy loss in pp collisions at √s = 13 TeV using the ATLAS experiment,

A TLASCollaboration, M. Aaboud et al., “Search for metastable heavy charged particles with large ionization energy loss in pp collisions at √s = 13 TeV using the ATLAS experiment,” Phys. Rev. D93 no. 11, (2016) 112015, arXiv:1604.04520 [hep-ex]

2016 arXiv
[36]

Search for heavy long-lived charged R-hadrons with the ATLAS detector in 3.2 fb −1 of proton–proton collision data at√s = 13 TeV,

A TLASCollaboration, M. Aaboud et al., “Search for heavy long-lived charged R-hadrons with the ATLAS detector in 3.2 fb −1 of proton–proton collision data at√s = 13 TeV,” Phys. Lett. B760 (2016) 647–665, arXiv:1606.05129 [hep-ex]

2016 arXiv
[37]

Search for Gamma-Ray Spectral Lines from Dark Matter Annihilation up to 100 TeV toward the Galactic Center with MAGIC,

MAGIC Collaboration, H. Abe et al., “Search for Gamma-Ray Spectral Lines from Dark Matter Annihilation up to 100 TeV toward the Galactic Center with MAGIC,” Phys. Rev. Lett.130 no. 6, (2023) 061002, arXiv:2212.10527 [astro-ph.HE]

2023 arXiv
[38]

Toward the ultimate reach of current imaging atmospheric Cherenkov telescopes and their sensitivity to TeV dark matter,

A. Montanari, E. Moulin, and N. L. Rodd, “Toward the ultimate reach of current imaging atmospheric Cherenkov telescopes and their sensitivity to TeV dark matter,” Phys. Rev. D107 no. 4, (2023) 043028, arXiv:2210.03140 [astro-ph.HE]

2023 arXiv
[39]

A modified naturalness principle and its experimental tests,

M. Farina, D. Pappadopulo, and A. Strumia, “A modified naturalness principle and its experimental tests,” JHEP 08 (2013) 022, arXiv:1303.7244 [hep-ph]

2013 arXiv
[40]

How to Falsify String Theory at a Collider,

M. Baumgart, P. Christeas, J. J. Heckman, and R. J. Hicks, “How to Falsify String Theory at a Collider,” arXiv:2412.13192 [hep-ph]

arXiv
[41]

Incomplete Multiplets in Supersymmetric Unified Models,

S. Dimopoulos and F. Wilczek, “Incomplete Multiplets in Supersymmetric Unified Models,”
[42]

Supersymmetric Grand Unified Theories and the Early Universe,

M. Srednicki, “Supersymmetric Grand Unified Theories and the Early Universe,” Nucl. Phys. B202 (1982) 327–335

1982
[43]

Efficacious additions to the standard model,

E. Ma, “Efficacious additions to the standard model,” Phys. Lett. B625 (2005) 76–78, arXiv:hep-ph/0508030

2005 arXiv
[44]

SU(5) Unification with TeV-scale Leptoquarks,

P. Cox, A. Kusenko, O. Sumensari, and T. T. Yanagida, “SU(5) Unification with TeV-scale Leptoquarks,” JHEP 03 (2017) 035, arXiv:1612.03923 [hep-ph]

2017 arXiv
[45]

SO(10) → SU (5) × U (1)χ as the Origin of Dark Matter,

E. Ma, “ SO(10) → SU (5) × U (1)χ as the Origin of Dark Matter,” Phys. Rev. D98 no. 9, (2018) 091701, arXiv:1809.03974 [hep-ph]

2018 arXiv
[46]

Search for squarks and gluinos in final states with jets and missing transverse momentum using 139 fb −1 of √s =13 TeV pp collision data with the ATLAS detector,

A TLASCollaboration, G. Aad et al., “Search for squarks and gluinos in final states with jets and missing transverse momentum using 139 fb −1 of √s =13 TeV pp collision data with the ATLAS detector,” JHEP 02 (2021) 143, arXiv:2010.14293 [hep-ex]

2021 arXiv
[47]

Search for squarks and gluinos in final states with one isolated 8 lepton, jets, and missing transverse momentum at√s = 13 with the ATLAS detector,

A TLASCollaboration, G. Aad et al., “Search for squarks and gluinos in final states with one isolated 8 lepton, jets, and missing transverse momentum at√s = 13 with the ATLAS detector,” Eur. Phys. J. C 81 no. 7, (2021) 600, arXiv:2101.01629 [hep-ex]. [Erratum: Eur.Phys.J.C 81,...

2021 arXiv
[48]

Searches for new phenomena in events with two leptons, jets, and missing transverse momentum in 139 fb −1 of √s = 13 TeV pp collisions with the ATLAS detector,

A TLASCollaboration, G. Aad et al., “Searches for new phenomena in events with two leptons, jets, and missing transverse momentum in 139 fb −1 of √s = 13 TeV pp collisions with the ATLAS detector,” Eur. Phys. J. C 83 no. 6, (2023) 515, arXiv:2204.13072 [hep-ex]

2023 arXiv
[49]

Search for type-III seesaw heavy leptons in dilepton final states in pp collisions at √s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector,

A TLASCollaboration, G. Aad et al., “Search for type-III seesaw heavy leptons in dilepton final states in pp collisions at √s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector,” Eur. Phys. J. C81 no. 3, (2021) 218, arXiv:2008.07949 [hep-ex]

2021 arXiv
[50]

Search for charged Higgs bosons decaying into a top quark and a bottom quark at √s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector,

A TLASCollaboration, G. Aad et al., “Search for charged Higgs bosons decaying into a top quark and a bottom quark at √s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector,” JHEP 06 (2021) 145, arXiv:2102.10076 [hep-ex]

2021 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

First Dark Matter Search Results from the LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) Experiment,

LZ Collaboration, J. Aalbers et al., “First Dark Matter Search Results from the LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) Experiment,” Phys. Rev. Lett.131 no. 4, (2023) 041002, arXiv:2207.03764 [hep-ex]

arXiv 2023

[2] [2]

New Dark Matter Search Results from the LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) Experiment,

S. Haselschwardt, “New Dark Matter Search Results from the LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) Experiment,” https: //indico.uchicago.edu/event/427/contributions/ 1325/attachments/359/548/lz_results_tevpa.pdf

work page

[3] [3]

Minimal dark matter,

M. Cirelli, N. Fornengo, and A. Strumia, “Minimal dark matter,” Nucl. Phys. B753 (2006) 178–194, arXiv:hep-ph/0512090

arXiv 2006

[4] [4]

Cancellation Mechanism for Dark-Matter–Nucleon Interaction,

C. Gross, O. Lebedev, and T. Toma, “Cancellation Mechanism for Dark-Matter–Nucleon Interaction,” Phys. Rev. Lett.119 no. 19, (2017) 191801, arXiv:1708.02253 [hep-ph]

arXiv 2017

[5] [5]

On dark matter models with uniquely spin-dependent detection possibilities,

M. Freytsis and Z. Ligeti, “On dark matter models with uniquely spin-dependent detection possibilities,” Phys. Rev. D 83 (2011) 115009, arXiv:1012.5317 [hep-ph]

arXiv 2011

[6] [6]

Loop corrections to dark matter direct detection in a pseudoscalar mediator dark matter model,

T. Abe, M. Fujiwara, and J. Hisano, “Loop corrections to dark matter direct detection in a pseudoscalar mediator dark matter model,” JHEP 02 (2019) 028, arXiv:1810.01039 [hep-ph]

arXiv 2019

[7] [7]

Unity of All Elementary Particle Forces,

H. Georgi and S. L. Glashow, “Unity of All Elementary Particle Forces,” Phys. Rev. Lett.32 (1974) 438–441

work page 1974

[8] [8]

SO(10) Grand Unification with Minimal Dark Matter and Color Octet Scalars

G.-C. Cho, K. Hayami, and N. Okada, “SO(10) grand unification with minimal dark matter and color octet scalars,” Phys. Rev. D105 no. 1, (2022) 015027, arXiv:2110.03884 [hep-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2022