Comparison of (Formula presented) and (Formula presented) oscillations as solutions of the atmospheric neutrino problem

Physical Review D - Particles, Fields, Gravitation and Cosmology

Volumn 58, Issue 7, 1998, Pages

  Lipari, Paolo ^a   Lusignoli, Maurizio ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÀ DI ROMA LA SAPIENZA   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85038938984     PISSN: 15507998     EISSN: 15502368     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevD.58.073005     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. K. S. Hirata, Phys. Lett. B 205, 416 (1988)
2. Phys. Lett. BK. S. Hirata280, 146 (1992)
3. Phys. Lett. BY. Fukuda, 335, 237 (1994)
4. D. Casper, Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 2561 (1991)
5. R. Becker-Szendy, Phys. Rev. D 46, 3720 (1992); PRVDAQSoudan-2 Collaboration, T. Kafka, Proceedings of TAUP97
6. Super-Kamiokande Collaboration, Y. Fukuda, hep-ex/9803006.
7. E. Kearns, Proceedings of TAUP97, hep-ex/9803007.
8. See, for example, V. Berezinsky, Invited Lecture at 25th ICRC, Durban, 1997, astro-ph/9710126.
9. LSND Collaboration, C. Athanassopoulos, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 3082 (1996)
10. C. Athanassopoulosnucl-ex/9706006
11. C. Athanassopoulosnucl-ex/9709006.
12. There have been several attempts to reconcile all detected anomalies with a scheme involving only three neutrino flavors, suggesting for example that (Formula presented) 67, or that (Formula presented) 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 (Formula presented) in this case, a positive signal for the CHOOZ experiment 9; therefore both scenarios are currently not supported by the data.
13. C. Y. Cardall and G. M. Fuller, Phys. Rev. D 53, 4421 (1996).
14. G. L. Fogli, E. Lisi, D. Montanino, and G. Scioscia, Phys. Rev. D 56, 4365 (1997).
15. A. Acker and S. Pakvasa, Phys. Lett. B 397, 209 (1997).
16. CHOOZ Collaboration, M. Apollonio, Phys. Lett. B 420, 397 (1998).
17. The current value for the number of standard light neutrinos is (Formula presented) see LEP Electroweak Working Group, CERN/PPE/95–172.
18. M. C. Gonzalez-Garcia, H. Nunokawa, O. L. G. Peres, T. Stanev, and J. W. F. Valle, Phys. Rev. D 58, 033004 (1998).
19. R. Foot, R. R. Volkas, and O. Yasuda, hep-ph/9802287.
20. E. Akhmedov, B. Lipari, and M. Lusignoli, Phys. Lett. B 300, 128 (1993).
21. R. Foot, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 9, 169 (1994)
22. R. Foot and R. R. Volkas, Phys. Rev. D 52, 6595 (1995); PRVDAQS. 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.
23. F. Vissani and A. Yu. Smirnov, hep-ph/9710565.
24. Q. Y. Liu and A. Yu. Smirnov, hep-ph/9712493.
25. R. Foot, R. R. Volkas, and O. Yasuda, Phys. Rev. D 58, 013006 (1998).
26. A. Dolgov, Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 33, 700 (1981)
27. R. Barbieri and A. Dolgov, Phys. Lett. B 237, 440 (1990)
28. R. BarbieriA. DolgovNucl. Phys. B349, 743 (1991)
29. K. Enqvist, K. Kainulainen, and M. Thomson, Phys. Rev. Lett. 68, 744 (1992)
30. K. EnqvistK. KainulainenM. ThomsonNucl. Phys. B373, 498 (1992)
31. J. Cline, Phys. Rev. Lett. 68, 3137 (1992)
32. X. Shi, D. N. Schramm, and B. D. Fields, Phys. Rev. D 48, 2563 (1993).
33. D. Schramm and M. Turner, Rev. Mod. Phys. 70, 303 (1998).
34. R. Foot and R. Volkas, Phys. Rev. D 55, 5147 (1997)
35. Phys. Rev. DR. FootR. Volkas56, 6653 (1997).
36. S. J. Barish, Phys. Rev. D 19, 2521 (1979).
37. G. L. Fogli and G. Nardulli, Nucl. Phys. B160, 116 (1979).
38. L. Wolfenstein, Phys. Rev. D 17, 2369 (1978)
39. S. P. Mikheyev and A. Yu. Smirnov, Yad. Fiz. 42, 1441 (1985) [Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 42, 913 (1985)].
40. The enhancement of the amplitude of oscillations at (Formula presented) in the case of (Formula presented) mixing, can be understood 16 as a case of “parametric resonance” 25.
41. E. Akhmedov, Yad. Fiz. 47, 475 (1988)
42. P. I. Krastev and A. Y. Smirnov, Phys. Lett. B 226, 341 (1989).
43. F. D. Stacey, Physics of the Earth (Wiley, New York, 1969).
44. The dashed curves in Figs. 33 and 44 are calculated assuming a constant density in the core and mantle of the earth (Formula presented) and (Formula presented) calculated averaging the density along a trajectory of zenith angle (Formula presented)
45. Note in the lower panels of Figs. 55 and 66 that the suppression factor for (Formula presented) 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. 33.
46. T. K. Gaisser, M. Honda, K. Kasahara, H. Lee, S. Midorikawa, V. Naumov, and T. Stanev, Phys. Rev. D 54, 5578 (1996).
47. Y. Fukuda, Phys. Lett. B 335, 237 (1994).
48. We note that in 17 the authors have considered only the case of positive (Formula presented) Matter effects allow to distinguish the case of positive and negative squared mass differences, and the allowed region for (Formula presented) is somewhat larger than in the other case, because of the MSW resonance present for the neutrinos.
49. V. Agrawal, T. K. Gaisser, P. Lipari, and T. Stanev, Phys. Rev. D 53, 1314 (1996).
50. P. Lipari, M. Lusignoli, and F. Sartogo, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 4384 (1995).
51. T. K. Gaisser and Todor Stanev, Phys. Rev. D 57, 1977 (1998).
52. The flux of (Formula presented)-induced muons is larger than the flux of atmospheric muons for line of sights shielded by a column density larger than (Formula presented) In the upper hemisphere this condition is satisfied at most in a small solid angle for the deepest detectors.
53. P. Lipari and M. Lusignoli, Phys. Rev. D 57, R3842 (1998).
54. W. Lohmann, R. Kopp, and R. Voss, CERN Yellow Report No. EP/85-03.
55. Baksan Collaboration, M. M. Boliev et al., ICRC ’95, Rome, Vol. 1, pp. 686 and 722.
56. MACRO Collaboration, S. Ahlen, Phys. Lett. B 357, 481 (1995); PYLBAJF. Ronga et al., in Neutrino ’96 14.
57. Kamiokande Collaboration, A. Suzuki et al., in Proceedings of 7th International Workshop on Neutrino Telescopes, Venice, 1996, edited by M. Baldo Ceolin, p. 263.
58. IMB Collaboration, R. Becker-Szendy, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 1010 (1992); PRLTAOD. W. Casper, in Proceedings of 3rd International Workshop on Neutrino Telescopes, Venice, 1991, edited by M. Baldo Ceolin, p. 213.
59. M. Honda, T. Kajita, K. Kasahara, and S. Midorikawa, Phys. Rev. D 52, 4985 (1995).
60. M. Gluck, E. Reya, and A. Vogt, Z. Phys. C 67, 433 (1995).
61. W. Frati, T. K. Gaisser, A. K. Mann, and T. Stanev, Phys. Rev. D 48, 1140 (1993).
62. 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.
63. G. L. Fogli, E. Lisi, and A. Marrone, Phys. Rev. D 57, 5893 (1998).