- 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
  • Letter
  • Open Access

Low-scale leptogenesis in the scotogenic model: Spectator processes and benchmark points

J. Racker*

  • *Contact author: jracker@unc.edu.ar
PDF

Phys. Rev. D 111, L081301 – Published 15 April, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.111.L081301

Abstract

We study leptogenesis from the decay of the lightest sterile neutrino in the scotogenic model with a scalar dark matter candidate. Our analysis focuses on the possible exponential suppression of washouts for sizable values of the inert Higgs mass and the crucial role of some spectator processes for this to happen. We show that leptogenesis can be successful for TeV-scale masses of the lightest sterile neutrino for both, thermal and zero, initial abundances of the neutrinos, without resorting to quasidegenerate neutrinos. Moreover, leptogenesis is viable for Yukawa couplings of the heavier sterile neutrinos large enough to yield observable charged lepton flavor violation (CLFV) processes in current and planned experiments.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (85)

  1. N. Aghanim et al. (Planck Collaboration), Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters, Astron. Astrophys. 641, A6 (2020); 652, C4(E) (2021).
  2. T.-H. Yeh, J. Shelton, K. A. Olive, and B. D. Fields, Probing physics beyond the standard model: Limits from BBN and the CMB independently and combined, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 10 (2022) 046.
  3. A. G. Cohen, A. De Rujula, and S. L. Glashow, A matter—antimatter Universe?, Astrophys. J. 495, 539 (1998).
  4. A. D. Sakharov, Violation of CP Invariance, C asymmetry, and baryon asymmetry of the universe, Pisma Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 5, 32 (1967).
  5. M. B. Gavela, P. Hernández, J. Orloff, and O. Pène, Standard model CP violation and baryon asymmetry, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 9, 795 (1994).
  6. M. B. Gavela, P. Hernandez, J. Orloff, O. Pène, and C. Quimbay, Standard model CP violation and baryon asymmetry. Part 2: Finite temperature, Nucl. Phys. B430, 382 (1994).
  7. D. Bödeker and W. Buchmüller, Baryogenesis from the weak scale to the grand unification scale, Rev. Mod. Phys. 93, 035004 (2021).
  8. M. Fukugita and T. Yanagida, Baryogenesis without grand unification, Phys. Lett. B 174, 45 (1986).
  9. S. Davidson and A. Ibarra, A lower bound on the right-handed neutrino mass from leptogenesis, Phys. Lett. B 535, 25 (2002).
  10. E. K. Akhmedov, V. A. Rubakov, and A. Y. Smirnov, Baryogenesis via neutrino oscillations, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 1359 (1998).
  11. T. Asaka and M. Shaposhnikov, The νMSM, dark matter and baryon asymmetry of the Universe, Phys. Lett. B 620, 17 (2005).
  12. A. Pilaftsis and T. E. J. Underwood, Resonant leptogenesis, Nucl. Phys. B692, 303 (2004).
  13. T. Hambye and D. Teresi, Higgs doublet decay as the origin of the baryon asymmetry, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 091801 (2016).
  14. M. Drewes, B. Garbrecht, P. Hernández, M. Kekic, J. Lopez-Pavon, J. Racker, N. Rius, J. Salvado, and D. Teresi, ARS leptogenesis, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 33, 1842002 (2018).
  15. J. Klarić, M. Shaposhnikov, and I. Timiryasov, Uniting low-scale leptogenesis mechanisms, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 111802 (2021).
  16. J. Klarić, M. Shaposhnikov, and I. Timiryasov, Reconciling resonant leptogenesis and baryogenesis via neutrino oscillations, Phys. Rev. D 104, 055010 (2021).
  17. H. Jukkala, K. Kainulainen, and P. M. Rahkila, Flavour mixing transport theory and resonant leptogenesis, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2021) 119.
  18. J. Racker, On different approaches to freeze-in and freeze-out leptogenesis with quasi-degenerate neutrinos, Eur. Phys. J. C 83, 170 (2023).
  19. L. Canetti, M. Drewes, T. Frossard, and M. Shaposhnikov, Dark matter, baryogenesis and neutrino oscillations from right handed neutrinos, Phys. Rev. D 87, 093006 (2013).
  20. J. Ghiglieri and M. Laine, Sterile neutrino dark matter via GeV-scale leptogenesis?, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2019) 078.
  21. J. Ghiglieri and M. Laine, Sterile neutrino dark matter via coinciding resonances, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 07 (2020) 012.
  22. Z.-j. Tao, Radiative seesaw mechanism at weak scale, Phys. Rev. D 54, 5693 (1996).
  23. E. Ma, Verifiable radiative seesaw mechanism of neutrino mass and dark matter, Phys. Rev. D 73, 077301 (2006).
  24. E. Ma, Common origin of neutrino mass, dark matter, and baryogenesis, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 21, 1777 (2006).
  25. T. Hambye, F. S. Ling, L. Lopez Honorez, and J. Rocher, Scalar multiplet dark matter, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2009) 090; 05 (2010) 066(E).
  26. S. Kashiwase and D. Suematsu, Baryon number asymmetry and dark matter in the neutrino mass model with an inert doublet, Phys. Rev. D 86, 053001 (2012).
  27. S. Kashiwase and D. Suematsu, Leptogenesis and dark matter detection in a TeV scale neutrino mass model with inverted mass hierarchy, Eur. Phys. J. C 73, 2484 (2013).
  28. J. Racker, Mass bounds for baryogenesis from particle decays and the inert doublet model, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 03 (2014) 025.
  29. T. Hugle, M. Platscher, and K. Schmitz, Low-scale leptogenesis in the scotogenic neutrino mass model, Phys. Rev. D 98, 023020 (2018).
  30. J. A. Casas and A. Ibarra, Oscillating neutrinos and μ→e,γ, Nucl. Phys. B618, 171 (2001).
  31. R. Barbieri, P. Creminelli, A. Strumia, and N. Tetradis, Baryogenesis through leptogenesis, Nucl. Phys. B 575, 61 (2000).
  32. T. Endoh, T. Morozumi, and Z.-h. Xiong, Primordial lepton family asymmetries in seesaw model, Prog. Theor. Phys. 111, 123 (2004).
  33. A. Pilaftsis, Resonant tau-leptogenesis with observable lepton number violation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 081602 (2005).
  34. A. Pilaftsis and T. E. J. Underwood, Electroweak-scale resonant leptogenesis, Phys. Rev. D 72, 113001 (2005).
  35. A. Abada, S. Davidson, F.-X. Josse-Michaux, M. Losada, and A. Riotto, Flavor issues in leptogenesis, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 04 (2006) 004.
  36. E. Nardi, Y. Nir, E. Roulet, and J. Racker, The importance of flavor in leptogenesis, J. High Energy Phys. 01 (2006) 164.
  37. A. Abada, S. Davidson, A. Ibarra, F. X. Josse-Michaux, M. Losada, and A. Riotto, Flavour matters in leptogenesis, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2006) 010.
  38. S. Blanchet, P. Di Bari, and G. G. Raffelt, Quantum Zeno effect and the impact of flavor in leptogenesis, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 03 (2007) 012.

  39. Other studies of leptogenesis in the scotogenic model include [40, 41, 42, 43, 44] and see also the review and references in [45].

  40. S. Baumholzer, V. Brdar, and P. Schwaller, The new νMSM (ννMSM): Radiative neutrino masses, keV-scale dark matter and viable leptogenesis with sub-TeV new physics, J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2018) 067.
  41. D. Borah, P. S. B. Dev, and A. Kumar, TeV scale leptogenesis, inflaton dark matter and neutrino mass in a scotogenic model, Phys. Rev. D 99, 055012 (2019).
  42. D. Mahanta and D. Borah, Fermion dark matter with N2 leptogenesis in minimal scotogenic model, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 11 (2019) 021.
  43. J. D. Clarke, R. Foot, and R. R. Volkas, Natural leptogenesis and neutrino masses with two Higgs doublets, Phys. Rev. D 92, 033006 (2015).
  44. D. Bose, R. Pramanick, and T. S. Ray, Cogenesis of visible and dark matter in a scotogenic model, arXiv:2409.06541.
  45. Y. Cai, J. Herrero-García, M. A. Schmidt, A. Vicente, and R. R. Volkas, From the trees to the forest: A review of radiative neutrino mass models, Front. Phys. 5, 63 (2017).
  46. R. Barbieri, L. J. Hall, and V. S. Rychkov, Improved naturalness with a heavy Higgs: An alternative road to LHC physics, Phys. Rev. D 74, 015007 (2006).
  47. L. Lopez Honorez, E. Nezri, J. F. Oliver, and M. H. G. Tytgat, The inert doublet model: An archetype for dark matter, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 02 (2007) 028.
  48. L. Lopez Honorez and C. E. Yaguna, The inert doublet model of dark matter revisited, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2010) 046.
  49. E. M. Dolle and S. Su, The inert dark matter, Phys. Rev. D 80, 055012 (2009).
  50. L. Lopez Honorez and C. E. Yaguna, A new viable region of the inert doublet model, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 01 (2011) 002.
  51. A. Goudelis, B. Herrmann, and O. Stål, Dark matter in the inert doublet model after the discovery of a Higgs-like boson at the LHC, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2013) 106.
  52. M. Krawczyk, D. Sokolowska, P. Swaczyna, and B. Swiezewska, Constraining inert dark matter by Rγγ and WMAP data, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2013) 055.
  53. M. Klasen, C. E. Yaguna, J. D. Ruiz-Alvarez, D. Restrepo, and O. Zapata, Scalar dark matter and fermion coannihilations in the radiative seesaw model, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 04 (2013) 044.
  54. A. Arhrib, Y.-L. S. Tsai, Q. Yuan, and T.-C. Yuan, An updated analysis of inert Higgs doublet model in light of the recent results from LUX, PLANCK, AMS-02 and LHC, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 06 (2014) 030.
  55. A. Ilnicka, M. Krawczyk, and T. Robens, Inert doublet model in light of LHC Run I and astrophysical data, Phys. Rev. D 93, 055026 (2016).
  56. C. Garcia-Cely, M. Gustafsson, and A. Ibarra, Probing the inert doublet dark matter model with Cherenkov Telescopes, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 02 (2016) 043.
  57. M. A. Díaz, B. Koch, and S. Urrutia-Quiroga, Constraints to dark matter from inert Higgs doublet model, Adv. High Energy Phys. 2016, 8278375 (2016).
  58. A. Belyaev, G. Cacciapaglia, I. P. Ivanov, F. Rojas-Abatte, and M. Thomas, Anatomy of the inert two Higgs doublet model in the light of the LHC and non-LHC dark matter searches, Phys. Rev. D 97, 035011 (2018).
  59. D. Borah and A. Gupta, New viable region of an inert Higgs doublet dark matter model with scotogenic extension, Phys. Rev. D 96, 115012 (2017).
  60. B. Eiteneuer, A. Goudelis, and J. Heisig, The inert doublet model in the light of Fermi-LAT gamma-ray data: A global fit analysis, Eur. Phys. J. C 77, 624 (2017).
  61. A. Ahriche, A. Jueid, and S. Nasri, Radiative neutrino mass and Majorana dark matter within an inert Higgs doublet model, Phys. Rev. D 97, 095012 (2018).
  62. I. M. Ávila, G. Cottin, and M. A. Díaz, Revisiting the scotogenic model with scalar dark matter, J. Phys. G 49, 065001 (2022).
  63. A. Merle and M. Platscher, Running of radiative neutrino masses: The scotogenic model—revisited, J. High Energy Phys. 11 (2015) 148.
  64. S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Review of particle physics, Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024).
  65. V. A. Kuzmin, V. A. Rubakov, and M. E. Shaposhnikov, On the anomalous electroweak baryon number nonconservation in the early Universe, Phys. Lett. B 155, 36 (1985).
  66. M. D’Onofrio, K. Rummukainen, and A. Tranberg, Sphaleron rate in the minimal standard model, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 141602 (2014).
  67. E. W. Kolb and S. Wolfram, Baryon number generation in the early Universe, Nucl. Phys. B172, 224 (1980); B195, 542(E) (1982).
  68. M. A. Luty, Baryogenesis via leptogenesis, Phys. Rev. D 45, 455 (1992).
  69. G. F. Giudice, A. Notari, M. Raidal, A. Riotto, and A. Strumia, Towards a complete theory of thermal leptogenesis in the SM and MSSM, Nucl. Phys. B685, 89 (2004).
  70. W. Buchmüller, P. Di Bari, and M. Plümacher, Leptogenesis for pedestrians, Ann. Phys. (Amsterdam) 315, 305 (2005).
  71. S. Davidson, E. Nardi, and Y. Nir, Leptogenesis, Phys. Rep. 466, 105 (2008).

  72. There is a typo in [28], our calculation coincides with [29] and with [73] for mη=0.

  73. L. Covi, E. Roulet, and F. Vissani, CP violating decays in leptogenesis scenarios, Phys. Lett. B 384, 169 (1996).
  74. J. A. Harvey and M. S. Turner, Cosmological baryon and lepton number in the presence of electroweak fermion number violation, Phys. Rev. D 42, 3344 (1990).

  75. The BEs and reaction densities have been integrated numerically using analytical expressions for the cross sections (following mainly [69], but neglecting finite temperature effects). Processes like ℓαη→ℓ¯βη¯ are mediated by different neutrino species (mainly N2 and N3) and have an interference contribution that we have approximated in terms of the individual contributions and a phase, such that it becomes exact (at tree level) for T≪M2,3 when the lepton asymmetry is ultimately generated for all our BPs and it does not affect the results.

  76. J. Racker, Mini-review on baryogenesis at the TeV scale and possible connections with dark matter, Nucl. Part. Phys. Proc. 273–275, 334 (2016).

  77. Interestingly, large differences between full and approximated treatments of (other) spectator processes were reported in [78, 79], which in their case appear when combined with relativistic effects.

  78. B. Garbrecht, P. Klose, and C. Tamarit, Relativistic and spectator effects in leptogenesis with heavy sterile neutrinos, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2020) 117.
  79. B. Garbrecht and E. Wang, The neutrino mass bound from leptogenesis revisited, J. High Energy Phys. 03 (2025) 008.
  80. M. Aoki et al. (C. Group Collaboration), A new charged lepton flavor violation program at Fermilab, in Snowmass 2021 (2022), .
  81. Y. Kuno and Y. Okada, Muon decay and physics beyond the standard model, Rev. Mod. Phys. 73, 151 (2001).
  82. T. Toma and A. Vicente, Lepton flavor violation in the scotogenic model, J. High Energy Phys. 01 (2014) 160.
  83. M. Drewes, Y. Georis, and J. Klarić, Mapping the viable parameter space for testable leptogenesis, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 051801 (2022).
  84. A. M. Baldini et al. (MEG Collaboration), Search for the lepton flavour violating decay μ+→e+γ with the full dataset of the MEG experiment, Eur. Phys. J. C 76, 434 (2016).
  85. A. Abada and T. Toma, Electric dipole moments in the minimal scotogenic model, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2018) 030; 04 (2021) 060(E).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 111, L081301– Published 15 April, 2025
  • Received 28 November 2024
  • Accepted 18 March 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