Review badges
0 pre-pub reviews
1 post-pub reviews

The vector leptoquark representation, U eta = (3, 1, 2/3), was recently identified as an exceptional single mediator model to address experimental hints on lepton flavor universality violation in semileptonic B-meson decays, both in neutral (b -> s mu mu) and charged (b -> c tau v) current processes. Nonetheless, it is well known that massive vectors crave an ultraviolet (UV) completion. We present the first full-fledged UV complete and calculable gauge model which incorporates this scenario while remaining in agreement with all other indirect flavor and electroweak precision measurements, as well as, direct searches at high-pT. The model is based on a new non-Abelian gauge group spontaneously broken at the TeV scale, and a specific flavor structure suppressing flavour violation in Delta F = 2 processes while inducing sizeable semileptonic transitions.


Di Luzio, Luca;  Greljo, Admir;  Nardecchia, Marco

Publons users who've claimed - I am an author

No Publons users have claimed this paper.

Contributors on Publons
  • 1 reviewer
Followers on Publons
Publons score (from 1 score)
Web of Science Core Collection Citations
  • Abstract, title and references ● Is the aim clear? Yes ● Is it clear what the study found and how they did it? Yes ● Is the title informative and relevant? Yes ● Are the references: ● Relevant? Yes ● Recent? Yes ● Referenced correctly? Yes ● Are appropriate key studies included? Yes Introduction/ background ● Is it clear what is already known about this topic? Yes ● Is the research question clearly outlined? Yes ● Is the research question justified given what is already known about the topic? Yes Methods ● Is the process of subject selection clear? Yes ● Are the variables defined and measured appropriately? Yes ● Are the study methods valid and reliable? To some Extent ● Is there enough detail in order to replicate the study? Yes Results ● Is the data presented in an appropriate way? Yes ● Tables and figures relevant and clearly presented? Yes ● Appropriate units, rounding, and number of decimals? Yes ● Titles, columns, and rows labelled correctly and clearly? Yes ● Categories grouped appropriately? Yes ● Does the text in the results add to the data or is it repetitive? repetitive ● Are you clear about what is a statistically significant result? Yes ● Are you clear about what is a practically meaningful result? Yes Discussion and Conclusions ● Are the results discussed from multiple angles and placed into context without being over interpreted? Yes ● Do the conclusions answer the aims of the study? To some extent ● Are the conclusions supported by references or results? Yes ● Are the limitations of the study fatal or are they opportunities to inform future research? Needs Future Research.

    Published in
    Ongoing discussion
All peer review content displayed here is covered by a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license.