Gravitational corrections to fermion masses in grand unified theories

Abstract

We reconsider quantum gravitational threshold effects to the unification of fermion masses in Grand Unified Theories. We show that the running of the Planck mass can have a sizable effect on these thresholds which are thus much more important than naively expected. These corrections make any extrapolation from low energy measurements challenging.

Unification, proton decay, and topological defects in non-SUSY GUTs with thresholds

“…The various breaking patterns we assume are achieved through the suitable choice of the scalar representations and the orientations of their vacuum expectation values (VEVs) [13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27]. Also, the different breaking patterns lead to different phenomenological models at low energy, as discussed in [14,24,25,[28][29][30][31] for SO (10) and [17,20,21,[32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43] for E (6). The neutrino and charged fermion mass and mixing generation in the context of unified theories are discussed in [24,[44][45][46][47][48][49][50]…”

Supersymmetric SU(5)×U(1)χPal1, Shafi2 2019Phys. Rev. D5010View full textAdd to dashboardCite

“…Many realistic SU (5) models predict b−τ Yukawa Unification (YU) [20] which would also hold for the χSU(5) model. Referring to Table I, consider the following dimension-five terms that generate masses in SU(5) for down quarks and charged leptons [21][22][23] ε where f ij , f ij are dimensionless constants and the Greek letters denote the SU(5) indices. Ignoring the first two families, the usual b−τ Yukawa Unification condition at M GU T is modified to [22]…”

Roadmap of left-right models based on GUTs

“…for both D-parity conserved and broken cases. We would like to mention here that these dimension-5 operators may affect the unification scenario for SO (10) and E(6) GUT groups [96,[110][111][112] and these corrections lead to the non-universality of gaugino masses in the SUSY case [10,15,109,[113][114][115][116] leading to different phenomenology [22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30]116] compared to the usual minimal supersymmetric standard model. Various types of topological defects which can form are : domain walls (k = 0), cosmic strings (k = 1), monopoles (k = 2), and textures (k = 3).…”

“…These specific breaking patterns can be achieved by the suitable choice of representations and orientations of the vacuum expectation values of the GUT breaking scalars [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15]. Many phenomenological studies have been performed both in presence and absence of supersymmetry (SUSY) for SO (10) [2,12,13,[16][17][18][19]] and E(6) [5,8,9,[20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30].…”