REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by
Non-Renormalizable SU(5) GUTs: Leptoquark-Induced Neutrino Masses
T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash
Pith's one-line read This paper argues that the color-triplet scalar partner of the Higgs doublet in SU(5) can stay light and collider-accessible if higher-dimensional operators suppress its baryon-number-violating couplings, and that the same triplet can…
desk verdict A careful and mostly honest extension of the authors' light-triplet SU(5) program; the new 75H machinery is solid and the neutrino fits are genuine, but the proton-stability 'bypass' still rests on unprotected Yukawa cancellations, exactly as the paper itself admits. read the letter →
The pith
A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.
The reading
What carries the argument
The central object is the color-triplet scalar $T = (3,1,-1/3)$ inside the $5_H$ Higgs, whose SU(5)-invariant couplings to $10_F 5_F$ and $10_F 10_F$ are extended by higher-dimensional operators suppressed by the cutoff $\Lambda$. The mechanism that carries the argument is the cancellation structure in the Yukawa sector: the relations (20)--(23) in the $24_H$ case and (43)--(46) in the $75_H$ case force the triplet's baryon-number-violating couplings to vanish while preserving charged-fermion masses. Neutrino masses come from the mixing of $T$ with another scalar leptoquark ($\eta_3^{-1/3}$ in $10_H$ or $\Delta_3^{-1/3}$ in $15_H$), with mixing angle $\theta$ and the one-loop formula $M_N \approx (3 \sin 2\theta / 32\pi^2) \ln(m_{S_1}^2/m_{S_2}^2)[\ldots]$. The same objects control the unification economy: in $24_H$ scenarios a dimension-five gauge kinetic operator with parameter $\epsilon_5$ raises $M_{\mathrm{GUT}}$ to $(3.4$--$5.9)\times 10^{14}$ GeV, while in $75_H$ scenarios the $\Phi_3(8,3,0)$ multiplet allows $M_{\mathrm{GUT}}$ up to $10^{19}$ GeV.
What would settle it
A high-precision renormalization-group and threshold calculation of the cancellation conditions, Eqs. (20)--(21) in the $24_H$ case and Eqs. (43)--(44) in the $75_H$ case, would settle the claim: if the low-scale proton-decay amplitude reappears above the current experimental bound, i.e., if the residual triplet-mediated coupling exceeds about $m_T/(10^{12}\,\mathrm{GeV})$, the framework fails. Conversely, observing a TeV-scale scalar with unsuppressed quark-quark couplings would immediately rule it out.
Extended reading notes
Core claim
The core claim is that the light color triplet $T$ in the $5_H$ representation can be made compatible with measured proton decay limits and can simultaneously be responsible for neutrino masses. Writing all dimension-four, dimension-five, and (where needed) dimension-six contractions between the fermion representations $10_F$ and $5_F$, the paper expresses the triplet's couplings to quark-quark and quark-lepton pairs through Yukawa matrices; imposing conditions such as $Y_d - Y_1 \epsilon_{24} + Y_2 \epsilon_{24} = 0$ and $(Y_u + Y_u^T) - (Y_3 + Y_3^T)\epsilon_{24} + \frac{1}{4}(Y_4 + Y_4^T)\epsilon_{24} = 0$ kills tree-level proton decay while leaving viable charged-fermion masses. The same triplet mixes with a second leptoquark from a $10_H$ or $15_H$ representation, generating one-loop Majorana neutrino masses through the usual radiative formula; in the $24_H$ cases the unified scale becomes large enough only with higher-dimensional gauge kinetic terms and a specific suppression pattern for gauge-boson-mediated proton decay, while the $75_H$ cases can reach $M_{\mathrm{GUT}} \sim 10^{19}$ GeV without such suppression. Numerical fits reproduce the five neutrino observables with $\chi^2 \sim 1.5$.
Load-bearing premise
The framework rests on exact cancellations among independent Yukawa matrices, relations (20)--(23) or (43)--(46), that are not guaranteed by any symmetry and must persist at the proton-decay scale to an accuracy the paper estimates as $m_T/(10^{12}\,\mathrm{GeV})$.
Editorial extensions
If this is right
- The light-triplet regime removes the need for an extreme mass hierarchy between the doublet and triplet partners in $5_H$: the triplet can sit near the TeV scale while the doublet is the Standard Model Higgs.
- The same scalar that generates neutrino masses at one loop can be produced at colliders; in the $24_H+10_H+5_H$ scenario the $\eta_3$ leptoquarks couple most strongly to the $d$ quark, giving characteristic final states, and improved proton-decay limits push the allowed leptoquark masses upward.
- In the $24_H$ scenarios, gauge coupling unification with a light triplet requires higher-dimensional gauge kinetic terms plus suppression of gauge-boson-mediated proton decay, with $M_{\mathrm{GUT}}$ in the $(3.4$--$5.9)\times 10^{14}$ GeV range; the $75_H$ scenarios need no such suppression and can reach $M_{\mathrm{GUT}}$ up to $10^{19}$ GeV.
- Benchmark fits reproduce the solar and atmospheric mass-squared differences and all three lepton mixing angles, with the sum of neutrino masses at 76 meV (in the $24_H$ $10_H$ case) and a neutrinoless double-beta parameter of 2.69 meV near upcoming experimental sensitivity.
- Scalar-mediated proton decay is rendered negligible, because the residual loop diagram requires two higher-dimensional vertices and is suppressed by the cutoff squared and a loop factor.
Reading between the lines
- If the cancellation relations are taken literally as exact at the cutoff scale, the light leptoquark's couplings to fermions are fully determined by the charged-fermion mass matrices; global fits of low-energy flavor observables could therefore indirectly test the structure even before direct production.
- Because the cancellations are not protected by any symmetry, a UV completion of the higher-dimensional operators would need to explain the tuning; the framework would be sharpened by identifying a discrete symmetry that enforces the required relations.
- The near-Planck-scale unification of the $75_H$ scenarios suggests the light-triplet idea could plausibly be embedded in a Planck-scale or string-motivated construction, where future proton-decay searches would see nothing from gauge bosons and the collider search for the triplet would be the only probe.
Signed reviews
Editorial analysis
A structured set of objections, weighed in public.
Referee Report
Summary. The paper advocates a light color-triplet scalar (leptoquark) T in the 5H of SU(5) as a viable alternative to the usual doublet–triplet mass splitting. The authors show that higher-dimensional SU(5)-invariant operators can in principle make the dangerous quark–quark (or quark–lepton) couplings of T vanish, in both the 24H and 75H symmetry-breaking scenarios. They then couple this idea to radiative neutrino mass generation by introducing 10H or 15H scalar representations, derive one-loop neutrino-mass formulae, perform gauge-coupling-unification scans, and present benchmark fits to neutrino oscillation data. They emphasize that the light triplet can be at collider scales while proton-decay bounds are evaded, and they discuss some collider signatures.
Significance. If the framework were fully realized, it would offer a qualitatively different resolution of the doublet–triplet splitting problem: instead of making the triplet heavy, one suppresses its baryon-number-violating couplings while keeping it light and testable. The group-theoretic decompositions, the derivation of the color-triplet couplings in Eqs. (15)–(19) and (38)–(42), and the one-loop neutrino-mass formulae appear internally consistent. The paper is also honest in several places about what it does not do, and the explicit benchmark fits (Table III) demonstrate that the proposed mechanisms can reproduce current neutrino-oscillation data. The 75H scenarios benefit from very high unification scales, which is a useful technical observation.
major comments (3)
- [Sec. 2.3, Eqs. (20)–(23) and (43)–(46)] The central viability claim—that a light triplet T can be made safe from proton decay—rests on exact Yukawa-matrix cancellations that the authors themselves state are 'not invariant under the renormalization group equation running' and 'are not result of some particular symmetry.' For mT near the TeV scale and proton-decay-scale matching, the required cancellation precision is mT/(10^12 GeV) ~ 10^-9, as the paper notes. This means the framework does not bypass the doublet–triplet splitting problem; it relocates the fine-tuning into the Yukawa sector, with the additional burden that the cancellation must be imposed at the proton-decay scale and must survive radiative corrections and threshold effects. The manuscript provides no UV boundary condition, RG analysis, or symmetry argument that would produce the needed low-scale alignment. Because the light-triplet scenario is the paper's main thesis, this missing support is load-bearing and needs to be addressed or explicitly reframed as a proof-of-principle with a quantified fine-tuning budget.
- [Sec. 4.1.2, around Eq. (78) and Fig. 3] In the 15H extension, the paper 'explicitly assume[s] that the one-loop contribution of Fig. 3 dominates over the tree-level contribution' of the type-II seesaw, but it provides no argument or numerical estimate for this assumption. Dominance requires either a sufficiently small VEV of the SU(2)_L triplet in 15H or sufficiently small Yukawa couplings Y_Y', and the scalar potential that would determine the triplet VEV is not shown. Since the neutrino-mass matrix of Eq. (82) depends on this loop being the leading contribution, this assumption is not peripheral; it should be backed by a concrete region of parameter space or by a demonstration that the tree-level contribution can always be made negligible without conflicting with other constraints.
- [Tables I and IV] The quoted 'highest possible unification scale' is obtained by an automated scan in which all scalar masses except the leptoquark pair are treated as free parameters between 1 TeV and MGUT. This yields an upper bound under a specific fine-tuned spectrum, not a typical or natural value. The text sometimes reads as if this M_max_GUT is the scale of the scenario, and it is then compared to proton-decay bounds. The authors should state more prominently that this is a maximized quantity and that any realistic spectrum requires all the intermediate scalar masses to be arranged to achieve it; otherwise the comparison overstates the compatibility with proton-decay constraints.
minor comments (4)
- [Sec. 4.1.2] In the sentence about 'leptoquark multiplets η3 ∈ 10H and ∆3 ∈ 155 as well as leptoquark T ∈ 5H', '155' is a typo for '15H'.
- [Sec. 5] The word 'stiplulates' in the discussion of the decay pattern of η3^{2/3} should be 'stipulates'.
- [Sec. 3] The phrase 'if it defers from the 24-dimensional scenario' should read 'differs from'; also 'self-consistancy' in Sec. 4.2.1 should be 'self-consistency'.
- [Sec. 2.3] The claim that 'there are infinitely many ways to implement the suppression' is trivially true because of arbitrary unitary rotations, but it would be helpful to state that such rotations do not affect the size of the required cancellation, which is fixed by the matrix-element conditions.
Circularity Check
No significant circularity: the suppression conditions are explicit cancellations, the neutrino benchmarks are labeled viability fits, and the self-citation of prior work is not load-bearing.
full rationale
The paper's central suppression mechanism is not circular: Eqs. (20)-(23) and (43)-(46) are explicit algebraic conditions obtained by setting the computed triplet-fermion coupling combinations in Eqs. (17)-(19) and (38)-(42) to zero. The paper openly states that these relations require cancellations, that they are not invariant under renormalization-group running, and that they are not the result of a symmetry; the claim is therefore an existence argument about free Yukawa parameters, not a derivation from the intended conclusion. The neutrino mass formulas (54), (61), (67), (82), and (97) contain free couplings YX and YX', and the benchmark fits are described as 'only meant to serve as a proof of phenomenological viability'; they fit the five neutrino observables rather than predicting them, so no fitted input is relabeled as a prediction. Tables I and IV are likewise labeled as the 'highest possible' unification scale obtained by letting scalar masses and epsilon5 vary, so they are maximizations rather than advertised no-free-parameter predictions. The main reliance on the authors' prior work [4] is the upper bound Lambda < 57 M_GUT^max, imported for perturbativity consistency; this bound supports but is not the basis of the suppression conditions or the neutrino mass mechanism, so it is a minor self-citation rather than load-bearing circularity. The paper is benchmarked externally against NuFit data, the proton-decay limit of Ref. [48], and PDG inputs.
Assumptions & free parameters
free parameters (4)
- ϵ5 = c5 v24/(2Λ) =
0.020 to 0.022 (Tables I and IV)
- Scalar masses of all 24H/10H/15H components except S1 and S2 =
free in 1 TeV to MGUT scan
- Neutrino-sector parameters, including entries of YX or YX′ and phases ξ_i, ζ_i, θ^Dc_ij, χ_1..3, α, β, δ =
benchmark values in Eqs. (69)-(75) and (84)-(90)
- Leptoquark mixing parameters λ, μ, λ′ =
not numerically fixed
assumptions (5)
- standard math SU(5) representation theory and the contractions listed in Eqs. (5) and (34) exhaust the relevant operators
- domain assumption Effective field theory with a single cutoff Λ and no additional symmetry, with operator coefficients of order one
- domain assumption VEV alignment in Eqs. (3), (4), and (31), and scale ordering Λ >> v24/75 >> v5
- ad hoc to paper In 15H extensions, the one-loop diagram dominates over the tree-level type-II seesaw
- domain assumption Yukawa entries can satisfy perturbativity and the required cancellations
Cite this review
Pith. "Pith review of Non-Renormalizable SU(5) GUTs: Leptoquark-Induced Neutrino Masses." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/NHOVX3VQ
@misc{pith2026250416022,
author = {Pith},
title = {Pith review of: Non-Renormalizable SU(5) GUTs: Leptoquark-Induced Neutrino Masses},
year = {2026},
howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/NHOVX3VQ}},
note = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.16022}
}
abstract
We revisit the doublet-triplet splitting problem within the $SU(5)$ gauge group framework to advocate a viable regime with the light scalar leptoquark of the doublet-triplet splitting notoriety that is compatible with the current experimental bounds on partial proton decay lifetimes. We explicitly demonstrate, through a consistent use of higher-dimensional operators, how to implement suppression of baryon number violating interactions of the aforementioned color triplet. Our study thus offers an alternative approach to the doublet-triplet splitting problem as it removes a need for an extreme mass hierarchy between the partners residing in the same representation. We furthermore pursue two different extensions of two distinct symmetry breaking scenarios of $SU(5)$, one with a $24$-dimensional representation and the other one with a $75$-dimensional representation, to produce comparative study of novel consequences for the gauge coupling unification and the one-loop level neutrino mass generation. Our results point towards qualitatively novel $SU(5)$ scenarios, where the light scalar leptoquarks, responsible for the neutrino mass generation, might be even accessible at colliders and thus serve as an accelerator accessible portal to the high-scale physics.
Figures
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Neutrino Mass Induced $n$-$\overline{n}$ Oscillation
In the Georgi-Glashow SU(5) theory, generating a Majorana neutrino mass necessarily produces neutron–antineutron oscillation from the same operator.
Reference graph
Works this paper leans on
-
[1]
Unity of All Elementary Particle Forces,
H. Georgi and S. L. Glashow, “Unity of All Elementary Particle Forces,”Phys. Rev. Lett. 32 (1974) 438–441
work page 1974
-
[2]
Softly Broken Supersymmetry and SU(5),
S. Dimopoulos and H. Georgi, “Softly Broken Supersymmetry and SU(5),”Nucl. Phys. B 193 (1981) 150–162
work page 1981
-
[3]
Naturalness in Supersymmetric Guts,
N. Sakai, “Naturalness in Supersymmetric Guts,”Z. Phys. C 11 (1981) 153
work page 1981
-
[4]
Is doublet-triplet splitting necessary?,
I. Doršner and S. Saad, “Is doublet-triplet splitting necessary?,”Phys. Rev. D 110 no. 7, (2024) 075025,arXiv:2404.09021 [hep-ph]
arXiv 2024
-
[5]
Can proton decay be rotated away?,
S. Nandi, A. Stern, and E. C. G. Sudarshan, “Can proton decay be rotated away?,” Phys. Lett. B 113 (1982) 165–169
work page 1982
-
[6]
V. S. Berezinsky and A. Y. Smirnov, “HOW TO SAVE MINIMAL SU(5),”Phys. Lett. B 140 (1984) 49–52
work page 1984
-
[7]
Can ’doublet - triplet splitting’ problem be solved without doublet - triplet splitting?,
G. R. Dvali, “Can ’doublet - triplet splitting’ problem be solved without doublet - triplet splitting?,” Phys. Lett. B 287 (1992) 101–108
work page 1992
-
[8]
G. R. Dvali, “Light color triplet Higgs is compatible with proton stability: An Alternative approach to the doublet - triplet splitting problem,”Phys. Lett. B 372 (1996) 113–120, arXiv:hep-ph/9511237. 27
work page Pith review arXiv 1996
Show all 72 references
-
[9]
d = 5 operators in SUSY GUT: Fermion masses versus proton decay,
Z. Berezhiani, Z. Tavartkiladze, and M. Vysotsky, “d = 5 operators in SUSY GUT: Fermion masses versus proton decay,” in10th International Seminar on High-Energy Physics (Quarks 98) . 5, 1998. arXiv:hep-ph/9809301
1998 arXiv
-
[10]
Proton decay in minimal supersymmetric SU(5),
B. Bajc, P. Fileviez Perez, and G. Senjanovic, “Proton decay in minimal supersymmetric SU(5),” Phys. Rev. D 66 (2002) 075005, arXiv:hep-ph/0204311
2002 arXiv
-
[11]
Minimal supersymmetric SU(5) theory and proton decay: Where do we stand?,
B. Bajc, P. Fileviez Perez, and G. Senjanovic, “Minimal supersymmetric SU(5) theory and proton decay: Where do we stand?,” inConference on Physics Beyond the Standard Model: Beyond the Desert 02 , pp. 131–139. 10, 2002. arXiv:hep-ph/0210374
2002 arXiv
-
[12]
Fermion mixings versus d = 6 proton decay,
P. Fileviez Perez, “Fermion mixings versus d = 6 proton decay,”Phys. Lett. B595 (2004) 476–483, arXiv:hep-ph/0403286 [hep-ph]
2004 arXiv
-
[13]
Could we rotate proton decay away?,
I. Dorsner and P. Fileviez Perez, “Could we rotate proton decay away?,”Phys. Lett. B 606 (2005) 367–370, arXiv:hep-ph/0409190
2005 arXiv
-
[14]
How long could we live?,
I. Dorsner and P. Fileviez Perez, “How long could we live?,”Phys. Lett. B 625 (2005) 88–95, arXiv:hep-ph/0410198
2005 arXiv
-
[15]
Phenomenological and cosmological aspects of a minimal GUT scenario,
I. Dorsner, P. Fileviez Perez, and R. Gonzalez Felipe, “Phenomenological and cosmological aspects of a minimal GUT scenario,”Nucl. Phys. B 747 (2006) 312–327, arXiv:hep-ph/0512068
2006 arXiv
-
[16]
Unification without supersymmetry: Neutrino mass, proton decay and light leptoquarks,
I. Dorsner and P. Fileviez Perez, “Unification without supersymmetry: Neutrino mass, proton decay and light leptoquarks,”Nucl. Phys. B723 (2005) 53–76, arXiv:hep-ph/0504276 [hep-ph]
2005 arXiv
-
[17]
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, arXiv:hep-ph/0601023
2007 arXiv
-
[18]
Heavy and light scalar leptoquarks in proton decay,
I. Dorsner, S. Fajfer, and N. Kosnik, “Heavy and light scalar leptoquarks in proton decay,” Phys. Rev. D 86 (2012) 015013, arXiv:1204.0674 [hep-ph]
2012 arXiv
-
[19]
A scalar leptoquark in SU(5),
I. Dorsner, “A scalar leptoquark in SU(5),”Phys. Rev. D86 (2012) 055009, arXiv:1206.5998 [hep-ph]
2012 arXiv
-
[20]
SU(5) Unification without Proton Decay,
B. Fornal and B. Grinstein, “SU(5) Unification without Proton Decay,”Phys. Rev. Lett. 119 no. 24, (2017) 241801,arXiv:1706.08535 [hep-ph]
2017 arXiv
-
[21]
SYMMETRY BREAKING MECHANISM IN AN ALTERNATIVE SU(5) MODEL,
T. Hubsch and S. Pallua, “SYMMETRY BREAKING MECHANISM IN AN ALTERNATIVE SU(5) MODEL,”Phys. Lett. B 138 (1984) 279–282. 28
1984
-
[22]
Gauge and scalar boson mediated proton decay in a predictive SU(5) GUT model,
I. Doršner, E. Džaferović-Mašić, S. Fajfer, and S. Saad, “Gauge and scalar boson mediated proton decay in a predictive SU(5) GUT model,”Phys. Rev. D 109 no. 7, (2024) 075023, arXiv:2401.16907 [hep-ph]
2024 arXiv
-
[23]
A Theory of Lepton Number Violation, Neutrino Majorana Mass, and Oscillation,
A. Zee, “A Theory of Lepton Number Violation, Neutrino Majorana Mass, and Oscillation,” Phys. Lett. B 93 (1980) 389. [Erratum: Phys.Lett.B 95, 461 (1980)]
1980
-
[24]
Neutrino mixing in grand unified theories,
L. Wolfenstein, “Neutrino mixing in grand unified theories,”eConf C801002 (1980) 116–120
1980
-
[25]
Hierarchical Fermion Masses in SU(5),
R. Barbieri, D. V. Nanopoulos, and D. Wyler, “Hierarchical Fermion Masses in SU(5),” Phys. Lett. B 103 (1981) 433–436
1981
-
[26]
Renormalizable SU(5) Unification,
P. Fileviez Perez and C. Murgui, “Renormalizable SU(5) Unification,”Phys. Rev. D94 no. 7, (2016) 075014,arXiv:1604.03377 [hep-ph]
2016 arXiv
-
[27]
Leptoquark mechanism of neutrino masses within the grand unification framework,
I. Doršner, S. Fajfer, and N. Košnik, “Leptoquark mechanism of neutrino masses within the grand unification framework,”Eur. Phys. J. C77 no. 6, (2017) 417, arXiv:1701.08322 [hep-ph]
2017 arXiv
-
[28]
Renormalizable SU(5) Completions of a Zee-type Neutrino Mass Model,
K. Kumericki, T. Mede, and I. Picek, “Renormalizable SU(5) Completions of a Zee-type Neutrino Mass Model,”Phys. Rev. D97 no. 5, (2018) 055012, arXiv:1712.05246 [hep-ph]
2018 arXiv
-
[29]
Origin of a two-loop neutrino mass from SU(5) grand unification,
S. Saad, “Origin of a two-loop neutrino mass from SU(5) grand unification,”Phys. Rev. D99 no. 11, (2019) 115016,arXiv:1902.11254 [hep-ph]
2019 arXiv
-
[30]
Towards MinimalSU (5),
I. Doršner and S. Saad, “Towards MinimalSU (5),” Phys. Rev. D 101 no. 1, (2020) 015009, arXiv:1910.09008 [hep-ph]
2020 arXiv
-
[31]
Parameter space exploration of the minimal SU(5) unification,
I. Doršner, E. Džaferović-Mašić, and S. Saad, “Parameter space exploration of the minimal SU(5) unification,”Phys. Rev. D 104 no. 1, (2021) 015023, arXiv:2105.01678 [hep-ph]
2021 arXiv
-
[32]
Fully testable axion dark matter within a minimal SU(5) GUT,
S. Antusch, I. Doršner, K. Hinze, and S. Saad, “Fully testable axion dark matter within a minimal SU(5) GUT,”Phys. Rev. D 108 no. 1, (2023) 015025, arXiv:2301.00809 [hep-ph]
2023 arXiv
-
[33]
Radiative neutrino masses and successfulSU (5) unification,
C. Klein, M. Lindner, and S. Vogl, “Radiative neutrino masses and successfulSU (5) unification,” Phys. Rev. D100 no. 7, (2019) 075024,arXiv:1907.05328 [hep-ph]
2019 arXiv
-
[34]
Leptoquark-mediated two-loop neutrino mass in unified theory,
K. Hinze and S. Saad, “Leptoquark-mediated two-loop neutrino mass in unified theory,” Phys. Lett. B 854 (2024) 138748, arXiv:2403.04644 [hep-ph] . 29
2024 arXiv
-
[35]
Ultraviolet completion of a two-loop neutrino mass model,
K. S. Babu and S. Saad, “Ultraviolet completion of a two-loop neutrino mass model,” JHEP 03 (2025) 132, arXiv:2412.14562 [hep-ph]
2025 arXiv
-
[36]
Non-renormalizable grand unification utilizing the leptoquark mechanism of neutrino mass,
c. Doğan, “Non-renormalizable grand unification utilizing the leptoquark mechanism of neutrino mass,”arXiv:2502.09333 [hep-ph]
-
[37]
B-L nonconservation and neutron oscillation,
L. Chang and N. Chang, “B-L nonconservation and neutron oscillation,”Phys. Lett. B 92 (1980) 103–106
1980
-
[38]
Classification of effective neutrino mass operators,
K. S. Babu and C. N. Leung, “Classification of effective neutrino mass operators,” Nucl. Phys. B 619 (2001) 667–689, arXiv:hep-ph/0106054
2001 arXiv
-
[39]
Two-Loop Neutrino Mass Generation through Leptoquarks,
K. S. Babu and J. Julio, “Two-Loop Neutrino Mass Generation through Leptoquarks,” Nucl. Phys. B 841 (2010) 130–156, arXiv:1006.1092 [hep-ph]
2010 arXiv
-
[40]
Neutrino Masses, Grand Unification, and Baryon Number Violation,
A. de Gouvea, J. Herrero-Garcia, and A. Kobach, “Neutrino Masses, Grand Unification, and Baryon Number Violation,”Phys. Rev. D 90 no. 1, (2014) 016011, arXiv:1404.4057 [hep-ph]
2014 arXiv
-
[41]
Small neutrino masses and gauge coupling unification,
S. M. Boucenna, R. M. Fonseca, F. Gonzalez-Canales, and J. W. F. Valle, “Small neutrino masses and gauge coupling unification,”Phys. Rev. D 91 no. 3, (2015) 031702, arXiv:1411.0566 [hep-ph]
2015 arXiv
-
[42]
Unification of Gauge Couplings in Radiative Neutrino Mass Models,
C. Hagedorn, T. Ohlsson, S. Riad, and M. A. Schmidt, “Unification of Gauge Couplings in Radiative Neutrino Mass Models,”JHEP 09 (2016) 111, arXiv:1605.03986 [hep-ph]
2016 arXiv
-
[43]
From the trees to the forest: a review of radiative neutrino mass models,
Y. Cai, J. Herrero-García, M. A. Schmidt, A. Vicente, and R. R. Volkas, “From the trees to the forest: a review of radiative neutrino mass models,”Front. in Phys. 5 (2017) 63, arXiv:1706.08524 [hep-ph]
2017 arXiv
-
[44]
Review of Particle Physics,
Particle Data Group Collaboration, K. A. Oliveet al., “Review of Particle Physics,” Chin. Phys. C38 (2014) 090001
2014
-
[45]
Are There Significant Gravitational Corrections to the Unification Scale?,
C. T. Hill, “Are There Significant Gravitational Corrections to the Unification Scale?,” Phys. Lett. B 135 (1984) 47–51
1984
-
[46]
Modification of GUT Predictions in the Presence of Spontaneous Compactification,
Q. Shafi and C. Wetterich, “Modification of GUT Predictions in the Presence of Spontaneous Compactification,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 52 (1984) 875
1984
-
[47]
A Note on dimension-5 operators in GUTs and their impact,
J. Chakrabortty and A. Raychaudhuri, “A Note on dimension-5 operators in GUTs and their impact,”Phys. Lett. B 673 (2009) 57–62, arXiv:0812.2783 [hep-ph] . 30
2009 arXiv
-
[48]
Minimal SU(5) theory on the edge: The importance of being effective,
G. Senjanović and M. Zantedeschi, “Minimal SU(5) theory on the edge: The importance of being effective,”Phys. Rev. D 109 no. 9, (2024) 095009, arXiv:2402.19224 [hep-ph]
2024 arXiv
-
[49]
NuFit-6.0: updated global analysis of three-flavor neutrino oscillations,
I. Esteban, M. C. Gonzalez-Garcia, M. Maltoni, I. Martinez-Soler, J. a. P. Pinheiro, and T. Schwetz, “NuFit-6.0: updated global analysis of three-flavor neutrino oscillations,” JHEP 12 (2024) 216, arXiv:2410.05380 [hep-ph]
2024 arXiv
-
[50]
Nufit webpage, available online:http://www.nu-fit.org (september 2024 data),
“Nufit webpage, available online:http://www.nu-fit.org (september 2024 data),”
2024
-
[51]
Review of particle physics,
Particle Data Group Collaboration, S. Navaset al., “Review of particle physics,” Phys. Rev. D 110 no. 3, (2024) 030001
2024
-
[52]
Search for Majorana Neutrinos with the Complete KamLAND-Zen Dataset,
KamLAND-Zen Collaboration, S. Abeet al., “Search for Majorana Neutrinos with the Complete KamLAND-Zen Dataset,”arXiv:2406.11438 [hep-ex]
-
[53]
µ→eγ at a Rate of One Out of109 Muon Decays?,
P. Minkowski, “µ→eγ at a Rate of One Out of109 Muon Decays?,” Phys. Lett. 67B (1977) 421–428
1977
-
[54]
Horizontal gauge symmetry and masses of neutrinos,
T. Yanagida, “Horizontal gauge symmetry and masses of neutrinos,”Conf. Proc. C7902131 (1979) 95–99
1979
-
[55]
The Future of Elementary Particle Physics,
S. Glashow, “The Future of Elementary Particle Physics,”NATO Sci. Ser. B 61 (1980) 687
1980
-
[56]
Complex Spinors and Unified Theories,
M. Gell-Mann, P. Ramond, and R. Slansky, “Complex Spinors and Unified Theories,” Conf. Proc. C 790927 (1979) 315–321, arXiv:1306.4669 [hep-th]
1979 arXiv
-
[57]
Neutrino Mass and Spontaneous Parity Nonconservation,
R. N. Mohapatra and G. Senjanovic, “Neutrino Mass and Spontaneous Parity Nonconservation,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 44 (1980) 912
1980
-
[58]
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,”Phys. Rev. D22 (1980) 2227
1980
-
[59]
Neutrino Decay and Spontaneous Violation of Lepton Number,
J. Schechter and J. W. F. Valle, “Neutrino Decay and Spontaneous Violation of Lepton Number,” Phys. Rev. D25 (1982) 774
1982
-
[60]
Seesaw at LHC,
B. Bajc and G. Senjanovic, “Seesaw at LHC,”JHEP 08 (2007) 014, arXiv:hep-ph/0612029 [hep-ph]
2007 arXiv
-
[61]
Fermion masses and the UV cutoff of the minimal realistic SU(5),
I. Dorsner, P. Fileviez Perez, and G. Rodrigo, “Fermion masses and the UV cutoff of the minimal realistic SU(5),”Phys. Rev. D 75 (2007) 125007, arXiv:hep-ph/0607208. 31
2007 arXiv
-
[62]
Predictions from type II see-saw mechanism in SU(5),
I. Dorsner and I. Mocioiu, “Predictions from type II see-saw mechanism in SU(5),” Nucl. Phys. B796 (2008) 123–136, arXiv:0708.3332 [hep-ph]
2008 arXiv
-
[63]
Nucleon decay in a minimal non-SUSY GUT with predicted quark-lepton Yukawa ratios,
S. Antusch and K. Hinze, “Nucleon decay in a minimal non-SUSY GUT with predicted quark-lepton Yukawa ratios,”Nucl. Phys. B 976 (2022) 115719, arXiv:2108.08080 [hep-ph]
2022 arXiv
-
[64]
Viable quark-lepton Yukawa ratios and nucleon decay predictions in SU(5) GUTs with type-II seesaw,
S. Antusch, K. Hinze, and S. Saad, “Viable quark-lepton Yukawa ratios and nucleon decay predictions in SU(5) GUTs with type-II seesaw,”Nucl. Phys. B 986 (2023) 116049, arXiv:2205.01120 [hep-ph]
2023 arXiv
-
[65]
Lepton flavor violation in minimal grand unified type II seesaw models,
L. Calibbi and X. Gao, “Lepton flavor violation in minimal grand unified type II seesaw models,” Phys. Rev. D 106 no. 9, (2022) 095036,arXiv:2206.10682 [hep-ph]
2022 arXiv
-
[66]
Quark-lepton Yukawa ratios and nucleon decay in SU(5) GUTs with type-III seesaw,
S. Antusch, K. Hinze, and S. Saad, “Quark-lepton Yukawa ratios and nucleon decay in SU(5) GUTs with type-III seesaw,”Nucl. Phys. B 991 (2023) 116195, arXiv:2301.03601 [hep-ph]
2023 arXiv
-
[67]
Minimal SU(5) GUTs with vectorlike fermions,
S. Antusch, K. Hinze, and S. Saad, “Minimal SU(5) GUTs with vectorlike fermions,” Phys. Rev. D 108 no. 9, (2023) 095010,arXiv:2308.08585 [hep-ph]
2023 arXiv
-
[68]
Unified origin of inflation, baryon asymmetry, and neutrino mass,
A. Kaladharan and S. Saad, “Unified origin of inflation, baryon asymmetry, and neutrino mass,” Phys. Rev. D 110 no. 11, (2024) 116012,arXiv:2409.02225 [hep-ph]
2024 arXiv
-
[69]
Neutrino Masses, Mixings and Oscillations in SU(2) x U(1) Models of Electroweak Interactions,
T. P. Cheng and L.-F. Li, “Neutrino Masses, Mixings and Oscillations in SU(2) x U(1) Models of Electroweak Interactions,”Phys. Rev. D 22 (1980) 2860
1980
-
[70]
Model of ’Calculable’ Majorana Neutrino Masses,
K. S. Babu, “Model of ’Calculable’ Majorana Neutrino Masses,”Phys. Lett. B 203 (1988) 132–136
1988
-
[71]
Triple-leptoquark interactions for tree- and loop-level proton decays,
I. Doršner, S. Fajfer, and O. Sumensari, “Triple-leptoquark interactions for tree- and loop-level proton decays,”JHEP 05 (2022) 183, arXiv:2202.08287 [hep-ph]
2022 arXiv
-
[72]
Triple-leptoquark interactions for tree- and loop-level proton decays,
I. Dorsner, “Triple-leptoquark interactions for tree- and loop-level proton decays,” PoS CORFU2023 (2024) 072. 32
2024
Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.