Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 38 references

The paper argues that CP-violating inflaton decays during reheating, transferring a scalar asymmetry to Dirac neutrinos and then to baryons via sphalerons, can reproduce the observed baryon asymmetry of the Universe.

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 23:51 UTC pith:T63SN2GM

load-bearing objection A genuinely new source for the initial asymmetry in Dirac leptogenesis, with a clean analytic estimate; the numerical window is narrower than the authors let on, but the idea is solid and deserves a referee. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2511.03794 v2 pith:T63SN2GM submitted 2025-11-05 hep-ph

Primordial Dirac Leptogenesis

Aqeel Ahmed , Juan P. Garc\'es , Manfred Lindner This is my paper
classification hep-ph
keywords Dirac leptogenesisbaryon asymmetryreheatinginflaton decayCP violationinert doubletelectroweak sphaleronsNeff
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 proposes a new implementation of Dirac leptogenesis in which lepton number is never violated. The asymmetry is created in the scalar sector: during reheating, the inflaton decays with a CP-violating phase into the Standard Model Higgs and an inert doublet, producing a Higgs-charge asymmetry. The inert doublet then decays into right-handed neutrinos, and electroweak sphalerons partially convert the left-handed neutrino component into baryons. The final baryon yield is proportional to λ5 sin(2θ), with the observed value 8.7×10⁻¹¹ reached for λ5 ≈ 7.4×10⁻⁹/sin(2θ). The mechanism avoids a strong first-order electroweak phase transition and predicts ΔNeff at a level accessible to upcoming CMB experiments.

Core claim

Starting from symmetric initial conditions with zero lepton numbers in left- and right-handed neutrinos, the paper shows that the interference between tree-level and one-loop inflaton decays, mediated by a complex trilinear coupling gφ and a real quartic coupling λ5, generates a Higgs doublet asymmetry during reheating. The inert doublet h-hat, decaying out of equilibrium into right-handed neutrinos, transfers this scalar asymmetry into a chiral neutrino asymmetry. Electroweak sphalerons convert part of the left-handed asymmetry into baryons, while the right-handed neutrinos remain out of equilibrium until much lower temperatures, freezing in a final baryon asymmetry with B0 = −(28/79)Lν_R.

What carries the argument

The CP asymmetry in inflaton decays, ε ≈ (3/16π) λ5 sin(2θ), produced by the interference of tree and absorptive loop amplitudes for φ → h* h-hat versus φ → h h-hat*, is the source of the primordial asymmetry. The quartic coupling λ5 between the two Higgs doublets carries the CP-violating information and controls both the size of the asymmetry and the washout; the quoted washout bound |λ5| ≲ 10⁻⁷√(Td/T_EW) from an earlier Higgsogenesis analysis sets the available parameter space. The drift-and-decay limit, in which the inert doublet decays out of equilibrium, connects the scalar asymmetry to the final baryon yield via Y_B = (28/79) Y_Δh-hat(Td).

Load-bearing premise

The mechanism relies on the quoted bound |λ5| ≲ 10⁻⁷√(Td/T_EW) for the λ5-mediated washout, taken from an earlier analysis without derivation; if the actual finite-temperature washout is larger, the required λ5 is erased and the baryon asymmetry fails to survive.

What would settle it

A finite-temperature calculation of the λ5-mediated 2→2 scattering rate that exceeds the bound of Eq. (12) at the decay temperature Td would erase the generated asymmetry; alternatively, a future CMB measurement of ΔNeff that excludes the range predicted for the relevant inert-doublet masses and Yukawa couplings would rule out this mechanism.

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

If this is right

  • If correct, the observed baryon asymmetry arises without any violation of total lepton number, making Dirac neutrino models with conserved L viable.
  • The mechanism predicts a contribution ΔNeff up to ~0.1 for m_h-hat = 500 GeV and y-hatν = 10⁻⁷, which should be visible to CMB-S4-class searches.
  • The inert doublet must be heavier than the electroweak scale and decay before the electroweak phase transition, giving concrete mass and coupling targets for collider experiments.
  • No strong first-order electroweak phase transition is required, unlike Higgsogenesis, simplifying the link to the Standard Model Higgs sector.
  • The absence of neutrinoless double beta decay is consistent with the framework because lepton number is conserved.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If finite-temperature corrections push the λ5 washout rate above the quoted bound, the required λ5 near 7.4×10⁻⁹ could still survive if the inert doublet decays at higher temperatures, but the safe parameter region would shift upward in mass — a testable quantitative extension.
  • The same scalar-asymmetry mechanism could be adapted to generate a dark matter asymmetry if the inert sector is extended to include a stable particle, an avenue the paper notes as future work.
  • The cancellation of the inflaton-potential dependence in the final yield suggests the result may be robust to the precise reheating history, which could be checked with a full numerical Boltzmann solution beyond the drift-and-decay limit.
  • The relation Y_B ∝ sin(2θ) implies maximal output for θ ≈ π/4; a measurement of the inflaton–Higgs CP phase would fix the required λ5 and sharpen the prediction for ΔNeff.

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

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a Dirac leptogenesis mechanism in which CP-violating, out-of-equilibrium inflaton decays into the SM Higgs and an inert doublet during reheating generate a chiral asymmetry in the scalar sector. This asymmetry is transferred to right-handed neutrinos through a small Yukawa coupling and partially converted into a baryon asymmetry by electroweak sphalerons. The central result is Eq. (25), Y_B ≃ 1.2×10^-2 λ5 sin(2θ), which reproduces the observed baryon asymmetry for λ5 ≃ 7.4×10^-9/sin(2θ). The model also predicts contributions to ΔN_eff that could be tested by future CMB observations.

Significance. If valid, the mechanism provides a novel and economical connection between reheating and baryogenesis, with a falsifiable ΔN_eff prediction and a simple final formula in which the inflationary-potential dependence cancels. The paper is clearly written and appropriately engages the Dirac-leptogenesis and Higgsogenesis literature. The main quantitative claim, however, rests on an imported washout bound (Eq. (12)) and on several sudden-decay approximations that are not fully scrutinized in the text; these need to be placed on firmer footing before the result can be regarded as secure.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 'A minimal realization', Eq. (12) and Eq. (27)] Eq. (12) is the principal quantitative constraint on the mechanism. It is quoted from Ref. [23] without derivation, and the required value λ5 ≈ 7.4×10^-9/sin(2θ) (Eq. (27)) is only a factor of ~13 below the bound at Td ≈ T_EW. The same λ5 controls both the CP asymmetry and the washout process hh ↔ ĥ*ĥ*, so an order-of-magnitude enhancement of the washout rate from finite-temperature corrections, thermal masses, or additional channels would erase the asymmetry for a substantial part of the sin(2θ) range. Please provide the derivation of Eq. (12) in this model or show that Eq. (25) remains viable under a conservative enhancement of the washout rate.
  2. [Eq. (3) vs. Eqs. (6)-(7)] As printed, the interaction (gϕ/M_Pl) φ h†ĥ has mass dimension 2 if gϕ is dimensionless, whereas the decay widths in Eqs. (6)-(7) are those of a cubic coupling with coefficient of order gϕ M_Pl. This makes the Lagrangian inconsistent with the subsequent calculation. Please correct the normalization or specify the mass dimension of gϕ; if the coupling is intended to be gϕ M_Pl, update Eq. (3) accordingly. Eq. (25) is insensitive to this rescaling, but the reheating constraints and the definition of the model depend on the correct operator.
  3. [Eqs. (17), (10), and (28)] The text calls Td the temperature at the time of ĥ decay, but Eq. (17) requires Γ_hat(Td) << H(Td) with Td ∼ m_hat. If Td is actually the temperature at which ĥ is produced/decouples, the true decay occurs later when Γ_hat ∼ H(T_dec). Because Γ_wash/H ∝ λ5^2 M_Pl/T grows as T drops, the washout condition Eq. (10) must be imposed at T_dec, not at Td ∼ m_hat. If Td is intended to be the decay temperature, then Eq. (17) should instead read Γ_hat(Td) ∼ H(Td). Please clarify this point and re-evaluate Eq. (28) for the actual decay temperature, as this affects the parameter window for sin(2θ) ≲ O(0.1).
minor comments (4)
  1. [Eq. (20)] The relation Y_ΔνR ≈ Y_Δĥ (up to sign) is stated without derivation. Since this sign determines whether baryons or antibaryons are produced, a short derivation or explicit charge assignment would be useful.
  2. [Eq. (6)] The CP-asymmetry formula is central but is presented without derivation or a direct reference to a calculation. Given that the entire mechanism relies on this quantity, an appendix with the two-loop/interference calculation would substantially strengthen the paper.
  3. [Eq. (34)] The statement that the current ΔN_eff bound can be recast as m_hat ≳ T_EW is essentially the input condition of Eq. (11), not a new constraint. Please reformulate this sentence to avoid implying that a nontrivial lower bound follows from Eq. (33).
  4. [General] There are a few typographical issues, e.g. 'dirft-and-decay' near Eq. (19). Please also ensure that the notation Td is introduced once and used consistently throughout.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circular reduction: the baryon asymmetry is derived from microphysics; observed Y_B only fixes a free coupling.

full rationale

The central derivation is self-contained. Eq. (8) computes the CP asymmetry epsilon = (3/16pi) lambda5 sin(2theta) from the inflaton decay widths of Eqs. (6)-(7); Eqs. (22)-(24) solve the relevant Boltzmann equations and give Delta_rho_hhat(T_d)/rho_R(T_d) ~ 2epsilon, with the inflationary unknowns dropping out; combining with the sphaleron coefficient 28/79 and the relativistic phase-space factor yields Eq. (25), Y_B ~ (1.2e-2) lambda5 sin(2theta). The measured Y_B is then used to fix the free product lambda5 sin(2theta) in Eq. (27). This is the standard procedure of constraining a model parameter, not a prediction that reduces by construction to the input. The washout bound in Eq. (12) is quoted from the external reference [23] rather than re-derived; this is a robustness/falsifiability concern, not circularity, because the bound comes from independent prior work and does not define Y_B in terms of itself. The self-citations are not load-bearing: [33] is cited alongside external Refs. [31,32,37] for standard reheating formalism, and [44] is only a forward-looking remark about dark-matter extensions. No uniqueness theorem or ansatz is imported from the authors' own work to force the conclusion. The mechanism could fail if the true washout is stronger than the quoted Eq. (12), but that would be a correctness failure, not a circular one.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

5 free parameters · 7 axioms · 3 invented entities

The model introduces no new particles beyond well-known ingredients (inert doublet, inflaton, right-handed neutrinos), but it does add free couplings (lambda5, theta, y_hat_nu, m_hat_h, g_phi) that are constrained, not predicted, by the baryon asymmetry. The central derivation assumes global lepton number conservation, a Z2 symmetry, and the drift-and-decay limit, each of which is a stated modeling choice, not an empirical input.

free parameters (5)
  • lambda5 (quartic Higgs-inert coupling) = ~ 7.4e-9 / sin(2theta)
    Fitted to the observed baryon asymmetry via Eq. (25) set equal to Y_B_obs in Eq. (27); the mechanism does not predict its magnitude.
  • sin(2theta) (CP phase of g_phi) = not determined; required > O(0.04) for washout compatibility
    The CP asymmetry and hence Y_B are proportional to sin(2theta); the paper only constrains a lower bound (Eq. 28) rather than predicting it.
  • y_hat_nu (inert doublet-neutrino Yukawa) = not determined; lower bound ~ 6e-8 sqrt(T_EW/m_hat_h) (Eq. 30)
    Sets the freeze-in production of right-handed neutrinos and Delta N_eff; used parametrically in Eq. (33), not predicted.
  • m_hat_h (inert doublet mass) = not determined; benchmark 500 GeV used for Delta N_eff
    Appears in constraints (Eqs. 12, 30, 33, 34); chosen by hand for illustrative testability.
  • g_phi (inflaton-Higgs trilinear coupling) = not determined; bounded below by reheating requirement and above by inflation
    Cancels in the CP asymmetry ratio epsilon (Eq. 8) but controls the total decay width; only weakly constrained.
axioms (7)
  • domain assumption Global lepton number is exactly conserved; no Majorana mass terms for nu_R are introduced.
    Stated after Eq. (2): 'we omit them under the assumption that global lepton number is conserved.' This is the defining assumption of Dirac leptogenesis.
  • ad hoc to paper Z2 symmetry: phi -> -phi, h-hat -> -h-hat, nu_R -> -nu_R, with the SM neutrino Yukawa (Eq. 13) the only Z2-breaking term.
    Introduced in Eq. (1) to forbid unwanted couplings and make y_nu naturally small; not required by data.
  • domain assumption Inflaton decay into on-shell h and h-hat with a non-vanishing absorptive loop amplitude generates the scalar CP asymmetry.
    Central to Eqs. (6)-(8); relies on perturbative reheating and Cutkosky rules for the absorptive part.
  • domain assumption The washout processes are dominated by lambda5-mediated 2-to-2 scatterings h h <-> h-hat* h-hat*, and the bound |lambda5| <~ 1e-7 sqrt(Td/T_EW) (Eq. 12) from Ref. [23] applies.
    Used to ensure the scalar asymmetry survives until h-hat decay; not derived in this paper.
  • domain assumption Drift-and-decay limit: inverse decays and scatterings are negligible; the h-hat asymmetry is fully transferred to neutrinos at T_d.
    Eqs. (17)-(19); simplifies the Boltzmann solution and gives the direct relation Y_B = 28/79 Y_Delta-h-hat in Eq. (20).
  • standard math Chemical equilibrium relations give B0 = -28/79 L_nu^R (Eq. 15).
    Standard sphaleron/chemical-potential computation for the SM plus right-handed neutrinos, as in the Dirac leptogenesis literature [10].
  • domain assumption Reheating temperature satisfies T_RH >~ m_hat_h, T_EW.
    Needed for the asymmetry generation and decay sequence described in the minimal realization section.
invented entities (3)
  • Inert Higgs doublet h-hat independent evidence
    purpose: Carries the scalar asymmetry generated in inflaton decays and transfers it to neutrinos via y_hat_nu decays.
    A standard inert-doublet state with collider and (via Delta N_eff) cosmological handles; not discovered, but not unique to this paper.
  • Inflaton phi (oscillating scalar field) independent evidence
    purpose: Drives inflation and reheating; its CP-violating decays generate the asymmetry.
    Inflation itself has observational support, but the specific particle phi is unidentified; its couplings are model-dependent.
  • Right-handed neutrinos nu_R independent evidence
    purpose: Dirac partners of left-handed neutrinos; store the lepton asymmetry and give small Dirac masses.
    Neutrino oscillations require neutrino mass; absence of 0v beta beta is consistent with Dirac nature, and Delta N_eff gives a probe; no direct detection.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 8864 in / 29208 out tokens · 238946 ms · 2026-08-03T23:51:54.938202+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We present a novel realization of Dirac leptogenesis based on the post-inflationary reheating phase of the early universe. An asymmetry generated within the scalar sector via CP-violating and out-of-equilibrium inflaton decays is transferred to chiral neutrinos through Yukawa interactions and then to baryons via electroweak sphalerons. We describe in detail a minimal realization of this mechanism that naturally accommodates small neutrino Yukawa couplings and results in contributions to the effective number of relativistic species, $N_{\text{eff}}$, testable in upcoming cosmological observations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2511.03794 by Aqeel Ahmed, Juan P. Garc\'es, Manfred Lindner.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Schematic illustration of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗

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

38 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Violation of CP Invariance, C asymmetry, and baryon asymmetry of the universe,

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

    1967

  2. [2]

    Standard model CP violation and baryon asymmetry,

    M. B. Gavela, P. Hernandez, J. Orloff, and O. Pene, “Standard model CP violation and baryon asymmetry,” Mod. Phys. Lett. A9(1994) 795–810, [hep-ph/9312215]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1994

  3. [3]

    Electroweak baryogenesis and standard model CP violation,

    P. Huet and E. Sather, “Electroweak baryogenesis and standard model CP violation,”Phys. Rev. D51(1995) 379–394, [hep-ph/9404302]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  4. [4]

    Recent progress in baryogenesis,

    A. Riotto and M. Trodden, “Recent progress in baryogenesis,”Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.49(1999) 35–75, [hep-ph/9901362]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  5. [5]

    Baryogenesis Without Grand Unification,

    M. Fukugita and T. Yanagida, “Baryogenesis Without Grand Unification,”Phys. Lett. B174(1986) 45–47

    1986

  6. [6]

    Leptogenesis,

    S. Davidson, E. Nardi, and Y. Nir, “Leptogenesis,” Phys. Rept.466(2008) 105–177, [arXiv:0802.2962]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  7. [7]

    A Saddle Point Solution in the Weinberg-Salam Theory,

    F. R. Klinkhamer and N. S. Manton, “A Saddle Point Solution in the Weinberg-Salam Theory,”Phys. Rev. D 30(1984) 2212

    1984

  8. [8]

    On the Anomalous Electroweak Baryon Number Nonconservation in the Early Universe,

    V. A. Kuzmin, V. A. Rubakov, and M. E. Shaposhnikov, “On the Anomalous Electroweak Baryon Number Nonconservation in the Early Universe,”Phys. Lett. B155(1985) 36

    1985

  9. [9]

    Baryon Asymmetry of the Universe in Standard Electroweak Theory,

    M. E. Shaposhnikov, “Baryon Asymmetry of the Universe in Standard Electroweak Theory,”Nucl. Phys. B287(1987) 757–775

    1987

  10. [10]

    Leptogenesis with Dirac neutrinos,

    K. Dick, M. Lindner, M. Ratz, and D. Wright, “Leptogenesis with Dirac neutrinos,”Phys. Rev. Lett. 84(2000) 4039–4042, [hep-ph/9907562]. [11]Super-KamiokandeCollaboration, Y. Fukudaet al., “Evidence for oscillation of atmospheric neutrinos,” Phys. Rev. Lett.81(1998) 1562–1567, [hep-ex/9807003]. [12]SNOCollaboration, Q. R. Ahmadet al., “Direct evidence for ...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  11. [15]

    Realistic Dirac leptogenesis,

    H. Murayama and A. Pierce, “Realistic Dirac leptogenesis,”Phys. Rev. Lett.89(2002) 271601, [hep-ph/0206177]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  12. [16]

    Theory and Phenomenology of Dirac Leptogenesis,

    B. Thomas, “Theory and Phenomenology of Dirac Leptogenesis,” other thesis, 12, 2007

    2007

  13. [17]

    The Minimal Phantom Sector of the Standard Model: Higgs Phenomenology and Dirac Leptogenesis,

    D. G. Cerdeno, A. Dedes, and T. E. J. Underwood, “The Minimal Phantom Sector of the Standard Model: Higgs Phenomenology and Dirac Leptogenesis,”JHEP 09(2006) 067, [hep-ph/0607157]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  14. [18]

    Testing Dirac leptogenesis with the cosmic microwave background and proton decay,

    J. Heeck, J. Heisig, and A. Thapa, “Testing Dirac leptogenesis with the cosmic microwave background and proton decay,”Phys. Rev. D108no. 3, (2023) 035014, [arXiv:2304.09893]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  15. [19]

    Affleck-Dine Dirac Leptogenesis,

    N. D. Barrie and C. Han, “Affleck-Dine Dirac Leptogenesis,”arXiv:2402.15245

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  16. [20]

    Dirac leptogenesis from asymmetry wash-in via scatterings,

    T. Blaˇ zek, J. Heeck, J. Heisig, P. Mat´ ak, and V. Zaujec, “Dirac leptogenesis from asymmetry wash-in via scatterings,”Phys. Rev. D110no. 5, (2024) 055042, [arXiv:2404.16934]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  17. [21]

    Dirac leptogenesis in left-right symmetric models,

    K. S. Babu and A. Kaladharan, “Dirac leptogenesis in left-right symmetric models,”Phys. Rev. D112no. 3, (2025) 035015, [arXiv:2410.24125]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  18. [22]

    Baryogenesis and Dark Matter through a Higgs Asymmetry,

    G. Servant and S. Tulin, “Baryogenesis and Dark Matter through a Higgs Asymmetry,”Phys. Rev. Lett. 111no. 15, (2013) 151601, [arXiv:1304.3464]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  19. [23]

    Baryogenesis through split Higgsogenesis,

    S. Davidson, R. Gonz´ alez Felipe, H. Serˆ odio, and J. P. Silva, “Baryogenesis through split Higgsogenesis,” JHEP11(2013) 100, [arXiv:1307.6218]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  20. [24]

    Dynamical CP violation in the early universe,

    K. R. S. Balaji, T. Biswas, R. H. Brandenberger, and D. London, “Dynamical CP violation in the early universe,”Phys. Lett. B595(2004) 22–27, [hep-ph/0403014]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  21. [25]

    Dynamical CP violation in the early universe and leptogenesis,

    K. R. S. Balaji, T. Biswas, R. H. Brandenberger, and D. London, “Dynamical CP violation in the early universe and leptogenesis,”Phys. Rev. D72(2005) 056005, [hep-ph/0506013]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  22. [26]

    CP-violating inflation and its cosmological imprints,

    V. Keus and K. Tuominen, “CP-violating inflation and its cosmological imprints,”Phys. Rev. D104no. 6, (2021) 063533, [arXiv:2102.07777]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  23. [27]

    Baryogenesis from primordial CP violation,

    V. Keus and E. W. Kolb, “Baryogenesis from primordial CP violation,”JHEP07(2025) 156, [arXiv:2412.12957]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  24. [28]

    A New Mechanism for Baryogenesis,

    I. Affleck and M. Dine, “A New Mechanism for Baryogenesis,”Nucl. Phys. B249(1985) 361–380

    1985

  25. [29]

    Improved naturalness with a heavy Higgs: An Alternative road to LHC physics,

    R. Barbieri, L. J. Hall, and V. S. Rychkov, “Improved naturalness with a heavy Higgs: An Alternative road to LHC physics,”Phys. Rev. D74(2006) 015007, [hep-ph/0603188]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  26. [30]

    Pattern of Symmetry Breaking with Two Higgs Doublets,

    N. G. Deshpande and E. Ma, “Pattern of Symmetry Breaking with Two Higgs Doublets,”Phys. Rev. D18 (1978) 2574. 7

    1978

  27. [31]

    Universe reheating after inflation,

    Y. Shtanov, J. H. Traschen, and R. H. Brandenberger, “Universe reheating after inflation,”Phys. Rev. D51 (1995) 5438–5455, [hep-ph/9407247]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  28. [32]

    Inflaton Oscillations and Post-Inflationary Reheating,

    M. A. G. Garcia, K. Kaneta, Y. Mambrini, and K. A. Olive, “Inflaton Oscillations and Post-Inflationary Reheating,”JCAP04(2021) 012, [arXiv:2012.10756]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  29. [33]

    Higgs boson induced reheating and ultraviolet frozen-in dark matter,

    A. Ahmed, B. Grzadkowski, and A. Socha, “Higgs boson induced reheating and ultraviolet frozen-in dark matter,”JHEP02(2023) 196, [arXiv:2207.11218]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  30. [34]

    Matter-antimatter accounting, thermodynamics, and black-hole radiation,

    D. Toussaint, S. B. Treiman, F. Wilczek, and A. Zee, “Matter-antimatter accounting, thermodynamics, and black-hole radiation,”Phys. Rev. D19(Feb, 1979) 1036–1045.https: //link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevD.19.1036

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.19.1036 1979

  31. [35]

    Cosmological production of baryons,

    S. Weinberg, “Cosmological production of baryons,” Phys. Rev. Lett.42(Mar, 1979) 850–853.https: //link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.42.850

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.42.850 1979

  32. [36]

    The Early Universe,

    E. W. Kolb and M. S. Turner, “The Early Universe,” Nature294(1981) 521–526

    1981

  33. [37]

    Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters,

    E. W. Kolb and M. S. Turner,The Early Universe, vol. 69. Taylor and Francis, 5, 2019. [38]PlanckCollaboration, N. Aghanimet al., “Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters,”Astron. Astrophys.641(2020) A6, [arXiv:1807.06209]. [Erratum: Astron.Astrophys. 652, C4 (2021)]. [39]CMB-S4Collaboration, K. N. Abazajianet al., CMB-S4 Science Book, First Editi...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  34. [40]

    CMB-S4 Science Case, Reference Design, and Project Plan,

    K. Abazajianet al., “CMB-S4 Science Case, Reference Design, and Project Plan,”arXiv:1907.04473

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1907

  35. [41]

    Dirac neutrinos and N ef f. Part II. The freeze-in case,

    X. Luo, W. Rodejohann, and X.-J. Xu, “Dirac neutrinos and N ef f. Part II. The freeze-in case,”JCAP 03(2021) 082, [arXiv:2011.13059]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  36. [42]

    IDM Benchmarks for the LHC and Future Colliders,

    J. Kalinowski, T. Robens, D. Sokolowska, and A. F. Zarnecki, “IDM Benchmarks for the LHC and Future Colliders,”Symmetry13no. 6, (2021) 991, [arXiv:2012.14818]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  37. [43]

    Neutrino-less Double Beta Decay and Particle Physics,

    W. Rodejohann, “Neutrino-less Double Beta Decay and Particle Physics,”Int. J. Mod. Phys. E20(2011) 1833–1930, [arXiv:1106.1334]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  38. [44]

    in preparation,

    A. Ahmed, J. P. Garc´ es, and M. Lindner, “in preparation,”