Paper detail

The Effect of Cancellation in Neutrinoless Double Beta Decay

In light of recent experimental results, we carefully analyze the effects of interference in neutrinoless double beta decay, when more than one mechanism is operative. We assume a complete cancellation is at work for $^{136}\rm{Xe}$, and find its implications on the half-life of other isotopes, such as $^{76}\rm{Ge}$. For definiteness, we consider the role of light and heavy sterile neutrinos. In this case, the effective Majorana mass parameter can be redefined to take into account all contributions and its value gets suppressed. Hence, larger values of neutrino masses are required for the same half-life. The canonical light neutrino contribution can not saturate the present limits of half-lives or the positive claim of observation of neutrinoless double beta decay, once the stringent bounds from cosmology are taken into account. For the case of cancellation, where all the sterile neutrinos are heavy, the tension between the results from neutrinoless double beta decay and cosmology becomes more severe. We show that the inclusion of light sterile neutrinos in this set up can resolve this issue. Using the recent results from GERDA, we derive upper limits on the active-sterile mixing angles and compare it with the case of no cancellation. The required values of the mixing angles become larger, if a cancellation is at work. A direct test of destructive interference in $^{136}\rm{Xe}$ is provided by the observation of this process in other isotopes and we study in detail the correlation between their half-lives. Finally, we discuss the model realizations which can accommodate light and heavy sterile neutrinos and the cancellation. We show that sterile neutrinos of few hundred MeV or GeV mass range, coming from an Extended seesaw framework or a further extension, can satisfy the required cancellation.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 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.

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.