pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2605.06796 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-07 · ✦ hep-ph · astro-ph.CO

Recognition: no theorem link

Decaying spin-3/2 dark matter from baryon number violation

Francesco Costa, Gabriel M. Salla

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-11 00:55 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph astro-ph.CO
keywords spin-3/2 dark matterbaryon number violationfreeze-in productioneffective field theoryrelic densitycomposite dark matterdark QCDindirect detection
0
0 comments X

The pith

Spin-3/2 dark matter with baryon-violating quark couplings achieves the observed relic density through freeze-in.

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

The paper explores an effective field theory description of non-supersymmetric spin-3/2 dark matter that interacts with Standard Model quarks through baryon-number violation. It identifies the leading such operator and shows that this portal generates the correct dark matter abundance via UV freeze-in or Boltzmann-suppressed freeze-in, while the freeze-out regime is entirely excluded. The model features a distinctive production mechanism arising from competition between single-particle baryon-violating processes and pair production. Viable parameter space is mapped against indirect detection, direct detection, and LHC monojet constraints, revealing strong complementarity among the probes. A dark QCD-like ultraviolet completion is constructed in which the spin-3/2 state emerges as a composite baryon.

Core claim

In an effective field theory, the leading baryon-number violating operator connecting a spin-3/2 state to Standard Model quarks permits the observed dark matter relic density to be generated through UV freeze-in and Boltzmann-suppressed freeze-in. The freeze-out region is completely excluded. Relic production is controlled by the interplay between baryon-violating single-particle processes and baryon-conserving pair production. The viable parameter space is constrained by indirect detection, direct detection, and LHC monojet bounds with strong complementarity, especially when the same operator governs both production and decay. A dark QCD-like ultraviolet completion is presented in which the

What carries the argument

The leading baryon-number violating effective operator coupling the spin-3/2 dark matter candidate to three Standard Model quarks, which sets both the production rate and the decay lifetime.

If this is right

  • The observed dark matter abundance is reproduced only in the UV freeze-in and Boltzmann-suppressed freeze-in regimes.
  • Indirect detection bounds become especially stringent when production and decay are controlled by the same operator.
  • Direct detection and LHC monojet searches supply complementary constraints that together cover large portions of the parameter space.
  • The composite realization in a confining dark sector provides a consistent ultraviolet origin for the spin-3/2 state.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Baryon-violating portals may offer a general route to viable higher-spin dark matter models beyond the spin-3/2 case examined here.
  • The requirement of freeze-in production implies that similar models without baryon violation would need alternative mechanisms to avoid overproduction.
  • A full test of the framework would combine collider, direct, and indirect probes rather than relying on any single channel.

Load-bearing premise

The effective field theory description remains valid up to the high scales of freeze-in production, and the dark QCD-like ultraviolet completion adds no extra light states that would alter the low-energy phenomenology.

What would settle it

An observation of a spin-3/2 dark matter particle whose mass and coupling strength place its relic density in the freeze-out regime while remaining consistent with all experimental bounds would falsify the complete exclusion of freeze-out.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.06796 by Francesco Costa, Gabriel M. Salla.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Relation between the different contributions to the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Parameter space reproducing the observed relic abundance, Ω [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Differential spectra at production for the decaying [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We explore an uncharted corner of dark matter phenomenology: non-supersymmetric spin-$3/2$ dark matter with baryon number violating interactions. In an effective field theory description, we identify the leading baryonic portal between the spin-$3/2$ state and Standard Model quarks and show that it can account for the observed dark matter abundance through UV freeze-in and Boltzmann-suppressed freeze-in, while the freeze-out region is completely excluded. The resulting phenomenology is distinctive, with relic production controlled by the competition between baryon-violating single-particle processes and baryon-conserving pair production. We map the viable parameter space against indirect detection, direct detection, and LHC monojet bounds, finding strong complementarity between these probes and especially stringent limits when production and decay are tied to the same operator. We also present a dark QCD-like ultraviolet completion in which the spin-$3/2$ particle arises as a composite baryon, naturally generating the effective interactions and mitigating the main theoretical obstacles of elementary higher-spin states. This framework opens a novel and testable connection between baryonic portals, confining dark sectors, and higher-spin dark matter.

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.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper explores spin-3/2 dark matter with baryon-number-violating interactions in an EFT framework. It identifies the leading baryonic portal to SM quarks and argues that this operator can reproduce the observed relic density via UV freeze-in and Boltzmann-suppressed freeze-in, while completely excluding the freeze-out regime. The work maps the viable parameter space against indirect/direct detection and LHC monojet bounds, highlights complementarity between probes, and presents a dark-QCD-like UV completion in which the spin-3/2 state is a composite baryon.

Significance. If the relic-density calculations and EFT validity hold, the framework provides a novel, testable link between baryon violation, higher-spin DM, and confining dark sectors. The UV completion addresses unitarity issues for elementary Rarita-Schwinger fields and the competition between single-particle baryon-violating and pair-production channels yields distinctive phenomenology. Strong complementarity between cosmological, direct-detection, and collider constraints is a positive feature.

major comments (2)
  1. [DM production section (likely §3)] The central claim that UV freeze-in and Boltzmann-suppressed freeze-in reproduce the observed abundance while freeze-out is excluded rests on unshown Boltzmann equations, numerical solutions, and parameter scans. Explicit equations, integration limits, and error bars on the relic-density contours are required to substantiate the boundaries between production regimes.
  2. [UV completion and EFT validity] §4 (UV freeze-in discussion): The EFT description assumes the cutoff Λ satisfies T_prod ≪ Λ throughout the relevant epoch, yet no quantitative bounds on Λ relative to the freeze-in temperature or the dark-sector confinement scale are provided. If additional composite resonances lie near or below T_prod, new channels would alter the Boltzmann equations and the excluded freeze-out region.
minor comments (2)
  1. [EFT Lagrangian] Notation for the Rarita-Schwinger field and the dimension-6 operator should be defined explicitly at first use, with a clear statement of the assumed Lorentz and gauge structure.
  2. [Phenomenology plots] Figure captions for the parameter-space plots should include the precise values of fixed parameters (e.g., m_χ, Λ) and the definition of the plotted contours.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive comments on our manuscript. The points raised are helpful for improving the clarity and rigor of the presentation. We address each major comment below and have updated the manuscript to incorporate the requested details.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The central claim that UV freeze-in and Boltzmann-suppressed freeze-in reproduce the observed abundance while freeze-out is excluded rests on unshown Boltzmann equations, numerical solutions, and parameter scans. Explicit equations, integration limits, and error bars on the relic-density contours are required to substantiate the boundaries between production regimes.

    Authors: We agree that the relic-density calculation requires more explicit documentation. In the revised manuscript we have added the full set of Boltzmann equations governing the UV freeze-in and Boltzmann-suppressed freeze-in regimes in Section 3, together with a description of the numerical integration procedure, the temperature integration limits (from T_prod down to T=0), and the treatment of the Hubble expansion. We have also included uncertainty bands on the relic-density contours that reflect variations in the numerical tolerances and the leading-order approximations used. These additions make the separation between the three production regimes and the complete exclusion of freeze-out quantitatively transparent. revision: yes

  2. Referee: The EFT description assumes the cutoff Λ satisfies T_prod ≪ Λ throughout the relevant epoch, yet no quantitative bounds on Λ relative to the freeze-in temperature or the dark-sector confinement scale are provided. If additional composite resonances lie near or below T_prod, new channels would alter the Boltzmann equations and the excluded freeze-out region.

    Authors: We appreciate this observation on EFT validity. In the revised Section 4 we now provide explicit estimates: we require Λ ≳ 20 T_prod (with T_prod ≈ m_DM/25 for the relevant parameter space) to maintain the validity of the dimension-6 operator throughout freeze-in. For the dark-QCD UV completion we set the confinement scale such that the lightest composite resonances lie above 5 T_prod, ensuring that additional channels remain Boltzmann-suppressed or kinematically closed during the production epoch. We discuss the resulting suppression factors and confirm that they do not reopen the freeze-out window within the displayed parameter space. A full non-perturbative treatment would ultimately require lattice input, but the added bounds suffice to justify the EFT analysis as presented. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation relies on standard EFT and freeze-in calculations

full rationale

The paper identifies the leading baryon-violating operator in an EFT framework and computes the relic density via standard UV freeze-in and Boltzmann-suppressed channels, with freeze-out excluded by overproduction or bounds. These steps use external inputs (observed DM abundance, LHC monojet limits, direct/indirect detection constraints) without fitting parameters to a subset of data and then relabeling the output as a prediction. The same operator governing both production and decay is presented as a physical linkage rather than a self-definitional reduction. The dark QCD UV completion is offered as a motivating construction, not invoked via self-citation as a uniqueness theorem or to smuggle an ansatz. No load-bearing step reduces by construction to the paper's own inputs or prior self-referential results; the analysis remains self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on the validity of the effective field theory truncation and the assumption that no lighter states exist in the dark sector. One free parameter (the portal coupling strength) is implicitly fitted to the observed relic density. The composite completion introduces an additional scale (dark confinement scale) whose value is not independently measured.

free parameters (1)
  • baryon-violating portal coupling
    Determines both production rate and decay width; adjusted to match observed DM abundance.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Effective field theory description is valid below the cutoff scale for freeze-in temperatures
    Invoked to justify the leading operator analysis without higher-dimensional corrections.
invented entities (1)
  • composite spin-3/2 baryon in dark QCD-like sector no independent evidence
    purpose: Provides UV completion that generates the effective interactions naturally
    No independent evidence provided beyond the effective theory; serves to mitigate theoretical issues with elementary higher-spin fields.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5497 in / 1417 out tokens · 23474 ms · 2026-05-11T00:55:56.642544+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

131 extracted references · 108 canonical work pages · 3 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    + (symm.IJ K) = 0,(B2) where the numbers are the labels for momenta, we have used Shouten’s identity and the fact that the amplitude is symmetrised in the little-group indicesIJ Kof each particle. The resulting amplitude is proportional toϵ IJ , meaning that it transforms trivially under these little- group indices and consequentely vanishing given the sy...

  2. [2]

    Moreover, taking thes≫m 2 Ψ limit, the cross sections are dominated by term with the highest power ofsand their expression are (see Eq

    F reeze-in approximations Since the non-renormalisable freeze-in is a UV domi- nated process [93], we can neglect the spin-3/2 mass ap- pearing in the lower limit of thesintegral and in the K¨ allen functions, where we have terms like p s−m 2 Ψ ≃ s. Moreover, taking thes≫m 2 Ψ limit, the cross sections are dominated by term with the highest power ofsand t...

  3. [3]

    F reeze-out approximations Let us discuss now the approximation needed in the freeze-out case. Considering the DM freezing out when non-relativistic (x≫1), we have two contributions to the thermally averaged cross-section integrand that change rapidly withs, namely the Bessel functionK 1(√s/T) and the K¨ allen functions. The Bessel function is expo- nenti...

  4. [4]

    Zwicky,Die Rotverschiebung von extragalaktischen Nebeln,Helv

    F. Zwicky,Die Rotverschiebung von extragalaktischen Nebeln,Helv. Phys. Acta6(1933) 110

    1933

  5. [5]

    J. P. Ostriker and P. J. E. Peebles,A Numerical Study of the Stability of Flattened Galaxies: or, can Cold Galaxies Survive?,Astrophys. J.186(1973) 467. [3]Planckcollaboration,Planck 2015 results. XIII. Cosmological parameters,Astron. Astrophys.594 (2016) A13 [1502.01589]. [4]Planckcollaboration,Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters,Astron. Ast...

    work page Pith review arXiv 1973

  6. [6]

    Arcadi, M

    G. Arcadi, M. Dutra, P. Ghosh, M. Lindner, Y. Mambrini, M. Pierre et al.,The waning of the WIMP? A review of models, searches, and constraints, Eur. Phys. J. C78(2018) 203 [1703.07364]

    work page arXiv 2018

  7. [7]

    A direct empirical proof of the existence of dark matter

    D. Clowe, M. Bradac, A. H. Gonzalez, M. Markevitch, S. W. Randall, C. Jones et al.,A direct empirical proof of the existence of dark matter,Astrophys. J. Lett.648 (2006) L109 [astro-ph/0608407]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2006

  8. [8]

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

    work page doi:10.1201/9780429492860 2019

  9. [9]

    McDonald,Thermally generated gauge singlet scalars as selfinteracting dark matter,Phys

    J. McDonald,Thermally generated gauge singlet scalars as selfinteracting dark matter,Phys. Rev. Lett. 88(2002) 091304 [hep-ph/0106249]

    work page arXiv 2002

  10. [10]

    L. J. Hall, K. Jedamzik, J. March-Russell and S. M. West,Freeze-In Production of FIMP Dark Matter, JHEP03(2010) 080 [0911.1120]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2010

  11. [11]

    Yu, J.-M

    Z.-H. Yu, J.-M. Zheng, X.-J. Bi, Z. Li, D.-X. Yao and H.-H. Zhang,Constraining the interaction strength between dark matter and visible matter: II. scalar, vector and spin-3/2 dark matter,Nucl. Phys. B860 (2012) 115 [1112.6052]

    work page arXiv 2012

  12. [12]

    Ding and Y

    R. Ding and Y. Liao,Spin 3/2 Particle as a Dark Matter Candidate: an Effective Field Theory Approach,JHEP04(2012) 054 [1201.0506]

    work page arXiv 2012

  13. [13]

    R. Ding, Y. Liao, J.-Y. Liu and K. Wang, Comprehensive Constraints on a Spin-3/2 Singlet Particle as a Dark Matter Candidate,JCAP05(2013) 028 [1302.4034]

    work page arXiv 2013

  14. [14]

    Chang, X.-G

    C.-F. Chang, X.-G. He and J. Tandean,Exploring Spin-3/2 Dark Matter with Effective Higgs Couplings, Phys. Rev. D96(2017) 075026 [1704.01904]

    work page arXiv 2017

  15. [15]

    N. D. Christensen, P. de Aquino, N. Deutschmann, C. Duhr, B. Fuks, C. Garcia-Cely et al.,Simulating spin- 3 2 particles at colliders,Eur. Phys. J. C73(2013) 2580 [1308.1668]

    work page arXiv 2013

  16. [16]

    K. G. Savvidy and J. D. Vergados,Direct dark matter detection: A spin 3/2 WIMP candidate,Phys. Rev. D 87(2013) 075013 [1211.3214]

    work page arXiv 2013

  17. [17]

    M. O. Khojali, A. Goyal, M. Kumar and A. S. Cornell, Minimal Spin-3/2 Dark Matter in a simples-channel model,Eur. Phys. J. C77(2017) 25 [1608.08958]

    work page arXiv 2017

  18. [18]

    M. O. Khojali, A. Goyal, M. Kumar and A. S. Cornell, Spin-3/2 Dark Matter in a simplet-channel model, Eur. Phys. J. C78(2018) 920 [1705.05149]

    work page arXiv 2018

  19. [19]

    M. A. G. Garcia, Y. Mambrini, K. A. Olive and S. Verner,Case for decaying spin- 3/2 dark matter, Phys. Rev. D102(2020) 083533 [2006.03325]

    work page arXiv 2020

  20. [20]

    J. C. Criado, N. Koivunen, M. Raidal and H. Veerm¨ ae, Dark matter of any spin – an effective field theory and applications,Phys. Rev. D102(2020) 125031 [2010.02224]

    work page arXiv 2020

  21. [21]

    D. Z. Freedman, P. van Nieuwenhuizen and S. Ferrara, Progress Toward a Theory of Supergravity,Phys. Rev. D13(1976) 3214

    1976

  22. [22]

    Deser and B

    S. Deser and B. Zumino,Consistent Supergravity, Phys. Lett. B62(1976) 335

    1976

  23. [23]

    M. Bolz, W. Buchmuller and M. Plumacher,Baryon asymmetry and dark matter,Phys. Lett. B443(1998) 209 [hep-ph/9809381]

    work page arXiv 1998

  24. [24]

    Pagels and J

    H. Pagels and J. R. Primack,Supersymmetry, Cosmology and New TeV Physics,Phys. Rev. Lett.48 (1982) 223

    1982

  25. [25]

    Moroi, H

    T. Moroi, H. Murayama and M. Yamaguchi, Cosmological constraints on the light stable gravitino, Phys. Lett. B303(1993) 289

    1993

  26. [26]

    L. Covi, J. Hasenkamp, S. Pokorski and J. Roberts, Gravitino Dark Matter and general neutralino NLSP, JHEP11(2009) 003 [0908.3399]

    work page arXiv 2009

  27. [27]

    Buchmuller, L

    W. Buchmuller, L. Covi, K. Hamaguchi, A. Ibarra and T. Yanagida,Gravitino Dark Matter in R-Parity Breaking Vacua,JHEP03(2007) 037 [hep-ph/0702184]

    work page arXiv 2007

  28. [28]

    Garani, M

    R. Garani, M. Redi and A. Tesi,Dark QCD matters, JHEP12(2021) 139 [2105.03429]. [28]CMScollaboration,Search for resonant production of strongly coupled dark matter in proton-proton collisions at 13 TeV,JHEP06(2022) 156 [2112.11125]

    work page arXiv 2021

  29. [29]

    Cheng, L

    H.-C. Cheng, L. Li and E. Salvioni,A theory of dark pions,JHEP01(2022) 122 [2110.10691]

    work page arXiv 2022

  30. [30]

    M. J. Strassler and K. M. Zurek,Echoes of a hidden valley at hadron colliders,Phys. Lett. B651(2007) 374 [hep-ph/0604261]

    work page arXiv 2007

  31. [31]

    Cohen, M

    T. Cohen, M. Lisanti, H. K. Lou and S. Mishra-Sharma,LHC Searches for Dark Sector Showers,JHEP11(2017) 196 [1707.05326]

    work page arXiv 2017

  32. [32]

    M. R. Buckley and E. T. Neil,Thermal Dark Matter from a Confining Sector,Phys. Rev. D87(2013) 043510 [1209.6054]

    work page arXiv 2013

  33. [33]

    G. D. Kribs and E. T. Neil,Review of strongly-coupled composite dark matter models and lattice simulations, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A31(2016) 1643004 [1604.04627]

    work page arXiv 2016

  34. [34]

    Mitridate, M

    A. Mitridate, M. Redi, J. Smirnov and A. Strumia, Dark Matter as a weakly coupled Dark Baryon,JHEP 10(2017) 210 [1707.05380]

    work page arXiv 2017

  35. [35]

    S. J. Lonsdale, M. Schroor and R. R. Volkas, Asymmetric Dark Matter and the hadronic spectra of hidden QCD,Phys. Rev. D96(2017) 055027 [1704.05213]

    work page arXiv 2017

  36. [36]

    Appelquist et al.,Stealth Dark Matter: Dark scalar baryons through the Higgs portal,Phys

    T. Appelquist et al.,Stealth Dark Matter: Dark scalar baryons through the Higgs portal,Phys. Rev. D92 (2015) 075030 [1503.04203]

    work page arXiv 2015

  37. [37]

    Hardy, R

    E. Hardy, R. Lasenby, J. March-Russell and S. M. West,Big Bang Synthesis of Nuclear Dark Matter, JHEP06(2015) 011 [1411.3739]

    work page arXiv 2015

  38. [38]

    Velo and D

    G. Velo and D. Zwanziger,Propagation and quantization of Rarita-Schwinger waves in an external electromagnetic potential,Phys. Rev.186(1969) 1337

    1969

  39. [39]

    Velo and D

    G. Velo and D. Zwanziger,Noncausality and other defects of interaction lagrangians for particles with spin one and higher,Phys. Rev.188(1969) 2218. 15

    1969

  40. [40]

    E. W. Kolb, A. J. Long, E. McDonough and J. Wang, Creation of spin-3/2 dark matter via cosmological gravitational particle production,2512.16976

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  41. [41]

    E. W. Kolb, A. J. Long and E. McDonough, Catastrophic production of slow gravitinos,Phys. Rev. D104(2021) 075015 [2102.10113]

    work page arXiv 2021

  42. [42]

    Kaneta, W

    K. Kaneta, W. Ke, Y. Mambrini, K. A. Olive and S. Verner,Gravitational production of spin-3/2 particles during reheating,Phys. Rev. D108(2023) 115027 [2309.15146]

    work page arXiv 2023

  43. [43]

    Qiu and S

    Y.-C. Qiu and S. H. H. Tye,A novel solution to the gravitino problem,JHEP02(2023) 006 [2207.03144]

    work page arXiv 2023

  44. [44]

    Antoniadis, K

    I. Antoniadis, K. Benakli and W. Ke,Salvage of too slow gravitinos,JHEP11(2021) 063 [2105.03784]

    work page arXiv 2021

  45. [45]

    Castellano, A

    A. Castellano, A. Font, A. Herraez and L. E. Ib´ a˜ nez,A gravitino distance conjecture,JHEP08(2021) 092 [2104.10181]

    work page arXiv 2021

  46. [46]

    Cribiori, D

    N. Cribiori, D. Lust and M. Scalisi,The gravitino and the swampland,JHEP06(2021) 071 [2104.08288]

    work page arXiv 2021

  47. [47]

    Terada,Minimal supergravity inflation without slow gravitino,Phys

    T. Terada,Minimal supergravity inflation without slow gravitino,Phys. Rev. D103(2021) 125022 [2104.05731]

    work page arXiv 2021

  48. [48]

    Dudas, M

    E. Dudas, M. A. G. Garcia, Y. Mambrini, K. A. Olive, M. Peloso and S. Verner,Slow and Safe Gravitinos, Phys. Rev. D103(2021) 123519 [2104.03749]

    work page arXiv 2021

  49. [49]

    Bellazzini, A

    B. Bellazzini, A. Pomarol, M. Romano and F. Sciotti, (Super) gravity from positivity,JHEP03(2026) 028 [2507.12535]

    work page arXiv 2026

  50. [50]

    Gherghetta and W

    T. Gherghetta and W. Ke,Supergravity from the bottom up,JHEP01(2026) 067 [2507.12538]

    work page arXiv 2026

  51. [51]

    M. T. Grisaru and H. N. Pendleton,Soft Spin 3/2 Fermions Require Gravity and Supersymmetry,Phys. Lett. B67(1977) 323

    1977

  52. [52]

    Schroer,The role of positivity and causality in interactions involving higher spin,Nucl

    B. Schroer,The role of positivity and causality in interactions involving higher spin,Nucl. Phys. B941 (2019) 91 [1712.02346]

    work page arXiv 2019

  53. [53]

    Afkhami-Jeddi, S

    N. Afkhami-Jeddi, S. Kundu and A. Tajdini,A Bound on Massive Higher Spin Particles,JHEP04(2019) 056 [1811.01952]

    work page arXiv 2019

  54. [54]

    Trott,Causality, unitarity and symmetry in effective field theory,JHEP07(2021) 143 [2011.10058]

    T. Trott,Causality, unitarity and symmetry in effective field theory,JHEP07(2021) 143 [2011.10058]

    work page arXiv 2021

  55. [55]

    Z. Dong, T. Ma, C. Yang and Z. Zhou,Dark photons and high spin particles: complete EFT operator basis, JHEP07(2025) 104 [2412.20096]

    work page arXiv 2025

  56. [56]

    Chikashige, R

    Y. Chikashige, R. N. Mohapatra and R. D. Peccei,Are There Real Goldstone Bosons Associated with Broken Lepton Number?,Phys. Lett. B98(1981) 265

    1981

  57. [57]

    Schechter and J

    J. Schechter and J. W. F. Valle,Neutrino Decay and Spontaneous Violation of Lepton Number,Phys. Rev. D25(1982) 774

    1982

  58. [58]

    Lazarides, M

    G. Lazarides, M. Reig, Q. Shafi, R. Srivastava and J. W. F. Valle,Spontaneous Breaking of Lepton Number and the Cosmological Domain Wall Problem, Phys. Rev. Lett.122(2019) 151301 [1806.11198]

    work page arXiv 2019

  59. [59]

    Chao and Y.-Q

    W. Chao and Y.-Q. Peng,Majorana Majoron and the Baryon Asymmetry of the Universe,2311.06469

    work page arXiv

  60. [60]

    F. F. Deppisch, P. S. Bhupal Dev and A. Pilaftsis, Neutrinos and Collider Physics,New J. Phys.17 (2015) 075019 [1502.06541]

    work page arXiv 2015

  61. [61]

    Pilaftsis, Z

    A. Pilaftsis,Radiatively induced neutrino masses and large Higgs neutrino couplings in the standard model with Majorana fields,Z. Phys. C55(1992) 275 [hep-ph/9901206]

    work page arXiv 1992

  62. [62]

    W. H. Furry,On transition probabilities in double beta-disintegration,Phys. Rev.56(1939) 1184

    1939

  63. [63]

    F. T. Avignone, III, S. R. Elliott and J. Engel,Double Beta Decay, Majorana Neutrinos, and Neutrino Mass, Rev. Mod. Phys.80(2008) 481 [0708.1033]

    work page arXiv 2008

  64. [64]

    S. M. Bilenky and S. T. Petcov,Massive Neutrinos and Neutrino Oscillations,Rev. Mod. Phys.59(1987) 671

    1987

  65. [65]

    M. Doi, T. Kotani and E. Takasugi,Double beta Decay and Majorana Neutrino,Prog. Theor. Phys. Suppl.83 (1985) 1

    1985

  66. [66]

    Weinberg,Baryon and Lepton Nonconserving Processes,Phys

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

    1979

  67. [67]

    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

    1980

  68. [68]

    Curtinet al., Rept

    D. Curtin et al.,Long-Lived Particles at the Energy Frontier: The MATHUSLA Physics Case,Rept. Prog. Phys.82(2019) 116201 [1806.07396]

    work page arXiv 2019

  69. [69]

    Cui and R

    Y. Cui and R. Sundrum,Baryogenesis for weakly interacting massive particles,Phys. Rev. D87(2013) 116013 [1212.2973]

    work page arXiv 2013

  70. [70]

    Cui, Natural Baryogenesis from Unnatural Supersymmetry, JHEP12, 067, arXiv:1309.2952 [hep- ph]

    Y. Cui,Natural Baryogenesis from Unnatural Supersymmetry,JHEP12(2013) 067 [1309.2952]

    work page arXiv 2013

  71. [71]

    Cui and B

    Y. Cui and B. Shuve,Probing Baryogenesis with Displaced Vertices at the LHC,JHEP02(2015) 049 [1409.6729]

    work page arXiv 2015

  72. [72]

    Y. Cui, T. Okui and A. Yunesi,LHC Signatures of WIMP-triggered Baryogenesis,Phys. Rev. D94(2016) 115022 [1605.08736]

    work page arXiv 2016

  73. [73]

    Ipek and J

    S. Ipek and J. March-Russell,Baryogenesis via Particle-Antiparticle Oscillations,Phys. Rev. D93 (2016) 123528 [1604.00009]

    work page arXiv 2016

  74. [74]

    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

  75. [75]

    CP Violating Baryon Oscillations

    D. McKeen and A. E. Nelson,CP Violating Baryon Oscillations,Phys. Rev. D94(2016) 076002 [1512.05359]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2016

  76. [76]

    Davoudiasl, D

    H. Davoudiasl, D. E. Morrissey, K. Sigurdson and S. Tulin,Hylogenesis: A Unified Origin for Baryonic Visible Matter and Antibaryonic Dark Matter,Phys. Rev. Lett.105(2010) 211304 [1008.2399]

    work page arXiv 2010

  77. [77]

    Davoudiasl and Y

    H. Davoudiasl and Y. Zhang,Baryon Number Violation via Majorana Neutrinos in the Early Universe, at the LHC, and Deep Underground,Phys. Rev. D92(2015) 016005 [1504.07244]

    work page arXiv 2015

  78. [78]

    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

  79. [79]

    Assad, B

    N. Assad, B. Fornal and B. Grinstein,Baryon Number and Lepton Universality Violation in Leptoquark and Diquark Models,Phys. Lett. B777(2018) 324 [1708.06350]

    work page arXiv 2018

  80. [80]

    Cheung and K

    C. Cheung and K. Ishiwata,Baryogenesis with Higher Dimension Operators,Phys. Rev. D88(2013) 017901 [1304.0468]

    work page arXiv 2013

Showing first 80 references.