Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

ALP Production from Abelian Gauge Bosons: Beyond Hard Thermal Loops

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-09 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Using the full 1PI-resummed gauge-boson propagator in the ALP self-energy, the paper shows thermal production rates stay positive at all momenta and that a timelike-timelike channel dominates at the softest scales, p ≲ g⁴T.

desk verdict A careful, self-aware full-propagator calculation that cures negative rates and finds a new timelike-timelike channel at p ≲ g^4 T, but that flagship claim is provisional because the omitted 2↔3 diagrams correct exactly the photon width that sets it. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.01729 v1 pith:UOX7GA3F submitted 2025-02-03 hep-ph

Mathias Becker , Julia Harz , Enrico Morgante , Cristina Puchades-Ibáñez , Pedro Schwaller This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-ph PACS 14.80.Va95.35.+d
keywords axion-likeparticlesthermalproductionrate1PIresummationhardloopssoftmomentumfreeze-indarkmatterLyman-alphaconstraintsgaugebosonspectraldensity
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

This paper aims to fix a known pathology in thermal production rates for feebly interacting particles: when hard and soft momentum regions are computed separately and matched at an arbitrary scale, the ALP interaction rate turns negative at soft momenta, which is unphysical. The authors argue that the cure is to stop approximating the gauge-boson propagator by hard-thermal-loop (HTL) forms and instead use the full 1PI-resummed propagator in both legs of the one-loop ALP self-energy, which is valid at every momentum scale and needs no matching or subtraction. They show that this yields positive rates everywhere and exposes a production channel — two timelike gauge bosons whose finite width relaxes kinematic constraints — that can dominate at the softest momenta ($p \lesssim g^4 T$) and exceed the previously known spacelike-spacelike channel by another order of magnitude. A careful reader would care because the soft part of the momentum distribution feeds the Lyman-$\alpha$ constraints on keV-scale ALP warm dark matter, and the paper updates the abundance and average momentum accordingly, although the integrated shifts are only at the percent level.

What carries the argument

The central object is the 1PI-resummed gauge-boson Wightman propagator, decomposed into transverse, longitudinal, and momentum-parallel polarizations, with spectral densities built from the full one-loop photon self-energy including the vacuum term. Feeding both propagators in their full resummed form into the ALP self-energy integral is what carries the argument: the imaginary parts of the full self-energy do not vanish for timelike momenta, so the timelike pole acquires a width that relaxes the kinematic suppression of the timelike-timelike channel, while the gauge-dependent parallel polarization cancels in the contraction, making the whole rate gauge independent. The clean separation into timelike-timelike, timelike-spacelike, and spacelike-spacelike channels — with scalings $p^2$ below the width, exponential suppression, and $p^{4/3}$, respectively — is what organizes the momentum regimes and underlies the soft-rate estimates.

What would settle it

Complete the leading-order computation by adding the missing $2\to 3$ diagrams with soft ALP emission from external photons (e.g., $f\gamma\to f\gamma a$) in the same 1PI-resummed framework and recompute the rate at $p \lesssim g^4 T$: if the timelike-timelike channel no longer dominates, or if the total rate develops a negative region, the paper's central claims fail. A cheaper test is to rerun the calculation at a smaller gauge coupling, say $g_1 \approx 0.1$, so the windows between $g^4 T$, $g^2 T$, and $gT$ widen, and check the predicted turnover of the timelike-timelike contribution from a momentum-independent plateau to $p^2$ scaling at $p \approx \Gamma_{TT}$, with positivity at every momentum.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Using the full form of the 1PI-resummed abelian gauge-boson propagator in both legs of the ALP self-energy, rather than HTL-approximated propagators matched to free ones at an intermediate scale $gT \ll k_\star \ll T$, removes the unphysical negative interaction rates that plagued previous calculations: the collision term $\Pi^<(p)$ is positive for all momenta without any matching or subtraction procedure. The new channel appears because the full spectral densities give the timelike photon a finite width — the HTL imaginary parts vanish for $K^2 > 0$ — which relaxes the kinematic constraints on production from two timelike gauge bosons. The resulting rate separates into clear regimes: for $p \gtrsim g T$ timelike-spacelike ($t$-channel $2\leftrightarrow 2$) scatterings dominate; for $g^4 T \lesssim p \lesssim g^2 T$ two spacelike bosons dominate and scale as $p^{4/3}$; and for $p \lesssim g^4 T$ two timelike bosons take over, with the self-energy nearly momentum-independent until $p$ drops below the zero-momentum photon width $\Gamma_{TT} \approx 5\times 10^{-4} T$, below which it scales as $p^2$. The authors stress that this hierarchy holds within their truncation and that a consistent leading-order result for the soft regime still requires the diagrams with soft ALP emission from external photons, which are left for future work.

Load-bearing premise

The paper assumes that the one-loop ALP self-energy with both gauge-boson propagators fully 1PI-resummed already gives the leading-order soft-momentum rate, yet it explicitly acknowledges that a class of three-loop diagrams — soft ALP emission from external photons, the last row of Fig. 2 — is missing and would be needed for a consistent leading-order computation in that regime.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The full-propagator method eliminates the matching scale $k_\star$ and the subtraction or tuned-mass schemes, so the ALP production rate is positive at every momentum without additional input parameters.
  • The timelike-timelike channel, completely absent in the HTL approximation because of the vanishing width, becomes the dominant production mechanism for $p \lesssim g^4 T$, and neglecting it underestimates the soft-momentum interaction rate by more than an order of magnitude.
  • The updated ALP distribution function leaves the number density essentially unchanged, $n_{\rm 1PI}/n_{\rm HTL} = 0.97$ and $n_{\rm 1PI}/n_{\rm Cut} = 1.09$, and lowers the average momentum to $\langle p/T\rangle \approx 3.06$, which translates into a percent-level weakening of the Lyman-$\alpha$ lower bound on the ALP mass as warm dark matter.
  • Because the contraction cancels the gauge-dependent polarization, the same treatment applies without modification to any ALP or feebly interacting particle coupled to an abelian gauge field — QED photons, dark photons, or $U(1)_Y$ — making positivity and the channel hierarchy a general abelian feature.
  • The authors position the result as the first step toward full leading-order accuracy for $g^4 T \lesssim p \lesssim g T$, and note that below $p \approx g^4 T$ the quasiparticle description breaks down and hydrodynamics become necessary.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Carried over to the gravitino and sterile-neutrino production problems, where the same negative rates appear, the full-propagator cure is likely a general feature of abelian sectors, while non-abelian cases would confront the gauge dependence the authors sidestep here.
  • The timelike-timelike dominance implies a flatter low-momentum tail in the freeze-in spectrum than the cut-based estimate suggests; even though the integrated average momentum shifts by only a few percent, the soft tail itself could be probed by momentum-sensitive small-scale structure observables such as 21-cm or strong-lensing statistics, which the paper does not study.
  • A decisive near-term extension is to include the omitted soft-emission diagrams; if they preserve the positivity and the timelike-timelike dominance, the method becomes the default tool for abelian freeze-in rates, and if they do not, only the positive-rate statement for the one-loop truncation itself survives.
  • The turnover scale $p_c \approx \Gamma_{TT}$ carries a specific coupling dependence, so scanning $g_1$ downward should move the plateau-to-$p^2$ turnover to smaller $p/T$; the paper's fixed $g_1 = 0.35$ setup leaves that prediction untested.
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.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper computes the thermal production rate of axion-like particles coupled to a U(1) gauge boson, using the full 1PI-resummed photon propagator in both lines of the one-loop ALP self-energy instead of HTL-resummed propagators. The authors show that the resulting rate is positive for all momenta, avoiding the negative rates obtained in matching/subtraction schemes. They decompose the rate into timelike-timelike (TT), timelike-spacelike (TS), and spacelike-spacelike (SS) contributions, and identify the momentum regimes in which each dominates. The main new quantitative claim is that at very soft momenta p ≲ g^4 T the TT contribution, enabled by the finite photon width, may exceed the SS contribution by another order of magnitude. They use these rates to update the ALP abundance and average momentum, finding only percent-level changes relative to previous work.

Significance. If the central soft-momentum claim survives scrutiny, the paper provides a framework for positive, physically consistent ALP production rates over the full momentum range, and it sharpens the understanding of the soft-momentum regime that determines warm-dark-matter constraints. Strengths of the paper include a careful derivation of the self-energy expression in Eq. (3.7), an explicit demonstration of gauge independence, comparison against the external benchmark of Ref. [11] and against the independent result of Ref. [54], and an unusually frank discussion of the diagrams that are not included. The omission of the last-row diagrams in Fig. 2, however, makes the flagship TT-dominance claim provisional rather than a complete leading-order result, and this needs to be reflected more consistently in the abstract and in Section 4.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 5 vs. Sec. 4 item (iv)] The paper itself states that the diagrams corresponding to soft ALP emission from external photons (e.g. f γ → f γ a) are part of the leading-order contribution to the rate for p ≲ m_V^2/T and that these diagrams are not included. This omission is not a minor higher-order correction: the TT contribution in Eq. (B.12) is proportional to the photon width Γ_TT, and the crossover scale p_c = Γ_TT(k=0) is the same width that the omitted diagrams correct. Consequently, the magnitude of the TT contribution, the determination of p_c, and the TT/SS comparison in Sec. 4 item (iv) are all computed at a level that is not demonstrably leading order in exactly the regime where the TT claim is made. The authors acknowledge this in the conclusion, but Sec. 4 item (iv) and the abstract's 'potentially exceeding' wording do not carry the same caveat. This issue must be addressed, either by performing the missing calculation or by explicitly reframing the TT-dominance claim as a partial/beyond-LO estimate whose leading-order status remains open.
  2. [Sec. 4 and abstract] The conclusion states that the approach 'does not strictly apply to ALP momenta p < g^4 T, where the quasiparticle description breaks down and hydrodynamics become necessary,' yet Sec. 4 item (iv) presents TT dominance for p ≲ g^4 T as one of the main findings, and the abstract highlights the p ≲ g^4 T region as a potentially order-of-magnitude enhancement. These statements need to be harmonized. If the formalism is not valid below g^4 T, then the abstract and Sec. 4 should present the p ≲ g^4 T behavior as an extrapolation of the 1PI-resummed calculation, explicitly outside the strict validity range, rather than as an established production channel.
  3. [Appendix B.2, Eqs. (B.5)-(B.12)] The scaling estimate for the TT contribution in Appendix B.2 relies on the narrow-width pole approximation and on approximating the width Γ_TT by the one-loop photon self-energy at zero momentum. This width controls both the piecewise p-scaling in Eq. (B.12) and the crossover momentum p_c. Because the omitted vertex/self-energy corrections enter at the same level as the width that sets the TT scaling, the numerical value p_c ≈ 5 × 10^-4 T and the resulting dominance window in Sec. 4 item (iv) should be labeled as an estimate rather than a prediction until the missing diagrams are included.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Appendix B.1, Eq. (B.3)] The numerical factor κ_I = 8 is fitted to the numerical result, not derived. The p^{4/3} scaling is analytic, but the text should state explicitly that the prefactor 93 in Eq. (B.4) is a numerical fit, since the phrase 'using HTL resummed propagators' might otherwise suggest a parameter-free result.
  2. [Sec. 4, footnote 6] The approximation of replacing the 1PI-resummed propagator by the HTL form for timelike momenta at hard ALP momentum p > T is acceptable because hard momenta are not the focus, but this should be stated in the main text near Fig. 6 rather than only in the footnote, since Fig. 6 is used for the TS comparison.
  3. [Eq. (3.14)] The notation Π_{TT}(p) = p^0 for p ≳ p_c is dimensionally confusing; the exponent should be written as a constant with respect to p (e.g. ∼ const. or p^0) and the p^2 branch clarified, since Eq. (B.12) is not obviously identical in notation.
  4. [Sec. 4, Fig. 6 discussion] The text states 'p ≲ 10^{-2} T ≈ g_1^4 T' and later reports Γ_TT ≈ 5 × 10^{-4} T, but the figure axis extends to p/T = 10^{-3}. The relation between the quoted p_c and the lowest plotted momentum should be made explicit to avoid the impression that the p^2 branch is visible in Fig. 6 when it is only visible in Fig. 9b.
  5. [Throughout] There are several typographical and grammatical slips, e.g. 'if Fig.2' in the caption of Fig. 2, 'the the ALP self energy' near the top of Sec. 4, and 'goverened' in Eq. (2.2). These do not affect the physics but should be corrected.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the positivity and TT-dominance claims follow from the full spectral densities (Eqs. 3.5–3.7), with no load-bearing fitted parameter or self-citation chain.

full rationale

The central derivation is self-contained. The ALP production rate is computed from Eq. (3.7) with the spectral densities of Eqs. (3.5)–(3.6), which are built from the SM one-loop photon self-energies (3.11), (3.12), (3.13), and (A.2); no quantity that the paper claims to predict is inserted back into these equations. Positivity is a direct numerical consequence of the positive spectral functions, and the TT-dominance scale p_c = Γ_TT(k=0) is an independently computed photon width (Sec. 3 and App. B.2), not a fit designed to reproduce the TT rate. The only fitted constant is κ_I = 8 in the SS scaling estimate, which the paper explicitly labels as 'chosen to reflect our numerical findings' (Eq. 3.16 and App. B); it is an approximation detail, not an input to the central positivity or TT claims, and the p^{4/3} scaling itself is derived analytically. Self-citations to [11] and [38] provide a benchmark and method context but are not load-bearing: the 'Cut' benchmark is itself built on [5], and the 2PI motivation is drawn from standard references [43–46]; no uniqueness theorem or circular chain is invoked. The Sec. 3 admission that soft-ALP emission from external photons (last row of Fig. 2) is omitted is a genuine leading-order completeness limitation, not a circularity: missing cut diagrams would only add positive contributions, and the paper explicitly flags the soft-regime dominance claim as needing confirmation by a consistent leading-order computation. I therefore find no circular step warranting a nonzero score.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central computation rests on a standard 2PI-based truncation of the ALP self-energy and on the HTL approximation for the SS and TS sub-processes. One numerical prefactor (kappa_I = 8) is fitted to the authors' own numerical result, and the omission of certain 2 to 3 diagrams is acknowledged. No new particles or entities are introduced.

free parameters (1)
  • kappa_I = 8
    Numerical prefactor in Eq. (B.4) for the double-spacelike scaling estimate, chosen to reflect the authors' own numerical findings rather than derived from first principles.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The ALP self-energy at leading order is the one-loop gauge boson loop with both propagators 1PI-resummed (Sec. 3, Fig. 1).
    Truncates the 2PI effective action and neglects higher-loop corrections; two-loop ALP insertions are suppressed by the feeble coupling.
  • domain assumption The one-loop gauge boson self-energy is computed using free-theory propagators (Sec. 2, approximation 2).
    Standard perturbative resummation; corrections beyond one loop are not included in the propagators.
  • domain assumption HTL approximations are reliable for the soft SS and near-lightlike TS contributions (Sec. 3).
    Used to justify replacing full self-energies by HTL forms in those channels; at hard momenta HTL is not used for the full calculation.
  • domain assumption ALP production is UV dominated, so evaluating the rate at z=0 with an exponential cutoff e^{-z} approximates the full temperature integral (Sec. 4, Eq. 4.3).
    Relies on Trh being large and production scaling with T; the paper uses this to build the distribution function.
  • domain assumption The quasiparticle description with 1PI-resummed propagators applies for p > g^4 T, but not below (Sec. 5).
    The authors state that for p < g^4 T hydrodynamics is needed; the extension of the TT result to p < g^4 T is therefore outside the framework.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of ALP Production from Abelian Gauge Bosons: Beyond Hard Thermal Loops." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/UOX7GA3F

@misc{pith2026250201729,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: ALP Production from Abelian Gauge Bosons: Beyond Hard Thermal Loops},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/UOX7GA3F}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.01729}
}
abstract

Previous computations of feebly interacting particle production have encountered issues with unphysical (negative) interaction rates at soft momenta. We address this problem by studying the production of Axion-Like Particles (ALPs) coupled to $U(1)$-gauge fields, employing the full form of 1PI-resummed gauge boson propagators. This approach avoids the need for matching or subtraction procedures, ensuring physically consistent results. We find that the ALP production rate remains positive across all momentum scales and identify the dominant production mechanisms. At soft ALP momenta ($p \lesssim g^2 T$), interactions involving two spacelike gauge bosons dominate the production rate, surpassing other channels by an order of magnitude. In particular, using the full gauge boson propagator suggests that at even softer momenta ($p \lesssim g^4 T$), production involving two timelike gauge bosons becomes significant, potentially exceeding other contributions by another order of magnitude. Using these insights, we update the thermal ALP abundance and refine the estimate of the average ALP momentum, providing important input for structure formation constraints on ALP dark matter in the keV mass range.

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

  1. Multiple Soft Scatterings in Scalar Dark Matter Freeze-In

    hep-ph 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A new calculation of the Landau-Pomeranchuk-Migdal effect for scalar dark matter production shows that it can add up to roughly 27 percent to the predicted relic abundance.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

58 extracted references · 13 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [11]

    Baumholzer, V

    S. Baumholzer, V. Brdar and E. Morgante,Structure Formation Limits on Axion-Like Dark Matter, JCAP 05 (2021) 004 [2012.09181]

    arXiv 2021

  2. [54]

    Laine, A

    M. Laine, A. Vuorinen and Y. Zhu,Next-to-leading order thermal spectral functions in the perturbative domain, JHEP 09 (2011) 084 [1108.1259]

    arXiv 2011

  3. [1]

    Braaten and R

    E. Braaten and R. D. Pisarski,Soft Amplitudes in Hot Gauge Theories: A General Analysis, Nucl. Phys. B 337 (1990) 569

    work page 1990

  4. [2]

    Braaten and R

    E. Braaten and R. D. Pisarski,Simple effective Lagrangian for hard thermal loops, Phys. Rev. D 45 (1992) R1827

    work page 1992

  5. [3]

    Braaten and M

    E. Braaten and M. H. Thoma,Energy loss of a heavy quark in the quark - gluon plasma, Phys. Rev. D44 (1991) R2625

    work page 1991

  6. [4]

    Braaten and T

    E. Braaten and T. C. Yuan,Calculation of screening in a hot plasma, Phys. Rev. Lett.66 (1991) 2183

    work page 1991

  7. [5]

    M. Bolz, A. Brandenburg and W. Buchmuller,Thermal production of gravitinos, Nucl. Phys. B 606 (2001) 518 [hep-ph/0012052]

    arXiv 2001

  8. [6]

    Graf and F

    P. Graf and F. D. Steffen,Thermal axion production in the primordial quark-gluon plasma, Phys. Rev. D83 (2011) 075011 [1008.4528]

    arXiv 2011

Show all 58 references
  1. [7]

    Pradler and F

    J. Pradler and F. D. Steffen,Thermal gravitino production and collider tests of leptogenesis, Phys. Rev. D75 (2007) 023509 [hep-ph/0608344]

    2007 arXiv

  2. [8]

    V. S. Rychkov and A. Strumia,Thermal production of gravitinos, Phys. Rev. D75 (2007) 075011 [hep-ph/0701104]

    2007 arXiv

  3. [9]

    Salvio, A

    A. Salvio, A. Strumia and W. Xue,Thermal axion production, JCAP 01 (2014) 011 [1310.6982]

    2014 arXiv

  4. [10]

    Brandenburg and F

    A. Brandenburg and F. D. Steffen,Axino dark matter from thermal production, JCAP 08 (2004) 008 [hep-ph/0405158]

    2004 arXiv

  5. [12]

    Ghiglieri, G

    J. Ghiglieri, G. Jackson, M. Laine and Y. Zhu,Gravitational wave background from Standard Model physics: Complete leading order, JHEP 07 (2020) 092 [2004.11392]

    2020 arXiv

  6. [13]

    Shi and G

    X.-D. Shi and G. M. Fuller,A New dark matter candidate: Nonthermal sterile neutrinos, Phys. Rev. Lett.82 (1999) 2832 [astro-ph/9810076]

    1999 arXiv

  7. [14]

    V. K. Narayanan, D. N. Spergel, R. Dave and C.-P. Ma,Constraints on the mass of warm dark matter particles and the shape of the linear power spectrum from the Lyα forest, Astrophys. J. Lett.543 (2000) L103 [astro-ph/0005095]

    2000 arXiv

  8. [15]

    M. Viel, J. Lesgourgues, M. G. Haehnelt, S. Matarrese and A. Riotto,Constraining warm dark matter candidates including sterile neutrinos and light gravitinos with WMAP and the Lyman-alpha forest, Phys. Rev. D71 (2005) 063534 [astro-ph/0501562]

    2005 arXiv

  9. [16]

    Cadamuro, S

    D. Cadamuro, S. Hannestad, G. Raffelt and J. Redondo,Cosmological bounds on sub-MeV mass axions, JCAP 02 (2011) 003 [1011.3694]

    2011 arXiv

  10. [17]

    Arias, D

    P. Arias, D. Cadamuro, M. Goodsell, J. Jaeckel, J. Redondo and A. Ringwald,WISPy Cold Dark Matter, JCAP 06 (2012) 013 [1201.5902]

    2012 arXiv

  11. [18]

    Jaeckel, J

    J. Jaeckel, J. Redondo and A. Ringwald,3.55 keV hint for decaying axionlike particle dark matter, Phys. Rev. D89 (2014) 103511 [1402.7335]. – 28 –

    2014 arXiv

  12. [19]

    Yèche, N

    C. Yèche, N. Palanque-Delabrouille, J. Baur and H. du Mas des Bourboux,Constraints on neutrino masses from Lyman-alpha forest power spectrum with BOSS and XQ-100, JCAP 06 (2017) 047 [1702.03314]

    2017 arXiv

  13. [20]

    Murgia, A

    R. Murgia, A. Merle, M. Viel, M. Totzauer and A. Schneider,”Non-cold” dark matter at small scales: a general approach, JCAP 11 (2017) 046 [1704.07838]

    2017 arXiv

  14. [21]

    Heeck and D

    J. Heeck and D. Teresi,Cold keV dark matter from decays and scatterings, Phys. Rev. D96 (2017) 035018 [1706.09909]

    2017 arXiv

  15. [22]

    Fonseca and E

    N. Fonseca and E. Morgante,Relaxion Dark Matter, Phys. Rev. D100 (2019) 055010 [1809.04534]

    2019 arXiv

  16. [23]

    Garzilli, A

    A. Garzilli, A. Magalich, O. Ruchayskiy and A. Boyarsky,How to constrain warm dark matter with the Lyman-α forest, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.502 (2021) 2356 [1912.09397]

    2021 arXiv

  17. [24]

    S. H. Im and K. S. Jeong,Freeze-in Axion-like Dark Matter, Phys. Lett. B799 (2019) 135044 [1907.07383]

    2019 arXiv

  18. [25]

    Fonseca and E

    N. Fonseca and E. Morgante,Probing photophobic axion and relaxion dark matter, Phys. Rev. D 103 (2021) 015011 [2009.10974]

    2021 arXiv

  19. [26]

    Ballesteros, M

    G. Ballesteros, M. A. G. Garcia and M. Pierre,How warm are non-thermal relics? Lyman-α bounds on out-of-equilibrium dark matter, JCAP 03 (2021) 101 [2011.13458]

    2021 arXiv

  20. [27]

    Dvorkin, T

    C. Dvorkin, T. Lin and K. Schutz,Cosmology of Sub-MeV Dark Matter Freeze-In, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127 (2021) 111301 [2011.08186]

    2021 arXiv

  21. [28]

    D’Eramo and A

    F. D’Eramo and A. Lenoci,Lower mass bounds on FIMP dark matter produced via freeze-in, JCAP 10 (2021) 045 [2012.01446]

    2021 arXiv

  22. [29]

    D’Eramo, F

    F. D’Eramo, F. Hajkarim and A. Lenoci,Dark radiation from the primordial thermal bath in momentum space, JCAP 03 (2024) 009 [2311.04974]

    2024 arXiv

  23. [30]

    Bouzoud and J

    K. Bouzoud and J. Ghiglieri,Thermal axion production at hard and soft momenta, 2404.06113

    arXiv

  24. [31]

    D’Eramo and A

    F. D’Eramo and A. Lenoci,Back to the phase space: thermal axion dark radiation via couplings to standard model fermions, 2410.21253

  25. [32]

    Besak and D

    D. Besak and D. Bodeker,Thermal production of ultrarelativistic right-handed neutrinos: Complete leading-order results, JCAP 03 (2012) 029 [1202.1288]

    2012 arXiv

  26. [33]

    Ghiglieri and M

    J. Ghiglieri and M. Laine,Neutrino dynamics below the electroweak crossover, JCAP 07 (2016) 015 [1605.07720]

    2016 arXiv

  27. [34]

    P. B. Arnold, G. D. Moore and L. G. Yaffe,Effective kinetic theory for high temperature gauge theories, JHEP 01 (2003) 030 [hep-ph/0209353]

    2003 arXiv

  28. [35]

    P. B. Arnold, G. D. Moore and L. G. Yaffe,Transport coefficients in high temperature gauge theories. 2. Beyond leading log, JHEP 05 (2003) 051 [hep-ph/0302165]

    2003 arXiv

  29. [36]

    D’Eramo, F

    F. D’Eramo, F. Hajkarim and S. Yun,Thermal Axion Production at Low Temperatures: A Smooth Treatment of the QCD Phase Transition, Phys. Rev. Lett.128 (2022) 152001 [2108.04259]

    2022 arXiv

  30. [37]

    D’Eramo, F

    F. D’Eramo, F. Hajkarim and S. Yun,Thermal QCD Axions across Thresholds, JHEP 10 (2021) 224 [2108.05371]. – 29 –

    2021 arXiv

  31. [38]

    Becker, E

    M. Becker, E. Copello, J. Harz and C. Tamarit,Dark matter freeze-in from non-equilibrium qft: towards a consistent treatment of thermal effects, 2312.17246

    arXiv

  32. [39]

    Eberl, I

    H. Eberl, I. D. Gialamas and V. C. Spanos,Gravitino thermal production revisited, Phys. Rev. D 103 (2021) 075025 [2010.14621]

    2021 arXiv

  33. [40]

    Eberl, I

    H. Eberl, I. D. Gialamas and V. C. Spanos,Gravitino Thermal Production, Dark Matter, and Reheating of the Universe, 2408.16043

    arXiv

  34. [41]

    Garbrecht, F

    B. Garbrecht, F. Glowna and M. Herranen,Right-Handed Neutrino Production at Finite Temperature: Radiative Corrections, Soft and Collinear Divergences, JHEP 04 (2013) 099 [1302.0743]

    2013 arXiv

  35. [42]

    Garbrecht, F

    B. Garbrecht, F. Glowna and P. Schwaller,Scattering Rates For Leptogenesis: Damping of Lepton Flavour Coherence and Production of Singlet Neutrinos, Nucl. Phys. B 877 (2013) 1 [1303.5498]

    2013 arXiv

  36. [43]

    J. M. Cornwall, R. Jackiw and E. Tomboulis,Effective Action for Composite Operators, Phys. Rev. D10 (1974) 2428

    1974

  37. [44]

    Chou, Z.-b

    K.-c. Chou, Z.-b. Su, B.-l. Hao and L. Yu,Equilibrium and Nonequilibrium Formalisms Made Unified, Phys. Rept. 118 (1985) 1

    1985

  38. [45]

    Berges,N-particle irreducible effective action techniques for gauge theories, Phys

    J. Berges,N-particle irreducible effective action techniques for gauge theories, Phys. Rev. D 70 (2004) 105010 [hep-ph/0401172]

    2004 arXiv

  39. [46]

    Berges,Introduction to nonequilibrium quantum field theory, AIP Conf

    J. Berges,Introduction to nonequilibrium quantum field theory, AIP Conf. Proc.739 (2004) 3 [hep-ph/0409233]

    2004 arXiv

  40. [47]

    D’Eramo and S

    F. D’Eramo and S. Yun,Flavor violating axions in the early Universe, Phys. Rev. D105 (2022) 075002 [2111.12108]

    2022 arXiv

  41. [48]

    M. L. Bellac,Thermal Field Theory, Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics. Cambridge University Press, 3, 2011, 10.1017/CBO9780511721700

    2011 doi

  42. [49]

    Bödeker, M

    D. Bödeker, M. Sangel and M. Wörmann,Equilibration, particle production, and self-energy, Phys. Rev. D93 (2016) 045028 [1510.06742]

    2016 arXiv

  43. [50]

    Prokopec, M

    T. Prokopec, M. G. Schmidt and S. Weinstock,Transport equations for chiral fermions to order h bar and electroweak baryogenesis. Part 1, Annals Phys. 314 (2004) 208 [hep-ph/0312110]

    2004 arXiv

  44. [51]

    M. L. Bellac,Thermal Field Theory. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1996

    1996

  45. [52]

    H. A. Weldon,Covariant calculations at finite temperature: The relativistic plasma, Phys. Rev. D 26 (1982) 1394

    1982

  46. [53]

    Drewes, Y

    M. Drewes, Y. Georis, M. Klasen, L. P. Wiggering and Y. Y. Y. Wong,Towards a precision calculation of Nef fin the Standard Model. Part III. Improved estimate of NLO contributions to the collision integral, JCAP 06 (2024) 032 [2402.18481]

    2024 arXiv

  47. [55]

    G. D. Moore and J.-M. Robert,Dileptons, spectral weights, and conductivity in the quark-gluon plasma, hep-ph/0607172

    arXiv

  48. [56]

    Braaten, R

    E. Braaten, R. D. Pisarski and T.-C. Yuan,Production of Soft Dileptons in the Quark - Gluon Plasma, Phys. Rev. Lett.64 (1990) 2242. – 30 –

    1990

  49. [57]

    E. W. Kolb,The Early Universe, vol. 69. Taylor and Francis, 5, 2019, 10.1201/9780429492860

    2019 doi

  50. [58]

    Drewes and J

    M. Drewes and J. U. Kang,The Kinematics of Cosmic Reheating, Nucl. Phys. B 875 (2013) 315 [1305.0267]. – 31 –

    2013 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 9, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.