pith. sign in

arxiv: 2507.04885 · v2 · submitted 2025-07-07 · ✦ hep-ph

Effect of Off-diagonal NSI Parameters on Entanglement Measurements in Neutrino Oscillations

Lekhashri Konwar , Papia Panda , Rukmani Mohanta This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-19 06:34 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph
keywords neutrino oscillationsnon-standard interactionsquantum entanglementDUNE experimentCP violationoff-diagonal NSI
0
0 comments X

The pith

Off-diagonal NSI parameters alter neutrino entanglement measures most at low energies, with Negativity most sensitive to the CP phase.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This paper explores how off-diagonal non-standard interaction parameters influence quantum entanglement in three-flavor neutrino oscillations. It rewrites the measures of entanglement of formation, concurrence, and negativity as functions of oscillation probabilities and tracks their changes under the parameters ε_eμ, ε_eτ, and ε_μτ for a DUNE-like setup. The results indicate that NSI effects stand out most clearly at lower energies, that negativity remains the strongest measure even as energy rises, and that it alone displays a pronounced dependence on the CP-violating phase in the energy plane. Different NSI parameters act through appearance or disappearance channels. A reader would care because the work supplies a quantum-information route to testing beyond-standard-model effects in neutrino data.

Core claim

Expressing entanglement of formation, concurrence, and negativity directly in terms of oscillation probabilities shows that the off-diagonal NSI parameters ε_eμ, ε_eτ, and ε_μτ, together with their phases, modify these quantum correlations, with the largest changes appearing at low energies in DUNE while negativity continues to dominate at higher energies and exhibits clearer sensitivity to δ_CP than the other two measures.

What carries the argument

The rewriting of entanglement measures (EOF, concurrence, negativity) as functions of neutrino oscillation probabilities, followed by their evaluation under off-diagonal NSI parameters.

If this is right

  • NSI effects would be most detectable in the low-energy region of long-baseline neutrino data.
  • Negativity would continue to register quantum correlations after EOF and concurrence weaken at high energies.
  • ε_eμ and ε_eτ would mainly modify entanglement through appearance-channel probabilities, while ε_μτ would act through disappearance channels.
  • Negativity would display a visible dependence on δ_CP within specific low-energy intervals under off-diagonal NSI.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same probability-based mapping could be applied to other long-baseline experiments to search for consistent NSI signatures.
  • Entanglement observables might supplement conventional oscillation fits when placing bounds on NSI parameters.
  • Low-energy runs could be prioritized to separate NSI contributions from standard oscillations using these measures.

Load-bearing premise

The entanglement measures can be extracted solely from oscillation probabilities without additional experimental or theoretical corrections that would alter the reported NSI dependence.

What would settle it

A DUNE measurement showing that the entanglement measures lack stronger NSI dependence at low energies or that negativity fails to remain dominant at high energies would falsify the central claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.04885 by Lekhashri Konwar, Papia Panda, Rukmani Mohanta.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: Upper (lower) row shows the appearance probability as a function of neutrino [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: Upper (lower) row shows the effect of each term containing [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3: Upper (lower) row shows the effect of each term containing [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: The disappearance probability as a function of neutrino energy for the DUNE [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: The effect of each term containing [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6: Upper (lower) row shows the NSI parameter ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7: Upper (lower) row shows the NSI parameter ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8: Upper (lower) row shows the NSI parameter ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_8.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

In this work, we explore the influence of off-diagonal non-standard interaction (NSI) parameters on quantum entanglement within the three-flavor neutrino oscillation framework. By expressing three key entanglement measures: Entanglement of Formation (EOF), Concurrence, and Negativity in terms of oscillation probabilities, we analyze how these quantum correlations are affected by the NSI parameters $\epsilon_{e\mu}$, $\epsilon_{e\tau}$, and $\epsilon_{\mu\tau}$, including their complex phases. The quantum correlation measures considered in this work cannot be extracted directly from event rates, but solely in terms of oscillation probabilities. Using the DUNE experiment as a reference point, our analysis shows that NSI effects are most pronounced at lower energies, while Negativity continuing to dominate even at higher energies. It is observed that $\epsilon_{e \mu}$ and $\epsilon_{e \tau}$ affect entanglement measures mainly through the appearance channel, while the impact of $\epsilon_{\mu \tau}$ on EOF, Concurrence, and Negativity is predominantly linked to the disappearance channel. Further, our results show that Negativity is more sensitive than EOF and Concurrence in the [Energy ($E$) - $\delta_{CP}$] plane under the influence of off-diagonal NSI scenarios, displaying a clear dependence of the CP-violating phase, $\delta_{CP}$ on specific energy ranges, particularly in the lower energy regime.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper explores the effects of off-diagonal NSI parameters (ε_eμ, ε_eτ, ε_μτ and their phases) on quantum entanglement in three-flavor neutrino oscillations. It expresses Entanglement of Formation (EOF), Concurrence, and Negativity in terms of oscillation probabilities, analyzes their behavior with DUNE as reference, and reports that NSI effects are strongest at low energies, Negativity dominates at higher energies, ε_eμ and ε_eτ primarily affect the appearance channel while ε_μτ affects disappearance, and Negativity shows greater sensitivity to δ_CP in the [E – δ_CP] plane under off-diagonal NSI.

Significance. If the expressions for the entanglement measures are shown to correctly incorporate all relevant phase information from the evolution operator, the work could provide a quantum-information-based approach to probing NSI in long-baseline experiments, with the reported differential sensitivities offering potential guidance for analysis strategies at DUNE and similar facilities.

major comments (1)
  1. [Section on quantum correlation measures] Section on quantum correlation measures (abstract and the section deriving entanglement measures from probabilities): The entanglement measures are expressed solely as functions of the oscillation probabilities P_αβ. For the pure state |ψ⟩ = ∑_β A_β |ν_β⟩ the density matrix has off-diagonal coherences √(P_α P_β) exp(i Δϕ_αβ), where the relative phases Δϕ_αβ are fixed by the full evolution operator containing both δ_CP and the complex phases of ε_eμ, ε_eτ, ε_μτ. Formulas discarding explicit phase information therefore cannot capture the full dependence on δ_CP and NSI phases reported in the [E – δ_CP] plane, especially at low energies where matter and NSI effects are stated to be largest. This is load-bearing for the central sensitivity claims.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and methods] The abstract and methods sections provide no error propagation for the entanglement measures derived from probabilities and no explicit baseline comparison to the standard oscillation case without NSI.
  2. [Numerical results] The numerical results lack a clear statement of how the NSI parameter magnitudes and phases are chosen or marginalized, which affects reproducibility of the reported [E – δ_CP] sensitivities.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading of our manuscript and for identifying an important technical point regarding the treatment of phases in the entanglement measures. We address this comment below and will revise the manuscript to strengthen the presentation and accuracy of our results.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: Section on quantum correlation measures (abstract and the section deriving entanglement measures from probabilities): The entanglement measures are expressed solely as functions of the oscillation probabilities P_αβ. For the pure state |ψ⟩ = ∑_β A_β |ν_β⟩ the density matrix has off-diagonal coherences √(P_α P_β) exp(i Δϕ_αβ), where the relative phases Δϕ_αβ are fixed by the full evolution operator containing both δ_CP and the complex phases of ε_eμ, ε_eτ, ε_μτ. Formulas discarding explicit phase information therefore cannot capture the full dependence on δ_CP and NSI phases reported in the [E – δ_CP] plane, especially at low energies where matter and NSI effects are stated to be largest. This is load-bearing for the central sensitivity claims.

    Authors: We thank the referee for this insightful comment. We agree that the off-diagonal elements of the density matrix for the pure neutrino state contain relative phases Δϕ_αβ that are determined by the full evolution operator and therefore depend on both δ_CP and the complex NSI phases. Our analytic expressions for EOF, Concurrence, and Negativity were written in a form that depends only on the probabilities P_αβ; this presentation omits explicit phase dependence and is therefore incomplete for capturing the full sensitivity structure. In the numerical DUNE analysis we did evolve the complete Hamiltonian (including all phases) to obtain the state amplitudes before computing the measures, but the manuscript does not make this distinction clear and the formulas as written do not retain the phases. We will revise the relevant section to express the measures directly from the full density-matrix elements ρ_αβ = A_α A_β^*, thereby incorporating both probabilities and phases. The abstract will also be updated to reflect the corrected derivation. These changes will ensure that the reported δ_CP and NSI-phase sensitivities in the [E – δ_CP] plane are rigorously justified. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation substitutes NSI probabilities into independent entanglement formulas

full rationale

The paper computes oscillation probabilities modified by off-diagonal NSI parameters (including phases) using the standard three-flavor evolution Hamiltonian, then inserts those probabilities into the standard expressions for EOF, concurrence, and negativity. No step reduces by construction to a fitted parameter, self-defined quantity, or self-citation chain. The entanglement formulas are taken from external quantum-information literature and applied directly; DUNE baseline and energy ranges are external inputs, not derived inside the work. The chain is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks and does not exhibit any of the enumerated circularity patterns.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The analysis rests on the standard three-flavor oscillation Hamiltonian plus the usual NSI parameterization; no new particles or forces are introduced. The only free parameters are the three off-diagonal NSI magnitudes and phases, which are scanned rather than fitted to new data.

free parameters (1)
  • ε_eμ, ε_eτ, ε_μτ magnitudes and phases
    Scanned over representative ranges to illustrate effects; values are not derived from first principles or external data within the paper.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Three-flavor neutrino oscillation framework with standard matter effects remains valid when off-diagonal NSI are added
    Invoked throughout the probability calculations and entanglement mappings.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5789 in / 1298 out tokens · 21744 ms · 2026-05-19T06:34:22.923669+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

66 extracted references · 66 canonical work pages · 14 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Next, we turn our attention to understanding how ϵeµ influences the other two entangle- ment measures: Concurrence and Negativity

    From this analysis, it becomes clear that the impact of ϵeµ on the EOF is predominantly driven by its effect on the appearance channel. Next, we turn our attention to understanding how ϵeµ influences the other two entangle- ment measures: Concurrence and Negativity. The simplified form of Concurrence (Eq. 12) in terms of electron neutrino appearance and m...

    work page

  2. [2]

    Fukuda et al

    Y. Fukuda et al. [Super-Kamiokande Collaboration], Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 1562–1567 (1998)

    work page 1998

  3. [4]

    Abe et al

    K. Abe et al. [T2K Collaboration], Eur. Phys. J. C 83 (2023), 10.1140/epjc/s10052-023-11819- x

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-023-11819- 2023

  4. [6]

    Abiet al.(DUNE), JINST15(08), T08008, arXiv:2002.02967 [physics.ins-det]

    B. Abi et al. [DUNE Collaboration], JINST 15, T08008 (2020), arXiv:2002.02967 [physics.ins- det]

    work page arXiv 2020

  5. [7]

    collaboration et al

    J. collaboration et al. , Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 123, 103927 (2022)

    work page 2022

  6. [8]

    Abi et al

    B. Abi et al. , Eur. Phys. J. C 81 (2021), 10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-09007-w

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-09007-w 2021

  7. [10]

    Mohanta, in Particle Physics and Cosmology in the Himalayas (2025) arXiv:2503.12985 [hep-ph]

    R. Mohanta, in Particle Physics and Cosmology in the Himalayas (2025) arXiv:2503.12985 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  8. [11]

    Panda and R

    P. Panda and R. Mohanta, (2024), arXiv:2412.05213 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  9. [12]

    Panda, D

    P. Panda, D. K. Singha, M. Ghosh, and R. Mohanta, Eur. Phys. J. C 85, 67 (2025), arXiv:2403.09105 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  10. [13]

    S. K. Pusty, R. Majhi, D. K. Singha, M. Ghosh, and R. Mohanta, (2024), arXiv:2410.23014 [hep-ph]. 22

    work page arXiv 2024

  11. [14]

    C. Bera, K. N. Deepthi, and R. Mohanta, JHEP 06, 179 (2025), arXiv:2501.14383 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  12. [15]

    D. K. Singha, R. Majhi, L. Panda, M. Ghosh, and R. Mohanta, Phys. Rev. D 109, 095038 (2024), arXiv:2308.10789 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  13. [16]

    Status of non-standard neutrino interactions

    T. Ohlsson, Rept. Prog. Phys. 76, 044201 (2013), arXiv:1209.2710 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  14. [17]

    O. G. Miranda and H. Nunokawa, New J. Phys. 17, 095002 (2015), arXiv:1505.06254 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  15. [18]

    Neutrino oscillations and Non-Standard Interactions

    Y. Farzan and M. Tortola, Front. in Phys. 6, 10 (2018), arXiv:1710.09360 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  16. [19]

    Biggio, M

    C. Biggio, M. Blennow, and E. Fern´ andez-Mart´ ınez, JHEP2009, 090–090 (2009)

    work page 2009

  17. [20]

    K. N. Deepthi, S. C, and R. Mohanta, New J. Phys. 17, 023035 (2015), arXiv:1409.2343 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  18. [21]

    Complementarity Between Hyperkamiokande and DUNE in Determining Neutrino Oscillation Parameters

    S. Fukasawa, M. Ghosh, and O. Yasuda, Nucl. Phys. B 918, 337 (2017), arXiv:1607.03758 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  19. [22]

    Probing CP violation signal at DUNE in presence of non-standard neutrino interactions

    M. Masud, A. Chatterjee, and P. Mehta, J. Phys. G 43, 095005 (2016), arXiv:1510.08261 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  20. [23]

    Non-standard Neutrino Interactions at DUNE

    A. de Gouvˆ ea and K. J. Kelly, Nucl. Phys. B 908, 318 (2016), arXiv:1511.05562 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  21. [24]

    Deepthi, S

    K. Deepthi, S. Goswami, and N. Nath, Nucl. Phys. B 936, 91–105 (2018)

    work page 2018

  22. [25]

    Blennow, P

    M. Blennow, P. Coloma, E. Fernandez-Martinez, J. Hernandez-Garcia, and J. Lopez-Pavon, JHEP 2017 (2017), 10.1007/jhep04(2017)153

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep04(2017)153 2017

  23. [26]

    S. K. Agarwalla, S. S. Chatterjee, and A. Palazzo, Phys. Lett. B 762, 64–71 (2016)

    work page 2016

  24. [27]

    Masud and P

    M. Masud and P. Mehta, Phys. Rev. D 94 (2016), 10.1103/physrevd.94.053007

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.94.053007 2016

  25. [28]

    Coloma and T

    P. Coloma and T. Schwetz, Phys. Rev. D 95 (2017), 10.1103/physrevd.95.079903

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.95.079903 2017

  26. [29]

    J. Liao, D. Marfatia, and K. Whisnant, Phys. Rev. D 93 (2016), 10.1103/physrevd.93.093016

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.93.093016 2016

  27. [30]

    Coloma, JHEP 2016 (2016), 10.1007/jhep03(2016)016

    P. Coloma, JHEP 2016 (2016), 10.1007/jhep03(2016)016

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep03(2016)016 2016

  28. [31]

    A. K. Alok, S. Banerjee, and S. Uma Sankar, Nucl. Phys. B 909, 65–72 (2016)

    work page 2016

  29. [32]

    Banerjee, A

    S. Banerjee, A. K. Alok, R. Srikanth, and B. C. Hiesmayr, Eur. Phys. J. C 75, 1 (2015)

    work page 2015

  30. [33]

    Formaggio, D

    J. Formaggio, D. Kaiser, M. Murskyj, and T. Weiss, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117 (2016), 10.1103/physrevlett.117.050402

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.117.050402 2016

  31. [34]

    Fu and X

    Q. Fu and X. Chen, Eur. Phys. J. C 77 (2017), 10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-5371-y

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-5371-y 2017

  32. [35]

    Muller, S

    J. Naikoo, A. K. Alok, S. Banerjee, and S. U. Sankar, Phys. Rev. D 99 (2019), 10.1103/phys- revd.99.095001

    work page doi:10.1103/phys- 2019

  33. [36]

    Naikoo, A

    J. Naikoo, A. K. Alok, S. Banerjee, S. Uma Sankar, G. Guarnieri, C. Schultze, and B. C. Hiesmayr, Nucl. Phys. B 951, 114872 (2020)

    work page 2020

  34. [37]

    Shafaq and P

    S. Shafaq and P. Mehta, J. Phys. G 48, 085002 (2021)

    work page 2021

  35. [38]

    Sarkar and K

    T. Sarkar and K. Dixit, Eur. Phys. J. C 81 (2021), 10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-08874-7

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-08874-7 2021

  36. [39]

    Blasone, F

    M. Blasone, F. Illuminati, L. Petruzziello, and L. Smaldone, Phys. Rev. A 108, 032210 (2023), arXiv:2111.09979 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  37. [40]

    D. S. Chattopadhyay and A. Dighe, Phys. Rev. D 108, 112013 (2023), arXiv:2304.02475 [hep- ph]. 23

    work page arXiv 2023

  38. [42]

    Dixit, S

    K. Dixit, S. S. Haque, and S. Razzaque, Eur. Phys. J. C 84 (2024), 10.1140/epjc/s10052-024- 12620-0

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024- 2024

  39. [43]

    Bouri, A

    S. Bouri, A. K. Jha, and S. Banerjee, (2024), arXiv:2405.13114 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  40. [44]

    Banerjee, P

    R. Banerjee, P. Panda, R. Mohanta, and S. Patra, (2024), arXiv:2410.05727 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  41. [45]

    Konwar and B

    L. Konwar and B. Yadav, J. Phys. G 52, 045001 (2025), arXiv:2411.14234 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  42. [46]

    Konwar, Journal of Subatomic Particles and Cosmology , 100065 (2025)

    L. Konwar, Journal of Subatomic Particles and Cosmology , 100065 (2025)

    work page 2025

  43. [47]

    Blasone, F

    M. Blasone, F. Dell’Anno, S. De Siena, and F. Illuminati, EPL 85, 50002 (2009)

    work page 2009

  44. [48]

    Blasone, F

    M. Blasone, F. Dell’Anno, S. D. Siena, and F. Illuminati, Journal of Physics: Conference Series 237, 012007 (2010)

    work page 2010

  45. [49]

    SpecBit, DecayBit and PrecisionBit: GAMBIT modules for com- puting mass spectra, particle decay rates and precision observables

    M. Blasone, S. De Siena, and C. Matrella, Eur. Phys. J. C 81 (2021), 10.1140/epjc/s10052- 021-09471-4

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052- 2021

  46. [50]

    Kumar Jha, S

    A. Kumar Jha, S. Mukherjee, and B. A. Bambah, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 36, 2150056 (2021), arXiv:2004.14853 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  47. [51]

    Konwar and B

    L. Konwar and B. Yadav, Nucl. Phys. B 1002, 116544 (2024)

    work page 2024

  48. [52]

    Horodecki, P

    R. Horodecki, P. Horodecki, M. Horodecki, and K. Horodecki, Rev. Mod. Phys. 81, 865–942 (2009)

    work page 2009

  49. [53]

    Blasone, F

    M. Blasone, F. Dell’Anno, S. De Siena, M. Di Mauro, and F. Illuminati, Phys. Rev. D 77 (2008), 10.1103/physrevd.77.096002

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.77.096002 2008

  50. [54]

    C. H. Bennett, D. P. DiVincenzo, J. A. Smolin, and W. K. Wootters, Phys. Rev. A 54, 3824 (1996), arXiv:quant-ph/9604024

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  51. [55]

    Guo and L

    Y. Guo and L. Zhang, Phys. Rev. A 101, 032301 (2020)

    work page 2020

  52. [56]

    Entanglement of a Pair of Quantum Bits

    S. Hill and W. K. Wootters, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 5022 (1997), arXiv:quant-ph/9703041

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  53. [57]

    W. K. Wootters, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 2245 (1998), arXiv:quant-ph/9709029

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  54. [58]

    Guo and G

    Y. Guo and G. Gour, Phys. Rev. A 99, 042305 (2019)

    work page 2019

  55. [59]

    Separability Criterion for Density Matrices

    A. Peres, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 1413 (1996), arXiv:quant-ph/9604005

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  56. [60]

    A computable measure of entanglement

    G. Vidal and R. F. Werner, Phys. Rev. A 65, 032314 (2002), arXiv:quant-ph/0102117

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  57. [61]

    Sab´ ın and G

    C. Sab´ ın and G. Garc´ ıa-Alcaine, Eur. Phys. J. C48, 435 (2008)

    work page 2008

  58. [62]

    J. Liao, D. Marfatia, and K. Whisnant, JHEP 01, 071 (2017), arXiv:1612.01443 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  59. [63]

    L.-J. Li, F. Ming, X.-K. Song, L. Ye, and D. Wang, Eur. Phys. J. C 81, 728 (2021)

    work page 2021

  60. [64]

    Abi et al

    B. Abi et al. (DUNE), (2021), arXiv:2103.04797 [hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2021

  61. [65]

    Huber, M

    P. Huber, M. Lindner, and W. Winter, Comput. Phys. Commun. 167, 195 (2005), arXiv:hep- ph/0407333

    work page arXiv 2005

  62. [66]

    New features in the simulation of neutrino oscillation experiments with GLoBES 3.0

    P. Huber, J. Kopp, M. Lindner, M. Rolinec, and W. Winter, Comput. Phys. Commun. 177, 432 (2007), arXiv:hep-ph/0701187

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  63. [67]

    NuFit-6.0: updated global analysis of three- flavor neutrino oscillations

    I. Esteban, M. C. Gonzalez-Garcia, M. Maltoni, I. Martinez-Soler, J. P. Pinheiro, and T. Schwetz, JHEP 2024 (2024), 10.1007/jhep12(2024)216. 24

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep12(2024)216 2024

  64. [68]

    S. S. Chatterjee and A. Palazzo, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 051802 (2021), arXiv:2008.04161 [hep- ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  65. [69]

    P. B. Denton, J. Gehrlein, and R. Pestes, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 051801 (2021), arXiv:2008.01110 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  66. [70]

    The fate of hints: updated global analysis of three-flavor neutrino oscillations,

    I. Esteban, M. C. Gonzalez-Garcia, M. Maltoni, T. Schwetz, and A. Zhou, JHEP 09, 178 (2020), arXiv:2007.14792 [hep-ph]. 25

    work page arXiv 2020