MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4409331873 · doi:10.1103/physrevd.111.075009

Flavor constraints in a generational three-Higgs-doublet model

2025· article· en· W4409331873 on OpenAlexaff
Wolfgang Altmannshofer, Kevin Toner

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. D/Physical review. D. · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicParticle physics theoretical and experimental studies
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Particle Physics
FundersU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsHiggs bosonFlavorParticle physicsPhysicsMathematicsComputer sciencePsychologyFood scienceChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a three-Higgs-doublet model (3HDM) that goes beyond natural flavor conservation and in which each of the three Higgs doublets couples mainly to a single generation of fermions via nonstandard Yukawa structures. A hierarchy in the vacuum expectation values of the three Higgs doublets can partially address the Standard Model flavor puzzle. In light of the experimentally observed 125 GeV Higgs boson, we primarily work within a 3HDM alignment limit such that a Standard Model-like Higgs is recovered. In order to reproduce the observed Cabibbo–Kobayashi–Maskawa mixing among quarks, the neutral Higgs bosons of the theory necessarily mediate flavor changing neutral currents at the tree level. We consider constraints from neutral kaon, B meson, and D meson mixing as well as from the rare leptonic decays B s / B 0 / K L → μ + μ − / e + e − . We identify regions of parameter space in which the new physics Higgs bosons can be as light as a TeV or even lighter.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.403 · 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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