Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 91 references

Solar-neutrino rates in dark matter detectors now produce NSI limits that rival dedicated neutrino experiments.

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

2026-08-01 04:22 UTC pith:Z3CEVB3C

load-bearing objection A solid, needed software paper with good NR validation, but the electron-recoil channel has a 12–23% calibration offset that propagates into the ER-based NSI limits and future projections. the 4 major comments →

arxiv 2607.22817 v1 pith:Z3CEVB3C submitted 2026-07-24 hep-ph astro-ph.CO

texttt{SNuDD}: Solar Neutrinos for Direct Detection

Dorian W. P. Amaral , David Cerde\~no , Andrew Cheek , Valeria Costa , Patrick Foldenauer This is my paper
classification hep-ph astro-ph.CO
keywords solar neutrinosdirect detectionCEνNSEνESnon-standard interactionsneutrino propagationxenon detectorsopen-source software
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 introduces SNuDD, an open-source Python package for computing solar neutrino recoil spectra at direct detection experiments, treating both nuclear and electron recoils within the Standard Model and with non-standard interactions (NSI). Its central mathematical move is to compute the rate as a trace of the neutrino density matrix against a generalized cross section, preserving quantum phase correlations between neutrino flavours that a simple flux-averaged treatment would miss. Using SNuDD, the authors derive 90% CL constraints on one-at-a-time NSI couplings from LZ, XENONnT, and PandaX-4T data, and find these direct-detection limits are now comparable to—and, for a future 200 tonne-year xenon detector, would improve by roughly an order of magnitude on—global fits from dedicated neutrino experiments. The package also propagates neutrinos through both the Sun and the Earth and folds in detector efficiencies and resolution. The paper argues that direct detection should therefore be included in future global neutrino analyses.

Core claim

SNuDD is presented as the first public package that computes both CEνNS and EνES rate spectra in the presence of NSI while keeping the full phase correlation of solar neutrino flavour states. It does so through a density-matrix trace formalism: the differential rate is n_T times the integral over neutrino energy of the flux times Tr[ρ dζ/dER], where ρ is the neutrino density matrix evolved from the solar production point through the Sun (adiabatic two-flavour Hamiltonian with NSI matter potentials) and through the Earth (slab method on a PREM density profile), and dζ/dER is the generalized CEνNS or EνES cross section including complex NSI couplings. Applied to LZ, XENONnT, and PandaX-4T nucl

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the density-matrix trace formula, Tr[ρ dζ/dER], which converts a mixed-state neutrino ensemble and a flavour-correlated scattering cross section into a rate. Solar propagation is reduced to a 2×2 adiabatic Hamiltonian in the θ13/θ23-rotated basis, giving an incoherent mass-basis density matrix after spatial averaging and decoherence. Earth propagation uses about fifty constant-density slabs from the PREM Earth model, with an optional Magnus-expansion fast approximation. The EνES channel uses a step-function treatment of xenon binding energies plus an energy-dependent relativistic random-phase approximation scaling; this bound-electron model is where the paper's own

Load-bearing premise

The electron-recoil predictions rest on a model of atomic xenon ionization—a step-function treatment of electron binding energies plus an energy-dependent relativistic random-phase approximation scaling—that the paper's own validation finds under-predicts collaboration event counts by 12–23%, outside the quoted 1σ uncertainties.

What would settle it

Recompute the LZ 2024 and PandaX-4T electron-recoil event counts with an independently calibrated ionization response: SNuDD gives 132.4 and 56 expected events versus collaboration expectations of 151±9 and 72.6±8.1. If a corrected model moves the 90% CL intervals on ε_ee, ε_eμ, and ε_eτ by more than their quoted ranges, the paper's electron-recoil-based claims are miscalibrated, while the nuclear-recoil limits would stand.

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

If this is right

  • LZ and XENONnT CEνNS limits on diagonal NSI couplings and ε_eτ begin to overlap the allowed intervals from global fits, so direct detection data are no longer only a background but a competitive neutrino-physics probe.
  • Combining nuclear and electron recoil channels removes the material-dependent blind directions that each channel has on its own, especially the xenon CEνNS blind direction near η ≈ −π/5.
  • A future 200 tonne-year xenon detector, modeled on the planned XLZD and PandaX-xT observatories, is projected to improve constraints on ε_ee, ε_eμ, and ε_eτ by roughly an order of magnitude.
  • Because the formalism retains flavour phase correlations, off-diagonal NSI interference and cancellation effects are computed correctly, which matters for interpreting null results from current data.
  • The open-source, modular structure lets users plug in custom cross sections and detector response functions, making it straightforward to fold new direct-detection data sets into future global NSI analyses.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The paper's own validation shows the bound-electron ionization model under-predicts collaboration-reported event counts by 12–23% (LZ 2024: 132.4 vs 151±9; PandaX-4T: 56 vs 72.6±8.1). If that calibration is off, the electron-recoil limits and the charged-plane future projection would shift; the nuclear-recoil results, validated separately, would likely survive.
  • The same pipeline could be applied to non-xenon targets: since the CEνNS blind direction sits at similar η for most heavy elements, combining xenon data with light-nucleus targets would break that degeneracy and give a more complete NSI coverage.
  • The day–night difference in the solar neutrino rate, which the package computes through Earth propagation, could become a standalone observable in future high-statistics detectors, independent of absolute rate calibration.
  • The modular cross-section interface means the trace formalism extends beyond NSI to other new-physics channels, such as light mediators or sterile-neutrino mixing, without re-deriving the propagation machinery.

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

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper introduces SNuDD, an open-source Python package for computing solar-neutrino recoil spectra at direct detection experiments, including CEνNS and EνES rates in the Standard Model and with neutral-current NSI. The package incorporates solar and Earth matter propagation via a density-matrix formalism, NSI-modified cross sections, and detector response functions. The authors apply SNuDD to derive 90% CL limits on NSI parameters from LZ, XENONnT, and PandaX-4T data, combining nuclear-recoil (CEνNS) and electron-recoil (EνES) channels, and project sensitivities for a future 200-tonne-year xenon detector (XLZD/PandaX-xT). The main claims are that SNuDD fills a missing-tool gap (no public package computes both CEνNS and EνES spectra with NSI and full flavour-phase correlations) and that current direct detection constraints are approaching, while future detectors can exceed, global-fit bounds on several NSI parameters.

Significance. If the ER model were properly validated, this would be a valuable and timely contribution: it provides the first public package combining solar/Earth propagation, NSI cross sections, and detector effects; it demonstrates concrete physics payoff by deriving competitive NSI limits; and it explicitly recommends a path toward including direct detection data in global fits. The NR channel validations (LZ 20.2, XENONnT 19.7 vs 16+5−4, PandaX 3.2 vs 2 expected) and the agreement with NuFAST for Earth propagation are strengths and give confidence in the propagation and CEνNS machinery. However, the ER (EνES) signal model shows a 12–23% under-prediction relative to collaboration expectations in the paper's own validation (§4.1). Because the ER channel anchors the ε_ee, ε_eμ, ε_eτ constraints in Fig. 5 and Table 1, and the order-of-magnitude future projection, this calibration offset is load-bearing for the paper's strongest physics claims. The NR-based results (Fig. 4) are largely unaffected and could stand alone, but the ER-based claims require additional work before publication.

major comments (4)
  1. [§4.1 (LZ and PandaX ER validation)] The paper's own validation of the bound-electron EνES model shows a systematic under-prediction: LZ 2024 predicts 132.4 events versus the collaboration's 151±9 (≈2.1σ discrepancy), and PandaX-4T predicts 56 versus 72.6±8.1 (≈2.0σ). Disabling the RRPA scaling gives 163 (LZ, over-prediction) and 69 (PandaX, closer). This indicates that the RRPA scaling from Ref. [81] is miscalibrated for these detectors, not merely that binding corrections are needed. Since this model enters the ER likelihood (Eq. 4.3) and directly produces the charged-plane limits in Fig. 5 and Table 1 (orange rows), the resulting constraints and their quoted 90% intervals are not reliable until the calibration offset is understood and corrected.
  2. [§4.3.2 / Fig. 5 and Table 1] The ER-based limits on ε_ee, ε_eμ, and ε_eτ, and the claim that these are 'rapidly approaching' global-fit intervals, rest entirely on the miscalibrated EνES model. A signal-rate deficit of 12–23% shifts the best-fit NSI parameters and biases the test statistic t_ε (Eq. 4.4). The authors should either re-derive these limits with a corrected RRPA implementation, add a multiplicative signal-normalization nuisance parameter with an appropriate prior covering the observed discrepancy, or at minimum quantify how much the constraints shift under this systematic. Without this, the ER-derived conclusions in the abstract and conclusion are not supported.
  3. [§4.1 'Future Xenon' and §4.3.2 projection] The future sensitivity projection for the 200-tonne-year xenon detector uses the same EνES model and the same RRPA scaling, so the predicted order-of-magnitude improvement over current constraints for ε_ee, ε_eμ, and ε_eτ inherits the same miscalibration. Additionally, the projection assumes reduced backgrounds from Ref. [90] but does not validate the solar-neutrino signal expectation against any updated collaboration model for a future detector. The projected reach should be re-evaluated after fixing the ER model, or presented with a caveat that a systematic offset of the size seen in the current-data validation could bias the projected exclusion by a similar amount.
  4. [§4.2 statistical framework] The likelihood in Eq. (4.3) includes Gaussian pull terms for neutrino flux (σ_a) and backgrounds (σ_b), but no term for uncertainty in the EνES signal model itself. Given that the paper's own validation shows the RRPA model is outside the quoted 1σ errors for two experiments, this omission is consequential. A signal-normalization nuisance (e.g., an additional pull parameter on the ER signal rate) should be included, or the analysis should be restricted to the NR channel until the ER model is validated. This is a fixable but load-bearing issue in the statistical treatment.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract and §1] The claim that 'no public package currently exists' for computing CEνNS and EνES spectra with NSI and flavour-phase correlations should be softened to 'to our knowledge' or explicitly contrast with PEANUTS/NuFAST capabilities (the latter compute propagation probabilities, not the full detector-rate pipeline).
  2. [§3.1 / code availability] The URL '/githubgithub.com/SNuDD/SNuDD' has a typo and should read 'https://github.com/SNuDD/SNuDD'.
  3. [Table 1] The text references Table 1 and its caption appears, but the actual table content is missing from the manuscript. The intervals for ε_u, ε_d, ε_p, ε_n, and ε_e must be included for the limits to be checkable.
  4. [§2.1.1] The statement that 'the adiabatic approximation holds even when including extra NSI-induced matter effects' is too broad given Fig. 6: for δ_CP = 0 there are regions with γ ≤ 100 or lower. The text should specify that this holds for the chosen NuFIT best-fit δ_CP = 212° (and δ_CP = 270°), which is what the analysis uses.
  5. [§4.1 (XENONnT ER)] The XENONnT ER validation is said to be 'discussed in detail in Ref. [22]' rather than shown here. Since this paper makes new claims about the ER channel, at least a short summary of the XENONnT ER expected-vs-observed counts should be included for consistency with the LZ and PandaX validations.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the NSI limits are honest inferences from external data, self-citations are not load-bearing, and the ER under-prediction is a calibration concern rather than a circular step.

full rationale

Walking the derivation chain, every load-bearing step is either derived in-paper, taken from external data/benchmarks, or a standard statistical procedure. The rate formula Eq. (2.1), the solar density matrix Eqs. (2.16)-(2.17), the Earth slab evolution Eqs. (2.18)-(2.19), the CEνNS and EνES cross sections Eqs. (2.20)-(2.25), the detector convolution Eq. (4.1), and the profile likelihood Eq. (4.3) are all explicitly written out and do not reduce to their own inputs. The NSI scan is an honest inference: the likelihood uses observed counts, a signal model, and literature uncertainties; no NSI parameter is fitted to the data and then renamed a prediction. The future projection uses a standard Asimov dataset under the SM hypothesis, not a retrofitted target. Self-citations, notably to Ref. [22] for the trace formalism and blind-direction discussion, are frequent but not load-bearing: the key equations (2.20), (2.21), (4.5), and (4.6) are reproduced in the paper itself, and Ref. [22] is cited for additional discussion rather than as the proof of the central claims. The ER validation mismatch (LZ: 132.4 vs 151±9; PandaX-4T: 56 vs 72.6±8.1) is a transparency and calibration issue: the RRPA scaling is taken from external Ref. [81], not fitted to the observed counts, so the ER-based limits may carry a systematic bias but are not circularly determined. This is a correctness risk, not an equation-identity or self-citation reduction. Overall, the paper is self-contained against external benchmarks and contains no significant circularity.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 9 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper's load-bearing inputs are Standard Solar Model fluxes, NuFIT oscillation parameters (with the δ_CP choice affecting μ/τ results), the PREM Earth model, RRPA atomic data from Ref. [81], plus statistical assumptions (Wilks' theorem, background-free NR). No new particles or forces are invented; the NSI framework is inherited from Refs. [61] and [22]. The main 'chosen' quantities are δ_CP=212° and the γ>100 adiabaticity threshold, both disclosed in the text.

free parameters (4)
  • δ_CP (CP-violating phase) = 212° (NuFIT 6.1 best fit)
    Adopted from literature, but Sec. 4.3 notes this value is what makes the solar adiabatic approximation valid and that it interchanges ρ_μμ↔ρ_ττ, shifting the μ- and τ-flavored NSI limits relative to the authors' prior δ_CP=0 analysis.
  • σ_a (8B solar flux uncertainty) = 0.12
    Gaussian pull on 8B flux used for all NR limits (Sec. 4.2); the paper states the 8B uncertainty dominates NR sensitivity.
  • σ_a (pp solar flux uncertainty, future projection) = 0.01
    Dominates the future ER projection error budget (Sec. 4.2).
  • σ_b (background uncertainties for ER analyses) = 12.5% (XENONnT), 6.2% (PandaX-4T), quadrature sum (LZ)
    Gaussian pulls on backgrounds for ER limits (Sec. 4.2), taken from collaboration analyses; the LZ value is a quadrature sum justified by flat-background dominance.
axioms (9)
  • domain assumption Standard Solar Model fluxes and production distributions (Vinyoles et al. 2017)
    Inputs for flux normalization and the ⟨cos 2θ_m⟩ production averaging (Eq. 2.15, Sec. 2.1.1).
  • domain assumption NuFIT 6.x oscillation parameters
    Vacuum parameters in Eq. (2.7); the μ/τ NSI limits (Figs. 4, 5) shift if δ_CP changes, as the paper notes in Sec. 4.3.
  • domain assumption Adiabatic solar neutrino evolution with NSI
    The density matrix Eq. (2.16) assumes γ≫1; validated in App. A.1 for the adopted δ_CP=212° but violated (γ<100) in patches for δ_CP=0° and 180° (Fig. 6).
  • domain assumption Two-flavour decoupling in the Sun (Δm_31 decoupling, |ε|≲3)
    Reduces the 3×3 problem to Eq. (2.10)-(2.11), following Ref. [22]; bounds the NSI range the package can describe.
  • domain assumption PREM Earth density profile with slab-constant electron density
    Used for Earth regeneration in Sec. 2.1.2; validated only against NuFAST for SM interactions.
  • domain assumption Wilks' theorem applies to the profile likelihood
    Sec. 4.2 sets 90% CL via χ²₁ with t_lim=2.71; PandaX NR has ≈3 events and LZ ≈20, so asymptotic calibration is optimistic for the lowest-statistics data.
  • domain assumption Background-free hypothesis for nuclear recoils
    Stated in Sec. 4.1 for all three NR analyses; if backgrounds are non-negligible in the ROI, the NR limits are stronger than warranted.
  • domain assumption RRPA atomic response from Chen et al. 2017
    Independent input used for ER spectral scaling (Sec. 3.3, Ref. [81]); the implementation's 12–23% under-prediction versus collaborations is documented in Sec. 4.1.
  • standard math Lindhard quenching and Helm form factor
    Used to map NR rates to electron-equivalent energies and to describe nuclear size (Secs. 2.2, 4).

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 31313 in / 17490 out tokens · 166945 ms · 2026-08-01T04:22:57.374690+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We introduce Solar Neutrinos for Direct Detection ($\texttt{SNuDD}$): an open-source Python package that enables the computation of the solar neutrino rate spectrum at direct detection experiments. $\texttt{SNuDD}$ can be used to determine the differential rate for both nuclear and electron recoils within the Standard Model and in the presence of beyond Standard Model physics effects, such as those arising from neutral-current non-standard interactions (NSI). The package accounts for matter effects during neutrino propagation through both the Sun and the Earth and for modifications to the scattering cross sections at the interaction site. We employ $\texttt{SNuDD}$ to place new limits on the effective NSI couplings using results from the xenon-based direct detection experiments LZ, XENONnT, and PandaX-4T, and we project the sensitivity of a future xenon detector based on the planned XLZD and PandaX-xT observatories. We find that current direct detection experiments are rapidly approaching sensitivities comparable to those of dedicated neutrino experiments and that future xenon detectors can provide leading constraints. We recommend that $\texttt{SNuDD}$ be used to combine incoming direct detection data with those from neutrino experiments in future global fits, placing direct detection within the broader landscape of neutrino physics.

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

91 extracted references · 72 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Billard, L

    J. Billard, L. Strigari and E. Figueroa-Feliciano,Implication of neutrino backgrounds on the reach of next generation dark matter direct detection experiments,Phys. Rev. D89(2014) 023524 [1307.5458]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  2. [2]

    Billard, L.E

    J. Billard, L.E. Strigari and E. Figueroa-Feliciano,Solar neutrino physics with low-threshold dark matter detectors,Phys. Rev. D91(2015) 095023 [1409.0050]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  3. [3]

    O’Hare,New Definition of the Neutrino Floor for Direct Dark Matter Searches, Phys

    C.A.J. O’Hare,New Definition of the Neutrino Floor for Direct Dark Matter Searches, Phys. Rev. Lett.127(2021) 251802 [2109.03116]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  4. [4]

    Carew, A.R

    B. Carew, A.R. Caddell, T.N. Maity and C.A.J. O’Hare,Neutrino fog for dark matter-electron scattering experiments,Phys. Rev. D109(2024) 083016 [2312.04303]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  5. [5]

    Harnik, J

    R. Harnik, J. Kopp and P.A.N. Machado,Exploring nu Signals in Dark Matter Detectors, JCAP07(2012) 026 [1202.6073]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  6. [6]

    Baudis, A

    L. Baudis, A. Ferella, A. Kish, A. Manalaysay, T. Marrodan Undagoitia and M. Schumann, Neutrino physics with multi-ton scale liquid xenon detectors,JCAP01(2014) 044 [1309.7024]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  7. [7]

    Cerde˜ no, M

    D.G. Cerde˜ no, M. Fairbairn, T. Jubb, P.A.N. Machado, A.C. Vincent and C. Bœhm, Physics from solar neutrinos in dark matter direct detection experiments,JHEP05(2016) 118 [1604.01025]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  8. [8]

    Bertuzzo, F.F

    E. Bertuzzo, F.F. Deppisch, S. Kulkarni, Y.F. Perez Gonzalez and R. Zukanovich Funchal, Dark Matter and Exotic Neutrino Interactions in Direct Detection Searches,JHEP04 (2017) 073 [1701.07443]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  9. [9]

    Y. Cui, M. Pospelov and J. Pradler,Signatures of Dark Radiation in Neutrino and Dark Matter Detectors,Phys. Rev. D97(2018) 103004 [1711.04531]. – 35 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  10. [10]

    Dutta, S

    B. Dutta, S. Liao, L.E. Strigari and J.W. Walker,Non-standard interactions of solar neutrinos in dark matter experiments,Phys. Lett. B773(2017) 242 [1705.00661]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  11. [11]

    Newstead, L.E

    J.L. Newstead, L.E. Strigari and R.F. Lang,Detecting CNO solar neutrinos in next-generation xenon dark matter experiments,Phys. Rev. D99(2019) 043006 [1807.07169]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  12. [12]

    Essig, M

    R. Essig, M. Sholapurkar and T.-T. Yu,Solar Neutrinos as a Signal and Background in Direct-Detection Experiments Searching for Sub-GeV Dark Matter With Electron Recoils, Phys. Rev. D97(2018) 095029 [1801.10159]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  13. [13]

    Aristizabal Sierra, B

    D. Aristizabal Sierra, B. Dutta, S. Liao and L.E. Strigari,Coherent elastic neutrino-nucleus scattering in multi-ton scale dark matter experiments: Classification of vector and scalar interactions new physics signals,JHEP12(2019) 124 [1910.12437]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  14. [14]

    Dutta and L.E

    B. Dutta and L.E. Strigari,Neutrino physics with dark matter detectors,Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.69(2019) 137 [1901.08876]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  15. [15]

    Amaral, D.G

    D.W.P.d. Amaral, D.G. Cerdeno, P. Foldenauer and E. Reid,Solar neutrino probes of the muon anomalous magnetic moment in the gaugedU(1) Lµ−Lτ ,JHEP12(2020) 155 [2006.11225]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  16. [16]

    Abdullah, D

    M. Abdullah, D. Aristizabal Sierra, B. Dutta and L.E. Strigari,Coherent Elastic Neutrino-Nucleus Scattering with directional detectors,Phys. Rev. D102(2020) 015009 [2003.11510]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  17. [17]

    Amaral, D.G

    D.W.P. Amaral, D.G. Cerdeno, A. Cheek and P. Foldenauer,ConfirmingU(1) Lµ−Lτ as a solution for(g−2) µ with neutrinos,Eur. Phys. J. C81(2021) 861 [2104.03297]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  18. [18]

    de Gouvˆ ea, E

    A. de Gouvˆ ea, E. McGinness, I. Martinez-Soler and Y.F. Perez-Gonzalez,pp solar neutrinos at DAR WIN,Phys. Rev. D106(2022) 096017 [2111.02421]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  19. [19]

    Schwemberger and T.-T

    T. Schwemberger and T.-T. Yu,Detecting beyond the standard model interactions of solar neutrinos in low-threshold dark matter detectors,Phys. Rev. D106(2022) 015002 [2202.01254]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  20. [20]

    Abdullah et al.,Coherent elastic neutrino-nucleus scattering: Terrestrial and astrophysical applications,2203.07361

    M. Abdullah et al.,Coherent elastic neutrino-nucleus scattering: Terrestrial and astrophysical applications,2203.07361

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  21. [21]

    O’Hare et al.,Recoil imaging for dark matter, neutrinos, and physics beyond the Standard Model, inSnowmass 2021, 3, 2022 [2203.05914]

    C.A.J. O’Hare et al.,Recoil imaging for dark matter, neutrinos, and physics beyond the Standard Model, inSnowmass 2021, 3, 2022 [2203.05914]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  22. [22]

    Amaral, D

    D.W.P. Amaral, D. Cerdeno, A. Cheek and P. Foldenauer,A direct detection view of the neutrino NSI landscape,JHEP07(2023) 071 [2302.12846]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  23. [23]

    Amaral, S

    D.W.P. Amaral, S. Liang, J. Qin and C. Tunnell,Fast Bayesian inference for neutrino non-standard interactions at dark matter direct detection experiments,Mach. Learn. Sci. Tech.6(2025) 015049 [2405.14932]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  24. [24]

    Acevedo, J

    J.F. Acevedo, J. Berger and P.B. Denton,Dark matter raining on DUNE and other large volume detectors,JHEP11(2024) 011 [2407.01670]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  25. [25]

    De Romeri, D.K

    V. De Romeri, D.K. Papoulias and C.A. Ternes,Light vector mediators at direct detection experiments,JHEP05(2024) 165 [2402.05506]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  26. [26]

    De Romeri, D.K

    V. De Romeri, D.K. Papoulias, G. Sanchez Garcia, C.A. Ternes and M. T´ ortola,Neutrino electromagnetic properties and sterile dipole portal in light of the first solar CEνNS data, JCAP05(2025) 080 [2412.14991]. – 36 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  27. [27]

    Atzori Corona, M

    M. Atzori Corona, M. Cadeddu, N. Cargioli, F. Dordei and M. Sestu,When backgrounds become signals: neutrino interactions in xenon-based dark matter detectors,JCAP05 (2026) 065 [2509.22178]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  28. [28]

    De Romeri, D.K

    V. De Romeri, D.K. Papoulias and C.A. Ternes,Bounds on new neutrino interactions from the first CEνNS data at direct detection experiments,JCAP05(2025) 012 [2411.11749]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  29. [29]

    De Romeri, A

    V. De Romeri, A. Majumdar, D.K. Papoulias and R. Srivastava,New light mediators and the neutrino fog: Implications from XENONnT nuclear recoil data,JCAP05(2026) 093 [2512.08853]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  30. [30]

    De Romeri, D.K

    V. De Romeri, D.K. Papoulias, F. Pompa, G. Sanchez Garcia and C.A. Ternes,Testing light and heavy vector mediators with solar CEνNS measurements,2603.00554

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  31. [31]

    Kelly, N

    K.J. Kelly, N. Mishra and L.E. Strigari,Sterile Neutrino Mixing Parameters from Solar-Neutrino Coherent Scattering,2605.22935

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  32. [32]

    Arg¨ uelles, C.V

    C.A. Arg¨ uelles, C.V. Cappiello, P.S.B. Dev, P. Figueroa, G. Herrera and I. Scoville, Towards the Detection of Thermal Solar Neutrinos,2606.15904. [33]PandaXcollaboration,First Indication of Solar B8 Neutrinos through Coherent Elastic Neutrino-Nucleus Scattering in PandaX-4T,Phys. Rev. Lett.133(2024) 191001 [2407.10892]. [34]XENONcollaboration,First Indi...

    arXiv 2024

  33. [45]

    Pattavina, N

    L. Pattavina, N. Ferreiro Iachellini and I. Tamborra,Neutrino observatory based on archaeological lead,Phys. Rev. D102(2020) 063001 [2004.06936]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  34. [46]

    Shekar, C

    A.C. Shekar, C. Lisotti, N. Mishra, C.A.J. O’Hare and L.E. Strigari,Searching for beyond-standard-model solar neutrino interactions using directional detectors,Phys. Rev. D 112(2025) 123021 [2506.09322]

    arXiv 2025

  35. [47]

    Wolfenstein,Neutrino Oscillations in Matter,Phys

    L. Wolfenstein,Neutrino Oscillations in Matter,Phys. Rev. D17(1978) 2369

    1978

  36. [48]

    Guzzo and S.T

    M.M. Guzzo and S.T. Petcov,On the matter-enhanced transitions of solar neutrinos in the absence of neutrino mixing in vacuum,Phys. Lett. B271(1991) 172

    1991

  37. [49]

    Guzzo, H

    M.M. Guzzo, H. Nunokawa, P.C. de Holanda and O.L.G. Peres,On the massless ’just-so’ solution to the solar neutrino problem,Phys. Rev. D64(2001) 097301 [hep-ph/0012089]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  38. [50]

    Gonzalez-Garcia, M.M

    M.C. Gonzalez-Garcia, M.M. Guzzo, P.I. Krastev, H. Nunokawa, O.L.G. Peres, V. Pleitez et al.,Atmospheric neutrino observations and flavor changing interactions,Phys. Rev. Lett. 82(1999) 3202 [hep-ph/9809531]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  39. [51]

    Bergmann, M.M

    S. Bergmann, M.M. Guzzo, P.C. de Holanda, P.I. Krastev and H. Nunokawa,Status of the solution to the solar neutrino problem based on nonstandard neutrino interactions,Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl.97(2001) 235

    2001

  40. [52]

    Guzzo, P.C

    M. Guzzo, P.C. de Holanda, M. Maltoni, H. Nunokawa, M.A. Tortola and J.W.F. Valle, Status of a hybrid three neutrino interpretation of neutrino data,Nucl. Phys. B629(2002) 479 [hep-ph/0112310]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  41. [53]

    Gonzalez-Garcia and M

    M.C. Gonzalez-Garcia and M. Maltoni,Atmospheric neutrino oscillations and new physics, Phys. Rev. D70(2004) 033010 [hep-ph/0404085]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  42. [54]

    Arg¨ uelles, J

    C.A. Arg¨ uelles, J. Salvado and C.N. Weaver,nuSQuIDS: A toolbox for neutrino propagation,Comput. Phys. Commun.277(2022) 108346 [2112.13804]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  43. [55]

    Denton and S.J

    P.B. Denton and S.J. Parke,Fast and accurate algorithm for calculating long-baseline neutrino oscillation probabilities with matter effects,Phys. Rev. D110(2024) 073005 [2405.02400]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  44. [56]

    Denton and S.J

    P.B. Denton and S.J. Parke,Efficient atmospheric, solar, and supernova neutrino propagation through the Earth,Phys. Rev. D113(2026) 053002 [2511.04735]

    arXiv 2026

  45. [57]

    Gonzalo and M

    T.E. Gonzalo and M. Lucente,PEANUTS: a software for the automatic computation of solar neutrino flux and its propagation within Earth,Eur. Phys. J. C84(2024) 119 [2303.15527]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  46. [58]

    Coloma, M.C

    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 [2204.03011]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  47. [59]

    Davidson, C

    S. Davidson, C. Pena-Garay, N. Rius and A. Santamaria,Present and future bounds on nonstandard neutrino interactions,JHEP03(2003) 011 [hep-ph/0302093]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  48. [60]

    Miranda and H

    O.G. Miranda and H. Nunokawa,Non standard neutrino interactions: current status and future prospects,New J. Phys.17(2015) 095002 [1505.06254]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  49. [61]

    Esteban, M.C

    I. Esteban, M.C. Gonzalez-Garcia, M. Maltoni, I. Martinez-Soler and J. Salvado,Updated constraints on non-standard interactions from global analysis of oscillation data,JHEP08 (2018) 180 [1805.04530]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  50. [62]

    Bahcall, A.M

    J.N. Bahcall, A.M. Serenelli and S. Basu,10,000 standard solar models: a Monte Carlo simulation,Astrophys. J. Suppl.165(2006) 400 [astro-ph/0511337]. – 38 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  51. [63]

    Esteban, M.C

    I. Esteban, M.C. Gonzalez-Garcia, M. Maltoni, I. Martinez-Soler, J.P. Pinheiro and T. Schwetz,NuFit-6.0: updated global analysis of three-flavor neutrino oscillations,JHEP 12(2024) 216 [2410.05380]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  52. [64]

    Vinyoles, A.M

    N. Vinyoles, A.M. Serenelli, F.L. Villante, S. Basu, J. Bergstr¨ om, M.C. Gonzalez-Garcia et al.,A new Generation of Standard Solar Models,Astrophys. J.835(2017) 202 [1611.09867]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  53. [65]

    Lisi and D

    E. Lisi and D. Montanino,Earth regeneration effect in solar neutrino oscillations: An Analytic approach,Phys. Rev. D56(1997) 1792 [hep-ph/9702343]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  54. [66]

    Akhmedov,Parametric resonance of neutrino oscillations and passage of solar and atmospheric neutrinos through the earth,Nucl

    E.K. Akhmedov,Parametric resonance of neutrino oscillations and passage of solar and atmospheric neutrinos through the earth,Nucl. Phys. B538(1999) 25 [hep-ph/9805272]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  55. [67]

    Chizhov and S.T

    M.V. Chizhov and S.T. Petcov,Enhancing mechanisms of neutrino transitions in a medium of nonperiodic constant density layers and in the earth,Phys. Rev. D63(2001) 073003 [hep-ph/9903424]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  56. [68]

    Ohlsson and H

    T. Ohlsson and H. Snellman,Neutrino oscillations with three flavors in matter: Applications to neutrinos traversing the Earth,Phys. Lett. B474(2000) 153 [hep-ph/9912295]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  57. [69]

    Akhmedov, M

    E.K. Akhmedov, M. Maltoni and A.Y. Smirnov,1-3 leptonic mixing and the neutrino oscillograms of the Earth,JHEP05(2007) 077 [hep-ph/0612285]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  58. [70]

    Giunti and C.W

    C. Giunti and C.W. Kim,Fundamentals of Neutrino Physics and Astrophysics(2007), 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198508717.001.0001

    arXiv 2007

  59. [71]

    Akhmedov, M

    E.K. Akhmedov, M. Maltoni and A.Y. Smirnov,Neutrino oscillograms of the Earth: Effects of 1-2 mixing and CP-violation,JHEP06(2008) 072 [0804.1466]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  60. [72]

    Blennow and A.Y

    M. Blennow and A.Y. Smirnov,Neutrino propagation in matter,Adv. High Energy Phys. 2013(2013) 972485 [1306.2903]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  61. [73]

    Maltoni and A.Y

    M. Maltoni and A.Y. Smirnov,Solar neutrinos and neutrino physics,Eur. Phys. J. A52 (2016) 87 [1507.05287]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  62. [74]

    Kelly, P.A.N

    K.J. Kelly, P.A.N. Machado, I. Martinez-Soler and Y.F. Perez-Gonzalez,DUNE atmospheric neutrinos: Earth tomography,JHEP05(2022) 187 [2110.00003]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  63. [75]

    Dziewonski and D.L

    A.M. Dziewonski and D.L. Anderson,Preliminary reference earth model,Phys. Earth Planet. Interiors25(1981) 297

    1981

  64. [76]

    Magnus,On the exponential solution of differential equations for a linear operator, Commun

    W. Magnus,On the exponential solution of differential equations for a linear operator, Commun. Pure Appl. Math.7(1954) 649

    1954

  65. [77]

    D’Olivo and J.A

    J.C. D’Olivo and J.A. Oteo,Magnus expansion and the two neutrino oscillations in matter, Phys. Rev. D42(1990) 256

    1990

  66. [78]

    Ioannisian and A.Y

    A.N. Ioannisian and A.Y. Smirnov,Describing neutrino oscillations in matter with Magnus expansion,Nucl. Phys. B816(2009) 94 [0803.1967]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  67. [79]

    Supanitsky, J.C

    A.D. Supanitsky, J.C. D’Olivo and G. Medina-Tanco,Perturbative exponential expansion and matter neutrino oscillations,Phys. Rev. D78(2008) 045024 [0804.1105]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  68. [80]

    Helm,Inelastic and Elastic Scattering of 187-Mev Electrons from Selected Even-Even Nuclei,Phys

    R.H. Helm,Inelastic and Elastic Scattering of 187-Mev Electrons from Selected Even-Even Nuclei,Phys. Rev.104(1956) 1466

    1956

  69. [81]

    Chen, H.-C

    J.-W. Chen, H.-C. Chi, C.P. Liu and C.-P. Wu,Low-energy electronic recoil in xenon detectors by solar neutrinos,Phys. Lett. B774(2017) 656 [1610.04177]. – 39 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  70. [82]

    Kopeikin, L.A

    V.I. Kopeikin, L.A. Mikaelyan, V.V. Sinev and S.A. Fayans,Scattering of reactor antineutrinos by electrons,Physics of Atomic Nuclei60(1997) 1859

    1997

  71. [84]

    Johnson and K.T

    W.R. Johnson and K.T. Cheng,Photoionization of the outer shells of neon, argon, krypton, and xenon using the relativistic random-phase approximation,Phys. Rev. A20(1979) 978

    1979

  72. [85]

    Johnson and C.D

    W.R. Johnson and C.D. Lin,Multichannel relativistic random-phase approximation for the photoionization of atoms,Phys. Rev. A20(1979) 964

    1979

  73. [86]

    Huang, W.R

    K.N. Huang, W.R. Johnson and K.T. Cheng,Theoretical study of spin polarization of photoelectrons from noble gases,Phys. Rev. Lett.43(1979) 1658

    1979

  74. [87]

    Huang, W.R

    K.N. Huang, W.R. Johnson and K.T. Cheng,Theoretical photoionization parameters for the noble gases argon, krypton, and xenon,Atom. Data Nucl. Data Tabl.26(1981) 33

    1981

  75. [88]

    XU,Lz ws2022+ws2024 low energy electronic recoil analysis, Nov., 2025

    Y. XU,Lz ws2022+ws2024 low energy electronic recoil analysis, Nov., 2025. 10.5281/zenodo.17660135. [89]LUXcollaboration,Signal yields, energy resolution, and recombination fluctuations in liquid xenon,Phys. Rev. D95(2017) 012008 [1610.02076]. [90]DAR WINcollaboration,Solar neutrino detection sensitivity in DAR WIN via electron scattering,Eur. Phys. J. C80...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  76. [91]

    Lindhard, V

    J. Lindhard, V. Nielsen, M. Scharff and P.V. Thomsen,Integral equations governing radiation effects. (notes on atomic collisions, iii),

  77. [92]

    Mount et al.,LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) Technical Design Report,1703.09144

    B.J. Mount et al.,LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) Technical Design Report,1703.09144

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  78. [93]

    Akerib, C

    D. Akerib, C. Akerlof, D. Akimov, A. Alquahtani, S. Alsum, T. Anderson et al.,The lux-zeplin (lz) experiment,Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment953(2020) 163047. [94]LZcollaboration,First Dark Matter Search Results from the LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) Experiment,Phys. Rev. Lett...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  79. [98]

    Xu,Xenonnt/cevns data release: Sr0+sr1+sr2, June, 2026

    D. Xu,Xenonnt/cevns data release: Sr0+sr1+sr2, June, 2026. 10.5281/zenodo.20576156. [99]XENONcollaboration,Excess electronic recoil events in XENON1T,Phys. Rev. D102 (2020) 072004 [2006.09721]. [100]XENONcollaboration,Search for New Physics in Electronic Recoil Data from XENONnT, Phys. Rev. Lett.129(2022) 161805 [2207.11330]. [101]PandaXcollaboration,Sear...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  80. [105]

    Cowan, K

    G. Cowan, K. Cranmer, E. Gross and O. Vitells,Asymptotic formulae for likelihood-based tests of new physics,Eur. Phys. J. C71(2011) 1554 [1007.1727]. [106]Particle Data Groupcollaboration,Review of particle physics,Phys. Rev. D110(2024) 030001

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

Showing first 80 references.