MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4406987960 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.111.015042

Mapping and probing Froggatt-Nielsen solutions to the quark flavor puzzle

2025· article· en· W4406987960 on OpenAlexafffund
Claudia Cornella, David Curtin, E. T. Neil, Jedidiah O. Thompson

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D. · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaInnovation, Science and Economic Development CanadaInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueExzellenzcluster Ozean der ZukunftOntario Ministry of Research, Innovation and ScienceU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsYukawa potentialParticle physicsCharge (physics)PhysicsQuarkFlavorPhysics beyond the Standard ModelChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Froggatt-Nielsen (FN) mechanism is an elegant solution to the flavor problem. In its minimal application to the quark sector, the different quark types and generations have different charges under a U ( 1 ) X flavor symmetry. The SM Yukawa couplings are generated below the flavor breaking scale with hierarchies dictated by the quark charge assignments. Only a handful of charge assignments are generally considered in the literature. We analyze the complete space of possible charge assignments with | X q i | ≤ 4 and perform both a set of Bayesian-inspired numerical scans and an analytical spurion analysis to identify those charge assignments that reliably generate SM-like quark mass and mixing hierarchies. The resulting set of top-20 flavor charge assignments significantly enlarges the viable space of FN models but is still compact enough to enable focused phenomenological study. We then apply our numerical methodology to demonstrate that these distinct charge assignments result in the generation of correlated flavor-violating four-quark operators characterized by significantly varied strengths, potentially differing substantially from the possibilities previously explored in the literature. Future precision measurement of Δ F = 2 observables, along with increasingly accurate SM predictions, may therefore enable us to distinguish among otherwise equally plausible FN charges, thus shedding light on the UV structure of the flavor sector.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.385 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D.→Same topicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies→French-language works237,207→