High Energy Physics - Phenomenology · arXiv:hep-ph/9406387 v1 · submitted 24 Jun 1994
Note Added to “Baryon Asymmetry of the Universe in the Standard Model"
The paper says
“We argue that their method cannot be considered as reliable, and thus their conclusions cannot be considered as justified.”
from the abstract · picked out as the main claim by a classifier
Reviews
Reviews by people
No person has reviewed this paper on Pith yet. A scientist listed on Pith can review it for a fee, and their review is published here whatever it concludes.
The paper
Abstract
Recent papers by Gavela et al. and Huet et al. claim to have shown that incluion of higher order interactions between quasiparticles dramatically decreases the baryon asymmetry of the universe which can arise in the Minimal Standard Model. These papers employ an inconsistent calculational scheme which, for instance, violates unitarity. We argue that their method cannot be considered as reliable, and thus their conclusions cannot be considered as justified.
The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. No sentence in this record was written by a model.
abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review
How the main claim is stated: asserted 0.91
What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.03 · states limitation 0.06 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.05 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.03 · compares with prior results 0.81 · mentions code or data availability 0.02
The abstract, sentence by sentence
This table labels the abstract only (arXiv listing abstract v1). The number is the probability the classifier gave the label.
| Sentence | Role | The authors' own work | States the main conclusion | Strength |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Recent papers by Gavela et al. and Huet et al. claim to have shown that incluion of higher order interactions between quasiparticles dramatically decreases the baryon asymmetry of the universe which can arise in the Minimal Standard Model. | background 1.00 | 0.03 | 0.06 | asserted 0.98 |
| These papers employ an inconsistent calculational scheme which, for instance, violates unitarity. | result 0.41 | 0.27 | 0.16 | asserted 1.00 |
| We argue that their method cannot be considered as reliable, and thus their conclusions cannot be considered as justified. | interpretation 0.86 | 0.39 | 0.88 | asserted 0.91 |
What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: position or commentary 1.00 · evidence from argument 0.92
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
How the labels were made
Compiled by classifier-1.13-20260917 via OpenRouter, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 2,941 input tokens, $0.0001 reported.
Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. This record as JSON
Cited by 3 Pith papers
Reviewed papers on Pith that cite this one. The full citation record
- Baryon asymmetry from electroweak tachyonic preheating hep-ph · Oct 2003
- Electroweak baryogenesis hep-ph · Jun 2012
- Electroweak Baryogenesis hep-ph · Mar 1998
How the literature uses it
Papers whose main result relates to this one's
States a conflicting result 1 paper
-
At present uncertainties related to the dynamics of the ew phase transition and the oversimplifications of our treatment are too great to decide whether or not this is the correct explanation for the presence of remnant matter in our universe, however the present work makes it clear that the minimal standard model cannot be discounted as a contender for explaining this phenomenon.
Baryon Asymmetry of the Universe in the Standard Model · 0.84
Challenges and discussion
Know something about this paper? Leave a comment.
Come back by email
A short list of the week's newly reviewed papers. Nothing is sent until you confirm from your inbox, and every email has a link that stops it. No account.
No comments yet.
Sign in to comment