The DOI matches its Crossref record.
A non-perturbative analysis of the finite-T phase transition in SU (2) × U (1) electroweak theory
Open accessAbstract
The continuum 3d SU(2)×U(1)+Higgs theory is an effective theory for a large class of 4d high-temperature gauge theories, including the minimal standard model and some of its supersymmetric extensions. We study the effects of the U(1) subgroup using lattice Monte Carlo techniques. When g ′2 /g 2 is increased from the zero corresponding to pure SU(2)+Higgs theory, the phase transition gets stronger. However, the increase in the strength is close to what is expected perturbatively, and the qualitative features of the phase diagram remain the same as for g ′2 = 0. In particular, the first order transition still disappears for mH > mH,c. We measure the photon mass and mixing angle, and find that the mass vanishes in both phases within the statistical errors.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Trodden, M. (1999) · Reviews of Modern Physics · doi:10.1103/revmodphys.71.1463 · Cited by 521
Metadata
- Authors
- Kajantie, K., Laine, M., Rummukainen, K., & Shaposhnikov, M.
- Venue
- Nuclear Physics B
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1997-05
- Volume
- 493
- Issue
- 1-2
- Pages
- 413-438
- ISSN
- 0550-3213 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2131596340
- Cited by
- 268
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 11.75
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
