arxiv: 2604.25989 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-28 · ✦ hep-ph · hep-ex· hep-th

Recognition: unknown

EFT Pathways to |Delta B| =2: Chiral Constructions and Phenomenology

Arnau Bas i Beneito , Ajdin Palavri\'c , Andrea Sainaghi

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-07 15:38 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph hep-exhep-th

keywords baryon number violationeffective field theorychiral symmetrynucleon oscillationsdinucleon decaySMEFTbaryon chiral perturbation theoryphenomenology

0 comments

The pith

A systematic chiral EFT framework links |ΔB|=2 operators from high scales to low-energy baryon processes like oscillations and dinucleon decays.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This paper develops an effective field theory approach to study interactions that violate baryon number by two units. It builds the full set of low-energy operators respecting chiral symmetry and matches them to those in the Standard Model effective field theory. The construction connects these to baryon chiral perturbation theory for practical calculations. Applying the framework to phenomenology shows that dinucleon decays can access more of the operator space than baryon-antibaryon oscillations, revealing new decay channels to explore. Overall, it offers a consistent bridge from ultraviolet models of baryon violation to measurable hadronic effects.

Core claim

We develop a systematic effective field theory framework for studying |ΔB|=2 interactions across energy scales. Using chiral symmetry, we construct the complete and non-redundant set of operators governing these interactions at low energies and establish their connection to the corresponding operators in the Standard Model effective field theory, as well as to their realizations in baryon chiral perturbation theory. The framework is then applied to the phenomenology of baryon-antibaryon oscillations and dinucleon decay, showing that oscillations probe only a limited subset while dinucleon decay accesses a broader class including new channels.

What carries the argument

The complete and non-redundant set of chiral operators for |ΔB|=2 interactions at low energies, matched to SMEFT operators and baryon ChPT realizations.

If this is right

Baryon-antibaryon oscillations are sensitive only to a limited subset of the operator structures.
Dinucleon decay processes are sensitive to a significantly broader class of operators, including transitions inaccessible to oscillations.
Previously unexplored dinucleon decay channels can probe unconstrained regions of the parameter space.
The formalism provides a consistent way to trace baryon-number-violating effects from their ultraviolet origin to low-energy observables.
It serves as a basis for systematic studies of ultraviolet models that generate such interactions.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

This matching could allow specific ultraviolet completions to be tested against multiple low-energy observables simultaneously.
Experimental limits on new dinucleon decay modes would directly constrain high-scale baryon violation parameters.
Extensions to include electromagnetic or other interactions could further expand the phenomenological reach.
Comparison with lattice QCD simulations of these processes would validate the operator basis and matching.

Load-bearing premise

The set of constructed chiral operators is complete and non-redundant, and their matching to SMEFT operators is accurate without omissions from higher-order or non-perturbative effects.

What would settle it

Detection of a dinucleon decay mode whose rate cannot be accommodated by any linear combination of the listed operators, or a mismatch between predicted and observed relations in oscillation versus decay rates.

read the original abstract

We develop a systematic effective field theory framework for studying $|\Delta B|=2$ interactions across energy scales. Using chiral symmetry, we construct the complete and non-redundant set of operators governing these interactions at low energies and establish their connection to the corresponding operators in the Standard Model effective field theory, as well as to their realizations in baryon chiral perturbation theory. The framework is then applied to the phenomenology of baryon-antibaryon oscillations and dinucleon decay. While oscillations probe only a limited subset of operator structures, dinucleon decay is sensitive to a significantly broader class, including transitions that are otherwise inaccessible. In addition, we identify previously unexplored dinucleon decay channels, which can probe these unconstrained regions of parameter space. More generally, this formalism makes explicit the complementarity of different probes and provides a consistent way to trace baryon-number-violating effects from their ultraviolet origin to low-energy hadronic observables, thereby providing a basis for systematic studies of ultraviolet models generating such interactions.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper gives a full chiral EFT operator basis for |ΔB|=2, matches it to SMEFT, and flags some new dinucleon decay channels that experiments could target.

read the letter

The main takeaway is that the authors have enumerated the complete non-redundant set of low-energy operators for two units of baryon number violation using chiral symmetry and connected them to the corresponding SMEFT structures. They then map how these operators feed into baryon-antibaryon oscillations versus dinucleon decays and point out a handful of decay modes that have not been discussed before. This makes the division of labor between different probes more explicit than before. Oscillations only hit a subset of the operators while decays reach a broader set, including regions that would otherwise stay unconstrained. The construction itself follows the standard chiral EFT route without obvious circularity or post-hoc fitting. The matching procedure is laid out clearly enough to let someone trace a UV model down to hadronic observables. The new channels are a concrete addition that could guide future searches. The soft spots are limited. The completeness claim rests on their chiral enumeration, and while the abstract and setup give no sign of missing operators, an explicit count or power-counting check would make the assertion easier to verify at a glance. The matching to SMEFT is described but could use a bit more discussion of possible non-perturbative corrections that might shift coefficients. The phenomenology section stays mostly at the level of which operators affect which processes rather than delivering new numerical predictions. This paper is for the small group working on baryon-number violation in low-energy experiments and EFT applications to rare processes. A reader who needs a reference operator list or wants to see how different observables complement each other will find it useful. It is worth sending to peer review because the operator basis and the new channels are tangible contributions that can be checked and built on, even if a referee asks for tighter documentation on completeness.

Referee Report

1 major / 0 minor

Summary. The paper develops a systematic EFT framework for |ΔB|=2 interactions. Using chiral symmetry, it constructs the complete and non-redundant set of low-energy operators, matches them to SMEFT operators and baryon chiral perturbation theory, and applies the framework to the phenomenology of baryon-antibaryon oscillations and dinucleon decays. It argues that oscillations probe only a limited subset of operators while dinucleon decay accesses a broader class, including new channels, and that the formalism makes explicit the complementarity of probes while tracing effects from UV origins to low-energy observables.

Significance. If the operator basis is verifiably complete and the matching robust, the work supplies a useful organizing framework for connecting UV models of baryon-number violation to low-energy hadronic observables. The explicit demonstration of complementarity between oscillation and decay channels, together with the identification of previously unexplored decay modes, would provide a concrete basis for systematic phenomenological studies and model-building in this sector.

major comments (1)

[Chiral operator construction and SMEFT matching] The central claim that the constructed chiral operator set is complete, non-redundant, and correctly matched to SMEFT without missing higher-order or non-perturbative contributions is load-bearing for all subsequent phenomenology. The manuscript asserts this via chiral symmetry but provides no independent verification such as a Hilbert-series count, exhaustive enumeration of baryon-meson structures up to the working chiral order, or explicit power-counting argument. If even one operator is omitted or if matching coefficients receive large non-perturbative corrections, the claimed complementarity between oscillations and dinucleon decays, and the identification of new channels, would not hold over the full parameter space.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for the constructive comments. We particularly appreciate the emphasis on the need for rigorous verification of the operator basis, which is indeed central to our conclusions. We address this major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: The central claim that the constructed chiral operator set is complete, non-redundant, and correctly matched to SMEFT without missing higher-order or non-perturbative contributions is load-bearing for all subsequent phenomenology. The manuscript asserts this via chiral symmetry but provides no independent verification such as a Hilbert-series count, exhaustive enumeration of baryon-meson structures up to the working chiral order, or explicit power-counting argument. If even one operator is omitted or if matching coefficients receive large non-perturbative corrections, the claimed complementarity between oscillations and dinucleon decays, and the identification of new channels, would not hold over the full parameter space.

Authors: We agree that an independent verification would be beneficial for establishing the completeness of the basis. Our construction proceeds by writing the most general chiral Lagrangian consistent with the symmetries of QCD (chiral SU(3)_L × SU(3)_R, parity, charge conjugation) and the ΔB=2 selection rule, at the chiral order appropriate for the low-energy processes under consideration. This method inherently generates a complete set, with redundancies removed using standard techniques such as integration by parts and equations of motion. To provide the requested cross-check, we will add to the revised manuscript an explicit enumeration of the baryon-meson operators and a brief power-counting discussion. We will also include a note on the matching procedure, clarifying that while non-perturbative effects influence the numerical values of the Wilson coefficients, the operator structures and the resulting complementarity between different experimental probes are protected by symmetry and thus robust. These additions will be incorporated without altering the main results. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: bottom-up chiral operator construction is independent of inputs or self-referential definitions.

full rationale

The derivation proceeds via explicit enumeration of operators under chiral symmetry, followed by matching to SMEFT and application to observables. No step reduces a prediction to a fitted parameter by construction, nor does any load-bearing claim rely on a self-citation chain or imported uniqueness theorem. The completeness assertion is an assertion of the method rather than a definitional loop. This is the expected non-circular outcome for a systematic EFT operator analysis.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The framework rests on standard chiral symmetry assumptions and EFT power counting; no free parameters or invented entities are mentioned in the abstract.

axioms (2)

domain assumption Chiral symmetry and its breaking pattern govern the low-energy dynamics of baryons and mesons
Invoked to construct the complete operator set at low energies
domain assumption The matching between low-energy chiral operators and SMEFT operators is valid in the appropriate energy regime
Used to connect the two EFTs

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5484 in / 1351 out tokens · 26410 ms · 2026-05-07T15:38:48.364187+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

117 extracted references · 78 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

[1]

A. D. Sakharov,Violation of CP Invariance, C asymmetry, and baryon asymmetry of the universe,Pisma Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz.5(1967) 32–35

1967
[2]

L. F. Abbott and M. B. Wise,The Effective Hamiltonian for Nucleon Decay,Phys. Rev. D 22(1980) 2208

1980
[3]

Proton stability in grand unified theories, in strings and in branes,

P. Nath and P. Fileviez Perez,Proton stability in grand unified theories, in strings and in branes,Phys. Rept.441(2007) 191–317, [hep-ph/0601023]

work page arXiv 2007
[4]

Langacker,Grand Unified Theories and Proton Decay,Phys

P. Langacker,Grand Unified Theories and Proton Decay,Phys. Rept.72(1981) 185

1981
[5]

Claudson, M

M. Claudson, M. B. Wise and L. J. Hall,Chiral Lagrangian for Deep Mine Physics,Nucl. Phys. B195(1982) 297–307

1982
[6]

Weinberg,Varieties of Baryon and Lepton Nonconservation,Phys

S. Weinberg,Varieties of Baryon and Lepton Nonconservation,Phys. Rev. D22(1980) 1694

1980
[7]

Weinberg,Baryon and Lepton Nonconserving Processes,Phys

S. Weinberg,Baryon and Lepton Nonconserving Processes,Phys. Rev. Lett.43(1979) 1566–1570

1979
[8]

A. B. Beneito, I, J. Gargalionis, J. Herrero-Garcia, A. Santamaria and M. A. Schmidt,An EFT approach to baryon number violation: lower limits on the new physics scale and correlations between nucleon decay modes,JHEP07(2024) 004, [2312.13361]

work page arXiv 2024
[9]

Georgi and S

H. Georgi and S. L. Glashow,Unity of All Elementary Particle Forces,Phys. Rev. Lett.32 (1974) 438–441

1974
[10]

Fritzsch and P

H. Fritzsch and P. Minkowski,Unified Interactions of Leptons and Hadrons,Annals Phys. 93(1975) 193–266

1975
[11]

J. C. Pati and A. Salam,Unified Lepton-Hadron Symmetry and a Gauge Theory of the Basic Interactions,Phys. Rev. D8(1973) 1240–1251

1973
[12]

V. A. Kuzmin,CP-noninvariance and baryon asymmetry of the universe,Pisma Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz.12(1970) 335–337

1970
[13]

W. E. Caswell, J. Milutinovic and G. Senjanovic,MATTER - ANTIMATTER TRANSITION OPERATORS: A MANUAL FOR MODELING,Phys. Lett. B122(1983) 373–377

1983
[14]

Rao and R

S. Rao and R. Shrock,n↔¯nTransition Operators and Their Matrix Elements in the MIT Bag Model,Phys. Lett. B116(1982) 238–242

1982
[15]

Rao and R

S. Rao and R. E. Shrock,Six Fermion (B−L) Violating Operators of Arbitrary Generational Structure,Nucl. Phys. B232(1984) 143–179

1984
[16]

R. N. Mohapatra and R. E. Marshak,Local B-L Symmetry of Electroweak Interactions, Majorana Neutrinos and Neutron Oscillations,Phys. Rev. Lett.44(1980) 1316–1319

1980
[17]

Kuo and S

T.-K. Kuo and S. T. Love,Neutron Oscillations and the Existence of Massive Neutral Leptons,Phys. Rev. Lett.45(1980) 93

1980
[18]

R. N. Mohapatra and R. E. Marshak,PHENOMENOLOGY OF NEUTRON OSCILLATIONS,Phys. Lett. B94(1980) 183

1980
[19]

L. N. Chang and N. P. Chang,B-L NONCONSERVATION AND NEUTRON OSCILLATION,Phys. Lett. B92(1980) 103–106. – 56 –

1980
[20]

Basecq and L

J. Basecq and L. Wolfenstein,DELTA B=2 TRANSITIONS,Nucl. Phys. B224(1983) 21

1983
[21]

Zwirner,Observable Delta B=2 Transitions Without Nucleon Decay in a Minimal Supersymmetric Extension of the Standard Model,Phys

F. Zwirner,Observable Delta B=2 Transitions Without Nucleon Decay in a Minimal Supersymmetric Extension of the Standard Model,Phys. Lett. B132(1983) 103–106

1983
[22]

Barbieri and A

R. Barbieri and A. Masiero,Supersymmetric Models with Low-Energy Baryon Number Violation,Nucl. Phys. B267(1986) 679–689

1986
[23]

R. N. Mohapatra and J. W. F. Valle,Neutrino Mass and Baryon Number Nonconservation in Superstring Models,Phys. Rev. D34(1986) 1642

1986
[24]

P. K. Kabir,LIMITS ON N ANTI-N OSCILLATIONS,Phys. Rev. Lett.51(1983) 231

1983
[25]

Addazi et al.,New high-sensitivity searches for neutrons converting into antineutrons and/or sterile neutrons at the HIBEAM/NNBAR experiment at the European Spallation Source,J

A. Addazi et al.,New high-sensitivity searches for neutrons converting into antineutrons and/or sterile neutrons at the HIBEAM/NNBAR experiment at the European Spallation Source,J. Phys. G48(2021) 070501, [2006.04907]

work page arXiv 2021
[26]

K. S. Babu and R. N. Mohapatra,Coupling Unification, GUT-Scale Baryogenesis and Neutron-Antineutron Oscillation in SO(10),Phys. Lett. B715(2012) 328–334, [1206.5701]

work page arXiv 2012
[27]

Fridell, J

K. Fridell, J. Harz and C. Hati,Probing baryogenesis with neutron-antineutron oscillations, JHEP11(2021) 185, [2105.06487]

work page arXiv 2021
[28]

K. S. Babu, R. N. Mohapatra and S. Nasri,Post-Sphaleron Baryogenesis,Phys. Rev. Lett. 97(2006) 131301, [hep-ph/0606144]

work page arXiv 2006
[29]

K. S. Babu, P. S. Bhupal Dev and R. N. Mohapatra,Neutrino mass hierarchy, neutron - anti-neutron oscillation from baryogenesis,Phys. Rev. D79(2009) 015017, [0811.3411]

work page arXiv 2009
[30]

K. S. Babu, P. S. Bhupal Dev, E. C. F. S. Fortes and R. N. Mohapatra,Post-Sphaleron Baryogenesis and an Upper Limit on the Neutron-Antineutron Oscillation Time,Phys. Rev. D87(2013) 115019, [1303.6918]

work page arXiv 2013
[31]

Gu and U

P.-H. Gu and U. Sarkar,Baryogenesis and neutron-antineutron oscillation at TeV,Phys. Lett. B705(2011) 170–173, [1107.0173]

work page arXiv 2011
[32]

Grojean, B

C. Grojean, B. Shakya, J. D. Wells and Z. Zhang,Implications of an Improved Neutron-Antineutron Oscillation Search for Baryogenesis: A Minimal Effective Theory Analysis,Phys. Rev. Lett.121(2018) 171801, [1806.00011]

work page arXiv 2018
[33]

R. N. Mohapatra and N. Okada,Affleck-Dine baryogenesis with observable neutron-antineutron oscillation,Phys. Rev. D104(2021) 055030, [2107.01514]

work page arXiv 2021
[34]

Aitken, D

K. Aitken, D. McKeen, T. Neder and A. E. Nelson,Baryogenesis from Oscillations of Charmed or Beautiful Baryons,Phys. Rev. D96(2017) 075009, [1708.01259]

work page arXiv 2017
[35]

P. S. B. Dev and R. N. Mohapatra,TeV scale model for baryon and lepton number violation and resonant baryogenesis,Phys. Rev. D92(2015) 016007, [1504.07196]

work page arXiv 2015
[36]

J. P. Bowes and R. R. Volkas,Baryogenesis from baryon number violating scalar interactions,Phys. Rev. D55(1997) 3844–3850, [hep-ph/9611440]

work page arXiv 1997
[37]

K. S. Babu and R. N. Mohapatra,Observable neutron anti-neutron oscillations in seesaw models of neutrino mass,Phys. Lett. B518(2001) 269–275, [hep-ph/0108089]

work page arXiv 2001
[38]

Physics of leptoquarks in precision exper- iments and at particle colliders,

I. Doršner, S. Fajfer, A. Greljo, J. F. Kamenik and N. Košnik,Physics of leptoquarks in precision experiments and at particle colliders,Phys. Rept.641(2016) 1–68, [1603.04993]. – 57 –

work page arXiv 2016
[39]

Berezhiani and A

Z. Berezhiani and A. Vainshtein,Neutron–Antineutron Oscillations: Discrete Symmetries and Quark Operators,Phys. Lett. B788(2019) 58–64, [1809.00997]

work page arXiv 2019
[40]

Dorsner, S

I. Dorsner, S. Fajfer and S. Saad,Neutrino Mass Inducedn-nOscillation,2510.16103

work page arXiv
[41]

Dorsner, S

I. Dorsner, S. Fajfer and S. Saad,Beyond neutrino mass: observable n-noscillations in UV complete seesaw models,JHEP11(2025) 024, [2509.00145]

work page arXiv 2025
[42]

J. L. Goity and M. Sher,Bounds on∆B= 1couplings in the supersymmetric standard model,Phys. Lett. B346(1995) 69–74, [hep-ph/9412208]

work page arXiv 1995
[43]

A. B. Beneito, I, S. Fajfer and A. A. Petrov,New avenues for |∆B| = 2 processes beyond neutron-antineutron oscillations,JHEP03(2026) 124, [2511.05657]

work page arXiv 2026
[44]

He and X.-D

X.-G. He and X.-D. Ma,∆B= 2neutron decay into antiproton moden→¯pe+ν(¯ν),Phys. Lett. B817(2021) 136298, [2101.01405]

work page arXiv 2021
[45]

Hao,Connection betweenνn→¯ν¯nreactions andn-¯noscillations via additional Higgs triplets,Phys

Y. Hao,Connection betweenνn→¯ν¯nreactions andn-¯noscillations via additional Higgs triplets,Phys. Rev. D101(2020) 056015, [1912.04188]

work page arXiv 2020
[46]

Heeck and V

J. Heeck and V. Takhistov,Inclusive Nucleon Decay Searches as a Frontier of Baryon Number Violation,Phys. Rev. D101(2020) 015005, [1910.07647]

work page arXiv 2020
[47]

L. J. Broussard et al.,Baryon number violation: from nuclear matrix elements to BSM physics,J. Phys. G52(2025) 083001, [2504.16983]

work page arXiv 2025
[48]

P. S. B. Dev et al.,Searches for baryon number violation in neutrino experiments: a white paper,J. Phys. G51(2024) 033001, [2203.08771]. [49]|∆B|= 2: A State of the Field, and Looking Forward–A brief status report of theoretical and experimental physics opportunities, 10, 2020

work page arXiv 2024
[49]

D. G. Phillips, II et al.,Neutron-Antineutron Oscillations: Theoretical Status and Experimental Prospects,Phys. Rept.612(2016) 1–45, [1410.1100]

work page arXiv 2016
[50]

J. M. Arnold, B. Fornal and M. B. Wise,Simplified models with baryon number violation but no proton decay,Phys. Rev. D87(2013) 075004, [1212.4556]

work page arXiv 2013
[51]

Baldes, N

I. Baldes, N. F. Bell and R. R. Volkas,Baryon Number Violating Scalar Diquarks at the LHC,Phys. Rev. D84(2011) 115019, [1110.4450]

work page arXiv 2011
[52]

Heeck, D

J. Heeck, D. Sokhashvili and A. Thapa,Opening up baryon-number-violating operators, 2603.17050

work page arXiv
[53]

Chen and Y.-Q

S.-L. Chen and Y.-Q. Xiao,The decomposition of neutron-antineutron oscillation operators, JHEP03(2023) 065, [2211.02813]

work page arXiv 2023
[54]

Gardner and X

S. Gardner and X. Yan,Processes that break baryon number by two units and the Majorana nature of the neutrino,Phys. Lett. B790(2019) 421–426, [1808.05288]

work page arXiv 2019
[55]

J. F. Nieves,Baryon and Lepton Number Nonconserving Processes and Intermediate Mass Scales,Nucl. Phys. B189(1981) 182–204

1981
[56]

J. P. Bowes, R. Foot and R. R. Volkas,Electric charge quantization from gauge invariance of a Lagrangian: A Catalog of baryon number violating scalar interactions,Phys. Rev. D54 (1996) 6936–6943, [hep-ph/9609290]

work page arXiv 1996
[57]

Ozer,NEUTRON ANTI-NEUTRON OSCILLATIONS AND RENORMALIZATION EFFECTS FOR DELTA B = 2 SIX QUARK OPERATORS,Phys

M. Ozer,NEUTRON ANTI-NEUTRON OSCILLATIONS AND RENORMALIZATION EFFECTS FOR DELTA B = 2 SIX QUARK OPERATORS,Phys. Rev. D26(1982) 3159–3166. – 58 –

1982
[58]

M. I. Buchoff and M. Wagman,Perturbative Renormalization of Neutron-Antineutron Operators,Phys. Rev. D93(2016) 016005, [1506.00647]

work page arXiv 2016
[59]

Thomas Arun, S

M. Thomas Arun, S. M and R. Pal,RG evolution and effect of intermediate new physics on ∆B = 2 six-quark operators,JHEP10(2025) 032, [2506.10105]

work page arXiv 2025
[60]

Weinberg,Phenomenological Lagrangians,Physica A96(1979) 327–340

S. Weinberg,Phenomenological Lagrangians,Physica A96(1979) 327–340

1979
[61]

Introduction to Chiral Perturbation Theory

S. Scherer,Introduction to chiral perturbation theory,Adv. Nucl. Phys.27(2003) 277, [hep-ph/0210398]

work page Pith review arXiv 2003
[62]

Gasser and H

J. Gasser and H. Leutwyler,Chiral Perturbation Theory: Expansions in the Mass of the Strange Quark,Nucl. Phys. B250(1985) 465–516

1985
[63]

E. E. Jenkins and A. V. Manohar,Baryon chiral perturbation theory using a heavy fermion Lagrangian,Phys. Lett. B255(1991) 558–562

1991
[64]

Bernard, N

V. Bernard, N. Kaiser and U.-G. Meissner,Chiral dynamics in nucleons and nuclei,Int. J. Mod. Phys. E4(1995) 193–346, [hep-ph/9501384]

work page arXiv 1995
[65]

Chiral Perturbation Theory

A. Pich,Chiral perturbation theory,Rept. Prog. Phys.58(1995) 563–610, [hep-ph/9502366]

work page Pith review arXiv 1995
[66]

Gasser and H

J. Gasser and H. Leutwyler,Chiral Perturbation Theory to One Loop,Annals Phys.158 (1984) 142

1984
[67]

Gasser, M

J. Gasser, M. E. Sainio and A. Svarc,Nucleons with chiral loops,Nucl. Phys. B307(1988) 779–853

1988
[68]

Rinaldi, S

E. Rinaldi, S. Syritsyn, M. L. Wagman, M. I. Buchoff, C. Schroeder and J. Wasem, Neutron-antineutron oscillations from lattice QCD,Phys. Rev. Lett.122(2019) 162001, [1809.00246]

work page arXiv 2019
[69]

Oosterhof, B

F. Oosterhof, B. Long, J. de Vries, R. G. E. Timmermans and U. van Kolck, Baryon-number violation by two units and the deuteron lifetime,Phys. Rev. Lett.122 (2019) 172501, [1902.05342]

work page arXiv 2019
[70]

Rinaldi, S

E. Rinaldi, S. Syritsyn, M. L. Wagman, M. I. Buchoff, C. Schroeder and J. Wasem,Lattice QCD determination of neutron-antineutron matrix elements with physical quark masses, Phys. Rev. D99(2019) 074510, [1901.07519]

work page arXiv 2019
[71]

Bijnens and E

J. Bijnens and E. Kofoed,Chiral perturbation theory for neutron–antineutron oscillations, Eur. Phys. J. C77(2017) 867, [1710.04383]

work page arXiv 2017
[72]

He and X.-D

X.-G. He and X.-D. Ma,An EFT toolbox for baryon and lepton number violating dinucleon to dilepton decays,JHEP06(2021) 047, [2102.02562]

work page arXiv 2021
[73]

Girmohanta and R

S. Girmohanta and R. Shrock,Improved Upper Limits on Baryon-Number Violating Dinucleon Decays to Dileptons,Phys. Lett. B803(2020) 135296, [1910.08356]

work page arXiv 2020
[74]

Girmohanta,Nucleon and dinucleon decays to leptonic final states in a left-right symmetric model with large extra dimensions,Eur

S. Girmohanta,Nucleon and dinucleon decays to leptonic final states in a left-right symmetric model with large extra dimensions,Eur. Phys. J. C81(2021) 143, [2005.12952]

work page arXiv 2021
[75]

Helset, C

A. Helset, C. Murgui and M. B. Wise,Simple models with both baryon and lepton number violation by two units,Phys. Rev. D104(2021) 015029, [2104.03316]

work page arXiv 2021
[76]

Grossman, W

Y. Grossman, W. H. Ng and S. Ray,Revisiting the bounds on hydrogen-antihydrogen oscillations from diffuseγ-ray surveys,Phys. Rev. D98(2018) 035020, [1806.08233]. – 59 –

work page arXiv 2018
[77]

Bramante, J

J. Bramante, J. Kumar and J. Learned,Proton annihilation at hadron colliders and Kamioka: high-energy versus high-luminosity,Phys. Rev. D91(2015) 035012, [1412.2140]

work page arXiv 2015
[78]

Bryman,Two nucleon (B−L)-conserving reactions involving tau leptons,Phys

D. Bryman,Two nucleon (B−L)-conserving reactions involving tau leptons,Phys. Lett. B 733(2014) 190–192, [1404.7776]

work page arXiv 2014
[79]

Feinberg, M

G. Feinberg, M. Goldhaber and G. Steigman,Multiplicative Baryon Number Conservation and the Oscillation of Hydrogen Into Anti-hydrogen,Phys. Rev. D18(1978) 1602

1978
[80]

Arnellos and W

L. Arnellos and W. J. Marciano,Hydrogen - Anti-hydrogen Oscillations, Double Proton Decay and Grand Unified Theories,Phys. Rev. Lett.48(1982) 1708

1982

Showing first 80 references.