Gravitational waves from phase transition in minimal SUSY 
<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mi>U</mml:mi><mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo><mml:mn>1</mml:mn><mml:msub><mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo><mml:mrow><mml:mi>B</mml:mi><mml:mo>−</mml:mo><mml:mi>L</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:math>
 model

Haba, Naoyuki; Yamada, Toshifumi

doi:10.1103/physrevd.101.075027

“…For instance, baryonic matter can only explain a fraction of the matter observed and the missing dark matter can be a part of a hidden sector that undergoes a phase transition [48][49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62][63][64][65]. Second, the near unification of gauge coupling constants along with conspiracy of gauge anomaly cancellation motivates grand unification which can sequentially break into the standard model gauge group and leave a gravitational wave background [66][67][68][69][70][71][72]. Finally, the generation of neutrino masses can arise through a B −L breaking transition [68,[73][74][75][76][77].…”

Section: Jhep06(2021)164mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Second, the near unification of gauge coupling constants along with conspiracy of gauge anomaly cancellation motivates grand unification which can sequentially break into the standard model gauge group and leave a gravitational wave background [66][67][68][69][70][71][72]. Finally, the generation of neutrino masses can arise through a B −L breaking transition [68,[73][74][75][76][77]. In each case, an observed signal not only sheds light on our cosmic history, but on a range of energy scales spanning from sub-GeV to the PeV scale [78] (even higher scales have been proposed, though technology needs to improve to make the sensitivity cosmologically relevant [79] with the possible exception of NEMO [80]).…”

Section: Jhep06(2021)164mentioning

confidence: 99%

The benefits of diligence: how precise are predicted gravitational wave spectra in models with phase transitions?

Guo

¹

,

Sinha

²

,

Vagie

³

et al. 2021

J. High Energ. Phys.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Models of particle physics that feature phase transitions typically provide predictions for stochastic gravitational wave signals at future detectors and such predictions are used to delineate portions of the model parameter space that can be constrained. The question is: how precise are such predictions? Uncertainties enter in the calculation of the macroscopic thermal parameters and the dynamics of the phase transition itself. We calculate such uncertainties with increasing levels of sophistication in treating the phase transition dynamics. Currently, the highest level of diligence corresponds to careful treatments of the source lifetime; mean bubble separation; going beyond the bag model approximation in solving the hydrodynamics equations and explicitly calculating the fraction of energy in the fluid from these equations rather than using a fit; and including fits for the energy lost to vorticity modes and reheating effects. The lowest level of diligence incorporates none of these effects. We compute the percolation and nucleation temperatures, the mean bubble separation, the fluid velocity, and ultimately the gravitational wave spectrum corresponding to the level of highest diligence for three explicit examples: SMEFT, a dark sector Higgs model, and the real singlet-extended Standard Model (xSM). In each model, we contrast different levels of diligence in the calculation and find that the difference in the final predicted signal can be several orders of magnitude. Our results indicate that calculating the gravitational wave spectrum for particle physics models and deducing precise constraints on the parameter space of such models continues to remain very much a work in progress and warrants care.

show abstract

“…). The masses square M 2 i are obtained from the m 2 i by adding the T-dependent self-energy corrections [62][63][64][65]. We will discuss the (φ η , φ η)-dependent particle masses square m 2 i and M 2 i specifically as follows.…”

Section: Finite Temperature Effective Potentialmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gravitational waves from the phase transition in the B-LSSM

Dong

¹

,

Feng

²

,

Zhang

³

et al. 2021

J. High Energ. Phys.

3

0

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Based on the gauge symmetry group SU(3)C ⨂ SU(2)L ⨂ U(1)Y ⨂ U(1)B–L, the minimal supersymmetric extension of the SM with local B-L gauge symmetry(B-LSSM) has been introduced. In this model, we study the Higgs masses with the one-loop zero temperature effective potential corrections. Besides, the finite temperature effective potentials connected with two U(1)B-L Higgs singlets are deduced specifically. Then we can obtain the gravitational wave spectrums generated from the strong first-order phase transition. In the B-LSSM, with the fine-tuned parameter regions, we can obtain the strength parameter αθ ~ 0.14 and the ratio of speed to Hubble rate β/Hn ~ 5 at nucleation temperature, and then obtain observable gravitational wave signals. The gravitational wave signals can be as strong as h2ΩGW ~ 10–9, which may be detectable in the future experiments.

show abstract

“…For instance, baryonic matter can only explain a fraction of the matter observed and the missing dark matter can be a part of a hidden sector that undergoes a phase transition [48][49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62]. Second, the near unification of gauge coupling constants along with conspiracy of gauge anomaly cancellation motivates grand unification which can sequentially break into the stand model gauge group and leave a gravitational wave background [63][64][65][66][67][68][69]. Finally, the generation of neutrino masses can arise through a B − L breaking transition [65,[70][71][72].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Second, the near unification of gauge coupling constants along with conspiracy of gauge anomaly cancellation motivates grand unification which can sequentially break into the stand model gauge group and leave a gravitational wave background [63][64][65][66][67][68][69]. Finally, the generation of neutrino masses can arise through a B − L breaking transition [65,[70][71][72]. In each case, an observed signal not only sheds light on our cosmic history, but on a range of energy scales spanning from sub-GeV to the PeV scale [73] (even higher scales have been proposed, though technology needs to improve to make the sensitivity cosmologically relevant [74] with the possible exception of NEMO [75]).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Benefits of Diligence: How Precise are Predicted Gravitational Wave Spectra in Models with Phase Transitions?

Guo,

Sinha,

Vagie

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Models of particle physics that feature phase transitions typically provide predictions for stochastic gravitational wave signals at future detectors and such predictions are used to delineate portions of the model parameter space that can be constrained. The question is: how precise are such predictions? Uncertainties enter in the calculation of the macroscopic thermal parameters and the dynamics of the phase transition itself. We calculate such uncertainties with increasing levels of sophistication in treating the phase transition dynamics. Currently, the highest level of diligence corresponds to careful treatments of the source lifetime; mean bubble separation; going beyond the bag model approximation in solving the hydrodynamics equations and explicitly calculating the fraction of energy in the fluid from these equations rather than using a fit; and including fits for the energy lost to vorticity modes and reheating effects. The lowest level of diligence incorporates none of these effects. We compute the percolation and nucleation temperatures, the mean bubble separation, the fluid velocity, and ultimately the gravitational wave spectrum corresponding to the level of highest diligence for three explicit examples: SMEFT, a dark sector Higgs model, and the real singlet-extended Standard Model (xSM). In each model, we contrast different levels of diligence in the calculation and find that the difference in the final predicted signal can be several orders of magnitude. Our results indicate that calculating the gravitational wave spectrum for particle physics models and deducing precise constraints on the parameter space of such models continues to remain very much a work in progress and warrants care.

show abstract

Gravitational waves from phase transition in minimal SUSY U(1)B−L model

Cited by 15 publications

References 74 publications

The benefits of diligence: how precise are predicted gravitational wave spectra in models with phase transitions?

The benefits of diligence: how precise are predicted gravitational wave spectra in models with phase transitions?

Gravitational waves from the phase transition in the B-LSSM

The Benefits of Diligence: How Precise are Predicted Gravitational Wave Spectra in Models with Phase Transitions?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About