Nu D OscillationResults 2023 - Compressed

D – Results from oscillation experiments
D1- Introduction
D2- Atmospheric neutrinos and LBL experiments: 𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟑𝟐 and 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝜽𝟐𝟑 *
D3- Solar neutrinos and LBL reactor experiments: 𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟐𝟏 and 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝜽𝟏𝟐 *
D4- Search for 𝜽𝟏𝟑 with LBL accelerators or SBL reactors *
D5- Oscillation results: a need for sterile neutrinos? *
D6- Conclusions about oscillations and how to go further
96
D1- Introduction
Oscillation parameter sensitivity versus neutrino source
SBL
LBL
SBL
LBL
With the 2-flavor oscillation probability:

𝑳 𝒌𝒎
𝑷 = 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 (𝟐𝜽)×𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝟏. 𝟐𝟕 𝜟𝒎𝟐 (𝒆𝑽𝟐 )×
𝑬 𝑮𝒆𝑽
Using CPT invariance one also has:

𝑷 𝝂𝒍 → 𝝂𝒙 = 𝑷 𝝂 8𝒍 → 𝝂8𝒙 = 𝑷 𝝂 𝒙 → 𝝂 𝒍 = 𝑷 𝝂
8𝒙 → 𝝂
8𝒍
97
Introduction
Create an exclusion plot
𝑳 𝒌𝒎
2-flavor oscillation probability: 𝑷 = 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 (𝟐𝜽)×𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝟏. 𝟐𝟕 𝜟𝒎𝟐 (𝒆𝑽𝟐 )×
𝑬 𝑮𝒆𝑽
Experiment results are presented in a 2D parameter space
For example: 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝟐𝜽 versus 𝜟𝒎𝟐
If no oscillations are detected, the experiment presents a typical exclusion plot as follows:
𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝟐𝜽 = 𝟐𝑷
𝜟𝒎𝟐
For large values of 𝜟𝒎𝟐 and small oscillation
𝑬 𝑮𝒆𝑽
length 𝑳𝟎 , with 𝑳𝟎 𝒌𝒎 ≈ 𝟐. 𝟒𝟕 𝜟𝒎𝟐 𝒆𝑽𝟐
→ the average value of 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝟏. 𝟐𝟕𝜟𝒎𝟐 𝑳/𝑬 gives
a probability 𝑷 = (𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝟐𝜽)/𝟐 ⟹ 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝟐𝜽 = 𝟐𝑷
Amplitude max
For small values of 𝜟𝒎𝟐 and large oscillation 𝜟𝒎𝟐𝒎𝒊𝒏

length 𝑳𝟎 , the probability is given by:
𝑷 ≈ (𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝟐𝜽) 𝜟𝒎𝟐 𝟏. 𝟐𝟕𝑳/𝑬 𝟐
The minimum value of 𝜟𝒎𝟐 is for 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝟐𝜽 = 𝟏:
𝑬
𝜟𝒎𝟐𝒎𝒊𝒏 ≈ 𝑷𝒎𝒊𝒏 0 1
𝟏. 𝟐𝟕𝑳 98
𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝟐𝜽
Introduction
Create an exclusion plot
What is the value of 𝜟𝒎𝟐 at the maximum of
the oscillation amplitude sensitivity ?
𝑳 𝒌𝒎 𝑳 𝒌𝒎 𝝅
𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝟏. 𝟐𝟕𝜟𝒎𝟐 (𝒆𝑽𝟐 )× 𝐦𝐚𝐱 ⟹ 𝟏. 𝟐𝟕 𝜟𝒎𝟐 × =
𝑬 𝑮𝒆𝑽 𝑬 𝑮𝒆𝑽 𝟐
𝜟𝒎𝟐
𝝅 𝑬 (𝑮𝒆𝑽)
⟹ 𝜟𝒎𝟐 = ×
𝟐×𝟏. 𝟐𝟕 𝑳 (𝒌𝒎)
𝜟𝒎𝟐𝒎𝒊𝒏
0 1
99
𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝟐𝜽
Introduction
Information to study atmospheric neutrinos
p + N ® pions Travel of neutrinos : 𝑳𝝂 ≈ 𝟐𝟓 − 𝟏𝟐𝟕𝟎𝟎 𝒌𝒎
p ® µ + nµ and µ ® e + ne + nµ ⟹ Big variations of 𝑳/𝑬 value
(production of neutrinos and antineutrinos) ⟹ Possible exploration of small 𝜟𝒎𝟐 values
nµ ≈ 66%
ne ≈ 33% Search for nµ-ne and nµ-nt oscillations by measuring
nµ and ne fluxes, with 100 MeV < 𝑬𝝂 < 105 GeV ;
To cancel systematic uncertainties, it is

conventional to present the double ratio:
Rexp =
( Nµ / Ne )
DATA
=1
natm are associated
to hadronic and
( N µ / N e ) SIMU
electromagnetic where a significant deviation from unity is
showers which give considered anomalous.
background.
At sea level, one
expects 2 nµ for 1 ne € ® If 𝑹𝒆𝒙𝒑 < 1 there are oscillations
Sea level
Expected event rate is very low ≈ 100 interactions/(kton.year) 100

Introduction
Information to study atmospheric neutrinos
primary cosmic ray: With a detector placed on Earth, in case there is NO oscillation, an
p, He, … up-down symmetry of the flux is expected for 𝑬𝝂 > a few GeV
atmosphere zenith neutrino
direction
p+
km
qup
25
µ+ Cosmic
e+ Super-K ray flux
q
𝝂𝒆 km
0
𝝂𝝁 R
00
10
q
zenith R
9𝝁
𝝂
qdown atmosphere
Emission of ≈ 𝟏/𝟑 (𝝂𝒆 + 𝝂 )𝒆) and ≈ 𝟐/𝟑 (𝝂𝝁 +) )𝝁 / 𝝂 𝒆 + 𝝂

𝝂𝝁) so a rate 𝝂𝝁 + 𝝂 )𝒆 ≈ 𝟐 for 𝑬𝝂 ≲ 𝟐 GeV.
101
Best detectors are sensitive to both types of (anti)neutrinos.
Introduction
Information to study atmospheric neutrinos Neutrino coming from above
L = 25 km
the detector: 𝑳 ≈ 25 km
atmosphere
Dependence with zenith angle cos q = 0
km .6
00 - 0
80 q =
L = 12700 km
L = cos
cos q = - 1
Neutrino coming from
below the detector:
𝑳 ≈ 12700 km
The measured spectrum of oscillations

can be modified by:
• variation of neutrino energy
• physical interactions
• detector resolution
102
Introduction
Information to study atmospheric neutrinos ne,µ,t
Charged current (CC) Neutral current (NC)

r
owe ne,µ,t
n sh
c tro
ele hadrons
ne
hadrons • Charged current (CC): emitted lepton is
ck used to identify the flavor of the incident
t ra
on neutrino (for nt neutrino, the t–particle is
mu
wer
o identified using its decay products)
nµ, sh
t ron • Charged current(CC) : almost all the
hadrons c
ele neutrino energy is deposited in the
t nt detector
• CC event rates are affected by oscillations
ack
nt t r • Neutral current (NC) : only hadrons are
n
uo detected. No information about the flavor
m
hadrons t of the incident neutrino.
nt
• NC event rate are not affected by
hadrons oscillations (NC events are considered as
signal in only few analyses; in most of cases
t nt NC events are considered as backgrounds
for CC processes). 103
Introduction
Information to study solar neutrinos
Solar neutrinos: pp chain and CNO cycle
Nuclear reactions inside the pep - peak

Sun allow transformation of p + e- + p " 2H + ne
hydrogen in helium: these (0,24%) En = 1.445 MeV
are source of 𝝂𝒆 of En < 0,42 MeV
different energies (peak or (2x10-5%)
continuous spectra) and of hep - 3He + p " 4He + e+ + ne
various abundances. En < 18,8 MeV
pp-chain (and pep-chain for 0,24%)

gives primordial solar neutrinos
En < 15 MeV En = 0.8631 MeV En = 0.3855 MeV

(90%) - peak (10%) - peak
8Be* " 2 4He
104
7Li + p " 2 4He
Introduction
Solar neutrinos: pp chain and CNO cycle Energies, flux and detection ranges
13N
En < 1,19 MeV
15O
En < 1,7317 MeV
One needs one solar model for each flux.

The Standard Solar Model (SSM) gives very precise
data about the solar neutrino emission.
En < 1,7364 MeV
17F
Estimation of the n flux arriving on Earth

LSoleil 1 3.83×10 26 W 1
Φν = 2 ⋅ ⋅ 2
= 2 ⋅ −13
⋅ 13 2
= 6.33×1010 cm105
−2 −1
s
Q 4π dT −S 26.73×1.6 ×10 J 4π (1.5 ×10 cm)
Introduction
Energy spectrum of n (< 20 MeV)
Electron neutrino energy spectrum of pp-chain (including hep-spectrum + the 2 peaks of 7Be,
8B spectrum, and pep-neutrino peak) and CNO-cycle (13N, 15O and 17F).
Detectors are filled of chlorine,

gallium, water (SuperK),
deuterium (SNO) or liquid
scintillator (Borexino)…
Each detector is sensitive to
one or more types of solar
neutrinos and one needs one
model for each type of flux.
106
Introduction
Standard Solar Model (SSM) has no free parameter (all known data and properties of Sun have to be fitted)
Talk of F.L. Villante –

Neutrino 2016
Flux measurements are needed to understand SSM problems
107
Introduction
Solar neutrinos: two different methods to detect them
Radiochemical experiments Real time experiments
ν e + (A, Z ) → e− + (A, Z +1)* ν x + e− → ν x + e−
• Count the number of daughter nuclei after Kamioka

extraction. ne
• The production rate is:
R=N ∫ Φ(E)σ (E) dE

nµ
Number of targer nuclei ≈ 10-45 cm2
• One needs around 1030 atoms of target to

create one neutrino reaction per day
That means tons of detection volume! • The scaterred electron is detected using
emission of Cerenkov light
Counting rates given in SNU (solar neutrino unit) • This is a forward scattering, which allows
with estimate the energy E.
1 SNU = 10-36 captures.atomes-1.s-1 • For a detector like Kamioka, only 8B neutrinos
• No information on arrival time, energy or are detected due to the energy threshold ktons
direction of the incident neutrino of target are needed. 108
Introduction
Information to study neutrinos from reactors
Reactor experiments can also be used to study neutrino oscillations
SBL
Principle of a )𝒆
𝝂
reactor
experiment
)𝒆
𝝂
LBL
Detection of electron antineutrinos from reactors using inverse beta decay (IBD):
2
⎛ Eν ⎞
ν e + p → n + e+ with
avec −42
σ ≈ 9.5 ×10 ⎜ ⎟ cm
2
⎝ 10 MeV ⎠
These are disappearance experiments.
The neutrino energy is obtained measuring the energy spectrum of the positron (neglecting the small
recoil due to p-n transformation (≈ 20 keV))
Eν = Ee+ + mn − m p = Te+ +1.8 MeV

QIBD < 0. There is an energy threshold which depends on the proton binding energy in the target nuclei
(minimal threshold of 1.8 MeV). 109
Introduction
Information to study neutrinos from reactors
How to detect reactor neutrinos?
Cuts have to be applied to isolate antineutrino-like events

• on « prompt » energy (electron-positron annihilation): 1.3 < Eprompt < 8 MeV
• on « delayed » energy (neutron capture by the target nuclei): 6 < Edelayed < 12 MeV
• on coincidence time between correlated events: 2 < t < 100 µs
• on space: positron-neutron separation < 100 cm
The neutrino rate is calculated using registered events and subtracting the number of simulated
accidental events due to backgrounds.
The reactor signal is obtained by subtracting the event rate obtained reactor OFF.
The rate predicted without oscillations is:
1
N evt = N fission ⋅ σ fission ⋅ 2
⋅ n p ⋅ (ε β ⋅ ε n ⋅ ε Δr ) ⋅Tlive
4π D
Expected number
of events Product of detection
Fission rate Distance reactor- efficiencies
detector Experiment
Cross-section Number of protons duration
110
inside target
Introduction
Motivations to study 𝜽𝟏𝟑 with LBL accelerators or SBL reactors
𝜽𝟏𝟑 is the smallest mixing angle + the one coupled to the CP-phase
Simulations showed that the extraction of the CPV phase dCP would be possible only for a high
enough value of the θ13 mixing angle, due to the sin2θ13 term which has to be > 10-4.
Using all data before 2010 and a global fit, an indirect

limit was: 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝜽𝟏𝟑 < 𝟎. 𝟎𝟑𝟓 (𝟎. 𝟎𝟓𝟔) @90% CL (3s)
With 𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟑𝟏 ≈ 𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟑𝟐 one uses:

• Disappearance experiments with electron
antineutrinos from reactors, with L/E values as for
atmospheric neutrinos
• Appearance experiments of electron neutrinos ne
from a nµ accelerator beam.
111
Introduction
Motivations to study 𝜽𝟏𝟑 with LBL accelerators or SBL reactors
𝜽𝟏𝟑 is the smallest mixing angle + the one coupled to the CP-phase
Using km-baseline (SBL), reactor experiments it is possible to study the oscillation dependence with
the 𝜽𝟏𝟑 mixing angle.
Since the energy of the reactor antineutrinos is lower than the muon production threshold, the 𝜽𝟏𝟑
measurement can be done only by studying the electron antineutrino disappearance.
The flavor change probability from an electron (anti)neutrino toward a 𝒙-neutrino with 𝒙 ≠ 𝒆 is:
𝑷 𝝂𝒆 → 𝝂𝒙 = 𝑷𝒆𝒙
𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟑𝟏 𝑳 𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟐𝟏 𝑳
≈ 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝟐𝜽 𝟏𝟑 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝟏. 𝟐𝟔𝟕 𝟒 𝟐 𝟐
+ 𝒄𝒐𝒔 𝜽𝟏𝟑 𝒔𝒊𝒏 𝟐𝜽𝟏𝟐 𝒔𝒊𝒏 𝟏. 𝟐𝟔𝟕
𝑬 𝑬
For a 2 km-baseline, the contribution of the 1st term is maximal for 4 MeV neutrinos, and the 2nd
term can be neglected.
The 𝑷𝒆𝒙 probability is independent of the CPV phase and matter effect can be neglected for such
low distances.
Also using 𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟑𝟏 ≈ 𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟑𝟐 value constraints from atmospheric neutrino experiments, SBL nuclear
reactor experiments can produce a precise measurement of 𝜽𝟏𝟑 . 112
D1- Atmospheric neutrinos and LBL experiments: 𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟑𝟐 and 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝜽𝟐𝟑 *
1998: discovery of atmospheric neutrino oscillations with Super-Kamiokande
1986 : First observation of background 𝝂𝝁 deficit was made in 1986 during search for proton decay; it
was called anomaly in atmospheric sector
SuperK experiment: Water tank = 50 kton ultrapure water (22,5 kton fiducial). In Zn mine of Kamioka
(Japon), 1000 m underground, 11146 PMTs (energy + timing).
Detection of µ and e produced by nµ and ne using Cerenkov effect; Cone of Cherenkov light measured
by PMTs for speeds > speed of light in water v = 2.2 x 105 km/s
𝝂𝝁 + 𝒏 → 𝝁 + 𝒑
42m
39 m
PID (particle identification) allows electron and muon

discrimination ⟶ reconstruction of ne versus nµ
Ring study ⟶ radius = E, position = q
𝝂𝒆 + 𝒏 → 𝒆 + 𝒑
1996-
113
Atmospheric neutrinos and LBL experiments: 𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟑𝟐 and 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝜽𝟐𝟑 *
1998: discovery of atmospheric neutrino oscillations with Super-Kamiokande

Takaaki Kajita – SuperK talk for Nobel prize 2015 - Results for multi-GeV data
Study of 𝑷𝝁𝝁 and 𝑷𝝁𝒆

Up-down asymmetry of µ
(with oscillations)
𝝓𝝂𝝁 (𝒖𝒑)
𝑹𝒆𝒙𝒑 = = 𝟎. 𝟓𝟒 ± 𝟎. 𝟎𝟒
𝝓𝝂𝝁 (𝒅𝒐𝒘𝒏)
< 𝟏 with dependence on zenith angle

⟹ Part of 𝝂𝝁 crossing Earth are suppressed 114
As a summary for atmospheric neutrino results
Results of SuperK later confirmed by SOUDAN and MACRO: neutrinos oscillate!
Other confirmations were given by long baseline (LBL) experiments with neutrino beams from
accelerators.
Dm322
There is a maximal oscillation

from nµ toward nt (unexpected)
No deficit for FREJUS and NUSEX (calorimeters) and deficit
observed for Cerenkov experiments (IMB, Kamiokande,
SuperK and then SOUDAN).
sin2 2q23
115
𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟑𝟐 and 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝟐𝜽𝟐𝟑 parameters from LBL experiments

• Sensitivity: 𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟑𝟐 > 𝟏×𝟏𝟎0𝟑 𝒆𝑽𝟐
• Disappearance of 𝝂𝝁 or appearance of 𝝂𝝉
• With new generation experiments, possibility to use neutrino and
antineutrino beams to study CP violation and neutrino mass ordering
L E L/E detector
Japon K2K KEK-Kamioka 235 km 1.4 GeV ≈ 150 1999 SuperK
USA NuMI FermiLab-Soudan 730 km 30 GeV ≈ 50-350 2005 MINOS
Europe CNGS CERN-LNGS 732 km 30 GeV ≈ 50-350 2006 Opera
Japon T2K Tokai-Kamioka 295 km 0.6 GeV ≈ 500 2009 SuperK
116
USA NuMI FermiLab-Soudan 810 km 2 GeV ≈ 400 2012 NOnA

OPERA @LNGS
𝟏. 𝟐𝟕𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟐𝟑 𝑳
𝑷 𝝂𝝁 → 𝝂𝝉 ≈ 𝒄𝒐𝒔𝟒 𝜽 𝟏𝟑 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝟐𝜽 𝟐𝟑 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐
𝑬
OPERA has recorded events for 18.0 x 1019 p.o.t. from CNGS beam from
2008 to 2012
• 𝝂𝝁 → 𝝂𝝉 oscillation analysis: 5 candidates, 0.25 bkg events expected D. Duchesneau, LAPP/CNRS,
On behalf of the OPERA Collaboration
→ Discovery with 5.1𝝈 significance (PRL 115 (2015) 121802 Neutrino 2016 conference
→ 𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟐𝟑 = 𝟑. 𝟑×𝟏𝟎0𝟑 𝒆𝑽𝟐 𝟗𝟎%𝑪𝑳 with confident interval The neutrino group from IP2I was
[2.5,5.0]×𝟏𝟎0𝟑 𝒆𝑽𝟐 involved
• 𝝂𝝁 disappearance analysis: 𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟑𝟐 consistent with world average
• 𝝂𝝁→ 𝝂𝒆 oscillation search: number of observed events in agreement
with expected bkg + standard oscillation
117

Long Baseline Neutrino Oscillation Results
(T2K and NOvA), S. Cao
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2310.09855.pdf
T2K (Tokai to Kamioka) versus NOvA (NuMI Off-Axis 𝝂𝒆 Appereance) experiments
T2K (Japan, 𝜈$ and 𝜈$̅ 600 MeV beam from J-PARC) NovA (USA, 𝜈$ and 𝜈$̅ 1.8 GeV beam from Fermilab)
Neutrinos detected at the near detector (ND280) and Neutrinos detected at the near detector and the far
the far detector SuperK (or future Hyper-Kamiokande) detector @810 km. Both detectors sit at 14 mrad off-
@295 km axis
Main physics goals (same for both): measurement of 𝜈< → 𝜈< , 𝜈<̅ → 𝜈<̅ , 𝜈< → 𝜈= and 𝜈<̅ → 𝜈=̅
?
oscillations in matter using: 𝐿 ≈ (100-1000) km and 𝐸 𝐺𝑒𝑉 ≈ 𝐿 𝑘𝑚 . Δ𝑚>? [𝑒𝑉 ?].
• observation of 𝜈= and 𝜈=̅ appearance to determine neutrino mass ordering, 𝜃?> and 𝛿@A
• precise measurement of 𝜈< and 𝜈<̅ disappearance to obtain 𝛥𝑚>? ? and 𝜃
?> 118
𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟑𝟐 and 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝟐𝜽𝟐𝟑 parameters from LBL experiments https://t2k-experiment.org/2020/04/t2k-results-

restrict-possible-values-of-neutrino-cp-phase/
T2K: a hint for CPV
Avril 2020: T2K Results Restrict Possible Values of Neutrino CP Phase
Published in Nature, the results are a major step forward in the study of difference between matter and
antimatter (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2177-0)
T2K evaluates confidence intervals for δCP. The disfavored region at 3σ (99.7% C.L.) is −2° to 165°. It is the
strongest constraint on δCP to date. The values of 0º and 180º are disfavored at 95% C.L., as for T2K’s
previous release in 2017, indicating that CP symmetry may be violated in neutrino oscillations.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.03222 - Improved T2K results with more data – Reviewed on 6/3/2023

#
The T2K data favors δCP ~ − , 𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟑𝟐 > 0 and 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝜽𝟐𝟑 > 𝟎. 𝟓 that means near maximal CP
$
violation, the normal mass ordering, and the upper octant in the PMNS paradigm.
For NO: 𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟑𝟐 = 𝟐. 𝟒𝟗𝟒,𝟎.𝟎𝟒𝟏 '𝟑 𝟐 𝟐
'𝟎.𝟎𝟓𝟖 ×𝟏𝟎 𝐞𝐕 and 𝒔𝒊𝒏 𝜽𝟐𝟑 = 𝟎. 𝟓𝟔𝟏'𝟎.𝟎𝟑𝟐
,𝟎.𝟎𝟐𝟏 119

NovA Improved measurement of neutrino oscillation parameters by the NOvA experiment
FERMILAB-PUB-21-373-ND
Normal mass ordering is favored.

Tension with T2K 2020 best fit.
For NO: 𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟑𝟐 = 𝟐. 𝟒𝟏 ± 𝟎. 𝟎𝟕 ×𝟏𝟎&𝟑 𝐞𝐕 𝟐
𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝜽𝟐𝟑 = 𝟎. 𝟓𝟕*𝟎.𝟎𝟑
&𝟎.𝟎𝟒
Long Baseline Neutrino Oscillation Results (T2K and NOvA), S. Cao, 2023
T2K provides a significant hint on the CP violation, whereas NOvA
shows dissimilar tendency if neutrino mass ordering is normal.
If neutrino mass ordering is inverted, the two experiments
consistently favor the maximal CP violation.
Normal mass ordering and higher octant of the 𝜃?> mixing angle are
weakly preferred for both experiments. 120
D2- Solar neutrinos and LBL reactor experiments: 𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟐𝟏 and 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝜽𝟏𝟐 *
The solar neutrino problem – Homestake in 1970 (after 10 extractions)
Homestake experiment: the first one with chlorine

1968: 1st detection of solar neutrinos in gold mine of Homestake
(South Dakota, USA, 1480 m underground)
615 tons of C2Cl4 ≈ 380 000 liters (cheap and easy to buy)
Eseuil = 0.8 MeV > Epp

(T1/2 = 35 days)
25 years of data taking = 108 runs (B.T. Cleveland et al., Ap. J. 496 (1998) 505)
Around 750 decays observed: ≈ 0.5 per day
Rate (Homestake): (2.56 ± 0.20) SNU

Only 30% of the expected flux which is
(7.6 ± 1.2) SNU
121
Solar neutrinos and LBL reactor experiments: 𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟐𝟏 and 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝜽𝟏𝟐 *
The solar neutrino problem – Gallium experiments
Radiochemical experiments with gallium: GALLEX and GNO (LNGS), SAGE (Baksan)
Sensitive to npp
Decay by electron capture on K- and L-shell
X-rays
Rate (Gallex) = 77.5 ± 6.2 (stat) ± 4.5 (syst) SNU
Rate (GNO) = 65.2 ± 6.4 (stat) ± 3.0 (syst) SNU
Rate (SAGE) = 70.8 ± 5.3 (stat) ± 3.5 (syst) SNU
Neutrino rate from gallium experiments is

≈ 60% of the expected solar flux of (128 ± 8) SNU
122
The solar neutrino problem – Real time experiments as SuperK
SuperKamiokande (see D2)
Elastic scattering allows to measure the
direction (angle) of the incident neutrino
knowing both the neutrino arrival time
and the electron recoil energy spectrum
(correlated to the neutrino spectrum).
SuperK, 1500 days; 22400 observed evts (48000 expected)

Flux of 8B : 2.35 ± 0.02 ± 0.08 (x 106 cm-2.s-1)
Data/SSM(2004) = 0.406 ± 0.004 +0.014-0.013 123

The solar neutrino problem before SNO
If one supposes SSM is true so the 3 results are

not compatible!
One needs to suppress part of the neutrino fluxes
associated to beryllium or boron, or modify the
model….
or introduce neutrino oscillations.
The situation in Spring 2001 And build SNO experiment to conclude!

124
SNO = Sudbury Neutrino Observatory (Canada): study of solar neutrinos
Discovery of solar neutrino oscillations – Art McDonald – Nobel prize 2015
SNO detector: a 12 m diameter cylinder with 1000 tons of deuterium (D2O) +

9500 PMTs - 2000 m underground (salt mine) ≈ 6000 m w.e.
125
Neutrino signatures in SNO (99.75% of D2O) – goal: measure all types of n
C.C. = charged current: ne + d " p + p + e-

(Ethres. = 1.4 MeV – sensitive only to ne)
If deficit of ne rate " Oscillations of ne
N.C. = neutral current: nX + d " p + n + nX

(Ethres. = 2.2 MeV - sensitive to the 3 n flavors – 3 modes to detect neutrons)
If the 3n flux is measured as expected " confirmation of the SSM
Comparison of NC and CC reaction rates indicates if there has been a flavor change
of the electron neutrinos
Radioactivity has to be controlled carefully since photons can break deuterium and produce free
neutrons 126
3 modes to detect neutrons = 3 phases of SNO experiment with different systematics
127
Neutrino signatures in SNO (99.75% of D2O) – goal: measure all types of n
C.C. = charged current: ne + d " p + p + e-

(Ethres. = 1.4 MeV – sensitive only to ne)
If deficit of ne rate " Oscillations of ne
N.C. = neutral current: nX + d " p + n + nX

(Ethres. = 2.2 MeV - sensitive to the 3 n flavors – 3 modes to detect neutrons)
If the 3n flux is measured as expected " confirmation of the SSM
E.S. = elastic scaterring: nX + e- " nX + e-

(sensitivity to the 3 n flavors but rate is 6 times more important for ne)
Used to show if non-electron neutrinos escape from Sun (MSW effect:
oscillation probability increases with the density of matter, Sun/Earth)
128
(Flux nX – Flux ne ≠ 0)
Results of phase I with pure D2O (2002)

Electron neutrinos arriving on Earth are only one third of the whole neutrino rate
This is a 5.3s effect so a clear demonstration that neutrinos change of flavor:

2/3 of the electron neutrinos oscillated toward muon or tau neutrinos during
their travel between the Sun core and the Earth.
This is the second confirmation that neutrinos have mass. 129
Results of phase 2 (salt phase)
x 106 cm-2 s-1
130
Results of final analysis of SNO (2003): phase 3 with ultra low background neutron counters
x 106 cm-2 s-1
131
SNO solved the solar neutrino problem

By measuring all neutrino flavors SNO confirmed that ne oscillate
Excellent agreement with
the SSM calculations
Using combined analyses
from SNO, SuperK and
solar experiments the
conclusion are:
Gallium ne are transformed in pure
𝑚? eigenstates using
interactions with
electrons from Sun, via
Chlore Super-K MSW effect, with a mass
𝑚? > 𝑚B.
?
Also 𝛥𝑚?B > 0 and 𝜃B?
mixing angle are
measured.
132
𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟐𝟏 and 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝟐𝜽𝟏𝟐 parameters using an LBL reactor experiment: KamLAND
Anti-ne from 16 japanese and corean reactors toward Kamioka mine –

Average distance = 180 km – 1280 PMTs – 1000 tons of liquid scintillator
+ shielding made of 2,5 m of non-scintillating liquid
There are oscillations
𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟐𝟏 = 𝟔. 𝟗×𝟏𝟎0𝟓 𝒆𝑽𝟐 and 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝟐𝜽𝟏𝟐 = 𝟏. 𝟎

133
Phys. Rev. Lett. 90 (2003) 021802
𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟐𝟏 and 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝟐𝜽𝟏𝟐 parameters using an LBL reactor experiment: KamLAND
2005-2008 results
nucl-ex/0502021, Phys. Rev. C72 (2005) 055502
Global fit includes solar data until 2005:

very precise measurement of q12
Solar data + KamLAND 2005:

precise measurement of Dm212
KamLAND – February 2008:

only LMA (Large Mixing Angle) solution is kept
𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟐𝟏 = (𝟕. 𝟓𝟗 ± 𝟎. 𝟐𝟏)×𝟏𝟎0𝟓 𝒆𝑽𝟐 Almost the current official values with 𝜽𝟏𝟐 = 𝟑𝟒°
𝒕𝒂𝒏𝟐 𝟐𝜽𝟏𝟐 = 𝟎. 𝟒𝟕 ± 𝟎. 𝟎𝟔 MSW effect in matter is found. 134
𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟐𝟏 and 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝟐𝜽𝟏𝟐 parameters with BOREXINO: solar neutrinos, geo-neutrinos…
BOREXINO
135
BOREXINO detector was designed to detect neutrinos from 7Be via elastic scattering on electrons using
ultrapure scintillating liquid.
Detection via light scintillation allows: Scintillator:

270 t PC+PPO in a 150 µm
ü very low energy thresholds thick nylon vessel
ü good position measurement
Buffer:
ü good energy resolution 1000 t PC+DMP
BUT Nylon vessels:

Inner: 4.25 m
ü no measurement of direction Outer: 5.50 m
ü events induced by neutrinos cannot be
Water Tank:
distinguished from those induced by
g and n shield
natural radioactivity µ water Č detector
208 PMTs in water
2100 m3
Carbon steel plates
Liquid scintillator has to be ultra radiopure 136

Radiopurity in BOREXINO: comparison of spectra before and after cuts
a-particules from 210Po are subtracted

using PSD (pulse shape discrimination).
Most of rejected events are external
background events and cosmic muon-
induced events.
Intrinsic contamination of the liquid
scintillator is the lowest ever obtained
for organic scintillators:
• 238U and 232Th at ≈10-19 g/g of
scintillator
• 14C/12C ≈ 10-18
This ultra low background allowed BOREXINO to extend its physics search to all solar neutrinos and
geo-neutrinos
137
Results for solar neutrinos

𝑷𝒆𝒆 = survival probability of electron neutrinos after oscillation as a
function of the neutrino energy
LMA (Large Mixing Angle) solution associated with matter effect MSW
confirmed by Borexino for solar neutrinos
Vacuum effect
MSW effect
138
D4- Search for 𝜽𝟏𝟑 with LBL accelerators or SBL reactors *
What is the value of 𝜽𝟏𝟑 ?
The Chooz experiment

Disappearance experiment in the French Ardennes – took data
between April 97 and July 98.
)𝒆 → 𝒏 + 𝒆D
Observation of IBD reactions: 𝒑 + 𝝂
Event signature
• Positron = prompt scintillation + 2 g of 511 keV
• Neutron = delayed signal associated to neutron capture in Gd
with emission of an 8-MeV gamma
Rµ/e = 1.01 ± 0.028 (stat) ± 0.027 (syst)

+ no distorsion observed in the spectrum
Conclusion: no oscillations
Until 2011, Chooz provided the best worl limit:

𝜟𝒎𝟐𝒂𝒕𝒎 = 𝟐. 𝟒×𝟏𝟎0𝟑 𝒆𝑽𝟐 and 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝟐𝜽𝟏𝟑 < 𝟎. 𝟏𝟒 (𝟗𝟎%𝑪. 𝑳. )
139
Search for 𝜽𝟏𝟑 with LBL accelerators or SBL reactors *
Some other experiments to answer
(China) (Korea) (France)
140
Some other experiments to answer

2011-2012: The 𝜽𝟏𝟑 = 𝟎 hypothesis is disfavored
@ 89% CL by MINOS (PRL 107.181802 (2011))
@2.5σ by T2K (PRL 107, 041801 (2011)
@94.6% C.L. by Double-Chooz (PRL 108, 131801 (2012))
The final answer came in 2012 from reactor experiments

2012: Measurement of 𝜽𝟏𝟑 ≠ 𝟎
)𝒆 from reactors by Double Chooz (L ≈ 1000 m), Daya Bay (L ≈ 1650 m), and
Disappearance of 𝝂
RENO (L ≈ 1380 m) (+ T2K + MINOS + NOVA)
Combined results:
𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝟐𝜽𝟏𝟑 ≈ 𝟎. 𝟏𝟎𝟓
𝜽𝟏𝟑 ≈ 𝟗°
This is a low but non-zero value for 𝜽𝟏𝟑 thus leptonic CPV is possible!
With 𝜽𝟏𝟑 ≈ 𝟗°, one have 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝜽𝟏𝟑 = 2.45 x 10-2 < 10-4 which satisfies the condition to measure a
possible leptonic CPV and a value of sin(dCP) ≠ 𝟎. 141
Oscillation reactor experiment results - Conclusion talk of Neutrinos –Vietnam 2017
142
D5 – Oscillation results: a need for low mass sterile neutrinos? *
Introduction
As a definition, sterile neutrinos are hypothetical neutral leptons which mix with active
neutrinos but do not have any known standard interactions except gravity
But it means that sterile neutrinos (in spite of their name) may have some non-standard
interaction (or property) coming from some new physics beyond the Standard Model
There are two motivations to consider sterile neutrino(s) and their possible (hinted/favored)
mass ranges:
- Anomalies observed in short baseline oscillation experiments, with mass at the eV-scale
- Possible candidate for Dark Matter with mass at the keV-scale indicated from X-ray
astrophysical observations (due to radiative decay of sterile neutrino) – see DM part of this
lecture
But since sterile neutrino mass can be any, one have to consider any mass scale for sterile
neutrinos to be probed experimentally
143
Oscillation results: a need for low mass sterile neutrinos? *
Hints for 𝝂𝒔 at the eV-scale: the LSND anomaly Aguilar et al (LSND collab.) PRD64 (2001) 112007
[hep-ex/0104049]
𝟐 𝟐
LSND experiment: 𝜈=̅ excess could be explained by oscillation with 𝜟𝒎 ~ 𝟎. 𝟐 − 𝟏𝟎 𝒆𝑽 .
No excess measured by KARMEN experiment (𝐿 ≈ 17𝑚) Armbruster et al (KARMEN collab.) PRD65 (2002)
112001 [hep-ex/0203012]
but can’t fully exclude LSND allowed regions
MiniBooNe experiment @Fermilab (𝐿 ≈ 540 𝑚) Aguilar-Arevalo et al (MiniBooNe collab.) PRL98

1st results with neutrino mode: first it almost (2007) 231801 [arXiv:0704.1500]
excluded LSND result
144
Hints for 𝝂𝒔 at the eV-scale: the LSND anomaly
Aguilar-Arevalo et al (MiniBooNe collab.) PRL121
2018 results of MiniBooNe experiment @Fermilab (2018) 221801 [arXiv:1805.120280]
Confirmation of LSND excess: 4.7𝜎 (6.0𝜎) by MiniBooNe alone (+LSND combined)
2021 results of MiniBooNe experiment @Fermilab Updated MiniBooNE neutrino oscillation results with
increased data and new background studies
LSND and MiniBooNE have compatible L/E dependence Aguilar-Arevalo et al. (MiniBooNE Collaboration) Phys.
Rev. D 103, 052002 – Published 8 March 2021
Recent results of MiniBooNE are compatible with LSND!

No ultimate conclusion on sterile neutrinos…
145
Hints for 𝝂𝒔 at the eV-scale: Gallium anomaly
Since L/E is similar to LSND,

oscillation with 𝜟𝒎𝟐 ≳ 𝟏 𝒆𝑽𝟐
could explain this deficit of about
15% at 3𝝈.
Ratio of measured to predicted neutrino induced signal
rate in the gallium experiments GALLEX and SAGE
146
Hints for 𝝂𝒔 at the eV-scale: the Reactor Antineutrino Anomaly (RAA)
The Reactor Antineutrino Anomaly (RAA)
appeared in 2011, following a revision of the
predicted neutrino fluxes for the main isotopes
in nuclear fuel (235U, 238U, 239Pu, 241Pu).
The reevaluation of predicted fluxes resulted in
a data-to-prediction deficit of about 5%.
One hypothesis to explain this deficit consists
in oscillations to a sterile neutrino state, since
sterile neutrinos are not observable in
detectors.
Ratio R of reactor data over predicted flux as a function

of the reactor-detector distance L
The survival probability for 𝐿 ≲ 1 𝑘𝑚 is written as:

𝚫𝒎𝟐𝟑𝟏 𝑳 𝚫𝒎𝟐𝟒𝟏 𝑳
)𝒆 → 𝝂
𝑷 𝝂 )𝒆 = 𝟏 − 𝒄𝒐𝒔𝟒 𝜽
𝟏𝟒 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝟐𝜽
𝟏𝟑 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝟐
− 𝒔𝒊𝒏 𝟐𝜽𝟏𝟒 𝒔𝒊𝒏 𝟐
𝟒𝑬 𝟒𝑬
?
𝜃BH and 𝛥𝑚HB correspond to parameters which govern the oscillations to the sterile state.
Based on data available at the time, the RAA best-fit parameters are of the order of:
𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝟐𝜽𝟏𝟒 ~𝟎. 𝟏 and 𝚫𝒎𝟐𝟒𝟏 ~𝟐 𝒆𝑽𝟐
147
Hints for 𝝂𝒔 at the eV-scale: the Reactor Antineutrino Anomaly (RAA) today!
Many dedicated
experiments as STEREO,
DANSS, PROSPECT, SOLID,…
to search for sterile
neutrinos at reactor!
The RAA best fit is almost

fully excluded! The best-fit
parameters of active-to-
sterile oscillations
from the Reactor
arXiv:2105.13776
Results of Antineutrino Anomaly are
STEREO and strongly rejected by these
PROSPECT, and experiments.
status of sterile
neutrino searches
M. Licciardi, LPSC
Grenoble, Wait for final analysis of SOLID
Neutrino experiment. Preliminary results
conference excluded sterile neutrinos.
148
Hints for 𝝂𝒔 at the eV-scale: best-fit regions of the anomalies, a global picture!
Reactor anomaly best fit:

𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝟐𝜽𝟏𝟒 ~ 𝟎. 𝟏 and
𝚫𝒎𝟐𝟒𝟏 ~𝟐 𝒆𝑽𝟐
Gallium anomaly best fit:

𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝟐𝜽𝒆𝒆~ 𝟎. 𝟑 and
𝚫𝒎𝟐𝟒𝟏 ~𝟐 𝒆𝑽𝟐
LSND anomaly best fit:

𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝟐𝜽𝒆𝝁~ 𝟑×𝟏𝟎0𝟑 and
𝚫𝒎𝟐𝟒𝟏 ~𝟏. 𝟐 𝒆𝑽𝟐
MiniBooNE anomaly best fit:

𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝟐𝜽𝒆𝝁~ 𝟎. 𝟗𝟏𝟖 and
𝚫𝒎𝟐𝟒𝟏 ~𝟎. 𝟎𝟒𝟏 𝒆𝑽𝟐
No conclusion on common values!
149
The (3+1) neutrino mixing scheme: adding a non-standard neutrino at the eV scale
The U mixing matrix becomes a (4 x 4) one, with 𝜈I the sterile neutrino eigenstate.
The new mass eigenstate 𝜈H is experimentally accessible through oscillation experiment results if it
has the same behavior as 𝜈J but propagate with other phase velocity.
The associated condition is: |𝑈KH|? ≪ 1 for 𝛼 = 𝑒, 𝜇, 𝜏.
Since 𝑚H is expected at the eV-scale, one also has: 𝑚H ≫ 𝑚>, 𝑚?, 𝑚B and the corresponding mass-
? ? ?
splitings Δ𝑚HJ ≈ 𝑒𝑉 ? are all similar and greater than Δ𝑚?B and Δ𝑚>? .
?
For experimental configurations where 4E ≈ Δ𝑚HJ 𝐿 and the oscillations due to sterile neutrinos are
? ?
observable, thus Δ𝑚?B and Δ𝑚>? are not effective.
150
The (3+1) neutrino mixing scheme: adding a non-standard neutrino at the eV scale
Future constraints from LBL experiments:
? ?
With SBL results, one has |𝑈KH|~|𝑈KH|~|𝑈KH|~𝜀~0.15 and 𝛼 ≡ 𝛥𝑚?B /|𝛥𝑚>B | ≈ 0.03~𝜀 ?
The LBL probability of 𝜈< → 𝜈= oscillations in case of (3+1) mixing can thus be written as:
𝑷 𝝂𝝁 → 𝝂𝒆 ≈ 𝟒 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝜽𝟏𝟑 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝜽𝟏𝟑 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝚫𝟑𝟏
+ 𝟐 𝒔𝒊𝒏 𝜽𝟏𝟑 𝒔𝒊𝒏 𝟐𝜽𝟏𝟐 𝒔𝒊𝒏 𝟐𝜽𝟐𝟑 𝜶𝚫𝟑𝟏 𝒔𝒊𝒏 𝚫𝟑𝟏 𝒄𝒐𝒔 𝚫𝟑𝟐 + 𝜹𝟏𝟑
+ 𝟒 𝒔𝒊𝒏 𝜽𝟏𝟑 𝒔𝒊𝒏 𝜽𝟏𝟒 𝒔𝒊𝒏 𝜽𝟐𝟒 𝒔𝒊𝒏 𝜽𝟐𝟑 𝜶𝚫𝟑𝟏 𝒔𝒊𝒏 𝚫𝟑𝟏 𝒄𝒐𝒔 𝚫𝟑𝟏 + 𝜹𝟏𝟑 − 𝜹𝟏𝟒
?
with 𝛥LM ≡ 𝛥𝑚LM 𝐿/4𝐸.
This probability is independent of mixing angle 𝜃>H and CP-phase 𝛿>H.
The 1st term is dominant: it gives the main sensitivity of LBL experiments to measure 𝜃B>;
The 2nd term is subdominant: it gives the sensitivity of LBL experiments to the standard CP-phase 𝛿B>;
The 3rd term is proper of 4-flavor mixing: it depends on the new mixing angles 𝜃BH and 𝜃?H, and on the
new CP-phase 𝛿BH.
The results of T2K and NOvA in favor of a large 𝛿B> around 3𝜋/4 (taking into account the reactor
constraints on 𝜃B>) in the case of 3-flavor mixing persists in the (3+1) scheme, but the precise
determination of 𝛿B> in the future dedicated experiments DUNE and Hyper-Kamiokande may be affected
by the presence of 𝛿BH.
151
Conclusion for a sterile neutrino at the eV scale
- Sterile neutrinos at the eV-scale to explain RAA and Ga are “almost” ruled out
- Still LSND / MiniBooNE anomaly but a lot of other experiments disfavor sterile neutrinos. Need
conclusion by SBL neutrino experiments.
- Answer would come for future neutrino oscillation programs, considering or not a (3+1) mixing
scheme (or from CENNS at low energy).
Example: SBN program at Fermilab to probe or reject MiniBooNE result

3 detector setup aiming to search for light sterile neutrinos Expected sensitivities to 𝜈$ → 𝜈+ oscillations
causing 𝜈+ appareance or 𝜈$ disappearance in 𝜈$ a beam
ICARUS-T600 (476 t) MicroBooNE (89 t) LAr1-ND (112 t)
@ L = 600 m @ L = 470 m @t L = 110 m
arXiv:1503.01520 – « A Proposal for a Three Detector Short-Baseline Neutrino Oscillation

Program in the Fermilab Booster Neutrino Beam », M. Antonello et al. (The ICARUS-WA104
Collaboration, The LAr1-ND Collaboration, The MicroBooNE Collaboration) 152
D6 - Conclusions about oscillations and how to go further
In summary, the neutrinos oscillate so they are massive!
Oscillation of neutrinos
Flavor eigenstates Mass eigenstates

Weak interaction eigenstates PMNS matrix Propagation eigenstates
DETECTION AMPLITUDE FREQUENCY
153
Conclusions about oscillations and how to go further
Conclusions from rpp2022 (most recent combination/parameterization)
https://pdg.lbl.gov/2023/reviews/rpp2022-rev-neutrino-mixing.pdf
• Atmospheric 𝜈< and 𝜈<̅ disappear most likely converting to 𝜈N and 𝜈N̅ . The results show an energy and
distance dependence perfectly described by mass-induced oscillations.
• Accelerator 𝜈< and 𝜈<̅ disappear over distances of ∼200 to 800 km. The energy spectrum of the
results show a clear oscillatory behavior also in accordance with mass-induced oscillations with a
wavelength in agreement with the effect observed in atmospheric neutrinos.
• Accelerator 𝜈< and 𝜈<̅ appear as 𝜈= and 𝜈=̅ at distances ∼200 to 800 km.
• Solar 𝜈= convert to 𝜈< and/or 𝜈N . The observed energy dependence of the effect is well described by
massive neutrino conversion in the Sun matter according to the MSW effect.
• Reactor 𝜈=̅ disappear over distances of ∼200 km and ∼1.5 km with different probabilities.
The observed energy spectra show two different mass-induced oscillation wavelengths:
- at short distances in agreement with the one observed in accelerator 𝜈< disappearance,
- at long distance compatible with the required parameters for MSW conversion in the Sun.
154
The minimum scenario to describe these results requires the mixing between the three flavor SM
neutrinos in three distinct mass eigenstates.
If there are only 𝑛 = 3 Majorana neutrinos, the mixing matrix 𝑈 is a 3x3 matrix analogous to the CKM
matrix for the quarks, but due to the Majorana nature of the neutrinos it depends on six independent
parameters: 3 mixing angles and 3 phases.
In this case the mixing matrix can be conveniently parameterized as (slide 70 of this lecture):
1 0 0 𝑐B> 0 𝑠B> 𝑒 0JO,- 𝑐B? 𝑠B? 0 𝑒 JP. 0 0

𝑈 = 0 𝑐?> 𝑠?> × 0 1 0 × −𝑠B? 𝑐B? 0 × 0 𝑒 JP/ 0
0 −𝑠?> 𝑐?> −𝑠B> 𝑒 JO,- 0 𝑐B> 0 0 1 0 0 1
where 𝑐JM ≡ cos 𝜃JM and 𝑠JM ≡ sin 𝜃JM
Q
• The angles 𝜃JM can be taken without loss of generality to lie in the first quadrant 𝜃JM ∈ [0, ?] and the
phases 𝛿@A , 𝜂J ∈ [0,2𝜋].
• Values of 𝛿@A different from 0 and 𝜋 imply CP-violation in neutrino oscillations in vacuum.
• The Majorana phases 𝜂B and 𝜂? play no role in neutrino oscillations
155
The minimum scenario to describe these results requires the mixing between the three flavor SM
neutrinos in three distinct mass eigenstates.
In the case there are only 𝑛 = 3 Dirac neutrinos, the Majorana phases, 𝜂B and 𝜂?, can be absorbed in
the neutrino states so the number of physical phases is one (similar to the CKM matrix).
Thus we can write 𝑈 as a 3 x 3 matrix with 3 mixing angles and 1 phase.
𝑐BC 𝑐BD 𝑠BC 𝑐BD 𝑠BD 𝑒 EFGRS

𝑈= −𝑠BC 𝑐CD − 𝑐BC 𝑠BD 𝑠CD 𝑒 FGRS 𝑐BC 𝑐CD − 𝑠BC 𝑠BD 𝑠CD 𝑒 FGRS 𝑐BD 𝑠CD
𝑠BC 𝑠CD − 𝑐BC 𝑠BD 𝑐CD 𝑒 FGRS −𝑐BC 𝑠CD − 𝑠BC 𝑠BD 𝑐CD 𝑒 FGRS 𝑐BD 𝑐CD
where 𝑐01 ≡ cos 𝜃01 and 𝑠01 ≡ sin 𝜃01
156
In this convention there are two non-equivalent orderings for the spectrum of neutrino masses:
• Spectrum with Normal Ordering (NO) with 𝑚B < 𝑚? < 𝑚>.
• Spectrum with Inverted ordering (IO) with 𝑚> < 𝑚B < 𝑚?.
157
See JHEP 09 (2020) 178 [arXiv:2007.14792] and NuFIT 5.2 (2022), www.nu-fit.org
Global analyses:
3-flavor oscillation
parameters from
NuFIT 5.2 fit to
global data as of
November 2022.
Note that NO gives

the best fit.
• Normal ordering NO (1st column) with 𝑚B < 𝑚? < 𝑚> : 𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟑𝟏 > 𝟎 in the table 158
• Inverted ordering IO (2nd column) with 𝑚> < 𝑚B < 𝑚? ∶ 𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟐𝟑 > 𝟎 (with 𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟑𝟐 < 𝟎 in the table)
The data show also a hierarchy

between the mass splittings: Neutrino energy spectrum
𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟐𝟏 ≪ |𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟑𝟏 |~ |𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟑𝟐 | 𝑚78
𝑚88
?
with Δ𝑚?B = 𝑚J? − 𝑚M?. 𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟐𝟏 ≈ 𝟕. 𝟒𝟏×𝟏𝟎 &𝟓
𝒆𝑽 𝟐
𝑚98
Using the PDG convention: 𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟑𝟏 ≈ 𝟐. 𝟓𝟏𝟏×𝟏𝟎&𝟑 𝒆𝑽𝟐
? 𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟐𝟑 ≈ 𝟐. 𝟒𝟗𝟖×𝟏𝟎&𝟑 𝒆𝑽𝟐
• 𝛥𝑚?B is always the smallest mass
splitting for both NO and IO.
? 8
• Up to a sign 𝛥𝑚>? is the largest 𝑚8 𝑚78
𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟐𝟏 ≈ 𝟕. 𝟒𝟏×𝟏𝟎&𝟓 𝒆𝑽𝟐
mass splitting for IO. 𝑚98
• For NO the largest mass splitting
? ? ?
is 𝛥𝑚>B = 𝛥𝑚>? + 𝛥𝑚?B . Normal ordering (NO) Inverted ordering (IO)
𝒎𝒎𝒊𝒏 = 𝒎𝟏 𝒎𝒎𝒊𝒏 = 𝒎𝟑
𝒎𝟑 ≫ 𝒎𝟐 > 𝒎𝟏 𝒎𝟐 > 𝒎𝟏 ≫ 𝒎𝟑
Also:
• Mixing angles : θB? ≈ 33,41° NO /IO, θ?> ≈ 49.1° NO (49.5° IO), θB> ≈ 8.54° NO (8.57° IO)
• θ?> seems to be > 𝜋/4 (2nd octant): to be confirmed 159
• 𝛿@A phase still unknown: 𝛿@A ≈ 197°DH?° D?V°
0?T° NO (286°0>?° IO) – No CPV not yet excluded
Next generation experiments for CPV and mass ordering
There are still questions:
• What is the mass ordering?
• What is the absolute mass scale?
• Is there CPV in the leptonic sector (what is the value of 𝜹𝑪𝑷 )?
ü Precise measurement of the antineutrino energy from reactors → 𝑷𝒆𝒆

→ the oscillation frequency varies depending on the sign: 𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟑𝟏 > 𝟎 (NO) or 𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟑𝟐 < 𝟎 (IO)
Ø Reactor experiment as JUNO
ü Search for amplification of the oscillation effect in matter → 𝑷𝝁𝒆

→ MSW resonance = 𝒇 𝜟𝒎𝟐 , 𝝂 )/𝝂
→ 𝑷𝒐𝒔𝒄 after a long traveled distance inside Earth
→ Comparison of 𝑷 𝝂𝝁 → 𝝂𝒆 and 𝑷 𝝂 )𝝁 → 𝝂)𝒆
Ø LBL accelerator experiments: T2K, NOVA, DUNE (@IP2I) and HyperK

Ø Study of atmospheric neutrinos: IceCube-PINGU, KM3NeT-ORCA, HyperK
160
Next generation experiments for CPV and mass ordering
Conclusion from « Neutrino oscillations » talk by Justyna Łagoda - HEP EPS conference 2023 - Vienna
161

Nu D OscillationResults 2023 - Compressed

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Nu D OscillationResults 2023 - Compressed

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

D – Results from oscillation experiments

D4- Search for 𝜽𝟏𝟑 with LBL accelerators or SBL reactors *

D5- Oscillation results: a need for sterile neutrinos? *

D6- Conclusions about oscillations and how to go further

With the 2-flavor oscillation probability:

Using CPT invariance one also has:

For small values of 𝜟𝒎𝟐 and large oscillation 𝜟𝒎𝟐𝒎𝒊𝒏

To cancel systematic uncertainties, it is

Expected event rate is very low ≈ 100 interactions/(kton.year) 100

Emission of ≈ 𝟏/𝟑 (𝝂𝒆 + 𝝂 )𝒆) and ≈ 𝟐/𝟑 (𝝂𝝁 +) )𝝁 / 𝝂 𝒆 + 𝝂

The measured spectrum of oscillations

Charged current (CC) Neutral current (NC)

Nuclear reactions inside the pep - peak

pp-chain (and pep-chain for 0,24%)

En < 15 MeV En = 0.8631 MeV En = 0.3855 MeV

En < 1,19 MeV

En < 1,7317 MeV

One needs one solar model for each flux.

Estimation of the n flux arriving on Earth

Detectors are filled of chlorine,

Talk of F.L. Villante –

Flux measurements are needed to understand SSM problems

• Count the number of daughter nuclei after Kamioka

R=N ∫ Φ(E)σ (E) dE

• One needs around 1030 atoms of target to

Eν = Ee+ + mn − m p = Te+ +1.8 MeV

Cuts have to be applied to isolate antineutrino-like events

The rate predicted without oscillations is:

Using all data before 2010 and a global fit, an indirect

With 𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟑𝟏 ≈ 𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟑𝟐 one uses:

PID (particle identification) allows electron and muon

1998: discovery of atmospheric neutrino oscillations with Super-Kamiokande

Study of 𝑷𝝁𝝁 and 𝑷𝝁𝒆

< 𝟏 with dependence on zenith angle

There is a maximal oscillation

𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟑𝟐 and 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝟐𝜽𝟐𝟑 parameters from LBL experiments

𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟑𝟐 and 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝟐𝜽𝟐𝟑 parameters from LBL experiments

𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟑𝟐 and 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝟐𝜽𝟐𝟑 parameters from LBL experiments

𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟑𝟐 and 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝟐𝜽𝟐𝟑 parameters from LBL experiments https://t2k-experiment.org/2020/04/t2k-results-

https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.03222 - Improved T2K results with more data – Reviewed on 6/3/2023

𝜟𝒎𝟐𝟑𝟐 and 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝟐 𝟐𝜽𝟐𝟑 parameters from LBL experiments

Normal mass ordering is favored.

Homestake experiment: the first one with chlorine

Eseuil = 0.8 MeV > Epp

Around 750 decays observed: ≈ 0.5 per day

Rate (Homestake): (2.56 ± 0.20) SNU

Rate (Gallex) = 77.5 ± 6.2 (stat) ± 4.5 (syst) SNU

Rate (GNO) = 65.2 ± 6.4 (stat) ± 3.0 (syst) SNU

Rate (SAGE) = 70.8 ± 5.3 (stat) ± 3.5 (syst) SNU

Neutrino rate from gallium experiments is

SuperK, 1500 days; 22400 observed evts (48000 expected)

Data/SSM(2004) = 0.406 ± 0.004 +0.014-0.013 123

If one supposes SSM is true so the 3 results are

or introduce neutrino oscillations.

The situation in Spring 2001 And build SNO experiment to conclude!

Discovery of solar neutrino oscillations – Art McDonald – Nobel prize 2015

SNO detector: a 12 m diameter cylinder with 1000 tons of deuterium (D2O) +

Discovery of solar neutrino oscillations – Art McDonald – Nobel prize 2015

Neutrino signatures in SNO (99.75% of D2O) – goal: measure all types of n

C.C. = charged current: ne + d " p + p + e-

N.C. = neutral current: nX + d " p + n + nX

Discovery of solar neutrino oscillations – Art McDonald – Nobel prize 2015

3 modes to detect neutrons = 3 phases of SNO experiment with different systematics