Paper detail

Revisiting the 'LSND anomaly' I: impact of new data

This paper, together with a subsequent paper, questions the so-called 'LSND anomaly': a 3.8 σ excess of anti-electronneutrino interactions over standard backgrounds, observed by the LSND Collaboration in a beam dump experiment with 800 MeV protons. That excess has been interpreted as evidence for the anti-muonneutrino{\to} anti-electronneutrino oscillation in the Δm2 range from 0.2 eV2 to 2 eV2. Such a Δm2 range is incompatible with the widely accepted model of oscillations between three light neutrino species and would require the existence of at least one light 'sterile' neutrino. In this paper, new data on pion production by protons on nuclei are presented, and four decades old data on pion production by neutrons on nuclei are recalled, that together increase significantly the estimates of standard backgrounds in the LSND experiment, and decrease the significance of the 'LSND anomaly' from 3.8 σ to 2.9 σ. In a subsequent paper, in addition the LSND Collaboration's data analysis will be questioned, rendering a further reduction of the significance of the 'LSND anomaly'.

preprint2011arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access23 authors1 topic

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.

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.