Protecting the Primordial Baryon Asymmetry From Erasure by Sphalerons

James M. Cline; Keith A. Olive; Kimmo Kainulainen

REVIEW

Protecting the Primordial Baryon Asymmetry From Erasure by Sphalerons

James M. Cline, Kimmo Kainulainen, Keith A. Olive

High Energy Physics - Phenomenology · Submitted 5 Jan 1994 · 22 references

Pith's verdict: A careful, honest re-derivation of the e_R-decoupling effect on sphaleron erasure, with a real corrected number (20 keV neutrino bound) and a full Boltzmann network; the headline idea is from the authors' own PRL, and they say so.

T0 · AI review

How this review was made: An AI referee (selfhosted/deepseek-v4.1-flash) read the paper on November 13, 2026 and answered a fixed list of questions about it. T0 is the starting level every paper gets. The levels describe how deeply Pith has checked the paper, never the authors.

T0 AI review An AI read the paper and answered a fixed list of questions.
T1 Audit Automatic checks that the references and files the paper relies on exist and match.
T2 Compute The paper's code or calculations re-run with the same results.
T3 Formal statement The claims written out in a formal math language a computer can read.
T4 Proof Those claims proved, and the proof checked by computer.

How Pith checks papers →

· 1 major objection · 8 minor · Ask about this paper · The compiled record · Read the full review →

Challenge this review Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗

Cite ▾

arXiv IDhep-ph/9401208 (version 1)

Pith IDSLBMRR5R, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review

CitationJames M. Cline, Keith A. Olive, Kimmo Kainulainen. "Protecting the Primordial Baryon Asymmetry From Erasure by Sphalerons." arXiv:hep-ph/9401208 (1994). https://pith.science/paper/SLBMRR5R

Cite this reviewBibTeX for Pith's review of this paper

Claim paper

Why Pith says this

Highlight any text to comment on it.

Editor's note

read the letter

Bottom line: this is a solid re-derivation paper, not a new-idea paper, and it is honest about that. The headline — e_R stays out of equilibrium down to T_* ~ 1 TeV because h_e ~ 3e-6, so bounds on nonrenormalizable B/L-violating operators weaken by up to nine orders — is from the authors' own PRL and from CDEO. What is new is the machinery: a full Boltzmann network with thermal masses, finite-T wave functions, Bose factors, a proper treatment of the s-channel resonance subtraction, and a corrected coefficient on |m_ee|^2 that they explicitly flag as wrong in the earlier letter. The 20 keV neutrino bound agrees with an independent analytic estimate (21 keV), which is the kind of cross-check that makes a number believable. The paper is also unusually self-critical about its own approximations, which I take as a good sign rather than a hedge.

Referee report

Significance

High. The e_R decoupling argument is a genuine correction to a body of work, and the weakening of nonrenormalizable-operator bounds by many orders of magnitude is a substantive, falsifiable consequence. The paper is unusually self-critical: it compares the CDEO decay approximation with the exact rate (Table 2), shows what the result would have been without scattering (fig. 5a), compares two s-channel subtraction schemes (Table 3), and scans m_t and m_0 (fig. 7). I checked the internal algebra at several nontrivial points — eqs. (35)-(40), (47)-(49), and (61)-(64) — and it closes consistently; for example, eq. (59) follows from eqs. (55) and (58), and eq. (64) from eq. (63). The main quantitative driver, however, is the gauge/Higgs scattering term I_G, whose displayed form needs attention (major comment).

Major objections (1)

[§3.2, Eq. (27) and Eq. (25)] As printed, the gauge/Higgs scattering cross section is dimensionally inconsistent. A cross section must carry E^-2, but the right-hand side 4 h_e^2 π s T^2 (m_eR^2 ln(s/m_eR^2) + m_eL^2 ln(s/m_eL^2) - (5/4)m_eL^2 - (7/4)m_eR^2) carries E^6, and no gauge coupling appears explicitly (it is presumably hidden in the thermal masses). Eq. (25) has a similar problem: with T^3 in front and λ (rather than λ^{1/2}) in the integrand, I_i comes out with the wrong dimensions, whereas Table 2 requires I_G = 3.2×10^-4 h_e^2 T^4. This matters because Table 2 and Eq. (43) show that I_G dominates the integrated rate for x_H ≲ 1.2, and hence fixes T* in Eq. (53) and every downstream bound in Eqs. (51) and (69). Please give the explicit derivation of Eq. (27) — the matrix elements and the thermal average — and the corrected formula. I want to be clear that this is a verification request, not a challenge to the conclusion: the qualitative result survives a factor-of-three error in T* (T* → 300 GeV still gives about eight orders of weakening and ⟨m_ei⟩ ~ 35 keV), and the entries in Table 2 are consistent with the physically expected σ ~ h_e^2 g^2 ln(s/m^2)/(16π s).

Minor objections (8)

[§2.2, Eq. (18)] For Eq. (41) to follow, the definition must be Γ_RL ≡ 12 I/T^3; as printed, 12 T^3 (I_D + I_G + Σ I_f) is dimensionally inconsistent. Several other fractions in the arXiv text appear garbled — for example, Eq. (55)'s '12', '23', and '13' should read 1/2, 2/3, and 1/3, as can be checked against Eqs. (61)-(63). A careful pass over all displayed equations is warranted.
[§4, Eq. (43)] The linear fit gives a negative decay contribution for x_H < 0.46, and the least-favorable case used in Eq. (53) is x_H ≈ 0.41. A negative contribution to a rate is unphysical; please restrict the fit to its validated range or quote T* from the full numerical integral. The effect is small and conservative (f ≈ 0.96 at x_H = 0.41), but the quoted number should not rest on an extrapolation.
[§5.1, Eq. (51)] The 20 keV bound follows from ln(B_initial/B_final) ≈ 18 with B_initial = 2×10^-3. Since the bound scales with this logarithm, the abstract and conclusions should state the assumed initial asymmetry alongside the number, as fig. 7 already does graphically.
[§5, introduction] The claim that bounds may be weakened by 'as many as nine orders of magnitude' is not attained by the explicit example: Eq. (69) gives 4×10^12 GeV → 30 TeV, about eight orders. Either identify the operator that attains nine or soften the wording for the cases actually shown.
[§4, closing paragraph] The phrase 'answer definitively the question CDEO posed' is stronger than the residual uncertainties (thermal masses, s-channel subtraction, Maxwell-Boltzmann approximation) support. The robustness argument from scattering dominance is convincing; the wording could be moderated.
[§3.3] The principal-value prescription for the double pole is ad hoc, and the negative off-shell contributions at m_H/T > 2 in Table 3 are hard to interpret physically. A sentence stating explicitly that these are artifacts of the subtraction, and that the decay term is the appropriate description in that regime, would help the reader.
[Fig. 5b] The caption should state the range of x_H covered by the contours and note that the region x_H > 0.55 is argued, rather than shown, to be more suppressed.
[§3.2] The Maxwell-Boltzmann approximation is used precisely where the scattering terms dominate; a quantitative estimate of the error, beyond the anticipated 20%, would strengthen the rate calculation.

How Pith checks papers → · Full audit of this paper →

The paper

The paper claims

The right-handed electron's tiny Yukawa coupling keeps it out of thermal equilibrium down to roughly a TeV, and that delay weakens bounds on exotic baryon- and lepton-number violation by as much as nine orders of magnitude.

The reading

Grand unified theories can generate the universe's baryon asymmetry at $10^{16}$ GeV, but the electroweak sphaleron — a nonperturbative transition that reshuffles baryon and lepton number while conserving $B-L$ — can destroy it later. If some additional exotic interaction violates $B-L$ itself, erasure is normally taken to be complete unless that interaction is extraordinarily weak, and that requirement has been translated into very stringent lower bounds on the scale of new physics. This paper argues that those bounds are far too strict, because the right-handed electron has such a small Yukawa coupling ($h_e = 2.94 × 10^{-6}$) that it stays out of equilibrium down to about a TeV. So long as the exotic operator does not itself touch the right-handed electron, the $e_R$ asymmetry props the baryon number up, and erasure can begin only after ordinary standard-model physics has brought $e_R$ into equilibrium.

What carries the argument

The machinery is a chemical-potential bookkeeping scheme layered on a Boltzmann network. Fast reactions (electroweak gauge interactions and sphalerons) are turned into equilibrium conditions among chemical potentials; charge neutrality and the sphaleron constraint close the system; and the slow reactions — $e_R ↔ e_L$ chirality flips and the exotic $B$- or $L$-violating operator — are kept as explicit rate equations. The load-bearing object is the $e_R$–$e_L$ equilibration rate $Γ_{RL}$, built from the decay integral $I_D$ plus the gauge and top-quark scattering integrals $I_G$ and $I_{top}$. The authors show that at small thermal Higgs mass the decays are phase-space suppressed and the scatterings dominate, which is what closes the loophole that a more accurate decay rate alone would have opened. Charge neutrality is what keeps a nonzero baryon number alive while the $e_R$ asymmetry persists, since the plasma must cancel the charge carried by the out-of-equilibrium electrons.

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the decoupling of the right-handed electron sets the real clock on baryon erasure, and that this clock runs much slower than previously assumed. The authors build the full set of Boltzmann equations for the $e_R$ and $e_L$ asymmetries, compute every tree-level chirality-changing rate (Higgs decays, gauge and top-quark scatterings, with the on-shell s-channel resonance subtracted), and find that $e_R$ number comes into equilibrium only at $T_* = 1.3 f(x_H)$ TeV, where $x_H$ is the asymptotic thermal Higgs mass in units of temperature. Two consequences follow. First, in a universe with $B-L = 0$ the asymmetry is indeed erased, confirming earlier work, but for a different reason: $e_R$ relaxes not to zero but to a fixed value $-C_{e,p}/3$, and the baryon number dies exponentially as $B(t) = B_{eq} e^{-∫Γ dt}$. Second, and this is the point of the paper, when $B-L$ is violated by an exotic operator the erasure can only proceed between $T_*$ and the electroweak phase transition, so bounds on such operators relax dramatically: the dimension-nine operator limit falls from about $4 × 10^{12}$ GeV to about $30$ TeV, and the neutrino mass bound becomes $⟨m_{ei}⟩ ≲ 20$ keV.

Load-bearing premise

The claim rests on the right-handed electron remaining a pure spectator — the exotic $B$- and $L$-violating operators must not touch it — and on taking the largest imaginable primordial asymmetry, $2 × 10^{-3}$, as the starting value, since the quoted bound scales with the logarithm of the erasure factor.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Lower bounds on nonrenormalizable $B$- and $L$-violating operators weaken from roughly $4 × 10^{12}$ GeV to roughly $30$ TeV, so new physics at the TeV scale is no longer excluded by the requirement that a GUT-scale baryon asymmetry survive.
The dimension-five operator that generates Majorana neutrino masses is bounded by $⟨m_{ei}⟩ ≲ 20$ keV, about an order of magnitude looser than earlier estimates, with the exact value depending on the assumed primordial asymmetry.
A primordial lepton or $e_R$ asymmetry can generate a baryon asymmetry even when $B = 0$ initially, which turns the argument from a preservation statement into a production mechanism.
In the $B - L = 0$ case the older negative conclusion stands: storing the asymmetry in $e_R$ cannot save it, so that route to protection is closed within the minimal standard model.
For a dimension-nine operator such as $M^{-5}(\bar u_R d_R^c)(\bar d_R d_R^c)(\bar u_R d_R^c)$, the correct temperature to use in the bound is $T_* \sim 1$ TeV rather than the sphaleron turn-on temperature of $10^{12}$ GeV.

Reading between the lines

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

The protection is conditional on the right-handed electron being a spectator under the new sector: any exotic interaction that couples directly to $e_R$ — a gauged $B-L$ boson light enough to be in equilibrium, for instance — would restore something close to the original stringent bounds, so the weakening is not a generic feature of all $B-L$ violation.
Because $T_*$ scales with the thermal Higgs mass parameter $x_H$, the cosmological bound is a function of the top and Higgs masses; a heavier top quark or a lighter Higgs shortens the protective window, so collider mass measurements feed directly into a cosmological constraint in a way that was not available when the paper was written.
The same bookkeeping should apply to $R$-parity-violating supersymmetric operators, which the paper mentions only in passing; it would be worth checking whether their limits weaken by a comparable factor or whether the extra colored fields change the equilibrium conditions.
An $e_R$ that stays out of equilibrium down to about a TeV is a small, in-principle computable shift in the relativistic degrees of freedom during big bang nucleosynthesis, which offers an independent, if delicate, cross-check on the decoupling temperature.

Original abstract

If the baryon asymmetry of the universe was created at the GUT scale, sphalerons together with exotic sources of $(B-L)$-violation could have erased it, unless the latter satisfy stringent bounds. We elaborate on how the small Yukawa coupling of the electron drastically weakens previous estimates of these bounds.

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged, kept beside the review and separate from it. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Compiled by classifier-1.13-20260917 via OpenRouter, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 2,297 input tokens, $0.0001 reported.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.03 · states limitation 0.20 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.06 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.08 · compares with prior results 0.89 · mentions code or data availability 0.02.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v1. Results and the main claim are underlined; show every role.

If the baryon asymmetry of the universe was created at the GUT scale, sphalerons together with exotic sources of $(B-L)$-violation could have erased it, unless the latter satisfy stringent bounds. We elaborate on how the small Yukawa coupling of the electron drastically weakens previous estimates of these bounds.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#	sentence	role	the authors' own work	states the main conclusion	strength
s0	If the baryon asymmetry of the universe was created at the GUT scale, sphalerons together with exotic sources of $(B-L)$-violation could have erased it, unless the latter satisfy stringent bounds.	background 1.00	0.06	0.20	hedged possibility 0.99
s1	We elaborate on how the small Yukawa coupling of the electron drastically weakens previous estimates of these bounds.	contribution 0.54	0.90	0.57	asserted 1.00

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: theoretical result 1.00 · evidence from proof or derivation 0.68.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read

arXiv listing abstract v1

not examined

full text
figures and tables
references and citing sentences
relations to other papers

levels run

P abstract

not run

S sections
T body sentences
C citations
R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

Figures

**Figure 1.** (a) Higgs boson decay into right-handed electron and lepton doublet; Higgs and gauge boson scattering of (b) Le into eR and (c) bosons into Le and eR; lepton number violating scatterings of (d) eLℓ − or eLνℓ into Higgs bosons and (e) eL-Higgs into (ℓ or νℓ)-Higgs

**Figure 3.** 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 0.0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 2.5 mH (T) T m0 (GeV) ⑦ eL Lℓ ❅ ❅ ❅❅

**Figure 6.** a) Evolution of the asymmetries LeR , LeL and B as a function of temperature, when electron lepton number is conserved at low temperatures, using the initial value LeR,p = 10−3 . b) Evolution of absolute values of asymmetries with electron lepton number violation corresponding to hmeii = 5 keV. B is initially negative and the dip in the corresponding curve marks the place where B becomes positive. Similarly LeL changes sign from positive to negative. LeR remains negative over the whole range. 38

**Figure 7.** The shaded area between the curves C and D shows the region consistent with the observed baryon asymmetry for some choice of parameters mt and mH. Curve C corresponds to B, mt , mH = 4 × 10−11, 90 GeV, 60 GeV and curve D to B, mt , mH = 6 × 10−11, 90 GeV, 1 TeV. 39

Showing 4 of the paper's 7 figures. See all figures in the PDF ↗ Figures reproduced from arXiv:hep-ph/9401208 by the authors.

References

Works cited (22)

[1]

V. Kuzmin, V. Rubakov and M. Shaposhnikov, Phys. Lett. B155 (1985) 36

View on Pith 1985
[2]

P. Arnold and L. McLerran, Phys. Rev. D36 (1987) 581, Phys. Rev. D37 (1988) 1020

View on Pith 1987
[3]

M. Fukugita and T. Yanagida, Phys. Rev. D42 (1990) 1285

View on Pith 1990
[4]

Harvey and M. Turner, Phys. Rev. D42 (1990) 3344

View on Pith 1990
[5]

B.A. Campbell, S. Davidson, J. Ellis, and K.A. Olive, Phys. Lett. B256 (1991) 457; Astroparticle Physics 1 (1992) 77

View on Pith 1991
[6]

W. Fischler, G.F. Giudice, R.G. Leigh, and S. Paban, Phys. Lett. B258 (1991) 45

View on Pith 1991
[7]

J.M. Cline, K. Kainulainen and K.A. Olive, Phys. Rev. Lett. 71 (1993) 2372

View on Pith 1993
[8]

B.A. Campbell, S. Davidson, J. Ellis, and K.A. Olive, Phys. Lett. B297 (1992) 118 (CDEO)

View on Pith 1992
[9]

M.E. Shaposhnikov, in Electroweak Interactions and Uniﬁed Theories; proceeding s of the XXVIIth Rencontres de Moriond (1992, Editions Frontieres, France)

View on Pith 1992
[10]

J.M. Cline, K. Kainulainen and K.A. Olive, Astroparticle Physics 4 (1993) 387

View on Pith 1993
[11]

H.A. Weldon, Phys. Rev. D26 (1982) 2789

View on Pith 1982
[12]

M.E. Carrington, Phys. Rev. D45 (1992) 2933; J.I. Kapusta, Finite-temperature ﬁeld theory, (1989, Cambridge University Press) 177

View on Pith 1992
[13]

E.W. Kolb and S. Wolfram, Nucl. Phys. B172 (1980) 224

View on Pith 1980
[14]

J.N. Fry, K.A. Olive, and M. Turner, Phys. Rev. D22 (1980) 2953, 2977

View on Pith 1980
[15]

L.E. Ib´ a˜ nez and F. Quevedo, Phys. Lett.B283 (1992) 261

View on Pith 1992
[16]

J. Ellis, K. Enqvist, D.V. Nanopoulos, and K.A. Olive, Phys. Lett. B 191(1987) 343. 36

View on Pith 1987
[17]

B. Campbell, S. Davidson, and K.A. Olive, Nucl. Phys. B399 (1993) 111

View on Pith 1993
[18]

A. Nelson and S. Barr, Phys. Lett. B246 (1990) 141

View on Pith 1990
[19]

H. Dreiner and G.G. Ross, Oxford preprint OUTP-92-08P (1992 )

View on Pith 1992
[20]

V. Kuzmin, V. Rubakov and M. Shaposhnikov, Phys. Lett. B191 (1987) 171

View on Pith 1987
[21]

T.P Walker, G.Steigman, D.N. Schramm, K.A. Olive, and H.-S. Kang, A p.J. 376 (1991) 51

View on Pith 1991
[22]

A. Antaramian, L.J. Hall and A. Raˇ sin, Lawrence Berkeley Labo ratory preprint LBL- 34827 (1993). 37 Figure Captions Fig. 1 (a) Higgs boson decay into right-handed electron and lepton double t; Higgs and gauge boson scattering of (b) Le into eR and (c) bosons into Le and eR; lepton number violating scatterings of (d) eLℓ− or eLνℓ into Higgs bosons and (e...

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1993

Forward citations

Cited by 20 Pith papers

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

Wash-In Leptogenesis
hep-ph 2020-11 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

Wash-in leptogenesis converts primordial conserved charges into a nonzero B-L asymmetry at right-handed-neutrino masses of a few hundred TeV, with no neutrino CP violation required.
Equilibration of right-handed electrons
hep-ph 2019-02 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

The leading-order equilibration rate of right-handed electrons in the symmetric Standard Model is dominated by 2-to-2 scattering and is several times larger than previous approximations, putting equilibration at about...
Cold keV dark matter from decays and scatterings
hep-ph 2017-06 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

Phase-space-suppressed freeze-in decays and near-resonant scatterings can produce keV-scale dark matter cold enough to satisfy Lyman-alpha constraints while keeping the parent particles in thermal equilibrium with the...
Electroweak baryogenesis from a dark sector
hep-ph 2017-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

A singlet scalar, a Majorana dark fermion and an inert Higgs doublet together yield the observed baryon asymmetry and dark matter relic density with order-one couplings, without new low-scale physics or electric dipol...
Flavour Covariant Transport Equations: an Application to Resonant Leptogenesis
hep-ph 2014-04 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Flavour-covariant transport equations with rank-4 rate tensors predict up to an order-of-magnitude larger lepton asymmetry in resonant leptogenesis than flavour-diagonal treatments.

Show 15 more citing papers

Scattering Rates For Leptogenesis: Damping of Lepton Flavour Coherence and Production of Singlet Neutrinos
hep-ph 2013-03 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

The leading-order flavour relaxation rate for left-handed Standard Model leptons is about 5x10^-3 T, dominated by t-channel fermion exchange, and the companion right-handed neutrino production rate disagrees with an e...
Flavour-Dependent Leptogenesis with Sequential Dominance
hep-ph 2006-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Tracking lepton flavours separately in the Boltzmann equations changes the predicted baryon asymmetry of sequential-dominance leptogenesis by factors of three up to orders of magnitude, and can convert a vanishing fla...
Flavour Matters in Leptogenesis
hep-ph 2006-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Flavour-dependent washout and flavour-specific CP asymmetries in thermal leptogenesis can change the predicted baryon asymmetry by orders of magnitude relative to the standard single-flavour formula.
Flavour Issues in Leptogenesis
hep-ph 2006-01 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Tracking lepton flavours separately in thermal leptogenesis weakens the per-flavour CP asymmetry bound, removing the model-independent limit on light neutrino mass and relaxing the reheat temperature bound by a factor...
Resonant Relaxation in Electroweak Baryogenesis
hep-ph 2004-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

The relaxation term in electroweak baryogenesis transport equations is resonantly enhanced under the same MSSM conditions that enhance the CP-violating sources, partially cancelling the source enhancement.
Baryogenesis through leptogenesis
hep-ph 1999-11 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

The lepton asymmetry in heavy-neutrino leptogenesis must be tracked as a 3x3 flavour density matrix, and with that bookkeeping both a U(1) and a U(2) family-symmetry model can be brought near the observed baryon asymmetry.
Leptogenesis Determined By Low Energy Parameters
hep-ph 2026-09 accept novelty 5.0 of 10

In two predictive seesaw models, thermal leptogenesis successfully produces the observed baryon asymmetry for normal neutrino mass ordering with nonzero Majorana phases, and predicts effective Majorana masses within r...
Quantum-Ordering Ambiguities in Weak Chern-Simons 4D Gravity and Metastability of the Condensate-Induced Inflation
gr-qc 2024-11 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

In a Chern-Simons gravity model, quantum-ordering-dependent imaginary parts of the gravitational anomaly condensate give inflation a finite lifetime and imply the string scale is about one tenth of the Planck mass.
Baryogenesis from axion inflation
hep-ph 2019-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

The observed baryon asymmetry can arise from axion inflation with a Chern-Simons coupling to hypercharge, for inflation scales of 10^10-10^12 GeV, if magnetic diffusion and the chiral plasma instability are both avoided.
Dirac-Phase Thermal Leptogenesis in the extended Type-I Seesaw Model
hep-ph 2018-02 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

In a TeV-scale inverse-plus-linear seesaw model, the Dirac CP phase alone can drive thermal leptogenesis, but only when both lepton-number-violating parameters are present and tuned to a resonant window.
Leptogenesis Constraints on the Mass of Right-handed Gauge Bosons
hep-ph 2014-08 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

A class of left-right seesaw models with large Yukawa couplings and a tuned Dirac-Majorana texture weakens the leptogenesis lower bound on the right-handed W boson mass from 18 TeV to roughly 3 TeV.
Spectator Effects during Leptogenesis in the Strong Washout Regime
hep-ph 2014-04 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Partially equilibrated spectator interactions in strong-washout leptogenesis can raise the freeze-out asymmetry by up to 50% over the fully equilibrated limit, by hiding asymmetry from washout until after freeze-out.
On the Impact of Flavour Oscillations in Leptogenesis
hep-ph 2006-11 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Flavour oscillations in thermal leptogenesis damp fast enough that the two-flavour regime is reached for right-handed neutrino masses near 10^12 GeV, not only well below it.
The minimal scenario of leptogenesis
hep-ph 2012-11 accept novelty 2.0 of 10

Thermal leptogenesis remains a quantitatively worked-out explanation of the matter-antimatter asymmetry, but flavour effects and quantum-kinetic corrections have eroded its early power to predict low-energy neutrino p...
Leptonic CP violation
hep-ph 2011-11 accept novelty 2.0 of 10

A comprehensive review of leptonic CP violation covering phase counting, weak-basis invariants, seesaw models, oscillation and double-beta observability, lepton-flavor violation, collider signatures, and leptogenesis.

How the literature uses it

35 arXiv papers cite this in 53 sentences

Each citing sentence is taken from the citing paper's LaTeX source and typed by Pith's classifier. A label appears at probability 0.8 or more (0.95 for support), a contest at 0.7 or more; the quoted words are the citing authors'. How each label was checked · JSON

Papers citing it · 38 sentences without a confident label

Contests it 2 papers

However, this argument fails in the presence of interference terms and the prescription [ref] has been found to give superficial negative cross sections [ref] , which never happens in the subtraction scheme [ref].

Momentum distributions of cosmic relics: Improved analysis · RIS SUBTRACTION · contest 0.86
Therefore we recompute $c _ t$ in [ref] using Maxwell-Boltzmann statistics for all particles, leading to $c _ t ^ MB = 2.14$, which is a relative error of $24%$ compared to the correct quantum statistics, as anticipated in [ref] .

Equilibration of right-handed electrons · Results and discussion · contest 0.71

Uses its method or tool 7 papers

The CP asymmetry matrix $ε_αβ^(j)$ denoting CP asymmetry in the decay of $j^th$ neutrino in terms of Yukawa coupling and right-handed neutrino masses are given by [ref] , [equation] with [equation] Moreover, $P^i_αβ$ is the projection matrix describing how a particular combination of flavor asymmetry gets washed out via $i^th$ right-handed neutrino, and its tree-level value is given by [ref] , [equation] The last two terms in <ref> describe the effect of charged lepton interaction [ref] [equation] The $y_τ$ dependent interaction comes into thermal equilibrium when the temperature drops below $10^12 GeV$, leading to the decoherence of $τ$ lepton states.

Fermion mass, Axion dark matter, and Leptogenesis in SO(10) GUT · Leptogenesis · 0.80
We follow the procedure from Ref. [ref] (see also Refs. [ref] ) and subtract $σ_s$ by [equation] For the Boltzmann equations we require the thermally averaged cross sections, summed over initial and final flavors.

Testing Dirac leptogenesis with the cosmic microwave background and proton decay · Involved cross sections · 1.00
Here, we follow Refs. [ref] with a real-intermediate-state subtraction by splitting the Breit-Wigner form of the scalar propagator as [equation] where $Γ_ϕ$ is the decay width of the thermal scalar.

Scattering versus Forbidden Decay in Dark Matter Freeze-in · Introduction · 1.00

Uses its data or values 1 paper

[ref] to be $γ_E≈5×10^-3T^4/6$ where thermal corrections and scatterings involving gauge fields and quark fields are taken into account.

Cosmic Evolution of Lepton Flavor Charges · Lepton flavor effect · 1.00

Compares with it 1 paper

With the values for the gauge couplings of [ref] , our result is about $50%$ larger [Cf. equations (25) through (27) in [ref] .] which could be due to the use of classical statistics and of zero-momentum thermal fermion masses in [ref] .

Equilibration of right-handed electrons · Results and discussion · 0.98

Cites it as background 2 papers

A matter-antimatter asymmetry created at some very high temperature like, e.g. in GUT baryogenesis, can be protected from washout if the right-handed electrons [ref] are not yet in equilibrium.

Equilibration of right-handed electrons · Introduction · 0.86
[See also Refs. [ref] for related earlier work as well as Refs. [ref] for some related discussions in the more recent literature.]

Wash-in leptogenesis after axion inflation · Introduction · 0.93

Discussion

Disagree with the review, or know something it missed? Leave a comment, highlight any passage above to comment on it, or challenge this review formally.

[1] [1]

V. Kuzmin, V. Rubakov and M. Shaposhnikov, Phys. Lett. B155 (1985) 36

View on Pith 1985

[2] [2]

P. Arnold and L. McLerran, Phys. Rev. D36 (1987) 581, Phys. Rev. D37 (1988) 1020

View on Pith 1987

[3] [3]

M. Fukugita and T. Yanagida, Phys. Rev. D42 (1990) 1285

View on Pith 1990

[4] [4]

Harvey and M. Turner, Phys. Rev. D42 (1990) 3344

View on Pith 1990

[5] [5]

B.A. Campbell, S. Davidson, J. Ellis, and K.A. Olive, Phys. Lett. B256 (1991) 457; Astroparticle Physics 1 (1992) 77

View on Pith 1991

[6] [6]

W. Fischler, G.F. Giudice, R.G. Leigh, and S. Paban, Phys. Lett. B258 (1991) 45

View on Pith 1991

[7] [7]

J.M. Cline, K. Kainulainen and K.A. Olive, Phys. Rev. Lett. 71 (1993) 2372

View on Pith 1993

[8] [8]

B.A. Campbell, S. Davidson, J. Ellis, and K.A. Olive, Phys. Lett. B297 (1992) 118 (CDEO)

View on Pith 1992

[9] [9]

M.E. Shaposhnikov, in Electroweak Interactions and Uniﬁed Theories; proceeding s of the XXVIIth Rencontres de Moriond (1992, Editions Frontieres, France)

View on Pith 1992

[10] [10]

J.M. Cline, K. Kainulainen and K.A. Olive, Astroparticle Physics 4 (1993) 387

View on Pith 1993

[11] [11]

H.A. Weldon, Phys. Rev. D26 (1982) 2789

View on Pith 1982

[12] [12]

M.E. Carrington, Phys. Rev. D45 (1992) 2933; J.I. Kapusta, Finite-temperature ﬁeld theory, (1989, Cambridge University Press) 177

View on Pith 1992

[13] [13]

E.W. Kolb and S. Wolfram, Nucl. Phys. B172 (1980) 224

View on Pith 1980

[14] [14]

J.N. Fry, K.A. Olive, and M. Turner, Phys. Rev. D22 (1980) 2953, 2977

View on Pith 1980

[15] [15]

L.E. Ib´ a˜ nez and F. Quevedo, Phys. Lett.B283 (1992) 261

View on Pith 1992

[16] [16]

J. Ellis, K. Enqvist, D.V. Nanopoulos, and K.A. Olive, Phys. Lett. B 191(1987) 343. 36

View on Pith 1987

[17] [17]

B. Campbell, S. Davidson, and K.A. Olive, Nucl. Phys. B399 (1993) 111

View on Pith 1993

[18] [18]

A. Nelson and S. Barr, Phys. Lett. B246 (1990) 141

View on Pith 1990

[19] [19]

H. Dreiner and G.G. Ross, Oxford preprint OUTP-92-08P (1992 )

View on Pith 1992

[20] [20]

V. Kuzmin, V. Rubakov and M. Shaposhnikov, Phys. Lett. B191 (1987) 171

View on Pith 1987

[21] [21]

T.P Walker, G.Steigman, D.N. Schramm, K.A. Olive, and H.-S. Kang, A p.J. 376 (1991) 51

View on Pith 1991

[22] [22]

A. Antaramian, L.J. Hall and A. Raˇ sin, Lawrence Berkeley Labo ratory preprint LBL- 34827 (1993). 37 Figure Captions Fig. 1 (a) Higgs boson decay into right-handed electron and lepton double t; Higgs and gauge boson scattering of (b) Le into eR and (c) bosons into Le and eR; lepton number violating scatterings of (d) eLℓ− or eLνℓ into Higgs bosons and (e...

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1993