Resonant flavor oscillations in electroweak baryogenesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Electroweak baryogenesis (EWBG) in extensions of the standard model will be tested quantitatively in upcoming nuclear and particle physics experiments, but only to the extent that theoretical computations are robust. Currently there exist orders-of-magnitude discrepancies between treatments of charge transport dynamics during EWBG performed by different groups, each relying on different sets of approximations. In this work, we introduce a consistent power-counting scheme (in ratios of length scales) for treating systematically the dynamics of EWBG: $CP$-asymmetric flavor oscillations, collisions, and diffusion. Within the context of a simplified model of EWBG, we derive the relevant Boltzmann equations using nonequilibrium field theory, and solve them exactly without ansatz for the functional form of the density matrices. We demonstrate the existence of a resonant enhancement in charge production when the flavor oscillation length is comparable to the wall thickness. We compare our results with the existing treatment of EWBG by Konstandin, Prokopec, Schmidt, and Seco (KPSS) who previously identified the importance of flavor oscillations in EWBG. We conclude: (i) the power counting of KPSS breaks down in the resonant regime, and (ii) this leads to substantial underestimation of the charge generated in the unbroken phase, and potentially of the final baryon asymmetry.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".