pith. sign in

arxiv: 2512.11285 · v3 · pith:NACJEQSFnew · submitted 2025-12-12 · ✦ hep-ph · hep-ex

JUNO's Impact on the Neutrino Mass Ordering from Lorentz Invariance Violation

Tatiana Araya-Santander , Cesar Bonilla , Supriya Pan This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-16 23:31 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph hep-ex
keywords neutrino oscillationsLorentz invariance violationJUNOneutrino mass orderingsolar mixing angleCPT violationbeyond Standard Model
0
0 comments X

The pith

Including Lorentz invariance violation in JUNO data analysis shifts the preferred neutrino mass ordering to inverted.

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

The paper examines the impact of Lorentz invariance violation on neutrino oscillation parameters extracted from JUNO's 59.1-day dataset. By allowing LIV coefficients in the fit, the authors find that the allowed region for sin²θ12 and Δm²21 changes, moving the normal-ordering best fit to higher θ12 values and producing a stronger preference for inverted ordering. This matters because the neutrino mass ordering remains a major open question, and unrecognized LIV could bias its determination across experiments. The analysis yields the tightest JUNO limits to date on the relevant LIV parameters, especially those differing with the tau sector.

Core claim

Including effects of Lorentz invariance violation in the analysis of the 59.1-day JUNO dataset causes a notable shift in the allowed region for sin²θ12 and Δm²21. The best-fit point under normal ordering moves toward larger θ12, resulting in an overall preference for the inverted mass ordering. The sectors involving differences with the tau flavor, namely c_ee - c_eτ and a_ee - a_eτ, exhibit the strongest impact, and the derived limits on the LIV parameters are the tightest obtained from JUNO so far.

What carries the argument

The CPT-even (c_ee - c_eμ, c_ee - c_eτ) and CPT-odd (a_ee - a_eμ, a_ee - a_eτ) LIV coefficients that modify the effective Hamiltonian for neutrino propagation and thereby alter oscillation probabilities.

Load-bearing premise

The 59.1-day dataset is assumed sufficient to distinguish mass-ordering preferences once LIV parameters are added, without dominant unaccounted systematics or correlations that could mimic the reported shift.

What would settle it

A longer JUNO exposure or independent measurement of θ12 that shows no shift in ordering preference when the same LIV terms are included in the fit.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2512.11285 by Cesar Bonilla, Supriya Pan, Tatiana Araya-Santander.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Left: Reconstructed JUNO prompt energy spectrum (per 0.1 MeV) from 59.1 day data set [2]. The blue curve shows the raw experimental data, while the red curve represents the data after subtracting all background components, shown individually as the green (geo￾ν), pink (9Li/8He), grey (world reactors), and light blue (214Bi-214Po) contributions. The black dotted curve represents the expected unoscillated re… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Total chi-square for sin2 θ12 − ∆m2 21 plane for NO (left) and IO (right). 1σ and 3σ contours are shown by green and blue lines, respectively, along with the best-fit point. This χ 2 analysis was computed marginalizing on ∆m2 31 and θ13 parameters. We determined the sensitivity to the remaining solar parameters (θ12 and ∆m2 21) by marginal￾izing over θ13 and ∆m2 31, as detailed in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Two dimensional ∆χ 2 contours for the LIV parameter pairs (cee, ceµ) (left) and (cee, ceτ ) (right) assuming normal ordering. The red triangles mark the global minima of each scan, which correspond to the best-fit LIV values preferred by the data. 1σ and 3σ contours are shown by green and blue lines, respectively. The sensitivity to the LIV parameters is shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Two dimensional ∆χ 2 contours for the LIV parameter pairs (ceµ, ϕeµ) (left) and (ceτ , ϕeτ ) (right) assuming normal ordering. The red triangles mark the global minima of each scan, which correspond to the best-fit LIV values preferred by the data. 1σ and 3σ contours are shown by green and blue lines, respectively. Plane cee − ceµ cee − ceτ ceµ − ϕeµ ceτ − ϕeτ Best Fit (1.78, 0.01) × 10−19 (2.85, 0.13) × 1… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Sensitivity in the sin2 θ12 − ∆m2 21 plane considering best-fit value of CP-violating parameters for cee, ceµ (left) and cee, ceτ (right). The 3σ and 1σ contours of NO and IO are shown by blue and green, respectively. Best fits are pointed by red and violet triangles for NO and IO, respectively. The main observations from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Two dimensional ∆χ 2 contours for the CP-violating parameter pairs (aee, aeµ) (left) and (aee, aeτ ) (right) assuming normal ordering. The red triangles mark the global minima of each scan, which correspond to the best-fit LIV values preferred by the data. 1σ and 3σ contours are shown by green and blue lines, respectively [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Two dimensional ∆χ 2 contours for the CP-violating parameter pairs (aeµ, ϕeµ) (left) and (aeτ , ϕeτ ) (right) assuming normal ordering. The red triangles indicate the global minima of each scan, corresponding to the best-fit LIV values preferred by the data. 1σ and 3σ contours are shown by green and blue lines, respectively. Plane aee − aeµ aee − aeτ aeµ − ϕeµ aeτ − ϕeτ Best Fit (10.0, 0.1) × 10−13 GeV (12… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Sensitivity in the sin2 θ12 − ∆m2 21 plane considering best-fit value of CP-violating parameters for aee, aeµ (left) and aee, aeτ (right). The 3σ and 1σ contours of NO and IO are shown by blue and green, respectively. Best fit are pointed by red and violet triangles for NO and IO, respectively. Similar to CP-conserving cases ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Two dimensional ∆χ 2 contours for the LIV parameter pairs (cee, ceµ) (left) and (cee, ceτ ) (right) assuming inverted ordering. The red triangles mark the global minima of each scan, which correspond to the best-fit LIV values preferred by the data. 1σ and 3σ contours are shown by green and blue lines, respectively. For CP-violating cases, the 3σ region in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Two dimensional ∆χ 2 contours for the LIV parameter pairs (ceµ, ϕeµ) (left) and (ceτ , ϕeτ ) (right) assuming inverted ordering. The red triangles mark the global minima of each scan, which correspond to the best-fit LIV values preferred by the data. 1σ and 3σ contours are shown by green and blue lines, respectively [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Two dimensional ∆χ 2 contours for the CP-violating parameter pairs (aee, aeµ) (left) and (aee, aeτ ) (right) assuming inverted ordering. The red triangles mark the global minima of each scan, which correspond to the best-fit LIV values preferred by the data. 1σ and 3σ contours are shown by green and blue lines, respectively. 17 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Two dimensional ∆χ 2 contours for the CP-violating parameter pairs (aeµ, ϕeµ) (left) and (aeτ , ϕeτ ) (right) assuming inverted ordering. The red triangles mark the global minima of each scan, which correspond to the best-fit LIV values preferred by the data. 1σ and 3σ contours are shown by green and blue lines, respectively. 18 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_12.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We explore the potential of the Jiangmen Underground Neutrino Observatory (JUNO) to probe new physics by searching for Lorentz-invariance violation (LIV). Using the 59.1-day dataset recently released by this experiment, we analyze neutrino oscillations to place new constraints on the LIV parameters in the CPT-even ($c_{ee} - c_{e\mu}$, $c_{ee} - c_{e\tau}$) and CPT-odd ($a_{ee} - a_{e\mu}$, $a_{ee} - a_{e\tau}$) sectors. Our analysis reveals a significant shift in the oscillation parameter space of $\sin^2\theta_{12}-\Delta m^2_{21}$ when LIV is included; with the best-fit point for normal ordering moving to the higher values of the solar angle $\theta_{12}$, a strong preference emerges for inverted mass ordering. In particular, the $c_{ee} - c_{e\tau}$ and $a_{ee} - a_{e\tau}$ sectors show the most pronounced effects. We report the most stringent bounds from JUNO to date on these LIV parameters, showcasing the detector's unique sensitivity to physics beyond the Standard Model.

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

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript analyzes the 59.1-day JUNO dataset to constrain Lorentz invariance violation (LIV) parameters in the CPT-even (c_ee - c_eμ, c_ee - c_eτ) and CPT-odd (a_ee - a_eμ, a_ee - a_eτ) sectors. It reports that including these LIV terms shifts the best-fit point in the sin²θ12−Δm²21 plane for normal ordering toward higher θ12, producing a strong preference for inverted mass ordering, and claims the most stringent JUNO bounds to date on the LIV coefficients.

Significance. If the reported ordering preference survives a full statistical accounting, the result would be noteworthy for showing how LIV can alter mass-ordering sensitivity in reactor experiments and for tightening constraints on dimension-3 and dimension-4 LIV operators. The use of real JUNO data is a positive feature, but the short exposure and additional free parameters limit the immediate impact.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the claim of a 'strong preference' for inverted ordering is presented without any quoted Δχ², effective degrees of freedom, or goodness-of-fit metric, making it impossible to judge whether the shift survives marginalization over the four LIV parameters.
  2. [Analysis] Analysis: with only tens of reactor antineutrino events expected in 59.1 days, floating four additional LIV coefficients enlarges the parameter space; the manuscript does not report the best-fit LIV values, their pulls, or any look-elsewhere correction, so it is unclear whether the ordering preference is data-driven or an artifact of the low-statistics regime.
  3. [Results] Results: no information is given on how systematic uncertainties (energy scale, flux, detector response) are treated once LIV parameters are introduced, nor whether they could produce a comparable shift in the sin²θ12−Δm²21 plane.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Introduction] The notation c_ee - c_eτ etc. is standard but should be explicitly linked to the effective Hamiltonian or Lagrangian at first use for clarity.
  2. [Figures] Any figures showing the shifted contours should include both normal- and inverted-ordering 1σ/2σ regions with and without LIV for direct visual comparison.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment point by point below. Where the manuscript was missing quantitative details or clarifications, we have revised it accordingly.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the claim of a 'strong preference' for inverted ordering is presented without any quoted Δχ², effective degrees of freedom, or goodness-of-fit metric, making it impossible to judge whether the shift survives marginalization over the four LIV parameters.

    Authors: We agree that the abstract should provide quantitative support for the claimed preference. In the revised manuscript we will quote the Δχ² between the best-fit normal-ordering and inverted-ordering hypotheses after marginalization over the four LIV coefficients, together with the effective number of degrees of freedom and a brief statement on the goodness-of-fit. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Analysis] Analysis: with only tens of reactor antineutrino events expected in 59.1 days, floating four additional LIV coefficients enlarges the parameter space; the manuscript does not report the best-fit LIV values, their pulls, or any look-elsewhere correction, so it is unclear whether the ordering preference is data-driven or an artifact of the low-statistics regime.

    Authors: We acknowledge the limited statistics of the 59.1-day exposure. The revised manuscript will report the best-fit values and 1σ uncertainties for all four LIV parameters, as well as their pulls relative to the no-LIV hypothesis. Because the analysis is restricted to theoretically motivated CPT-even and CPT-odd sectors, we maintain that the marginalization already performed suffices; we will nevertheless add an explicit discussion of this point and of the low-statistics regime. revision: partial

  3. Referee: [Results] Results: no information is given on how systematic uncertainties (energy scale, flux, detector response) are treated once LIV parameters are introduced, nor whether they could produce a comparable shift in the sin²θ12−Δm²21 plane.

    Authors: Systematic uncertainties are included as nuisance parameters and floated simultaneously with the LIV coefficients and oscillation parameters in the global fit. The revised text will contain an explicit description of this procedure and additional checks (e.g., fits with systematics fixed at their best-fit values) demonstrating that the shift in the sin²θ12−Δm²21 plane is not reproduced by systematics alone. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; standard parameter fit to data

full rationale

The paper introduces the LIV coefficients (c_ee−c_eτ, a_ee−a_eτ and their μ counterparts) as free parameters and performs a joint fit to the 59.1-day JUNO reactor antineutrino spectrum together with the standard oscillation parameters. The reported shift in the sin²θ12−Δm²21 plane and the preference for inverted ordering are direct outputs of this minimization; no equation redefines the ordering preference as an input quantity, no self-citation supplies a uniqueness theorem, and no ansatz is imported. The derivation chain is therefore a conventional statistical analysis whose central claims remain independent of the fitted values themselves.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the standard three-flavor neutrino oscillation framework plus phenomenological LIV terms that are fitted to data; no new particles or forces are postulated.

free parameters (1)
  • LIV coefficients (c_ee - c_eμ, c_ee - c_eτ, a_ee - a_eμ, a_ee - a_eτ)
    Phenomenological parameters introduced and fitted to the JUNO dataset to extract bounds and best-fit values.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Neutrino oscillation probabilities receive additive corrections from CPT-even and CPT-odd Lorentz-violating operators
    This is the modeling assumption that allows the inclusion of the listed LIV parameters in the fit.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5513 in / 1275 out tokens · 30155 ms · 2026-05-16T23:31:54.763816+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

34 extracted references · 34 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Review of Particle Physics

    S. Navas et al. “Review of Particle Physics”. In:Phys. Rev. D110 (3 Aug. 2024), p. 030001.doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.110.030001.url:https://link.aps.org/doi/ 10.1103/PhysRevD.110.030001

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.110.030001.url:https://link.aps.org/doi/ 2024

  2. [2]

    Pontecorvo,Inverse beta processes and nonconservation of lepton charge,Zh

    Angel Abusleme et al. “First measurement of reactor neutrino oscillations at JUNO”. In:arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.14593(2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  3. [4]

    Kardos, G

    Sanjib Kumar Agarwalla and Mehedi Masud. “Can Lorentz invariance violation af- fect the sensitivity of deep underground neutrino experiment?” In:Eur. Phys. J. C 80.8 (2020), p. 716.doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052- 020- 8303- 1. arXiv:1912.13306 [hep-ph]

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052- 2020

  4. [5]

    Looking for Lorentz invariance violation (LIV) in the latest long baseline accelerator neutrino oscillation data

    Ushak Rahaman. “Looking for Lorentz invariance violation (LIV) in the latest long baseline accelerator neutrino oscillation data”. In:Eur. Phys. J. C81.9 (2021), p. 792. doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-09598-4. arXiv:2103.04576 [hep-ph]

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-09598-4 2021

  5. [6]

    Distinguishing nonstandard interaction and Lorentz invariance violation at the Protvino to super-ORCA experiment

    Rudra Majhi et al. “Distinguishing nonstandard interaction and Lorentz invariance violation at the Protvino to super-ORCA experiment”. In:Phys. Rev. D107.7 (2023), p. 075036.doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.107.075036. arXiv:2212.07244 [hep-ph]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.107.075036 2023

  6. [7]

    InvestigatingLorentz Invariance Violation with the long baseline experiment P2O

    NishatFiza,NafisRezwanKhanChowdhury,andMehediMasud.“InvestigatingLorentz Invariance Violation with the long baseline experiment P2O”. In:JHEP01 (2023), p. 076.doi:10.1007/JHEP01(2023)076. arXiv:2206.14018 [hep-ph]

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep01(2023)076 2023

  7. [8]

    Sensitivity to CP dis- covery in the presence of Lorentz invariance-violating potential at T2HK/T2HKK

    Supriya Pan, Kaustav Chakraborty, and Srubabati Goswami. “Sensitivity to CP dis- covery in the presence of Lorentz invariance-violating potential at T2HK/T2HKK”. In:Eur. Phys. J. C84.4 (2024), p. 354.doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-12541-y. arXiv:2308.07566 [hep-ph]

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-12541-y 2024

  8. [9]

    Constraining Lorentz invariance violation with next-generation long-baseline experiments

    S. K. Agarwalla et al. “Constraining Lorentz invariance violation with next-generation long-baseline experiments”. In:Journal of High Energy Physics2023.7 (2023), p. 216. doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2023)216.url:https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP07(2023) 216

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep07(2023)216.url:https://doi.org/10.1007/jhep07(2023 2023

  9. [10]

    Constraining the isotropic CPT-odd coefficients of the stan- dard model extension by a combined DUNE and ESSnuSB analysis

    Luis A. Delgadillo et al. “Constraining the isotropic CPT-odd coefficients of the stan- dard model extension by a combined DUNE and ESSnuSB analysis”. In:Phys. Rev. D111.9 (2025), p. 095027.doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.111.095027. arXiv:2409.03716 [hep-ph]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.111.095027 2025

  10. [11]

    Neutrino Lorentz invariance violation from theCPT-even SME coefficients through a tensor interaction with cosmological scalar fields

    Rubén Cordero et al. “Neutrino Lorentz invariance violation from theCPT-even SME coefficients through a tensor interaction with cosmological scalar fields”. In:Eur. Phys. J. C85.1 (2025), p. 6.doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-13719-0. arXiv:2407.18513 [hep-ph]. 19

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-13719-0 2025

  11. [12]

    Exploring New Physics with Deep Underground Neutrino Experiment High-Energy Flux: The Case of Lorentz In- variance Violation, Large Extra Dimensions and Long-Range Forces

    Alessio Giarnetti, Simone Marciano, and Davide Meloni. “Exploring New Physics with Deep Underground Neutrino Experiment High-Energy Flux: The Case of Lorentz In- variance Violation, Large Extra Dimensions and Long-Range Forces”. In:Universe 10.9 (2024).issn: 2218-1997.doi:10.3390/universe10090357.url:https://www. mdpi.com/2218-1997/10/9/357

    work page doi:10.3390/universe10090357.url:https://www 2024

  12. [13]

    Constraining and Resolving Lorentz-Violating New Physics at ESSnuSB Using Complementarity with DUNE

    Himanshu Bora, Debajyoti Dutta, and Abinash Medhi. “Constraining and Resolving Lorentz-Violating New Physics at ESSnuSB Using Complementarity with DUNE”. In: (Dec. 2025). arXiv:2512.06953 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  13. [14]

    Probing Lorentz Invariance Violation with atmospheric neutrinos at INO-ICAL

    S. Sahoo, A. Kumar, and S. K. Agarwalla. “Probing Lorentz Invariance Violation with atmospheric neutrinos at INO-ICAL”. In:Journal of High Energy Physics2022.3 (2022), p. 050.doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2022)050.url:https://doi.org/10.1007/ JHEP03(2022)050

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep03(2022)050.url:https://doi.org/10.1007/ 2022

  14. [15]

    ComprehensivestudyofLIV in atmospheric and long-baseline experiments

    DeepakRaikwal,SandhyaChoubey,andMonojitGhosh.“ComprehensivestudyofLIV in atmospheric and long-baseline experiments”. In: (Mar. 2023). arXiv:2303.10892 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  15. [16]

    Discriminating between Lorentz violation and non-standard interactions using core-passing atmospheric neutrinos at INO-ICAL

    Sadashiv Sahoo et al. “Discriminating between Lorentz violation and non-standard interactions using core-passing atmospheric neutrinos at INO-ICAL”. In:Physics Let- ters B841 (2023), p. 137949.issn: 0370-2693.doi:https : / / doi . org / 10 . 1016 / j . physletb . 2023 . 137949.url:https : / / www . sciencedirect . com / science / article/pii/S0370269323002836

    work page 2023

  16. [17]

    CombinedsearchforLorentz invariance violation with ANTARES, IceCube, and KM3NeT

    LukasHennig,AlbaDomi,andCarlosArgüelles-Delgado.“CombinedsearchforLorentz invariance violation with ANTARES, IceCube, and KM3NeT”. In:PoSICRC2025 (2025), p. 1058.doi:10.22323/1.501.1058

    work page doi:10.22323/1.501.1058 2025

  17. [18]

    Tests of Lorentz invariance at the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory

    B. Aharmim et al. “Tests of Lorentz invariance at the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory”. In:Phys. Rev. D98.11 (2018), p. 112013.doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.98.112013. arXiv: 1811.00166 [hep-ex]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.98.112013 2018

  18. [19]

    Anisotropic Lorentz invariance violation in reactor neutrino experiments

    Hai-Xing Lin, Jie Ren, and Jian Tang. “Anisotropic Lorentz invariance violation in reactor neutrino experiments”. In:Front. Phys. (Beijing)21.1 (2026), p. 16200.doi: 10.15302/frontphys.2026.016200. arXiv:2503.02305 [hep-ph]

    work page doi:10.15302/frontphys.2026.016200 2026

  19. [20]

    Constraints on Lorentz invariance from the event KM3- 230213A

    Paolo Walter Cattaneo. “Constraints on Lorentz invariance from the event KM3- 230213A”. In:Eur. Phys. J. C85.5 (2025), p. 529.doi:10 . 1140 / epjc / s10052 - 025-14264-0. arXiv:2502.13201 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  20. [21]

    Constraints on Lorentz-invariance violation in the neutrino sec- tor from the ultrahigh-energy event KM3-230213A

    Yu-Ming Yang et al. “Constraints on Lorentz-invariance violation in the neutrino sec- tor from the ultrahigh-energy event KM3-230213A”. In:Phys. Rev. D111.12 (2025), p. 123037.doi:10.1103/6zzg-tv4s. arXiv:2502.18256 [hep-ph]

    work page doi:10.1103/6zzg-tv4s 2025

  21. [22]

    Ultra-high-energy event KM3-230213A constraints on Lorentz Invari- ance Violation in neutrino sector

    Petr Satunin. “Ultra-high-energy event KM3-230213A constraints on Lorentz Invari- ance Violation in neutrino sector”. In:Eur. Phys. J. C85.5 (2025), p. 545.doi: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-025-14240-8. arXiv:2502.09548 [hep-ph]

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-025-14240-8 2025

  22. [23]

    First Search for Lorentz and CPT Violation in Double Beta Decay with EXO-200

    J. B. Albert et al. “First Search for Lorentz and CPT Violation in Double Beta Decay with EXO-200”. In:Phys. Rev. D93.7 (2016), p. 072001.doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 93.072001. arXiv:1601.07266 [nucl-ex]. 20

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd 2016

  23. [24]

    Search for Lorentz-invariance violation with the first KATRIN data

    M. Aker et al. “Search for Lorentz-invariance violation with the first KATRIN data”. In:Phys. Rev. D107.8 (2023), p. 082005.doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.107.082005. arXiv: 2207.06326 [nucl-ex]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.107.082005 2023

  24. [25]

    Updated bounds on the (1,2) neutrino oscillation parameters after first JUNO results,

    Francesco Capozzi et al. “Updated bounds on the (1,2) neutrino oscillation parameters after first JUNO results”. In: (Nov. 2025). arXiv:2511.21650 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  25. [26]

    Enhancing the sensitivity to neutrino oscillation parameters using synergy between T2K, NOνA and JUNO

    Srubabati Goswami et al. “Enhancing the sensitivity to neutrino oscillation parameters using synergy between T2K, NOνA and JUNO”. In: (Nov. 2025). arXiv:2512.00172 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  26. [27]

    Lorentz and CPT violation in neutrinos

    V. Alan Kostelecký and Matthew Mewes. “Lorentz and CPT violation in neutrinos”. In:Phys. Rev. D69 (1 Jan. 2004), p. 016005.doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.69.016005

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.69.016005 2004

  27. [28]

    Lorentz-violating extension of the standard model

    D. Colladay and V. Alan Kostelecký. “Lorentz-violating extension of the standard model”. In:Phys. Rev. D58 (11 Oct. 1998), p. 116002.doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.58. 116002.url:https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevD.58.116002

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.58 1998

  28. [29]

    Lorentz and CPT violation in the neutrino sector

    V. Alan Kostelecký and Matthew Mewes. “Lorentz and CPT violation in the neutrino sector”. In:Phys. Rev. D70 (3 Aug. 2004), p. 031902.doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.70. 031902.url:https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevD.70.031902

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.70 2004

  29. [30]

    Some Aspects About Pushing the CPT and Lorentz Invariance Frontier With Neutrinos

    Gabriela Barenboim. “Some Aspects About Pushing the CPT and Lorentz Invariance Frontier With Neutrinos”. In:Frontiers in Physics10, 813753 (May 2022), p. 813753. doi:10.3389/fphy.2022.813753

    work page doi:10.3389/fphy.2022.813753 2022

  30. [31]

    Statusandprospects of the JUNO experiment

    MatthiasRaphaelStockandonbehalfoftheJUNOcollaboration.“Statusandprospects of the JUNO experiment”. In:SciPost Phys. Proc.(2025), p. 020.doi:10.21468/ SciPostPhysProc.17.020

    work page 2025

  31. [32]

    Simulation of long-baseline neutrino oscillation experiments with GLoBES

    P. Huber, M. Lindner, and W. Winter. “Simulation of long-baseline neutrino oscillation experiments with GLoBES”. In:Computer Physics Communications167.3 (May 2005), pp. 195–202.issn: 0010-4655.doi:10 . 1016 / j . cpc . 2005 . 01 . 003.url:http : //dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cpc.2005.01.003

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2005.01.003 2005

  32. [33]

    New features in the simulation of neutrino oscillation experiments withGLoBES3.0

    Patrick Huber et al. “New features in the simulation of neutrino oscillation experiments withGLoBES3.0”.In:Computer Physics Communications177.5(Sept.2007),pp.432– 438.issn: 0010-4655.doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2007.05.004.url:http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.cpc.2007.05.004

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2007.05.004.url:http://dx.doi.org/ 2007

  33. [34]

    Technical Report / Software Manual

    Joachim Kopp.Sterile neutrinos and non-standard neutrino interactions in GLoBES (snu-1.0). Technical Report / Software Manual. Version v1.0. Available online: snu-1.0 code manual; implementation for sterile neutrinos and NSI in GLoBES. Max Planck Institute for Physics (Munich), Nov. 2010.url:https://www.xn--mpihd-ou3b.mpg. de/personalhomes/globes/tools/sn...

    work page 2010

  34. [35]

    PrecisionMeasurementofReactorAntineutrinoOscillationatKilometer- Scale Baselines by Daya Bay

    F.P.Anetal.“PrecisionMeasurementofReactorAntineutrinoOscillationatKilometer- Scale Baselines by Daya Bay”. In:Phys. Rev. Lett.130 (16 Apr. 2023), p. 161802.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.130.161802.url:https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRevLett.130.161802. 21

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.130.161802.url:https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ 2023