Topcolor Assisted Technicolor

Christopher T. Hill

REVIEW

Topcolor Assisted Technicolor

Christopher T. Hill

High Energy Physics - Phenomenology · Submitted 29 Nov 1994 · 12 references

Pith's verdict: The founding topcolor-assisted technicolor paper: the framework holds up, but eq. (9) has an algebra slip that its own quoted numbers contradict.

T0 · AI review

How this review was made: An AI referee (selfhosted/deepseek-v4.1-flash) read the paper on October 29, 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 →

· 3 major objections · 9 minor · Ask about this paper · The compiled record · Read the full review →

Challenge this review Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗

Cite ▾

arXiv IDhep-ph/9411426 (version 2)

Pith IDIMFRN4GD, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review

CitationChristopher T. Hill. "Topcolor Assisted Technicolor." arXiv:hep-ph/9411426 (1994). https://pith.science/paper/IMFRN4GD

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

This is the paper that started topcolor-assisted technicolor, and it earns its place. The move is simple and good: stop asking the top condensate to break electroweak symmetry itself, let technicolor do that, and use a generation-specific strong SU(3)_1 x U(1)_Y1 to condense only the top. That decouples the Pagels-Stokar fine-tuning problem from the top mass and gives a spectrum — colorons, a Z', and a triplet of top-pions with f_pi about 50 GeV and g_tb_pi about m_t/f_pi about 3 — that experimentalists can actually hunt. The U(1)_Y1 trick for tilting the gap equation toward tt and away from bb (eqs. 5-6) is the cleanest part of the construction, and the instanton-induced b mass in eq. (12) is a nice touch. The paper is also candid where it should be: it says outright that the NJL approximation is crude and that perturbative unification is being abandoned. The classifier's 'limitations: none found' is wrong on both counts; those sentences are in the text. The reader's circularity worry is overstated — using m_t = 175 GeV to get f_pi is a consistency estimate, not a derivation of the top mass from itself. The real soft spots are smaller and more specific. Eq. (9) is misprinted: with f_pi^2 = (N/8pi^2) m_t^2 log(M_B/m_t) from eq. (1) at k = 0, the middle expression reduces to epsilon M_B^2 / log(M_B/m_t), not epsilon M_B^2 log(M_B/m_t). The quoted 180 and 240 GeV follow the denominator version; the printed formula gives roughly 380 and 410 GeV. That matters because the pi0 phenomenology assumes m_pi < 2m_t, and the printed version puts it above the ttbar threshold. It is a presentation error, not a threat to the mechanism, but it should be fixed. Beyond that: epsilon is a dial, not a prediction; the 'no fine-tuning' claim after eq. (6) never gets a window-width estimate; and k in eq. (12) is order-one uncertain. All minor for a Letter that says the details are coming elsewhere. Who should read it: anyone working on dynamical electroweak breaking, and anyone thinking about a strongly coupled fourth-generation or top-condensate sector. It deserves a serious referee, mainly to catch eq. (9) and to press on the tuning window.

Referee report

Major objections (3)

[Eq. (9)] Eq. (9), second equality: with k = 0, Eq. (1) gives f_π^2 = (N_c/8π^2) m_t^2 log(M_B/m_t), so the middle expression of Eq. (9) equals ε M_B^2 / log(M_B/m_t), not ε M_B^2 log(M_B/m_t) as printed. The quoted numbers confirm the denominator form: ε = 0.03, M_B = 1.5 TeV gives 178 GeV (paper: 180), and ε = 0.1, M_B = 1.0 TeV gives 242 GeV (paper: 240), whereas the printed formula gives about 380 and 415 GeV. This matters because §III(iii) states that the π0 may be narrow if m_π < 2m_t; the printed formula puts m_π above 2m_t and would open π0 → t̄t. The equation should be corrected.
[§II, paragraph following Eq. (9)] The statement that the bare ε is radiatively enhanced by factors of order (Λ_ETC/M_B)^p ~ 10^1 is load-bearing for the top-pion mass prediction. Without it, ε_0 ~ 0.005 gives m_π ~ 70 GeV, below m_t, and the phenomenology of §III(iii) changes qualitatively. No derivation or reference is given for this enhancement; please supply one, or state the assumption explicitly as a conjecture.
[Eq. (6) and following sentence] The claim that Eqs. (6) can be satisfied 'without fine-tuning' should be quantified. The allowed window is κ_crit - (8/27)κ_{Y1} < κ < κ_crit + (4/27)κ_{Y1}, of width (4/9)κ_{Y1}; a natural window therefore requires κ_{Y1} ~ κ_crit = 2π/3, i.e., q_1 cotθ' ~ O(5). Please state the required size of κ_{Y1} and hence of the U(1)_{Y1} coupling, so the reader can judge the tuning.

Minor objections (9)

[Eq. (5), second line] The log argument in the b-quark gap equation is ln(M_B^2/m_t^2); since m_b → 0, please state explicitly that m_t is the IR regulator and why this is the appropriate scale.
[Eq. (8) and following sentence] The charged-pion coefficient in Eq. (8) is m_t/f_π, while the text quotes g_{btπ} ≈ m_t/√2f_π; the two differ by √2. Please reconcile the normalization, since it enters the π+ → tb width.
[Table I] The additional fields required to cancel the SU(3)_1^3 and mixed anomalies are not shown; at least state their quantum numbers, since the anomaly structure constrains the model.
[Footnote 4] The scenario in which the top decays dominantly to b + (π+ → c + b̄) is in tension with the emerging t → Wb evidence; a sentence acknowledging this would be appropriate.
[§II, discussion of θ_1] The suggestion that the θ-term in SU(3)_1 may be the origin of CKM CP violation is stated without support; either sketch the mechanism or flag it explicitly as speculation.
[§I] The value m_t ≈ 175 GeV used throughout should be referenced to the CDF/D0 top evidence.
[§III(v)] S, T and U are deferred to elsewhere; a brief estimate of the topcolor contribution to S would strengthen the phenomenological case, since oblique corrections are a standard constraint on extended strong sectors.
[Eq. (12)] With k ~ 1, m_b* ≈ 6.6 GeV exceeds the observed b mass; the paper should note the required size of k and how the instanton and ETC contributions combine (sign and interference).
[Abstract] The phrase 'explain the gauge hierarchy' overstates the scope: the hierarchy problem is addressed by TC at the TeV scale, and topcolor does not add to that. Consider softening the wording.

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

The paper

The paper claims

Hill proposes that a separate strong force acting mainly on the third generation, broken to ordinary QCD at the TeV scale by technicolor, forms a top-quark condensate that supplies most of the top mass while technicolor does the electroweak

The reading

The top quark is too heavy for the simplest version of the idea that the top quark alone drives electroweak symmetry breaking: plugging $f_* = 175$ GeV into the Pagels-Stokar relation gives a dynamical top mass near 900 GeV. Hill's proposal splits the job. Technicolor with extended technicolor breaks electroweak symmetry and, through its condensates, breaks a new strong gauge group down to ordinary QCD at the TeV scale; that new group, topcolor, couples preferentially to the third generation and is tuned near its critical strength so that only the top quark condenses. The top mass then has two pieces: a dynamical part $(1-*)$ from the condensate and a small fundamental part $*m_t$ from extended technicolor or a Higgs. The payoff is a definite low-energy residue: colorons and a $Z'$ at several hundred GeV to a TeV, a possible instanton-induced bottom mass, and, most distinctively, a triplet of strongly coupled pseudo-Nambu-Goldstone bosons, the top-pions.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing device is the pair of Nambu-Jona-Lasinio gap equations for the dynamical top and bottom masses, driven by the four-fermion interactions obtained by integrating out the coloron octet and the $Z'$. The coloron exchange is attractive and custodially symmetric in the $tt$ and $bb$ channels, while the $U(1)_{Y1}$ exchange is attractive for $tt$ and repulsive for $bb$; the conditions $* + (8/27)*_{Y1} > *_crit$ and $*_{crit} > * - (4/27)*_{Y1}$ are satisfied without fine-tuning, giving a top condensate and no bottom condensate. The Pagels-Stokar relation then converts the dynamical top mass and the topcolor cutoff into the top-pion decay constant, $f_*^2 = (N_c/16*^2) m_c^2 (log(*^2/m_c^2) + k)$, which is what fixes $f_*$ near 50 GeV and hence the strength of every top-pion coupling.

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that electroweak symmetry breaking and the large top mass need not come from the same dynamics. Technicolor (with extended technicolor) can break electroweak symmetry and simultaneously break a replicated strong gauge structure $SU(3)_1 x SU(3)_2 x U(1)_{Y1} x U(1)_{Y2}$ down to QCD times electromagnetism at the TeV scale. If the coupling of the group felt by the third generation is near-critical, the coloron and $Z'$ exchange interactions generate a top condensate, and the $U(1)_{Y1}$ hypercharge force tilts the gap equation so that the top condenses while the bottom does not. The top mass is then mostly dynamical, with a small piece from extended technicolor, and the bottom mass comes partly from instantons in $SU(3)_1$. Because the top condensation is a spectator to technicolor, a multiplet of top-pions must appear with decay constant $f_*$ about 50 GeV and coupling $g_{tb}*$ about $m_t/(sqrt(2) f_*) * 3$.

Load-bearing premise

The quantitative predictions rest on the Nambu-Jona-Lasinio gap equations and the Pagels-Stokar formula being a faithful guide to a strongly coupled, spontaneously broken gauge theory near its critical point; the paper itself calls the NJL approximation crude and requires the full theory's phase transitions to be approximately second order, with no lattice or other dynamical check offered.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

A triplet of top-pions exists near or above the top mass, with $f_*$ about 50 GeV and couplings of strong-interaction size, so that $t -> *^+ + b$ competes with the conventional $t -> W^+ + b$ whenever it is kinematically open.
The neutral top-pion can be narrow below the $2m_t$ threshold and decays through anomalies to gluon pairs and photon pairs, mimicking some signals of two-scale technicolor without the color-octet pseudo-Goldstone bosons.
A degenerate color-octet of colorons and a heavy $Z'$ appear at roughly 500 GeV to 1 TeV, and both can enhance $R_b = *(Z -> bb)/*(Z -> hadrons)$, with the $Z'$ doing so while disturbing top production less than colorons alone.
Instanton effects in $SU(3)_1$ generate a bottom mass of order $3 k m_t/(8*^2) * 6.6 k$ GeV, so the observed bottom mass need not come entirely from extended technicolor.
Flavor-changing couplings of the top-pions, induced by rotating to the mass basis, feed $b -> s + *$ and $*S = 2$, $*C = 2$ processes, which bound the mixing of the third generation with the second.

Reading between the lines

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

The scheme converts the top mass from a fitted parameter into a boundary condition on a near-critical coupling, so a precise measurement of the top Yukawa plus a demonstration that no top-pion exists below roughly 400 GeV would squeeze the allowed region sharply.
Because the same near-critical tuning is asked to select the top and reject the bottom, the model sits close to a phase transition; lattice studies of the broken $SU(3)_1$ gauge theory would be the natural place to check whether the two condensates really separate as the gap equations say.
The instanton-induced bottom mass links the size of CP violation in the strong sector to the CKM phase, which suggests that improved bounds on electric dipole moments and on $B$ mixing are indirect probes of the topcolor scale.
If the top-pion is heavier than the top, its main trace would be virtual: shifts in $Z -> bb$ and in single-top and top-pair rates at hadron colliders, which makes those measurements the cheapest place to look first.

Original abstract

A condensate, $\overline{t}t$, arising from $O(TeV)$ scale ``topcolor,'' in addition to technicolor (and ETC) may naturally explain the gauge hierarchy, the large top quark mass, and contains a rich system of testable consequences. A triplet of strongly coupled pseudo--Nambu--Goldstone bosons, ``top-pions,'' near the top mass scale is a generic prediction of the models. A new class of technicolor schemes and associated phenomenology is suggested in this approach.

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, 2,982 input tokens, $0.0001 reported.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.05 · states limitation 0.05 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.01 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.13 · compares with prior results 0.09 · mentions code or data availability 0.01.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v2. Results and the main claim are underlined; show every role.

A condensate, $\overline{t}t$, arising from $O(TeV)$ scale ``topcolor,'' in addition to technicolor (and ETC) may naturally explain the gauge hierarchy, the large top quark mass, and contains a rich system of testable consequences. A triplet of strongly coupled pseudo--Nambu--Goldstone bosons, ``top-pions,'' near the top mass scale is a generic prediction of the models. A new class of technicolor schemes and associated phenomenology is suggested in this approach.

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	A condensate, $\overline{t}t$, arising from $O(TeV)$ scale ``topcolor,'' in addition to technicolor (and ETC) may naturally explain the gauge hierarchy, the large top quark mass, and contains a rich system of testable consequences.	contribution 0.77	0.30	0.73	hedged possibility 1.00
s1	A triplet of strongly coupled pseudo--Nambu--Goldstone bosons, ``top-pions,'' near the top mass scale is a generic prediction of the models.	result 0.69	0.39	0.16	asserted 0.92
s2	A new class of technicolor schemes and associated phenomenology is suggested in this approach.	contribution 0.91	0.52	0.17	hedged possibility 0.97

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: theoretical result 0.89 · evidence from argument 0.99.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read

arXiv listing abstract v2

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

References

Works cited (12)

[1]

W. A. Bardeen, C. T. Hill, M. Lindner Phys. Rev. D41, 1647 (1990)

View on Pith 1990
[2]

C. T. Hill, Phys. Rev. D24, 691 (1990); C. T. Hill, C.N. Leung, S. Rao, Nucl. Phys. B262, 517, (1985); J. Bagger, S. Dimopoulous, E. Masso, Phys. Rev. Lett. 55 920 (1985)

View on Pith 1990
[3]

S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. D13, 974 (1976); L. Susskind, Phys. Rev. D20, 2619 (1979); S. Dimopoulos, L. Susskind, Nucl. Phys. B155 237 (1979); E. Eichten, K. Lane, Phys. Lett. 90B 125 (1980)

View on Pith 1976
[4]

C. T. Hill, Phys. Lett. B266 419 (1991); S. P. Martin, Phys. Rev. D46, 2197 (1992); Phys. Rev. D45, 4283 (1992), Nucl. Phys. B398, 359 (1993); M. Lindner and D. Ross, Nucl. Phys. B 370 , 30 (1992); R. B¨ onisch, Phys. Lett. B268 394 (1991); C. T. Hill, D. Kennedy, T. Onogi, H. L. Yu, Phys. Rev. D47 2940 (1993)

View on Pith 1991
[5]

T. Appelquist, M. Einhorn, T. Takeuchi, L. C. R. Wijeward hana, Phys. Lett. B220 223 (1989). T. W. Appelquist, D. Karabali, L.C.R. Wijewardh ana Phys. Rev. Lett. 57, 957 (1986); R. R. Mendel, V. Miransky, Phys. Lett. B268 384 (1991); V. Miransky, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69 1022 (1992); N. Evans, Phys. Lett. B331 378 (1994)

View on Pith 1989
[6]

B. Holdom, Phys. Rev. Lett. 60 1223 (1988); see also [5]

View on Pith 1988
[7]

C. T. Hill, G. G. Ross, Nucl. Phys. B311, 253 (1988); Phys. Lett. , B203, 125 (1988). –14– FERMILAB–Pub–94/395–T

View on Pith 1988
[8]

See, e.g., N. Deshpande in “B-Decays,” ed. S. Stone, Worl d Scientiﬁc, (1992); J. L. Hewett, “Top Ten Models Constrained By b →sγ, SLAC-PUB-6521 (1994); Phys. Rev. Lett. , 70 1045 (1993); V. Barger, M. Berger, R.J.N. Phillips, Phys. Rev. Lett., 70 1368 (1993); B. Grinstein, R. Springer and M. Wise, Nucl. Phys. B339 269 (1990)

View on Pith 1992
[9]

E. Eichten, K. Lane, Phys. Lett. B222 274 (1989); K. Lane, M. Ramana, Phys. Rev. D44, 2678 (1991)

View on Pith 1989
[10]

S. Chivukula, S. Selipsky, E. Simmons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 575 (1992)

View on Pith 1992
[11]

C. T. Hill, Xinmin Zhang, “ Z → bb versus Dynamical Electroweak ymmetry Breaking Involving the Top Quark,” Fermilab-Pub-94/231, hep-ph/9409315, sub- mitted to Phys. Rev. D

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[12]

C. T. Hill, S. J. Parke, Phys. Rev. D49, 4454 (1994). –15– FERMILAB–Pub–94/395–T ﬁeld SU (3)T C1 SU (3)T C2 SU (3)1 SU (3)2 SU (2)L U(1)Y 1 U(1)Y 2 QL 3 1 3 1 1 1 0 QR 3 1 1 3 1 0 1 TL = (T,B )L 1 3 1 1 2 0 13 TR = (T,B )R 1 3 1 1 1 0 ( 43, − 23 ) tL = (t,b )L 1 1 3 1 2 13 0 tR = (t,b )R 1 1 3 1 1 ( 43, − 23) 0 cL = (c,s )L 1 1 1 3 2 13 0 cR = (c,s )R 1 1...

View on Pith 1994

Forward citations

Cited by 15 Pith papers

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

Search for a neutral gauge boson with nonuniversal fermion couplings in vector boson fusion processes in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV
hep-ex 2024-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

CMS finds no evidence for a VBF-produced Z' boson with nonuniversal fermion couplings and excludes masses up to 2.45 TeV (tau-tau) and 1.60 TeV (WW), assuming 50% branching fractions and maximal W coupling.
Third-family quark-lepton unification with a fundamental composite Higgs
hep-ph 2020-04 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

A single hypercolor sector can simultaneously break the 4321 quark-lepton unification symmetry at the TeV scale and generate the Higgs as a pseudo-Nambu-Goldstone boson, predicting heavy gauge bosons with rho approxim...
Search for anomalous t t-bar production in the highly-boosted all-hadronic final state
hep-ex 2012-04 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

No excess over standard model background is seen in boosted all-hadronic top pair events, giving 95% CL upper limits near 1 pb on Z' and Kaluza-Klein gluon production and a bound of 2.6 on any generic top pair enhance...
Top pair invariant mass distribution: a window on new physics
hep-ph 2007-12 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

The shape of the top-antitop invariant mass spectrum is under good theoretical control and carries distinctive fingerprints of heavy resonances, so a peak-plus-angular-analysis strategy can identify new physics and po...
Z-prime Gauge Bosons at the Tevatron
hep-ph 2004-08 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

The Tevatron dilepton signal of a Z-prime can be parameterized by two couplings, cu and cd, letting experimental limits be compared to any Z-prime model without recomputing the full cross section.

Show 10 more citing papers

Search for resonant $\mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}$ production in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s} =$ 13 TeV
hep-ex 2018-10 accept novelty 5.0 of 10

No resonance appears in the top-antitop mass spectrum of 35.9 inverse femtobarns of 13 TeV CMS data, excluding leptophobic Z-prime bosons up to 3.80, 5.25, and 6.65 TeV for widths of 1, 10, and 30 percent, and Kaluza-...
Search for heavy particles decaying into top-quark pairs using lepton-plus-jets events in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV with the ATLAS detector
hep-ex 2018-04 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

No resonance is found in the top-antitop invariant mass spectrum of 36.1 fb^-1 of 13 TeV ATLAS data, excluding Kaluza-Klein gluons below 3.7-3.8 TeV and several Z' benchmark models below 1.2-3.0 TeV.
Search for resonant t t-bar production in proton-proton collisions at sqrt(s) = 8 TeV
hep-ex 2015-06 accept novelty 5.0 of 10

No resonant excess appears in 19.7 fb^-1 of 8 TeV CMS data, excluding narrow topcolor Z' resonances below 2.4 TeV, 10%-width Z' below 2.9 TeV, and Randall-Sundrum Kaluza-Klein gluons below 2.8 TeV at 95% confidence.
A search for $t\bar{t}$ resonances using lepton-plus-jets events in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 8$ TeV with the ATLAS detector
hep-ex 2015-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

No top-pair resonance appears in 20.3 fb^-1 of ATLAS 8 TeV data, excluding a narrow leptophobic Z' below 1.8 TeV and a 15.3%-width Kaluza-Klein gluon below 2.2 TeV at 95% confidence.
Lepton Flavor Violation in B Decays?
hep-ph 2014-11 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

If new physics explains the R_K anomaly through muon-specific interactions, it must also produce lepton-flavor-violating B decays at rates just below current limits, with R_K equal to the B_s to mu mu rate ratio.
Measurement of differential top-quark pair production cross sections in pp collisions at sqrt(s) = 7 TeV
hep-ex 2012-11 accept novelty 5.0 of 10

Normalised differential top-quark-pair cross sections measured by CMS in five decay channels agree with standard-model QCD predictions up to approximate next-to-next-to-leading order.
125 GeV Higgs from a not so light Technicolor Scalar
hep-ph 2012-11 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Top-quark loop corrections raise the intrinsic mass of a technicolor Higgs to roughly 600 GeV, and geometric scaling shows two-index technicolor representations at small number of colors can accommodate the observed 1...
Massive Color-Octet Bosons: Bounds on Effects in Top-Quark Pair Production
hep-ph 2011-06 accept novelty 5.0 of 10

A single s-channel color-octet resonance cannot raise the high-mass top-quark forward-backward asymmetry above about 26 percent without conflicting with dijet and cross-section data.
Minimal Conformal Technicolor and Precision Electroweak Tests
hep-ph 2010-01 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

The minimal conformal technicolor model gives a good precision electroweak fit for v/f below about 0.25 with roughly 10% fine tuning, even assuming a positive unsuppressed strong-sector S parameter.
Simplified Models for LHC New Physics Searches
hep-ph 2011-05 accept novelty 4.0 of 10

A community workshop produced a standardized catalog of simplified models for LHC new-physics searches, intended to make experimental limits reusable across many theories.

How later papers used it

83 later papers cite it

Evidence: some. 82 of the citing papers share no author with it, and 4 of those carry a confident label from Pith's citation classifier.

Pith read 15 of the 127 citing sentences, choosing only those whose citation markers point at this paper alone, and wrote the paraphrases from them. The summary, the counts, the evidence level, the links and the quotes come from code; the summary counts the papers listed below. A later paper is listed under a label when Pith's citation classifier gives one of its sentences that label at probability 0.8 or more (0.95 for support), Pith's reading finds that the citing paper itself did it, and a second check confirms the paraphrase against the sentence. This section lists uses only. It does not list criticism or disagreement, so their absence here says nothing about how the paper has been received. Papers that share an author with this one are listed apart, under "By the same authors". A quote is the citing authors' own sentence, shown when their paper's licence is CC BY, CC BY-SA or CC0. JSON

1 later paper by other authors is listed below: 1 used its data or values.

Uses its data or values 1 of 2 papers with this label

Used this paper's estimate that the Extended Technicolor dynamical mass contribution is of the order of a few GeV, together with the known top mass, to infer that its model's Topcolor sector must contribute around 170 GeV.

Hypercharge-Universal Topcolor (2007) · 0.99 · paraphrased: the licence does not allow quoting

How the literature uses it

77 arXiv papers cite this in 120 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 · 67 sentences without a confident label

Uses its data or values 2 papers

Here $f_π$ denotes the value of the top-quark condensate which is estimated in the TC2 model to be $f_π∼$ 60 GeV [ref] .

The Top Quark Decay Vertex in Standard Model Extensions · Top-color assisted technicolor and Little Higgs models · 0.97
Since the top mass is known to be $(172.5±2.3) GeV$ [ref] and the dynamical mass contribution coming from Extended Technicolor can be estimated [ref] to be of the order of a few GeV, the Topcolor sector of our model must give a dynamical mass contribution of around $170 GeV$.

Hypercharge-Universal Topcolor · The Gap Triangle · 0.99

Compares with it 2 papers

As described in [ref] [ref] [ref] , the effective Lagrangians for the classic and flavor-universal Topcolor models differ from the one we derive here, due to the alternative fermion charge assignments.

Hypercharge-Universal Topcolor · The Topgluon and $Z'$ Effective Lagrangians · 0.96
This is similar to the instanton effects found in Topcolor theories in Ref. [ref] .

Two Higgs Doublets from Fermion Condensation · A Two-Higgs Doublet from Fermion Condensation · 0.93

Cites it as background 41 papers

The lines represent spin-zero link fields which transform as a fundamental (anti-fundamental) representation of the group at the tail (head) of the link. $Σ_01$ and $Σ_12$ are nonlinear sigma model fields, describing the technicolor/three-site [ref] sector of the theory, while $Φ$ (the top-Higgs doublet) is a linear sigma model field arising from top-color [ref] .

Discovering Strong Top Dynamics at the LHC · The Triangle Moose Model · 0.87
Topcolor assisted technicolor (TC2) [ref] is a dynamical theory of electroweak symmetry breaking that combines the ingredients of technicolor [ref] and top condensation [ref] .

Topcolor in the LHC Era · Introduction · 0.99
Topcolor assisted technicolor (TC2) [ref] is a dynamical theory of electroweak symmetry breaking that combines the ingredients of technicolor [ref] and top condensation [ref] .

LHC Limits on the Top-Higgs in Models with Strong Top-Quark Dynamics · Introduction · 0.99

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]

W. A. Bardeen, C. T. Hill, M. Lindner Phys. Rev. D41, 1647 (1990)

View on Pith 1990

[2] [2]

C. T. Hill, Phys. Rev. D24, 691 (1990); C. T. Hill, C.N. Leung, S. Rao, Nucl. Phys. B262, 517, (1985); J. Bagger, S. Dimopoulous, E. Masso, Phys. Rev. Lett. 55 920 (1985)

View on Pith 1990

[3] [3]

S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. D13, 974 (1976); L. Susskind, Phys. Rev. D20, 2619 (1979); S. Dimopoulos, L. Susskind, Nucl. Phys. B155 237 (1979); E. Eichten, K. Lane, Phys. Lett. 90B 125 (1980)

View on Pith 1976

[4] [4]

C. T. Hill, Phys. Lett. B266 419 (1991); S. P. Martin, Phys. Rev. D46, 2197 (1992); Phys. Rev. D45, 4283 (1992), Nucl. Phys. B398, 359 (1993); M. Lindner and D. Ross, Nucl. Phys. B 370 , 30 (1992); R. B¨ onisch, Phys. Lett. B268 394 (1991); C. T. Hill, D. Kennedy, T. Onogi, H. L. Yu, Phys. Rev. D47 2940 (1993)

View on Pith 1991

[5] [5]

T. Appelquist, M. Einhorn, T. Takeuchi, L. C. R. Wijeward hana, Phys. Lett. B220 223 (1989). T. W. Appelquist, D. Karabali, L.C.R. Wijewardh ana Phys. Rev. Lett. 57, 957 (1986); R. R. Mendel, V. Miransky, Phys. Lett. B268 384 (1991); V. Miransky, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69 1022 (1992); N. Evans, Phys. Lett. B331 378 (1994)

View on Pith 1989

[6] [6]

B. Holdom, Phys. Rev. Lett. 60 1223 (1988); see also [5]

View on Pith 1988

[7] [7]

C. T. Hill, G. G. Ross, Nucl. Phys. B311, 253 (1988); Phys. Lett. , B203, 125 (1988). –14– FERMILAB–Pub–94/395–T

View on Pith 1988

[8] [8]

See, e.g., N. Deshpande in “B-Decays,” ed. S. Stone, Worl d Scientiﬁc, (1992); J. L. Hewett, “Top Ten Models Constrained By b →sγ, SLAC-PUB-6521 (1994); Phys. Rev. Lett. , 70 1045 (1993); V. Barger, M. Berger, R.J.N. Phillips, Phys. Rev. Lett., 70 1368 (1993); B. Grinstein, R. Springer and M. Wise, Nucl. Phys. B339 269 (1990)

View on Pith 1992

[9] [9]

E. Eichten, K. Lane, Phys. Lett. B222 274 (1989); K. Lane, M. Ramana, Phys. Rev. D44, 2678 (1991)

View on Pith 1989

[10] [10]

S. Chivukula, S. Selipsky, E. Simmons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 575 (1992)

View on Pith 1992

[11] [11]

C. T. Hill, Xinmin Zhang, “ Z → bb versus Dynamical Electroweak ymmetry Breaking Involving the Top Quark,” Fermilab-Pub-94/231, hep-ph/9409315, sub- mitted to Phys. Rev. D

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[12] [12]

C. T. Hill, S. J. Parke, Phys. Rev. D49, 4454 (1994). –15– FERMILAB–Pub–94/395–T ﬁeld SU (3)T C1 SU (3)T C2 SU (3)1 SU (3)2 SU (2)L U(1)Y 1 U(1)Y 2 QL 3 1 3 1 1 1 0 QR 3 1 1 3 1 0 1 TL = (T,B )L 1 3 1 1 2 0 13 TR = (T,B )R 1 3 1 1 1 0 ( 43, − 23 ) tL = (t,b )L 1 1 3 1 2 13 0 tR = (t,b )R 1 1 3 1 1 ( 43, − 23) 0 cL = (c,s )L 1 1 1 3 2 13 0 cR = (c,s )R 1 1...

View on Pith 1994