Paper detail

Heavy neutrino decays at MiniBooNE

It has been proposed that a sterile neutrino ν_h with m_h \approx 50 MeV and a dominant decay mode (ν_h -> νγ) may be the origin of the experimental anomaly observed at LSND. We define a particular model that could also explain the MiniBooNE excess consistently with the data at other neutrino experiments (radiative muon capture at TRIUMF, T2K, or single photon at NOMAD). The key ingredients are (i) its long lifetime (τ_h\approx 3-7x10^{-9} s), which introduces a 1/E dependence with the event energy, and (ii) its Dirac nature, which implies a photon preferably emitted opposite to the beam direction and further reduces the event energy at MiniBooNE. We show that these neutrinos are mostly produced through electromagnetic interactions with nuclei, and that T2K observations force BR(ν_h -> ν_τγ) \le 0.01 \approx BR(ν_h -> ν_μγ). The scenario implies then the presence of a second sterile neutrino ν_{h'} which is lighter, longer lived and less mixed with the standard flavors than ν_h. Since such particle would be copiously produced in air showers through (ν_h -> ν_{h'}γ) decays, we comment on the possible contamination that its photon-mediated elastic interactions with matter could introduce in dark matter experiments.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors2 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.