Skip to main content

Full text of "3+1 and 3+2 Sterile Neutrino Fits"

See other formats


EURDNU-WP6-11-37 
arXiv:1107.1452v3 [hep-ph] 



O 

(N 
(N 



3+1 and 3+2 Sterile Neutrino Fits 



Carlo Giuntli] 
INFN, Sezione di Torino, Via P. Giuria 1, 1-10125 Torino, Italy 

Marco LavedeiO] 

Dipartimento di Fisica "G. Galilei", Universttd dt Padova, and INFN, 

Sezione di Padova, Via F. Marzolo 8, 1-35131 Padova, Italy 

(Dated: September 5, 2011) 

We present the results of fits of short-baseline neutrino oscillation data in 3+1 and 3+2 neutrino 
mixing schemes. In spite of the presence of a tension in the interpretation of the data, 3+1 neutrino 
mixing is attractive for its simplicity and for the natural correspondence of one new entity (a sterile 
neutrino) with a new effect (short-baseline oscillations). The allowed regions in the oscillation 
parameter space can be tested in near-future experiments. In the framework of 3+2 neutrino mixing 
there is less tension in the interpretation of the data, at the price of introducing a second sterile 
neutrino. Moreover, the improvement of the parameter goodness of fit is mainly a statistical effect 
due to an increase of the number of parameters. The CP violation in short-baseline experiments 
allowed in 3+2 neutrino mixing can explain the positive i/jj — ^ i>e signal and the negative f^ — ^ Ve 
measurement in the MiniBooNE experiment. For the CP-violating phase we obtained two minima 
of the marginal x^ close to the two values where CP-violation is maximal. 

PACS numbers: 14.60.Pq, 14.60.Lm, 14.60.St 






> 

o 



X 



I. INTRODUCTION 

The recent agreement of MiniBooNE antincutrino data 
[ij with the short-baseline i^^ — ?> Pe oscillation signal ob- 
served several years ago in the LSND experiment Q] has 
opened an intense theoretical and experimental activity 
aimed at the clarification of the explanation of these ob- 
servations in a framework compatible with the data of 
other neutrino oscillation experiments. Several short- 
baseline neutrino oscillation experiments did not observe 
neutrino oscillations and their data constraint the in- 
terpretation of the LSND and MiniBooNE antineutrino 
signal. However, there are other positive indications of 
short-baseline neutrino oscillations that may be taken 
into account: the reactor antineutrino anomaly [3|, in 
favor of a small short-baseline disappearance of i>e, the 
Gallium neutrino anomaly |3l4l2l|. in favor of a short- 
baseline disappearance of i^e, and the MiniBooNE low- 
energy anomaly [3, 0, m, 113 ■ ^^ ^^is paper we consider 
only the reactor antineutrino anomaly, by taking into ac- 
count the new calculation of reactor antineutrino fluxes 
in Ref. [1^. We leave the discussion of the effects of 
the more controversial Gallium anomaly and MiniBooNE 
low-energy anomaly to a following article |14l |. 

The results of solar, atmospheric and long-baseline 
neutrino oscillation experiments led us to the current 
standard three-neutrino mixing paradigm, in which the 
three active neutrinos Vg, v^^, v^ are superpositions of 
three massive neutrinos v\^ 1/2, ^'3 with respective masses 
TTii, 7712, "^3- The measured solar (SOL) and atmospheric 



* |giunti@to.infn.it[ also at Department of Theoretical Physic 

University of Torino, Italy 
t ,laveder@pd. infn.it, 



(ATM) squared-mass differences can be interpreted as 



A777|oL = ^™2i = (7-6 ± 0.2) X lO"''^ eV^ [15] , (1) 



AnzirpM — \Am'^ 



311 



= 2.32lJ];J|xlO-^eV^ M, (2) 



with Arn^ = m,f, — 777^. 

The completeness of the three-neutrino mixing 
paradigm has been challenged by the LSND [2| and Mini- 
BooNE [l| observations of short-baseline 7>^ — )■ De transi- 
tions at different values of distance (L) and energy (E), 
but approximately at the same L/E. Since the distance 
and energy dependences of neutrino oscillations occur 
through this ratio, the agreement of the MiniBooNE and 
LSND signals raised interest in the possibility of exis- 
tence of one or more squared-mass differences larger than 
about 0.5 eV, which is much bigger than the values of 
A777gQL and Arn^j,^. Hence, we are lead to the exten- 
sion of three-neutrino mixing with the introduction of 
one or more sterile neutrinos which do not have weak in- 
teractions and do not contribute to the invisible width of 
the Z boson [I3|. In this paper we consider the simplest 
possibilities: 3+1 mixing with one sterile neutrino and 
3+2 mixing with two sterile neutrinos. 

The existence of sterile neutrinos which have been ther- 
malized in the early Universe is compatible with Big- 
Bang Nucleosynthesis data [I3, [l^ , with the indication 
however that schemes with more than one sterile neutrino 
are disfavored [20] , and cosmological measurements of the 
Cosmic Microwave Background and Large-Scale Struc- 
tures if the neutrino masses are limited below about 1 
eV |2ll - [25J | . Therefore, in this paper we consider squared- 
mass differences smaller than 10 eV^. 



Am^i 



1^4 



Amli 



"normal" 



1^4 

"inverted" 



^1,2,3 



FIG. 1. Schematic description of the two possible 3+1 
schemes that we are considering, taking into account that 
lAmiil < |Amii|< |Amli|. 



II. 3+1 NEUTRINO MIXING 

In this section we consider the simplest extension of 
three-neutrino mixing with the addition of one massive 
neutrino. In such four-neutrino mixing framework the 
flavor neutrino basis is composed by the three active neu- 
trinos Ve, i^fj., Vt and a sterile neutrino Vg. 

So-called 2+2 four-neutrino mixing schemes are 
strongly disfavored by the absence of any signal of sterile 
neutrino effects in solar and atmospheric neutrino data 
[26| . Hence, we consider only the so-called 3+1 four- 
neutrino schemes depicted in Fig. [1] Since the inverted 
scheme has three massive neutrinos at the eV scale, it is 
disfavored by cosmological data [2l|, [22| over the normal 
scheme. In both 3+1 schemes the effective flavor tran- 
sition and survival probabilities in short-baseline (SBL) 
experiments are given by 



i?SBL_=sin2 2^„.sin2('^^ 






'afi i 



i.SBL_^ ^ 1 _ 3i^2 2^^^ gi^2 /' AmliL 



A.E 



(a^/3), (3) 
(4) 



for a, /3 = e, /x, r, s, with 



sin2 2^,^=4|(7„4r|(704| 
sin2 2^„„=4|;7„4|'(l- 



|C/c.4p) 



(5) 
(6) 



4. CP violation cannot be observed in SBL oscilla- 
tion experiments, even if the mixing matrix con- 
tains CP-violation phases. In other words, neutri- 
nos and antineutrinos have the same effective SBL 
oscillation probabilities. 

Before the recent indication of an antineutrino v^,_ — >■ v^, 
signal consistent with the LSND antineutrino signal, the 
MiniBooNE collaboration published the results of neu- 
trino data which do not show a corresponding v^ — >■ v^ 
signal 27[ . This difference between the MiniBooNE neu- 
trino and antineutrino data may be due to CP violation. 

The absence of any difference in the effective SBL oscil- 
lation probabilities of neutrinos and antineutrinos in 3+1 
four-neutrino mixing schemes implies that these schemes 
cannot explain the difference between neutrinos and an- 
tineutrino oscillations observed in the MiniBooNE exper- 
iment. Moreover, the dependence of all the oscillation 
amplitudes in Eqs. ([5]) and ([B]) on three independent ab- 
solute values of the elements in the fourth column of the 
mixing matrix implies that the amplitude of z/^ -^ Vf. 
transitions is limited by the absence of large SBL disap- 
pearance of Uf, and v^ observed in several experiments. 

The results of reactor neutrino experiments constrain 
the value |C/e4p through the measurement of sin^2z9ee- 
The calculation of the reactor Uf. flux has been recently 
improved in Ref. [l3J , resulting in an increase of about 3% 
with respect to the previous value adopted by all exper- 
iments for the comparison with the data (see Ref. |28|). 
Since the measured reactor rates are in approximate 
agreement with those derived from the old Ve flux, they 
show a deficit with respect to the rates derived from the 
new i/g flux. This is the "reactor antineutrino anomaly" 
^3^, which is quantified by the value 



-'*'rcactor anomaly — U.y4u it U.UZ4 



(7) 



Therefore: 



for the average of the ratios of measured event rates 
and those expected in absence of i^e transformations into 
other states. We considered the integral rates of the 
Bugey-3 ^, Bugey-4 [30|, R0VN091 [3i|, Gosgen ^ 
and Krasnoyarsk [33| short-baseline reactor antineutrino 
experiments using the information in Table II of Ref. 3]j. 
Hence, the reactor antineutrino anomaly is a 2.2a in- 
dication that there is a small short-baseline disappear- 
ance of v^ which may correspond to the i>^ — t- v^ sig- 
nal observed in the LSND and MiniBooNE experiments. 



1. All effective SBL oscillation probabilities depend 
only on the absolute value of the largest squared- 
mass difference Arnl^. 

2. All oscillation channels are open, each one with its 
own oscillation amplitude. 

3. The oscillation amplitudes depend only on the ab- 
solute values of the elements in the fourth column 
of the mixing matrix, i.e. on three real numbers 
with sum less than unity, since the unitarity of the 
mixing matrix implies ^^ |t^a4p = 1 



^ We do not use the two rates of the Savannah River experiment 
H in Table II of Ref. Q, RsRP I = 0.952 ± 0.006 ± 0.037 and 
-RsRP n = 1-018 ± 0.010 ± 0.037 because they are about 5.5o- 
apart, taking into account that their difference 0.066 ± 0.012 
is independent of the correlated systematic uncertainty (0.037). 
Such a large difference cannot be due to neutrino oscillations 
averaged over the whole energy spectrum, because the two mea- 
surements have been done at distances which are not different 
enough (18 m and 24 m). We also do not use the ROVN088 3^ 
rates in Table II of Ref. 3 , because the correlation with Bugey-4 
and R0VN091 is not clear. 



10 



> 

CD 



10" 



10" 



99% C.L. 
Bugey-3(1995) 

Bugey-4 (1994) + Rovno (1991) 
Gosgen (1986) + ILL (1995) 
Krasnoyarsk (1994) 




10 



10" 



10"' 



> 

CD 



10" 



10" 





/^^ 


- 


99% C.L. 
CDHSW(1984):v^, 


, , 



10" 



10" 
sin^2-&, 



^^ 



FIG. 2. Exclusion curves obtained from the data of reactor 
Ue disappearance experiments (see Ref. [3]). 



However, the De disappearance is small and large val- 
ues of sin 2dee are constrained by the exclusion curves 
in Fig. [2] (as in Ref. \3\ , the Bugey-3 exclusion curve has 
been obtained by fitting the three integral rates measured 
a,t L = 15,40,95m and the 40m/15m spectral ratio in 
Fig. 15 of Ref. [29|). Since values of |C/e4p close to unity 
are excluded by solar neutrino oscillations (which require 



large \Uei\ 



\Ue2?) 



for small sin 2t9pp we have 



sin"' 2i?p 



41 1/,, 



(8) 



The value of sin 21?^^ is constrained by the curves in 
Fig. 131 which have been obtained from the lack of Vj 
disappearance in the CDHSW 

from the requirement of large |?7;iilf.+ |t/„,2p + |t/„aP for 
atmospheric neutrino oscillations [3 
small and 




FIG. 3. Exclusion curves obtained from the data of the 
CDHSW u^ disappearance experiment [3y], and from at- 
mospheric neutrino data (extracted from the analysis in 
Ref. [32 



shown in Fig. [S] the constraint becomes stronger by in- 
cluding the data of the KARMEN 0, NOMAD [4l| and 
MiniBooNE neutrino [27[ experiments, which did not ob- 
serve a short-baseline i^^ -^ v^. signal. Since the parame- 
ter goodness-of-fit [43] is 6 x 10~^, 3-1-1 schemes are dis- 
favored by the data. This conclusion has been reached 
recently also in Refs. [33, [43l-[45l a nd confirms the pre- 
MiniBooNE results in Refs^UlM [H, SI- 

However, in spite of the low value of the parameter 
goodness-of-fit it is not inconceivable to refuse to reject 
the 3-f 1 schemes for the following reasons: 

1. It is the simplest scheme beyond the standard 
three-neutrino mixing which can partially explain 
the data. 



sin-^ 2i?, 



4|C/, 



p4| 



(9) 



From Eqs. (0, ([8]) and (0, for the amplitude of v^ 
i/g transitions we obtain [38l , [39| 



sin^ 2??p 



1 



sin^ 2z9pp sin^ 2?9,, 



(10) 



Therefore, if sin^ 2^ee and sin^ 2i5^^ are small, sin^ 2^ep 
is quadratically suppressed. This is illustrated in Fig. [H 
where one can see that the separate effects of the con- 
straints on sin^ 2i?ee and sin^ 2^^^ exclude only the large- 
sin^ 2i9e^ part of the region allowed by LSND and Mini- 
BooNE antineutrino data, whereas most of this region 
is excluded by the combined constraint in Eq. (ITUl) . As 



2. It corresponds to the natural addition of one new 
entity (a sterile neutrino) to explain a new effect 
(short-baseline oscillations). Better fits of the data 
require the addition of at least another new entity 
(in any case at least one sterile neutrino is needed 
to generate short-baseline oscillations). 

3. The minimum value of the global ^ is rather good: 
Xmin = 100.2 for 104 degrees of freedom. 

Note also that 3+1 schemes are favored with respect 
to 3+2 schemes by the Big-Bang Nucleosynthesis limit 
iVcff < 4 at 95% C.L. obtained in Ref. [23|. Therefore, 
we consider the global fit of all data in 3+1 schemes, 
which yields the best-fit values of the oscillation param- 
eters listed in Tab. [Tj 



10 



> 

CD 



10" 



10" 



99% C.L 
Reactors 

CDHSW + Atm 

Disappearance 

LSND + MBv 



\ J 



\ 



10" 



10" 



10"-= 
s/n^2de 



10" 



10 



> 

CD 



10" 



10" 




99% C.L. 
MBv + LSNDv 
Dis + KAR + NOM + MBv 



10' 



10" 



10"-^ 
s/n^2de 



10" 



FIG. 4. Exclusion curves in the sin 2i9e(j-Am4i plane ob- FIG. 5. Exclusion curve in the sin I'&^^-^m^^ plane ob- 



tained from the separate constraints in Figs. [2] and [3] (blue 
dashed line and green dotted line) and the combined con- 
straint given by Eq. (|10l) (red solid line) from disappearance 
experiments (Dis). The regions allowed by LSND and Mini- 
BooNE antineutrino data are delimited by dark-blue long- 
dashed lines. 



tained with the addition to the disappearance constraint in 
Fig.Hof the constraints obtained from KARMEN [il (KAR), 
NOMAD 41^ (NOM) and MiniBooNE neutrino 27| (MBi^) 
data (red solid line). The regions allowed by LSND and Mini- 
BooNE antineutrino data are delimited by dark-blue long- 
dashed lines. 



Figures [6] and [7] show the allowed regions in the 



sin^ 2^e 



-Am|i, 



sin^ 2??p 



-Arn|;^ 



and sin^ 2??„ 



-Am^i 



planes and the marginal Ax s for tym\^^ sin 2i?e^, 
sin^ 2i^pp and sin^2t?,,,, . The best-fit values of the os- 



cillation amplitudes are 



sin^ 2i?eA. = 0.0023 , 
sin^ 2^ee = 0.098 , 
sin^ 2i?„„ = 0.091 . 



(11) 
(12) 

(13) 



3+1 



3+2 



Xmin 


100.2 


91.6 


NDF 


104 


100 


GoF 


59% 


71% 


Am^i [eV"] 


0.89 


0.90 


|f/e4p 


0.025 


0.017 


\UA^ 


0.023 


0.019 


Ami [eV^] 




1.61 


\U.6\' 




0.017 


\u,,f 




0.0061 


V 




1.5l7r 


Axpg 


24.1 


22.2 


NDFpG 


2 


5 


PGoF 


6 X 10"'' 


5 X lO""* 



TABLE I. Values of x^ , number of degrees of freedom (NDF) , 
goodness-of-fit (GoF) and best-fit values of the mixing pa- 
rameters obtained in our 3+1 and 3+2 fits of short-baseline 
oscillation data. The last three lines give the results of the 
parameter goodness-of-fit test [431: Axpgi number of degrees 
of freedom (NDFpg) and parameter goodness-of-fit (PGoF). 



From Fig. [6] one can see that the allowed regions are 
compatible with those allowed by appearance data (the 
D^ -^ De data of the LSND \2], KARMEN [H and Mini- 
BooNE [1 [experiments and the i/^j, — )■ Ve data of the 
NOMADgH and MiniBooNE [13 experiments) and are 
slightly pushed towards the left by the disappearance 
constraints. Future experiments aimed at checking the 
LSND [1] and MiniBooNE [l| i>^ -^ Pe oscillation signal 
(as those in Refs. |48l - [5(]| |) should aim at exploring these 
regions. 

Figure [7] shows that the allowed regions in the 
sin 2^ee~Am|]^ and sin 2?9^^-Am|]^ planes lie just on 
the left of the disappearance constraints, as expected. 
From the left panel in Fig. [7] one can see that the al- 
lowed regions in the sin 2'dee~^iTi^i plane are compati- 
ble with the area indicated by the Gallium anomaly [i2| ■ 
The allowed region around the best- fit point and the 
isolated region at Am^i ~ GeV'^are also compatible 
with the recent results in Ref. [51]. If the 3+1 neu- 
trino mixing scheme is realized in nature, future exper- 
iments searching for short-baseline v^ disappearance (as 



<l 




> 

03 



s 

< 



^o-' 



m 






3+1 




68.27% C.L(1o) 




90.00% C.L. 


k 


95.45% C.L. (2o) 


99.00% C.L. 




99.73% C.L. (So) 





10' 



10" 



10" 



10" 



e\i 




8 10 



those in Refs. [Ill, |48|, ISfl, l52|-l57| ) should find a disappear- 
ance compatible with the reactor antineutrino anomaly in 
Eq. ([7]). Future experiments searching for short-baseline 

Vfi disappearance (as those in Refs. [4^, [S^) should 
find a disappearance just below the current bound, for 

0.4 < Amli < 7eV^. Short-baseline v^ and f^ disap- 
pearance can have observable effects, respectively, also 
in solar neutrino experiments l59ll6Cl, long-baseline neu- 
trino oscillation experiments [6ll |62[ and atmospheric 
neutrino experiments [63, ^gg . 



III. 3+2 NEUTRINO MIXING 

The CP-violating difference between MiniBooNE neu- 
trino and antineutrino data can be explained by in- 
troducing another physical effect in addition to a ster- 
ile neutrino: a second sterile neutrino in 3-1-2 schemes 
[l^iSliiJe^Jel, non-standard interactions '4$, CPT 
violation [4Jj [Z0|- I^ ^his section we discuss the pos- 
sibility of 3-1-2 neutrino mixing according to the possi- 
ble schemes illustrated schematically in Fig. [51 The in- 
verted and perverted schemes have been called, respec- 
tively, 2-1-3 and 1-1-3-1-1 in Ref. [71|. Since the inverted 
and perverted schemes have three or four massive neutri- 
nos at the eV scale, they are disfavored by cosmological 




s/n 2iJp, 



sin'^Z'du 



FIG. 6. Allowed regions in the sin'^ 2i}e^-Amii plane and 
marginal A^^'s for sin^ 2i9eM and Am|i obtained from the V 

global fit of all the considered data in 3+1 schemes. The best- 
fit point corresponding to Xmin is indicated by a cross. The 
isolated dark-blue dash-dotted contours enclose the regions 
allowed at 3a by the analysis of appearance data (the i/fj, — >■ i/e 
data of the LSND [2, KARMEN ^ and MiniBooNE [J 
experiments and the i*^ — >■ Ue data of the NOMAD [41[ and 
MiniBooNE [13] experiments). 



Allowed regions in the sin'^ 2i?ee-Am|i and 
-Am4i planes and marginal Ax 's for sin 2'Oee and 
sin'^ 2i?,t^ obtained from the global fit of all the considered 
data in 3-1-1 schemes. The best-fit point corresponding to 
Xmin is indicated by a cross. The line types and color have 
the same meaning as in Fig. [S] The isolated dark-blue dash- 
dotted lines are the 3a exclusion curves obtained from reac- 
tor neutrino data in the left plot (corresponding to the blue 
dashed line in Fig.|4]) and from CDHSW and atmospheric neu- 
trino data in the right plot (corresponding to the green dotted 
line in Fig. [4]). The isolated dark-red long-dashed lines delimit 
the region allowed at 99% C.L. by the Gallium anomaly [l3 ]. 



data [21], [22| over the normal scheme. Note also that all 
3-1-2 schemes are disfavored by the Big-Bang Nucleosyn- 
thesis limit Ncs < 4 at 95% C.L. obtained in Ref. [20J . 

In 3+2 schemes the relevant effective oscillation prob- 
abilities in short-baseline experiments are given by 



i?_T<-,=4|C/,4| 



|C/e4psin2(/)4i 



4|C/^5nC/e5psin2 05i 



+ 8\Ufj,iUe4:Ufj,5Ue5\ siu (/>4i siu 05i COs( 



(+) 
^54 - V) , (14) 



pSBL 



= 1-4(1 



|C/a4| 
|2 „• 2 



Ic/csH 



X (|C/a4|^ sin^ 041 + \Uc5f sin^ 05i) 



-4|C/„4r|C/a5rsin2 
for a, /3 — e, fj,, with 



^54 : 



(15) 



0,, = AmlL/AE , r; = a.rg[U:,U,iUe5U;,] . (16) 

Note the change in sign of the contribution of the CP- 
violating phase ry going from neutrinos to antineutrinos, 
which allows us to explain the CP-violating difference 



Att^Ij 



Am',, 



Am^i 



'^.2.3 

" normal" 



Ami 


n 


Amji 


^^1,2,3 



"inverted" 



"perverted" 



FIG. 8. Schematic description of the three possible 3+2 
schemes that we are considering, taking into account that 
|Amii| < |Amii| < |Amli| < |Amii|. In the perverted 
scheme the identification of the labels k and j is chosen in 
order to satisfy the inequality |Ar7i|i| < |Am|i|. 



between MiniBooNE neutrino and antineutrino data. In 
our analysis we consider Am|]^ > and Arn^i > 0, with 
Amgj^ > Am|j^, which implies ^rn^^ > 0. These as- 
sumptions correspond to the normal scheme in Fig. [51 
which is favored by cosmological data, as noted above. 
In any case, the results of our analysis can be applied 
also to the inverted scheme (Am|j^ < 0, AyTigj^ < 0, 
ATO54 < 0) with the change 77 — i- 27r — 77. Instead the 
perverted schemes, which have been considered in the fit 
of Ref. [431 , require a separate treatment because in these 



schemes IATO541 



lAmiil 



IATO44I. For simplicity we 



do not consider them here, because they are strongly dis- 
favored by cosmological data, having four massive neu- 
trinos at the eV scale. 

Figures [HHH] show the marginal allowed regions in two- 
dimensional planes of interesting combinations of the 
oscillation parameters and the corresponding marginal 
Ax^'s obtained in our 3-f2 global fit of the same set of 
data used in Fig. [5l The best-fit values of the mixing 
parameters are shown in Tab. [H 

The correlation of the allowed regions of r] and 
4:\Ue4Ufj,4Ue5Ufj,5\ in Fig.[T2]is due to their presence in the 

last term in the effective j^^ -^ i^e oscillation probability 



in Eq. (|14p . The marginal Ax^ for ry has two minima 
close to the two values where CP-violation is maximal 
(77 = 7r/2 and 77 = 37r/2), in agreement with what we 
expected from the need to fit the positive Df^ — >■ D^ signal 
and negative v^ — ^ i^e measurement in the MiniBooNE 
experiment in the same range of L/ E. From Fig. [l^ 
one can also see that the marginal Ax^ for ?? is always 
smaller than the Ax^ — 7.8 corresponding to a negligi- 
bly small value of 4|C/e4[/^4[/e5C^^5| (this value is reached 
for 77 ~ O.Itt and around rj — n). Such a Ax^ is smaller 
than the difference of the x^ minima in the 3-1-1 and 3-1-2 
schemes because the condition for 4|[/e4C/^4C^e5C^^5| to 
vanish requires that only one of C/gs and C/^5 vanishes. 
In particular, if only U^^ is practically negligible, the re- 
actor antineutrino data can be fitted sligtly better than 
in 3-1-1 schemes, as already noted in Ref. \45^. 



3+2 

68.27% C.L. 
90.00% C.L. 
95.45% C.L. (20) 
99.00% C.L. 
99.73% C.L. (3o) 




Ami 



[eV 



Ax 



FIG. 9. Allowed regions in the Amii-Amli plane and cor- 
responding marginal Ax^'s obtained from the global fit of 
all the considered data in 3+2 schemes. The best-fit point 
corresponding to Xmin is indicated by a cross. 



The parameter goodness-of-fit obtained with the com- 
parison of the fit of LSND and MiniBooNE antineutrino 
data and the fit of all other data is 5 x 10^^. This is 
an improvement with respect to the 6 x 10^^ parameter 
goodness-of-fit obtained in 3+1 schemes. However, the 
value of the parameter goodness-of-fit remains low and 
the improvement is mainly due to the increased num- 
ber of degrees of freedom, as one can see from Tab. [D 
The persistence of a bad parameter goodness-of-fit is a 
consequence of the fact that the j?^ — > De transitions ob- 
served in LSND and MiniBooNE must correspond in any 
neutrino mixing schemes to enough short-baseline dis- 
appearance of i^e and 7/^ which has not been observed 
and there is an irreducible tension between the LSND 
and MiniBooNE antineutrino data and the KARMEN 
antineutrino data. The only benefit of 3+2 schemes with 
respect to 3+1 schemes is that they allow to explain 
the difference between MiniBooNE neutrino and antineu- 
trino data through CP violation. In fact, neglecting the 
MiniBooNE neutrino data we obtain Ax|q = 16.6 with 
PGoF = 3 X 10"-* in 3+1 schemes and AxpQ = 20.4 with 
PGoF = 1 X lO^'' in 3+2 schemes. In this case Axpq is 
even lower in 3+1 schemes than in 3+2 schemes! 

The tension between LSND and MiniBooNE antineu- 
trino data and disappearance, KARMEN, NOMAD and 
MiniBooNE neutrino data is illustrated in Fig.[T31 which 
is the analogous for 3+2 schemes of Fig. \5\ in 3+1 
schemes. In practice, in order to show the tension in 
a two-dimensional figure we have marginalized the x^ 
over all the other mixing parameters, including the two 
Am'^'s. 




10^ 10 



4\U,/{1-\U,/) 



10" 10" 




lO" 10" 



FIG. 10. 



Allowed regions in the 



4|f/e4p(l-|C/e4r)-Am|iand4|(7p4r(l- 



4|t/e4p 



|[/^4r-AmIi, 
-Am|i planes 



and marginal Ax^'s for 4|l7e4p|t/^4p, 4|[/e4|^(l - \Ue4\'^) and 
4|C/^i4p(l — |(7^4p) obtained from the global fit of all the con- 
sidered data in 3+2 schemes. The line types and color have 
the same meaning as in Fig. (9] The best-fit point correspond- 
ing to Xmin is indicated by a cross. 



FIG. 11. Allowed regions in the 4\Ue5\ \U^5\ -Amli, 

4|C/e5p(l-|f/e5p)-Amii and 4|[7p5 P (1" If/^s H-Amli planes 
and marginal Ax^'s for 4|f/e5p|f/^5p, 4|C/e5p(l - It/esl") and 
4|f/^5p(l — |C/^t5p) obtained from the global fit of all the con- 
sidered data in 3-1-2 schemes. The line types and color have 
the same meaning as in Fig. [9] The best-fit point correspond- 
ing to Xmin is indicated by a cross. 



The results of our 3-1-2 global fit are in reasonable 
agreement with those presented in Ref. [4^. There is 
a discrepancy in the location of the best-fit point in the 
Amli-Am'^i plane, but we obtain similar regions for the 
local x^ minima. Our allowed regions are larger than 
those presented in Ref. [43] ■ We think that such differ- 
ence is probably due to a different treatment of the spec- 
tral data of the Bugey-3 reactor experiment [22i] which 
cause the wiggling for Am^ < 1 eV^ of the disappear- 
ance limit in Fig. 3] and the exclusion curve in Fig. [S] 
Such wigghng is wider in Fig. 3 of Ref. [45], leading to 
deeper valleys of the x^ function and smaller allowed re- 
gions. The compatibility with cosmological data of the 
allowed regions in the Arn^j^-Arn^^ plane shown in Fig.[S] 
will be discussed in a separate article 72 1 (an interesting 
previous study was presented in Ref. [73|). 



3+2 
68.27% C.L. ( 
90.00% C.L. 
95.45% C.L. (2o} 
99.00% C.L. 
99.73% C.L. (3o} 




FIG. 12. Allowed regions in the r)-A\U eiU ^iU ez,U ^z,\ plane 
and corresponding marginal Ax^'s obtained from the global 

fit of all the considered data in 3-f2 schemes. The best-fit 

Figures [TOHII] show the allowed regions for the ampli- point corresponding to xiin is indicated by a cross. 

tudes of the oscillating terms in short-baseline z/^ — > Ve 
transitions and Vp and v^ disappearance, for which we 



10" 
"-IE 10" 



10" 



10 



-4 





95%C.L. 


■^; 




MBv + LSNDv 


J-^'^1- 




Dis + KAR + NOM + MBv 


y^ 




/ 


j 


i 

1 


y — 

_|_LJ_LLLi^ i 1 Mini 1 L 


+ I 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 \ jJ\ \ w 



10" 



10" 



10" 



10" 



^\Ue,nu^4\ 



FIG. 13. Comparison of the 95% C.L. allowed regions in the 
4|C/e4p|t/^4|^-4|f/e5p|t/M5|^ plane obtained from LSND and 
MiniBooNE antineutrino data on the right (green area) and 
disappearance, KARMEN, NOMAD and MiniBooNE neu- 
trino data on the left (red area). The corresponding best-fit 
points are indicated by crosses. 



have the best-fit values 



(7e4n(7^4|'= 0.0013, 
t/e5|'|t/M5|'= 0.00042, 
C/e4p(l-|C/e4n= 0.068, 
(7e5|'(l-|C/e5n= 0.068, 

t/^4|'(l-|f/Mp) = 0.076, 
t/^5|'(l-|t/M5n- 0.024. 



(17) 
(18) 
(19) 
(20) 
(21) 
(22) 



Comparingthe valuesof 4|C/e4p|C/^4p, 4|[/e4|2(l-|J7e4p) 
and 4|[/p4p(l — |t^/j4p) with those obtained in 3+1 mix- 
ing, given in Eqs pT|) - p^ . one can see that they are 
lower, but keep the same order of magnitude. In the fit 
of the data the smaller values of these amplitudes is due 
to the additional contribution of the amplitudes gener- 



ated by the mixing of i/g and v^ with 1/5 . 



(-) 



(-) 



i/n disappearance [4 



IV. CONCLUSIONS 

In this paper we presented the results of fits of short- 
baseline neutrino oscillation data in 3+1 and 3+2 neu- 
trino mixing schemes. 

In the framework of 3+1 neutrino mixing schemes in 
Fig. [TJ we confirm the strong tension between LSND and 
MiniBooNE antineutrino data and disappearance, KAR- 
MEN, NOMAD and MiniBooNE neutrino data discussed 
recently in Refs. |37l. I43l445l | . Since however the minimum 
value of the global x^ is rather good, one may choose 
to consider as possible 3+1 neutrino mixing, which can 
partially explain the data, taking into account its sim- 
plicity and the natural correspondence of one new entity 
(a sterile neutrino) with a new effect (short-baseline os- 
cillations). Following this approach, we presented the re- 
sults of the global fit in 3+1 neutrino mixing, which leads 
to the determination of restricted allowed regions in the 
mixing parameter space which can be explored in future 

Si-i3'j^e disappearance [H El US IH-il and 

58| experiments. 

We also presented a global fit in the framework of the 
3+2 neutrino mixing schemes in Fig. [51 We have shown 
that the tension between LSND and MiniBooNE antineu- 
trino data and disappearance, KARMEN, NOMAD and 
MiniBooNE neutrino data is reduced with respect to the 
3+1 fit, but is not eliminated (see Fig. [T3l) . Moreover, 
the improvement of the parameter goodness of fit with 
respect to that obtained in the 3+1 fit is mainly due to 
the increase of the number of oscillation parameters, as 
one can see from Tab. [T] Hence it seems mainly a statis- 
tical effect. 

The results of our 3+2 fit arc compatible with those 
presented recently in Ref. [45.] . but we obtain a differ- 
ent indication for the best fit (see Tab. H]). For the CP- 
violating phase we obtained two minima of the marginal 
X^ close to the two values where CP- violation is maximal. 

In conclusion, we think that our results are useful for 
the discussion of the interpretation of the current ex- 
perimental indications in favor of short-baseline neutrino 
oscillations and for the study of new experiments aimed 
at a clarification of the validity of these indications. 



[1] MiniBooNE, A. A. Aguilar-Arevalo et al, Phys. Rev. 

Lett. 105, 181801 (2010), arXi v: 1007.1150] 
[2] LSND, A. Aguilar et al, Phys. Rev. D64, 112007 (2001), 

hep-ex/010 4049 , 
[3] G. Mentio n et al, Phys. Rev. D83, 073006 (2011), 

,arXiv:110i:2755| 
[4] J. N. Bahcall, P. I. Krastev, and E. Lisi, Phys. Lett. 

B348, 121 (1995),'hep-ph/9411414, 
[5] M. Laveder, Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 168, 344 (2007), 



Talk presented at the Workshop on Neutrino Oscillation 

Physics (NOW 2006), Otranto, Lecce, Italy, 9-16 Sep 

2006. 
[6] C. Giunti and M. Laveder, Mod. Phys. Lett. A22, 2499 

(2007), hep-ph/0610352 
[7] C. Giu nti and M. Lave der, Phys. Rev. D77, 093002 

(2008), rarXiv:0707.4593] 
[8] M. A. Acero, C. Giunti, and M. Laveder, Phys. Rev. 

D78, 073009 (2008), arXiv:0711.4222, 



[9] C. Giunti and M. Laveder, Phys. Rev. D80, 013005 

(20091. . arXiv:0902. 1992 [42 

[10] C. Giu nti and M. Lave der, Phys. Rev. D82, 053005 

(20101. [axXrv:1005.4599l [43 

[11] V. N. Gavrin, V. V. Gorbachev, E. P. Veretenkin, and 

B. T. Cleveland, (2010), arXiv:1006.2l03 [44 

[12] C. Giu nti and M. Laveder, Phys. Rev. C83, 065504 

(20111. larXiv:1 006.3244 [45 

[13] T. A. Mue ller et al, Phys. Rev. CSS, 054615 (2011), 

larXiv:1101 .2663 [46 

[14] C. Giunti and M. Laveder, (2011), In Preparation. 
[15] Super-Kamiokande, K. Abe et al, Phys. Rev. D83, [47 

052010 (2011), arXiv;1010.0118 
[16] MINO S, P. Adamson et al, Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 181801 [ 

(20111. larXiv:1103.0340l [49 

[17] ALEPH, DELPHI, L3, OPAL, SLD, LEP Electroweak 

Working Group, SLD Electroweak Group, SLD Heavy [50 

Flavour Group, S. Schael et al., Phys. Rept. 427, 257 

(2006), hep-ex/0509008, [51 

[18] R. H. Cyburt, B. D. Fields, K. A. Olive, and E. SkiUman, [52 

Astropart. Phys. 23, 313 (2005), |astro-ph/0408033, 
[19] Y. I. Izotov and T. X. Thuan, Astrophys. J. 710, L67 [53 

(2010), arXiv:1001.4440': 
[20] G. Mangano and P. D. Serpico, Phys. Lett. B701, 296 [54 

(2011), arXiv:1103.1261 
[21] J. Hamann, S. Hannestad, G. G. Raflelt, I. Tamborra, [55 

and Y. Y. Wong, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 181301 (2010), 
[a:rXiv:1006.527 6 [56 

[22] E. Giusarma et al, Phys. Rev. D83, 115023 (2011), 

larXiv:1102 .4"774 [57 

[23] J. R. Kristiansen and O. Elgaroy, (2011), 

arXiv: 1104.0704, [58 

[24] Z. Hou, R. Keisler, L. Knox, M. Millea, and C. Reichardt, 

(2011), arXiv:1104.2333 [59 

[25] A. X. Gonzalez-Morales, R. Poltis, B. D. Sherwin, and 

L. Verde, (2011), arXiv: 1106.5052 [60 

[26] M. Maltoni, T. Schwetz, M. Tortola, and J. Valle, New 

J. Phys. 6, 122 (2004), hep-ph/0405172 [61 

[27] MiniBooNE, A. A. Aguilar-Arevalo, Phys. Rev. Lett. 

102, 101802 (20091. ■arXiv:0812. 2243. [62 

[28] C. Bemporad, G. Gratta, and P. Vogel, Rev. Mod. Phys. 

74, 297 (2002), hep-ph/0107277" [63 

[29] Bugey, B. Achkar et al, Nucl. Phys. B434, 503 (1995). 
[30] Bugey, Y. Declais et al, Phys. Lett. B338, 383 (1994). [64 

[31] A. Kuvshinnikov, L. Mikaelyan, S. Nikolaev, M. Sko- 

rokhvatov, and A. Etenko, JETP Lett. 54, 253 (1991), [65 

in russian. [66 

[32] CalTech-SIN-TUM, G. Zacek et al, Phys. Rev. D34, 

2621 (1986). [67 

[33] G. S. Vidyakin et al, Sov. Phys. JETP 71, 424 (1990). 
[34] Z. D. Greenwood et al, Phys. Rev. D53, 6054 (1996). [ 

[35] A. I. Afonin et al, Sov. Phys. JETP 67, 213 (1988). 
[36] CDHSW, F. Dydak et al, Phys. Lett. B134, 281 (1984). [69 

[37] M. Mahoni and T. Schwetz, Phys. Rev. D76, 093005 

(2007), arXiv:0705.0107 
[38] N. Okada and O. Yasuda, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A12, 3669 [70 

(1997), hep-ph/9606411 
[39] S. M. Bilenky, C. Giunti, and W. Grimus, Eur. Phys. J. [71 

CI, 247 (1998),|hep-ph/9607372 
[40] KARMEN, B. Tm ibruster et al, Phys. Rev. D65, [72 

112001 (2002),'hep-ex/0203021, 
[41] NOMAD, P. Astier et al, Phys. Lett. B570, 19 (2003), [73 



hep-ex/0306037 

M. Maltoni and T. Schwetz, Phys. Rev. D68, 033020 
(2003), hep-ph/0304176 

E. Akhmedov and T. Schwetz, JHEP 10, 115 (2010), 
arXiv: 1007.4171 

C. Giunti and M. Laveder, Phys. Rev. D83, 053006 
(2011), arXiv;1012.0267 

J. Kopp, M. Maltoni, and T. Schwetz, (2011), 
■arXiv:1 103.4570 

S. M. Bilenky, C. Giunti, W. G rimus, and T. Sc hwetz, 
Phys. Rev. D60, 073007 (1999),"hep-ph/9903454[ 
M. Maltoni, T. Schwetz, M. A. Tortola, and J. W. F. 
Valle, Nucl. Phys. B643, 321 (2002), hep-ph/0207157 
C. Rubbia, (2011), CERN-SPSC-2011-012; SPSC-M-773. 
S. K. Agarwalla and P. Huber, Phys. Lett. B696, 359 
(20111, ■arXiv:1007.3228. 

S. K. Agarwalla, J. Conrad, and M. Shaevitz, (2011), 
arXiv:1105.4984' 

J. Conrad and M. Shaevitz, (2011), arXiv:1106.5"552] 
S. K. Agarwalla, P. Huber, and J. M. Link, JHEP 01, 
071 (2010), arXiv:0907.3145. 

C. Giunti, M. Laveder, and W. Winter, Phys. Rev. D80, 
073005 (2009),"arXiv:0907.5487' 

Nucifer Collaboration, A. Porta, J.Phys.Conf.Ser. 203, 
012092 (2010). 

S. K. Agarwalla and R. S. Raghavan, (2010), 
larXiv:1011.4509l 

J. Vergados, Y. Giomataris, and Y. Novikov, (2011), 
larXiv:1103.5307l 

M. Pallavicini, (2011), Short-Baseline Neutrino Work- 
shop (SBNWU), 12-14 May 2011, Fermilab. 
SciBooNE-MiniBooNE, K. B. M. Mahn et al, (2011), 
arXiv:11 06.568_5 . 

C. Giun ti and Y . Li, Phys. Rev. D80, 113007 (2009), 
arXiv:0910.5856, 

A. Palazzo, Phys. Rev. D83, 113013 (2011), 

arXiv:1105.1705 

MINOS, P. Adamson et al, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 011802 

(2011), arXi v:1104.3922l 

D. Hernandez and A. Y. Smirnov, (2011), 
larXiv:1105.5 946 

O. Peres and A. Smirnov, Nucl.Phys. B599, 3 (2001), 
hep-ph/0011054 

H. Nunokawa, O. L. G. Peres, and R. Z. Funchal, Phys. 
Lett. B562, 279 (2003), hep-ph/0302039 
S. Choubey, JHEP 12, 014 (2007), arXiv:0709.1937 
S. Razzaque and A. Y. Smirnov, JHEP 07, 084 (2011), 
arXiv:1104.1390 

M. Sorel, J. Conrad, and M. Shaevitz, Phys. Rev. D70, 
073004 (2004), h ep-ph/030525 5 

G. Karagiorgi et al, Phys. Rev. D75, 013011 (2007), 
hep-ph/0609177, 

G. Karagiorgi, Z. Djurcic, J. Conrad, M. H. Shae- 
vitz, and M. Sorel, Phys. Rev. D80, 073001 (2009), 
arXiv:0906.1997 

C. Giunti and M. Laveder, Phys. Rev. D82, 093016 
(2010), arXiv: 1010. 1395, 

S. Goswami and W. Rodejohann, JHEP 10, 073 (2007), 
arXiv:0706.1462 

M. Archidiacono, N. Fornengo, C. Giunti, and A. Mel- 
chiorri, (2011), In Preparation. 

A. Melchiorri et al, JCAP 0901, 036 (2009), 
larXiv:0810.5133l