Comparison of vν ↔ ν τ and ν μ ↔ νs oscillations as solutions of the atmospheric neutrino problem

Physical Review D

Volumn 58, Issue 7, 1998, Pages 0730051-07300512

  Lipari, Paolo ^a   Lusignoli, Maurizio ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÀ DI ROMA LA SAPIENZA   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0001065795     PISSN: 05562821     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.58.073005     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. K. S. Hirata et al., Phys. Lett. B 205, 416 (1988); 280, 146 (1992);
2. Y. Fukuda et al., Phys. Lett. B ibid. 335, 237 (1994);
3. D. Casper et al, Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 2561 (1991);
4. R. Becker-Szendy et al, Phys. Rev. D 46, 3720 (1992);
5. Soudan-2 Collaboration, T. Kafka, Proceedings of TAUP97; Super-Kamiokande Collaboration, Y. Fukuda et al., hep-ex/9803006.
6. E. Kearns, Proceedings of TAUP97, hep-ex/9803007.
7. See, for example, V. Berezinsky, Invited Lecture at 25th ICRC, Durban, 1997, astro-ph/9710126.
8. LSND Collaboration, C. Athanassopoulos et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 3082 (1996); nucl-ex/9706006; nucl-ex/9709006.
9. There have been several attempts to reconcile all detected anomalies with a scheme involving only three neutrino flavors, suggesting for example that Am SWD=Am ,m [6,7], or that AHiQ=A; ; i ,m [8]. The first scenario predicts the absence of a zenith angle dependence of the atmospheric neutrino anomaly, the second one predicts a constant suppression for all solar neutrino experiments and, since the atmospheric neutrino anomaly is essentially due to v/i< -> ve in this case, a positive signal for the CHOOZ experiment [9]; therefore both scenarios are currently not supported by the data.
10. C. Y. Cardall and G. M. Fuller, Phys. Rev. D 53, 4421 (1996).
11. G. L. Fogli, E. Lisi, D. Montanino, and G. Scioscia, Phys. Rev. D 56, 4365 (1997).
12. A. Acker and S. Pakvasa, Phys. Lett. B 397, 209 (1997).
13. CHOOZ Collaboration, M. Apollonio et al., Phys. Lett. B 420, 397 (1998).
14. The current value for the number of standard light neutrinos is Nv= 2.995 ± 0.061, see LEP Electroweak Working Group, CERN/PPE/95-172.
15. M. C. Gonzalez-Garcia, H. Nunokawa, O. L. G. Pè res, T. Stanev, and J. W. F. Valle, Phys. Rev. D 58, 033004 (1998).
16. R. Foot, R. R. Volkas, and O. Yasuda, hep-ph/9802287.
17. E. Akhmedov, B. Lipari, and M. Lusignoli, Phys. Lett. B 300, 128 (1993).
18. R. Foot, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 9, 169 (1994);
19. R. Foot and R. R. Volkas, Phys. Rev. D 52, 6595 (1995);
20. S. M. Bilenky, C. :Giunti, and W. Grimus, in Neutrino 96, Proceedings of the conference, Helsinki, 1996, edited by K. Enqvist et al. (World Scientific, Singapore, 1997), p. 174.
21. F. Vissani and A. Yu. Smirnov, hep-ph/9710565.
22. Q. Y. Liu and A. Yu. Smirnov, hep-ph/9712493.
23. R. Foot, R. R. Volkas, and O. Yasuda, Phys. Rev. D 58, 013006 (1998).
24. A. Dolgov, Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 33, 700 (1981);
25. R. Barbieri and A. Dolgov, Phys. Lett. B 237, 440 (1990); Nucl. Phys. B349, 743 (1991);
26. K. Enqvist, K. Kainulainen, and M. Thomson, Phys. Rev. Lett. 68, 744 (1992); Nucl. Phys. B373, 498 (1992);
27. J. Cline, Phys. Rev. Lett. 68, 3137 (1992);
28. X. Shi, D. N. Schramm, and B. D. Fields, Phys. Rev. D 48, 2563 (1993).
29. D. Schramm and M. Turner, Rev. Mod. Phys. 70, 303 (1998).
30. R. Foot and R. Volkas, Phys. Rev. D 55, 5147 (1997); 56, 6653 (1997).
31. S. J. Barish et al., Phys. Rev. D 19, 2521 (1979).
32. G. L. Fogli and G. Nardulli, Nucl. Phys. B160, 116 (1979).
33. L. Wolfenstein, Phys. Rev. D 17,2369 (1978);
34. S. P. Mikheyev and A. Yu. Smirnov, Yad. Fiz. 42, 1441 (1985) [Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 42, 913 (1985)].
35. s mixing, can be understood [16] as a case of parametric resonance [25].
36. E. Akhmedov, Yad. Fiz. 47, 475 (1988);
37. P. I. Krastev and A. Y. Smirnov, Phys. Lett. B 226, 341 (1989).
38. F. D. Stacey, Physics of the Earth (Wiley, New York, 1969).
39. The dashed curves in Figs. 3 and 4 are calculated assuming a constant density in the core and mantle of the earth (pc(0z)) and (pm(0z)), calculated averaging the density along a trajectory of zenith angle 0Z.
40. Note in the lower panels of Figs. 5 and 6 that the suppression factor for v -> v, transitions, if studied in great detail shows a complex dependence on the zenith angle that can be compared with the oscillation probability curves in Fig. 3.
41. T. K. Gaisser, M. Honda, K. Kasahara, H. Lee, S. Midorikawa, V. Naumov, and T. Stanev, Phys. Rev. D 54, 5578 (1996).
42. Y. Fukuda et al., Phys. Lett. B 335, 237 (1994).
43. We note that in [17] the authors have considered only the case of positive Am2. Matter effects allow to distinguish the case of positive and negative squared mass differences, and the allowed region for Aw2< 0 is somewhat larger than in the other case, because of the MSW resonance present for the neutrinos.
44. V. Agrawal, T. K. Gaisser, P. Lipari, and T. Stanev, Phys. Rev. D 53, 1314(1996).
45. P. Lipari, M. Lusignoli, and F. Sartogo, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 4384 (1995).
46. T. K. Gaisser and Todor Stanev, Phys. Rev. D 57, 1977 (1998).
47. The flux of r-induced muons is larger than the flux of atmospheric muons for line of sights shielded by a column density larger than ~ 106 g cm~2. In the upper hemisphere this condition is satisfied at most in a small solid angle for the deepest detectors.
48. P. Lipari and M. Lusignoli, Phys. Rev. D 57, R3842 (1998).
49. W. Lohmann, R. Kopp, and R. Voss, CERN Yellow Report No. EP/85-03.
50. Baksan Collaboration, M. M. Boliev et al, ICRC '95, Rome, Vol. l, pp. 686 and 722.
51. MACRO Collaboration, S. Ahlen et al, Phys. Lett. B 357, 481 (1995);
52. F. Ronga et al., in Neutrino '96 [14].
53. Kamiokande Collaboration, A. Suzuki et al, in Proceedings of 7th International Workshop on Neutrino Telescopes, Venice, 1996, edited by M. Baldo Ceolin, p. 263.
54. 1MB Collaboration, R. Becker-Szendy et al, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 1010 (1992);
55. D. W. Casper, in Proceedings of 3rd International Workshop on Neutrino Telescopes, Venice, 1991, edited by M. Baldo Ceolin, p. 213.
56. M. Honda, T. Kajita, K. Kasahara, and S. Midorikawa, Phys. Rev. D 52, 4985 (1995).
57. M. Gluck, E. Reya, and A. Vogt, Z. Phys. C 67, 433 (1995).
58. W. Frati, T. K. Gaisser, A. K. Mann, and T. Stanev, Phys. Rev. D 48, 1140(1993).
59. The acceptance for the muon flux increases with the area (as opposed to the volume) of the detector: SK does not dominate the other experiments as for the contained neutrino events.
60. G. L. Fogli, E. Lisi, and A. Marrone, Phys. Rev. D 57, 5893 (1998).