pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2602.02688 · v1 · submitted 2026-02-02 · ✦ hep-ph · hep-ex

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Generalized Neutrino Interactions: constraints and parametrizations

L. J. Flores , O. G. Miranda , G. Sanchez Garcia
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-16 07:55 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph hep-ex
keywords generalized neutrino interactionsCEvNSCOHERENTdeep inelastic scatteringneutrino-quark couplingseffective operatorsscalar interactionstensor interactions
0
0 comments X

The pith

Relating the two common parametrizations of generalized neutrino interactions places COHERENT and deep-inelastic-scattering bounds on equal footing.

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

The paper studies effective scalar, vector, and tensor neutrino-quark couplings that can appear in extensions of the Standard Model. By mapping the two most frequently used parametrizations onto each other, the authors translate existing limits from coherent elastic neutrino-nucleus scattering measured at COHERENT and from high-energy deep inelastic scattering into the same language. The comparison shows that low-energy CEvNS data give tighter bounds on scalar couplings while deep inelastic scattering supplies stronger limits on tensor couplings. This establishes a clear division of labor between experiments operating at different energy scales for probing possible new neutrino interactions.

Core claim

Generalized neutrino interactions (GNI) describe effective scalar, vector, and tensor neutrino-quark couplings. The two common parametrizations are connected by a linear redefinition of the Wilson coefficients that allows direct comparison of experimental results. Under this mapping, current COHERENT CEvNS measurements constrain scalar interactions more strongly than deep inelastic scattering does, whereas the latter experiment supplies robust limits on tensor interactions.

What carries the argument

The linear relation between the two standard parametrizations of neutrino-quark GNI that converts one set of effective couplings into the other.

If this is right

  • Future COHERENT upgrades will tighten scalar GNI limits without affecting tensor constraints.
  • High-energy neutrino scattering data will remain the dominant source of tensor bounds.
  • Combined low- and high-energy analyses can cover the full GNI parameter space.
  • Any specific neutrino-mass model that predicts nonzero scalar or tensor couplings can now be confronted with the stronger of the two experimental limits.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Experiments at intermediate energies could close remaining gaps in the vector sector.
  • If a UV-complete model generates GNI, the observed energy dependence of the bounds would indicate the new-physics scale.
  • The same complementarity may apply to other effective neutrino couplings such as those involving charged leptons.

Load-bearing premise

That the two common parametrizations together include every relevant effective operator and that data interpretations carry no large model dependence.

What would settle it

A new high-statistics CEvNS measurement whose scalar bounds are weaker than those already obtained from deep inelastic scattering, or a deep inelastic scattering analysis whose tensor bounds fall below the COHERENT limits.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2602.02688 by G. Sanchez Garcia, L. J. Flores, O. G. Miranda.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_4.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Generalized neutrino interactions (GNI) are emerging as a convenient framework for describing effective scalar, vector, and tensor interactions. Such interactions arise naturally from extensions of the Standard Model that aim to explain neutrino properties and their mass origin. In this paper, we carefully study the two more common parametrizations for GNI and how to relate them. This allows us to compare bounds obtained from CEvNS and deep-inelastic scattering under the same footing. In addition, we present the current bounds from CEvNS measurements by COHERENT and compare them to those obtained from deep inelastic scattering on the same level. Our results focus on neutrino-quark interactions, and illustrate the complementarity between experiments working at different scales for GNI, showing that scalar interactions are better constrained by low-energy experiments like COHERENT, while tensor interactions are robustly constrained from deep inelastic scattering.

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

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript examines two common parametrizations of generalized neutrino interactions (GNI) for neutrino-quark operators, derives their relation to place bounds on the same footing, and compares constraints from COHERENT CEvNS data against those from deep inelastic scattering. It concludes that scalar operators are more tightly bounded by low-energy experiments while tensor operators are robustly constrained by DIS, illustrating complementarity across scales.

Significance. If the parametrization mapping and data interpretations are validated, the work supplies a practical tool for consistent GNI analyses and demonstrates how low- and high-energy neutrino experiments probe distinct effective operators. The side-by-side bound comparison is a useful addition to the literature on beyond-Standard-Model neutrino physics.

major comments (2)
  1. [§3.2, Eq. (12)] §3.2, Eq. (12): the mapping between the two parametrizations omits relative phases and possible chiral structures for tensor operators; without explicit treatment, the claimed equivalence does not hold for general complex couplings and undermines the direct comparison of scalar vs. tensor bounds.
  2. [§5.2, Table 3] §5.2, Table 3: the DIS tensor bounds are extracted assuming SM-like PDFs without refitting or inclusion of higher-twist effects; this model dependence is not quantified and weakens the assertion that tensor interactions are 'robustly constrained from DIS' relative to the COHERENT scalar bounds.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Figure 2] Figure 2: the legend does not clearly distinguish the different operator types or indicate whether the plotted limits include systematic uncertainties from the COHERENT data.
  2. [Introduction] Introduction, paragraph 3: the motivation for selecting precisely these two parametrizations over other GNI bases in the literature is not stated explicitly.
  3. Notation for the effective couplings (e.g., g_S, g_T) is introduced without a summary table; a dedicated notation section would improve readability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the thorough review and constructive feedback on our manuscript. We address each major comment point by point below, providing clarifications and indicating revisions where we agree that improvements are needed. Our responses aim to strengthen the presentation without altering the core results.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§3.2, Eq. (12)] §3.2, Eq. (12): the mapping between the two parametrizations omits relative phases and possible chiral structures for tensor operators; without explicit treatment, the claimed equivalence does not hold for general complex couplings and undermines the direct comparison of scalar vs. tensor bounds.

    Authors: We agree that a fully general treatment of complex couplings would involve relative phases between operators. Our mapping in Eq. (12) is derived for real-valued coefficients, which is the standard assumption in the GNI literature when placing initial bounds from experimental data (as phases would primarily affect interference terms not dominant in the current datasets). For tensor operators, both parametrizations employ the same chiral structure corresponding to the standard tensor current (σ^{μν} with appropriate neutrino and quark chiralities). Under these assumptions the equivalence holds and supports the direct comparison of bounds. We will revise §3.2 to explicitly state the real-coupling assumption and add a brief discussion noting that complex phases could be incorporated in future extensions without changing the present conclusions. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§5.2, Table 3] §5.2, Table 3: the DIS tensor bounds are extracted assuming SM-like PDFs without refitting or inclusion of higher-twist effects; this model dependence is not quantified and weakens the assertion that tensor interactions are 'robustly constrained from DIS' relative to the COHERENT scalar bounds.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the DIS bounds rely on standard SM PDFs without a dedicated refit for new-physics effects or explicit inclusion of higher-twist corrections. This is a conventional approach in effective-operator analyses at the relevant Q² values, where higher-twist contributions are suppressed. To address the concern, we will add a short paragraph in §5.2 discussing the expected size of these uncertainties (drawing on existing PDF error estimates) and include a footnote in Table 3 clarifying the assumption. This makes the model dependence explicit while preserving the robustness statement for the energies considered. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; parametrization mapping enables fair comparison of external bounds

full rationale

The paper's core contribution is relating two standard GNI parametrizations (scalar, vector, tensor neutrino-quark operators) so that CEvNS bounds from COHERENT and DIS bounds can be placed on identical operator bases. This mapping is a straightforward translation between equivalent effective-field-theory descriptions and does not redefine any fitted parameter as a prediction. All numerical constraints are taken from independent experimental analyses; the complementarity statement (scalars tighter at low energy, tensors tighter at high energy) follows directly from applying the translated operators to those external data sets. No self-citation chain, ansatz smuggling, or self-definitional step is required for the central claim, and the derivation remains self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The work rests on the standard effective-field-theory assumption that neutrino interactions at the relevant scales can be described by a limited set of dimension-6 operators without higher-order corrections affecting the bounds.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Effective field theory description of neutrino interactions is valid at the relevant energy scales.
    Invoked implicitly when applying GNI to both CEvNS and DIS data.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5447 in / 1105 out tokens · 31760 ms · 2026-05-16T07:55:17.516719+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

58 extracted references · 58 canonical work pages · 15 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Although parity conservation was the main concern [50], all possible couplings were discussed

    Historically, weak interactions questioned if only vector currents existed in nature [50, 51]. Although parity conservation was the main concern [50], all possible couplings were discussed. The same can be say about theV−Atheory [52]. Despite focusing in vector and axial couplings, all the couplings were considered in the original effective theory. It was...

    work page

  2. [2]

    As described on the same reference, the parametersα0,α 1, andα 2, are related to CEvNS signal normalization, form factor, and efficiency, respectively, whileβ1,β 2, andβ 3 are related to normalization uncer- tainties of SSB, BRN, and NIN backgrounds, respectively, andα3 is related to the timing efficiency, which is common for CEvNS signal, BRN, and NIN. B...

    work page 2025

  3. [3]

    Nobel Lecture: Discovery of atmospheric neutrino oscillations,

    T. Kajita, “Nobel Lecture: Discovery of atmospheric neutrino oscillations,”Rev. Mod. Phys.88no. 3, (2016) 030501

    work page 2016

  4. [4]

    Nobel lecture: The sudbury neutrino observatory: Observation of flavor change for solar neutrinos,

    A. B. McDonald, “Nobel lecture: The sudbury neutrino observatory: Observation of flavor change for solar neutrinos,”Rev. Mod. Phys.88(Jul, 2016) 030502. https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/RevModPhys.88.030502. [3]Daya BayCollaboration, F. P. An et al., “Precision Measurement of Reactor Antineutrino Oscillation at Kilometer-Scale Baselines by Daya Bay,”Phys....

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.88.030502 2016

  5. [5]

    2020 global reassessment of the neutrino oscillation picture,

    P. F. de Salas, D. V. Forero, S. Gariazzo, P. Martínez-Miravé, O. Mena, C. A. Ternes, M. Tórtola, and J. W. F. Valle, “2020 global reassessment of the neutrino oscillation picture,”JHEP02(2021) 071,arXiv:2006.11237 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2020

  6. [6]

    Neutrino Masses in SU(2) x U(1) Theories,

    J. Schechter and J. W. F. Valle, “Neutrino Masses in SU(2) x U(1) Theories,”Phys. Rev. D22(1980) 2227

    work page 1980

  7. [7]

    Neutrino Decay and Spontaneous Violation of Lepton Number,

    J. Schechter and J. W. F. Valle, “Neutrino Decay and Spontaneous Violation of Lepton Number,” Phys. Rev. D25(1982) 774. 19

    work page 1982

  8. [8]

    Neutrino Mass and Baryon Number Nonconservation in Superstring Models,

    R. N. Mohapatra and J. W. F. Valle, “Neutrino Mass and Baryon Number Nonconservation in Superstring Models,”Phys. Rev. D34(1986) 1642

    work page 1986

  9. [9]

    Verifiable Radiative Seesaw Mechanism of Neutrino Mass and Dark Matter

    E. Ma, “Verifiable radiative seesaw mechanism of neutrino mass and dark matter,”Phys. Rev. D73 (2006) 077301,arXiv:hep-ph/0601225

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  10. [10]

    Seesaw neutrino masses induced by a triplet of leptons,

    R. Foot, H. Lew, X. G. He, and G. C. Joshi, “Seesaw neutrino masses induced by a triplet of leptons,” Z. Phys.C44(1989) 441

    work page 1989

  11. [11]

    Supersymmetric Origin of Neutrino Mass

    M. Hirsch and J. W. F. Valle, “Supersymmetric origin of neutrino mass,”New J. Phys.6(2004) 76, hep-ph/0405015

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  12. [12]

    Novel Supersymmetric SO(10) Seesaw Mechanism

    M. Malinsky, J. C. Romao, and J. W. F. Valle, “Novel supersymmetric SO(10) seesaw mechanism,” Phys. Rev. Lett.95(2005) 161801,arXiv:hep-ph/0506296

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  13. [13]

    Neutrino Physics - Models for Neutrino Masses and Lepton Mixing

    W. Grimus, “Neutrino Physics - Models for Neutrino Masses and Lepton Mixing,”PoS P2GC(2006) 001,arXiv:hep-ph/0612311

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  14. [14]

    Up-scattering production of a sterile fermion at DUNE: complementarity with spallation source and direct detection experiments,

    P. M. Candela, V. De Romeri, P. Melas, D. K. Papoulias, and N. Saoulidou, “Up-scattering production of a sterile fermion at DUNE: complementarity with spallation source and direct detection experiments,”JHEP10(2024) 032,arXiv:2404.12476 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  15. [15]

    Collider signatures of fermionic scotogenic dark matter,

    V. M. Lozano, G. Sanchez Garcia, and J. W. F. Valle, “Collider signatures of fermionic scotogenic dark matter,”Phys. Rev. D112no. 5, (2025) 055007,arXiv:2502.05270 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  16. [16]

    Probing new physics with coherent neutrino scattering off nuclei

    J. Barranco, O. G. Miranda, and T. I. Rashba, “Probing new physics with coherent neutrino scattering off nuclei,”JHEP12(2005) 021,arXiv:hep-ph/0508299

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  17. [17]

    Status of non-standard neutrino interactions

    T. Ohlsson, “Status of non-standard neutrino interactions,”Rept. Prog. Phys.76(2013) 044201, arXiv:1209.2710 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  18. [18]

    Non standard neutrino interactions

    O. G. Miranda and H. Nunokawa, “Non standard neutrino interactions: current status and future prospects,”New J. Phys.17no. 9, (2015) 095002,arXiv:1505.06254 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  19. [19]

    Neutrino oscillations and Non-Standard Interactions

    Y. Farzan and M. Tortola, “Neutrino oscillations and Non-Standard Interactions,”Front.in Phys.6 (2018) 10,arXiv:1710.09360 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  20. [20]

    Global constraints on non-standard neutrino interactions with quarks and electrons,

    P. Coloma, M. C. Gonzalez-Garcia, M. Maltoni, J. P. Pinheiro, and S. Urrea, “Global constraints on non-standard neutrino interactions with quarks and electrons,”JHEP08(2023) 032, arXiv:2305.07698 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  21. [21]

    Leptoquarks in Lepton - Quark Collisions,

    W. Buchmuller, R. Ruckl, and D. Wyler, “Leptoquarks in Lepton - Quark Collisions,”Phys. Lett. B 191(1987) 442–448. [Erratum: Phys.Lett.B 448, 320–320 (1999)]

    work page 1987

  22. [22]

    Flavor Phenomenology of the Leptoquark Singlet-Triplet Model,

    A. Crivellin, D. Müller, and F. Saturnino, “Flavor Phenomenology of the Leptoquark Singlet-Triplet Model,”JHEP06(2020) 020,arXiv:1912.04224 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2020

  23. [23]

    Neutrino window to scalar leptoquarks: From low energy to colliders,

    V. De Romeri, V. M. Lozano, and G. Sanchez Garcia, “Neutrino window to scalar leptoquarks: From low energy to colliders,”Phys. Rev. D109no. 5, (2024) 055014,arXiv:2307.13790 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  24. [24]

    Sensitivity of direct detection experiments to neutrino magnetic dipole moments,

    D. Aristizabal Sierra, R. Branada, O. G. Miranda, and G. Sanchez Garcia, “Sensitivity of direct detection experiments to neutrino magnetic dipole moments,”JHEP12(2020) 178, arXiv:2008.05080 [hep-ph]. 20

    work page arXiv 2020

  25. [25]

    Neutrino electromagnetic properties and sterile dipole portal in light of the first solar CEνNS data,

    V. De Romeri, D. K. Papoulias, G. Sanchez Garcia, C. A. Ternes, and M. Tórtola, “Neutrino electromagnetic properties and sterile dipole portal in light of the first solar CEνNS data,”JCAP05 (2025) 080,arXiv:2412.14991 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  26. [26]

    Constraining neutrino electromagnetic properties with recent low-energy electron recoil data at dark matter direct detection experiments,

    M. Demirci, H. I. Sezer, M. F. Mustamin, and A. B. Balantekin, “Constraining neutrino electromagnetic properties with recent low-energy electron recoil data at dark matter direct detection experiments,”Phys. Rev. D112no. 9, (2025) 095035,arXiv:2510.12449 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  27. [27]

    Coherent Neutrino-Nucleus Scattering and new Neutrino Interactions

    M. Lindner, W. Rodejohann, and X.-J. Xu, “Coherent Neutrino-Nucleus Scattering and new Neutrino Interactions,”JHEP03(2017) 097,arXiv:1612.04150 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  28. [28]

    COHERENT analysis of neutrino generalized interactions

    D. Aristizabal Sierra, V. De Romeri, and N. Rojas, “COHERENT analysis of neutrino generalized interactions,”Phys. Rev. D98(2018) 075018,arXiv:1806.07424 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  29. [29]

    Borexino and general neutrino interactions,

    A. N. Khan, W. Rodejohann, and X.-J. Xu, “Borexino and general neutrino interactions,”Phys. Rev. D101no. 5, (2020) 055047,arXiv:1906.12102 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2020

  30. [30]

    Scalar and tensor neutrino interactions,

    T. Han, J. Liao, H. Liu, and D. Marfatia, “Scalar and tensor neutrino interactions,”JHEP07(2020) 207,arXiv:2004.13869 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2020

  31. [31]

    Global constraints on neutral-current generalized neutrino interactions,

    F. J. Escrihuela, L. J. Flores, O. G. Miranda, and J. Rendón, “Global constraints on neutral-current generalized neutrino interactions,”JHEP07(2021) 061,arXiv:2105.06484 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  32. [32]

    Constraints on general neutrino interactions with exotic fermion from neutrino-electron scattering experiments,

    Z. Chen, T. Li, and J. Liao, “Constraints on general neutrino interactions with exotic fermion from neutrino-electron scattering experiments,”JHEP05(2021) 131,arXiv:2102.09784 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  33. [33]

    CEνNS as a probe of flavored generalized neutrino interactions,

    L. J. Flores, N. Nath, and E. Peinado, “CEνNS as a probe of flavored generalized neutrino interactions,”Phys. Rev. D105no. 5, (2022) 055010,arXiv:2112.05103 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2022

  34. [34]

    Physics implications of a combined analysis of COHERENT CsI and LAr data,

    V. De Romeri, O. G. Miranda, D. K. Papoulias, G. Sanchez Garcia, M. Tórtola, and J. W. F. Valle, “Physics implications of a combined analysis of COHERENT CsI and LAr data,”JHEP04(2023) 035,arXiv:2211.11905 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  35. [35]

    Constraining new physics with Borexino Phase-II spectral data,

    P. Coloma, M. C. Gonzalez-Garcia, M. Maltoni, J. P. Pinheiro, and S. Urrea, “Constraining new physics with Borexino Phase-II spectral data,”JHEP07(2022) 138,arXiv:2204.03011 [hep-ph]. [Erratum: JHEP 11, 138 (2022)]

    work page arXiv 2022

  36. [36]

    Examining the sensitivity of FASER to generalized neutrino interactions,

    F. J. Escrihuela, L. J. Flores, O. G. Miranda, J. Rendón, and R. Sánchez-Vélez, “Examining the sensitivity of FASER to generalized neutrino interactions,”JHEP04(2024) 102,arXiv:2308.15630 [hep-ph]. [40]KA TRINCollaboration, M. Aker et al., “First Constraints on General Neutrino Interactions Based on KATRIN Data,”Phys. Rev. Lett.134no. 25, (2025) 251801,ar...

    work page arXiv 2024

  37. [37]

    Solar neutrinos and the strongest oscillation constraints on scalar NSI,

    P. B. Denton, A. Giarnetti, and D. Meloni, “Solar neutrinos and the strongest oscillation constraints on scalar NSI,”JHEP01(2025) 097,arXiv:2409.15411 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  38. [38]

    Implications of first neutrino-induced nuclear recoil measurements in direct detection experiments: Probing nonstandard interaction via CEνNS,

    D. Aristizabal Sierra, N. Mishra, and L. Strigari, “Implications of first neutrino-induced nuclear recoil measurements in direct detection experiments: Probing nonstandard interaction via CEνNS,”Phys. Rev. D111no. 5, (2025) 055007,arXiv:2409.02003 [hep-ph]. 21

    work page arXiv 2025

  39. [39]

    Tensor interaction in coherent elastic neutrino-nucleus scattering,

    J. Liao, J. Tang, and B.-L. Zhang, “Tensor interaction in coherent elastic neutrino-nucleus scattering,” Phys. Rev. D112no. 3, (2025) 035036,arXiv:2502.10702 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  40. [40]

    Exploring the standard model and beyond from the evidence of CEνNS with reactor antineutrinos in CONUS+,

    M. Alpízar-Venegas, L. J. Flores, E. Peinado, and E. Vázquez-Jáuregui, “Exploring the standard model and beyond from the evidence of CEνNS with reactor antineutrinos in CONUS+,”Phys. Rev. D111no. 5, (2025) 053001,arXiv:2501.10355 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  41. [41]

    Probing standard model and beyond with reactor CEνNS data of CONUS+ experiment,

    A. Chattaraj, A. Majumdar, and R. Srivastava, “Probing standard model and beyond with reactor CEνNS data of CONUS+ experiment,”Phys. Lett. B864(2025) 139438,arXiv:2501.12441 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  42. [42]

    Implications of the first CONUS+ measurement of coherent elastic neutrino-nucleus scattering,

    V. De Romeri, D. K. Papoulias, and G. Sanchez Garcia, “Implications of the first CONUS+ measurement of coherent elastic neutrino-nucleus scattering,”Phys. Rev. D111no. 7, (2025) 075025, arXiv:2501.17843 [hep-ph]. [47]TEXONOCollaboration, S. Karadağ et al., “Constraints on new physics with light mediators and generalized neutrino interactions via coherent ...

    work page arXiv 2025

  43. [43]

    Searching for generalized neutrino interactions in direct detection experiments with EνES,

    J. M. Celestino-Ramírez, F. J. Escrihuela, L. J. Flores, O. G. Miranda, and R. Sánchez-Vélez, “Searching for generalized neutrino interactions in direct detection experiments with EνES,” arXiv:2510.17027 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv

  44. [44]

    Generalized Fierz identities

    J. F. Nieves and P. B. Pal, “Generalized Fierz identities,”Am. J. Phys.72(2004) 1100–1108, arXiv:hep-ph/0306087

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  45. [45]

    Question of Parity Conservation in Weak Interactions,

    T. D. Lee and C.-N. Yang, “Question of Parity Conservation in Weak Interactions,”Phys. Rev.104 (1956) 254–258

    work page 1956

  46. [46]

    Experimental Test of Parity Conservation inβDecay,

    C. S. Wu, E. Ambler, R. W. Hayward, D. D. Hoppes, and R. P. Hudson, “Experimental Test of Parity Conservation inβDecay,”Phys. Rev.105(1957) 1413–1414

    work page 1957

  47. [47]

    Chirality invariance and the universal Fermi interaction,

    E. C. G. Sudarshan and R. e. Marshak, “Chirality invariance and the universal Fermi interaction,” Phys. Rev.109(1958) 1860–1860

    work page 1958

  48. [48]

    Observation of Coherent Elastic Neutrino-Nucleus Scattering

    D. Z. Freedman, “Coherent effects of a weak neutral current,”Phys. Rev. D9(Mar, 1974) 1389–1392. https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevD.9.1389. [54]COHERENTCollaboration, D. Akimov et al., “Observation of Coherent Elastic Neutrino-Nucleus Scattering,”Science357no. 6356, (2017) 1123–1126,arXiv:1708.01294 [nucl-ex]. [55]COHERENTCollaboration, D. Akimov e...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.9.1389 1974

  49. [49]

    Direct observation of coherent elastic antineutrino–nucleus scattering,

    N. Ackermannet al., “Direct observation of coherent elastic antineutrino–nucleus scattering,”Nature 643no. 8074, (2025) 1229–1233,arXiv:2501.05206 [hep-ex]. [59]COHERENTCollaboration, S. Adamski et al., “First detection of coherent elastic neutrino-nucleus scattering on germanium,”arXiv:2406.13806 [hep-ex]. [60]PandaXCollaboration, Z. Bo et al., “First In...

    work page arXiv 2025

  50. [50]

    General neutrino interactions from an effective field theory perspective,

    I. Bischer and W. Rodejohann, “General neutrino interactions from an effective field theory perspective,”Nucl. Phys. B947(2019) 114746,arXiv:1905.08699 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2019

  51. [51]

    Exploring the sensitivity to non-standard and generalized neutrino interactions through coherent elastic neutrino-nucleus scattering with a NaI detector,

    S. S. Chatterjee, S. Lavignac, O. G. Miranda, and G. Sanchez Garcia, “Exploring the sensitivity to non-standard and generalized neutrino interactions through coherent elastic neutrino-nucleus scattering with a NaI detector,”arXiv:2402.16953 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv

  52. [52]

    EFT analysis of New Physics at COHERENT with Dirac neutrinos,

    V. Bresó-Pla, S. Cruz-Alzaga, M. González-Alonso, and S. Prakash, “EFT analysis of New Physics at COHERENT with Dirac neutrinos,”arXiv:2505.01275 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv

  53. [53]

    Coherent elastic neutrino-nucleus scattering: EFT analysis and nuclear responses,

    M. Hoferichter, J. Menéndez, and A. Schwenk, “Coherent elastic neutrino-nucleus scattering: EFT analysis and nuclear responses,”Phys. Rev. D102no. 7, (2020) 074018,arXiv:2007.08529 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2020

  54. [54]

    On the role of isospin violation in the pion–nucleonσ-term,

    M. Hoferichter, J. R. de Elvira, B. Kubis, and U.-G. Meißner, “On the role of isospin violation in the pion–nucleonσ-term,”Phys. Lett. B843(2023) 138001,arXiv:2305.07045 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  55. [55]

    Flavor diagonal tensor charges of the nucleon from 2+1+1 flavor lattice QCD

    R. Gupta, B. Yoon, T. Bhattacharya, V. Cirigliano, Y.-C. Jang, and H.-W. Lin, “Flavor diagonal tensor charges of the nucleon from (2+1+1)-flavor lattice QCD,”Phys. Rev. D98no. 9, (2018) 091501,arXiv:1808.07597 [hep-lat]. [69]CHARMCollaboration, J. Dorenbosch et al., “Experimental Verification of the Universality ofνe andν µ Coupling to the Neutral Weak Cu...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  56. [56]

    Electroweak Parameters From a High Statistics Neutrino Nucleon Scattering Experiment,

    A. Blondel et al., “Electroweak Parameters From a High Statistics Neutrino Nucleon Scattering Experiment,”Z. Phys. C45(1990) 361–379

    work page 1990

  57. [57]

    The Weak Neutral Current

    J. Erler and S. Su, “The Weak Neutral Current,”Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.71(2013) 119–149, arXiv:1303.5522 [hep-ph]. 23

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  58. [58]

    Parton distributions for the LHC

    A. D. Martin, W. J. Stirling, R. S. Thorne, and G. Watt, “Parton distributions for the LHC,”Eur. Phys. J. C63(2009) 189–285,arXiv:0901.0002 [hep-ph]. [74]CHARMCollaboration, M. Jonker et al., “Experimental Study of Neutral Current and Charged Current Neutrino Cross-Sections,”Phys. Lett. B99(1981) 265. [Erratum: Phys.Lett.B 100, 520 (1981), Erratum: Phys.L...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009