Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

A family-dependent gauge boson can raise the rank of the neutrino mass matrix at one loop, whereas Standard Model fields require two loops.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-04 05:33 UTC pith:GOAIW4PY

load-bearing objection New one-loop rank-raising term in the Weinberg-operator RGE from a flavored Z', worth a careful referee despite the unshown loop integral. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2604.00990 v2 pith:GOAIW4PY submitted 2026-04-01 hep-ph hep-th

Quantum effects on neutrino parameters from a flavored gauge boson

Alejandro Ibarra , Lukas Treuer This is my paper
classification hep-ph hep-th PACS 14.60.Pq11.10.Hi
keywords neutrino massesWeinberg operatorrenormalization group equationsflavored gauge bosonU(1)_Lmu-Ltaurank increasequasi-fixed pointsseesaw mechanism
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper claims that extending the Standard Model with a massive gauge boson that couples differently to electron, muon, and tau lepton doublets changes the renormalization-group evolution of the neutrino mass operator in a qualitatively new way. Specifically, the one-loop RGE acquires a term G^T κ G, where G is proportional to the charge matrix Q' = diag(0,1,-1). Because this matrix does not commute with the leptonic mixing matrix, it can increase the rank of the neutrino mass matrix at one loop, whereas Standard Model fields only do so at two loops. This means even a neutrino mass matrix that is singular at the high scale develops a nonzero lightest eigenvalue at the Z' scale, and exactly degenerate eigenvalues are split, with quasi-fixed points for the mixing angles.

Core claim

The central claim is Eq. (9): with a flavored gauge boson, the one-loop RGE of the Weinberg operator contains the term G^T κ G with G = sqrt(6) g' Q'. Since Q' = diag(0,1,-1) is not proportional to the identity, this term mixes different entries of κ. In the eigenvalue basis, the evolution of each eigenvalue κ_i is not proportional to itself but receives contributions from all eigenvalues through (G̃_{ji})^2 κ_j. Consequently, a zero eigenvalue at the cut-off M1 is radiatively generated at the Z' scale, with hierarchy κ1/κ3 ~ (6g'^2/16π^2) log(M1/MZ') (U32 U12 - U33 U13)^2. Degenerate pairs are split at first order in the loop factor unless a quasi-fixed point condition holds, in which case

What carries the argument

The central object is the new term G^T κ G in the one-loop RGE, with G = sqrt(6) g' Q' where Q' = diag(0,1,-1) is the L_mu-L_tau charge matrix of the left-handed lepton doublets. This matrix is flavor off-diagonal in the mass basis, so it transfers strength from heavier to lighter eigenvalues, raising the rank of κ at one loop. In the eigenvalue evolution, the relevant quantities are the rotated matrices G̃ = U G U†; their off-diagonal squares G̃_{ji}^2 multiply κ_j in the equation for κ_i. The paper also introduces the quasi-fixed point condition Σ_k W_{ki} W_{kj} κ_k = 0, which determines when degenerate eigenvalues remain degenerate.

Load-bearing premise

The paper's result rests on an unshown one-loop calculation that gives exactly the coefficient sqrt(6) g' for the flavored-gauge term, with no extra self-energy or vertex counterterms that could cancel or alter the flavor structure.

What would settle it

An independent, complete one-loop computation of the Z' contribution to the Weinberg operator RGE—including wavefunction renormalization of the lepton doublets and the Higgs—would either reproduce the G^T κ G term with coefficient sqrt(6) g' or not. Alternatively, a high-precision measurement of the lightest neutrino mass that is smaller (in normal ordering) than the value predicted by Eq. (24) for g' of order one and the measured angles would rule out this mechanism.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • A neutrino mass matrix with a zero eigenvalue at the scale M1 acquires a nonzero lightest eigenvalue at M_{Z'} of order (6g'^2/16π^2) log(M1/M_{Z'}) sin^2 2θ in the two-generation case, or (6g'^2/16π^2) log(M1/M_{Z'}) (U32 U12 - U33 U13)^2 in the three-generation normal-ordering case.
  • Exactly degenerate eigenvalues are split by one-loop Z' effects, with the sign and size of the splitting governed by the mixing angles; when a quasi-fixed point is reached, the splitting is postponed to second order.
  • The mixing angles are pushed to quasi-fixed points in the infrared; in the real normal-ordering case with κ1=κ2, the predicted reactor angle |θ13| ~ 23° for the current solar and atmospheric central values, which is excluded, but complex phases can satisfy the fixed-point condition.
  • These effects can dynamically generate the measured mass differences and mixing angles for both normal and inverted ordering, given suitable high-scale parameters and g' ~ 1.
  • For an exact double zero (κ1=κ2=0) at the cut-off, one eigenvalue remains zero at leading order but is generated at order b^2 ~ (1/(16π^2))^2 log^2(M1/M_{Z'}), with contributions from two-loop effects of similar size.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If this mechanism is the origin of the lightest neutrino mass, the measured value of the lightest mass, solar mass splitting, and mixing angles jointly constrain the combination g'^2 log(M1/M_{Z'}); current neutrino data already bound the real-case fixed point, so a full complex-phase analysis could either accommodate or rule out the quasi-fixed point.
  • The same G^T κ G structure should appear in any SMEFT extension with a flavor-dependent gauge symmetry acting on lepton doublets, including gauged B-L variants with family-dependent charges; the paper's U(1)_{L_mu-L_tau} example is archetypal but the rank-raising effect is generic.
  • Because the non-Abelian generalization with leptons in the fundamental of SU(n) yields a contribution proportional to κ itself, the rank-raising effect is particular to Abelian (or suitably chosen) flavor gauge groups; model builders looking to avoid the effect might invoke such non-Abelian symmetries.
  • A discovery of a Z' with family-dependent lepton couplings (e.g., in muon g-2 explanations) could be cross-checked by measuring neutrino mass ordering and the lightest mass; the predicted correlation between θ13 and the solar/atmospheric angles at the quasi-fixed point is a falsifiable signature.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper studies the one-loop renormalization group evolution of the neutrino mass (Weinberg) operator in an effective theory where the Standard Model is extended by a massive U(1)_{Lμ-Lτ} gauge boson with family-dependent couplings to left-handed leptons. The central claim is Eq. (9): in addition to the usual SM terms, the RGE contains a term G^T κ G with G = √6 g' Q'. Because Q' = diag(0,1,-1) does not commute with the neutrino mixing matrix, this term can increase the rank of the neutrino mass matrix at one loop, in contrast to the SM where rank increase first appears at two loops. The paper illustrates this in two- and three-generation examples, deriving approximate formulas for radiatively generated lightest neutrino masses, mass splittings, and quasi-fixed points for mixing angles, in normal and inverted ordering scenarios. A non-Abelian generalization is given in an appendix, where it is shown that for lepton doublets in the fundamental of SU(n) the rank-increasing terms sum to a term proportional to κ.

Significance. If the central calculation is correct, the result is significant: it identifies a minimal new-physics ingredient (a family-dependent Z') that changes the structure of the Weinberg-operator RGE in a qualitatively new way at one loop, and it gives concrete analytic predictions (e.g., Eqs. (19), (24), (34)) that could be tested. The paper is careful to present the UV completion, to distinguish the exact solution (Eq. (11)) from first-order approximations, and to include an appendix showing the scope condition for non-Abelian gauge groups. The main weakness is that the derivation of the key term is not displayed, and the quantitative predictions therefore rest on an unverified coefficient.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. 3, Eq. (9)-(10), Fig. 2] The central new result is asserted, not derived. The text states that the Z' contribution is G^T κ G with G = √6 g' Q', citing fermion-flow rules, but no loop integral, renormalization scheme, or cancellation pattern is shown. In particular, the coefficient 6 and the stated absence of additional one-loop g'^2 terms of the form Q'^2 κ + κ Q'^2 (from lepton wave-function renormalization) are not checkable. All quantitative results (Eqs. (17)-(24), (29)-(35), Figs. 3-7) scale with b = 6g'^2/(16π^2) log(M1/MZ'), so a different coefficient or an additional structure changes the predictions. Please provide the explicit one-loop calculation in an appendix, including the treatment of the fermion flow and the cancellation of self-energy/vertex divergences.
  2. [Sec. 3.2.1, text after Eq. (27), and Conclusions] The real-case quasi-fixed point predicts |θ13| ≈ 23° for the NuFit central values θ12 ≈ 34°, θ23 ≈ 48°, while the measured value is 8.5°. The paper acknowledges this and defers a detailed complex-phase analysis to future work. As a result, the abstract's and introduction's framing that the framework can 'generate dynamically the measured ... mixing angles' is not yet supported; the only explicit, quantitative real-case prediction for the reactor angle is excluded. Please either include a complex-phase example satisfying the fixed-point condition Re(W31 W32)=0 with the measured angles, or explicitly restrict the phenomenological claims to mass observables and to the qualitative rank-raising effect.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Eq. (11)] The lower integration limit is written as tΛ but the prefactor is κij(tM1); should be t_{M1} (or κij(tΛ)) for consistency.
  2. [Footnote 2, Sec. 3] The statement that a rank-increasing term can only appear at one loop from flavor-dependent gauge interactions is not demonstrated; a one-sentence proof would help.
  3. [Fig. 1 caption] 'below the diagonal with MZ'=|M1|' should likely read 'below the diagonal line MZ'=|M1|'.
  4. [Footnote after Eq. (10)] The footnote explains the U(1)_Y cancellation but does not explain why the U(1)' contribution has no analogous cancellation; this is part of the missing derivation and should be addressed.
  5. [Appendix A, Eqs. (36)-(39)] The notation G_± is introduced, but the expression for G_± in Eq. (39) references Q'_± as 'analogous to the Abelian case'; please define Q'_± explicitly for clarity.
  6. [Sec. 3.1, text before Eq. (16)] The two-generation example uses G = √6 g' diag(1,−1), whereas Eq. (2) has Q' = diag(0,1,−1). Presumably the electron is decoupled and the surviving charges are rescaled; this should be stated explicitly.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the central RGE term is asserted from a diagram, not fitted to or defined in terms of the predicted neutrino observables.

full rationale

The paper's main claim is Eq. (9): the one-loop RGE of the Weinberg operator gains the term G^T κ G with G = sqrt(6) g' Q'. This term is introduced as the result of the diagram in Fig. 2, with a citation to standard fermion-flow rules [23]; it is not obtained by fitting to neutrino masses or mixing angles, and no equation defines the target output into the assumed input. The later rank-raising statements, quasifixed points, and numerical examples follow by algebra from Eq. (9) together with chosen, freely specified initial conditions; choosing initial conditions is model-building freedom, not circularity. The self-citations [5] and [18] are used for context or analogy (the known two-loop SM rank-raising term and previous two-Higgs-doublet RGE work), but the new one-loop flavored-gauge result does not reduce to those citations. The skeptical concern that the loop coefficient 6 and the absence of additional wavefunction-renormalization terms are asserted rather than displayed in the text is a real verifiability/correctness issue, not a circularity: it does not make the prediction equivalent to its inputs by construction. Therefore no circular step is identified.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

5 free parameters · 5 axioms · 2 invented entities

The main theoretical result (rank increase at one loop) depends only on the existence of a flavor-non-universal gauge interaction and on the specific form of the one-loop gauge contribution. The phenomenological discussion, however, relies on several hand-chosen initial conditions, the free coupling g', and the scale ratio M1/MZ'; none of these is fitted to the measured neutrino parameters, and the complex-phase scenario needed to match data is not computed.

free parameters (5)
  • U(1)' gauge coupling g' = not fitted to data; illustrative g'=1 in examples
    Coupling of the flavored gauge boson; controls the size of G and the b coefficient. The phenomenological 'ballpark' estimates explicitly assume g'~1.
  • Initial eigenvalues κ1, κ2, κ3 at the cutoff M1 = e.g., κ1=0, κ2=κ3/100, κ3=1; or κ1=κ2=0
    Initial conditions of the Weinberg coefficient at the high scale. The paper states these are unspecified by the UV model and chooses representative values to illustrate rank increase and fixed points.
  • Initial leptonic mixing angles (and CP/Majorana phases in the complex case) = e.g., θ12=15°, θ13=-10°, θ23=50°; complex phases left free
    The fixed-point predictions and radiatively generated eigenvalues depend on the initial mixing matrix; no fit to NuFit data is performed.
  • Scale ratio M1/MZ' = e.g., M1=10^12 GeV, MZ'=10^9 GeV
    The log(M1/MZ') factor controls the size of a and b; chosen for illustration. The paper shows a wide allowed region in Fig. 1.
  • UV parameters (Yukawa couplings λ_ij, vevs ⟨S_i⟩, M_ij) = scanned in ranges; not fitted to neutrino data
    These determine the initial κ texture and the M1/MZ' ratio; the paper random-scans them to demonstrate parameter space but does not use them as a predictive fit.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption Seesaw mechanism: integrating out right-handed neutrinos produces the Weinberg operator κ=-Yν M_R^{-1} Yν^T at scale M1.
    Standard seesaw matching used in Sec. 2 to connect the UV model to the effective operator.
  • domain assumption The U(1)_{Lμ-Lτ} extension with the given N_i and S_i charge assignments is anomaly-free.
    Field content in Table 1 is chosen to cancel gauge anomalies; this is asserted, not proven in the text.
  • domain assumption Below M1, the EFT contains only the SM fields, the Weinberg operator, and the massive Z'; no other light degrees of freedom or higher-dimensional operators affect the running.
    Required for the closed-form RGE (9) to be valid; threshold corrections at MZ' are taken as simple decoupling.
  • standard math Standard one-loop RGE techniques and fermion-number-violating Feynman rules (as in [23]) are correctly applied to obtain Eq. (9).
    The central G^T κ G term is presented via Fig. 2 but the loop integral is not shown; correctness is assumed from standard methods.
  • ad hoc to paper The flavor-dependent gauge contribution does not receive an additional one-loop wavefunction-renormalization term that would cancel or modify the rank-raising structure.
    The paper states the gauge term is only G^T κ G, with no separate Q'^2 κ + κ Q'^2 term in Eq. (9); this is a load-bearing structural assumption.
invented entities (2)
  • Massive Z' gauge boson of U(1)_{Lμ-Lτ} independent evidence
    purpose: Mediates the family-dependent force that produces the rank-increasing G^T κ G term in the RGE.
    Lμ-Lτ gauge bosons are well-studied extensions with independent experimental constraints (e.g., neutrino trident, beam-dump searches); cited [19,20]. Not invented by this paper, but load-bearing.
  • Heavy right-handed neutrinos N1,N2,N3 and singlet scalars S0,S1,S2 no independent evidence
    purpose: UV completion that generates the Weinberg operator and breaks U(1)_{Lμ-Lτ}.
    Standard seesaw ingredients with no direct experimental evidence; the paper does not provide independent falsifiable handles for these fields.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 13536 in / 17497 out tokens · 196799 ms · 2026-08-04T05:33:42.978611+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We calculate the one-loop renormalization group equations of the neutrino mass matrix when the Standard Model particle content is extended with a massive gauge boson which has family-dependent couplings to the left-handed leptons. We show that quantum effects induced by the extra gauge boson increase the rank of the neutrino mass matrix at the one-loop level, in contrast to the well-known result that Standard Model fields can only increase the rank at the two-loop level. We also discuss the possibility of generating dynamically the measured mass differences and mixing angles between the active neutrinos in scenarios with normal and inverted mass ordering.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.00990 by Alejandro Ibarra, Lukas Treuer.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Scatter plot of the absolute value of the smallest right-handed neutrino mass [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: One-loop diagram of Z ′ giving rise to the GT κG term in the RGE. The light gray arrow denotes fermion flow used for the calculation, following [23]. Here, λ is the quartic coupling in the Higgs potential; g2 is the SU(2)L gauge coupling constant; Yu, Yd, and Ye are respectively the Yukawa couplings of the up-type quarks, down￾type quarks, and charged leptons; and g ′ and Q′ are respectively the gauge coup… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Running of the eigenvalues (left panel) and the mixing angles (right panel) for a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Running of the eigenvalues (left panel) and the mixing angles (right panel) for a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Same as Fig. 3, but for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Running of the eigenvalues (left panel) and the mixing angles (right panel) for a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Same as Fig. 6, but for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_7.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Radiative Breaking of Two-Zero Neutrino Mass Minors: Revisiting the $\mathrm{U}(1)_{L_\mu-L_\tau}$ Model

    hep-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0

    One-loop threshold corrections in the minimal U(1)_{L_mu-L_tau} seesaw model break the tree-level two-zero minor structure, relaxing the lower bound on total neutrino mass and easing cosmological tension.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

24 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Baryon and Lepton Nonconserving Processes

    Steven Weinberg. “Baryon and Lepton Nonconserving Processes”. In:Phys. Rev. Lett.43 (1979), pp. 1566–1570.doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.43.1566

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.43.1566 1979

  2. [2]

    Renormalization group equations for seesaw neutrino masses

    Piotr H. Chankowski and Zbigniew Pluciennik. “Renormalization group equations for seesaw neutrino masses”. In:Phys. Lett. B316 (1993), pp. 312–317.doi:10.1016/0370- 2693(93)90330-K. arXiv:hep-ph/9306333

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1993

  3. [3]

    Renormalization of the neutrino mass operator

    K. S. Babu, Chung Ngoc Leung, and James T. Pantaleone. “Renormalization of the neutrino mass operator”. In:Phys. Lett. B319 (1993), pp. 191–198.doi:10.1016/0370- 2693(93)90801-N. arXiv:hep-ph/9309223

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1993

  4. [4]

    Neutrino mass operator renormalization revisited

    Stefan Antusch et al. “Neutrino mass operator renormalization revisited”. In:Phys. Lett. B519 (2001), pp. 238–242.doi:10 . 1016 / S0370 - 2693(01 ) 01127 - 3. arXiv:hep - ph/0108005

    arXiv 2001

  5. [5]

    Complete two-loop renormalization group equation of the Weinberg operator

    Alejandro Ibarra, Nicholas Leister, and Di Zhang. “Complete two-loop renormalization group equation of the Weinberg operator”. In:JHEP03 (2025), p. 214.doi:10.1007/ JHEP03(2025)214. arXiv:2411.08011 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  6. [6]

    The Smallest neutrino mass

    Sacha Davidson, Gino Isidori, and Alessandro Strumia. “The Smallest neutrino mass”. In: Phys. Lett. B646 (2007), pp. 100–104.doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2007.01.015. arXiv: hep-ph/0611389

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  7. [7]

    Naturalness of nearly degenerate neutrinos

    J. A. Casas et al. “Naturalness of nearly degenerate neutrinos”. In:Nucl. Phys. B556 (1999), pp. 3–22.doi:10.1016/S0550-3213(99)00383-1. arXiv:hep-ph/9904395

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  8. [8]

    Can neutrinos be degenerate in mass?

    John R. Ellis and Smaragda Lola. “Can neutrinos be degenerate in mass?” In:Phys. Lett. B458 (1999), pp. 310–321.doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(99)00545-6. arXiv:hep- ph/9904279

    arXiv 1999

  9. [9]

    Theoretical constraints on the vacuum oscillation solution to the solar neutrino problem

    J. A. Casas et al. “Theoretical constraints on the vacuum oscillation solution to the solar neutrino problem”. In:JHEP09 (1999), p. 015.doi:10.1088/1126-6708/1999/09/015. arXiv:hep-ph/9906281

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  10. [10]

    General RG equations for physical neutrino parameters and their phenomenological implications

    J. A. Casas et al. “General RG equations for physical neutrino parameters and their phenomenological implications”. In:Nucl. Phys. B573 (2000), pp. 652–684.doi:10 . 1016/S0550-3213(99)00781-6. arXiv:hep-ph/9910420

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  11. [11]

    Fixed points in the evolution of neutrino mixings

    Piotr H. Chankowski, Wojciech Krolikowski, and Stefan Pokorski. “Fixed points in the evolution of neutrino mixings”. In:Phys. Lett. B473 (2000), pp. 109–117.doi:10.1016/ S0370-2693(99)01465-3. arXiv:hep-ph/9910231

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  12. [12]

    Energyscaledependenceoftheleptonflavormixingmatrix

    N.Habaetal.“Energyscaledependenceoftheleptonflavormixingmatrix”.In:Eur. Phys. J. C10 (1999), pp. 677–680.doi:10.1007/s100520050605. arXiv:hep-ph/9904292

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  13. [13]

    Nearlydegenerateneutrinos,supersymmetryandradiativecorrections

    J.A.Casasetal.“Nearlydegenerateneutrinos,supersymmetryandradiativecorrections”. In:Nucl. Phys. B569 (2000), pp. 82–106.doi:10.1016/S0550-3213(99)00605-7. arXiv: hep-ph/9905381

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  14. [14]

    Neutrino mass operator renormalization in two Higgs doublet models and the MSSM

    Stefan Antusch et al. “Neutrino mass operator renormalization in two Higgs doublet models and the MSSM”. In:Phys. Lett. B525 (2002), pp. 130–134.doi:10.1016/S0370- 2693(01)01414-9. arXiv:hep-ph/0110366. 15

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  15. [15]

    Supergraph techniques and two loop beta functions for renormalizable and nonrenormalizable operators

    Stefan Antusch and Michael Ratz. “Supergraph techniques and two loop beta functions for renormalizable and nonrenormalizable operators”. In:JHEP07 (2002), p. 059.doi: 10.1088/1126-6708/2002/07/059. arXiv:hep-ph/0203027

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  16. [16]

    One-loop corrections to the seesaw mechanism in the multi-Higgs-doublet standard model

    Walter Grimus and Luis Lavoura. “One-loop corrections to the seesaw mechanism in the multi-Higgs-doublet standard model”. In:Phys. Lett. B546 (2002), pp. 86–95.doi: 10.1016/S0370-2693(02)02672-2. arXiv:hep-ph/0207229

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  17. [17]

    Three neutrino mass spectrum from combining seesaw and radiative neutrino mass mechanisms

    W. Grimus and H. Neufeld. “Three neutrino mass spectrum from combining seesaw and radiative neutrino mass mechanisms”. In:Phys. Lett. B486 (2000), pp. 385–390.doi: 10.1016/S0370-2693(00)00769-3. arXiv:hep-ph/9911465

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  18. [18]

    Understanding neutrino properties from de- coupling right-handed neutrinos and extra Higgs doublets

    Alejandro Ibarra and Cristoforo Simonetto. “Understanding neutrino properties from de- coupling right-handed neutrinos and extra Higgs doublets”. In:JHEP11 (2011), p. 022. doi:10.1007/JHEP11(2011)022. arXiv:1107.2386 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  19. [19]

    NEW Z-prime PHENOMENOLOGY

    X. G. He et al. “NEW Z-prime PHENOMENOLOGY”. In:Phys. Rev. D43 (1991), pp. 22–24.doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.43.R22

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.43.r22 1991

  20. [20]

    GaugedL µ −L τ Symmetry at the Electroweak Scale

    Julian Heeck and Werner Rodejohann. “GaugedL µ −L τ Symmetry at the Electroweak Scale”. In:Phys. Rev. D84 (2011), p. 075007.doi:10 . 1103 / PhysRevD . 84 . 075007. arXiv:1107.5238 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  21. [21]

    NuFit-6.0: updated global analysis of three-flavor neutrino oscilla- tions

    Ivan Esteban et al. “NuFit-6.0: updated global analysis of three-flavor neutrino oscilla- tions”. In:JHEP12 (2024), p. 216.doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2024)216. arXiv:2410.05380 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  22. [22]

    Low-energy threshold corrections to neutrino masses and mixing angles

    Piotr H. Chankowski and Pawel Wasowicz. “Low-energy threshold corrections to neutrino masses and mixing angles”. In:Eur. Phys. J. C23 (2002), pp. 249–258.doi:10.1007/ s100520100867. arXiv:hep-ph/0110237

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  23. [23]

    Feynman rules for fermion number violating interactions

    Ansgar Denner et al. “Feynman rules for fermion number violating interactions”. In:Nucl. Phys. B387 (1992), pp. 467–481.doi:10.1016/0550-3213(92)90169-C

    work page doi:10.1016/0550-3213(92)90169-c 1992

  24. [24]

    Useful relations among the generators in the defining and adjoint representations of SU(N)

    Howard E. Haber. “Useful relations among the generators in the defining and adjoint representations of SU(N)”. In:SciPost Phys. Lect. Notes21 (2021), p. 1.doi:10.21468/ SciPostPhysLectNotes.21. arXiv:1912.13302 [math-ph]. 16

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021