Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 7 minor 3 cited by

Universal two-zero texture in SO(10) fits JUNO-era flavor data with seven parameters and arises from Z3 gauging of Z7.

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 · grok-4.5

2026-07-12 12:30 UTC pith:HTORNXRU

load-bearing objection Solid JUNO-updated fit of prior UTZT-SO(10) plus a clean minimal NIS origin for the zeros; predictive and internally consistent within its stated assumptions. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2606.24571 v2 pith:HTORNXRU submitted 2026-06-23 hep-ph

Universal two-zero texture in SO(10): implications of JUNO and realization from non-invertible symmetries

Zi-Qiang Chen , Wen-Hao Jiang , Ye-Ling Zhou This is my paper
classification hep-ph
keywords universal two-zero textureSO(10) GUTJUNOnormal orderingnon-invertible symmetriesZ3 gauging of ZNneutrino mass matrixDirac CP phase
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.

This paper shows that imposing the same two-zero pattern on every quark and lepton mass matrix inside an SO(10) grand unified theory remains fully consistent with present CKM and neutrino data once the JUNO preference for normal neutrino-mass ordering is taken into account. With the nine charged-fermion Yukawa eigenvalues fixed at their GUT-scale best-fit values, only seven free parameters are left to describe nine mixing and mass-squared observables; a global scan finds solutions with total chi-squared less than 10. The same scan predicts the leptonic Dirac phase in two narrow intervals, one of which overlaps current global-fit values, and places the neutrinoless-double-beta-decay mass in meV-scale bands beyond the reach of next-generation experiments. The authors further demonstrate that the texture itself can be generated by non-invertible selection rules coming from the Z3 gauging of Z7, without introducing any extra light particles that would spoil gauge unification or proton-decay bounds.

Core claim

With charged-fermion Yukawas fixed at GUT-scale best-fit values, the universal two-zero texture imposed on all SO(10) Yukawa matrices A, B and C yields a seven-parameter model that fits the nine current flavor observables under normal ordering at chi-squared less than 10, predicts the Dirac CP phase mainly in the intervals (122°,233°) and (39°,85°), and forces m_ββ into two meV bands, while the same texture is generated by the conjugacy-class fusion rules of the Z3 gauging of Z7.

What carries the argument

The universal two-zero texture (UTZT): every fermion mass matrix, including the light-neutrino matrix generated by Type-I+II seesaw, is forced into the form with vanishing (1,1) and (1,3) entries; once this pattern is shared by the three SO(10) Yukawa matrices, quark–lepton unification automatically correlates all low-energy observables and reduces them to seven free parameters.

Load-bearing premise

That the identical two-zero pattern can be imposed simultaneously on the three SO(10) Yukawa matrices at the GUT scale and is preserved by the subsequent intermediate-scale breaking and seesaw.

What would settle it

A future global fit that excludes both predicted Dirac-phase windows (roughly 39°–85° and 122°–233°) at high significance, or a positive 0νββ signal above a few meV, would rule out the viable parameter space found in the scan.

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

If this is right

  • The leptonic Dirac phase is predicted to lie in one of two narrow intervals, one of which already agrees with present global fits.
  • m_ββ is forced into two meV-scale bands well below the sensitivity of planned 0νββ experiments.
  • Right-handed neutrino masses are constrained to a hierarchical spectrum with the lightest around 10^9–10^10 GeV and the heaviest around 10^12 GeV.
  • The same texture can be engineered without extra light Higgs copies, thereby automatically protecting gauge-coupling unification and proton-decay bounds.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Because the non-invertible construction introduces no extra light states, any future tension between SO(10) proton-decay limits and flavor data would have to be resolved by the intermediate-scale spectrum rather than by additional scalars.
  • If the second, presently disfavored Dirac-phase window is eventually excluded, the model still retains a single viable island whose m_ββ prediction remains testable only by next-to-next-generation 0νββ experiments.
  • The same conjugacy-class assignment that produces the UTZT may be reusable for other two-zero patterns once more than one Higgs generation is allowed.

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 / 7 minor

Summary. The paper embeds a universal two-zero texture (UTZT) for all fermion mass matrices into a non-supersymmetric SO(10) framework with Type-I+II seesaw, so that the SO(10) Yukawa matrices A, B, C (and hence all low-energy Y_f and M_ν) share vanishing (1,1) and (1,3) entries. With charged-fermion Yukawa eigenvalues fixed at GUT-scale best-fit values, seven continuous parameters plus discrete signs are used to fit nine observables (four CKM parameters, three PMNS angles, two Δm^{2}). An updated χ^{2} scan motivated by JUNO’s normal-ordering indication finds viable points with χ^{2}_tot < 10, predicts the Dirac phase mainly in two bands δ_l ≃ (122°, 233°) and (39°, 85°), and yields narrow meV-scale m_ββ intervals together with hierarchical RHN masses. The same texture is then realized by non-invertible selection rules from the Z_3 gauging of Z_N, with a minimal conjugacy-class assignment for N = 7 that requires no extra low-energy degrees of freedom.

Significance. If the GUT-scale UTZT premise and the numerical fit hold, the work supplies a tightly constrained SO(10) flavor scenario whose residual predictions (δ_l regions, meV m_ββ bands, RHN spectrum) are concrete and in principle falsifiable by oscillation and 0 uββ data. The non-invertible-symmetry construction is a genuine strength: it generates the zeros without additional light Higgs copies, thereby avoiding the Landau-pole and proton-decay issues that accompany conventional discrete-flavor embeddings of the same texture. The combination of an overconstrained seven-parameter fit with an economical NIS origin is of clear interest to the GUT and flavor communities, even though the zeros themselves remain an input rather than a dynamical output of the gauge sector.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract and §3] Abstract and §3 claim that the texture “exhibits an enhanced preference for normal ordering,” yet the numerical analysis explicitly restricts itself to normal ordering only (“we will consider only normal ordering,” §3) and never reports an inverted-ordering scan or a χ^{2} comparison. The preference statement is therefore not established by the present work; it should be removed or replaced by a clear reference to prior IO analyses, or an IO scan should be added so that the claim is quantitative.
  2. [§3, Eq. (26) and Figs. 1–2] The acceptance cut χ^{2}_tot < 10 for nine observables (seven continuous parameters) is soft and is not accompanied by the minimum χ^{2}, the distribution of pulls, or a statement of how many points lie within, e.g., χ^{2}/dof ≲ 1. Without these diagnostics it is hard to judge whether the viable regions in Figs. 1–2 are genuine good fits or merely points that pass a loose threshold. Report min χ^{2}_q, min χ^{2}_l and the pulls of the nine observables for the best points (or for representative points in each δ_l branch).
  3. [§2.2 and §3] The central predictivity rests on the assumption that the two-zero pattern is imposed simultaneously on A, B and C at the GUT scale and is inherited by every low-energy Y_f and by M_ν via Eqs. (7)–(11) and the Type-I+II formula (§2.2). The manuscript does not discuss whether renormalization-group evolution from M_GUT to the electroweak scale preserves the zeros to the accuracy needed for the quoted meV m_ββ bands. A short estimate of the size of RG-induced fill-ins (or a statement that the analysis is performed entirely at the GUT scale with low-energy data used only as boundary conditions) is needed to make the residual predictions robust.
minor comments (7)
  1. [§4 title] Section 4 title reads “non-invertable symmetries”; correct to “non-invertible” (also check the same misspelling elsewhere).
  2. [§5] Conclusions: “It this work, we presented…” → “In this work…”.
  3. [Abstract] Abstract: “future neutrinoless double beta decay measurement” → “measurements” (plural); also align the wording with the body, which cites JUNO-50T sensitivity rather than a generic future bound.
  4. [Figs. 1–2] Figs. 1–2: the color scale for χ^{2} is hard to read in grayscale; add a labeled color bar and, if possible, mark the best-fit point(s) explicitly.
  5. [Table 1] Table 1 lists parameter ranges but not the discrete signs {η_u, η_d, η_e, ζ_d}; a one-line note that all four signs are scanned would help the reader reproduce the count of free parameters.
  6. [§2.2] The statement that M_ν “has been proven” to inherit the two-zero texture (§2.2) should cite the explicit reference (presumably [24] or an appendix derivation) so that the inheritance is checkable.
  7. [References] A few references appear with incomplete or non-standard formatting (e.g., arXiv-only entries without journal data where available); a quick consistency pass would improve polish.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Standard UTZT ansatz + 7-parameter scan against 9 external observables yields residual (not fitted) predictions for δ_l and m_ββ; NIS construction is independent. No reduction of any claimed prediction to its inputs by construction.

full rationale

The paper states the UTZT as an assumption on the SO(10) Yukawa matrices A, B, C at the GUT scale (Sec. 2.2), shows that the GUT relations (7) and Type-I+II seesaw (9) then force every low-energy Y_f and M_ u to inherit the same two zeros, and reparameterizes the Hermitian matrices in terms of the fixed charged-fermion Yukawa eigenvalues plus seven free parameters {A_u, A_d, φ_1, φ_2, m_L, m_R, c_ u} (plus discrete signs). These seven parameters are scanned against nine external observables (four CKM quantities + three leptonic angles + two u mass-squared differences from NuFIT/JUNO); δ_l and m_ββ are deliberately omitted from χ^{2} and appear only as residual outputs of the successful points (χ^{2}_tot < 10). The narrow m_ββ bands follow from the two texture zeros in M_ u together with the quark-sector constraint on A_e (Eq. 11), which is a genuine model prediction, not a tautology. The non-invertible realization (Sec. 4) is an independent bottom-up construction: conjugacy-class assignments under Z_3 times Z_7 (Table 3) plus the fusion rules (Table 2) forbid precisely the (1,1) and (1,3) entries without introducing extra low-energy fields. Self-citations to the authors’ prior UTZT-SO(10) paper supply the model setup and the earlier numerical preference for normal ordering, but the present scan is an update with new JUNO inputs and the NIS construction is new; neither step reduces a claimed prediction to an input by definition. The analysis is therefore self-contained against external data and free of the six circularity patterns.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

7 free parameters · 7 axioms · 1 invented entities

The phenomenological claim rests on fixing all charged-fermion Yukawas to external best-fit values, imposing UTZT on A, B, C at the GUT scale, assuming a specific non-SUSY SO(10) breaking chain with Type-I+II seesaw and CP-enforced Hermitian Yukawas, then fitting seven continuous parameters plus discrete signs. The NIS claim adds conjugacy-class assignments under Z7 ⋊ Z3 that are chosen to reproduce the texture; they are not derived from a UV completion beyond the selection-rule postulate. No new light particles are introduced, which is the main economy relative to ordinary discrete symmetries.

free parameters (7)
  • Au/yt = viable branches near ~0.18 and ~0.36
    Continuous free parameter in the Hermitian up-quark two-zero texture; scanned in (0,1) and fitted to CKM data.
  • Ad/yb = viable branches near ~2.3e-3 and ~4.7e-3 (in Ad units of 1e-2 scale in Fig. 1)
    Continuous free parameter in the down-quark two-zero texture; scanned and fitted jointly with Au to CKM angles and phase.
  • ϕ1, ϕ2
    Relative phase differences in Pq = diag(1, e^{iϕ1}, e^{iϕ2}) that enter V_CKM; scanned over (0, 2π) and fitted to CKM.
  • mL = most points near 13–15.5 eV (with tails)
    Type-II seesaw scale parameter; scanned in (0.1, 100) eV and fitted to neutrino mass-squared differences and mixings.
  • mR = most points near 0.50–0.67 eV
    Type-I seesaw scale parameter; scanned and fitted together with mL and cν.
  • cν = broad range (0.016, 15), preference for large cν
    Relative 120H contribution in the Dirac neutrino Yukawa; scanned in (0.01, 15) and fitted to lepton observables.
  • discrete signs {ηu, ηd, ηe, ζd} = ηe = −1 for all viable points; both ηd = ±1 appear
    Sign ambiguities in the Hermitian reparameterization and overall Yd sign; scanned over ±1 combinations. All viable points have ηe = −1.
axioms (7)
  • domain assumption SO(10) breaks along the non-supersymmetric chain SO(10) → G422^C → G3221 → GSM with 54H, 45H, 126H as stated in Eq. (2).
    Adopted from prior literature (Bertolini et al.; King et al.) and used throughout §2 to define intermediate scales and bi-doublet content.
  • domain assumption A generalized CP symmetry above the GUT scale forces A, B real symmetric and C purely imaginary antisymmetric, yielding Hermitian low-energy Yukawas when 10H/126H VEVs are real and 120H VEVs imaginary.
    Stated in §2.1; essential for the Hermitian UTZT reparameterization that reduces the continuous parameter count to seven.
  • ad hoc to paper The universal two-zero texture is imposed on the SO(10) Yukawa matrices A, B, and C at the GUT scale, so all Yf and Mν inherit the same zeros.
    Core modeling choice of §2.2; not derived from gauge dynamics. Enables the entire predictivity claim.
  • domain assumption Light neutrino masses are generated by the Type-I+II seesaw formula Mν = mL F − mR Yν F^{−1} Yν^T with F proportional to the 126H coupling.
    Standard SO(10) assumption used in Eqs. (9)–(10); required for Mν to inherit the two-zero texture.
  • domain assumption Charged-fermion Yukawa eigenvalues may be fixed exactly to external GUT-scale best-fit values (Eq. 22) while scanning only the texture parameters.
    Explicitly done in §3 to reduce dimensionality; uncertainties on those masses are not propagated.
  • domain assumption Non-invertible selection rules from conjugacy-class fusion in ZN ⋊ Z3 allow a Yukawa coupling iff the product of classes contains the identity class C1.
    Bottom-up NIS framework of §4.1, following recent literature; used to justify the Z7 assignment in Table 3.
  • ad hoc to paper Only normal ordering of light neutrinos is considered, motivated by JUNO’s 2.3σ indication and prior GUT preference.
    Stated in §3; inverted ordering is not scanned, so the 'enhanced preference for NO' is partly an input choice.
invented entities (1)
  • Conjugacy-class assignment of 16_F^i and Higgs multiplets under Z7 ⋊ Z3 (Table 3) no independent evidence
    purpose: Enforce the universal two-zero texture on A, B, C via non-invertible fusion rules without extra light Higgs generations.
    The assignment (fermions: C1, C1_3, C2_3; Higgses: C2_3) is chosen by hand to reproduce the desired zeros; it is not uniquely fixed by a deeper principle in the paper.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-grok45 · 20969 in / 4746 out tokens · 45244 ms · 2026-07-12T12:30:04.570225+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We apply the universal two-zero texture (UTZT) to all quark and lepton mass matrices in the SO(10) grand unified framework. With charged fermion masses fixed at their best-fit values, this texture contains only seven free parameters to account for nine flavor observables, rendering it highly predictive. Motivated by the recent JUNO indication in favor of the normal ordering of light neutrino masses, we perform an updated analysis of the UTZT in SO(10). The texture remains fully compatible with all current flavor data and exhibits an enhanced preference for normal ordering. The Dirac phase is predicted mainly in two regions, one of which matches very well with current data. A meV-scale $m_{\beta\beta}$ is predicted, beyond the sensitivity bound of future neutrinoless double beta decay measurements. We further explore the origin of the UTZT from non-invertible symmetries, without introducing additional low-energy degrees of freedom. We show that the UTZT can be realized through non-invertible selection rules arising from the $Z_3$ gauging of $Z_N$, with a minimal realization corresponding to $N=7$.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.24571 by Wen-Hao Jiang, Ye-Ling Zhou, Zi-Qiang Chen.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Scan of model parameters with χ 2 ≤ 10. 10 4 10 3 10 2 10 1 10 0 mlightest [eV] 10 3 10 2 10 1 10 0 m [ e V ] KamLAND-Zen Upper Limit JUNO-50T Sensitivity 1 & 3 5 10 15 20 MN1/10 9 [GeV] 1 2 3 MN 3 / 1 0 1 2 [ G e V ] 0 1 2 3 | |(%) 90 180 270 360 l( ) 1 3 1 2 3 MN3/10 12 [GeV] 90 180 270 360 l( ) 1 3 0 2 4 6 8 10 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: The effective neutrino mass prediction (top left panel) and two-dimensional correlations [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png] view at source ↗

Review history (2 revisions) →

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Revisiting One-Zero and Two-Zero Neutrino Mass Textures in Light of Recent Oscillation and Cosmological Data

    hep-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0

    With CMB+BAO mass-sum bounds only A1/A2 two-zero textures survive; viable one-zero textures (via flow matching) predict distinct Σmi, ⟨mee⟩, and δCP patterns, realizable by non-invertible selection rules.

  2. Neutrino cuboid for normal mass ordering and tribimaximal flavor mixing

    hep-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0

    A cuboid mass ansatz that sets mass angles equal to mixing angles predicts a nearly degenerate normal spectrum whose deviations from tribimaximal mixing are fixed by the observed mass-squared ratio.

  3. Neutrino cuboid for normal mass ordering and tribimaximal flavor mixing

    hep-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 4.0

    A geometric 'flavor cuboid' ansatz conjectures that neutrino mixing angles equal mass-parametrization angles, predicting a nearly degenerate normal mass ordering and a testable correlation among mixing angles and mass...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

64 extracted references · 4 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers · 4 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Fritzsch, Phys

    H. Fritzsch, Phys. Lett. B70, 436-440 (1977) doi:10.1016/0370-2693(77)90408-7

    doi:10.1016/0370-2693(77)90408-7 1977

  2. [2]

    Weinberg, Trans

    S. Weinberg, Trans. New York Acad. Sci. 38, 185-201 (1977) doi:10.1111/j.2164- 0947.1977.tb02958.x

    doi:10.1111/j.2164- 1977

  3. [3]

    Wilczek and A

    F. Wilczek and A. Zee, Phys. Lett. B70, 418 (1977) [erratum: Phys. Lett. B72, 504 (1978)] doi:10.1016/0370-2693(77)90403-8

    doi:10.1016/0370-2693(77)90403-8 1977

  4. [4]

    Fritzsch, Phys

    H. Fritzsch, Phys. Lett. B73, 317-322 (1978) doi:10.1016/0370-2693(78)90524-5

    doi:10.1016/0370-2693(78)90524-5 1978

  5. [5]

    Fritzsch, Nucl

    H. Fritzsch, Nucl. Phys. B155, 189-207 (1979) doi:10.1016/0550-3213(79)90362-6

    doi:10.1016/0550-3213(79)90362-6 1979

  6. [6]

    D. s. Du and Z. z. Xing, Phys. Rev. D48, 2349-2352 (1993) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.48.2349

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.48.2349 1993

  7. [7]

    Fritzsch and Z

    H. Fritzsch and Z. z. Xing, Phys. Lett. B 353, 114-118 (1995) doi:10.1016/0370- 2693(95)00545-V [arXiv:hep-ph/9502297 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/0370- 1995

  8. [8]

    Z. z. Xing, J. Phys. G23, 1563-1578 (1997) doi:10.1088/0954-3899/23/11/006 [arXiv:hep- ph/9609204 [hep-ph]]

    doi:10.1088/0954-3899/23/11/006 1997

  9. [9]

    Fritzsch and Z

    H. Fritzsch and Z. z. Xing, Phys. Lett. B 555, 63-70 (2003) doi:10.1016/S0370- 2693(03)00048-0 [arXiv:hep-ph/0212195 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/s0370- 2003

  10. [10]

    Z. z. Xing and H. Zhang, J. Phys. G30, 129-136 (2004) doi:10.1088/0954-3899/30/2/011 [arXiv:hep-ph/0309112 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/0954-3899/30/2/011 2004

  11. [11]

    Z. z. Xing and Z. h. Zhao, Nucl. Phys. B 897, 302-325 (2015) doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2015.05.027 [arXiv:1501.06346 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2015.05.027 2015

  12. [12]

    Fritzsch, Z

    H. Fritzsch, Z. z. Xing and D. Zhang, Nucl. Phys. B 974, 115634 (2022) doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2021.115634 [arXiv:2111.06727 [hep-ph]]

    doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2021.115634 2022

  13. [13]

    P. H. Frampton, S. L. Glashow and D. Marfatia, Phys. Lett. B 536, 79-82 (2002) doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(02)01817-8 [arXiv:hep-ph/0201008 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/s0370-2693(02)01817-8 2002

  14. [14]

    Z. z. Xing, Phys. Lett. B 530, 159-166 (2002) doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(02)01354-0 [arXiv:hep-ph/0201151 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/s0370-2693(02)01354-0 2002

  15. [15]

    Z. z. Xing, Phys. Lett. B539, 85-90 (2002) doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(02)02062-2 [arXiv:hep- ph/0205032 [hep-ph]]. 12

    doi:10.1016/s0370-2693(02)02062-2 2002

  16. [16]

    Fritzsch, Z

    H. Fritzsch, Z. z. Xing and S. Zhou, JHEP09, 083 (2011) doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2011)083 [arXiv:1108.4534 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/jhep09(2011)083 2011

  17. [17]

    Z.z.XingandH.Zhang, Phys.Lett.B 569, 30-40(2003)doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2003.07.008 [arXiv:hep-ph/0304234 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2003.07.008 2003

  18. [18]

    Y. L. Zhou, Phys. Rev. D 86, 093011 (2012) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.86.093011 [arXiv:1205.2303 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.86.093011 2012

  19. [19]

    Barranco, D

    J. Barranco, D. Delepine and L. Lopez-Lozano, Phys. Rev. D 86, 053012 (2012) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.86.053012 [arXiv:1205.0859 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.86.053012 2012

  20. [20]

    Fritzsch and S

    H. Fritzsch and S. Zhou, Phys. Lett. B 718, 1457-1464 (2013) doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2012.12.071 [arXiv:1212.0411 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2012.12.071 2013

  21. [21]

    J. Liao, D. Marfatia and K. Whisnant, Phys. Rev. D 87, 073013 (2013) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.87.073013 [arXiv:1302.2372 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.87.073013 2013

  22. [22]

    M. J. S. Yang, Phys. Lett. B 806, 135483 (2020) doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2020.135483 [arXiv:2002.09152 [hep-ph]]

    doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2020.135483 2020

  23. [23]

    M. J. S. Yang, PTEP 2022, no.1, 013B12 (2022) doi:10.1093/ptep/ptab162 [arXiv:2104.12063 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1093/ptep/ptab162 2022

  24. [24]

    G. X. Fang and Y. L. Zhou, Chin. Phys. C49, no.10, 103107 (2025) doi:10.1088/1674- 1137/ade6d7 [arXiv:2410.18743 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1674- 2025

  25. [25]

    Altarelli and D

    G. Altarelli and D. Meloni, JHEP 08, 021 (2013) doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2013)021 [arXiv:1305.1001 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/jhep08(2013)021 2013

  26. [26]

    K. S. Babu, B. Bajc and S. Saad, JHEP 02, 136 (2017) doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2017)136 [arXiv:1612.04329 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/jhep02(2017)136 2017

  27. [27]

    K. S. Babu, T. Fukuyama, S. Khan and S. Saad, JHEP 06, 045 (2019) doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2019)045 [arXiv:1812.11695 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/jhep06(2019)045 2019

  28. [28]

    Ohlsson and M

    T. Ohlsson and M. Pernow, JHEP 06, 085 (2019) doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2019)085 [arXiv:1903.08241 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/jhep06(2019)085 2019

  29. [29]

    V. S. Mummidi and K. M. Patel, JHEP 12, 042 (2021) doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2021)042 [arXiv:2109.04050 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/jhep12(2021)042 2021

  30. [30]

    B. Fu, S. F. King, L. Marsili, S. Pascoli, J. Turner and Y. L. Zhou, JHEP11, 072 (2022) doi:10.1007/JHEP11(2022)072 [arXiv:2209.00021 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/jhep11(2022)072 2022

  31. [31]

    B. Fu, S. F. King, L. Marsili, S. Pascoli, J. Turner and Y. L. Zhou, Phys. Rev. D109, no.5, 5 (2024) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.109.055025 [arXiv:2308.05799 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.109.055025 2024

  32. [32]

    K. S. Babu, C. S. Fong and S. Saad, JHEP11, 151 (2025) doi:10.1007/JHEP11(2025)151 [arXiv:2508.14969 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/jhep11(2025)151 2025

  33. [33]

    Dueck and W

    A. Dueck and W. Rodejohann, JHEP 09, 024 (2013) doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2013)024 [arXiv:1306.4468 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/jhep09(2013)024 2013

  34. [34]

    Saad, JHEP04, 058 (2023) doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2023)058 [arXiv:2212.05291 [hep-ph]]

    S. Saad, JHEP04, 058 (2023) doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2023)058 [arXiv:2212.05291 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/jhep04(2023)058 2023

  35. [35]

    K. S. Babu, P. Di Bari, C. S. Fong and S. Saad, JHEP 10, 190 (2024) doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2024)190 [arXiv:2409.03840 [hep-ph]]. 13

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/jhep10(2024)190 2024

  36. [36]

    Abusleme et al

    A. Abusleme et al. [JUNO], [arXiv:2511.14593 [hep-ex]]

    arXiv

  37. [37]

    Z. Q. Chen, G. X. Fang and Y. L. Zhou, Phys. Rev. D 113, no.11, 115024 (2026) doi:10.1103/lwmz-2y6c [arXiv:2511.16196 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/lwmz-2y6c 2026

  38. [38]

    Y. F. Wang,JUNO Experiment, Talk presented in Neutrino 2026, Ivrine, June 2026

    2026

  39. [39]

    Grimus, A

    W. Grimus, A. S. Joshipura, L. Lavoura and M. Tanimoto, Eur. Phys. J. C36, 227-232 (2004) doi:10.1140/epjc/s2004-01896-y [arXiv:hep-ph/0405016 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1140/epjc/s2004-01896-y 2004

  40. [40]

    Gonzalez Canales, A

    F. Gonzalez Canales, A. Mondragon and M. Mondragon, Fortsch. Phys.61, 546-570 (2013) doi:10.1002/prop.201200121 [arXiv:1205.4755 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1002/prop.201200121 2013

  41. [41]

    P. M. Ferreira, W. Grimus, D. Jurčiukonis and L. Lavoura, Nucl. Phys. B906, 289-320 (2016) doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2016.03.011 [arXiv:1510.02641 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2016.03.011 2016

  42. [42]

    I. P. Ivanov and L. Lavoura, J. Phys. G 43, no.10, 105005 (2016) doi:10.1088/0954- 3899/43/10/105005 [arXiv:1511.02720 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/0954- 2016

  43. [43]

    Flavor Symmetries in the Yukawa Sector of Non-Supersymmetric SO(10): Numerical Fits Using Renormalization Group Running

    T. Ohlsson and M. Pernow, JHEP 09, 111 (2021) doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2021)111 [arXiv:2107.08771 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/jhep09(2021)111 2021

  44. [44]

    Flavor Symmetries in an SU(5) Model of Grand Unification

    M. Lindestam, T. Ohlsson and M. Pernow, JHEP 01, 009 (2022) doi:10.1007/JHEP01(2022)009 [arXiv:2110.09533 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/jhep01(2022)009 2022

  45. [45]

    Zhang, Nucl

    D. Zhang, Nucl. Phys. B 952, 114935 (2020) doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2020.114935 [arXiv:1910.07869 [hep-ph]]

    doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2020.114935 2020

  46. [46]

    J. N. Lu, X. G. Liu and G. J. Ding, Phys. Rev. D 101, no.11, 115020 (2020) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.101.115020 [arXiv:1912.07573 [hep-ph]]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.101.115020 2020

  47. [47]

    Y. Choi, H. T. Lam and S. H. Shao, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, no.16, 161601 (2022) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.129.161601 [arXiv:2205.05086 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.129.161601 2022

  48. [48]

    Cordova and K

    C. Cordova and K. Ohmori, Phys. Rev. X 13, no.1, 011034 (2023) doi:10.1103/PhysRevX.13.011034 [arXiv:2205.06243 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevx.13.011034 2023

  49. [49]

    Cordova, S

    C. Cordova, S. Hong, S. Koren and K. Ohmori, Phys. Rev. X14, no.3, 031033 (2024) doi:10.1103/PhysRevX.14.031033 [arXiv:2211.07639 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevx.14.031033 2024

  50. [50]

    Cordova, S

    C. Cordova, S. Hong and S. Koren, Phys. Rev. X 15, no.3, 031011 (2025) doi:10.1103/PhysRevX.15.031011 [arXiv:2402.12453 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevx.15.031011 2025

  51. [51]

    Kobayashi, H

    T. Kobayashi, H. Otsuka and M. Tanimoto, JHEP 12, 117 (2024) doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2024)117 [arXiv:2409.05270 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/jhep12(2024)117 2024

  52. [52]

    G. C. Branco, L. Lavoura and F. Mota, Phys. Rev. D 39, 3443 (1989) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.39.3443

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.39.3443 1989

  53. [53]

    Jiang, B

    Z. Jiang, B. Y. Qu and G. J. Ding, Phys. Rev. D 112, no.11, 115029 (2025) doi:10.1103/d29s-cw34 [arXiv:2510.07236 [hep-ph]]

    doi:10.1103/d29s-cw34 2025

  54. [54]

    Kobayashi, H

    T. Kobayashi, H. Otsuka, M. Tanimoto and H. Uchida, JHEP 08, 189 (2025) doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2025)189 [arXiv:2505.07262 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/jhep08(2025)189 2025

  55. [55]

    Kobayashi, H

    T. Kobayashi, H. Otsuka and T. T. Yanagida, Phys. Rev. D113, no.5, 055016 (2026) doi:10.1103/vbd5-5cp3 [arXiv:2508.12287 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/vbd5-5cp3 2026

  56. [56]

    B. Y. Qu, Z. Jiang and G. J. Ding, [arXiv:2602.24214 [hep-ph]]. 14

    arXiv

  57. [57]

    Bertolini, L

    S. Bertolini, L. Di Luzio and M. Malinsky, Phys. Rev. D 80, 015013 (2009) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.80.015013 [arXiv:0903.4049 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.80.015013 2009

  58. [58]

    S. F. King, S. Pascoli, J. Turner and Y. L. Zhou, JHEP 10, 225 (2021) doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2021)225 [arXiv:2106.15634 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/jhep10(2021)225 2021

  59. [59]

    Dutta, Y

    B. Dutta, Y. Mimura and R. N. Mohapatra, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 091804 (2005) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.94.091804 [arXiv:hep-ph/0412105 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.94.091804 2005

  60. [60]

    Dutta, Y

    B. Dutta, Y. Mimura and R. N. Mohapatra, Phys. Rev. D 72, 075009 (2005) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.72.075009 [arXiv:hep-ph/0507319 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.72.075009 2005

  61. [61]

    Altarelli and G

    G. Altarelli and G. Blankenburg, JHEP 03, 133 (2011) doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2011)133 [arXiv:1012.2697 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/jhep03(2011)133 2011

  62. [62]

    Dutta, Y

    B. Dutta, Y. Mimura and R. N. Mohapatra, Phys. Rev. D 80, 095021 (2009) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.80.095021 [arXiv:0910.1043 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.80.095021 2009

  63. [63]

    Esteban, M

    I. Esteban, M. C. Gonzalez-Garcia, M. Maltoni, I. Martinez-Soler, J. P. Pinheiro and T. Schwetz, JHEP 12, 216 (2024) doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2024)216 [arXiv:2410.05380 [hep- ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/jhep12(2024)216 2024

  64. [64]

    Kobayashi and H

    T. Kobayashi and H. Otsuka, [arXiv:2512.16376 [hep-ph]]. 15

    arXiv