Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 50 references

Search for an all-sky and a Galactic Ridge diffuse neutrino emission with the first 2 years of KM3NeT/ARCA data

T0 review · 2 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read After 640 days with six to twenty-one lines, KM3NeT/ARCA finds no significant cosmic-neutrino excess in an all-sky search or toward the Galactic Ridge, and its 90% upper limits remain compatible with IceCube and ANTARES measurements.

desk verdict First KM3NeT/ARCA diffuse flux search is a careful null result with competitive limits; the all-sky background normalization has a real period-dependent mismatch, but the central no-excess conclusion holds. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.06163 v1 pith:LLKF7YKX submitted 2026-08-06 astro-ph.HE hep-ex

The KM3NeT Collaboration This is my paper
classification astro-ph.HEhep-ex
keywords diffuseneutrinofluxKM3NeT/ARCAGalacticRidgeall-skysearchatmosphericbackgroundBayesiananalysisupperlimitstelescope
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper reports KM3NeT/ARCA's first search for a diffuse astrophysical neutrino flux, both across the full sky and from the Galactic Ridge, using 640 days of data taken with detector configurations of 6, 8, 19, and 21 detection units. The central claim is that neither search finds a statistically significant excess of cosmic neutrinos above the estimated atmospheric background. Fitting the all-sky sample with a single power law returns a cosmic flux $\phi_0 = 3.0^{+2.1}_{-2.0} \times 10^{-18}$ GeV$^{-1}$ cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ sr$^{-1}$ with spectral index $\gamma = 3.00^{+0.30}_{-0.35}$ at 68% credibility, and 90% upper limits are placed for both the all-sky and the Galactic Ridge emission that are compatible with IceCube and ANTARES measurements. The result matters because it shows that a partially built Mediterranean telescope with a direct view of the Galactic centre can already constrain the diffuse cosmic neutrino flux, and because the two analysis pipelines built here are what future, larger KM3NeT datasets will rely on.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by two complementary background-estimation pipelines built on a common event selection. Up-going track-like $\nu_\mu$ charged-current events are selected through multi-stage reconstruction, a Boosted Decision Tree trained against atmospheric muons, and energy cuts optimised with the Model Rejection Factor technique. For the all-sky search the expected background, conventional and prompt atmospheric neutrinos (Honda and Enberg models) plus atmospheric muons (MUPAGE), comes from Monte Carlo, with a single global background normalisation $N_{\mathrm{bkg}} = 1.53 \pm 0.24$ fitted to ARCA19/21 data to absorb a data/MC discrepancy. For the Galactic Ridge search the background is measured from the data itself, using a cut-and-count ON/OFF design originally developed by ANTARES, in which the ON region, optimised to reconstructed Galactic coordinates $|b| < 3^\circ$ to $5^\circ$ and $|l| < 30^\circ$ to $31^\circ$, is compared with OFF regions built from random time shifts in right ascension so that the exposure is identical and no signal is expected. Both searches are interpreted with a Bayesian likelihood, with Gaussian priors on background and signal acceptance and a flat prior on the flux parameters, cross-checked by a frequentist $\chi^2$ fit.

What would settle it

One calculation would settle the all-sky claim: bin the ARCA21 data and Monte Carlo in fine reconstructed-energy bins and test whether the data/MC ratio is constant in energy at the fitted $N_{\mathrm{bkg}} = 1.53$. If the ratio varies systematically with energy, the assumed background shape is wrong and the fitted cosmic flux and upper limits shift; if it is flat, the background-only interpretation survives. For the Galactic Ridge claim, re-running the same ON/OFF selection with OFF regions that sample right ascension uniformly, or with a doubled livetime, would test whether the null result persists.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper establishes that, with the first 640 days of KM3NeT/ARCA data, the observed sample of up-going track-like neutrinos is consistent with atmospheric background with at most a subdominant cosmic component, in both an all-sky analysis and a targeted analysis of the Galactic Ridge. The all-sky Bayesian fit, combining the four detector configurations and allowing a single global background normalisation $N_{\mathrm{bkg}} = 1.53 \pm 0.24$ for the two largest configurations, gives $\phi_0^{1f} = 3.0^{+2.1}_{-2.0} \times 10^{-18}$ GeV$^{-1}$ cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ sr$^{-1}$ and $\gamma = 3.00^{+0.30}_{-0.35}$ at 68% credible level; the frequentist cross-check returns $\phi_0 = 1.16 \times 10^{-18}$ GeV$^{-1}$ cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ sr$^{-1}$ and $\gamma = 3.04$, consistent within uncertainties. Because these best-fit parameters are not statistically significant, the paper reports 90% C.L. upper limits: for the all-sky flux, $4.35$ to $6.85 \times 10^{-18}$ GeV$^{-1}$ cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ sr$^{-1}$ at 100 TeV across spectral indices $\gamma \in [2.2, 2.7]$, and for the Galactic Ridge, $1.1 \times 10^{-5}$ to $2.1 \times 10^{-3}$ GeV$^{-1}$ cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ sr$^{-1}$ at 1 GeV. The Galactic Ridge fit yields no constraint on flux parameters, and the ANTARES hint of TeV ridge emission can be neither confirmed nor excluded.

Load-bearing premise

The all-sky limits assume the simulated atmospheric neutrino and muon background has the correct energy and angular shape, with only its overall normalisation left free ($N_{\mathrm{bkg}} = 1.53 \pm 0.24$); the Galactic Ridge limits separately assume that time-shifted OFF regions have exactly the same exposure as the ON region and contain no signal.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The combined 90% C.L. all-sky upper limits, $4.35$ to $6.85 \times 10^{-18}$ GeV$^{-1}$ cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ sr$^{-1}$ at 100 TeV for $\gamma \in [2.2, 2.7]$, bound single-power-law models of the cosmic neutrino flux and are compatible with, though less constraining than, the flux measured by IceCube.
  • The Galactic Ridge analysis neither confirms nor excludes the ANTARES TeV hint: at the ANTARES best-fit flux only about 0.3 to 2.9 signal events are expected across the four configurations, against 8 to 16 observed ON-region events.
  • ARCA21 dominates the combined result, and its data indicate that the simulated atmospheric background is underestimated by roughly 50%, so the single-normalisation correction will need to give way to a simultaneous fit of cosmic and background parameters as statistics grow.
  • The quoted limits carry explicit energy ranges of validity (roughly $10^4$ to $10^6$ GeV for the all-sky limits), so the constraints apply specifically to the TeV–PeV regime where an astrophysical signal is expected.
  • The Monte Carlo and ON/OFF analysis pipelines are now fully specified for the growing detector, meaning additional ARCA livetime and detection units translate directly into tighter limits without redesigning the selection.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • (Editorial) If the missing background in ARCA19/21 is concentrated at low reconstructed energies rather than flat, the fitted cosmic spectrum would appear softer than its true shape; testing whether the data/MC ratio is energy-independent at the quoted $N_{\mathrm{bkg}} = 1.53$ would resolve this, and the reported $\gamma \approx 3.0$ (softer than IceCube's 2.37) makes this a live concern.
  • (Editorial) The null Galactic Ridge result is not yet in tension with ANTARES, since the expected ridge signal is only about three events in the largest configuration; roughly a tripling of exposure would be needed before ARCA's current effective area can test the ridge excess.
  • (Editorial) Because the two searches use different background assumptions, running the ON/OFF method on the all-sky sample and the Monte Carlo method on the ridge region would provide an internal, data-driven cross-check of the background shape that currently anchors the all-sky limits.
  • (Editorial) The per-spectral-index limits are ready-made inputs for a joint likelihood combining ARCA's public energy distributions with other telescopes' measurements, which would tighten the global all-sky flux constraint before ARCA reaches its full instrumented volume.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 6 minor

Summary. This manuscript reports a search for a diffuse astrophysical neutrino flux from the full sky and from the Galactic Ridge using 640 days of KM3NeT/ARCA data from the 6, 8, 19, and 21 detection-unit configurations. The all-sky analysis uses Monte Carlo background estimates and a Bayesian fit, yielding a single-flavour flux normalisation phi0 = 3.0(+2.1/-2.0) x 10^-18 GeV^-1 cm^-2 s^-1 sr^-1 and spectral index gamma = 3.00(+0.30/-0.35) at 68% credible level, with 90% C.L. upper limits for spectral indices in [2.2, 2.7]. The Galactic Ridge analysis uses a data-driven OFF-region background and, finding no significant excess, reports upper limits rather than best-fit parameters. The paper concludes that neither search shows a statistically significant excess and presents the methods as a basis for future measurements.

Significance. If the results are taken at face value, the paper provides the first competitive diffuse neutrino flux constraints from KM3NeT/ARCA partial configurations and demonstrates the detector's ability to reach the relevant sensitivity. The analysis is careful in several respects: the event selection is optimised with a blind strategy, the statistical framework is standard and includes systematic priors, the Galactic Ridge background is estimated from data in time-shifted OFF regions, and all claims are appropriately hedged (the best fit is not called a detection and the unconstrained Galactic Ridge parameters are not quoted). The main weakness is the treatment of the all-sky Monte Carlo background normalisation, which affects the quoted flux parameters and limits; this does not overturn the no-excess conclusion but limits confidence in the central numeric results.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 5.2, Table 4] The single global background normalisation Nbkg = 1.53 +/- 0.24 is fitted using ARCA19/21 data only, but Table 4 shows a period-dependent data/MC mismatch that this one-parameter correction cannot represent. ARCA6 has 14 observed events against an expected 29.7 atmospheric background plus 0.9 cosmic signal before the fit, a deficit of about 16.6 events; ARCA21 has 48 observed against 29.4 atmospheric plus 4.5 signal, an excess of about 14 events. Applying the reported best-fit cosmic expectations together with Nbkg = 1.53 makes ARCA6 even more discrepant (about 33.2 predicted versus 14 observed), indicating that the background model has a shape or period-dependent problem. Because the quoted Bayesian credible intervals and upper limits do not include an equivalent per-configuration or per-bin shape-mismatch term (such as the alpha_A,i and alpha_M,i terms in Eq. 5 of the frequentist analysis), the central all-sky results are not demonstrably robust against the background model choice. The authors should either extend the Bayesian model with per-configuration background normalisations, include a shape-mismatch systematic, or show explicitly that the flux and limits are unchanged under such extensions.
  2. [Section 5.2, background normalisation procedure] The manuscript is ambiguous about whether Nbkg is marginalised simultaneously with phi0 and gamma or fixed before the final fit. The sentence 'With higher statistics, a simultaneous fit of all three parameters (phi0, gamma, Nbkg) would be feasible' suggests the reported posterior may not include the Nbkg uncertainty, yet Appendix B presents a correlation matrix for Nbkg, phi0, and gamma. If Nbkg is fixed at 1.53 when computing the credible regions and upper limits in Table 5, the quoted intervals underestimate the total uncertainty. The authors should specify the exact fitting procedure and, if Nbkg is not marginalised, propagate its uncertainty into the results.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Section 5.2, Figure 6 caption] The caption states that 'the total background is upscaled by a factor obtained from background normalisation estimation' but does not give the factor or its uncertainty; adding this would help the reader assess the correction.
  2. [Section 5.2, background description] The sentence 'For ARCA19 and ARCA21, the background is assumed to fluctuate across energy bins through a single global background normalisation' is imprecise: a single global normalisation does not fluctuate across bins; the intended meaning is that bin-to-bin variations are not modelled by additional parameters.
  3. [Table 4 caption] The caption says the expected numbers are given 'before the best-fit estimation', but the text later quotes expected cosmic events using the best-fit parameters; clarifying which values are used in the table would avoid confusion.
  4. [Section 6.1, OFF-region construction] The description of the OFF-region construction should include a validation that the time-shifted OFF regions have the same exposure as the ON region (for example, a relative-exposure map or a data/MC comparison), since this assumption is central to the Galactic Ridge background estimate.
  5. [Figures 8 and 12] Both figures show duplicate legend entries for the same dataset; please remove the redundant entries.
  6. [Throughout] The paper alternates between 'credible level' and 'confidence level' for the 90% upper limits; please use consistent terminology, reserving 'credible level' for Bayesian results and 'confidence level' for frequentist results.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the flux parameters and upper limits are fitted measurements, not predictions derived from their own inputs.

full rationale

The paper is a search measurement. The all-sky analysis fits the signal normalisation phi0 and spectral index gamma directly to the observed event counts via the Poisson likelihood of Eq. 2, and the same data determine the 90% CL upper limits. The background normalisation Nbkg = 1.53 +/- 0.24 (Section 5.2) is a fitted nuisance parameter estimated with the cosmic parameters profiled; the paper explicitly presents it as a best estimate, not as a prediction, and it is used only to rescale the MC background in ARCA19/21. This is statistically conditional but not circular: the quoted flux, gamma, and limits are not equal to Nbkg by construction, and the frequentist analysis of Section 5.2.1 re-fits with per-bin nuisance parameters as an independent cross-check. The Galactic Ridge analysis determines its background from data in time-shifted OFF regions and uses the ANTARES best-fit flux only as an external comparison spectrum, so there is no self-defined 'prediction'. Self-citations to theses [36,39,50] provide methodological details only and are not load-bearing. The only limitation relevant to robustness, the single-global-normalisation assumption and the period-dependent data/MC spread visible in Table 4, is a model-uncertainty concern, not a circularity. No derivation step reduces to its own inputs, so the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central results are fits and limits, so the free parameters are the two signal parameters and one background normalisation. No new particles, forces, or entities are introduced. The main assumptions are standard flux models, detector simulation fidelity, and the ON/OFF background equivalence.

free parameters (3)
  • phi0 (all-sky single-flavour normalisation) = 3.0e-18 GeV^-1 cm^-2 s^-1 sr^-1
    Fitted to 640 days of all-sky data under the single power-law assumption; the result is not statistically significant.
  • gamma (all-sky spectral index) = 3.00
    Fitted jointly with phi0; the uncertainties are quoted at 68% credible level.
  • Nbkg (global background normalisation for ARCA19/21) = 1.53 +/- 0.24
    A single global rescaling factor fitted to the ARCA19/21 data to correct the data/MC background discrepancy.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Single power-law astrophysical neutrino flux model (Eq. 1)
    The entire all-sky fit and all upper limits assume the diffuse flux is a single power law in energy.
  • domain assumption Atmospheric neutrino flux models (Honda et al. conventional, Enberg et al. prompt, H3a knee correction)
    The background estimate for the all-sky analysis relies on these external flux predictions; a wrong prompt component would shift the result.
  • domain assumption Detector simulation (MUPAGE and gSeaGen) accurately models acceptance and reconstruction
    Cut optimisation, signal efficiency, and background expectations all come from these simulations, with no public cross-check.
  • domain assumption ON and OFF regions have equal exposure and negligible signal in OFF regions
    The Galactic Ridge background is estimated from time-shifted OFF regions; any signal leakage into OFF regions would bias the background estimate.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Search for an all-sky and a Galactic Ridge diffuse neutrino emission with the first 2 years of KM3NeT/ARCA data." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/LLKF7YKX

@misc{pith2026260806163,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Search for an all-sky and a Galactic Ridge diffuse neutrino emission with the first 2 years of KM3NeT/ARCA data},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/LLKF7YKX}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.06163}
}
abstract

We report on the search performed for a diffuse astrophysical neutrino flux from the full sky and from a specific region of the Galactic plane, the Galactic Ridge. The study uses the dataset collected with the first KM3NeT/ARCA configurations with 6, 8, 19, and 21 active detection units, corresponding to a total livetime of 640 days. For the all-sky analysis, the fitted single-flavour astrophysical neutrino flux parameters, under the single power-law assumption, are $\phi_0^{1f} = 3.0^{+2.1}_{-2.0} \times 10^{-18}$ GeV$^{-1}$ cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ sr$^{-1}$ with spectral index $\gamma = 3.00^{+0.30}_{-0.35}$ at 68% credible level. The Galactic Ridge fit does not yield constraints for the flux parameters with the current sensitivity. For both analyses upper limits are derived and compared with state-of-the-art measurements. While the analysis of these datasets has not yielded statistically significant results, the developed methods provide a solid basis for future measurements with the KM3NeT detector.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.06163 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Data and Monte Carlo comparison for the angular error estimate (β0) (left) and the reconstructed zenith angle (right) after preliminary event selection for the ARCA8 configuration. Statistical uncertainties are shown for data. 3.50 3.25 3.00 2.75 2.50 2.25 2.00 1.75 1.50 log10( 0) 10 3 10 2 10 1 10 0 10 1 10 2 10 3 10 4 10 5 Events / bin KM3NeT/ARCA21, 287 days data Atmospheric muons Atmospheric neutrinos E 2 cosmic… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Data and Monte Carlo comparison for the angular error estimate (β0) (left) and the reconstructed zenith angle (right) after preliminary event selection for the ARCA21 configuration. Statistical uncertainties are shown for data. 11 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. BDT score distributions for data (black dots with statistical errors) and Monte Carlo simulated events for ARCA8 (top) and ARCA21 (bottom): atmospheric muons (blue), atmospheric neutrinos (orange) and cosmic neutrinos (green). p(ϕ0, γ; {Ni}) = Z L({Ni}; {Si(γ)}, {Bi}, ϕ0)× (3) × π({Bi}) × π({Si(γ)}) × π(ϕ0, γ) × Y i ×dBi dSi(γ). Different detector configurations can be combined irrespective of the binning scheme or … view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (9 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Percentage variation relative to the nominal simulation as a function of reconstructed neutrino energy for an E−2 astrophysical neutrino flux. It was obtained varying PMT efficiency and light absorption length from modified Monte Carlo simulations. The quadrature sum i…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: KM3NeT/ARCA21 effective area, averaged over muon neutrino and anti-neutrino charged current up-going events, for different ranges of true cosine zenith (left). Median (solid black line) and 68% quantile (shaded blue area) angular resolution for the cosmic muon neutrino…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Distributions of the reconstructed energy using the best-fit estimate for the all-sky cosmic flux parameters for ARCA6−21. For ARCA19−21 the total background is upscaled by a factor obtained from background normalisation estimation. The expected background of atmospher…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Marginalised posterior distribution for unblinded data at the final selection stage for the all-sky diffuse flux analysis after the cut on reconstructed energy. The 68%, 90% and 99% credible regions for the cosmic parameters together with the best point estimators are …
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Envelope of the 90% C.L. upper limits drawn for selected spectral indices γ ∈ [2.2, 2.7] obtained with the full combined ARCA dataset, shown as a function of the true neutrino energy (red line). For each γ, the line spans the central 90% energy range of the signal. The…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Comparison between the 68% (solid) and 90% (dashed) confidence-level/credible region contours obtained in the frequentist (black)/Bayesian (red) approach along with the best-fit values (cross) for the all-sky diffuse analysis. nearly coincide, indicating a background d…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Map in Galactic coordinates of the ON (red rectangle) and OFF (blue to yellow rectangles) regions, corresponding to time-shifted replicas of the same shape. can cause signal events originating within this region to be reconstructed outside of it. To account for this e…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Energy distributions for the ARCA6-21 detector configurations. Data points in the Galactic Ridge ON region (black squares) are compared with background estimates derived from OFF regions with the magenta band representing the relative statistical uncertainty. The expe…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Envelope of 90% C.L. upper limit for γ ∈ [2.2, 2.7] for the Galactic Ridge diffuse flux shown as a function of the true neutrino energy (blue line). For comparison, ANTARES and IceCube best-fit fluxes are reported. IceCube limits have been rescaled considering the sig…

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

50 extracted references · 21 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Halzen, High-energy neutrinos from the cosmos, Annalen der Physik 533 (2021) 2100309.doi:10.1002/andp.202100309

    F. Halzen, High-energy neutrinos from the cosmos, Annalen der Physik 533 (2021) 2100309.doi:10.1002/andp.202100309

    work page doi:10.1002/andp.202100309 2021

  2. [2]

    Ackermann, et al., High-energy and ultra-high-energy neutrinos: a Snowmass white paper, JHEAp 36 (2022) 55.arXiv:2203.08096,doi:10.1016/j.jheap.2022.08.001

    M. Ackermann, et al., High-energy and ultra-high-energy neutrinos: a Snowmass white paper, JHEAp 36 (2022) 55.arXiv:2203.08096,doi:10.1016/j.jheap.2022.08.001

    arXiv 2022

  3. [3]

    Palladino, et al., Neutrino telescopes and high-energy cosmic neutrinos, Universe 6 (2020) 30.arXiv:2009.01919,doi:10.3390/universe6020030

    A. Palladino, et al., Neutrino telescopes and high-energy cosmic neutrinos, Universe 6 (2020) 30.arXiv:2009.01919,doi:10.3390/universe6020030

    arXiv 2020

  4. [4]

    M. G. Aartsen, et al., Evidence for high-energy extraterrestrial neutrinos at the Ice- Cube detector, Science 342 (2013) 1242856.arXiv:1311.5238,doi:10.1126/science. 1242856

    arXiv 2013

  5. [5]

    Abbasi, et al., The IceCube high-energy starting event sample: description and flux characterization with 7.5 years of data, Phys

    R. Abbasi, et al., The IceCube high-energy starting event sample: description and flux characterization with 7.5 years of data, Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021) 022002.arXiv: 2011.03545,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.104.022002

    arXiv 2021

  6. [6]

    Abbasi, et al., Improved characterization of the astrophysical muon-neutrino flux with 9.5 years of IceCube data, Astrophys

    R. Abbasi, et al., Improved characterization of the astrophysical muon-neutrino flux with 9.5 years of IceCube data, Astrophys. J. 928 (2022) 50.arXiv:2111.10299,doi: 10.3847/1538-4357/ac4d29

    arXiv 2022

  7. [7]

    M. G. Aartsen, et al., Characteristics of the diffuse astrophysical electron and tau neu- trino flux with six years of IceCube high-energy cascade data, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125 (2020) 121104.arXiv:2001.09520,doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.125.121104

    arXiv 2020

  8. [8]

    Abbasi, et al., Characterization of the astrophysical diffuse neutrino flux using start- ing track events in IceCube, Phys

    R. Abbasi, et al., Characterization of the astrophysical diffuse neutrino flux using start- ing track events in IceCube, Phys. Rev. D 110 (2024) 022001.arXiv:2402.18026, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.110.022001

    arXiv 2024

Show all 50 references
  1. [9]

    V. A. Allakhverdyan, et al., Diffuse neutrino flux measurements with Baikal-GVD neu- trino telescope, Phys. Rev. D 107 (2023) 042005.arXiv:2211.09447,doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.107.042005

    2023 arXiv

  2. [10]

    A. Albert, et al., Constraints on the energy spectrum of the diffuse cosmic neutrino flux from the ANTARES neutrino telescope, JCAP 08 (2024) 038.arXiv:2407.00328, doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2024/08/038

    2024 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Palladino, et al., On the IceCube spectral anomaly, JCAP 12 (2016) 045.arXiv: 1610.07015,doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2016/12/045

    A. Palladino, et al., On the IceCube spectral anomaly, JCAP 12 (2016) 045.arXiv: 1610.07015,doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2016/12/045

    2016 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Abbasi, et al., Observation of high-energy neutrinos from the Galactic Plane, Science 380 (2023) 1338.doi:10.1126/science.adc9818

    R. Abbasi, et al., Observation of high-energy neutrinos from the Galactic Plane, Science 380 (2023) 1338.doi:10.1126/science.adc9818

    2023 doi

  5. [13]

    Mascaretti, et al., On the relevance of prompt neutrinos for the interpretation of the IceCube signals, JCAP 08 (2019) 004.arXiv:1904.11938,doi:10.1088/1475-7516/ 2019/08/004

    C. Mascaretti, et al., On the relevance of prompt neutrinos for the interpretation of the IceCube signals, JCAP 08 (2019) 004.arXiv:1904.11938,doi:10.1088/1475-7516/ 2019/08/004. 28

    2019 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Gaggero, et al., The gamma-ray and neutrino sky: a consistent picture of Fermi-LAT, Milagro, and IceCube results, Astrophys

    D. Gaggero, et al., The gamma-ray and neutrino sky: a consistent picture of Fermi-LAT, Milagro, and IceCube results, Astrophys. J. Lett. 815 (2015) L25.arXiv:1504.00227, doi:10.1088/2041-8205/815/2/L25

    2015 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Schwefer, et al., Diffuse emission of Galactic high-energy neutrinos from a global fit of cosmic rays, Astrophys

    G. Schwefer, et al., Diffuse emission of Galactic high-energy neutrinos from a global fit of cosmic rays, Astrophys. J. 949 (2023) 16.arXiv:2211.15607,doi:10.3847/ 1538-4357/acc1e2

    2023 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Evoli, et al., Diffuse neutrino and gamma-ray emissions of the Galaxy above the TeV, JCAP 2007 (2007) 003.doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2007/06/003

    C. Evoli, et al., Diffuse neutrino and gamma-ray emissions of the Galaxy above the TeV, JCAP 2007 (2007) 003.doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2007/06/003

    2007 doi

  9. [17]

    Ackermann, et al., Fermi-LAT observations of the diffuse gamma-ray emission: im- plications for cosmic rays and the interstellar medium, Astrophys

    M. Ackermann, et al., Fermi-LAT observations of the diffuse gamma-ray emission: im- plications for cosmic rays and the interstellar medium, Astrophys. J. 750 (2012) 3. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/750/1/3

    2012 doi

  10. [18]

    Amenomori, et al., First detection of sub-PeV diffuse gamma rays from the Galactic disk: evidence for ubiquitous Galactic cosmic rays beyond PeV energies, Phys

    M. Amenomori, et al., First detection of sub-PeV diffuse gamma rays from the Galactic disk: evidence for ubiquitous Galactic cosmic rays beyond PeV energies, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126 (2021) 141101.doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.126.141101

    2021 doi

  11. [19]

    Cao, et al., Measurement of ultra-high-energy diffuse gamma-ray emission of the Galactic plane from 10 TeV to 1 PeV with LHAASO-KM2A, Phys

    Z. Cao, et al., Measurement of ultra-high-energy diffuse gamma-ray emission of the Galactic plane from 10 TeV to 1 PeV with LHAASO-KM2A, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131 (2023) 151001.doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.131.151001

    2023 doi

  12. [20]

    Albert, et al., Hint for a TeV neutrino emission from the Galactic Ridge with ANTARES, Phys

    A. Albert, et al., Hint for a TeV neutrino emission from the Galactic Ridge with ANTARES, Phys. Lett. B 841 (2023) 137951.arXiv:2212.11876,doi:10.1016/j. physletb.2023.137951

    2023 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Adrián-Martínez, et al., Letter of intent for KM3NeT 2.0, J

    S. Adrián-Martínez, et al., Letter of intent for KM3NeT 2.0, J. Phys. G 43 (2016) 084001.arXiv:1601.07459,doi:10.1088/0954-3899/43/8/084001

    2016 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Albert, et al., The ANTARES detector: two decades of neutrino searches in the Mediterranean Sea, Phys

    A. Albert, et al., The ANTARES detector: two decades of neutrino searches in the Mediterranean Sea, Phys. Rept. 1121 (2025) 1.doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2025.04.001

    2025 doi

  15. [23]

    Aiello, et al., Astronomy potential of KM3NeT/ARCA, Eur

    S. Aiello, et al., Astronomy potential of KM3NeT/ARCA, Eur. Phys. J. C 84 (2024) 885.arXiv:2402.08363,doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-13137-2

    2024 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Aiello, et al., Measurement of neutrino oscillation parameters with the first six detec- tion units of KM3NeT/ORCA, JHEP 10 (2024) 206.doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2024)206

    S. Aiello, et al., Measurement of neutrino oscillation parameters with the first six detec- tion units of KM3NeT/ORCA, JHEP 10 (2024) 206.doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2024)206

    2024 doi

  17. [25]

    Aiello, et al., The KM3NeT multi-PMT optical module, JINST 17 (2022) P07038

    S. Aiello, et al., The KM3NeT multi-PMT optical module, JINST 17 (2022) P07038. arXiv:2203.10048,doi:10.1088/1748-0221/17/07/P07038

    2022 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Melis, et al., KM3NeT/ARCA event reconstruction algorithms, PoS ICRC2017 (2018) 950.doi:10.22323/1.301.0950

    K. Melis, et al., KM3NeT/ARCA event reconstruction algorithms, PoS ICRC2017 (2018) 950.doi:10.22323/1.301.0950

    2018 doi

  19. [27]

    Aiello, et al., Observation of an ultra-high-energy cosmic neutrino with KM3NeT, Nature 638 (2025) 376.doi:10.1038/s41586-024-08543-1

    S. Aiello, et al., Observation of an ultra-high-energy cosmic neutrino with KM3NeT, Nature 638 (2025) 376.doi:10.1038/s41586-024-08543-1

    2025 doi

  20. [28]

    de Jong, et al., The probability density function of the arrival time of Čerenkov light (2023).arXiv:2305.19626

    M. de Jong, et al., The probability density function of the arrival time of Čerenkov light (2023).arXiv:2305.19626. 29

    2023 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Bretaudeau, et al., Dynamical position and orientation calibration of the KM3NeT telescope, PoS ICRC2023 (2023) 1033.doi:10.22323/1.444.1033

    F. Bretaudeau, et al., Dynamical position and orientation calibration of the KM3NeT telescope, PoS ICRC2023 (2023) 1033.doi:10.22323/1.444.1033

    2023 doi

  22. [30]

    Carminati, et al., Atmospheric MUons from PArametric formulas: a fast GEnerator for neutrino telescopes (MUPAGE), Comput

    G. Carminati, et al., Atmospheric MUons from PArametric formulas: a fast GEnerator for neutrino telescopes (MUPAGE), Comput. Phys. Commun. 179 (2008) 915.doi: 10.1016/j.cpc.2008.07.014

    2008 doi

  23. [31]

    Aiello, et al., gSeaGen: the KM3NeT GENIE-based code for neutrino telescopes, Comput

    S. Aiello, et al., gSeaGen: the KM3NeT GENIE-based code for neutrino telescopes, Comput. Phys. Commun. 256 (2020) 107477.doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2020.107477

    2020

  24. [32]

    S. Aiello, et al., gSeaGen code by KM3NeT: an efficient tool to propagate muons simu- latedwithCORSIKA,Comput.Phys.Commun.314(2025)109660.arXiv:2410.24115, doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2025.109660

    2025 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Honda, et al., Calculation of atmospheric neutrino flux using the interaction model calibrated with atmospheric muon data, Phys

    M. Honda, et al., Calculation of atmospheric neutrino flux using the interaction model calibrated with atmospheric muon data, Phys. Rev. D 75 (2007) 043006.doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.75.043006

    2007

  26. [34]

    Enberg, et al., Prompt neutrino fluxes from atmospheric charm, Phys

    R. Enberg, et al., Prompt neutrino fluxes from atmospheric charm, Phys. Rev. D 78 (2008) 043005.doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.78.043005

    2008 doi

  27. [35]

    Gaisser, et al., Cosmic ray energy spectrum from measurements of air showers, Front

    T. Gaisser, et al., Cosmic ray energy spectrum from measurements of air showers, Front. Phys. 8 (2013) 748.doi:10.1007/s11467-013-0319-7

    2013 doi

  28. [36]

    Tsourapis, Development of methods and study of the neutrino flux with the KM3NeT neutrino telescope, Ph.D

    V. Tsourapis, Development of methods and study of the neutrino flux with the KM3NeT neutrino telescope, Ph.D. thesis, National Technical University of Athens, NCSR Demokritos (2025).doi:10.12681/eadd/60033

    2025 doi

  29. [37]

    TMVA 4, toolkit for multivariate data analysis with root,https://root.cern.ch/ download/doc/tmva/TMVAUsersGuide.pdf(2026)

    2026

  30. [38]

    Pedregosa, et al., Scikit-learn: machine learning in Python, JMLR 12 (2011) 2825

    F. Pedregosa, et al., Scikit-learn: machine learning in Python, JMLR 12 (2011) 2825

    2011

  31. [39]

    Stavropoulos, Measurement of the atmospheric muon neutrino flux with the KM3NeT/ORCA6 detector, Ph.D

    D. Stavropoulos, Measurement of the atmospheric muon neutrino flux with the KM3NeT/ORCA6 detector, Ph.D. thesis, National Technical University of Athens, NCSR Demokritos (2024).doi:10.12681/eadd/57393

    2024 doi

  32. [40]

    scikit-learn developers, sklearn.metrics.f1_score - scikit-learn api reference,https:// scikit-learn.org/stable/modules/generated/sklearn.metrics.f1_score.html (2026)

    2026

  33. [41]

    G. C. Hill, et al., Unbiased cut selection for optimal upper limits in neutrino de- tectors: the model rejection potential technique, Astropart. Phys. 19 (2003) 393. arXiv:astro-ph/0209350,doi:10.1016/S0927-6505(02)00240-2

    2003 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Riccobene, et al., Deep seawater inherent optical properties in the Southern Ionian Sea, Astropart

    G. Riccobene, et al., Deep seawater inherent optical properties in the Southern Ionian Sea, Astropart. Phys. 27 (2007) 1.doi:10.1016/j.astropartphys.2006.08.006. 30

    2007 doi

  35. [43]

    Anassontzis, et al., Light transmission measurements with LAMS in the Mediter- ranean Sea, Nucl

    E. Anassontzis, et al., Light transmission measurements with LAMS in the Mediter- ranean Sea, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A 626 (2011) S120.doi:https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2010.06.353

    2011 doi

  36. [44]

    Adrián-Martínez, et al., Long term monitoring of the optical background in the Capo Passero deep-sea site with the NEMO tower prototype, Eur

    S. Adrián-Martínez, et al., Long term monitoring of the optical background in the Capo Passero deep-sea site with the NEMO tower prototype, Eur. Phys. J. C 76 (2016) 68. arXiv:1507.05024,doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-016-3908-0

    2016 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Ageron, et al., ANTARES: The first undersea neutrino telescope, NIM A 656 (2011) 11.doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2011.06.103

    M. Ageron, et al., ANTARES: The first undersea neutrino telescope, NIM A 656 (2011) 11.doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nima.2011.06.103

    2011 doi

  38. [46]

    Adrían-Martínez, et al., Measurement of the atmosphericνµ energy spectrum from 100 GeV to 200 TeV with the ANTARES telescope, Eur

    S. Adrían-Martínez, et al., Measurement of the atmosphericνµ energy spectrum from 100 GeV to 200 TeV with the ANTARES telescope, Eur. Phys. J. C 73 (2013) 2606. arXiv:1308.1599,doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-013-2606-4

    2013 arXiv

  39. [47]

    G. L. Fogli, et al., Getting the most from the statistical analysis of solar neutrino oscillations, Phys. Rev. D 66 (2002) 053010.arXiv:hep-ph/0206162,doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.66.053010

    2002 arXiv

  40. [48]

    R. L. Workman, et al., Review of particle physics, PTEP 2022 (2022) 083C01.doi: 10.1093/ptep/ptac097

    2022 doi

  41. [49]

    Albert, et al., Search for diffuse galactic neutrinos with the full ANTARES telescope dataset, JHEAp 53 (2026) 100565.arXiv:2511.01687,doi:10.1016/j.jheap.2026

    A. Albert, et al., Search for diffuse galactic neutrinos with the full ANTARES telescope dataset, JHEAp 53 (2026) 100565.arXiv:2511.01687,doi:10.1016/j.jheap.2026. 100565

    2026

  42. [50]

    F. Filippini, Search for a diffuse astrophysical neutrino emission from the Galactic Ridge with the first KM3NeT/ARCA data and strategies for realtime follow-up searches of rapid transient phenomena, Ph.D. thesis, Università di Bologna (2024).doi:10.48676/ unibo/amsdottorato/1...

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.