Status of lattice standard model

[atyy]

What is the "consensus" status of the existence of a lattice standard model? These two sets of notes don't seem to be in agreement.

Wiese's 2009 notes http://www.itp.uni-hannover.de/saalburg/Lectures/wiese.pdf say "Thanks to a recent breakthrough in lattice gauge theory, the standard model is now consistently defined beyond perturbation theory."

But Kaplan's notes http://arxiv.org/abs/0912.2560, also from 2009 say "Thus we lack of a nonperturbative regulator for the Standard Model - but then again, we think perturbation theory suffices for understanding the Standard Model in the real world. If a solution to putting chiral gauge theories on the lattice proves to be a complicated and not especially enlightening enterprise, then it probably is not worth the effort (unless the LHC finds evidence for a strongly coupled chiral gauge theory!). However, if there is a compelling and physical route to such theories, that would undoubtedly be very interesting.

Even if eventually a lattice formulation of the Standard Model is achieved ..."

I'm aware of more off-the beaten-track proposals like http://arxiv.org/abs/0908.0591 and http://arxiv.org/abs/1305.1045, but I would like to have comments on the "mainstream" proposals first.

 

[fzero]

http://arxiv.org/abs/1003.5896 reviews and analyzes the Luscher etc method in some detail and http://arxiv.org/abs/1211.6947v3 reviews and discusses another method with negative results. At least the latter paper is a couple of years older than Wiese's notes and would have benefited from some consensus on whether the methods referred to have actually been successful. I haven't been following lattice and haven't really read these papers that I'm linking, but will take a closer look when I can. I figure that they at least suggest that Wiese was being a bit premature in declaring success.