Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 142 references

Radiative Mass Generation in Gauged Theories of Flavour: A Path to Fermion Mass Hierarchies

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Only third-generation fermions get tree-level masses; new gauge-boson loops generate the lighter generations, explaining the observed hierarchy.

desk verdict Serious, mostly honest radiative-mass model building; the new no-go result and the 1-2 flavour/mass correlation are worth engaging with, but the scalar-loop suppression assumption is load-bearing and must be pushed on. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.23665 v1 pith:Z6JQHHY5 submitted 2025-06-30 hep-ph hep-th

Gurucharan Mohanta This is my paper
classification hep-phhep-th
keywords radiativemassgenerationfermionhierarchygaugedflavoursymmetrynon-universalityviolationvector-likefermionsstrongCPproblemleft-right
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 thesis tries to establish that the observed charged-fermion mass hierarchy stops being a set of unexplained numbers once the Standard Model is extended by a gauged flavour symmetry. In the proposed constructions only the third-generation fermions receive tree-level masses; the first and second generations acquire their masses through loop diagrams involving new gauge bosons and a pair of vector-like fermions. Concretely, the thesis builds renormalisable models based on $U(1)_1 \times U(1)_2$, a single $U(1)_F$ with two-loop masses, $SU(3)_F$, and a left-right symmetric version, and shows by numerical fits that they reproduce the charged fermion masses and CKM parameters. If true, the intergenerational hierarchy becomes a calculable consequence of gauge charges, gauge-boson mass ratios, and loop factors rather than of arbitrarily small Yukawa couplings.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the rank-one tree-level mass matrix $M^{(0)}_{ij} = -\mu_{Li}\mu_{Rj}/m_F$, built from a pair of vector-like fermions, states whose left- and right-handed components carry identical Standard Model charges and so admit a gauge-invariant mass. This seed gives mass only to the third generation. The mechanism that carries the argument is the gauge-boson self-energy loop: with flavour non-universal charges, the gauge couplings in the physical basis are not diagonal, and the loop diagram with a new gauge boson and a heavy vector-like fermion generates the off-diagonal mass entries. The thesis derives the resulting rank-two one-loop mass matrix (eq. 2.45), the two-loop mass formula expressed entirely in terms of the tree-level matrix, the gauge charges, and the gauge-boson mass (eq. 4.21), and the $SU(3)_F$ gauge-boson mass ordering produced by the breaking chain.

What would settle it

Compute the complete one-loop fermion self-energy with the scalar sector included, without imposing the small-mixing assumption on $h_{Li}$ and $h_{Ri}$; if the scalar diagrams generate masses for the first or second generation comparable to the gauge-boson contributions, or introduce uncontrolled flavour-changing neutral currents, the claim that the observable hierarchy comes from gauge-boson loops alone is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim, stated in the author's own terms, is that only third-generation fermions acquire tree-level masses, while the first and second generations gain their masses via quantum corrections induced by new gauge bosons. The mechanism works because each chiral fermion sector couples to a vector-like pair through mass terms $\mu_L$ and $\mu_R$, producing a seesaw-like tree-level mass matrix of rank one; the sole massive state is the third-generation fermion. Non-universal gauge charges then break the accidental $U(2)^5$ symmetry of the mass Lagrangian, and gauge-boson self-energy diagrams generate the remaining masses: both lighter generations at one loop in the $U(1)_1 \times U(1)_2$ model, with the hierarchy set by the ratio of the two gauge-boson masses; the first generation at two loops in the optimised single-$U(1)_F$ model, where the loop-corrected mass matrix stays rank two at one loop and becomes rank three only through the two-loop formula; and sequential first- and second-generation masses in the $SU(3)_F$ model from the two-step breaking $SU(3)_F \to SU(2)_F \to$ nothing. Numerical fits to the charged fermion masses and CKM mixing are presented for each construction, and the left-right version is claimed to keep the strong CP phase at $\bar{\theta} \lesssim 10^{-14}$.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that scalar-mediated loops and scalar-induced flavour-changing neutral currents are small enough to be ignored; the thesis assumes small mixing between the $h_{Li}$ and $h_{Ri}$ scalars and accepts that this suppression requires some fine-tuning.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the $U(1)_1 \times U(1)_2$ model is correct, the new gauge-boson scale must lie near $10^5$ TeV, since meson-antimeson mixing and lepton flavour violation exclude lighter $Z_1$ masses.
  • If the optimised single-$U(1)_F$ model is correct, the scale drops to about $10^3$ TeV, and the first-generation mass and the flavour violation in the 1-2 sector are tied: the latter vanishes exactly when the former vanishes.
  • If the $SU(3)_F$ model is correct, its fewer parameters make it more predictive, and it computes the strange quark mass about $3\sigma$ away from the current central value.
  • If the left-right version is correct, the strong CP phase is predicted to satisfy $\bar{\theta} \lesssim 10^{-14}$, with the $U(1)_{2-3}$ breaking scale linked to the $SU(2)_R$ scale.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial inference: the correlation between the two-loop first-generation mass and 1-2 flavour violation in the single-$U(1)_F$ model means a future observation of $\mu \to e$ conversion or $K^0$-$\bar K^0$ mixing would translate almost directly into a measurement of, or an upper bound on, the first-generation fermion mass in this framework.
  • Editorial inference: the same seesaw-with-vector-like-fermions template could be reused for Dirac neutrinos by treating the neutral vector-like singlet as the heavy partner, which the thesis sketches as the Dirac option; whether the solar-to-atmospheric ratio can be reproduced without fine-tuning would be a direct test of that extension.
  • Editorial inference: if the gauge charges $\{1-\epsilon,1+\epsilon,-2\}$ originate from kinetic mixing or deconstructed hypercharge, as the thesis suggests, then measuring the effective $X$-boson couplings and $\epsilon$ would connect the flavour puzzle to the number of $U(1)$ factors in the ultraviolet theory.
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. The thesis proposes gauged flavour extensions of the Standard Model in which only third-generation charged fermions acquire tree-level masses (via a universal seesaw with vector-like fermions), while first- and second-generation masses are generated by loops of new flavour gauge bosons. A general Abelian toy model is developed in Chapter 2, where the rank-1 tree-level mass matrix, the rank-2 one-loop structure, the necessity of flavour non-universal charges, and the 1-loop self-energy formula (Eq. 2.34) are derived, with the divergent part shown to vanish as required by renormalisability. Four model classes are then constructed: a U(1)_1 x U(1)_2 model with both lighter generations at 1 loop (Chapter 3); a single U(1)_F model with optimised charges and a 2-loop first-generation mass (Chapter 4); an SU(3)_F model with sequential symmetry breaking (Chapter 5); and a left-right Abelian extension addressing strong CP (Chapter 6). Numerical fits to the charged fermion masses and CKM parameters are provided, along with flavour-violation constraints from meson mixing and lepton flavour violation.

Significance. If the underlying assumptions can be realised, this is a valuable and reasonably calculable approach to the fermion mass hierarchy: the loop-induced masses are expressed in terms of gauge couplings, charges, and masses, and the 1-loop mass-matrix structure is derived analytically rather than imposed. The explicit cancellation of divergences in Eqs. (2.28)-(2.29) and (5.13) is a genuine strength, as is the systematic treatment of flavour-violating constraints, which yields concrete new-physics scales (about 10^5 TeV in the two-U(1) model and about 10^3 TeV in the optimised single-U(1) model). The SU(3)_F framework is a useful attempt to reduce the number of free parameters compared with Abelian models, and the left-right variant adds a potentially interesting connection to the strong CP problem. However, the central claim that the hierarchy is governed by gauge-boson loops depends on a scalar-sector suppression that is assumed rather than demonstrated, and this assumption is inherited by all four model classes. The numerical fits are existence proofs rather than sharp predictions, with marginal pulls in the light quark sector.

major comments (3)
  1. [2.4, Eq. (2.70)] The neglect of scalar-mediated one-loop contributions is load-bearing but is only an assumption. Eq. (2.70) shows that deltaM^(S)_ij is suppressed only by the mixing entries R_LR and R_RL, and Section 2.4 concludes with 'we assume such an arrangement in our subsequent chapters to neglect the scalar-induced contributions'; Section 3.4 similarly states 'we assume that this suppression is feasible, albeit with some fine-tuning'. The scalar potential in Eq. (3.1) contains the terms (m_udeta)_ijk epsilon_ijk eta_i H_uj H_dk and (m_eta)_ijk eta_i eta_j eta_k, which generically generate H-eta mixing after spontaneous symmetry breaking, and no protecting symmetry is identified. Because the massless first-generation state and the 2-loop formula (4.21) require gauge-boson loops to be the only radiative source of light-fermion masses, this unquantified assumption threatens the central claim. Please provide an explicit parameter scan or a symmetry argument showing that a region of the scalar potential exists in which deltaM^(S) is safely below the gauge contributions while the required VEVs and the 125 GeV Higgs are reproduced.
  2. [Abstract / Sec. 5.4] The abstract states that the SU(3)_F model 'computes the strange quark mass slightly deviating from its current central value by 3 sigma', and Table 4.2 shows down-quark pulls of -2.21 and -2.32 in the optimised single-U(1) fits. For a framework whose selling point is predictivity, these borderline pulls should be analysed explicitly rather than merely quoted: how many of the 13 observables are outside 1 sigma, how stable are the pulls under reasonable variations of the input quark-mass uncertainties, and does an acceptable chi^2 region exist with m_s within 2 sigma? Without this discussion, the claim that the models 'reproduce' the observed spectrum is weaker than the fits suggest.
  3. [4.1.1, Eq. (4.21)] The derivation of the 2-loop corrected mass matrix is presented very tersely. Eq. (4.21) is introduced with 'we finally obtain', and the divergent part in Eq. (4.22) is rank-one and stated to be absorbed by renormalising m_3^(0). Since deltaM^(0) is itself a loop-induced quantity and the renormalisable Lagrangian does not contain a corresponding tree-level counterterm of the form q_Li q_Rj M^(0)_ij, the UV finiteness and scheme-independence of the 2-loop first-generation mass deserve a more explicit spurion/counterterm analysis. Please spell out which renormalisation constants absorb the divergence and demonstrate that m_1^(2) is finite and physical at this order.
minor comments (5)
  1. [2.1 / 4.1] Eq. (2.31) has a stray comma at the end of the displayed definition, and Eq. (4.7) contains malformed absolute-value bars in the ratio; please fix the typesetting.
  2. [3.4] The statement that scalar FCNCs are suppressed 'if the masses of the scalars are of O(MX)' should be reconciled with the requirement that the same scalar sector contains a 125 GeV Higgs; the fine-tuning in Det M^2_h << M_X^18 is acknowledged but should be quantified (how many independent tunings are required?).
  3. [4.3.1] The text says the Wilson coefficients are displayed in Fig. 4.4, but the relevant plots appear to be Figs. 4.5 and 4.6; please correct the cross-reference.
  4. [3.3.2] 'Tabel 3.5' should be 'Table 3.5'.
  5. [4.2 / Fig. 4.2] The notation Q^(n)_ij is used in Fig. 4.2 before it is defined in the text; a short definition in the caption or the text would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the loop-mass hierarchy is derived by explicit computation (eqs. 2.34, 2.43, 4.21, 5.36), and the fits are transparent over-parameterized chi2 solutions; flagged limitations are the assumed suppression of scalar loops (§2.4, §3.4) and minor, non-load-bearing self-citation.

full rationale

The thesis derives its central claim through an explicit, self-contained chain. The tree-level mass matrix is rank-1 by construction (eq. 2.6). The 1-loop gauge-boson self-energy is computed directly (eqs. 2.21-2.34), giving δM(0)_ij ∝ q_Li q_Rj M(0)_ij, and the rank-2 structure with one massless state at 1-loop follows algebraically (eqs. 2.43-2.45). The 2-loop first-generation mass formula (eq. 4.21) is expressed entirely in terms of previously computed quantities (M(0), δM(0), U(1), m(1)_2, m(1)_3) and is parameter-free once charges, couplings, masses and the μ's are chosen. The SU(3)_F hierarchy follows from sequential breaking with an explicit gauge-boson mass matrix (eqs. 5.31-5.36), and the strong-CP result follows from the Hermiticity lemma (App. B). These are genuine computations, not identities with their inputs. The numerical 'solutions' are presented transparently as χ2 fits with more parameters (23-25) than observables (13), and the derived scale bounds (about 10^5 and 10^3 TeV) arise by imposing external K-Kbar and LFV limits on the fitted solutions. Genuine predictive tension appears: m_d sits 2.2-2.3σ low (Table 4.2) and m_s deviates by 3σ (abstract), which is inconsistent with a circular fit. Two limitations are flagged explicitly in the manuscript itself: the neglect of scalar-mediated 1-loop masses rests on the stated assumption of small h_L-h_R (H-η) mixing ('We assume such an arrangement in our subsequent chapters to neglect the scalar-induced contributions', §2.4; 'we assume that this suppression is feasible, albeit with some fine-tuning', §3.4), and the scalar potential is assumed to have suitable minima ('we assume that such a minima can be obtained for a suitable choice of their values', §3.1). These are correctness/robustness risks, not hidden reductions: they are stated premises, and the gauge-loop computation itself is not equivalent to the inputs. Note also that in Chapter 3 the first-versus-second-generation hierarchy is partly an input via the gauge-boson mass ratio (eq. 2.50: C2/C1 ~ M^2_Z1/M^2_Z2), since the hierarchy is 'orchestrated by implementing hierarchical masses for the respective gauge bosons' (§2.2); however, these are fitted scales, not predictions, and Chapters 4-5 derive the analogous suppression structurally (2-loop order, sequential SU(3)_F breaking).

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 3 invented entities

The central mechanism rests on a repeated structure (rank-1 mass ansatz plus gauge loop corrections), but the concrete models introduce many fitted parameters: the U(1)xU(1) model has 25 real parameters, the optimized U(1) has 23 plus epsilon, and SU(3)F has 21. The scalar-sector suppression is the main ad hoc input, and the gauge charge choices (e.g., (1-epsilon, 1+epsilon, -2)) are optimized rather than derived.

free parameters (5)
  • gauge boson masses MZ1, MZ2 = e.g., MZ1=10^6 GeV, MZ2=1.27x10^7 GeV (Ch. 3, S2)
    The first/second generation mass gap is set by the ratio of these masses; fitted to reproduce the observed spectrum.
  • vector-like fermion masses mT, mB, mE = e.g., 1.10x10^6, 3.13x10^7, 4.56x10^7 GeV (Ch. 3, S2)
    They set the universal seesaw scale for third-generation masses; fitted values.
  • flavour charge parameter epsilon = 0.178 (Ch. 4 S1), 0.285 (Ch. 4 S2)
    Controls 1-2 flavour violation and the first/second generation mass ratio; chosen by hand and fitted.
  • effective mass parameters mu_fi and mu'_fi = Tables 3.3, 4.3, 5.2
    Derived from Yukawa couplings and VEVs; fitted to the 13 observables.
  • VEV ratio epsilon = MZ1/MZ2 in SU(3)F = 0.0284 (Ch. 5 S1)
    Sets the first/second generation mass gap through sequential SU(3)F breaking; fitted.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math Passarino-Veltman reduction and dimensional regularization give the finite loop functions b0
    Used in eqs. (2.21)-(2.31); standard QFT result.
  • standard math The seesaw approximation (mF >> mu_L,R) justifies truncating unitary rotations to first order
    Used throughout to derive rank-1 structure and simplified loop corrections; standard perturbation theory.
  • ad hoc to paper Scalar-mediated loop corrections and FCNCs can be made negligible by assuming small mixing between eta and H fields
    Section 2.4: 'We assume such an arrangement'; Section 3.4: 'we assume that this suppression is feasible, albeit with some fine-tuning.' This is load-bearing for the computability of the loop-mass predictions.
  • domain assumption The scalar potential admits a vacuum with the required VEV alignment that fully breaks the flavour symmetry and preserves U(1)em
    Assumed in Ch. 3 and Ch. 5; shown possible for suitable parameter choices in Ch. 5, but not proven for the specific fitted benchmarks.
  • domain assumption There is no kinetic mixing between the U(1)s, or it is small enough not to alter the mass hierarchy
    Section 3.1.1 argues a small mixing parameter keeps the hierarchy; assumed in the fits.
invented entities (3)
  • Vector-like fermions (TL,R, BL,R, EL,R, NL,R) independent evidence
    purpose: Generate rank-1 tree-level mass matrix for third generation via universal seesaw and participate in loop diagrams
    Heavy VL quarks and leptons have LHC direct search limits (mB>1.57 TeV, mT>1.31 TeV), providing falsifiable collider handles, though fitted masses are 10^6-10^8 GeV.
  • New gauge bosons (Z1, Z2 for U(1) models; SU(3)F gauge bosons) independent evidence
    purpose: Mediate loop-induced masses for first and second generation fermions
    Subject to direct search limits (MZ1 > 5-7 TeV for O(1) couplings) and flavour constraints; the derived scale ~10^3-10^5 TeV is testable indirectly.
  • Flavoured scalars (Hui, Hdi, eta_i)
    purpose: Break the flavour symmetry and generate mu and mu' mass terms; eta singlets break U(1)/SU(3) at high scale
    No distinct low-energy signature beyond the high scale; scalar loop contributions are assumed negligible, so they lack independent experimental handles.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Radiative Mass Generation in Gauged Theories of Flavour: A Path to Fermion Mass Hierarchies." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/Z6JQHHY5

@misc{pith2026250623665,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Radiative Mass Generation in Gauged Theories of Flavour: A Path to Fermion Mass Hierarchies},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/Z6JQHHY5}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.23665}
}
abstract

We present a class of models based on extended gauged flavour symmetries that address the hierarchical structure of fermion masses in the Standard Model (SM) through the radiative mass generation mechanism. In these frameworks, only third-generation fermions acquire tree-level masses, while the first and second generations gain their masses via quantum corrections induced by new gauge bosons, naturally explaining the observed mass hierarchy. Since the technically natural structure of fermion masses in the SM prevents such a mechanism from being implemented directly, we propose extensions involving both Abelian and non-Abelian gauge symmetries. Abelian extensions, which must be flavour non-universal, typically generate masses for only second-generation fermions at the 1-loop level, requiring higher order corrections or extension of gauge structure to account for first-generation masses. We show that either a $U(1)_1 \times U(1)_2$ extension or a single $U(1)_F$ with up to 2-loop mass generation can successfully realize the mechanism, with the latter predicting a viable new physics scale around $10^3$ TeV when flavour-violating charges are optimized. Non-Abelian extensions, such as those based on $SU(3)_F$, provide a more constrained and predictive setup due to a comparatively fewer number of free parameters. We also explore a radiative mechanism in Abelian extensions within left-right symmetric theories, which simultaneously addresses the strong CP problem. All these models collectively offer a compelling and testable framework for generating a realistic SM fermion mass spectrum.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.23665 by the authors.

Figure 2.1
Figure 2.1. Gauge boson induced fermion self-energy correction at 1-loop. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p048_2_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2.2
Figure 2.2. Scalar induced fermion self-energy correction at 1-loop. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p059_2_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4.1
Figure 4.1. Next-to-leading order correction to the 1-loop corrected mass matrix. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p090_4_1.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 4.2
Figure 4.2. Figure 4.2: Left sub-figure: contours of m1/m3 = 10−6 , 10−4 , 10−3 (black) and m2/m3 = 10−1.1, 10−1.3 (blue). Right sub-figure: contours of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p094_4_2.png]
Figure 4.3
Figure 4.3. Figure 4.3: Left sub-figure: Charged fermion masses at tree level, 1-loop, and 2-loop [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p095_4_3.png]
Figure 4.4
Figure 4.4. Figure 4.4: The calculated χ 2 min as a function of ϵ for three exemplary values of MX, with scenarios classified as case A (left panel) and case B (right panel). • Case A: Ordered µf i and µ ′ f i, i.e. for f = u,d, e, we impose |µf 1 | < |µf 2 | < |µf 3 |, and |µ ′ f 1 | < |µ …
Figure 4.5
Figure 4.5. Figure 4.5: Magnitude of ReC 4 K calculated for the best-fit points with different values of ϵ, for MX = 106 GeV (left sub-figure) and MX = 107 GeV (right sub-figure). The shaded regions indicate exclusions based on current limits at the 95% confidence level. 4.3.1 Meson-antimes…
Figure 4.6
Figure 4.6. Figure 4.6: Magnitude of ReC 5 K computed for the best-fit points for different values of ϵ and for MX = 106 GeV (left sub-figure) and MX = 107 GeV (right sub-figure). The shaded regions are excluded by the present limits at 95% confidence level. We also present these estimation…
Figure 4.7
Figure 4.7. Figure 4.7: Left sub-figure: BR[µ → e] in 197Au nucleus for various values of ϵ and for MX = 106 GeV estimated from the best-fit solutions. Right sub-figure: The same for the lepton flavour violating observable BR[µ → e γ]. corresponding to MX = 106 GeV. The results are presente…
Figure 5.1
Figure 5.1. Figure 5.1: Self-energy correction induced by SU(3)F gauge boson at 1-loop. Thus, the gauge interactions in the physical basis of fermions and gauge bosons are obtained as −Lgauge = gF 2  f Lαγ µ  U † LΛ aUL  αβ fLβ + f Rαγ µ  UR †Λ aUR  αβ fRβ RabB b µ . (5.5) Due to the …
Figure 6.1
Figure 6.1. Figure 6.1: Gauge boson induced next order correction at 3-loop. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p155_6_1.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

142 extracted references · 22 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Partial Symmetries of Weak Interactions

    S. L. Glashow. “Partial Symmetries of Weak Interactions”. In: Nucl. Phys. 22 (1961), pp. 579–588. doi: 10.1016/0029-5582(61)90469-2

    doi:10.1016/0029-5582(61)90469-2 1961

  2. [2]

    Electromagnetic and weak interactions

    Abdus Salam and John Clive Ward. “Electromagnetic and weak interactions”. In: Phys. Lett. 13 (1964), pp. 168–171. doi: 10.1016/0031-9163(64)90711-5

    work page doi:10.1016/0031-9163(64)90711-5 1964

  3. [3]

    A Model of Leptons

    Steven Weinberg. “A Model of Leptons”. In: Phys. Rev. Lett.19 (1967), pp. 1264–

    1967

  4. [4]

    Broken Symmetries and the Masses of Gauge Bosons

    Peter W. Higgs. “Broken Symmetries and the Masses of Gauge Bosons”. In: Phys. Rev. Lett. 13 (1964). Ed. by J. C. Taylor, pp. 508–509. doi: 10 . 1103 / PhysRevLett.13.508

    1964

  5. [5]

    Broken symmetries, massless particles and gauge fields

    Peter W. Higgs. “Broken symmetries, massless particles and gauge fields”. In: Phys. Lett. 12 (1964), pp. 132–133. doi: 10.1016/0031-9163(64)91136-9

    doi:10.1016/0031-9163(64)91136-9 1964

  6. [6]

    Spontaneous Symmetry Breakdown without Massless Bosons

    Peter W. Higgs. “Spontaneous Symmetry Breakdown without Massless Bosons”. In: Phys. Rev. 145 (1966), pp. 1156–1163. doi: 10.1103/PhysRev.145.1156

    doi:10.1103/physrev.145.1156 1966

  7. [7]

    CP Violation in the Renormaliz- able Theory of Weak Interaction

    Makoto Kobayashi and Toshihide Maskawa. “CP Violation in the Renormaliz- able Theory of Weak Interaction”. In:Prog. Theor. Phys. 49 (1973), pp. 652–657. doi: 10.1143/PTP.49.652

    doi:10.1143/ptp.49.652 1973

  8. [8]

    The Standard Model: From Fundamental Symme- tries to Experimental Tests

    Yuval Grossman and Yossi Nir. The Standard Model: From Fundamental Symme- tries to Experimental Tests . Princeton University Press, Oct. 2023. isbn: 978-0- 691-23910-1

    2023

Show all 142 references
  1. [9]

    Combined Measurement of the Higgs Boson Mass in pp Collisions at√s = 7 and 8 TeV with the ATLAS and CMS Experiments

    Georges Aad et al. “Combined Measurement of the Higgs Boson Mass in pp Collisions at√s = 7 and 8 TeV with the ATLAS and CMS Experiments”. In: Phys. Rev. Lett.114 (2015), p. 191803. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.191803. arXiv: 1503.07589 [hep-ex]

    2015 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Evidence for the 2 π Decay of theK0 2 Meson

    J. H. Christenson et al. “Evidence for the 2 π Decay of theK0 2 Meson”. In: Phys. Rev. Lett. 13 (1964), pp. 138–140. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.13.138

    1964 doi

  3. [11]

    Evidence for oscillation of atmospheric neutrinos

    Y. Fukuda et al. “Evidence for oscillation of atmospheric neutrinos”. In: Phys. Rev. Lett. 81 (1998), pp. 1562–1567. doi: 10 . 1103 / PhysRevLett . 81 . 1562. arXiv: hep-ex/9807003

    1998 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Baryon and Lepton Nonconserving Processes

    Steven Weinberg. “Baryon and Lepton Nonconserving Processes”. In: Phys. Rev. Lett. 43 (1979), pp. 1566–1570. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.43.1566

    1979 doi

  5. [14]

    Pieces of the Flavour Puzzle

    Ferruccio Feruglio. “Pieces of the Flavour Puzzle”. In: Eur. Phys. J. C75.8 (2015), p. 373. doi: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-015-3576-5 . arXiv: 1503.04071 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  6. [15]

    NuFit-6.0: updated global analysis of three-flavor neutrino oscillations

    Ivan Esteban et al. “NuFit-6.0: updated global analysis of three-flavor neutrino oscillations”. In: JHEP 12 (2024), p. 216. doi: 10 . 1007 / JHEP12(2024 ) 216. arXiv: 2410.05380 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  7. [16]

    Neutrino mass anar- chy

    Lawrence J. Hall, Hitoshi Murayama, and Neal Weiner. “Neutrino mass anar- chy”. In: Phys. Rev. Lett.84 (2000), pp. 2572–2575. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett. 84.2572. arXiv: hep-ph/9911341. 147 148 REFERENCES

    2000 arXiv

  8. [17]

    Neutrino Mixing Anarchy: Alive and Kicking

    Andre de Gouvea and Hitoshi Murayama. “Neutrino Mixing Anarchy: Alive and Kicking”. In: Phys. Lett. B 747 (2015), pp. 479–483. doi: 10 . 1016 / j . physletb.2015.06.028. arXiv: 1204.1249 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  9. [18]

    Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters

    N. Aghanim et al. “Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters”. In: As- tron. Astrophys. 641 (2020). [Erratum: Astron.Astrophys. 652, C4 (2021)], A6. doi: 10.1051/0004-6361/201833910. arXiv: 1807.06209 [astro-ph.CO]

    2020 arXiv

  10. [19]

    Measurement of the Permanent Electric Dipole Moment of the Neutron

    C. Abel et al. “Measurement of the Permanent Electric Dipole Moment of the Neutron”. In:Phys. Rev. Lett.124.8 (2020), p. 081803.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett. 124.081803. arXiv: 2001.11966 [hep-ex]

    2020 arXiv

  11. [20]

    INSTANTONS AND THE mu QUARK MASS

    Howard Georgi and Ian N. McArthur. “INSTANTONS AND THE mu QUARK MASS”. In: (Mar. 1981)

    1981

  12. [21]

    Mass Renormalization by Instantons and the Strong CP Problem

    Kiwoon Choi, C. W. Kim, and W. K. Sze. “Mass Renormalization by Instantons and the Strong CP Problem”. In:Phys. Rev. Lett.61 (1988), p. 794.doi: 10.1103/ PhysRevLett.61.794

    1988

  13. [23]

    Constraints Imposed by CP Conservation in the Presence of Instantons

    R. D. Peccei and Helen R. Quinn. “Constraints Imposed by CP Conservation in the Presence of Instantons”. In: Phys. Rev. D 16 (1977), pp. 1791–1797. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.16.1791

    1977 doi

  14. [25]

    A New Light Boson?

    Steven Weinberg. “A New Light Boson?” In: Phys. Rev. Lett. 40 (1978), pp. 223–

    1978

  15. [26]

    Weak Interaction Singlet and Strong CP Invariance

    Jihn E. Kim. “Weak Interaction Singlet and Strong CP Invariance”. In: Phys. Rev. Lett. 43 (1979), p. 103. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.43.103

    1979 doi

  16. [27]

    Can Confine- ment Ensure Natural CP Invariance of Strong Interactions?

    Mikhail A. Shifman, A. I. Vainshtein, and Valentin I. Zakharov. “Can Confine- ment Ensure Natural CP Invariance of Strong Interactions?” In: Nucl. Phys. B 166 (1980), pp. 493–506. doi: 10.1016/0550-3213(80)90209-6

    1980 doi

  17. [28]

    A Simple Solution to the Strong CP Problem with a Harmless Axion

    Michael Dine, Willy Fischler, and Mark Srednicki. “A Simple Solution to the Strong CP Problem with a Harmless Axion”. In:Phys. Lett. B104 (1981), pp. 199–

    1981

  18. [29]

    Naturally Weak CP Violation

    Ann E. Nelson. “Naturally Weak CP Violation”. In: Phys. Lett. B 136 (1984), pp. 387–391. doi: 10.1016/0370-2693(84)92025-2

    1984 doi

  19. [31]

    Natural Suppression of Strong p and t Noninvariance

    Rabindra N. Mohapatra and G. Senjanovic. “Natural Suppression of Strong p and t Noninvariance”. In: Phys. Lett. B 79 (1978), pp. 283–286. doi: 10.1016/ 0370-2693(78)90243-5

    1978

  20. [34]

    Hierarchy of Quark Masses, Cabibbo Angles and CP Violation

    C. D. Froggatt and Holger Bech Nielsen. “Hierarchy of Quark Masses, Cabibbo Angles and CP Violation”. In: Nucl. Phys. B 147 (1979), pp. 277–298. doi: 10. 1016/0550-3213(79)90316-X

    1979

  21. [35]

    Explaining fermions mass and mixing hierarchies through U(1) X and Z 2 symmetries

    Abdul Rahaman Shaikh and Rathin Adhikari. “Explaining fermions mass and mixing hierarchies through U(1) X and Z 2 symmetries”. In: Commun. Theor. Phys. 77.5 (2025), p. 055202. doi: 10.1088/1572- 9494/ad9c45 . arXiv: 2404. 11570 [hep-ph]

    2025 doi

  22. [36]

    Comment on

    Gian F. Giudice and Matthew McCullough. “Comment on ”Disassembling the Clockwork Mechanism””. In: (May 2017). arXiv: 1705.10162 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  23. [37]

    A Large mass hierarchy from a small ex- tra dimension

    Lisa Randall and Raman Sundrum. “A Large mass hierarchy from a small ex- tra dimension”. In: Phys. Rev. Lett. 83 (1999), pp. 3370–3373. doi: 10 . 1103 / PhysRevLett.83.3370. arXiv: hep-ph/9905221

    1999 arXiv

  24. [38]

    Renormalizable Lagrangians for Massive Yang-Mills Fields

    Gerard ’t Hooft. “Renormalizable Lagrangians for Massive Yang-Mills Fields”. In: Nucl. Phys. B35 (1971). Ed. by J. C. Taylor, pp. 167–188.doi: 10.1016/0550- 3213(71)90139-8

    1971 doi

  25. [39]

    Electromagnetic and weak masses

    Steven Weinberg. “Electromagnetic and weak masses”. In: Phys. Rev. Lett. 29 (1972), pp. 388–392. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.29.388

    1972 doi

  26. [40]

    Attempts to calculate the electron mass

    Howard Georgi and Sheldon L. Glashow. “Attempts to calculate the electron mass”. In: Phys. Rev. D 7 (1973), pp. 2457–2463. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.7. 2457

    1973 doi

  27. [41]

    Spontaneously broken gauge sym- metry and elementary particle masses

    Howard Georgi and Sheldon L. Glashow. “Spontaneously broken gauge sym- metry and elementary particle masses”. In: Phys. Rev. D 6 (1972), pp. 2977–

    1972

  28. [43]

    A New Approach to the electron-Muon Mass Ratio

    Stephen M. Barr and A. Zee. “A New Approach to the electron-Muon Mass Ratio”. In: Phys. Rev. D 15 (1977), p. 2652. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.15.2652

    1977 doi

  29. [44]

    Calculating the Electron Mass in Terms of Mea- sured Quantities

    Stephen M. Barr and A. Zee. “Calculating the Electron Mass in Terms of Mea- sured Quantities”. In: Phys. Rev. D 17 (1978), p. 1854. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD. 17.1854

    1978 doi

  30. [45]

    Naturalness, chiral symmetry, and spontaneous chiral sym- metry breaking

    Gerard ’t Hooft. “Naturalness, chiral symmetry, and spontaneous chiral sym- metry breaking”. In: NATO Sci. Ser. B 59 (1980). Ed. by Gerard ’t Hooft et al., pp. 135–157. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4684-7571-5_9

    1980 doi

  31. [46]

    Fermion Mass Hierarchy From Radiative Corrections

    B. S. Balakrishna. “Fermion Mass Hierarchy From Radiative Corrections”. In: Phys. Rev. Lett. 60 (1988), p. 1602. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.60.1602

    1988 doi

  32. [47]

    Quark Mixings and Mass Hierarchy From Radiative Corrections

    B. S. Balakrishna, A. L. Kagan, and R. N. Mohapatra. “Quark Mixings and Mass Hierarchy From Radiative Corrections”. In: Phys. Lett. B 205 (1988), pp. 345–

    1988

  33. [48]

    RADIATIVELY INDUCED LEPTON MASSES

    B. S. Balakrishna. “RADIATIVELY INDUCED LEPTON MASSES”. In: Phys. Lett. B 214 (1988), pp. 267–272. doi: 10.1016/0370-2693(88)91480-3. 150 REFERENCES

    1988 doi

  34. [49]

    Radiative Fermion Masses From New Physics at Tev Scale

    B. S. Balakrishna and R. N. Mohapatra. “Radiative Fermion Masses From New Physics at Tev Scale”. In: Phys. Lett. B 216 (1989), pp. 349–352. doi: 10.1016/ 0370-2693(89)91129-5

    1989

  35. [50]

    Fermion mass hierarchy and the strong CP prob- lem

    K. S. Babu and Xiao-Gang He. “Fermion mass hierarchy and the strong CP prob- lem”. In: Phys. Lett. B 219 (1989), pp. 342–346. doi: 10.1016/0370-2693(89) 90401-2

    1989 doi

  36. [51]

    Supersymmetric Model for Fermion Mass Hierarchy

    K. S. Babu, B. S. Balakrishna, and R. N. Mohapatra. “Supersymmetric Model for Fermion Mass Hierarchy”. In: Phys. Lett. B 237 (1990), pp. 221–228. doi: 10.1016/0370-2693(90)91433-C

    1990 doi

  37. [52]

    Radiative Quark and Lepton Masses in a Left-right Gauge Model

    Ernest Ma. “Radiative Quark and Lepton Masses in a Left-right Gauge Model”. In: Phys. Rev. Lett. 63 (1989), p. 1042. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.63.1042

    1989 doi

  38. [53]

    Permutation Symmetry and the Origin of Fermion Mass Hierarchy

    K. S. Babu and R. N. Mohapatra. “Permutation Symmetry and the Origin of Fermion Mass Hierarchy”. In: Phys. Rev. Lett. 64 (1990), p. 2747. doi: 10.1103/ PhysRevLett.64.2747

    1990

  39. [54]

    A Supersymmetric theory of flavor with radiative fermion masses

    Nima Arkani-Hamed, Hsin-Chia Cheng, and L. J. Hall. “A Supersymmetric theory of flavor with radiative fermion masses”. In: Phys. Rev. D 54 (1996), pp. 2242–2260. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.54.2242. arXiv: hep-ph/9601262

    1996 arXiv

  40. [55]

    Radiative Quark and Lepton Masses Induced by a Fourth Genera- tion

    Ernest Ma. “Radiative Quark and Lepton Masses Induced by a Fourth Genera- tion”. In: Phys. Rev. Lett. 62 (1989), p. 1228. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.62. 1228

    1989 doi

  41. [56]

    Radiative gen- eration of light fermion masses in a SU(3)(H) horizontal symmetry model

    Albino Hernandez Galeana and J. Halim Montes de Oca Yemha. “Radiative gen- eration of light fermion masses in a SU(3)(H) horizontal symmetry model”. In: Rev. Mex. Fis. 50 (2004), pp. 522–526. arXiv: hep-ph/0406315

    2004 arXiv

  42. [57]

    Quark mass ratios and mix- ing angles from SU(3) family gauge symmetry

    Thomas Appelquist, Yang Bai, and Maurizio Piai. “Quark mass ratios and mix- ing angles from SU(3) family gauge symmetry”. In: Phys. Lett. B 637 (2006), pp. 245–250. doi: 10.1016/j.physletb.2006.04.043. arXiv: hep-ph/0603104

    2006 arXiv

  43. [58]

    Radiative fermion mass hierarchy in a non-supersymmetric unified theory

    S. M. Barr. “Radiative fermion mass hierarchy in a non-supersymmetric unified theory”. In: Phys. Rev. D 76 (2007), p. 105024. doi: 10 . 1103 / PhysRevD . 76 . 105024. arXiv: 0706.1490 [hep-ph]

    2007 arXiv

  44. [59]

    Quark and lepton masses from top loops

    Bogdan A. Dobrescu and Patrick J. Fox. “Quark and lepton masses from top loops”. In: JHEP 08 (2008), p. 100. doi: 10.1088/1126- 6708/2008/08/100 . arXiv: 0805.0822 [hep-ph]

    2008 arXiv

  45. [60]

    A Domino Theory of Flavor

    Peter W. Graham and Surjeet Rajendran. “A Domino Theory of Flavor”. In: Phys. Rev. D 81 (2010), p. 033002. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.81.033002 . arXiv: 0906.4657 [hep-ph]

    2010 arXiv

  46. [61]

    Models of Lepton and Quark Masses

    Steven Weinberg. “Models of Lepton and Quark Masses”. In: Phys. Rev. D101.3 (2020), p. 035020. doi: 10 . 1103 / PhysRevD . 101 . 035020. arXiv: 2001 . 06582 [hep-th]

    2020

  47. [62]

    Flavor seesaw mechanism

    Sudip Jana, Sophie Klett, and Manfred Lindner. “Flavor seesaw mechanism”. In: Phys. Rev. D105.11 (2022), p. 115015. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.105.115015. arXiv: 2112.09155 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  48. [63]

    Radiatively generated fermion mass hierarchy from flavor nonuniversal gauge symmetries

    Gurucharan Mohanta and Ketan M. Patel. “Radiatively generated fermion mass hierarchy from flavor nonuniversal gauge symmetries”. In: Phys. Rev. D 106.7 (2022), p. 075020. doi: 10 . 1103 / PhysRevD . 106 . 075020. arXiv: 2207 . 10407 [hep-ph]. REFERENCES 151

    2022

  49. [64]

    Radiative Seesaw Mechanism for Charged Leptons

    Cheng-Wei Chiang and Kei Yagyu. “Radiative Seesaw Mechanism for Charged Leptons”. In: Phys. Rev. D 103.11 (2021), p. L111302. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD. 103.L111302. arXiv: 2104.00890 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  50. [65]

    Dark sector as origin of light lepton mass and its phenomenology

    Cheng-Wei Chiang, Ryomei Obuchi, and Kei Yagyu. “Dark sector as origin of light lepton mass and its phenomenology”. In: JHEP 05 (2022), p. 070. doi: 10.1007/JHEP05(2022)070. arXiv: 2202.07784 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  51. [66]

    Has the Origin of the Third-Family Fermion Masses been Determined?

    Michael J. Baker, Peter Cox, and Raymond R. Volkas. “Has the Origin of the Third-Family Fermion Masses been Determined?” In: JHEP 04 (2021), p. 151. doi: 10.1007/JHEP04(2021)151. arXiv: 2012.10458 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  52. [67]

    Radiative muon mass models and (g− 2)µ

    Michael J. Baker, Peter Cox, and Raymond R. Volkas. “Radiative muon mass models and (g− 2)µ”. In: JHEP 05 (2021), p. 174. doi: 10.1007/JHEP05(2021)

    2021 doi

  53. [68]

    Radiative lepton mass and muon g − 2 with suppressed lepton flavor and CP violations

    Wen Yin. “Radiative lepton mass and muon g − 2 with suppressed lepton flavor and CP violations”. In:JHEP 08 (2021), p. 043.doi: 10.1007/JHEP08(2021)043. arXiv: 2103.14234 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  54. [69]

    Yukawa coupling and anomalous magnetic moment of the muon: an update for the LHC era

    Andreas Crivellin, Jennifer Girrbach, and Ulrich Nierste. “Yukawa coupling and anomalous magnetic moment of the muon: an update for the LHC era”. In: Phys. Rev. D 83 (2011), p. 055009. doi: 10 . 1103 / PhysRevD . 83 . 055009. arXiv: 1010.4485 [hep-ph]

    2011 arXiv

  55. [70]

    Phenomenological consequences of radiative flavor violation in the MSSM

    Andreas Crivellin et al. “Phenomenological consequences of radiative flavor violation in the MSSM”. In: Phys. Rev. D 84 (2011), p. 035030. doi: 10.1103/ PhysRevD.84.035030. arXiv: 1105.2818 [hep-ph]

    2011 arXiv

  56. [71]

    Non-universal gauged lepton number for charged lepton masses hierarchy and (g− 2)e,µ

    We-Fu Chang. “Non-universal gauged lepton number for charged lepton masses hierarchy and (g− 2)e,µ”. In: (Oct. 2022). arXiv: 2210.11097 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  57. [72]

    Rising through the ranks: flavor hi- erarchies from a gauged SU(2) symmetry

    Admir Greljo and Anders Eller Thomsen. “Rising through the ranks: flavor hi- erarchies from a gauged SU(2) symmetry”. In:Eur. Phys. J. C84.2 (2024), p. 213. doi: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-12556-5 . arXiv: 2309.11547 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  58. [73]

    Exploring a Gauge Horizontal Model for Charged Fermion Masses

    We-Fu Chang. “Exploring a Gauge Horizontal Model for Charged Fermion Masses”. In: (Aug. 2024). arXiv: 2408.02238 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  59. [74]

    SO(3) family symmetry and axions

    Mario Reig, José W. F. Valle, and Frank Wilczek. “SO(3) family symmetry and axions”. In: Phys. Rev. D 98.9 (2018), p. 095008. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.98. 095008. arXiv: 1805.08048 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  60. [75]

    Gauged SU(3) F and loop induced quark and lepton masses

    Gurucharan Mohanta and Ketan M. Patel. “Gauged SU(3) F and loop induced quark and lepton masses”. In:JHEP 10 (2023), p. 128.doi: 10.1007/JHEP10(2023)

    2023 doi

  61. [76]

    Parity and lepton masses in the left-right symmetric model

    Ravi Kuchimanchi. “Parity and lepton masses in the left-right symmetric model”. In: Phys. Rev. D 110.9 (2024), p. 095028. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.110.095028 . arXiv: 2406.14480 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  62. [77]

    Loop-induced masses for the first two generations with optimum flavour violation

    Gurucharan Mohanta and Ketan M. Patel. “Loop-induced masses for the first two generations with optimum flavour violation”. In: JHEP 12 (2024), p. 158. doi: 10.1007/JHEP12(2024)158. arXiv: 2406.19179 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  63. [78]

    Radiative origin of fermion mass hierarchy in left-right sym- metric theory

    Sudip Jana et al. “Radiative origin of fermion mass hierarchy in left-right sym- metric theory”. In: JHEP 01 (2025), p. 082. doi: 10 . 1007 / JHEP01(2025 ) 082. arXiv: 2409.04246 [hep-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  64. [79]

    Radiative Mass Mechanism: Addressing the Flavour Hi- erarchy and Strong CP Puzzle

    Gurucharan Mohanta. “Radiative Mass Mechanism: Addressing the Flavour Hi- erarchy and Strong CP Puzzle”. In: (Nov. 2024). arXiv:2411.13385 [hep-ph]. 152 REFERENCES

    2024 arXiv

  65. [80]

    Fermion Mass Hierarchy with a Radiative Originand Ex- perimental Insights into Neutrino Interactions

    Sophie Elaine Klett. “Fermion Mass Hierarchy with a Radiative Originand Ex- perimental Insights into Neutrino Interactions”. PhD thesis. U. Heidelberg (main),

  66. [81]

    The Weak Mixing Angles in Gauge Models with Horizontal Symmetry: A New Approach to Quark and Lepton Masses

    Z. G. Berezhiani. “The Weak Mixing Angles in Gauge Models with Horizontal Symmetry: A New Approach to Quark and Lepton Masses”. In: Phys. Lett. B 129 (1983), pp. 99–102. doi: 10.1016/0370-2693(83)90737-2

    1983 doi

  67. [82]

    Horizontal Symmetry and Quark - Lepton Mass Spectrum: The SU(5) x SU(3)-h Model

    Z. G. Berezhiani. “Horizontal Symmetry and Quark - Lepton Mass Spectrum: The SU(5) x SU(3)-h Model”. In: Phys. Lett. B 150 (1985), pp. 177–181. doi: 10.1016/0370-2693(85)90164-9

    1985 doi

  68. [83]

    Small and Calculable Dirac Neu- trino Mass

    Darwin Chang and Rabindra N. Mohapatra. “Small and Calculable Dirac Neu- trino Mass”. In: Phys. Rev. Lett. 58 (1987), p. 1600. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett. 58.1600

    1987 doi

  69. [84]

    Seesaw Masses for Quarks and Leptons in an Ambidextrous Elec- troweak Interaction Model

    S. Rajpoot. “Seesaw Masses for Quarks and Leptons in an Ambidextrous Elec- troweak Interaction Model”. In: Phys. Lett. B 191 (1987), pp. 122–126. doi: 10. 1016/0370-2693(87)91332-3

    1987

  70. [85]

    Universal Seesaw Mechanism?

    A. Davidson and Kameshwar C. Wali. “Universal Seesaw Mechanism?” In: Phys. Rev. Lett. 59 (1987), p. 393. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.59.393

    1987 doi

  71. [86]

    µ → eγ at a Rate of One Out of 1-Billion Muon Decays?

    Peter Minkowski. “ µ → eγ at a Rate of One Out of 1-Billion Muon Decays?” In: Phys. Lett. B 67 (1977), pp. 421–428. doi: 10.1016/0370-2693(77)90435-X

    1977 doi

  72. [87]

    Horizontal Symmetry and Mass of the Top Quark

    Tsutomu Yanagida. “Horizontal Symmetry and Mass of the Top Quark”. In: Phys. Rev. D 20 (1979), p. 2986. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.20.2986

    1979 doi

  73. [88]

    Complex Spinors and Unified The- ories

    M. Gell-Mann, P . Ramond, and R. Slansky. “Complex Spinors and Unified The- ories”. In: (1979). Ed. by D.Z. Freedman and P . Van Nieuwenhuizen. arXiv:hep- th/9803009, pp. 315–321

    1979

  74. [89]

    Generalised µ-τ sym- metries and calculable gauge kinetic and mass mixing in U (1)Lµ−Lτ models

    Anjan S. Joshipura, Namit Mahajan, and Ketan M. Patel. “Generalised µ-τ sym- metries and calculable gauge kinetic and mass mixing in U (1)Lµ−Lτ models”. In: JHEP 03 (2020), p. 001. doi: 10.1007/JHEP03(2020)001. arXiv: 1909.02331 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  75. [90]

    One Loop Corrections for e+ e- Annihi- lation Into mu+ mu- in the Weinberg Model

    G. Passarino and M. J. G. Veltman. “One Loop Corrections for e+ e- Annihi- lation Into mu+ mu- in the Weinberg Model”. In: Nucl. Phys. B 160 (1979), pp. 151–207. doi: 10.1016/0550-3213(79)90234-7

    1979 doi

  76. [91]

    New Physics From Electric Charge Quantization?

    Robert Foot. “New Physics From Electric Charge Quantization?” In: Mod. Phys. Lett. A 06 (1991), pp. 527–530. doi: 10.1142/S0217732391000543

    1991 doi

  77. [92]

    NEW Z-prime PHENOMENOLOGY

    X. G. He et al. “NEW Z-prime PHENOMENOLOGY”. In: Phys. Rev. D43 (1991), pp. 22–24. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.43.R22

    1991 doi

  78. [93]

    Simplest Z-prime model

    Xiao-Gang He et al. “Simplest Z-prime model”. In: Phys. Rev. D 44 (1991), pp. 2118–2132. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.44.2118

    1991 doi

  79. [94]

    Leptophobic U(1) s and the R(b) - R(c) crisis

    K. S. Babu, Christopher F. Kolda, and John March-Russell. “Leptophobic U(1) s and the R(b) - R(c) crisis”. In: Phys. Rev. D 54 (1996), pp. 4635–4647. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.54.4635. arXiv: hep-ph/9603212

    1996 arXiv

  80. [95]

    Horizontal gauge symmetry and masses of neutrinos

    T. Yanagida. “Horizontal gauge symmetry and masses of neutrinos”. In: (1979)

    1979

  81. [96]

    Neutrino Mass and Sponta- neous Parity Nonconservation

    Rabindra N. Mohapatra and Goran Senjanovic. “Neutrino Mass and Sponta- neous Parity Nonconservation”. In: Phys. Rev. Lett. 44 (1980), p. 912. doi: 10. 1103/PhysRevLett.44.912. REFERENCES 153

    1980

  82. [97]

    Leptogenesis and fermion mass fit in a renormalizable SO(10) model

    V. Suryanarayana Mummidi and Ketan M. Patel. “Leptogenesis and fermion mass fit in a renormalizable SO(10) model”. In: JHEP 12 (2021), p. 042. doi: 10.1007/JHEP12(2021)042. arXiv: 2109.04050 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  83. [98]

    Updated Values of Running Quark and Lepton Masses

    Zhi-zhong Xing, He Zhang, and Shun Zhou. “Updated Values of Running Quark and Lepton Masses”. In: Phys. Rev. D 77 (2008), p. 113016. doi: 10 . 1103 / PhysRevD.77.113016. arXiv: 0712.1419 [hep-ph]

    2008 arXiv

  84. [99]

    Review of Particle Physics

    R. L. Workman et al. “Review of Particle Physics”. In: PTEP 2022 (2022), p. 083C01. doi: 10.1093/ptep/ptac097

    2022 doi

  85. [100]

    Model-independent constraints on ∆F = 2 operators and the scale of new physics

    M. Bona et al. “Model-independent constraints on ∆F = 2 operators and the scale of new physics”. In: JHEP 03 (2008), p. 049. doi: 10.1088/1126- 6708/ 2008/03/049. arXiv: 0707.0636 [hep-ph]

    2008 arXiv

  86. [101]

    Delta M(K) and epsilon(K) in SUSY at the next-to-leading order

    Marco Ciuchini et al. “Delta M(K) and epsilon(K) in SUSY at the next-to-leading order”. In: JHEP 10 (1998), p. 008. doi: 10.1088/1126- 6708/1998/10/008 . arXiv: hep-ph/9808328

    1998 arXiv

  87. [102]

    Anomaly free Froggatt- Nielsen models of flavor

    Aleks Smolkovi č, Michele Tammaro, and Jure Zupan. “Anomaly free Froggatt- Nielsen models of flavor”. In: JHEP 10 (2019). [Erratum: JHEP 02, 033 (2022)], p. 188. doi: 10.1007/JHEP10(2019)188. arXiv: 1907.10063 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  88. [103]

    Bd− ¯Bd mixing and the Bd→J/ψKs asymmetry in general SUSY models

    D. Becirevic et al. “ Bd− ¯Bd mixing and the Bd→J/ψKs asymmetry in general SUSY models”. In: Nucl. Phys. B 634 (2002), pp. 105–119. doi: 10.1016/S0550- 3213(02)00291-2. arXiv: hep-ph/0112303

    2002 arXiv

  89. [104]

    Updated Bs-mixing con- straints on new physics models forb→sℓ+ℓ− anomalies

    Luca Di Luzio, Matthew Kirk, and Alexander Lenz. “Updated Bs-mixing con- straints on new physics models forb→sℓ+ℓ− anomalies”. In: Phys. Rev. D 97.9 (2018), p. 095035. doi: 10 . 1103 / PhysRevD . 97 . 095035. arXiv: 1712 . 06572 [hep-ph]

    2018

  90. [105]

    Collider constraints on Z′ models for neutral current B-anomalies

    B. C. Allanach, J. M. Butterworth, and Tyler Corbett. “Collider constraints on Z′ models for neutral current B-anomalies”. In: JHEP 08 (2019), p. 106. doi: 10.1007/JHEP08(2019)106. arXiv: 1904.10954 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  91. [106]

    A Search for muon to electron conversion in muonic gold

    Wilhelm H. Bertl et al. “A Search for muon to electron conversion in muonic gold”. In: Eur. Phys. J. C 47 (2006), pp. 337–346. doi: 10.1140/epjc/s2006- 02582-x

    2006 doi

  92. [107]

    Detailed calculation of lepton flavor violating muon electron conversion rate for various nuclei

    Ryuichiro Kitano, Masafumi Koike, and Yasuhiro Okada. “Detailed calculation of lepton flavor violating muon electron conversion rate for various nuclei”. In: Phys. Rev. D 66 (2002). [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 76, 059902 (2007)], p. 096002. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.76.059902. arXiv: hep...

    2002 arXiv

  93. [108]

    Charged Lepton Flavour Violation: An Experimental and Theoretical Introduction

    Lorenzo Calibbi and Giovanni Signorelli. “Charged Lepton Flavour Violation: An Experimental and Theoretical Introduction”. In:Riv. Nuovo Cim.41.2 (2018), pp. 71–174. doi: 10.1393/ncr/i2018-10144-0. arXiv: 1709.00294 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  94. [109]

    Lepton flavor violation with light vector bosons

    Julian Heeck. “Lepton flavor violation with light vector bosons”. In: Phys. Lett. B 758 (2016), pp. 101–105. doi: 10.1016/j.physletb.2016.05.007 . arXiv: 1602.03810 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  95. [110]

    General formulae for f(1) → f(2) gamma

    L. Lavoura. “General formulae for f(1) → f(2) gamma”. In: Eur. Phys. J. C 29 (2003), pp. 191–195. doi: 10 . 1140 / epjc / s2003 - 01212 - 7. arXiv: hep - ph / 0302221

    2003

  96. [111]

    Search for resonant and nonresonant new phenomena in high-mass dilepton final states at√s = 13 TeV

    Albert M Sirunyan et al. “Search for resonant and nonresonant new phenomena in high-mass dilepton final states at√s = 13 TeV”. In: JHEP 07 (2021), p. 208. doi: 10.1007/JHEP07(2021)208. arXiv: 2103.02708 [hep-ex]. 154 REFERENCES

    2021 arXiv

  97. [112]

    Search for narrow and broad dijet resonances in proton-proton collisions at √s = 13 TeV and constraints on dark matter me- diators and other new particles

    Albert M Sirunyan et al. “Search for narrow and broad dijet resonances in proton-proton collisions at √s = 13 TeV and constraints on dark matter me- diators and other new particles”. In: JHEP 08 (2018), p. 130. doi: 10 . 1007 / JHEP08(2018)130. arXiv: 1806.00843 [hep-ex]

    2018 arXiv

  98. [113]

    A search for bottom-type, vector-like quark pair pro- duction in a fully hadronic final state in proton-proton collisions at √s = 13 TeV

    Albert M Sirunyan et al. “A search for bottom-type, vector-like quark pair pro- duction in a fully hadronic final state in proton-proton collisions at √s = 13 TeV”. In: Phys. Rev. D 102 (2020), p. 112004. doi: 10 . 1103 / PhysRevD . 102 . 112004. arXiv: 2008.09835 [hep-ex]

    2020 arXiv

  99. [114]

    Morad Aaboud et al. “Search for pair production of heavy vector-like quarks decaying into high-pT W bosons and top quarks in the lepton-plus-jets final state in pp collisions at√s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector”. In: JHEP 08 (2018), p. 048. doi: 10.1007/JHEP08(2018)048. arXi...

    2018 arXiv

  100. [115]

    Search for vector-like quarks in events with two op- positely charged leptons and jets in proton-proton collisions at √s = 13 TeV

    Albert M Sirunyan et al. “Search for vector-like quarks in events with two op- positely charged leptons and jets in proton-proton collisions at √s = 13 TeV”. In: Eur. Phys. J. C 79.4 (2019), p. 364. doi: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-019-6855-8 . arXiv: 1812.09768 [hep-ex]

    2019 arXiv

  101. [116]

    Combination of the searches for pair-produced vector- like partners of the third-generation quarks at√s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS de- tector

    Morad Aaboud et al. “Combination of the searches for pair-produced vector- like partners of the third-generation quarks at√s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS de- tector”. In: Phys. Rev. Lett.121.21 (2018), p. 211801.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett. 121.211801. arXiv: 1808.02343 [hep-ex]

    2018 arXiv

  102. [117]

    Implications of gen- eralized Z - Z-prime mixing

    K. S. Babu, Christopher F. Kolda, and John March-Russell. “Implications of gen- eralized Z - Z-prime mixing”. In: Phys. Rev. D 57 (1998), pp. 6788–6792. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.57.6788. arXiv: hep-ph/9710441

    1998 arXiv

  103. [118]

    Global fits of third family hypercharge models to neutral current B-anomalies and electroweak precision observables

    B. C. Allanach, J. Eliel Camargo-Molina, and Joe Davighi. “Global fits of third family hypercharge models to neutral current B-anomalies and electroweak precision observables”. In: Eur. Phys. J. C 81.8 (2021), p. 721. doi: 10 . 1140 / epjc/s10052-021-09377-1 . arXiv: 2103.1205...

    2021 arXiv

  104. [119]

    Anomalous Z’ bosons for anomalous B decays

    Joe Davighi. “Anomalous Z’ bosons for anomalous B decays”. In: JHEP 08 (2021), p. 101. doi: 10.1007/JHEP08(2021)101. arXiv: 2105.06918 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  105. [120]

    Global constraints on absolute neutrino masses and their ordering

    Francesco Capozzi et al. “Global constraints on absolute neutrino masses and their ordering”. In:Phys. Rev. D95.9 (2017). [Addendum: Phys.Rev.D 101, 116013 (2020)], p. 096014. doi: 10 . 1103 / PhysRevD . 95 . 096014. arXiv: 2003 . 08511 [hep-ph]

    2017

  106. [121]

    2020 global reassessment of the neutrino oscillation pic- ture

    P . F. de Salas et al. “2020 global reassessment of the neutrino oscillation pic- ture”. In: JHEP 02 (2021), p. 071. doi: 10 . 1007 / JHEP02(2021 ) 071. arXiv: 2006.11237 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  107. [122]

    The fate of hints: updated global analysis of three-flavor neutrino oscillations

    Ivan Esteban et al. “The fate of hints: updated global analysis of three-flavor neutrino oscillations”. In: JHEP 09 (2020), p. 178. doi: 10.1007/JHEP09(2020)

    2020 doi

  108. [123]

    Neutrino Masses in SU(2) x U(1) Theories

    J. Schechter and J. W. F. Valle. “Neutrino Masses in SU(2) x U(1) Theories”. In: Phys. Rev. D 22 (1980), p. 2227. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.22.2227

    1980 doi

  109. [124]

    Seesaw Neutrino Masses Induced by a Triplet of Leptons

    Robert Foot et al. “Seesaw Neutrino Masses Induced by a Triplet of Leptons”. In: Z. Phys. C 44 (1989), p. 441. doi: 10.1007/BF01415558

    1989 doi

  110. [125]

    Proton Lifetime and Fermion Masses in an SO(10) Model

    George Lazarides, Q. Shafi, and C. Wetterich. “Proton Lifetime and Fermion Masses in an SO(10) Model”. In: Nucl. Phys. B 181 (1981), pp. 287–300. doi: 10.1016/0550-3213(81)90354-0. References 155

    1981 doi

  111. [126]

    Neutrino Mass Problem and Gauge Hierarchy

    M. Magg and C. Wetterich. “Neutrino Mass Problem and Gauge Hierarchy”. In: Phys. Lett. B 94 (1980), pp. 61–64. doi: 10.1016/0370-2693(80)90825-4

    1980 doi

  112. [127]

    Neutrino Masses and Mixings in Gauge Models with Spontaneous Parity Violation

    Rabindra N. Mohapatra and Goran Senjanovic. “Neutrino Masses and Mixings in Gauge Models with Spontaneous Parity Violation”. In:Phys. Rev. D23 (1981), p. 165. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.23.165

    1981 doi

  113. [128]

    arXiv: 2308.05642 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  114. [129]

    Tri-hypercharge: a separate gauged weak hypercharge for each fermion family as the origin of flavour

    Mario Fernández Navarro and Stephen F. King. “Tri-hypercharge: a separate gauged weak hypercharge for each fermion family as the origin of flavour”. In: JHEP 08 (2023), p. 020. doi: 10.1007/JHEP08(2023)020 . arXiv: 2305.07690 [hep-ph]

    2023

  115. [130]

    Deconstructed hypercharge: a natural model of flavour

    Joe Davighi and Ben A. Stefanek. “Deconstructed hypercharge: a natural model of flavour”. In: JHEP 11 (2023), p. 100. doi: 10.1007/JHEP11(2023)100. arXiv: 2305.16280 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  116. [131]

    Charged Fermion Masses and Mixing from a SU(3) Family Symmetry Model

    Albino Hernandez-Galeana. “Charged Fermion Masses and Mixing from a SU(3) Family Symmetry Model”. In: Bled Workshops Phys. 16.2 (2015). Ed. by Norma Susana Mankoč Borštnik, Holger Bech Nielsen, and Dragan Lukman, pp. 47–

    2015

  117. [132]

    Group Theory of the Spontaneously Broken Gauge Symmetries

    Ling-Fong Li. “Group Theory of the Spontaneously Broken Gauge Symmetries”. In: Phys. Rev. D 9 (1974), pp. 1723–1739. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.9.1723

    1974 doi

  118. [133]

    Journeys beyond the standard model

    Pierre Ramond. Journeys beyond the standard model. Vol. 101. 1999. isbn: 978-0- 8133-4131-6, 978-0-7382-0116-0

    1999

  119. [134]

    Seesaw limit of the Nelson-Barr mechanism

    A. L. Cherchiglia et al. “Seesaw limit of the Nelson-Barr mechanism”. In: Phys. Lett. B 860 (2025), p. 139222. doi: 10.1016/j.physletb.2024.139222 . arXiv: 2404.16945 [hep-ph]

    2025

  120. [135]

    Electric dipole moments and the search for new physics

    Ricardo Alarcon et al. “Electric dipole moments and the search for new physics”. In: Snowmass 2021. Mar. 2022. arXiv: 2203.08103 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  121. [136]

    Unity of All Elementary Particle Forces

    H. Georgi and S. L. Glashow. “Unity of All Elementary Particle Forces”. In: Phys. Rev. Lett. 32 (1974), pp. 438–441. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.32.438

    1974 doi

  122. [137]

    Two U(1)’s and Epsilon Charge Shifts

    Bob Holdom. “Two U(1)’s and Epsilon Charge Shifts”. In: Phys. Lett. B 166 (1986), pp. 196–198. doi: 10.1016/0370-2693(86)91377-8

    1986 doi

  123. [138]

    Lepton Number as the Fourth Color

    Jogesh C. Pati and Abdus Salam. “Lepton Number as the Fourth Color”. In: Phys. Rev. D 10 (1974). [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 11, 703–703 (1975)], pp. 275–

    1974

  124. [141]

    arXiv: 1602.08212 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  125. [147]

    Unified Interactions of Leptons and Hadrons

    Harald Fritzsch and Peter Minkowski. “Unified Interactions of Leptons and Hadrons”. In: Annals Phys. 93 (1975), pp. 193–266.doi: 10.1016/0003-4916(75) 90211-0

    1975 doi

  126. [174]

    arXiv: 2103.13401 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  127. [178]

    arXiv: 2007.14792 [hep-ph]

    2007 arXiv

  128. [202]

    doi: 10.1016/0370-2693(81)90590-6

    doi

  129. [226]

    doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.40.223

    doi

  130. [289]

    doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.10.275

    doi

  131. [352]

    doi: 10.1016/0370-2693(88)91676-0

    doi

  132. [1266]

    doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.19.1264

    doi

  133. [2024]

    doi: 10.11588/heidok.00035705

    doi

  134. [2982]

    doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.6.2977

    doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.