Paper detail

Addendum to: Global constraints on absolute neutrino masses and their ordering

We revisit our previous work [Phys. Rev. D 95, 096014 (2017)] where neutrino oscillation and nonoscillation data were analyzed in the standard framework with three neutrino families, in order to constrain their absolute masses and to probe their ordering (either normal, NO, or inverted, IO). We include updated oscillation results to discuss best fits and allowed ranges for the two squared mass differences $δm^2$ and $Δm^2$, the three mixing angles $θ_{12}$, $θ_{23}$ and $θ_{13}$, as well as constraints on the CP-violating phase $δ$, plus significant indications in favor of NO vs IO at the level of $Δχ^2=10.0$. We then consider nonoscillation data from beta decay, from neutrinoless double beta decay (if neutrinos are Majorana), and from various cosmological input variants (in the data or the model) leading to results dubbed as default, aggressive, and conservative. In the default option, we obtain from nonoscillation data an extra contribution $Δχ^2 = 2.2$ in favor of NO, and an upper bound on the sum of neutrino masses $Σ< 0.15$ eV at $2σ$; both results - dominated by cosmology - can be strengthened or weakened by using more aggressive or conservative options, respectively. Taking into account such variations, we find that the combination of all (oscillation and nonoscillation) neutrino data favors NO at the level of $3.2-3.7σ$, and that $Σ$ is constrained at the $2σ$ level within $Σ< 0.12-0.69$ eV. The upper edge of this allowed range corresponds to an effective $β$-decay neutrino mass $m_β= Σ/3 = 0.23$ eV, at the sensitivity frontier of the KATRIN experiment.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access6 authors4 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.