Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Nonperturbative and perturbative dynamics of a light QCD axion: Dark matter and the strong CP problem

Raymond T. Co, Taegyu Lee, and Owen P. Leonard

Phys. Rev. D 112, 115007 – Published 1 December, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/18j2-l2y9

Abstract

Considerable theoretical efforts have gone into expanding the reach of the quantum chromodynamics (QCD) axion beyond its canonical mass–decay-constant relation. The ZN QCD axion model reduces the QCD axion mass naturally, by invoking a discrete ZN symmetry through which the axion field is coupled to N copies of the Standard Model. Before the QCD phase transition at temperature TQCD, the ZN potential has a minimum at misalignment angle θ=π. At TQCD, θ=π becomes a maximum; the axion potential becomes exponentially suppressed and develops N minima—only one of which actually solves the strong CP problem. Before TQCD, θ relaxes toward π. After TQCD, the axion field starts from around the hilltop and may have sufficient kinetic energy to overcome the newly suppressed potential barriers. Such a field evolution leads to nonperturbative effects via the self-interactions near the hilltop, which can cause the exponential growth of fluctuations and backreaction on the coherent motion. This behavior can influence the relic density of the field and the minimum in which it settles. We conduct the first lattice simulations of the ZN QCD axion using CosmoLattice to accurately calculate dark matter abundances and find nonperturbative dynamics reduce the abundance by up to a factor of two. We furthermore find that the probability of solving the strong CP problem tends to diverge considerably from the naïve expectation of 1/N.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (64)

  1. J. Preskill, M. B. Wise, and F. Wilczek, Phys. Lett. 120B, 127 (1983).
  2. M. Dine and W. Fischler, Phys. Lett. 120B, 137 (1983).
  3. L. F. Abbott and P. Sikivie, Phys. Lett. 120B, 133 (1983).
  4. R. D. Peccei and H. R. Quinn, Phys. Rev. Lett. 38, 1440 (1977).
  5. R. D. Peccei and H. R. Quinn, Phys. Rev. D 16, 1791 (1977).
  6. S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 40, 223 (1978).
  7. F. Wilczek, Phys. Rev. Lett. 40, 279 (1978).
  8. G. Grilli di Cortona, E. Hardy, J. Pardo Vega, and G. Villadoro, J. High Energy Phys. 01 (2016) 034.
  9. S. Dimopoulos, Phys. Lett. 84B, 435 (1979).
  10. S. H. H. Tye, Phys. Rev. Lett. 47, 1035 (1981).
  11. B. Holdom and M. E. Peskin, Nucl. Phys. B208, 397 (1982).
  12. J. M. Flynn and L. Randall, Nucl. Phys. B293, 731 (1987).
  13. V. A. Rubakov, JETP Lett. 65, 621 (1997).
  14. Z. Berezhiani, L. Gianfagna, and M. Giannotti, Phys. Lett. B 500, 286 (2001).
  15. A. Hook, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 141801 (2015).
  16. H. Fukuda, K. Harigaya, M. Ibe, and T. T. Yanagida, Phys. Rev. D 92, 015021 (2015).
  17. T. Gherghetta, N. Nagata, and M. Shifman, Phys. Rev. D 93, 115010 (2016).
  18. S. Dimopoulos, A. Hook, J. Huang, and G. Marques-Tavares, J. High Energy Phys. 11 (2016) 052.
  19. P. Agrawal and K. Howe, J. High Energy Phys. 12 (2018) 029.
  20. P. Agrawal and K. Howe, J. High Energy Phys. 12 (2018) 035.
  21. M. K. Gaillard, M. B. Gavela, R. Houtz, P. Quilez, and R. Del Rey, Eur. Phys. J. C 78, 972 (2018).
  22. B. Lillard and T. M. P. Tait, J. High Energy Phys. 11 (2018) 199.
  23. J. Fuentes-Martín, M. Reig, and A. Vicente, Phys. Rev. D 100, 115028 (2019).
  24. C. Csáki, M. Ruhdorfer, and Y. Shirman, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2020) 031.
  25. A. Hook, S. Kumar, Z. Liu, and R. Sundrum, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 221801 (2020).
  26. T. Gherghetta, V. V. Khoze, A. Pomarol, and Y. Shirman, J. High Energy Phys. 03 (2020) 063.
  27. T. Gherghetta and M. D. Nguyen, J. High Energy Phys. 12 (2020) 094.
  28. A. Valenti, L. Vecchi, and L.-X. Xu, J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2022) 025.
  29. A. Kivel, J. Laux, and F. Yu, J. High Energy Phys. 11 (2022) 088.
  30. F. Elahi, G. Elor, A. Kivel, J. Laux, S. Najjari, and F. Yu, Phys. Rev. D 108, L031701 (2023).
  31. R. T. Co, T. Gherghetta, Z. Liu, and K.-F. Lyu, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2024) 145.
  32. A. Hook, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 261802 (2018).
  33. L. Di Luzio, B. Gavela, P. Quilez, and A. Ringwald, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2021) 184.
  34. R. T. Co, L. J. Hall, and K. Harigaya, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 251802 (2020).
  35. J. Jaeckel, V. M. Mehta, and L. T. Witkowski, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 01 (2017) 036.
  36. J. Berges, A. Chatrchyan, and J. Jaeckel, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 08 (2019) 020.
  37. N. Fonseca, E. Morgante, R. Sato, and G. Servant, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2020) 010.
  38. L. Di Luzio, B. Gavela, P. Quilez, and A. Ringwald, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 10 (2021) 001.
  39. D. G. Figueroa, A. Florio, F. Torrenti, and W. Valkenburg, Comput. Phys. Commun. 283, 108586 (2023).
  40. A. Banerjee, M. A. Buen-Abad, and A. Hook, Phys. Rev. D 112, 075027 (2025).
  41. R. D. Pisarski and L. G. Yaffe, Phys. Lett. 97B, 110 (1980).
  42. E. Berkowitz, M. I. Buchoff, and E. Rinaldi, Phys. Rev. D 92, 034507 (2015).
  43. R. Kitano and N. Yamada, J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2015) 136.
  44. S. Borsanyi, M. Dierigl, Z. Fodor, S. D. Katz, S. W. Mages, D. Nogradi, J. Redondo, A. Ringwald, and K. K. Szabo, Phys. Lett. B 752, 175 (2016).
  45. P. Petreczky, H.-P. Schadler, and S. Sharma, Phys. Lett. B 762, 498 (2016).
  46. S. Borsanyi et al., Nature (London) 539, 69 (2016).
  47. Y. Taniguchi, K. Kanaya, H. Suzuki, and T. Umeda, Phys. Rev. D 95, 054502 (2017).
  48. N. Aghanim et al. (Planck Collaboration), Astron. Astrophys. 641, A5 (2020).
  49. C. Eröncel, R. Sato, G. Servant, and P. Sørensen, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 10 (2022) 053.
  50. A. Arvanitaki, S. Dimopoulos, M. Galanis, L. Lehner, J. O. Thompson, and K. Van Tilburg, Phys. Rev. D 101, 083014 (2020).
  51. L. Kofman, A. D. Linde, and A. A. Starobinsky, Phys. Rev. Lett. 73, 3195 (1994).
  52. L. Kofman, A. D. Linde, and A. A. Starobinsky, Phys. Rev. D 56, 3258 (1997).
  53. S. Hoof, J. Riess, and D. J. E. Marsh, 10.21105/astro.2108.09563 (2021).
  54. K. Springmann, M. Stadlbauer, S. Stelzl, and A. Weiler, Phys. Rev. D 112, 075009 (2025).
  55. A. Hook and J. Huang, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2018) 036.
  56. R. Balkin, J. Serra, K. Springmann, S. Stelzl, and A. Weiler, Phys. Rev. D 109, 095032 (2024).
  57. A. Gómez-Bañón, K. Bartnick, K. Springmann, and J. A. Pons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 251002 (2024).
  58. M. Kumamoto, J. Huang, C. Drischler, M. Baryakhtar, and S. Reddy, Phys. Rev. D 112, 043008 (2025).
  59. M. Baryakhtar, M. Galanis, R. Lasenby, and O. Simon, Phys. Rev. D 103, 095019 (2021).
  60. J. Zhang, Z. Lyu, J. Huang, M. C. Johnson, L. Sagunski, M. Sakellariadou, and H. Yang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 161101 (2021).
  61. D. F. Jackson Kimball et al., Springer Proc. Phys. 245, 105 (2020).
  62. A. Arvanitaki, A. Madden, and K. Van Tilburg, Phys. Rev. D 109, 072009 (2024).
  63. M. Fasiello, J. Lizarraga, A. Papageorgiou, and A. Urio, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 09 (2025) 019.
  64. N. Aghanim et al. (Planck Collaboration), Astron. Astrophys. 641, A6 (2020); 652, C4(E) (2021).

Outline

Information

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation