Collapsing domain walls with $\mathbb{Z}_2$-violating coupling to thermalized fermions and their impact on gravitational wave detections

Jiaming Zheng; Qing-Quan Zeng; Xi He; Zhao-Huan Yu

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 1 cited by

Collapsing domain walls with $\mathbb{Z}_2$-violating coupling to thermalized fermions and their impact on gravitational wave detections

T0 review · 3 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A $\mathbb{Z}_2$-violating Yukawa coupling to thermalized fermions can change when cosmic domain walls annihilate, shifting and amplifying the gravitational-wave signal from their collapse.

desk verdict New finite-T bias mechanism for collapsing domain walls, but the paper never examines the sign of the thermal correction, which flips the true and false vacuum labels around T_c. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.10059 v3 pith:C7IFWV7R submitted 2025-01-17 hep-ph astro-ph.COgr-qchep-th

Qing-Quan Zeng , Xi He , Zhao-Huan Yu , Jiaming Zheng This is my paper · ORCID

classification hep-phastro-ph.COgr-qchep-th PACS 04.30.-w98.80.Cq11.30.Qc

keywords domainwallsstochasticgravitationalwavebackgroundthermaleffectivepotentialZ2symmetryYukawacouplingvacuumbiasdetection

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 studies domain walls formed when an approximate $\mathbb{Z}_2$ symmetry of a real scalar is spontaneously broken, with the symmetry also broken explicitly by a small $\phi^3$ term and by a Yukawa coupling to a Dirac fermion in the thermal bath. It argues that thermal corrections make the vacuum-energy bias between the two vacua temperature-dependent, so the annihilation temperature of the wall network can shift relative to the usual temperature-independent bias case. The authors compute the wall tension, the bias pressure, and fermion friction, and feed the resulting annihilation temperature into the standard stochastic-gravitational-wave-background estimate. For their benchmark parameter sets the shift changes the peak GW amplitude by orders of magnitude; in BP3 the peak rises from $1.14\times10^{-11}$ to $6.82\times10^{-8}$, moving the signal within reach of future ground-based interferometers. The paper also checks that the results are stable under renormalization-scale variation.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the thermally corrected effective potential $V(\phi,T)=V_0(\phi)+V_{\rm CW}(\phi)+V_T(\phi,T)$, whose $\mathbb{Z}_2$-violating Yukawa coupling $y$ enters through the field-dependent fermion mass $M_f(\phi)=m_f+y\phi$. The bias $V_{\rm bias}(T)$ between the two minima produces a pressure $p_V\sim V_{\rm bias}$ that competes with the wall tension pressure $p_T\sim \sigma_{\rm DW}/t$ and the fermion friction $F_f$; the network annihilates when $p_V+F_f\simeq p_T$. The thermal contribution makes $p_V\propto T^2$ at high temperature, parallel to $p_T$ in the radiation era, which is why small changes in $y$ and $m_f$ translate into sizeable shifts of the intersection point $T_{\rm ann}$. The Coleman-Weinberg term provides a temperature-independent shift of the bias, and the paper verifies that the combined bias is nearly invariant under renormalization-scale changes.

What would settle it

A hertz-band search with future ground-based interferometers at the sensitivity needed to see $\Omega_{\rm GW}h^2\sim6.8\times10^{-8}$ near $f\sim2$ Hz would settle BP3: a null result rules out that parameter set, while a lattice simulation with the same Yukawa coupling and thermal bath would test whether the wall network actually annihilates at the predicted $T_{\rm ann}$.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a thermalized fermion species with a $\mathbb{Z}_2$-violating Yukawa coupling to the domain-wall scalar sources a temperature-dependent bias $V_{\rm bias}(T)=V(\phi_-,T)-V(\phi_+,T)$ between false and true vacua, and that this bias, not just the zero-temperature Coleman-Weinberg contribution, controls the annihilation temperature $T_{\rm ann}$ when the wall network collapses. Because the thermal part of the bias grows like $y v_\phi m_f T^2$ at intermediate temperatures, the collapse pressure $p_V\sim V_{\rm bias}$ scales with $T^2$ in parallel with the wall tension force $p_T$, making the crossing point $p_V+F_f=p_T$ (the annihilation condition) sensitive to the Yukawa parameters. The authors show that including the fermion can lower or raise $T_{\rm ann}$ depending on parameters, and because the GW peak frequency scales with $H(T_{\rm ann})$ while the peak amplitude scales roughly as $T_{\rm ann}^{-4}$ in a radiation-dominated era, a later collapse can boost the peak amplitude by several orders of magnitude. In benchmark BP3 the peak amplitude increases by a factor $\sim 6\times10^3$, from $1.14\times10^{-11}$ to $6.82\times10^{-8}$, turning an undetectable spectrum into one that future ground-based detectors could see.

Load-bearing premise

The analysis assumes the fermion $f$ and scalar $\phi$ are thermally populated in the early Universe through efficient (but unspecified) interactions with the Standard Model bath; if they never reach equilibrium, the temperature-dependent bias that drives the effect disappears.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

For BP1, including the fermion lowers $T_{\rm ann}$ by a factor of about 3.2 and raises the peak GW amplitude by two orders of magnitude, bringing the signal closer to future space-borne interferometers.
For BP2, the fermion raises $T_{\rm ann}$ by a factor of about 3.9 and reduces the peak amplitude by two orders of magnitude; both versions of the spectrum sit in the nanohertz band probed by pulsar timing arrays.
For BP3, $T_{\rm ann}$ drops by an order of magnitude and the peak amplitude rises from $1.14\times10^{-11}$ to $6.82\times10^{-8}$ at $f_{\rm peak}\simeq1.97$ Hz, making the spectrum potentially detectable by future ground-based detectors.
Varying the VEV $v_\phi$ while keeping ratios fixed shows that larger $v_\phi$ increases the peak amplitude; for small $v_\phi$ the thermal bias can make walls collapse before reaching the scaling regime, suppressing GW emission.
The relative deviation of $T_{\rm ann}$ and peak frequency under renormalization-scale changes from $v_\phi/2$ to $2v_\phi$ is below 6% and the peak-amplitude deviation is within 20%, so the prediction is robust at the one-loop level.

Reading between the lines

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

Editorial extension: the same thermal-bias mechanism could apply to axion-like domain walls with a Yukawa coupling to hot fermions, shifting the wall-collapse epoch relative to the pure QCD-bias case and changing the interpretation of nanohertz backgrounds reported by pulsar timing arrays.
Editorial extension: the equilibrium assumption is the main environmental condition; a concrete ultraviolet completion that gives the fermion a Standard-Model interaction would allow the calculation to be applied to specific models and the predicted $T_{\rm ann}$ shift to be checked.
Editorial extension: a lattice simulation of the wall network with a Yukawa-coupled fermion bath could test the analytic friction and bias treatment, in particular whether the wall velocity stays near $v_{\rm DW}\simeq0.3$ and whether the scaling-regime assumption holds when the thermal bias is comparable to the tension force.
Editorial extension: the $T^2$ scaling of the thermal bias means detectors in different frequency bands probe different slices of Yukawa-coupling parameter space, so a multi-band search could jointly constrain this class of models if no signal is found.

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

Dear colleague,

You should know one thing about this paper: it adds a genuinely new temperature-dependent bias to domain-wall cosmology, but it never checks the sign of that bias. For the parameters chosen (y > 0, m_f > 0), the high-temperature fermion correction raises the phi_+ minimum relative to phi_-, opposite to the tree and Coleman-Weinberg terms. Since the thermal piece dominates near T_c, the true and false vacua swap at some intermediate temperature. The paper defines V_bias in Eq. (9) with phi_- as false and asserts 0.311 < p_- <= 0.5 after Eq. (10), but it never shows V_bias(T) or T_*. That is the soft spot that makes the CONDITIONAL verdict about right.

What is actually new: previous biased-DW studies used a temperature-independent bias; Ref. [40] added only the CW correction. The finite-T effective potential from a Z2-violating Yukawa is a real new ingredient. The machinery is standard, the tension and friction computations are careful, the renormalization-scale check in Sec. V is a plus, and the BP3 factor-of-10 shift in T_ann with a four-order-of-magnitude change in peak amplitude shows the mechanism can matter. That is worth taking seriously.

The sign problem matters because the evolution of the wall network before the low-T regime is not captured by assuming a single false vacuum. If V_bias is negative at high T, the pressure direction in Eq. (19) is backwards for that epoch. The network may still form and collapse at roughly the same late T_ann, but the paper needs to demonstrate that. The authors' own criterion |y v| m_f M_P vs sigma_DW puts BP3 close to the edge of immediate collapse, which makes the omission more than cosmetic. They should also say how the f and phi get into the bath, since the central effect vanishes if they don't. No code or data is shipped, and the GW amplitude rests on unpropagated simulation constants, but those are minor.

This paper is not a desk reject. The mechanism is plausible, the numbers are reproducible in principle, and a serious referee can push the authors to display V_bias(T), locate T_*, and either show the sign flip is harmless or redo the late-time evolution with the correct vacuum labels. I'd send it to review.

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. This paper studies domain walls formed by spontaneous breaking of an approximate Z2 symmetry in a real scalar field, with the scalar coupled to a Dirac fermion through a Z2-violating Yukawa term. The authors compute the one-loop Coleman-Weinberg and finite-temperature contributions to the effective potential, define the temperature-dependent bias V_bias(T) between the two minima, and use it to determine the wall pressure, friction, annihilation temperature T_ann, and the resulting stochastic gravitational-wave background. Three benchmark points are studied with and without the fermion. The central claim is that the thermal correction from the fermion changes T_ann and can greatly enhance the peak GW amplitude; for BP3, the peak amplitude is claimed to rise from 1.14e-11 to 6.82e-8, bringing the signal within reach of Cosmic Explorer. The paper also checks the renormalization-scale dependence of T_ann and the GW spectrum.

Significance. The idea that a Z2-violating Yukawa coupling to thermalized fermions can generate a temperature-dependent vacuum bias is interesting and, if correct, would be a useful addition to the domain-wall GW literature. The paper is self-contained: it derives the effective potential, solves the wall profile, computes the tension and pressure, estimates the friction, and gives explicit benchmark predictions with sensitivity curves. The renormalization-scale check in Sec. V is a genuine strength and shows that the zero-temperature one-loop bias is reasonably scale-stable. However, the central quantitative claim is undermined by a sign problem in the finite-temperature correction, discussed below, which affects all three benchmark points and the derived GW spectra. The paper is therefore not publishable in its present form, but the framework is repairable.

major comments (3)

[Sec. II, Eqs. (7)-(9); Sec. III, Eqs. (18)-(19); Table II] The sign of the finite-temperature fermion correction is opposite to the direction assumed in the paper. Expanding Eq. (7) for M_f(phi)/T << 1 gives V_T^F(phi,T) ≈ -7π^4 T^4/360 + M_f^2(phi) T^2/24 + ..., so V_T(phi_-) - V_T(phi_+) ≈ -(M_+^2 - M_-^2) T^2/24. With the benchmark choices y>0 and m_f>0, M_+ = m_f + y v_phi is larger than M_- = m_f - y v_phi, so the thermal correction is negative and favors phi_-, whereas the tree-level cubic term and the fermion Coleman-Weinberg term favor phi_+. For BP3, M_+ ≈ 1.05e8 GeV, M_- ≈ 1.5e7 GeV, and near T_c ≈ 2 v_phi ≈ 3e11 GeV the thermal contribution to V_bias is approximately -4e37 GeV^4, while the tree-level bias is only of order 1e32 GeV^4. Thus at nucleation the global minimum is phi_-, not phi_+; the labels true/false in Eq. (9) are reversed at high temperature. Since Eq. (18) uses V_bias as a positive pressure that shrinks the false vacuum and Eq. (19) determines T_ann from that pressure, the values in Table II and the GW spectra in Fig. 5 are not supported unless V_bias(T) is shown and the temperature at which the labels switch is identified. The paper never displays V_bias(T) or the switching temperature, and its statement that p_- satisfies 0.311 < p_- ≤ 0.5 is inconsistent with phi_- being the lower minimum near T_c, which would give p_- > 0.5.
[Sec. III after Eq. (10)] The numerical verification '0.311 < p_- ≤ 0.5' is not substantiated. Because of the sign issue in Eq. (7), near T_c the lower minimum is phi_- rather than phi_+, so Eq. (10) should give p_- > 0.5 unless the free-energy difference is computed with the opposite labeling. The paper does not show p_- as a function of T, nor the percolation fraction of the phase that is actually at higher energy. This is not a presentation detail: the percolation threshold in Eq. (10) must be applied to the high-energy phase, and if the high-energy phase is subdominant the scale-invariant DW network assumed for the GW estimate may not form in the way described. The authors should identify the true and false minima at each temperature, present V_bias(T) and p_-(T), and treat the pressure reversal at the temperature where V_bias changes sign.
[Sec. II, before Eq. (7)] The central effect requires the fermion f to be in the thermal bath, but no coupling of f (or phi) to the Standard Model is specified. The sentence 'We assume that the f fermions and the phi scalar bosons are thermally produced in the early Universe, which is the case if they interact efficiently with SM particles' is an assumption, not a model ingredient. If the fermions are not actually in the bath at T ~ T_c, the temperature-dependent bias that drives the paper's main result vanishes. The authors should either specify a minimal coupling that realizes the thermal bath and estimate the thermalization rate Gamma vs H(T) around T_c, or explicitly frame the calculation as conditional on that assumption in the conclusions.

minor comments (3)

[Sec. VI, Summary] The summary states that the renormalization scale is varied to 'v_phi/2 and v_phi', but Sec. V and Table III use v_phi/2 and 2 v_phi; the summary should be corrected.
[Fig. 1 and Sec. III] Because the potential bias is extremely small on the scale of the plot, the curves in Fig. 1 look symmetric and the reader cannot tell which minimum is lower. Adding an inset or a color-coded marker showing the true minimum at each temperature would make the labeling in Eq. (9) transparent.
[Table I and Table II] The notation 'BPnw/of' is hard to read; 'BPn w/o f' is clearer and should be used consistently, including in the table headings.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the central thermal bias and gravitational-wave spectra follow from stated model inputs and standard finite-temperature / Coleman-Weinberg effective potentials, with no fitted input renamed as a prediction.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained: Eq. (8) combines the tree-level potential, the Coleman-Weinberg potential (4), and the standard finite-temperature potential (7); the potential bias in Eq. (9) is then used in Eq. (18) to define the collapse pressure, Eq. (19) fixes T_ann, and Eqs. (28)-(31) convert T_ann into the SGWB spectrum. The benchmark parameters in Table I are declared inputs, not fits to external data, and the resulting numbers in Table II are direct evaluations of these formulas. The only self-citation, Ref. [40], is used in the Introduction to recall that rare coupled particles contribute through radiative corrections; it is not load-bearing for the paper's central thermal effect, which is derived independently from the standard finite-temperature effective potential. The numerical assertion after Eq. (10) that 0.311 < p_- <= 0.5 is presented as a consistency check of the chosen benchmarks rather than as a derived prediction that presupposes the final GW result. The renormalization-scale study in Sec. V is an independent robustness check based on the RGE, not an input-output tautology. Any concern about the sign of the fermionic thermal contribution to V_bias is a physical consistency or correctness question, not a circularity of the derivation.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 2 invented entities

The central calculation rests on five free model parameters chosen by hand for the benchmark points, on standard finite-temperature effective potential formulas, and on simulation-derived constants for GW emission. No new entity is introduced beyond the toy-model scalar and fermion fields, and neither has an independent falsifiable handle outside the model.

free parameters (5)

mu3 (tree-level Z2-violating cubic coupling) = BP1: -1e-17 vphi; BP2: -1e-27 vphi; BP3: -3.645e-13 vphi
Sets the tree-level vacuum energy bias that drives DW collapse; values chosen so the thermal and quantum corrections can compete and put GW peaks in target bands.
lambda_phi (scalar quartic) = 0.1 (all BPs)
Sets the DW tension scale and the wall thickness; chosen as a representative weakly coupled value.
y (Z2-violating Yukawa coupling) = BP1: 4.65e-5; BP2: 2.5e-8; BP3: 3e-4
Controls the size of the fermion-induced quantum and thermal corrections to V_bias; tuned so the effect is neither negligible nor so large that walls collapse immediately.
mf (fermion mass parameter) = BP1: 4e-5 vphi; BP2: 5e-7 vphi; BP3: 4e-4 vphi
Together with y sets the temperature range over which the thermal correction is active; chosen to keep the new physics in the GeV to 10^11 GeV window.
vphi (scalar VEV) = BP1: 3e9 GeV; BP2: 6e4 GeV; BP3: 1.5e11 GeV
Sets the mass scale and hence the GW peak frequency band (LISA, PTA, ground-based); varied in Fig. 6.

assumptions (6)

standard math One-loop Coleman-Weinberg and finite-temperature effective potentials are adequate for the model (Eqs. (4) and (7)).
The paper uses the standard MS-bar effective potential including fermionic and scalar thermal functions; higher-order and daisy corrections are not included.
domain assumption The f fermions and phi scalars are thermally populated because they interact efficiently with SM particles.
Invoked in Sec. II before Eq. (7); if this fails the thermal bias vanishes.
domain assumption The DW network reaches the scaling regime with A=0.8 before annihilation.
Used in Eq. (15) and throughout Sec. III; taken from field-theoretic simulations Ref. [36].
domain assumption The GW peak amplitude formula with epsilon_GW=0.7 and the f^3, f^-1 spectral shape from simulations apply.
Used in Eqs. (29)-(31); simulation-derived and not re-derived here.
domain assumption Wall velocity v_DW=0.3 is representative for friction estimates.
Assumed after Fig. 3; friction is found negligible for the BPs.
domain assumption Reflection probability for fermions off the wall is approximated by a step potential.
Eq. (23); the paper notes the actual reflectivity is lower, but friction is subdominant.

invented entities (2)

Real scalar field phi (beyond SM)
purpose: Forms the domain walls via spontaneous breaking of an approximate Z2 symmetry.
No direct signature is predicted; it appears only through the toy-model potential and DW dynamics.
Dirac fermion f (beyond SM)
purpose: Couples to phi through a Z2-violating Yukawa term that sources the quantum and thermal corrections to the vacuum bias.
No mass or coupling is predicted from first principles; the fermion is a model input whose only observable consequence is the modified GW spectrum.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Collapsing domain walls with $\mathbb{Z}_2$-violating coupling to thermalized fermions and their impact on gravitational wave detections." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/C7IFWV7R

@misc{pith2026250110059,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Collapsing domain walls with $\mathbbZ_2$-violating coupling to thermalized fermions and their impact on gravitational wave detections},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/C7IFWV7R}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.10059}
}

abstract

We study the dynamics of domain walls formed through the spontaneous breaking of an approximate $\mathbb{Z}_2$ symmetry in a scalar field, focusing on their collapse under the influence of quantum and thermal corrections induced by a $\mathbb{Z}_2$-violating Yukawa coupling to Dirac fermions in the thermal bath. The thermal effects make the potential bias between the true and false vacua dependent on the temperature and may lead to notable variations in the annihilation temperature of domain walls, in addition to the shift caused by temperature-independent quantum corrections. These modifications could substantially alter the gravitational wave spectrum produced by collapsing domain walls, potentially providing observable signatures for future gravitational wave detection experiments.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.10059 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** FIG. 2. DW tension varying with temperature. The solid red line and dashed blue line correspond to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** FIG. 3. Friction force per unit area [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (3 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_4.png]

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5. SGWB spectra induced by the DWs for the three BPs with (red lines) and without (blue lines) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_5.png]

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: FIG. 6 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

Gravitational waves from seesaw assisted collapsing domain walls
hep-ph 2025-12 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Right-handed-neutrino couplings generate the energy bias that collapses Z2 domain walls, linking the type-I seesaw mass scale to observable gravitational-wave peaks and to resonant leptogenesis.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

59 extracted references · 15 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[40]

Nano-Hertz gravitational waves from collapsing domain walls associated with freeze-in dark matter in light of pulsar timing array observations,

Z. Zhang, C. Cai, Y.-H. Su, S. Wang, Z.-H. Yu, and H.-H. Zhang, “Nano-Hertz gravitational waves from collapsing domain walls associated with freeze-in dark matter in light of pulsar timing array observations,”Phys. Rev. D108(2023) 095037,arXiv:2307.11495 [hep-ph]

arXiv 2023
[3]

Cosmological Backgrounds of Gravitational Waves,

C. Caprini and D. G. Figueroa, “Cosmological Backgrounds of Gravitational Waves,”Class. Quant. Grav.35(2018) 163001,arXiv:1801.04268 [astro-ph.CO]

arXiv 2018
[4]

Stochastic Gravitational-Wave Backgrounds: Current Detection Efforts and Future Prospects,

A. I. Renzini, B. Goncharov, A. C. Jenkins, and P. M. Meyers, “Stochastic Gravitational-Wave Backgrounds: Current Detection Efforts and Future Prospects,”Galaxies10(2022) 34, arXiv:2202.00178 [gr-qc]. [5]KAGRA, LIGO Scientific, Virgo, VIRGOCollaboration, B. P. Abbottet al., “Prospects for observing and localizing gravitational-wave transients with Advance...

arXiv 2022
[8]

European Pulsar Timing Array Limits On An Isotropic Stochastic Gravitational-Wave Background,

L. Lentatiet al., “European Pulsar Timing Array Limits On An Isotropic Stochastic Gravitational-Wave Background,”Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.453(2015) 2576–2598, arXiv:1504.03692 [astro-ph.CO]

arXiv 2015
[9]

Gravitational waves from binary supermassive black holes missing in pulsar observations,

R. M. Shannonet al., “Gravitational waves from binary supermassive black holes missing in pulsar observations,”Science349(2015) 1522–1525,arXiv:1509.07320 [astro-ph.CO]

arXiv 2015
[10]

The international pulsar timing array project: using pulsars as a gravitational wave detector,

G. Hobbset al., “The international pulsar timing array project: using pulsars as a gravitational wave detector,”Class. Quant. Grav.27(2010) 084013,arXiv:0911.5206 [astro-ph.SR]

arXiv 2010
[11]

Gravitational wave astronomy with the SKA,

G. Janssenet al., “Gravitational wave astronomy with the SKA,”PoSAASKA14(2015) 037, arXiv:1501.00127 [astro-ph.IM]. [12]LISACollaboration, P. Amaro-Seoaneet al., “Laser Interferometer Space Antenna,” arXiv:1702.00786 [astro-ph.IM]

arXiv 2015
[13]

Taiji program: Gravitational-wave sources,

W.-H. Ruan, Z.-K. Guo, R.-G. Cai, and Y.-Z. Zhang, “Taiji program: Gravitational-wave sources,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. A35(2020) 2050075,arXiv:1807.09495 [gr-qc]

arXiv 2020

Show all 59 references

[14]

Science with the TianQin Observatory: Preliminary results on stochastic gravitational-wave background,

Z.-C. Liang, Y.-M. Hu, Y. Jiang, J. Cheng, J.-d. Zhang, and J. Mei, “Science with the TianQin Observatory: Preliminary results on stochastic gravitational-wave background,”Phys. Rev. D105 (2022) 022001,arXiv:2107.08643 [astro-ph.CO]. [15]NANOGravCollaboration, G. Agazieet al.,...

2022 arXiv
[17]

Search for an Isotropic Gravitational-wave Background with the Parkes Pulsar Timing Array,

D. J. Reardonet al., “Search for an Isotropic Gravitational-wave Background with the Parkes Pulsar Timing Array,”Astrophys. J. Lett.951(2023) L6,arXiv:2306.16215 [astro-ph.HE]

2023 arXiv
[18]

Searching for the Nano-Hertz Stochastic Gravitational Wave Background with the Chinese Pulsar Timing Array Data Release I,

H. Xuet al., “Searching for the Nano-Hertz Stochastic Gravitational Wave Background with the Chinese Pulsar Timing Array Data Release I,”Res. Astron. Astrophys.23(2023) 075024, arXiv:2306.16216 [astro-ph.HE]. [19]NANOGravCollaboration, A. Afzalet al., “The NANOGrav 15 yr Data ...

2023 arXiv
[21]

Topology of Cosmic Domains and Strings,

T. W. B. Kibble, “Topology of Cosmic Domains and Strings,”J. Phys. A9(1976) 1387–1398

1976
[22]

Gravitational Field of Vacuum Domain Walls and Strings,

A. Vilenkin, “Gravitational Field of Vacuum Domain Walls and Strings,”Phys. Rev. D23(1981) 852–857

1981
[23]

Lectures on cosmic topological defects,

T. Vachaspati, “Lectures on cosmic topological defects,”ICTP Lect. Notes Ser.4(2001) 165–202, arXiv:hep-ph/0101270

2001 arXiv
[24]

Vilenkin and E

A. Vilenkin and E. P. S. Shellard,Cosmic Strings and Other Topological Defects. Cambridge University Press, 7, 2000

2000
[25]

Cosmological Consequences of the Spontaneous Breakdown of Discrete Symmetry,

Y. B. Zeldovich, I. Y. Kobzarev, and L. B. Okun, “Cosmological Consequences of the Spontaneous Breakdown of Discrete Symmetry,”Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz.67(1974) 3–11

1974
[26]

Dynamical Evolution of Domain Walls in an Expanding Universe,

W. H. Press, B. S. Ryden, and D. N. Spergel, “Dynamical Evolution of Domain Walls in an Expanding Universe,”Astrophys. J.347(1989) 590–604

1989
[27]

Wormholes and Global Symmetries,

L. F. Abbott and M. B. Wise, “Wormholes and Global Symmetries,”Nucl. Phys. B325(1989) 687–704

1989
[28]

Wormholes made without massless matter fields,

S. R. Coleman and K.-M. Lee, “Wormholes made without massless matter fields,”Nucl. Phys. B 329(1990) 387–409

1990
[29]

Gravitational Waves from Collapsing Domain Walls,

T. Hiramatsu, M. Kawasaki, and K. Saikawa, “Gravitational Waves from Collapsing Domain Walls,”JCAP05(2010) 032,arXiv:1002.1555 [astro-ph.CO]

2010 arXiv
[30]

Study of gravitational radiation from cosmic domain walls,

M. Kawasaki and K. Saikawa, “Study of gravitational radiation from cosmic domain walls,”JCAP 09(2011) 008,arXiv:1102.5628 [astro-ph.CO]

2011 arXiv
[31]

Cosmology of Biased Discrete Symmetry Breaking,

G. B. Gelmini, M. Gleiser, and E. W. Kolb, “Cosmology of Biased Discrete Symmetry Breaking,” Phys. Rev. D39(1989) 1558

1989
[32]

Gravitational waves from domain walls in the next-to-minimal supersymmetric standard model,

K. Kadota, M. Kawasaki, and K. Saikawa, “Gravitational waves from domain walls in the next-to-minimal supersymmetric standard model,”JCAP10(2015) 041,arXiv:1503.06998 [hep-ph]

2015 arXiv
[33]

Probing left-right symmetry via gravitational waves from domain walls,

D. Borah and A. Dasgupta, “Probing left-right symmetry via gravitational waves from domain walls,”Phys. Rev. D106(2022) 035016,arXiv:2205.12220 [hep-ph]

2022 arXiv
[34]

Biased domain walls,

D. Coulson, Z. Lalak, and B. A. Ovrut, “Biased domain walls,”Phys. Rev. D53(1996) 4237–4246

1996
[35]

Gravitational waves from collapsing vacuum domains,

M. Gleiser and R. Roberts, “Gravitational waves from collapsing vacuum domains,”Phys. Rev. Lett.81(1998) 5497–5500,arXiv:astro-ph/9807260

1998 arXiv
[36]

On the estimation of gravitational wave spectrum from cosmic domain walls,

T. Hiramatsu, M. Kawasaki, and K. Saikawa, “On the estimation of gravitational wave spectrum from cosmic domain walls,”JCAP02(2014) 031,arXiv:1309.5001 [astro-ph.CO]

2014 arXiv
[37]

Gravitational waves from domain walls and their 22 implications,

K. Nakayama, F. Takahashi, and N. Yokozaki, “Gravitational waves from domain walls and their 22 implications,”Phys. Lett. B770(2017) 500–506,arXiv:1612.08327 [hep-ph]

2017 arXiv
[38]

A review of gravitational waves from cosmic domain walls,

K. Saikawa, “A review of gravitational waves from cosmic domain walls,”Universe3(2017) 40, arXiv:1703.02576 [hep-ph]

2017 arXiv
[39]

Gravitational wave signatures from discrete flavor symmetries,

G. B. Gelmini, S. Pascoli, E. Vitagliano, and Y.-L. Zhou, “Gravitational wave signatures from discrete flavor symmetries,”JCAP02(2021) 032,arXiv:2009.01903 [hep-ph]

2021 arXiv
[41]

Holes in the walls: Primordial black holes as a solution to the cosmological domain wall problem,

D. Stojkovic, K. Freese, and G. D. Starkman, “Holes in the walls: Primordial black holes as a solution to the cosmological domain wall problem,”Phys. Rev. D72(2005) 045012, arXiv:hep-ph/0505026

2005 arXiv
[42]

GUTs, hybrid topological defects, and gravitational waves,

D. I. Dunsky, A. Ghoshal, H. Murayama, Y. Sakakihara, and G. White, “GUTs, hybrid topological defects, and gravitational waves,”Phys. Rev. D106(2022) 075030,arXiv:2111.08750 [hep-ph]

2022 arXiv
[43]

Axion Models with No Domain Wall Problem,

G. Lazarides and Q. Shafi, “Axion Models with No Domain Wall Problem,”Phys. Lett. B115 (1982) 21–25

1982
[44]

Radiative Corrections as the Origin of Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking,

S. R. Coleman and E. J. Weinberg, “Radiative Corrections as the Origin of Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking,”Phys. Rev. D7(1973) 1888–1910

1973
[45]

Dynamics of Non-renormalizable Electroweak Symmetry Breaking,

C. Delaunay, C. Grojean, and J. D. Wells, “Dynamics of Non-renormalizable Electroweak Symmetry Breaking,”JHEP04(2008) 029,arXiv:0711.2511 [hep-ph]

2008 arXiv
[46]

Finite temperature field theory and phase transitions,

M. Quiros, “Finite temperature field theory and phase transitions,” inICTP Summer School in High-Energy Physics and Cosmology, pp. 187–259. 1, 1999,arXiv:hep-ph/9901312

1999 arXiv
[47]

Consistent Use of Effective Potentials,

A. Andreassen, W. Frost, and M. D. Schwartz, “Consistent Use of Effective Potentials,”Phys. Rev. D91(2015) 016009,arXiv:1408.0287 [hep-ph]

2015 arXiv
[48]

Scaling theory of percolation clusters,

D. Stauffer, “Scaling theory of percolation clusters,”Phys. Rept.54(1979) 1–74

1979
[49]

Analytic scaling solutions for cosmic domain walls,

M. Hindmarsh, “Analytic scaling solutions for cosmic domain walls,”Phys. Rev. Lett.77(1996) 4495–4498,arXiv:hep-ph/9605332

1996 arXiv
[50]

Level set method for the evolution of defect and brane networks,

M. Hindmarsh, “Level set method for the evolution of defect and brane networks,”Phys. Rev. D 68(2003) 043510,arXiv:hep-ph/0207267

2003 arXiv
[51]

Scaling in numerical simulations of domain walls,

T. Garagounis and M. Hindmarsh, “Scaling in numerical simulations of domain walls,”Phys. Rev. D68(2003) 103506,arXiv:hep-ph/0212359

2003 arXiv
[52]

Review of particle physics,

E. W. Kolb and M. S. Turner,The Early Universe, vol. 69. Taylor and Francis, 5, 1990. [53]Particle Data GroupCollaboration, S. Navaset al., “Review of particle physics,”Phys. Rev. D 110(2024) 030001

2024
[53]

Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Black Hole Merger,

and we adoptg ∗(Tann ≳100 GeV)≃100 andg ∗(T0) = 3.36. Furthermore, causality implies Ω GW ∝f 3 forf < fpeak [65, 66], while numerical simulations suggest Ω GW ∝f −1 for 14 10 10 10 8 10 6 10 4 10 2 100 102 104 Frequency[Hz] 10 16 10 14 10 12 10 10 10 8 10 6 10 4 10 2 100 ΩGWh ...

2016 arXiv
[54]

Baumann,Cosmology

D. Baumann,Cosmology. Cambridge University Press, 7, 2022

2022
[55]

Friction on ALP domain walls and gravitational waves,

S. Blasi, A. Mariotti, A. Rase, A. Sevrin, and K. Turbang, “Friction on ALP domain walls and gravitational waves,”JCAP04(2023) 008,arXiv:2210.14246 [hep-ph]

2023 arXiv
[56]

Axionic domain walls at Pulsar Timing Arrays: QCD bias and particle friction,

S. Blasi, A. Mariotti, A. Rase, and A. Sevrin, “Axionic domain walls at Pulsar Timing Arrays: QCD bias and particle friction,”JHEP11(2023) 169,arXiv:2306.17830 [hep-ph]

2023 arXiv
[57]

Evolution of Domain Walls in the Early Universe,

L. Kawano, “Evolution of Domain Walls in the Early Universe,”Phys. Rev. D41(1990) 1013

1990
[58]

One-scale model for domain wall network evolution,

P. P. Avelino, C. J. A. P. Martins, and J. C. R. E. Oliveira, “One-scale model for domain wall network evolution,”Phys. Rev. D72(2005) 083506,arXiv:hep-ph/0507272

2005 arXiv
[59]

Axion cosmology with long-lived domain walls,

T. Hiramatsu, M. Kawasaki, K. Saikawa, and T. Sekiguchi, “Axion cosmology with long-lived domain walls,”JCAP01(2013) 001,arXiv:1207.3166 [hep-ph]

2013 arXiv
[60]

Maggiore,Gravitational Waves

M. Maggiore,Gravitational Waves. Vol. 1: Theory and Experiments. Oxford University Press, 2007

2007
[61]

Gravitational waves from domain wall 23 collapse, and application to nanohertz signals with QCD-coupled axions,

N. Kitajima, J. Lee, K. Murai, F. Takahashi, and W. Yin, “Gravitational waves from domain wall 23 collapse, and application to nanohertz signals with QCD-coupled axions,”Phys. Lett. B851 (2024) 138586,arXiv:2306.17146 [hep-ph]

2024 arXiv
[62]

Stability of domain walls with inflationary fluctuations under potential bias, and gravitational wave signatures,

N. Kitajima, J. Lee, F. Takahashi, and W. Yin, “Stability of domain walls with inflationary fluctuations under potential bias, and gravitational wave signatures,”arXiv:2311.14590 [hep-ph]

arXiv
[63]

Gravitational waves from domain walls in Pulsar Timing Array datasets,

R. Z. Ferreira, A. Notari, O. Pujolas, and F. Rompineve, “Gravitational waves from domain walls in Pulsar Timing Array datasets,”JCAP02(2023) 001,arXiv:2204.04228 [astro-ph.CO]

2023 arXiv
[64]

Detecting gravitational waves from cosmological phase transitions with LISA: an update,

C. Capriniet al., “Detecting gravitational waves from cosmological phase transitions with LISA: an update,”JCAP03(2020) 024,arXiv:1910.13125 [astro-ph.CO]

2020 arXiv
[65]

General Properties of the Gravitational Wave Spectrum from Phase Transitions,

C. Caprini, R. Durrer, T. Konstandin, and G. Servant, “General Properties of the Gravitational Wave Spectrum from Phase Transitions,”Phys. Rev. D79(2009) 083519,arXiv:0901.1661 [astro-ph.CO]

2009 arXiv
[66]

Universal infrared scaling of gravitational wave background spectra,

R.-G. Cai, S. Pi, and M. Sasaki, “Universal infrared scaling of gravitational wave background spectra,”Phys. Rev. D102(2020) 083528,arXiv:1909.13728 [astro-ph.CO]

2020 arXiv
[67]

Axionic defects in the CMB: birefringence and gravitational waves,

R. Z. Ferreira, S. Gasparotto, T. Hiramatsu, I. Obata, and O. Pujolas, “Axionic defects in the CMB: birefringence and gravitational waves,”JCAP05(2024) 066,arXiv:2312.14104 [hep-ph]

2024 arXiv
[68]

Revisiting evolution of domain walls and their gravitational radiation with CosmoLattice,

I. Dankovsky, E. Babichev, D. Gorbunov, S. Ramazanov, and A. Vikman, “Revisiting evolution of domain walls and their gravitational radiation with CosmoLattice,”JCAP09(2024) 047, arXiv:2406.17053 [astro-ph.CO]

2024 arXiv
[69]

Renormalization Group Improvement of the Effective Potential: an EFT Approach,

A. V. Manohar and E. Nardoni, “Renormalization Group Improvement of the Effective Potential: an EFT Approach,”JHEP04(2021) 093,arXiv:2010.15806 [hep-ph]

2021 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [40]

Nano-Hertz gravitational waves from collapsing domain walls associated with freeze-in dark matter in light of pulsar timing array observations,

Z. Zhang, C. Cai, Y.-H. Su, S. Wang, Z.-H. Yu, and H.-H. Zhang, “Nano-Hertz gravitational waves from collapsing domain walls associated with freeze-in dark matter in light of pulsar timing array observations,”Phys. Rev. D108(2023) 095037,arXiv:2307.11495 [hep-ph]

arXiv 2023

[2] [3]

Cosmological Backgrounds of Gravitational Waves,

C. Caprini and D. G. Figueroa, “Cosmological Backgrounds of Gravitational Waves,”Class. Quant. Grav.35(2018) 163001,arXiv:1801.04268 [astro-ph.CO]

arXiv 2018

[3] [4]

Stochastic Gravitational-Wave Backgrounds: Current Detection Efforts and Future Prospects,

A. I. Renzini, B. Goncharov, A. C. Jenkins, and P. M. Meyers, “Stochastic Gravitational-Wave Backgrounds: Current Detection Efforts and Future Prospects,”Galaxies10(2022) 34, arXiv:2202.00178 [gr-qc]. [5]KAGRA, LIGO Scientific, Virgo, VIRGOCollaboration, B. P. Abbottet al., “Prospects for observing and localizing gravitational-wave transients with Advance...

arXiv 2022

[4] [8]

European Pulsar Timing Array Limits On An Isotropic Stochastic Gravitational-Wave Background,

L. Lentatiet al., “European Pulsar Timing Array Limits On An Isotropic Stochastic Gravitational-Wave Background,”Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.453(2015) 2576–2598, arXiv:1504.03692 [astro-ph.CO]

arXiv 2015

[5] [9]

Gravitational waves from binary supermassive black holes missing in pulsar observations,

R. M. Shannonet al., “Gravitational waves from binary supermassive black holes missing in pulsar observations,”Science349(2015) 1522–1525,arXiv:1509.07320 [astro-ph.CO]

arXiv 2015

[6] [10]

The international pulsar timing array project: using pulsars as a gravitational wave detector,

G. Hobbset al., “The international pulsar timing array project: using pulsars as a gravitational wave detector,”Class. Quant. Grav.27(2010) 084013,arXiv:0911.5206 [astro-ph.SR]

arXiv 2010

[7] [11]

Gravitational wave astronomy with the SKA,

G. Janssenet al., “Gravitational wave astronomy with the SKA,”PoSAASKA14(2015) 037, arXiv:1501.00127 [astro-ph.IM]. [12]LISACollaboration, P. Amaro-Seoaneet al., “Laser Interferometer Space Antenna,” arXiv:1702.00786 [astro-ph.IM]

arXiv 2015

[8] [13]

Taiji program: Gravitational-wave sources,

W.-H. Ruan, Z.-K. Guo, R.-G. Cai, and Y.-Z. Zhang, “Taiji program: Gravitational-wave sources,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. A35(2020) 2050075,arXiv:1807.09495 [gr-qc]

arXiv 2020