Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 122 references

Precision Tests of SM and new physics with the COHERENT Ge-mini and TEXONO data

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Combining the latest COHERENT Ge-mini and TEXONO germanium coherent-scattering data with their electron-scattering channels gives $\sin^2\theta_W = 0.233^{+0.025}_{-0.024}$, consistent with the Standard Model, and sets competitive limits…

desk verdict Useful, workmanlike CEνNS constraints paper with genuinely new TEXONO and combined Ge-mini numbers, but the COHERENT background model has a load-bearing assumption that needs scrutiny before the numbers are trusted. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.10104 v1 pith:DRCDXA3O submitted 2026-08-10 hep-ph hep-ex

Tousib Ahmed , Ayan Chattaraj , Anirban Majumdar , Newton Nath , Rahul Srivastava This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-phhep-ex PACS 13.15.+g14.60.Lm14.60.St
keywords coherentelasticneutrino-nucleusscatteringneutrinoelectromagneticpropertiesweakmixinganglemillichargelightmediatorssterileupscatteringgermaniumdetectors
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 argues that the two most recent germanium-based coherent elastic neutrino-nucleus scattering (CEνNS) datasets—one from a stopped-pion source (COHERENT Ge-mini) and one from a reactor (TEXONO)—can be combined, with their elastic neutrino–electron scattering (EνES) channels included, into one statistical framework that tests the Standard Model and searches for new physics. The central result is a low-energy determination of the weak mixing angle, $\sin^2\theta_W = 0.233^{+0.025}_{-0.024}$, from COHERENT Ge-mini, consistent with the Standard Model at low momentum transfer. The same framework produces some of the strongest existing limits on neutrino electromagnetic properties, most notably TEXONO's $\mu_{\nu_e} \le 1.18\times 10^{-10}\,\mu_B$ and $q_{\nu_e}\in[-1.94,2.04]\times 10^{-12}\,e$, and shows that adding EνES improves the neutrino millicharge sensitivity by up to three orders of magnitude. If correct, the analysis demonstrates that current germanium CEνNS detectors already function as a precision low-energy electroweak laboratory, with reactor and stopped-pion sources covering complementary mass regimes.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the effective nuclear weak charge $Q_V^W = ZF_p(|q|^2)(2g_{Vu}+g_{Vd}) + NF_n(|q|^2)(g_{Vu}+2g_{Vd})$, which controls the CEνNS rate through $d\sigma/dT_N \propto (Q_V^W)^2$, together with the analogous EνES cross section; the weak mixing angle enters through the vector couplings $g_{Vf}$. Around this core, the analysis builds a Poissonian (COHERENT) and Gaussian (TEXONO) $\chi^2$ with nuisance parameters for signal and background normalization, and folds in detector response through the standard quenching model, energy resolution, atomic-binding effects, and Klein–Nystrand nuclear form factors. For new physics, helicity-preserving electromagnetic interactions are incorporated as a shift $Q_\alpha$ in the same cross sections, so millicharge, charge radius, and anapole moment all enter through one quantity, while magnetic moments add incoherently; this single framework is what lets the combined CEνNS+EνES datasets constrain all these parameters on equal footing.

What would settle it

Refit the COHERENT Ge-mini spectrum with an additional free beam-correlated background term (neutron or neutrino induced) in place of the fixed steady-state background; if the fit prefers a nonzero beam background that shifts $\sin^2\theta_W$ by more than the quoted $\pm 0.025$ uncertainty, the central claim fails. The published 30-bin spectrum and background histogram in Fig. 1 are sufficient to perform this test.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that a combined CEνNS+EνES analysis of COHERENT Ge-mini and TEXONO germanium data yields a low-energy weak mixing angle $\sin^2\theta_W = 0.233^{+0.025}_{-0.024}$ from COHERENT Ge-mini, consistent with the Standard Model, while TEXONO only gives $\sin^2\theta_W \le 0.285$ at the 1σ level. It further claims 90% CL bounds of $\mu_{\nu_e} \le 1.18\times 10^{-10}\,\mu_B$ and $q_{\nu_e}\in[-1.94,2.04]\times 10^{-12}\,e$ from TEXONO, with EνES improving the millicharge sensitivity by roughly two orders of magnitude for COHERENT Ge-mini and three for TEXONO. For light mediators, TEXONO dominates at low mediator masses while COHERENT Ge-mini gives the leading vector $U(1)_{B-L}$ constraints for mediator masses around 10–200 MeV; for sterile neutral leptons, COHERENT Ge-mini reaches masses up to roughly 50 MeV and is among the most sensitive in the 20–40 MeV window, while TEXONO reaches $\mu_{\nu_e N}\sim 1.2\times 10^{-10}\,\mu_B$ for masses below 1 MeV. The paper also notes that the charge radius and anapole moment are phenomenologically indistinguishable in these processes, related by $a_\nu = -\langle r_\nu^2\rangle/6$.

Load-bearing premise

The COHERENT Ge-mini analysis treats the measured steady-state background as the complete background; if any beam-correlated neutrons or neutrino-induced events also contribute to the observed spectrum, the extracted weak mixing angle and all COHERENT bounds would shift.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The COHERENT Ge-mini weak-mixing-angle measurement is comparable in precision to the combined COHERENT CsI+LAr analysis and more precise than earlier reactor-based CEνNS determinations, sharpening the low-energy test of electroweak running.
  • TEXONO's reactor data provide the first weak-mixing-angle constraint from that experiment's CEνNS signal, albeit as an upper limit, and the stronger of the two sets of limits on electron-neutrino magnetic moment and millicharge.
  • Including the EνES channel improves millicharge sensitivity by roughly two orders of magnitude for COHERENT Ge-mini and three for TEXONO, because the millicharge interaction is enhanced at low electron recoil energies.
  • The two experiments are complementary for light mediators: TEXONO sets the strongest scalar bounds for $M_\phi \gtrsim 6$ MeV, while COHERENT Ge-mini gives the leading vector $B-L$ constraints in the 10–200 MeV range and extends sterile-neutrino reach to about 50 MeV.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper, the same combined CEνNS+EνES likelihood could be applied to future reactor germanium datasets or the next stopped-pion campaign; the millicharge improvement suggests that any detector with sub-keV electron recoil sensitivity is a natural millicharge probe.
  • Because charge radius and anapole are related by $a_\nu = -\langle r_\nu^2\rangle/6$ in this analysis, a future experiment that can distinguish the sign of $\langle r_\nu^2\rangle$ would break the degeneracy and separately pin the anapole.
  • The complementarity shown here implies that a single facility combining a stopped-pion source and a reactor, or a detector with both nuclear and electron recoil readout, could cover the full light-mediator mass range with one consistent model.
  • If the assumed steady-state background at COHERENT is later found to hide a beam-correlated component, the quoted $\sin^2\theta_W$ central value would shift; the size of the shift is directly calculable from the published spectra by adding a free beam-background term.
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

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper presents a combined fit to the latest COHERENT Ge-mini and TEXONO germanium CEνNS data, including EνES, with the goal of testing the Standard Model and deriving constraints on a wide range of BSM scenarios. The authors report sin²θW = 0.233+0.025−0.024 from COHERENT Ge-mini and sin²θW ≤ 0.285 (1σ) from TEXONO, together with 90% CL limits on neutrino electromagnetic properties (magnetic moment, millicharge, charge radius, and anapole moment, with the last obtained via the exact degeneracy a = −⟨r²⟩/6), light scalar and vector mediators, and sterile neutral lepton upscattering through dipole, scalar, and vector portals. The statistical setup is a Poisson χ² for COHERENT with profiled signal/background normalizations and a Gaussian χ² for TEXONO with a profiled ¹³⁵Xe background normalization. The paper concludes that current germanium CEνNS experiments provide competitive low-energy electroweak tests and complementary BSM probes.

Significance. If the results hold, this is a useful and fairly comprehensive update of CEνNS phenomenology. The TEXONO bounds (μ_νe ≤ 1.18×10⁻¹⁰ μB, q_νe ∈ [−1.94, 2.04]×10⁻¹² e) are competitive with the current reactor limits, and COHERENT Ge-mini extends sterile-neutrino upscattering reach to m_N ≈ 50 MeV, including leading B−L bounds in the 10–200 MeV region. The inclusion of both CEνNS and EνES, the explicit treatment of quenching, energy resolution, and atomic binding, and the profiled nuisance parameters are strengths. The cross-section formulas are standard, and the statistical framework is transparent. The paper does not provide code or extracted data, and two background-model assumptions are load-bearing, as detailed below. The anapole constraints are not independent measurements, but the paper explicitly acknowledges the charge-radius/anapole degeneracy in Sec. IV (Eq. (30)).

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. III A, Eq. (46), Fig. 1] The COHERENT predicted spectrum contains only SM CEνNS+EνES signal plus the measured steady-state background (SSB) with a 1% background-normalization nuisance. No beam-correlated background—prompt beam-related neutrons or neutrino-induced neutrons—is modeled. Because SSB is measured with the beam off, it cannot constrain such components by construction. A beam-correlated contaminant at the few-percent level of the CEνNS rate would shift the extracted sin²θW by more than the quoted 1σ uncertainty and bias every COHERENT Ge-mini BSM limit. Please add an explicit estimate, sideband constraint, or additional background component in Eq. (46), or demonstrate quantitatively that the omitted components are negligible for each reported constraint.
  2. [Sec. III B, Eq. (48)] The Gaussian prior on the ¹³⁵Xe background, R_¹³⁵Xe = 1.55 ± 0.02, is described as "obtained from a fit to the combined D50 and D70 datasets"—the same data used in the χ². This is a circular use of the data: the background is constrained by the very spectrum from which the BSM limits are derived, which tends to overstate the sensitivity, especially for the TEXONO magnetic moment and millicharge limits. Please either use an external constraint for β or assess how the reported limits change with the prior width and with the assumption that the ¹³⁵Xe component is the only reactor-induced background.
  3. [Sec. IV, weak mixing angle and BSM limits] The quoted statistical uncertainties on the COHERENT Ge-mini results do not include the systematic uncertainty on the germanium quenching factor or on the neutron root-mean-square radius ⟨R_n⟩, both of which enter directly in Eq. (8) and the event-rate simulation. Since sin²θW is extracted from the recoil spectrum, the sensitivity to these fixed inputs should be documented; otherwise the reported 1σ interval may be underestimated.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Figs. 1, 2, 6, and elsewhere] Several figure captions and axis labels contain placeholder glyphs (e.g., "10□5", "10□12 e", "gφ = 2 × 10□5"); these should be rendered as proper superscripts or as "×10⁻⁵" notation.
  2. [General] No ancillary data or code is provided. To enable reproduction of the quoted limits, please include the extracted event spectra or a public code repository.
  3. [Sec. II D, Footnotes 3 and 4] The kinematic upper bounds on the sterile-neutrino mass m_N are stated in footnotes without derivation; adding a short derivation or a reference would improve transparency.
  4. [Sec. III A, Eq. (43)] The notation N_target is used for both CEνNS and EνES; for the EνES channel the effective electron number N_target Z_eff(T_e) is meant, which could be stated explicitly to avoid confusion.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

Central constraints are direct fits to external COHERENT Ge-mini and TEXONO data; the only disclosed re-labeling is the anapole bound, which is the charge-radius fit rewritten through Eq. (30).

  1. renaming known result [Section IV, 'Neutrino Anapole Moment' paragraph; Eq. (30)]
    "we stress that, in elastic neutrino scattering, the effects of the neutrino charge radius and the anapole moment are phenomenologically indistinguishable, since their contributions to the scattering cross section are related by a να =−⟨r 2 να⟩/6, as follows from Eq. (30) ... Consequently, the corresponding constraints on the neutrino anapole moment can be directly derived from the charge radius limits using the above relation."

    Eq. (30) defines Qα = sqrt(2πα_EM/G_F)[⟨r_ν^2⟩/3 − 2a_ν − (2/|q|^2)(q_ν/e)], and the EM cross-section modifications in Eqs. (29a)-(29b) enter only through this Qα while all other EM properties are set to zero. Therefore the substitution a_ν = −⟨r_ν^2⟩/6 maps the charge-radius likelihood point-by-point onto the anapole likelihood; the reported anapole intervals are exactly the charge-radius intervals relabeled. The paper explicitly states this degeneracy, so it is a disclosed equivalence rather than a hidden circular fit.

full rationale

The paper's central results—sin^2θW, neutrino magnetic moments, millicharges, charge radii, light-mediator bounds, and sterile upscattering limits—are obtained by Poisson or Gaussian likelihood fits to the published COHERENT Ge-mini and TEXONO spectra, with detector response, quenching, fluxes, and nuisance parameters taken from external experimental references or prior literature. These are direct fits to external data, not derivations from fitted outputs, so no pattern-1 or pattern-2 circularity is present. The one place where a 'derived' constraint reduces by construction is the anapole moment: Eq. (30) makes the anapole contribution identical to the charge-radius contribution after the stated relation a_ν = −⟨r_ν^2⟩/6, and the paper explicitly acknowledges that the two are phenomenologically indistinguishable. This is a minor, disclosed re-labeling, not a load-bearing circular derivation. Self-citations appear when comparing with earlier CONUS+, LZ/XENONnT, or COHERENT CsI+LAr analyses and for standard spin-suppression statements, but none of these carry the central argument. The COHERENT Ge-mini background model, which includes only steady-state background plus signal in Eq. (46), is a physical modeling assumption that could bias results if beam-correlated backgrounds exist, but that is a correctness risk rather than a circularity of the derivation chain.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new entities; all BSM states (B-L Z', scalar mediator, sterile neutral leptons) are inherited benchmarks from prior literature. The main unstated inputs are the background and detector-response assumptions listed above, plus the nuisance parameters profiled in the chi-square fits.

free parameters (4)
  • COHERENT signal normalization nuisance α
    Profiled in Eqs. (45)-(46) with prior σα=10.3%; absorbs flux, distance, calibration, mass, form factor, and quenching uncertainties. All COHERENT constraints depend on this normalization.
  • COHERENT background normalization nuisance β
    Profiled with σβ=1% in Eq. (46); scales the measured steady-state background.
  • TEXONO 135Xe background normalization β = 1.55 ± 0.02
    Gaussian prior in Eq. (48), stated to come from a fit to the combined D50 and D70 datasets; the same datasets are then used for BSM limits, so the background may partially absorb new-physics signals.
  • Lindhard quenching parameter k = 0.157 (COHERENT), 0.162 (TEXONO)
    Taken from collaboration recommendations; converts nuclear recoil energy to electron-equivalent ionization and affects all CEνNS spectra.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption SM electroweak effective theory with ρ=1 and tree-level Z couplings, and no radiative corrections beyond the quoted MS running of sin^2θW.
    Used throughout Sec. II A in Eqs. (3)-(10); this is the benchmark against which all BSM constraints are defined.
  • domain assumption Klein-Nystrand nuclear form factor with proton and neutron rms radii 4.078 fm and 4.099 fm.
    Eqs. (6)-(7); affects COHERENT Ge spectra at higher momentum transfer. The authors state that the Helm form factor gives no appreciable change.
  • domain assumption Lindhard quenching model with k=0.157 for COHERENT and k=0.162 for TEXONO.
    Converts nuclear recoil to ionization energy; quoted from Refs. [47,49] and used for all CEνNS event rates.
  • domain assumption Huber-Mueller reactor antineutrino spectra for Eν>2 MeV, a spectrum from Ref. [80] below 2 MeV, and no propagated uncertainty on the low-energy flux.
    Eq. (47) and Sec. III B; the TEXONO EνES-based limits depend on the low-energy reactor flux shape.
  • ad hoc to paper The 135Xe Compton background is the only reactor-induced background in TEXONO, with a Gaussian prior fitted to the same D50/D70 data.
    Eqs. (48)-(49); if other backgrounds are present or the fit absorbs signal, the TEXONO BSM limits are biased.
  • ad hoc to paper Steady-state background is the only background in COHERENT Ge-mini; beam-related neutron and neutrino-induced backgrounds are not modeled.
    Eq. (46) and Fig. 1; no beam-related background term is included, so any such background would shift the extracted parameters.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Precision Tests of SM and new physics with the COHERENT Ge-mini and TEXONO data." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/DRCDXA3O

@misc{pith2026260810104,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Precision Tests of SM and new physics with the COHERENT Ge-mini and TEXONO data},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/DRCDXA3O}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.10104}
}
abstract

A comprehensive numerical analysis of the latest germanium based CE$\nu$NS data from the COHERENT Ge-mini and TEXONO experiments has been conducted to test the Standard Model (SM) and search for new physics. By combining CE$\nu$NS and E$\nu$NS signals with a consistent treatment of detector effects and systematic uncertainties, we obtain a low energy determination of the weak mixing angle from COHERENT Ge-mini, in agreement with the SM prediction. We derive novel constraints on neutrino electromagnetic properties, including the magnetic moment, millicharge, charge radius, and anapole moment, with TEXONO providing particularly competitive bounds. Inclusion of E$\nu$NS, significantly improves the sensitivity to the neutrino millicharge by up to three orders of magnitude. We also investigated light scalar and vector mediators, finding striking complementarity between reactor and stopped pion sources across different mediator mass regimes. Finally, we put bounds on sterile neutral leptons production through transition dipole, scalar, and vector portals, probing masses from the sub MeV to tens of MeV scale. Our results demonstrate that current germanium based CE$\nu$NS experiments provide a powerful low energy laboratory for precision electroweak tests and complementary probes of a broad class of physics beyond the SM.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.10104 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. shows the reconstructed electron equivalent energy spectrum of the COHERENT Ge￾mini experiment as a function of the reconstructed electron equivalent recoil energy, T reco e . The green histogram represents the measured steady state background (SSB) [47], while the black data points correspond to the observed beam on events [47]. The blue and magenta histograms denote the predicted total event spectra, including con… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. shows the reactor ON−OFF spectrum of the TEXONO experiment as a function of the reconstructed electron equivalent recoil energy, T reco e . The green histogram represents the predicted reactor induced 135Xe Compton background, while the black data points correspond to the measured excess events [49]. The blue and magenta histograms denote the predicted total excess spectra, including contributions from the 135Xe bac… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (9 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_12.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

122 extracted references · 3 canonical work pages

  1. [3]

    Coherent Neutrino Nucleus Scattering as a Probe of the Weak Neutral Current,

    D. Z. Freedman, “Coherent Neutrino Nucleus Scattering as a Probe of the Weak Neutral Current,” Phys. Rev. D9(1974) 1389–1392

    1974

  2. [4]

    Principles and Applications of a Neutral Current Detector for Neutrino Physics and Astronomy,

    A. Drukier and L. Stodolsky, “Principles and Applications of a Neutral Current Detector for Neutrino Physics and Astronomy,”Phys. Rev. D30(1984) 2295. [5]COHERENTCollaboration, D. Akimovet al., “Observation of Coherent Elastic Neutrino-Nucleus Scattering,”Science357no. 6356, (2017) 1123–1126,arXiv:1708.01294 [nucl-ex]. [6]COHERENTCollaboration, D. Akimove...

    arXiv 1984

  3. [8]

    Measurement of Coherent Elastic Neutrino-Nucleus Scattering from Reactor Antineutrinos,

    J. Colaresi, J. I. Collar, T. W. Hossbach, C. M. Lewis, and K. M. Yocum, “Measurement of Coherent Elastic Neutrino-Nucleus Scattering from Reactor Antineutrinos,”Phys. Rev. Lett.129no. 21, (2022) 211802,arXiv:2202.09672 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 2022

  4. [9]

    Direct observation of coherent elastic antineutrino–nucleus scattering,

    N. Ackermannet al., “Direct observation of coherent elastic antineutrino–nucleus scattering,”Nature 643no. 8074, (2025) 1229–1233,arXiv:2501.05206 [hep-ex]. [10]PandaXCollaboration, Z. Boet al., “First Indication of Solar B8 Neutrinos through Coherent Elastic Neutrino-Nucleus Scattering in PandaX-4T,”Phys. Rev. Lett.133no. 19, (2024) 191001, arXiv:2407.10...

    arXiv 2025

  5. [14]

    Coherent elastic neutrino-nucleus scattering: Terrestrial and astrophysical applications,

    M. Abdullahet al., “Coherent elastic neutrino-nucleus scattering: Terrestrial and astrophysical applications,”arXiv:2203.07361 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  6. [15]

    Neutrino, electroweak, and nuclear physics from COHERENT elastic neutrino-nucleus scattering with refined quenching factor,

    M. Cadeddu, F. Dordei, C. Giunti, Y. F. Li, and Y. Y. Zhang, “Neutrino, electroweak, and nuclear physics from COHERENT elastic neutrino-nucleus scattering with refined quenching factor,”Phys. Rev. D101no. 3, (2020) 033004,arXiv:1908.06045 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2020

  7. [16]

    Impact of the Dresden-II and COHERENT neutrino scattering data on neutrino electromagnetic properties and electroweak physics,

    M. Atzori Corona, M. Cadeddu, N. Cargioli, F. Dordei, C. Giunti, Y. F. Li, C. A. Ternes, and Y. Y. Zhang, “Impact of the Dresden-II and COHERENT neutrino scattering data on neutrino electromagnetic properties and electroweak physics,”JHEP09(2022) 164,arXiv:2205.09484 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2022

  8. [17]

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

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

    arXiv 2023

Show all 122 references
  1. [18]

    Implications of first LZ and XENONnT results: A comparative study of neutrino properties and light mediators,

    S. K. A., A. Majumdar, D. K. Papoulias, H. Prajapati, and R. Srivastava, “Implications of first LZ and XENONnT results: A comparative study of neutrino properties and light mediators,”Phys. Lett. B839(2023) 137742,arXiv:2208.06415 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  2. [19]

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

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

    2025 arXiv

  3. [20]

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

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

    2025 arXiv

  4. [21]

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

    V. De Romeri, D. K. Papoulias, and G. Sanchez Garcia, “Implications of the first CONUS+ measurement of coherent elastic neutrino-nucleus scattering,”Phys. Rev. D111no. 7, (2025) 075025, arXiv:2501.17843 [hep-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  5. [22]

    Phenomenological implications of the high-precision COHERENT germanium CEnNS data,

    M. Atzori Corona, M. Cadeddu, N. Cargioli, R. Cerulli, G. Co’, F. Dordei, C. Giunti, and R. Pavarani, “Phenomenological implications of the high-precision COHERENT germanium CEnNS data,”arXiv:2605.07975 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  6. [23]

    Sensitivity to oscillation with a sterile fourth generation neutrino from ultra-low threshold neutrino-nucleus coherent scattering,

    B. Dutta, Y. Gao, R. Mahapatra, N. Mirabolfathi, L. E. Strigari, and J. W. Walker, “Sensitivity to oscillation with a sterile fourth generation neutrino from ultra-low threshold neutrino-nucleus coherent scattering,”Phys. Rev. D94no. 9, (2016) 093002,arXiv:1511.02834 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  7. [24]

    Coherent Neutrino-Nucleus Scattering and new Neutrino Interactions,

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

    2017 arXiv

  8. [25]

    COHERENT analysis of neutrino generalized interactions,

    D. Aristizabal Sierra, V. De Romeri, and N. Rojas, “COHERENT analysis of neutrino generalized interactions,”Phys. Rev. D98(2018) 075018,arXiv:1806.07424 [hep-ph]. 29

    2018 arXiv

  9. [26]

    CEνNS as a probe of flavored generalized neutrino interactions,

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

    2022 arXiv

  10. [27]

    Dark matter detectors as a novel probe for light new physics,

    A. Majumdar, D. K. Papoulias, and R. Srivastava, “Dark matter detectors as a novel probe for light new physics,”Phys. Rev. D106no. 1, (2022) 013001,arXiv:2112.03309 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  11. [28]

    Physics implications of recent Dresden-II reactor data,

    A. Majumdar, D. K. Papoulias, R. Srivastava, and J. W. F. Valle, “Physics implications of recent Dresden-II reactor data,”Phys. Rev. D106no. 9, (2022) 093010,arXiv:2208.13262 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  12. [29]

    Probing conventional and new physics at the ESS with coherent elastic neutrino-nucleus scattering,

    A. Chattaraj, A. Majumdar, D. K. Papoulias, and R. Srivastava, “Probing conventional and new physics at the ESS with coherent elastic neutrino-nucleus scattering,”JHEP05(2025) 064, arXiv:2501.12443 [hep-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  13. [30]

    Probing neutrino coupling to a light scalar with coherent neutrino scattering,

    Y. Farzan, M. Lindner, W. Rodejohann, and X.-J. Xu, “Probing neutrino coupling to a light scalar with coherent neutrino scattering,”JHEP05(2018) 066,arXiv:1802.05171 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  14. [31]

    Testing large non-standard neutrino interactions with arbitrary mediator mass after COHERENT data,

    P. B. Denton, Y. Farzan, and I. M. Shoemaker, “Testing large non-standard neutrino interactions with arbitrary mediator mass after COHERENT data,”JHEP07(2018) 037,arXiv:1804.03660 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  15. [32]

    Non-standard neutrino interactions in U(1)’ model after COHERENT data,

    L. J. Flores, N. Nath, and E. Peinado, “Non-standard neutrino interactions in U(1)’ model after COHERENT data,”JHEP06(2020) 045,arXiv:2002.12342 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  16. [33]

    Constraints on light vector mediators through coherent elastic neutrino nucleus scattering data from COHERENT,

    M. Cadeddu, N. Cargioli, F. Dordei, C. Giunti, Y. F. Li, E. Picciau, and Y. Y. Zhang, “Constraints on light vector mediators through coherent elastic neutrino nucleus scattering data from COHERENT,”JHEP01(2021) 116,arXiv:2008.05022 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  17. [34]

    Complementarity between dark matter direct searches and CEνNS experiments in U(1)’ models,

    L. M. G. de la Vega, L. J. Flores, N. Nath, and E. Peinado, “Complementarity between dark matter direct searches and CEνNS experiments in U(1)’ models,”JHEP09(2021) 146,arXiv:2107.04037 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  18. [35]

    Probing light vector mediators with coherent scattering at future facilities,

    E. Bertuzzo, G. Grilli di Cortona, and L. M. D. Ramos, “Probing light vector mediators with coherent scattering at future facilities,”JHEP06(2022) 075,arXiv:2112.04020 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  19. [36]

    Consequences of the Dresden-II reactor data for the weak mixing angle and new physics,

    D. Aristizabal Sierra, V. De Romeri, and D. K. Papoulias, “Consequences of the Dresden-II reactor data for the weak mixing angle and new physics,”JHEP09(2022) 076,arXiv:2203.02414 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  20. [37]

    Constraining low scale dark hypercharge symmetry at spallation, reactor, and dark matter direct detection experiments,

    A. Majumdar, D. K. Papoulias, H. Prajapati, and R. Srivastava, “Constraining low scale dark hypercharge symmetry at spallation, reactor, and dark matter direct detection experiments,”Phys. Rev. D111no. 7, (2025) 073006,arXiv:2411.04197 [hep-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  21. [38]

    Measuring solar neutrino fluxes in direct detection experiments in the presence of light mediators,

    S.-y. Xia, “Measuring solar neutrino fluxes in direct detection experiments in the presence of light mediators,”Nucl. Phys. B1009(2024) 116738,arXiv:2410.01167 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  22. [39]

    Bounds on new neutrino interactions from the first CEνNS data at direct detection experiments,

    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,arXiv:2411.11749 [hep-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  23. [40]

    Clarity through the neutrino fog: constraining new forces in dark matter detectors,

    P. Blanco-Mas, P. Coloma, G. Herrera, P. Huber, J. Kopp, I. M. Shoemaker, and Z. Tabrizi, “Clarity through the neutrino fog: constraining new forces in dark matter detectors,”JHEP08(2025) 043, arXiv:2411.14206 [hep-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  24. [41]

    Testing light and heavy vector mediators with solar CEnNS measurements,

    V. De Romeri, D. K. Papoulias, F. Pompa, G. Sanchez Garcia, and C. A. Ternes, “Testing light and heavy vector mediators with solar CEnNS measurements,”arXiv:2603.00554 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  25. [42]

    Prospects for exploring New Physics in Coherent Elastic Neutrino-Nucleus Scattering,

    J. Billard, J. Johnston, and B. J. Kavanagh, “Prospects for exploring New Physics in Coherent Elastic Neutrino-Nucleus Scattering,”JCAP11(2018) 016,arXiv:1805.01798 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  26. [43]

    New physics probes: Atomic parity violation, polarized electron scattering and neutrino-nucleus coherent scattering,

    G. Arcadi, M. Lindner, J. Martins, and F. S. Queiroz, “New physics probes: Atomic parity violation, polarized electron scattering and neutrino-nucleus coherent scattering,”Nucl. Phys. B959(2020) 115158,arXiv:1906.04755 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  27. [44]

    Low-energy probes of sterile neutrino transition magnetic moments,

    O. G. Miranda, D. K. Papoulias, O. Sanders, M. T´ ortola, and J. W. F. Valle, “Low-energy probes of sterile neutrino transition magnetic moments,”JHEP12(2021) 191,arXiv:2109.09545 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  28. [45]

    COHERENT production of a dark fermion,

    P. M. Candela, V. De Romeri, and D. K. Papoulias, “COHERENT production of a dark fermion,” Phys. Rev. D108no. 5, (2023) 055001,arXiv:2305.03341 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  29. [46]

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

    P. M. Candela, V. De Romeri, P. Melas, D. K. Papoulias, and N. Saoulidou, “Up-scattering production of a sterile fermion at DUNE: complementarity with spallation source and direct detection experiments,”JHEP10(2024) 032,arXiv:2404.12476 [hep-ph]. [47]COHERENTCollaboration, M. ...

    2024 arXiv

  30. [48]

    Studies of Neutrino-Nucleus Elastic Scattering with Point-Contact Germanium Detectors at the Kuo-Sheng Reactor Neutrino Laboratory,

    R. Bouabid,Tests of the Effective Weak Interaction with the World’s Smallest Neutrino Detector. PhD thesis, Duke U., 2025. [49]TEXONOCollaboration, M. K. Singhet al., “Studies of Neutrino-Nucleus Elastic Scattering with Point-Contact Germanium Detectors at the Kuo-Sheng Reacto...

    2025

  31. [50]

    Refined extraction of electroweak and nuclear parameters from germanium CEnNS data,

    V. De Romeri, L. Duque, D. K. Papoulias, G. Sanchez Garcia, and C. A. Ternes, “Refined extraction of electroweak and nuclear parameters from germanium CEnNS data,”arXiv:2605.27121 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  32. [51]

    A Model of Leptons,

    S. Weinberg, “A Model of Leptons,”Phys. Rev. Lett.19(1967) 1264–1266

    1967

  33. [52]

    Weak and Electromagnetic Interactions,

    A. Salam, “Weak and Electromagnetic Interactions,”Conf. Proc. C680519(1968) 367–377

    1968

  34. [53]

    Flavor-dependent radiative corrections in coherent elastic neutrino-nucleus scattering,

    O. Tomalak, P. Machado, V. Pandey, and R. Plestid, “Flavor-dependent radiative corrections in coherent elastic neutrino-nucleus scattering,”JHEP02(2021) 097,arXiv:2011.05960 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  35. [54]

    Probing new physics with coherent neutrino scattering off nuclei,

    J. Barranco, O. G. Miranda, and T. I. Rashba, “Probing new physics with coherent neutrino scattering off nuclei,”JHEP12(2005) 021,arXiv:hep-ph/0508299. [55]Particle Data GroupCollaboration, R. L. Workmanet al., “Review of Particle Physics,”PTEP2022 (2022) 083C01

    2005 arXiv

  36. [56]

    Electroweak Precision Tests of the Standard Model after the Discovery of the Higgs Boson,

    J. Erler and M. Schott, “Electroweak Precision Tests of the Standard Model after the Discovery of the Higgs Boson,”Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.106(2019) 68–119,arXiv:1902.05142 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  37. [57]

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

    R. H. Helm, “Inelastic and Elastic Scattering of 187-Mev Electrons from Selected Even-Even Nuclei,” Phys. Rev.104(1956) 1466–1475

    1956

  38. [58]

    Exclusive vector meson production in relativistic heavy ion collisions,

    S. Klein and J. Nystrand, “Exclusive vector meson production in relativistic heavy ion collisions,” Phys. Rev. C60(1999) 014903,arXiv:hep-ph/9902259

    1999 arXiv

  39. [59]

    Nuclear charge radii of germanium isotopes aroundN= 40,

    S. J. Wanget al., “Nuclear charge radii of germanium isotopes aroundN= 40,”Phys. Lett. B856 (2024) 138867,arXiv:2404.06046 [nucl-ex]. [Erratum: Phys.Lett.B 858, 139073 (2024)]

    2024 arXiv

  40. [60]

    SCF Hartree-Fock results for elements with two open shells and the elements francium to nobelium,

    J. B. Mann, “SCF Hartree-Fock results for elements with two open shells and the elements francium to nobelium,”Atom. Data Nucl. Data Tabl.12(1973) 1–86

    1973

  41. [61]

    Table of experimental nuclear ground state charge radii: An update,

    I. Angeli and K. P. Marinova, “Table of experimental nuclear ground state charge radii: An update,” Atom. Data Nucl. Data Tabl.99no. 1, (2013) 69–95

    2013

  42. [62]

    Charged and Neutral Current Interference in ν− e eScattering,

    B. Kayser, E. Fischbach, S. P. Rosen, and H. Spivack, “Charged and Neutral Current Interference in ν− e eScattering,”Phys. Rev. D20(1979) 87

    1979

  43. [63]

    Giunti and C

    C. Giunti and C. W. Kim,Fundamentals of Neutrino Physics and Astrophysics. Oxford University Press, 03, 2007

    2007

  44. [64]

    Light and HeavyZ ′ from Flavored ChiralU(1) X Gauge Symmetries: Purely Axial and Mixed Vector-Axial Couplings,

    H. K. Prajapati and R. Srivastava, “Light and HeavyZ ′ from Flavored ChiralU(1) X Gauge Symmetries: Purely Axial and Mixed Vector-Axial Couplings,”arXiv:2603.27157 [hep-ph]

  45. [65]

    Flavor specific chiral U(1)X framework for explaining the ATOMKI anomaly,

    A. Batra, F. R. Joaquim, H. Prajapati, and R. Srivastava, “Flavor specific chiral U(1)X framework for explaining the ATOMKI anomaly,”Phys. Rev. D114no. 1, (2026) 015042,arXiv:2604.22278 [hep-ph]

    2026 arXiv

  46. [66]

    Neutrino-electron scattering: general constraints onZ ′ and dark photon models,

    M. Lindner, F. S. Queiroz, W. Rodejohann, and X.-J. Xu, “Neutrino-electron scattering: general constraints onZ ′ and dark photon models,”JHEP05(2018) 098,arXiv:1803.00060 [hep-ph]. [67]MILCCollaboration, W. Freeman and D. Toussaint, “Intrinsic strangeness and charm of the nucl...

    2018 arXiv

  47. [68]

    Baryon spectrum with Nf = 2 + 1 + 1twisted mass fermions,

    C. Alexandrou, V. Drach, K. Jansen, C. Kallidonis, and G. Koutsou, “Baryon spectrum with Nf = 2 + 1 + 1twisted mass fermions,”Phys. Rev. D90no. 7, (2014) 074501,arXiv:1406.4310 [hep-lat]. [69]Flavour Lattice Averaging GroupCollaboration, S. Aokiet al., “FLAG Review 2019: Flavo...

    2014 arXiv

  48. [70]

    The Theory of Direct Dark Matter Detection: A Guide to Computations,

    E. Del Nobile, “The Theory of Direct Dark Matter Detection: A Guide to Computations,” arXiv:2104.12785 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  49. [71]

    Searching for BSM neutrino interactions in dark matter detectors,

    J. M. Link and X.-J. Xu, “Searching for BSM neutrino interactions in dark matter detectors,”JHEP 08(2019) 004,arXiv:1903.09891 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  50. [72]

    Nobel Lecture: The Sudbury Neutrino Observatory: Observation of flavor change for solar neutrinos,

    A. B. McDonald, “Nobel Lecture: The Sudbury Neutrino Observatory: Observation of flavor change for solar neutrinos,”Rev. Mod. Phys.88no. 3, (2016) 030502

    2016

  51. [73]

    Nobel Lecture: Discovery of atmospheric neutrino oscillations,

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

    2016

  52. [74]

    Mesonium and Antimesonium,

    B. Pontecorvo, “Mesonium and Antimesonium,”Sov. Phys. JETP6(1958) 429–431. 31

    1958

  53. [75]

    Remarks on the unified model of elementary particles,

    Z. Maki, M. Nakagawa, and S. Sakata, “Remarks on the unified model of elementary particles,”Prog. Theor. Phys.28(1962) 870–880

    1962

  54. [76]

    Majorana Neutrinos and Magnetic Fields,

    J. Schechter and J. W. F. Valle, “Majorana Neutrinos and Magnetic Fields,”Phys. Rev. D24(1981) 1883–1889. [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 25, 283 (1982)]

    1981

  55. [77]

    Electromagnetic Properties of Majorana Neutrinos,

    J. F. Nieves, “Electromagnetic Properties of Majorana Neutrinos,”Phys. Rev. D26(1982) 3152

    1982

  56. [78]

    Majorana Neutrinos and their Electromagnetic Properties,

    B. Kayser, “Majorana Neutrinos and their Electromagnetic Properties,”Phys. Rev. D26(1982) 1662

    1982

  57. [79]

    Electromagnetic Properties and Decays of Dirac and Majorana Neutrinos in a General Class of Gauge Theories,

    R. E. Shrock, “Electromagnetic Properties and Decays of Dirac and Majorana Neutrinos in a General Class of Gauge Theories,”Nucl. Phys. B206(1982) 359–379

    1982

  58. [80]

    Neutrino Electromagnetic Form-Factors,

    P. Vogel and J. Engel, “Neutrino Electromagnetic Form-Factors,”Phys. Rev. D39(1989) 3378

    1989

  59. [81]

    All electromagnetic form-factors,

    M. Nowakowski, E. A. Paschos, and J. M. Rodriguez, “All electromagnetic form-factors,”Eur. J. Phys.26(2005) 545–560,arXiv:physics/0402058

    2005 arXiv

  60. [82]

    Neutrino electromagnetic interactions: a window to new physics,

    C. Giunti and A. Studenikin, “Neutrino electromagnetic interactions: a window to new physics,”Rev. Mod. Phys.87(2015) 531,arXiv:1403.6344 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  61. [83]

    Neutrino Electromagnetic Properties,

    C. Giunti, K. Kouzakov, Y.-F. Li, and A. Studenikin, “Neutrino Electromagnetic Properties,”Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.75no. 1, (2025) 1–33,arXiv:2411.03122 [hep-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  62. [84]

    Effects of neutrino oscillations and neutrino magnetic moments on elastic neutrino - electron scattering,

    W. Grimus and P. Stockinger, “Effects of neutrino oscillations and neutrino magnetic moments on elastic neutrino - electron scattering,”Phys. Rev. D57(1998) 1762–1768,arXiv:hep-ph/9708279

    1998 arXiv

  63. [85]

    Neutrino magnetic and electric dipole moments: From measurements to parameter space,

    D. Aristizabal Sierra, O. G. Miranda, D. K. Papoulias, and G. S. Garcia, “Neutrino magnetic and electric dipole moments: From measurements to parameter space,”Phys. Rev. D105no. 3, (2022) 035027,arXiv:2112.12817 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  64. [86]

    Static quantities in Weinberg’s model of weak and electromagnetic interactions,

    W. A. Bardeen, R. Gastmans, and B. E. Lautrup, “Static quantities in Weinberg’s model of weak and electromagnetic interactions,”Nucl. Phys. B46(1972) 319–331

    1972

  65. [87]

    Higher-order corrections to leptonic processes and the renormalization of weinberg’s theory of weak interactions in the unitary gauge,

    S. Y. Lee, “Higher-order corrections to leptonic processes and the renormalization of weinberg’s theory of weak interactions in the unitary gauge,”Phys. Rev. D6(1972) 1701–1717

    1972

  66. [88]

    Natural Suppression of Symmetry Violation in Gauge Theories: Muon - Lepton and Electron Lepton Number Nonconservation,

    B. W. Lee and R. E. Shrock, “Natural Suppression of Symmetry Violation in Gauge Theories: Muon - Lepton and Electron Lepton Number Nonconservation,”Phys. Rev. D16(1977) 1444

    1977

  67. [89]

    Neutrino Charge in the Linear R(xi) Gauge,

    J. L. Lucio, A. Rosado, and A. Zepeda, “Neutrino Charge in the Linear R(xi) Gauge,”Phys. Rev. D 29(1984) 1539

    1984

  68. [90]

    A Characteristic Size for the Neutrino,

    J. L. Lucio, A. Rosado, and A. Zepeda, “A Characteristic Size for the Neutrino,”Phys. Rev. D31 (1985) 1091

    1985

  69. [91]

    Electric charge and magnetic moment of massive neutrino,

    M. Dvornikov and A. Studenikin, “Electric charge and magnetic moment of massive neutrino,”Phys. Rev. D69(2004) 073001,arXiv:hep-ph/0305206

    2004 arXiv

  70. [92]

    Electromagnetic form-factors of a massive neutrino,

    M. S. Dvornikov and A. I. Studenikin, “Electromagnetic form-factors of a massive neutrino,”J. Exp. Theor. Phys.99(2004) 254–269,arXiv:hep-ph/0411085

    2004 arXiv

  71. [93]

    The Processesµ→e+γ,µ→e+ e,ν′→ν+γin the Weinberg-Salam Model with Neutrino Mixing,

    S. T. Petcov, “The Processesµ→e+γ,µ→e+ e,ν′→ν+γin the Weinberg-Salam Model with Neutrino Mixing,”Sov. J. Nucl. Phys.25(1977) 340. [Erratum: Sov.J.Nucl.Phys. 25, 698 (1977), Erratum: Yad.Fiz. 25, 1336 (1977)]

    1977

  72. [94]

    Exotic Decays of the Muon and Heavy Leptons in Gauge Theories,

    W. J. Marciano and A. I. Sanda, “Exotic Decays of the Muon and Heavy Leptons in Gauge Theories,”Phys. Lett. B67(1977) 303–305

    1977

  73. [95]

    The Magnetic Moment of a Massive Neutrino and Neutrino Spin Rotation,

    K. Fujikawa and R. Shrock, “The Magnetic Moment of a Massive Neutrino and Neutrino Spin Rotation,”Phys. Rev. Lett.45(1980) 963

    1980

  74. [96]

    Radiative Decays of Massive Neutrinos,

    P. B. Pal and L. Wolfenstein, “Radiative Decays of Massive Neutrinos,”Phys. Rev. D25(1982) 766

    1982

  75. [97]

    On the charge radius of the neutrino,

    J. Bernabeu, L. G. Cabral-Rosetti, J. Papavassiliou, and J. Vidal, “On the charge radius of the neutrino,”Phys. Rev. D62(2000) 113012,arXiv:hep-ph/0008114

    2000 arXiv

  76. [98]

    On the observability of the neutrino charge radius,

    J. Bernabeu, J. Papavassiliou, and J. Vidal, “On the observability of the neutrino charge radius,” Phys. Rev. Lett.89(2002) 101802,arXiv:hep-ph/0206015. [Erratum: Phys.Rev.Lett. 89, 229902 (2002)]

    2002 arXiv

  77. [99]

    The Neutrino charge radius is a physical observable,

    J. Bernabeu, J. Papavassiliou, and J. Vidal, “The Neutrino charge radius is a physical observable,” Nucl. Phys. B680(2004) 450–478,arXiv:hep-ph/0210055

    2004 arXiv

  78. [100]

    Model for Large Transition Magnetic Moment of theν e,

    K. S. Babu and R. N. Mohapatra, “Model for Large Transition Magnetic Moment of theν e,”Phys. Rev. Lett.63(1989) 228

    1989

  79. [101]

    A White Paper on keV Sterile Neutrino Dark Matter,

    M. Dreweset al., “A White Paper on keV Sterile Neutrino Dark Matter,”JCAP01(2017) 025, arXiv:1602.04816 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  80. [102]

    Sterile neutrinos in cosmology,

    K. N. Abazajian, “Sterile neutrinos in cosmology,”Phys. Rept.711-712(2017) 1–28, arXiv:1705.01837 [hep-ph]. 32

    2017 arXiv

  81. [103]

    Sterile neutrino Dark Matter,

    A. Boyarsky, M. Drewes, T. Lasserre, S. Mertens, and O. Ruchayskiy, “Sterile neutrino Dark Matter,”Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.104(2019) 1–45,arXiv:1807.07938 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  82. [104]

    Muon Capture Constraints on Sterile Neutrino Properties,

    D. McKeen and M. Pospelov, “Muon Capture Constraints on Sterile Neutrino Properties,”Phys. Rev. D82(2010) 113018,arXiv:1011.3046 [hep-ph]

    2010 arXiv

  83. [105]

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

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

    2021 arXiv

  84. [106]

    Interaction between four half spin particles and the decay of theµmeson,

    L. Michel, “Interaction between four half spin particles and the decay of theµmeson,”Proc. Phys. Soc. A63(1950) 514–531

    1950

  85. [107]

    Theory ofµ-Meson Decay with the Hypothesis of Nonconservation of Parity,

    C. Bouchiat and L. Michel, “Theory ofµ-Meson Decay with the Hypothesis of Nonconservation of Parity,”Phys. Rev.106(1957) 170–172

    1957

  86. [108]

    Range concepts and heavy ion searches,

    J. Lindhard, M. Scharff, and H. Schiott, “Range concepts and heavy ion searches,”Mat. Fys. Medd . Dan. Vid. Selsk.33(1963)

    1963

  87. [109]

    Measurements of the fano factor and the energy per hole-electron pair in germanium,

    S. Antman, D. Landis, and R. Pehl, “Measurements of the fano factor and the energy per hole-electron pair in germanium,”Nuclear Instruments and Methods40no. 2, (1966) 272–276

    1966

  88. [110]

    Average energy expended per e-h pair for germanium-based dark matter experiments,

    W. Z. Wei, L. Wang, and D. M. Mei, “Average energy expended per e-h pair for germanium-based dark matter experiments,”JINST12no. 04, (2017) P04022,arXiv:1602.08005 [physics.ins-det]

    2017 arXiv

  89. [111]

    Low-energy electronic recoil in xenon detectors by solar neutrinos,

    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) 656–661,arXiv:1610.04177 [hep-ex]

    2017 arXiv

  90. [112]

    A. C. Thompson, D. Vaughan, M. A. Cox,et al.,X-Ray Data Booklet, 2009.https://xdb.lbl.gov/

    2009

  91. [113]

    Isotopic compositions of the elements 2009 (iupac technical report),

    M. Berglund and M. E. Wieser, “Isotopic compositions of the elements 2009 (iupac technical report),”Pure and Applied Chemistry83no. 2, (2011) 397–410

    2011

  92. [114]

    On the determination of anti-neutrino spectra from nuclear reactors,

    P. Huber, “On the determination of anti-neutrino spectra from nuclear reactors,”Phys. Rev. C84 (2011) 024617,arXiv:1106.0687 [hep-ph]. [Erratum: Phys.Rev.C 85, 029901 (2012)]

    2011 arXiv

  93. [115]

    Improved Predictions of Reactor Antineutrino Spectra,

    T. A. Muelleret al., “Improved Predictions of Reactor Antineutrino Spectra,”Phys. Rev. C83 (2011) 054615,arXiv:1101.2663 [hep-ex]. [116]TEXONOCollaboration, H. T. Wonget al., “A Search of Neutrino Magnetic Moments with a High-Purity Germanium Detector at the Kuo-Sheng Nuclear ...

    2011 arXiv

  94. [118]

    The results of search for the neutrino magnetic moment in GEMMA experiment,

    A. G. Beda, V. B. Brudanin, V. G. Egorov, D. V. Medvedev, V. S. Pogosov, M. V. Shirchenko, and A. S. Starostin, “The results of search for the neutrino magnetic moment in GEMMA experiment,” Adv. High Energy Phys.2012(2012) 350150. [119]LSNDCollaboration, L. B. Auerbachet al., ...

    2012 arXiv

  95. [121]

    Constraining new physics with Borexino Phase-II spectral data,

    P. Coloma, M. C. Gonzalez-Garcia, M. Maltoni, J. P. Pinheiro, and S. Urrea, “Constraining new physics with Borexino Phase-II spectral data,”JHEP07(2022) 138,arXiv:2204.03011 [hep-ph]. [Erratum: JHEP 11, 138 (2022)]. [122]XMASSCollaboration, K. Abeet al., “Search for exotic neu...

    2022 arXiv

  96. [124]

    Probing light mediators and (g−2) ţ through detection of coherent elastic neutrino nucleus scattering at COHERENT,

    M. Atzori Corona, M. Cadeddu, N. Cargioli, F. Dordei, C. Giunti, Y. F. Li, E. Picciau, C. A. Ternes, and Y. Y. Zhang, “Probing light mediators and (g−2) ţ through detection of coherent elastic neutrino nucleus scattering at COHERENT,”JHEP05(2022) 109,arXiv:2202.11002 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  97. [125]

    Reactor antineutrinos CEνNS on germanium: CONUS+ and TEXONO as a new gateway to SM and BSM physics,

    M. Atzori Corona, M. Cadeddu, N. Cargioli, F. Dordei, and C. Giunti, “Reactor antineutrinos CEνNS on germanium: CONUS+ and TEXONO as a new gateway to SM and BSM physics,”Phys. Rev. D112no. 1, (2025) 015007,arXiv:2501.18550 [hep-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  98. [126]

    Light vector mediators at direct detection experiments,

    V. De Romeri, D. K. Papoulias, and C. A. Ternes, “Light vector mediators at direct detection experiments,”JHEP05(2024) 165,arXiv:2402.05506 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  99. [127]

    Serendipity in dark photon searches,

    P. Ilten, Y. Soreq, M. Williams, and W. Xue, “Serendipity in dark photon searches,”JHEP06(2018) 004,arXiv:1801.04847 [hep-ph]. 33 [128]https://gitlab.com/philten/darkcast

    2018 arXiv

  100. [129]

    Axial vectors in DarkCast,

    C. Baruch, P. Ilten, Y. Soreq, and M. Williams, “Axial vectors in DarkCast,”JHEP11(2022) 124, arXiv:2206.08563 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  101. [130]

    Cosmological implications of gauged U(1) B−L on∆N eff in the CMB and BBN,

    H. Esseili and G. D. Kribs, “Cosmological implications of gauged U(1) B−L on∆N eff in the CMB and BBN,”JCAP05(2024) 110,arXiv:2308.07955 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  102. [131]

    N eff constraints on light mediators coupled to neutrinos: the dilution-resistant effect,

    S.-P. Li and X.-J. Xu, “N eff constraints on light mediators coupled to neutrinos: the dilution-resistant effect,”JHEP10(2023) 012,arXiv:2307.13967 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  103. [132]

    Neff at CMB challenges U(1)X light gauge boson scenarios,

    D. K. Ghosh, P. Ghosh, S. Jeesun, and R. Srivastava, “Neff at CMB challenges U(1)X light gauge boson scenarios,”Phys. Rev. D110no. 7, (2024) 075032,arXiv:2404.10077 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  104. [133]

    Constraining the Self-Interacting Neutrino Interpretation of the Hubble Tension,

    N. Blinov, K. J. Kelly, G. Z. Krnjaic, and S. D. McDermott, “Constraining the Self-Interacting Neutrino Interpretation of the Hubble Tension,”Phys. Rev. Lett.123no. 19, (2019) 191102, arXiv:1905.02727 [astro-ph.CO]

    2019 arXiv

  105. [134]

    Astrophysical constraints on nonstandard coherent neutrino-nucleus scattering,

    A. M. Suliga and I. Tamborra, “Astrophysical constraints on nonstandard coherent neutrino-nucleus scattering,”Phys. Rev. D103no. 8, (2021) 083002,arXiv:2010.14545 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  106. [135]

    The Neutrino Magnetic Moment Portal: Cosmology, Astrophysics, and Direct Detection,

    V. Brdar, A. Greljo, J. Kopp, and T. Opferkuch, “The Neutrino Magnetic Moment Portal: Cosmology, Astrophysics, and Direct Detection,”JCAP01(2021) 039,arXiv:2007.15563 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  107. [136]

    Luminous solar neutrinos I: Dipole portals,

    R. Plestid, “Luminous solar neutrinos I: Dipole portals,”Phys. Rev. D104(2021) 075027, arXiv:2010.04193 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  108. [137]

    Double-Cascade Events from New Physics in Icecube,

    P. Coloma, P. A. N. Machado, I. Martinez-Soler, and I. M. Shoemaker, “Double-Cascade Events from New Physics in Icecube,”Phys. Rev. Lett.119no. 20, (2017) 201804,arXiv:1707.08573 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  109. [138]

    Dipole Portal to Heavy Neutral Leptons,

    G. Magill, R. Plestid, M. Pospelov, and Y.-D. Tsai, “Dipole Portal to Heavy Neutral Leptons,”Phys. Rev. D98no. 11, (2018) 115015,arXiv:1803.03262 [hep-ph]. [139]NOMADCollaboration, J. Altegoeret al., “The NOMAD experiment at the CERN SPS,”Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A404(1998) 96–128

    2018 arXiv

  110. [140]

    Limits on the magnetic moment of sterile neutrino and two photon neutrino decay,

    S. N. Gninenko and N. V. Krasnikov, “Limits on the magnetic moment of sterile neutrino and two photon neutrino decay,”Phys. Lett. B450(1999) 165–172,arXiv:hep-ph/9808370

    1999 arXiv

  111. [141]

    Dipole-coupled heavy-neutral-lepton explanations of the MiniBooNE excess including constraints from MINERvA data,

    N. W. Kamp, M. Hostert, A. Schneider, S. Vergani, C. A. Arg ¨uelles, J. M. Conrad, M. H. Shaevitz, and M. A. Uchida, “Dipole-coupled heavy-neutral-lepton explanations of the MiniBooNE excess including constraints from MINERvA data,”Phys. Rev. D107no. 5, (2023) 055009, arXiv:22...

    2023 arXiv

  112. [143]

    Constraints and sensitivities for dipole-portal heavy neutral leptons from ND280 and its upgrade,

    M.-S. Liu, N. Kamp, and C. A. Arg ¨uelles, “Constraints and sensitivities for dipole-portal heavy neutral leptons from ND280 and its upgrade,”Phys. Rev. D112no. 3, (2025) 035012, arXiv:2412.15051 [hep-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  113. [144]

    Luminous solar neutrinos: The notebooks

    R. Plestid, “Luminous solar neutrinos: The notebooks.” https://github.com/ryanplestid/luminous-solar-nu, 2020

    2020

  114. [145]

    Neutrino portals, terrestrial upscattering, and atmospheric neutrinos,

    R. A. Gustafson, R. Plestid, and I. M. Shoemaker, “Neutrino portals, terrestrial upscattering, and atmospheric neutrinos,”Phys. Rev. D106no. 9, (2022) 095037,arXiv:2205.02234 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.