- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review D

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

Universal bound on QCD axions from supernovae

Konstantin Springmann1,2,*, Michael Stadlbauer1,3,†, Stefan Stelzl4,‡, and Andreas Weiler1,§

  • *Contact author: konstantin.springmann@weizmann.ac.il
  • †Contact author: michael.stadlbauer@tum.de
  • ‡Contact author: stefan.stelzl@epfl.ch
  • §Contact author: andreas.weiler@tum.de
PDF

Phys. Rev. D 112, 075009 – Published 6 October, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/18t2-1w3b

Abstract

We identify a new production channel for quantum chromodynamics (QCD) axions in supernova environments that contributes to axion emissivity for all models solving the strong CP problem. This channel arises at tree-level from a shift-symmetry-breaking operator constructed at next-to-leading order in chiral perturbation theory. In scenarios where model-dependent derivative couplings to nucleons are absent, this sets the strongest model-independent constraint on the axion mass, improving on existing bounds by two orders of magnitude.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (78)

  1. R. D. Peccei and H. R. Quinn, Phys. Rev. Lett. 38, 1440 (1977).
  2. R. D. Peccei and H. R. Quinn, Phys. Rev. D 16, 1791 (1977).
  3. F. Wilczek, Phys. Rev. Lett. 40, 279 (1978).
  4. S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 40, 223 (1978).
  5. G. Raffelt and D. Seckel, Phys. Rev. Lett. 60, 1793 (1988).
  6. J. R. Ellis and K. A. Olive, Phys. Lett. B 193, 525 (1987).
  7. M. S. Turner, Phys. Rev. Lett. 60, 1797 (1988).
  8. R. Mayle, J. R. Wilson, J. R. Ellis, K. A. Olive, D. N. Schramm, and G. Steigman, Phys. Lett. B 203, 188 (1988).
  9. R. Mayle, J. R. Wilson, J. R. Ellis, K. A. Olive, D. N. Schramm, and G. Steigman, Phys. Lett. B 219, 515 (1989).
  10. R. P. Brinkmann and M. S. Turner, Phys. Rev. D 38, 2338 (1988).
  11. G. Raffelt and D. Seckel, Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 2605 (1991).
  12. G. Raffelt and D. Seckel, Phys. Rev. D 52, 1780 (1995).
  13. H.-T. Janka, W. Keil, G. Raffelt, and D. Seckel, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 2621 (1996).
  14. G. Raffelt and G. Sigl, Phys. Rev. D 60, 023001 (1999).
  15. A. Sedrakian and A. E. L. Dieperink, Phys. Rev. D 62, 083002 (2000).
  16. E. N. E. van Dalen, A. E. L. Dieperink, and J. A. Tjon, Phys. Rev. C 67, 065807 (2003).
  17. G. I. Lykasov, C. J. Pethick, and A. Schwenk, Phys. Rev. C 78, 045803 (2008).
  18. J. H. Chang, R. Essig, and S. D. McDermott, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2018) 051.
  19. P. Carenza, T. Fischer, M. Giannotti, G. Guo, G. Martínez-Pinedo, and A. Mirizzi, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 10 (2019) 016; 05 (2020) E01.
  20. G. Guo and G. Martínez-Pinedo, Astrophys. J. 887, 58 (2019).
  21. D. R. Entem, R. Machleidt, and Y. Nosyk, Phys. Rev. C 96, 024004 (2017).
  22. A. Bartl, Neutrino interactions with supernova matter, Ph.D. thesis, Darmstadt, Technische Universität, 2016.
  23. M. Buschmann, C. Dessert, J. W. Foster, A. J. Long, and B. R. Safdi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 091102 (2022).
  24. G. G. Raffelt, Stars as Laboratories for Fundamental Physics: The Astrophysics of Neutrinos, Axions, and Other Weakly Interacting Particles (1996).
  25. A. Caputo and G. Raffelt, in 1st Training School of the COST Action COSMIC WISPers (CA21106) (2024), arXiv:2401.13728.
  26. L. Di Luzio, F. Mescia, E. Nardi, P. Panci, and R. Ziegler, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 261803 (2018).
  27. M. Badziak and K. Harigaya, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2023) 014.
  28. P. Carenza, B. Fore, M. Giannotti, A. Mirizzi, and S. Reddy, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 071102 (2021).
  29. K. Springmann, M. Stadlbauer, S. Stelzl, and A. Weiler, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2025) 138.
  30. R. L. Workman et al. (Particle Data Group), Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys. 2022, 083C01 (2022).
  31. Y. Aoki et al. [Flavour Lattice Averaging Group (FLAG], Eur. Phys. J. C 82, 869 (2022).
  32. M. Hoferichter, J. Ruiz de Elvira, B. Kubis, and U.-G. Meißner, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 192301 (2015).
  33. V. Bernard, N. Kaiser, and U.-G. Meissner, Nucl. Phys. A615, 483 (1997).
  34. E. Epelbaum, U. G. Meissner, W. Gloeckle, and C. Elster, Phys. Rev. C 65, 044001 (2002).

  35. Note that this term has been extensively used in the literature as it can lead to the sourcing of light scalar fields in dense and large objects [36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43].

  36. A. Hook and J. Huang, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2018) 036.
  37. J. Zhang, Z. Lyu, J. Huang, M. C. Johnson, L. Sagunski, M. Sakellariadou, and H. Yang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 161101 (2021).
  38. R. Balkin, J. Serra, K. Springmann, S. Stelzl, and A. Weiler, Phys. Rev. D 109, 095032 (2024).
  39. A. Gómez-Bañón, K. Bartnick, K. Springmann, and J. A. Pons, arXiv:2408.07740.
  40. R. Balkin, J. Serra, K. Springmann, and A. Weiler, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2020) 221.
  41. R. Balkin, J. Serra, K. Springmann, S. Stelzl, and A. Weiler, SciPost Phys. 14, 071 (2023).
  42. R. Balkin, J. Serra, K. Springmann, S. Stelzl, and A. Weiler, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2022) 023.
  43. R. Balkin, J. Serra, K. Springmann, S. Stelzl, and A. Weiler, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2025) 141.
  44. G. Lucente, L. Mastrototaro, P. Carenza, L. Di Luzio, M. Giannotti, and A. Mirizzi, Phys. Rev. D 105, 123020 (2022).
  45. R. J. Crewther, P. Di Vecchia, G. Veneziano, and E. Witten, Phys. Lett. 88B, 123 (1979); Phys. Lett.91B, 487(E) (1980).
  46. M. Pospelov and A. Ritz, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 2526 (1999).

  47. A similar term is the dominant production channel for light pseudoscalars that couple to the quark mass matrix. On the other hand, if, unlike the QCD axion, a pseudoscalar field couples directly to a quark EDM, the nucleon EDM operator [44] is generated at tree level and thus dominant.

  48. S. Weinberg, Physica A (Amsterdam) 96, 327 (1979).
  49. S. Weinberg, Phys. Lett. B 251, 288 (1990).
  50. E. E. Jenkins and A. V. Manohar, Phys. Lett. B 255, 558 (1991).
  51. S. Weinberg, Nucl. Phys. B363, 3 (1991).
  52. S. Weinberg, Phys. Lett. B 295, 114 (1992).
  53. L. Di Luzio, V. Fiorentino, M. Giannotti, F. Mescia, and E. Nardi, Phys. Rev. D 111, 015018 (2025).

  54. Note that we are slightly deviating from the basis choice of, e.g., [55] in that we split χ− into its trace and its traceless part.

  55. N. Fettes, U.-G. Meissner, M. Mojzis, and S. Steininger, Ann. Phys. (Amsterdam) 283, 273 (2000); 288, 249(E) (2001).
  56. T. Vonk, F.-K. Guo, and U.-G. Meißner, J. High Energy Phys. 03 (2020) 138.
  57. Garching Core-Collapse Supernova Archive: https://wwwmpa.mpa-garching.mpg.de/ccsnarchive/.
  58. R. Bollig, W. DeRocco, P. W. Graham, and H.-T. Janka, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 051104 (2020); 126, 189901(E) (2021).
  59. M. Rampp and H. T. Janka, Astron. Astrophys. 396, 361 (2002).
  60. A. Marek, H. Dimmelmeier, H. T. Janka, E. Muller, and R. Buras, Astron. Astrophys. 445, 273 (2006).
  61. G. G. Raffelt, Lect. Notes Phys. 741, 51 (2008).
  62. C. O’Hare, cajohare/axionlimits: Axionlimits, GitHub, https://cajohare.github.io/AxionLimits/ (2020).
  63. I. Schulthess et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 191801 (2022).
  64. C. Abel et al., Phys. Rev. X 7, 041034 (2017).
  65. T. S. Roussy et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 171301 (2021).
  66. E. Madge, G. Perez, and Z. Meir, Phys. Rev. D 110, 015008 (2024).
  67. E. Fuchs, F. Kirk, E. Madge, C. Paranjape, E. Peik, G. Perez, W. Ratzinger, and J. Tiedau, Phys. Rev. X 15, 021055 (2025).
  68. S. Karanth et al. (JEDI Collaboration), Phys. Rev. X 13, 031004 (2023).
  69. X. Zhang, A. Banerjee, M. Leyser, G. Perez, S. Schiller, D. Budker, and D. Antypas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 251002 (2023).
  70. P. J. Fox, N. Weiner, and H. Xiao, Phys. Rev. D 108, 095043 (2023).
  71. K. Blum, R. T. D’Agnolo, M. Lisanti, and B. R. Safdi, Phys. Lett. B 737, 30 (2014).
  72. V. M. Mehta, M. Demirtas, C. Long, D. J. E. Marsh, L. Mcallister, and M. J. Stott, arXiv:2011.08693.
  73. M. Baryakhtar, M. Galanis, R. Lasenby, and O. Simon, Phys. Rev. D 103, 095019 (2021).
  74. C. Ünal, F. Pacucci, and A. Loeb, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 05 (2021) 007.
  75. L. Di Luzio, B. Gavela, P. Quilez, and A. Ringwald, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2021) 184.
  76. L. Caloni, M. Gerbino, M. Lattanzi, and L. Visinelli, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 09 (2022) 021.
  77. M. Badziak, K. Harigaya, M. Łukawski, and R. Ziegler, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2024) 136.
  78. S. Hoof, D. J. E. Marsh, J. Sisk-Reynés, J. H. Matthews, and C. Reynolds, arXiv:2406.10337.

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 112, 075009– Published 6 October, 2025
  • Received 24 November 2024
  • Accepted 9 September 2025
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI. Funded by SCOAP3.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation