Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 6 cited by

By keeping the singlet scalar at zero vacuum expectation value, a minimal dark matter extension avoids the usual conflict between a strong first-order electroweak phase transition and experimental constraints.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-03 09:36 UTC pith:P47XSN4X

load-bearing objection Useful scan of a known no-VEV singlet scalar + fermion DM setup; the physics is mostly standard but the zero-temperature global-minimum check is missing and that is load-bearing. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2601.13147 v4 pith:P47XSN4X submitted 2026-01-19 hep-ph

Revisiting Singlet Fermion Dark Matter with a Scalar Portal: Connecting Higgs Phenomenology and Strong Electroweak Phase Transition

Jaydeb Das , Saurabh Niyogi , Tripurari Srivastava This is my paper
classification hep-ph
keywords singlet fermion dark matterscalar portalzero-VEV singletelectroweak phase transitiongravitational wavesrelic densitydirect detectioncollider constraints
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper tries to show that in a minimal extension of the Standard Model—one real singlet scalar plus one singlet Dirac fermion dark matter candidate—the well-known tension between a strong first-order electroweak phase transition and dark-matter/direct-detection constraints can be removed by a structural choice: the singlet scalar is assumed not to acquire a vacuum expectation value at zero temperature. With no singlet VEV, the quartic Higgs-portal coupling λ_hs is free to be large enough to drive a strongly first-order transition, while the Higgs–singlet mixing angle sinθ is controlled separately by a trilinear portal term and can stay small. The authors identify nine benchmark points that simultaneously satisfy relic abundance, direct-detection, collider, and electroweak-precision constraints, all with transition strength v_c/T_c ≥ 1.1 along the Higgs direction. If correct, the model connects Higgs phenomenology, dark matter, and a stochastic gravitational-wave background detectable by future space-based interferometers, in one renormalizable framework.

Core claim

The central claim is that a real singlet scalar with zero vacuum expectation value at T=0 acts as a phase-transition catalyst while leaving the dark-matter detection cross section controlled by the independently small mixing angle. The scalar mass matrix is diagonalised with a single mixing angle, and the physical statement is that λ_hs and sinθ are decoupled parameters: λ_hs sets the finite-temperature barrier, sinθ is set by μ_hs = (m_h2²−m_h1²) sinθ cosθ / v. In all nine benchmark points the electroweak transition is two-step and strongly first order in the second step, with ξ_h = v_c/T_c = 1.10–2.97; BP9 also has ξ_s = 1.83 and a gravitational-wave spectrum peaking near 0.01 Hz, within t

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the no-VEV assumption for the singlet scalar at zero temperature, which places the electroweak vacuum at (h,s)=(v,0). That choice decouples the Higgs-portal quartic λ_hs—the parameter that generates the tree-level barrier in the finite-temperature effective potential—from the mixing angle sinθ that controls collider production rates and the spin-independent direct-detection cross section. The mixing is generated by the dimensionful trilinear portal μ_hs |H|²s. A two-step phase transition follows: at high temperature the singlet develops a small VEV and the Higgs VEV is zero; at the critical temperature the system jumps to (v_c, 0). The direct-detection amplitude

Load-bearing premise

The claim collapses if the zero-temperature point (h,s)=(v,0) is not the global minimum of the scalar potential: the paper imposes only the stationary conditions and quartic boundedness, so a deeper minimum along the singlet direction, possible with the negative trilinear term μ_3 s³/3, would invalidate the no-VEV construction.

What would settle it

Evaluate the full one-loop zero-temperature effective potential for each benchmark and check for a minimum deeper than (v,0) at s≠0; any such minimum falsifies the no-VEV premise for that point. Conversely, a confirmed global minimum at (v,0) would remove the main structural risk.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • The decoupling of λ_hs from sinθ means a strong first-order electroweak phase transition can be realised with the mixing angle at or below current bounds—no fine cancellation between constraints is needed.
  • The model predicts two-step transition dynamics in every benchmark point, so the early-Universe thermal history is qualitatively different from the Standard Model crossover.
  • A detectable stochastic gravitational-wave signal is possible: BP9 peaks near 0.01 Hz within reach of planned space-based detectors, with the other benchmarks spanning frequencies from 10⁻⁴ to 10⁵ Hz and complementary detector coverage.
  • Relic density can be obtained in three distinct regimes (Higgs funnel, h2 resonance, and degenerate mχ ≃ m_h2), and in the resonance regime the relic density is essentially insensitive to the mixing angle.
  • Non-standard di-scalar production (pp→h1h2 and h2h2) is sub-femtobarn for most benchmarks, but BP8 reaches sub-femtobarn and is identified as the best future collider target.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The practical takeaway goes beyond this model: any singlet extension that wants a large portal coupling for the phase transition and a small mixing for direct detection can achieve both by choosing field-space coordinates that forbid a VEV for the singlet, rather than by tuning couplings.
  • If the paper's logic is right, the gravitational-wave signal and the dark-matter blind spot are correlated: the same destructive interference that hides the dark matter at direct detection also forces small sinθ, which suppresses collider production and makes gravitational waves the most accessible probe.
  • A direct check of the construction is to map the global minimum structure of the one-loop zero-temperature potential; if a deeper minimum at s≠0 exists for the benchmark points, the no-VEV premise fails, but if the scan confirms (v,0) is global, the framework's viability is strengthened.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies an SM extension with a real singlet scalar s and a Z2-odd singlet Dirac fermion chi as dark matter. Its central structural assumption is that s has zero vacuum expectation value at T=0, so the quartic Higgs-portal coupling lambda_hs can be large enough to drive a strong first-order electroweak phase transition while the Higgs-singlet mixing angle sin(theta) remains small and is controlled separately by the trilinear term mu_hs. The authors impose theoretical, EWPO, LHC, relic-density, and direct-detection constraints, select nine benchmark points, compute the one-loop finite-temperature effective potential, and use CosmoTransitions to extract phase-transition parameters and gravitational-wave spectra. They report xi_h = v_c/T_c between about 1.10 and 2.97 for all benchmarks, with BP9 yielding a signal near the projected sensitivity of LISA, BBO, and DECIGO.

Significance. If the construction holds, the model provides a useful way to evade the usual tension between strong first-order EWPT and direct-detection/collider constraints by decoupling sin(theta) from lambda_hs. The paper has concrete strengths: it uses standard numerical tools (micrOMEGAs, CosmoTransitions, MadGraph), gives explicit benchmark points and phase-transition tables, provides counterterm definitions in an appendix, and candidly acknowledges some limitations (Landau-pole caveat in footnote 1, and the absence of a systematic renormalization-scale/gauge study in Sec. 5.1). However, the headline claims are conditional on a zero-temperature global-minimum check that is not performed, and on quantitative robustness of the phase-transition parameters, which is not demonstrated. The paper is therefore significant if the missing checks can be supplied, but it cannot be accepted in its present form.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. 2, Sec. 3.1, Eqs. (2.6)-(2.7), (3.1)] The no-VEV construction is never verified as a global minimum. Section 2 imposes only the stationary conditions (2.6)-(2.7), and Sec. 3.1 checks boundedness and unitarity via (3.1), not the absence of deeper minima. This is not an academic concern: for BP4-like parameters (m_h2=350 GeV, lambda_hs=4.3), Eq. (2.14) gives mu_s^2 approximately -7.6e3 GeV^2, so along h=0 the tree-level potential has a negative quadratic term, a cubic term mu_3 s^3/3, and a tadpole term; a deeper minimum at s != 0 can easily exist. Since all benchmark phenomenology, the EWPT analysis, and the GW spectra rest on (v,0) being the true zero-temperature vacuum, the claim that all nine BPs are viable requires either a global minimization over (h,s) for every benchmark and scan region, or an analytic/tree-level condition excluding such minima.
  2. [Sec. 5.1, Eq. (5.22), Tabs. 3-4, Fig. 9] The paper explicitly states that it does not attempt a systematic renormalization-scale or gauge study and that only moderate variations around the characteristic mass scales were checked. This matters because the quantitative conclusions in Tabs. 3-4 and Fig. 9 depend on xi_h, alpha_n, and beta/H_n, which in singlet-extended models can shift by O(10%) or more with the renormalization scale and gauge choice. For BP4-BP6, xi_h is only about 1.10, close to the SFOEWPT threshold, while for BP9 the GW signal is claimed to lie near LISA/BBO/DECIGO sensitivity. A quantitative scan over, e.g., mu in [m_h2/2, 2m_h2], and ideally a gauge check, is needed to support the statement that the signals are robustly observable rather than artifacts of the chosen scale.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Table 1] The benchmark table appears truncated: the BP1, BP3, BP4, and BP6 rows do not show entries in the m_h2 and sin(theta) columns, although the text elsewhere indicates m_h2=200 GeV for BP1-BP3 and m_h2=350 GeV for BP4-BP6. Please provide a complete, machine-readable table so the results are reproducible.
  2. [Eq. (3.6)] The inequality in Eq. (3.6) appears to have the wrong direction: the ZZ->4l search constrains sin(theta) to be below roughly 0.13-0.20 in the stated mass range, so the displayed 'sin(theta) > 0.13-0.20' should be 'sin(theta) < 0.13-0.20' or an exclusion statement.
  3. [Sec. 5.1 and App. A] Eq. (5.22) writes the one-loop zero-temperature Coleman-Weinberg term as V_CW^{1-loop}(h,s,T), while App. A defines counterterms using V_CW at T=0. Please clarify exactly which masses (tree-level or thermally resummed) enter V_CW and V_T in the numerical calculation, and how the counterterms are evaluated when the Parwani-style resummation is used, to avoid double-counting and to make the numerics reproducible.
  4. [Footnote 1] The footnote acknowledges that large lambda_hs and lambda_s may trigger Landau poles at an intermediate scale and that the model should therefore be viewed as an EFT with cutoff Lambda, but no estimate of Lambda is given. Since some benchmarks approach the perturbative-unitarity bounds, a one-loop RGE estimate of Lambda would clarify whether the EFT is valid at the temperatures and energies used.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No formal circularity: the central derivation is self-contained; the GW/EWPT results are benchmark selection effects and the T=0 global-minimum check is missing, but no derived equation reduces to an input.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is not circular in the formal sense. The no-VEV assumption (Sec. 2) is a stated model input, not an output; the decoupling of sinθ from λ_hs follows from the tree-level potential (2.5) and mass matrix (2.8), whose off-diagonal entry is μ_hs v, independent of λ_hs. The inverse relations (2.13)-(2.14) are algebraic identities, not fits. The dark-matter and collider analyses compare micrOMEGAs and MadGraph outputs to external data (Planck, LZ, ATLAS/CMS); these parameters are not fitted to the paper's own phase-transition claims. The EWPT and GW spectra are computed from the same benchmark parameters with the standard one-loop finite-T potential (5.22) and CosmoTransitions; no equation equates the output (ξ_h, α_n, Ω_GW) to an input by construction. The only soft points are non-circular caveats: (i) the benchmark points were partly selected with large λ_hs to realize SFOEWPT (footnote 1), so the statement that all BPs have ξ_h ≥ 1 and that BP9 is LISA-visible is a selection effect rather than an independent prediction; (ii) the paper checks boundedness (3.1) and stationarity (2.6)-(2.7) but never verifies that (v,0) is the global minimum, so the no-VEV benchmarks may be invalid if a deeper s ≠ 0 minimum exists. These are correctness/interpretation caveats, not reductions of the result to its inputs. Self-citations ([28], [29], [45]) involve co-authors but are used only for context or known Z2 limits, and no uniqueness theorem or ansatz is smuggled in via self-citation.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

7 free parameters · 4 axioms · 2 invented entities

The paper's central claims rest on hand-chosen benchmark parameters, a no-VEV assumption, and one-loop finite-temperature perturbation theory. No machine-checked proofs or shipped code are provided. The free parameters are the scalar masses, mixings, quartic couplings, trilinear coupling, DM mass, and Yukawa coupling, all set by hand for each benchmark.

free parameters (7)
  • m_h2 = 70-350 GeV (BP-dependent)
    Heavy scalar mass selected by hand; determines resonance positions, collider bounds, and phase transition strength.
  • sinθ = 0.001-0.13 (BP-dependent)
    Mixing angle chosen to satisfy LHC and direct-detection constraints while allowing the desired DM annihilation channels.
  • λ_hs = 0.8-4.45
    Higgs-singlet quartic portal; chosen large to generate a strong first-order EWPT.
  • λ_s = 0.73-4.8
    Singlet quartic coupling; shapes the scalar potential and phase transition dynamics.
  • μ_3 = -100 to 20 GeV
    Singlet trilinear coupling; tuned to raise or lower the barrier in the finite-temperature potential.
  • m_χ = 78-380 GeV
    Dark matter mass selected to sit near the h2 resonance or degenerate region to reproduce relic density.
  • g_χ = 0.02-0.87
    Yukawa coupling between the singlet scalar and the DM fermion; controls annihilation rate and direct detection signal.
axioms (4)
  • domain assumption The singlet scalar has zero VEV at zero temperature.
    Central model assumption; only stationary conditions (Eqs. 2.6-2.7) are imposed, not global minimum conditions. With μ_3 and λ_s present, deeper minima may exist.
  • domain assumption One-loop finite-temperature effective potential with Parwani daisy resummation is adequate for phase transition conclusions.
    Used to compute v_c/T_c for all benchmarks; the paper explicitly declines a systematic study of renormalization-scale and gauge uncertainties (Sec. 5.1).
  • domain assumption The DM is a standard thermal WIMP with standard freeze-out.
    Relic density is computed with micrOMEGAs assuming standard thermal freeze-out; no non-thermal production or additional cosmological assumptions are considered.
  • domain assumption The Z2 symmetry stabilizing χ forbids any tree-level coupling of χ to SM fields.
    The Lagrangian in Eq. (2.1) and scalar potential in Eq. (2.2) assume this; it underlies the DM stability and the direct detection amplitude.
invented entities (2)
  • Singlet Dirac fermion χ (dark matter) independent evidence
    purpose: Provides the observed dark matter relic density through scalar-mediated annihilation.
    Predicts spin-independent scattering cross sections and relic abundance that can be compared with LZ and Planck data; direct detection or future collider signatures could falsify it.
  • Real singlet scalar s (physical state h2) independent evidence
    purpose: Generates a strong first-order electroweak phase transition via large λ_hs and mediates DM-scalar interactions.
    Predicts heavy scalar resonances in ZZ, WW, and di-Higgs channels, plus GW signals from the phase transition; collider searches and LISA/DECIGO can probe it.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 29303 in / 15775 out tokens · 163109 ms · 2026-08-03T09:36:29.319773+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We investigate a minimal extension of the Standard Model with a real singlet scalar and a singlet Dirac fermion acting as dark matter. Unlike a conventional singlet scalar setup, we assume that the singlet scalar does not acquire a vacuum expectation value at zero temperature. This decouples the scalar mixing angle from the Higgs-portal quartic coupling responsible for the strong first-order electroweak phase transition, allowing it to coexist with current collider and direct-detection constraints. The Higgs-singlet mixing is generated independently through a trilinear portal interaction. We check theoretical consistency conditions, various LHC limits on heavy scalar resonances, dark matter relic abundance, and direct detection bounds to delineate the viable parameter space. We perform a detailed analysis of the electroweak phase transition and show that a strong first-order transition is realized for a selected set of benchmark points. We further compute the resulting stochastic gravitational wave spectra and find that several scenarios yield signals potentially observable at future space-based interferometers. Our results establish a unified and testable framework that connects collider phenomenology, first-order electroweak phase transition, and the resulting production of gravitational waves, along with the dark matter phenomenology, all within a simple renormalizable extension of the Standard Model.

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 6 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Non-Markovian Electroweak Baryogenesis: Memory Effects on CP-Violating Transport and Gravitational Waves

    hep-ph 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Non-Markovian memory effects narrow the viable parameter space for electroweak baryogenesis, shift optimal wall velocities lower, produce non-monotonic baryon asymmetry dependence on memory timescale, and can enhance ...

  2. Electroweak First-Order Phase Transition Triggered by Non-Gaussian Fluctuations of a $\mathbb{Z}_2$-Symmetric Spectator Scalar

    hep-ph 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Non-Gaussian primordial fluctuations of a Z2-symmetric spectator scalar trigger a strong first-order electroweak phase transition, with the field serving as cold dark matter and generating a stochastic gravitational w...

  3. A Non-Holomorphic Modular $A_4$ Framework for Resonant Leptogenesis with Gravitational Wave Signatures

    hep-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0

    A non-holomorphic modular A4 seesaw model yields quasi-degenerate right-handed neutrinos, enabling resonant leptogenesis at ~10^6 GeV and a double-peaked gravitational-wave signature.

  4. Solving Cosmological Puzzles using Finite Temperature $\nu$SMEFT

    hep-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    A minimal extension of the Standard Model with three heavy Majorana neutrinos simultaneously realizes fermionic dark matter, a strong first-order electroweak phase transition, and low-scale resonant leptogenesis consi...

  5. Electroweak phase transitions in a $U(1)_D$ extension of the standard model with dimension-six operators: Gravitational waves and LHC signatures

    hep-ph 2026-03 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    A dimension-six operator |H|^2|phi|^4 in a U(1)_D singlet extension relaxes the usual Higgs-portal and mixing-angle correlation, enabling strong first-order electroweak phase transitions driven primarily by the singlet VEV.

  6. Heavy singlet fermionic dark matter with $Z_4$ symmetry

    hep-ph 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 3.0

    In the Z4-symmetric singlet fermionic DM model with a new scalar, viable heavy-DM parameter space in the secluded regime permits non-negligible Higgs mixing while satisfying relic density and direct detection bounds.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

118 extracted references · 103 linked inside Pith · cited by 6 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Kajantie, M

    K. Kajantie, M. Laine, K. Rummukainen and M.E. Shaposhnikov,Is there a hot electroweak phase transition atm H ≳m W ?,Phys. Rev. Lett.77(1996) 2887 [hep-ph/9605288]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  2. [2]

    Huet and E

    P. Huet and E. Sather,Electroweak baryogenesis and standard model CP violation,Phys. Rev. D51(1995) 379 [hep-ph/9404302]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  3. [3]

    Csikor, Z

    F. Csikor, Z. Fodor and J. Heitger,Endpoint of the hot electroweak phase transition,Phys. Rev. Lett.82(1999) 21 [hep-ph/9809291]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  4. [4]

    Sakharov,Violation of CP Invariance, C asymmetry, and baryon asymmetry of the universe,Pisma Zh

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

    1967

  5. [5]

    Anderson and L.J

    G.W. Anderson and L.J. Hall,The Electroweak phase transition and baryogenesis,Phys. Rev. D45(1992) 2685

    1992

  6. [6]

    Morrissey and M.J

    D.E. Morrissey and M.J. Ramsey-Musolf,Electroweak baryogenesis,New J. Phys.14(2012) 125003 [1206.2942]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  7. [7]

    Cline, K

    J.M. Cline, K. Kainulainen, P. Scott and C. Weniger,Update on scalar singlet dark matter, Phys. Rev. D88(2013) 055025 [1306.4710]. [8]GAMBITcollaboration,Status of the scalar singlet dark matter model,Eur. Phys. J. C77 (2017) 568 [1705.07931]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  8. [9]

    Profumo, M.J

    S. Profumo, M.J. Ramsey-Musolf and G. Shaughnessy,Singlet Higgs phenomenology and the electroweak phase transition,JHEP08(2007) 010 [0705.2425]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  9. [10]

    Noble and M

    A. Noble and M. Perelstein,Higgs self-coupling as a probe of electroweak phase transition, Phys. Rev. D78(2008) 063518 [0711.3018]. [11]XENONcollaboration,First results on the scalar WIMP-pion coupling, using the XENON1T experiment,Phys. Rev. Lett.122(2019) 071301 [1811.12482]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  10. [12]

    Arcadi, A

    G. Arcadi, A. Djouadi and M. Raidal,Dark Matter through the Higgs portal,Phys. Rept. 842(2020) 1 [1903.03616]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  11. [13]

    Craig, H.K

    N. Craig, H.K. Lou, M. McCullough and A. Thalapillil,The Higgs Portal Above Threshold, JHEP02(2016) 127 [1412.0258]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  12. [14]

    Robens and T

    T. Robens and T. Stefaniak,Status of the Higgs Singlet Extension of the Standard Model after LHC Run 1,Eur. Phys. J. C75(2015) 104 [1501.02234]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  13. [15]

    Profumo, M.J

    S. Profumo, M.J. Ramsey-Musolf, C.L. Wainwright and P. Winslow,Singlet-catalyzed electroweak phase transitions and precision Higgs boson studies,Phys. Rev. D91(2015) 035018 [1407.5342]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  14. [16]

    Beniwal, M

    A. Beniwal, M. Lewicki, J.D. Wells, M. White and A.G. Williams,Gravitational wave, collider and dark matter signals from a scalar singlet electroweak baryogenesis,JHEP08 (2017) 108 [1702.06124]. – 32 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  15. [17]

    Cline and P.-A

    J.M. Cline and P.-A. Lemieux,Electroweak phase transition in two Higgs doublet models, Phys. Rev. D55(1997) 3873 [hep-ph/9609240]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  16. [18]

    Bhatnagar, D

    A. Bhatnagar, D. Croon and P. Schicho,Interpreting the 95 GeV resonance in the Two Higgs Doublet Model: Implications for the Electroweak Phase Transition,2506.20716

    arXiv

  17. [19]

    D ´ ıaz S´ aez, P

    B. D ´ ıaz S´ aez, P. Escalona, S. Norero and A.R. Zerwekh,Fermion singlet dark matter in a pseudoscalar dark matter portal,JHEP10(2021) 233 [2105.04255]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  18. [20]

    Ghorbani,Vacuum stability vs

    P. Ghorbani,Vacuum stability vs. positivity in real singlet scalar extension of the standard model,Nucl. Phys. B971(2021) 115533 [2104.09542]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  19. [21]

    Ellis, M

    J. Ellis, M. Lewicki, M. Merchand, J.M. No and M. Zych,The scalar singlet extension of the Standard Model: gravitational waves versus baryogenesis,JHEP01(2023) 093 [2210.16305]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  20. [22]

    Ghorbani and P.H

    K. Ghorbani and P.H. Ghorbani,Strongly First-Order Phase Transition in Real Singlet Scalar Dark Matter Model,J. Phys. G47(2020) 015201 [1804.05798]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  21. [23]

    Barger, P

    V. Barger, P. Langacker, M. McCaskey, M.J. Ramsey-Musolf and G. Shaughnessy,LHC Phenomenology of an Extended Standard Model with a Real Scalar Singlet,Phys. Rev. D77 (2008) 035005 [0706.4311]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  22. [24]

    Carena, Z

    M. Carena, Z. Liu and Y. Wang,Electroweak phase transition with spontaneous Z 2-breaking, JHEP08(2020) 107 [1911.10206]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  23. [25]

    Espinosa, T

    J.R. Espinosa, T. Konstandin and F. Riva,Strong Electroweak Phase Transitions in the Standard Model with a Singlet,Nucl. Phys. B854(2012) 592 [1107.5441]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  24. [26]

    Cline and K

    J.M. Cline and K. Kainulainen,Electroweak baryogenesis and dark matter from a singlet Higgs,JCAP01(2013) 012 [1210.4196]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  25. [27]

    Alanne, K

    T. Alanne, K. Tuominen and V. Vaskonen,Strong phase transition, dark matter and vacuum stability from simple hidden sectors,Nucl. Phys. B889(2014) 692 [1407.0688]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  26. [28]

    Srivastava, J

    T. Srivastava, J. Das, A. Ghosh and A. Chaudhuri,Electroweak Phase Transition, Gravitational Waves and Collider Probes in Multi-Scalar Dark Matter Scenarios, 2507.05917

    arXiv

  27. [29]

    Chaudhuri and J

    A. Chaudhuri and J. Das,Study of entropy production due to electroweak phase transition inZ 2 symmetric extension of the Standard Model,Phys. Rev. D106(2022) 095016 [2206.08699]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  28. [30]

    Borah, P

    P. Borah, P. Ghosh and A.K. Saha,Prospecting bipartite dark matter through gravitational waves,JCAP05(2025) 035 [2412.17141]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  29. [31]

    Chiang and B.-Q

    C.-W. Chiang and B.-Q. Lu,First-order electroweak phase transition in a complex singlet model withZ 3 symmetry,JHEP07(2020) 082 [1912.12634]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  30. [32]

    Z. Kang, P. Ko and T. Matsui,Strong first order EWPT&strong gravitational waves in Z3-symmetric singlet scalar extension,JHEP02(2018) 115 [1706.09721]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  31. [33]

    Kannike, K

    K. Kannike, K. Loos and M. Raidal,Gravitational wave signals of pseudo-Goldstone dark matter in theZ 3 complex singlet model,Phys. Rev. D101(2020) 035001 [1907.13136]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  32. [34]

    Ghorbani,Gravitational waves from thermal heavy scalar dark matter,Phys

    P. Ghorbani,Gravitational waves from thermal heavy scalar dark matter,Phys. Rev. D110 (2024) 115002 [2408.16475]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  33. [35]

    Ghorbani and P.H

    K. Ghorbani and P.H. Ghorbani,A Simultaneous Study of Dark Matter and Phase Transition: Two-Scalar Scenario,JHEP12(2019) 077 [1906.01823]. – 33 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  34. [36]

    D ´ ıaz S´ aez, J

    B. D ´ ıaz S´ aez, J. Lahiri and K. M¨ ohling,Coscattering in the extended singlet-scalar Higgs portal,JCAP10(2024) 001 [2404.19057]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  35. [37]

    D ´ ıaz S´ aez, K

    B. D ´ ıaz S´ aez, K. M¨ ohling and D. St¨ ockinger,Two real scalar WIMP model in the assisted freeze-out scenario,JCAP10(2021) 027 [2103.17064]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  36. [38]

    Murai, K

    K. Murai, K. Sakurai and F. Takahashi,Primordial black hole formation via inverted bubble collapse,JHEP07(2025) 065 [2502.02291]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  37. [39]

    Chakrabarty, H

    N. Chakrabarty, H. Roy and T. Srivastava,Single-step first order phase transition and gravitational waves in a SIMP dark matter scenario,Nucl. Phys. B998(2024) 116392 [2212.09659]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  38. [40]

    Ferber, A

    T. Ferber, A. Grohsjean and F. Kahlhoefer,Dark Higgs bosons at colliders,Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.136(2024) 104105 [2305.16169]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  39. [41]

    Zhang,Operators analysis for Higgs potential and cosmological bound on Higgs mass, Phys

    X.-m. Zhang,Operators analysis for Higgs potential and cosmological bound on Higgs mass, Phys. Rev. D47(1993) 3065 [hep-ph/9301277]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1993

  40. [42]

    Camargo-Molina, R

    J.E. Camargo-Molina, R. Enberg and J. L¨ ofgren,A new perspective on the electroweak phase transition in the Standard Model Effective Field Theory,JHEP10(2021) 127 [2103.14022]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  41. [43]

    Hashino and D

    K. Hashino and D. Ueda,SMEFT effects on the gravitational wave spectrum from an electroweak phase transition,Phys. Rev. D107(2023) 095022 [2210.11241]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  42. [44]

    Oikonomou and A

    V.K. Oikonomou and A. Giovanakis,Electroweak phase transition in singlet extensions of the standard model with dimension-six operators,Phys. Rev. D109(2024) 055044 [2403.01591]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  43. [45]

    D. Gazi, A. Mukherjee, S. Niyogi and S. Poddar,Search for Stochastic GW Signal as a Complementary Approach to Multi-Higgs Productions at the Hadron Colliders to Probe Dimension Six Operator,2408.13326

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  44. [46]

    Kamionkowski, A

    M. Kamionkowski, A. Kosowsky and M.S. Turner,Gravitational radiation from first order phase transitions,Phys. Rev. D49(1994) 2837 [astro-ph/9310044]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1994

  45. [47]

    Ellis, M

    J. Ellis, M. Lewicki and J.M. No,On the Maximal Strength of a First-Order Electroweak Phase Transition and its Gravitational Wave Signal,JCAP04(2019) 003 [1809.08242]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  46. [48]

    Croon, V

    D. Croon, V. Sanz and G. White,Model Discrimination in Gravitational Wave spectra from Dark Phase Transitions,JHEP08(2018) 203 [1806.02332]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  47. [49]

    Beniwal, M

    A. Beniwal, M. Lewicki, M. White and A.G. Williams,Gravitational waves and electroweak baryogenesis in a global study of the extended scalar singlet model,JHEP02(2019) 183 [1810.02380]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  48. [50]

    Huang and X

    F.P. Huang and X. Zhang,Probing the gauge symmetry breaking of the early universe in 3-3-1 models and beyond by gravitational waves,Phys. Lett. B788(2019) 288 [1701.04338]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  49. [51]

    Hashino, M

    K. Hashino, M. Kakizaki, S. Kanemura, P. Ko and T. Matsui,Gravitational waves from first order electroweak phase transition in models with the U(1) X gauge symmetry,JHEP 06(2018) 088 [1802.02947]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  50. [52]

    Demidov, D.S

    S.V. Demidov, D.S. Gorbunov and D.V. Kirpichnikov,Gravitational waves from phase transition in split NMSSM,Phys. Lett. B779(2018) 191 [1712.00087]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  51. [53]

    Mazumdar and G

    A. Mazumdar and G. White,Review of cosmic phase transitions: their significance and experimental signatures,Rept. Prog. Phys.82(2019) 076901 [1811.01948]. – 34 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  52. [54]

    Kobakhidze, A

    A. Kobakhidze, A. Manning and J. Yue,Gravitational waves from the phase transition of a nonlinearly realized electroweak gauge symmetry,Int. J. Mod. Phys. D26(2017) 1750114 [1607.00883]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  53. [55]

    Kobakhidze, C

    A. Kobakhidze, C. Lagger, A. Manning and J. Yue,Gravitational waves from a supercooled electroweak phase transition and their detection with pulsar timing arrays,Eur. Phys. J. C 77(2017) 570 [1703.06552]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  54. [56]

    Dev and A

    P.S.B. Dev and A. Mazumdar,Probing the Scale of New Physics by Advanced LIGO/VIRGO,Phys. Rev. D93(2016) 104001 [1602.04203]. [57]LIGO Scientific, Virgocollaboration,Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Black Hole Merger,Phys. Rev. Lett.116(2016) 061102 [1602.03837]. [58]eLISAcollaboration,The Gravitational Universe,1305.5720

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  55. [59]

    Kawamura et al.,The Japanese space gravitational wave antenna: DECIGO,Class

    S. Kawamura et al.,The Japanese space gravitational wave antenna: DECIGO,Class. Quant. Grav.28(2011) 094011

    2011

  56. [60]

    Corbin and N.J

    V. Corbin and N.J. Cornish,Detecting the cosmic gravitational wave background with the big bang observer,Class. Quant. Grav.23(2006) 2435 [gr-qc/0512039]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  57. [61]

    Gong et al.,Descope of the ALIA mission,J

    X. Gong et al.,Descope of the ALIA mission,J. Phys. Conf. Ser.610(2015) 012011 [1410.7296]. [62]TianQincollaboration,TianQin: a space-borne gravitational wave detector,Class. Quant. Grav.33(2016) 035010 [1512.02076]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  58. [63]

    O’Connell, M.J

    D. O’Connell, M.J. Ramsey-Musolf and M.B. Wise,Minimal Extension of the Standard Model Scalar Sector,Phys. Rev. D75(2007) 037701 [hep-ph/0611014]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  59. [64]

    Fairbairn and R

    M. Fairbairn and R. Hogan,Singlet Fermionic Dark Matter and the Electroweak Phase Transition,JHEP09(2013) 022 [1305.3452]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  60. [65]

    Kim, K.Y

    Y.G. Kim, K.Y. Lee and S. Shin,Singlet fermionic dark matter,JHEP05(2008) 100 [0803.2932]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  61. [66]

    Kozaczuk, M.J

    J. Kozaczuk, M.J. Ramsey-Musolf and J. Shelton,Exotic Higgs boson decays and the electroweak phase transition,Phys. Rev. D101(2020) 115035 [1911.10210]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  62. [67]

    C.-Y. Chen, J. Kozaczuk and I.M. Lewis,Non-resonant Collider Signatures of a Singlet-Driven Electroweak Phase Transition,JHEP08(2017) 096 [1704.05844]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  63. [68]

    C.-Y. Chen, S. Dawson and I.M. Lewis,Exploring resonant di-Higgs boson production in the Higgs singlet model,Phys. Rev. D91(2015) 035015 [1410.5488]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  64. [69]

    Chiang, D

    C.-W. Chiang, D. Huang and B.-Q. Lu,Electroweak phase transition confronted with dark matter detection constraints,JCAP01(2021) 035 [2009.08635]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  65. [70]

    R. Zhou, J. Yang and L. Bian,Gravitational Waves from first-order phase transition and domain wall,JHEP04(2020) 071 [2001.04741]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  66. [71]

    Kang and J

    S.K. Kang and J. Park,Unitarity Constraints in the standard model with a singlet scalar field,JHEP04(2015) 009 [1306.6713]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  67. [72]

    Alwall, M

    J. Alwall, M. Herquet, F. Maltoni, O. Mattelaer and T. Stelzer,MadGraph 5 : Going Beyond,JHEP06(2011) 128 [1106.0522]. [73]ATLAScollaboration,Combination of searches for non-resonant and resonant Higgs boson – 35 – pair production in theb ¯bγγ,b ¯bτ +τ − andb ¯bb¯bdecay channels usingppcollisions at √s= 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, . [74]ATLAScollabora...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  68. [77]

    Alguero, G

    G. Alguero, G. Belanger, F. Boudjema, S. Chakraborti, A. Goudelis, S. Kraml et al., micrOMEGAs 6.0: N-component dark matter,Comput. Phys. Commun.299(2024) 109133 [2312.14894]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  69. [78]

    Belanger, F

    G. Belanger, F. Boudjema, A. Pukhov and A. Semenov,micrOMEGAs: Version 1.3, Comput. Phys. Commun.174(2006) 577 [hep-ph/0405253]. [79]Planckcollaboration,Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters,Astron. Astrophys.641(2020) A6 [1807.06209]. [80]ATLAScollaboration,Combination of searches for invisible decays of the Higgs boson using 139 fb−1 of proto...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  70. [82]

    Christensen and C

    N.D. Christensen and C. Duhr,FeynRules - Feynman rules made easy,Comput. Phys. Commun.180(2009) 1614 [0806.4194]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  71. [83]

    Degrande,Automatic evaluation of UV and R2 terms for beyond the Standard Model Lagrangians: a proof-of-principle,Comput

    C. Degrande,Automatic evaluation of UV and R2 terms for beyond the Standard Model Lagrangians: a proof-of-principle,Comput. Phys. Commun.197(2015) 239 [1406.3030]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  72. [84]

    Degrande, C

    C. Degrande, C. Duhr, B. Fuks, D. Grellscheid, O. Mattelaer and T. Reiter,UFO - The Universal FeynRules Output,Comput. Phys. Commun.183(2012) 1201 [1108.2040]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  73. [85]

    de Aquino, W

    P. de Aquino, W. Link, F. Maltoni, O. Mattelaer and T. Stelzer,ALOHA: Automatic Libraries Of Helicity Amplitudes for Feynman Diagram Computations,Comput. Phys. Commun.183(2012) 2254 [1108.2041]. [86]NNPDFcollaboration,Parton distributions with QED corrections,Nucl. Phys. B877 (2013) 290 [1308.0598]. [87]NNPDFcollaboration,Parton distributions for the LHC ...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  74. [88]

    Coleman and E.J

    S.R. Coleman and E.J. Weinberg,Radiative Corrections as the Origin of Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking,Phys. Rev. D7(1973) 1888

    1973

  75. [89]

    Quiros,Finite temperature field theory and phase transitions, inICTP Summer School in High-Energy Physics and Cosmology, pp

    M. Quiros,Finite temperature field theory and phase transitions, inICTP Summer School in High-Energy Physics and Cosmology, pp. 187–259, 1, 1999 [hep-ph/9901312]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  76. [90]

    Wainwright,CosmoTransitions: Computing Cosmological Phase Transition Temperatures and Bubble Profiles with Multiple Fields,Comput

    C.L. Wainwright,CosmoTransitions: Computing Cosmological Phase Transition Temperatures and Bubble Profiles with Multiple Fields,Comput. Phys. Commun.183 (2012) 2006 [1109.4189]. – 36 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  77. [91]

    Blinov, S

    N. Blinov, S. Profumo and T. Stefaniak,The Electroweak Phase Transition in the Inert Doublet Model,JCAP07(2015) 028 [1504.05949]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  78. [92]

    M. Aoki, T. Komatsu and H. Shibuya,Possibility of a multi-step electroweak phase transition in the two-Higgs doublet models,PTEP2022(2022) 063B05 [2106.03439]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  79. [93]

    Chiang, Y.-T

    C.-W. Chiang, Y.-T. Li and E. Senaha,Revisiting electroweak phase transition in the standard model with a real singlet scalar,Phys. Lett. B789(2019) 154 [1808.01098]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  80. [94]

    Athron, C

    P. Athron, C. Balazs, A. Fowlie, L. Morris, G. White and Y. Zhang,How arbitrary are perturbative calculations of the electroweak phase transition?,JHEP01(2023) 050 [2208.01319]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

Showing first 80 references.