arxiv: 2604.16157 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-17 · ✦ hep-ph · hep-ex· physics.ins-det

Recognition: unknown

δ_{rm CP}-free constraints on NSI parameters varepsilon_{eμ} and varepsilon_{eτ} using high-purity ν_μ\,{rm CC} events at IceCube DeepCore

J Krishnamoorthi , Anil Kumar , Sanjib Kumar Agarwalla

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 08:22 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph hep-exphysics.ins-det

keywords non-standard interactionsNSIatmospheric neutrinosIceCube DeepCoreneutrino oscillationsCP phase degeneracy

0 comments

The pith

High-purity muon neutrino events at IceCube DeepCore constrain non-standard interactions without CP phase dependence.

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

The paper uses a sample of atmospheric muon neutrino charged-current events collected over 7.5 years at IceCube DeepCore to search for non-standard neutrino interactions. Because these events mainly arise from the muon neutrino survival channel, the resulting limits on the NSI parameters ε_eμ and ε_eτ do not suffer from degeneracies with the CP-violating phase δ_CP that affect appearance-based measurements. The data is consistent with standard oscillations, yielding bounds on ε_eμ, ε_eτ, and ε_ee - ε_μμ that are comparable to existing constraints and serve as a complementary probe to long-baseline experiments.

Core claim

By selecting high-purity ν_μ CC events, which are dominated by the survival probability with little sensitivity to δ_CP, this work extracts constraints on the NSI parameters ε_eμ, ε_eτ, and ε_ee−ε_μμ that are independent of the unknown CP phase. The observed spectrum agrees with standard three-flavor oscillations, allowing the authors to set upper limits on these couplings.

What carries the argument

The high-purity selection of ν_μ charged-current events from atmospheric neutrinos, exploiting the δ_CP-insensitive survival channel P(ν_μ → ν_μ) to bound NSI effects in Earth matter.

If this is right

The derived limits provide a cross-check for NSI searches at accelerator-based long-baseline facilities where δ_CP is entangled.
Any future detection of NSI in this channel would indicate matter effects independent of oscillation phase.
These bounds can be incorporated into global fits to reduce allowed parameter space for NSI.
Improvements in event selection purity could further tighten the constraints without introducing δ_CP dependence.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

Combining this δ_CP-free data with appearance measurements from other experiments could help disentangle NSI from CP violation in global analyses.
This method might extend to other atmospheric neutrino detectors like Super-Kamiokande or future ones to cross-validate the results.
The reliance on accurate modeling of atmospheric fluxes and Earth density suggests that improved geophysical data could strengthen the NSI bounds.

Load-bearing premise

The selected ν_μ CC events have negligible dependence on δ_CP and that the atmospheric neutrino flux, Earth density profile, and detector effects are modeled with sufficient accuracy to isolate any NSI signal.

What would settle it

Observation of a statistically significant deviation from standard oscillation predictions in the energy or zenith angle distribution of the high-purity ν_μ CC sample that is better explained by non-zero ε_eμ or ε_eτ, or conversely, if the limits weaken substantially when δ_CP is allowed to vary freely in the analysis.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.16157 by Anil Kumar, J Krishnamoorthi, Sanjib Kumar Agarwalla.

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: FIG. 2. The differences of the three-flavor neutrino oscillation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: FIG. 3. The differences of the three-flavor neutrino oscillation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4. Difference of expected event distributions between the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5. Difference of expected event distributions between the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: FIG. 6. Difference of expected event distributions between the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_6.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: FIG. 7 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_7.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: FIG. 8 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_8.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 9.** Figure 9: FIG. 9. The observed (solid curve) and expected (dashed [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_9.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 10.** Figure 10: FIG. 10. Constraints on the real-valued NSI parameters [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_10.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Atmospheric neutrinos provide a unique avenue to probe theories beyond the Standard Model (BSM) over a wide range of energies and path lengths. The theory of non-standard interactions (NSI) of neutrinos is one of the important BSM scenarios, which can modify flavor oscillations of atmospheric neutrinos traveling through the Earth. In this work, we use a high-purity $\nu_{\mu}$ charged-current (CC) sample of atmospheric neutrinos from IceCube DeepCore with a livetime of 7.5 years to search for the NSI parameters $\varepsilon_{e\mu}$, $\varepsilon_{e\tau}$, and $\varepsilon_{ee}-\varepsilon_{\mu\mu}$. The $\nu_{\mu}$ CC events mainly come from the $\nu_{\mu}$ survival channel having no significant dependence on $\delta_{\rm CP}$. Therefore, the constraints on $\varepsilon_{e\mu}$ and $\varepsilon_{e\tau}$ obtained using this $\nu_{\mu}$ CC sample are expected to be free from the $\delta_{\rm CP}$-degeneracy. The data sample is found to be in agreement with the standard neutrino interactions. Therefore, we place bounds on these NSI parameters that are consistent with and comparable to existing experimental constraints. These $\delta_{\rm CP}$-free constraints from IceCube DeepCore are complementary to those from the long-baseline neutrino oscillation experiments, where the appearance channel depends on $\delta_{\rm CP}$.

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.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

IceCube DeepCore muon sample provides δ_CP-free NSI bounds on ε_eμ and ε_eτ, but the independence rests on an unverified assumption.

read the letter

This paper's main result is a set of δ_CP-independent constraints on the NSI parameters ε_eμ and ε_eτ derived from IceCube DeepCore's high-purity atmospheric muon neutrino sample. They analyzed 7.5 years of ν_μ CC events, which are dominated by the survival channel. The authors state that this channel has no significant δ_CP dependence, so the limits avoid the degeneracy common in appearance-based searches. The observed rates match standard oscillations, allowing them to set bounds comparable to other experiments. This provides complementary information for global fits that mix accelerator and atmospheric data. The work is a direct application of existing techniques to a new dataset. It correctly highlights the advantage of using survival probabilities for these particular NSI parameters. The data-driven nature and the agreement with the standard model are straightforward. However, the δ_CP-free claim depends on the assumption that NSI effects do not introduce meaningful phase dependence in the probabilities or after detector effects. Standard oscillations already include small δ_CP terms in disappearance, and adding NSI to the Hamiltonian could affect their magnitude. The abstract does not include a check or plot showing the variation remains negligible over the relevant range. This is a soft spot that could affect how much weight the bounds get in fits. Details on the event selection, systematic uncertainties, and the exact fitting method are absent from the summary, making it tough to evaluate the precision of the limits. The paper is useful for anyone doing combined analyses of neutrino oscillation data with NSI. Specialists in atmospheric neutrinos or BSM searches will see the value in these additional constraints. It deserves peer review to scrutinize the independence assumption and the technical implementation.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the assumption that standard three-flavor neutrino oscillations plus a known atmospheric flux and Earth matter profile accurately describe the data in the absence of NSI; the NSI parameters themselves are the quantities being constrained rather than free parameters fitted to produce the result.

axioms (2)

domain assumption Standard three-flavor neutrino oscillation framework with known mixing angles and mass-squared differences from prior global fits
Invoked when predicting the expected ν_μ survival probability in the absence of NSI
domain assumption Atmospheric neutrino flux and detector response are modeled with uncertainties that can be marginalized over without introducing bias in the NSI limits
Required to interpret the observed event rates as constraints on NSI rather than flux or detector mismodeling

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5593 in / 1285 out tokens · 67320 ms · 2026-05-10T08:22:57.307724+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

74 extracted references · 60 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

[1]

Fukuda et al

Y. Fukudaet al.(Super-Kamiokande), Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 1562 (1998), arXiv:hep-ex/9807003

work page arXiv 1998
[2]

Q. R. Ahmadet al.(SNO), Phys. Rev. Lett.87, 071301 (2001), arXiv:nucl-ex/0106015

work page arXiv 2001
[3]

Q. R. Ahmadet al.(SNO), Phys. Rev. Lett.89, 011301 (2002), arXiv:nucl-ex/0204008

work page arXiv 2002
[4]

Z. Maki, M. Nakagawa, and S. Sakata, Prog. Theor. Phys.28, 870 (1962)

1962
[5]

Pontecorvo, Zh

B. Pontecorvo, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz.53, 1717 (1967)

1967
[6]

Navaset al.(Particle Data Group), Phys

S. Navaset al.(Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D110, 030001 (2024)

2024
[7]

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 12, 216 (2024), arXiv:2410.05380 [hep-ph]

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2024
[8]

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

F. Capozzi, E. Lisi, F. Marcone, A. Marrone, and A. Palazzo, (2025), arXiv:2511.21650 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2025
[9]

Weinberg, Phys

S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. Lett.19, 1264 (1967)

1967
[10]

M. B. Gavela, D. Hernandez, T. Ota, and W. Winter, Phys. Rev. D79, 013007 (2009), arXiv:0809.3451 [hep- ph]

work page arXiv 2009
[11]

Bischer and W

I. Bischer and W. Rodejohann, Nucl. Phys. B947, 114746 (2019), arXiv:1905.08699 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2019
[12]

Valle, Phys

J. Valle, Phys. Lett. B199, 432 (1987)

1987
[13]

Roulet, Phys

E. Roulet, Phys. Rev. D44, R935 (1991)

1991
[14]

M. M. Guzzo, A. Masiero, and S. T. Petcov, Phys. Lett. B260, 154 (1991)

1991
[15]

M. M. Guzzo, H. Nunokawa, P. C. de Holanda, and O. L. G. Peres, Phys. Rev. D64, 097301 (2001), arXiv:hep-ph/0012089

work page arXiv 2001
[16]

Huber and J

P. Huber and J. W. F. Valle, Phys. Lett.B523, 151 (2001), arXiv:hep-ph/0108193 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2001
[17]

M. C. Gonzalez-Garcia and M. Maltoni, Phys. Rev. D 70, 033010 (2004), arXiv:hep-ph/0404085

work page arXiv 2004
[18]

J. Kopp, M. Lindner, T. Ota, and J. Sato, Phys. Rev. D77, 013007 (2008), arXiv:0708.0152 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2008
[19]

Biggio, M

C. Biggio, M. Blennow, and E. Fernandez-Martinez, JHEP08, 090 (2009), arXiv:0907.0097 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2009
[20]

F. J. Escrihuela, M. Tortola, J. W. F. Valle, and O. G. Miranda, Phys. Rev. D83, 093002 (2011), arXiv:1103.1366 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2011
[21]

M. C. Gonzalez-Garcia, M. Maltoni, and J. Salvado, JHEP05, 075 (2011), arXiv:1103.4365 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2011
[22]

S. K. Agarwalla, F. Lombardi, and T. Takeuchi, JHEP 12, 079 (2012), arXiv:1207.3492 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2012
[23]

Ohlsson, Rept

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

work page arXiv 2013
[24]

Esmaili and A

A. Esmaili and A. Y. Smirnov, JHEP06, 026 (2013), arXiv:1304.1042 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2013
[25]

M. C. Gonzalez-Garcia and M. Maltoni, JHEP09, 152 (2013), arXiv:1307.3092 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2013
[26]

Adamsonet al.(MINOS), Phys

P. Adamsonet al.(MINOS), Phys. Rev. D88, 072011 (2013), arXiv:1303.5314 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2013
[27]

Chatterjee, P

A. Chatterjee, P. Mehta, D. Choudhury, and R. Gandhi, Phys. Rev. D93, 093017 (2016), arXiv:1409.8472 [hep- ph]

work page arXiv 2016
[28]

S. K. Agarwalla, P. Bagchi, D. V. Forero, and M. T´ ortola, JHEP07, 060 (2015), arXiv:1412.1064 [hep- ph]. 12 Parameters Best-fit values Nominal values Priors (1σ) εeµ εeτ εee −ε µµ Detector: DOM efficiency 1.062 1.064 1.053 1.0±0.1 Ice absorption 0.973 0.973 0.970 1.0 Unconstrained Ice scattering 0.988 0.989 0.990 1.05 Unconstrained Relative eff.p 0 −0.2...

work page arXiv 2015
[29]

Mocioiu and W

I. Mocioiu and W. Wright, Nucl. Phys. B893, 376 (2015), arXiv:1410.6193 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2015
[30]

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

work page arXiv 2015
[31]

S. K. Agarwalla, Y. Kao, D. Saha, and T. Takeuchi, JHEP11, 035 (2015), arXiv:1506.08464 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2015
[32]

Choubey, A

S. Choubey, A. Ghosh, T. Ohlsson, and D. Tiwari, JHEP 12, 126 (2015), arXiv:1507.02211 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2015
[33]

S. K. Agarwalla, S. S. Chatterjee, and A. Palazzo, Phys. Lett. B762, 64 (2016), arXiv:1607.01745 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2016
[34]

Salvado, O

J. Salvado, O. Mena, S. Palomares-Ruiz, and N. Rius, JHEP01, 141 (2017), arXiv:1609.03450 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2017
[35]

Farzan and M

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

work page arXiv 2018
[36]

Coloma, P

P. Coloma, P. B. Denton, M. C. Gonzalez-Garcia, M. Maltoni, and T. Schwetz, JHEP04, 116 (2017), arXiv:1701.04828 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2017
[37]

M. G. Aartsenet al.(IceCube), Phys. Rev. D97, 072009 (2018), arXiv:1709.07079 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2018
[38]

Esteban, M

I. Esteban, M. C. Gonzalez-Garcia, M. Maltoni, I. Martinez-Soler, and J. Salvado, JHEP08, 180 (2018), [Addendum: JHEP 12, 152 (2020)], arXiv:1805.04530 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2018
[39]

S. K. Agarwallaet al.(Borexino), JHEP02, 038 (2020), arXiv:1905.03512 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2020
[40]

P. S. Bhupal Devet al., SciPost Phys. Proc.2, 001 (2019), arXiv:1907.00991 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2019
[41]

Khatun, S

A. Khatun, S. S. Chatterjee, T. Thakore, and S. Ku- mar Agarwalla, Eur. Phys. J. C80, 533 (2020), arXiv:1907.02027 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2020
[42]

Kumar, A

A. Kumar, A. Khatun, S. K. Agarwalla, and A. Dighe, JHEP04, 159 (2021), arXiv:2101.02607 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2021
[43]

S. K. Agarwalla, S. Das, M. Masud, and P. Swain, JHEP 11, 094 (2021), arXiv:2103.13431 [hep-ph]. 13

work page arXiv 2021
[44]

Abbasiet al.(IceCube), Phys

R. Abbasiet al.(IceCube), Phys. Rev. D104, 072006 (2021), arXiv:2106.07755 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2021
[45]

Abbasiet al.(IceCube), PoSEPS-HEP2021, 245 (2022)

R. Abbasiet al.(IceCube), PoSEPS-HEP2021, 245 (2022)

2022
[46]

Krishnamoorthi, A

J. Krishnamoorthi, A. K. Upadhyay, A. Ku- mar, and S. K. Agarwalla, JHEP2025(2025), 10.1007/jhep10(2025)213, arXiv:2507.02167 [hep-ph]

work page doi:10.1007/jhep10(2025)213 2025
[47]

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, JHEP08, 032 (2023), arXiv:2305.07698 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2023
[48]

M. A. Aceroet al.(NOvA), Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 201802 (2024), arXiv:2403.07266 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2024
[49]

Aielloet al.(KM3NeT), JCAP02, 073 (2025), arXiv:2411.19078 [hep-ex]

S. Aielloet al.(KM3NeT), JCAP02, 073 (2025), arXiv:2411.19078 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2025
[50]

Neutrino Oscillations in Matter,

A. Albertet al.(ANTARES), JHEP07, 048 (2022), arXiv:2112.14517 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2022
[51]

Abbasiet al.(IceCube), Phys

R. Abbasiet al.(IceCube), Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 011804 (2022), arXiv:2201.03566 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2022
[52]

Mitsukaet al.(Super-Kamiokande), Phys

G. Mitsukaet al.(Super-Kamiokande), Phys. Rev. D84, 113008 (2011), arXiv:1109.1889 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2011
[53]

Jana and Y

S. Jana and Y. Porto, JCAP03, 046 (2025), arXiv:2407.06251 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2025
[54]

Krishnamoorthi, A

J. Krishnamoorthi, A. Kumar, and S. K. Agarwalla, (2025), arXiv:2512.22632 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2025
[55]

Replication Data for: Mea- surement of atmospheric neutrino mixing with improved IceCube DeepCore calibration and data processing,

R. Abbasiet al.(IceCube), “Replication Data for: Mea- surement of atmospheric neutrino mixing with improved IceCube DeepCore calibration and data processing,” (2025)

2025
[56]

Abbasiet al.(IceCube), Phys

R. Abbasiet al.(IceCube), Phys. Rev. D108, 012014 (2023), arXiv:2304.12236 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2023
[57]

A. M. Gago, H. Minakata, H. Nunokawa, S. Uchi- nami, and R. Zukanovich Funchal, JHEP01, 049 (2010), arXiv:0904.3360 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2010
[58]

J. Liao, D. Marfatia, and K. Whisnant, Phys. Rev. D 93, 093016 (2016), arXiv:1601.00927 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2016
[59]

Ge and A

S.-F. Ge and A. Y. Smirnov, JHEP10, 138 (2016), arXiv:1607.08513 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2016
[60]

J. M. Hyde, Nucl. Phys. B949, 114804 (2019), arXiv:1806.09221 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2019
[61]

E. K. Akhmedov, R. Johansson, M. Lindner, T. Ohls- son, and T. Schwetz, JHEP04, 078 (2004), arXiv:hep- ph/0402175

work page arXiv 2004
[62]

Opher, Astron

R. Opher, Astron. Astrophys.37, 135 (1974)

1974
[63]

Langacker, J

P. Langacker, J. P. Leveille, and J. Sheiman, Phys. Rev. D27, 1228 (1983)

1983
[64]

Kikuchi, H

T. Kikuchi, H. Minakata, and S. Uchinami, JHEP03, 114 (2009), arXiv:0809.3312 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2009
[65]

M. G. Aartsenet al.(IceCube), JINST12, P03012 (2017), [Erratum: JINST 19, E05001 (2024)], arXiv:1612.05093 [astro-ph.IM]

work page arXiv 2017
[66]

Abbasiet al.(IceCube), Astropart

R. Abbasiet al.(IceCube), Astropart. Phys.35, 615 (2012), arXiv:1109.6096 [astro-ph.IM]

work page arXiv 2012
[67]

M. G. Aartsenet al.(IceCube), Phys. Rev. D91, 072004 (2015), arXiv:1410.7227 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2015
[68]

J. P. Y´ a˜ nez,Measurement of neutrino oscillations in atmospheric neutrinos with the IceCube DeepCore de- tector, Ph.D. thesis, Humboldt-Universit¨ at zu Berlin, Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Fakult¨ at I (2014)

2014
[69]

Terliuk,Measurement of atmospheric neutrino oscilla- tions and search for sterile neutrino mixing with IceCube DeepCore, Ph.D

A. Terliuk,Measurement of atmospheric neutrino oscilla- tions and search for sterile neutrino mixing with IceCube DeepCore, Ph.D. thesis, Humboldt-Universit¨ at zu Berlin, Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Fakult¨ at I (2018)

2018
[70]

Abbasiet al.(IceCube), Eur

R. Abbasiet al.(IceCube), Eur. Phys. J. C82, 807 (2022), arXiv:2203.02303 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2022
[71]

J. H. Friedman, Annals Statist.29, 1189 (2001)

2001
[72]

M. G. Aartsenet al.(IceCube), Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 071801 (2018), arXiv:1707.07081 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2018
[73]

Esteban, M.C

I. Esteban, M. C. Gonzalez-Garcia, M. Maltoni, T. Schwetz, and A. Zhou, JHEP09, 178 (2020), arXiv:2007.14792 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2020
[74]

M. G. Aartsenet al.(IceCube), Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 977, 164332 (2020), arXiv:1803.05390 [physics.data-an]

work page arXiv 2020