Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

The Neutrino Kaleidoscope: Searches for Non-Standard Neutrino Oscillations at Neutrino Telescopes with a TeV Muon Accelerator Source

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper argues that pairing a TeV muon accelerator with a gigaton neutrino telescope—a 'neutrino kaleidoscope'—would give the first terrestrial access to double-Planck-suppressed Lorentz violation and beat all current sterile-neutrino…

desk verdict A new and cleanly presented experimental concept; the marquee double-Planck claim is conditional on a tau-tagging benchmark or a 50 TeV beam, so the conclusion overreaches. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.09249 v1 pith:7NDJMPOB submitted 2025-08-12 hep-ph hep-ex

Nicholas W. Kamp , Gray Putnam This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-phhep-ex
keywords neutrinokaleidoscopemuonacceleratortelescopesterileoscillationsLorentzviolationStandard-ModelExtensionsiderealvariationsquantumgravity
topics Quantum Gravity
open problems Quantum Gravity
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

Muon accelerators proposed for TeV-scale collisions would also emit an intense, tightly collimated beam of neutrinos as the stored muons decay. The paper argues that aiming such a beam at a gigaton neutrino telescope—a combination it calls the neutrino kaleidoscope—creates a long-baseline neutrino experiment with baselines of thousands of kilometres and TeV energies, exactly the regime for two kinds of non-standard oscillations. Matter-enhanced oscillations into an eV-squared sterile neutrino would appear as a distortion of the radial event distribution in the detector, with projected sensitivity orders of magnitude beyond existing and planned terrestrial searches. Planck-suppressed Lorentz violation would imprint a sidereal-day modulation on muon-to-tau neutrino oscillations that the experiment could detect down to double-Planck-suppressed coefficients, the first terrestrial access to that regime. If these projections hold, the kaleidoscope turns a planned accelerator technology into a general-purpose probe of new physics; the reach nevertheless assumes a detector systematic budget far tighter than anything demonstrated at TeV energies.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing objects are the muon-decay neutrino beam and the two-flavor oscillation Hamiltonians it feeds. At 5 TeV the beam's intrinsic angular spread is $1/\gamma \approx 2\times10^{-5}$ rad, so the beam spot at a telescope roughly 10,000 km away is of order 100 m, matched to a gigaton detector; the nominal beam-dump scenario supplies $2\times10^{14}$ muon decays per year, and an interaction-point straight section supplies far more. For sterile neutrinos, the machinery is the $3+1$ Hamiltonian in Eq. (1), whose matter potential $G_F N_e/\sqrt{2}$ creates a resonance at $\Delta m^2/(4E) \simeq G_F N_e/\sqrt{2}$; the paper numerically integrates this equation with the PREM Earth density and reads the signal out through the annular-radius distribution of interaction vertices, because different radii see different spectra. For Lorentz violation, the machinery is the $\nu_\mu$–$\nu_\tau$ Hamiltonian in Eq. (2) with a non-standard potential $V_{\mu\tau}$; at short baselines the appearance probability is $P_{\nu_\mu\to\nu_\tau} = L^2\,|\Delta m^2_{31}\sin2\theta_{23}/(4E) + V_{\mu\tau}|^2 + O(L^4)$. In the Standard-Model Extension, $V_{\mu\tau}$ acquires the sidereal-time expansion of Eq. (4) at frequency $\omega_\oplus$ and its harmonics, and the analysis extracts limits by Fourier-transforming the sidereal event-rate distribution in the manner of previous sidereal searches.

What would settle it

Apply the same annular-radius binning analysis to the existing TeV atmospheric-neutrino sample in a gigaton telescope: if the bin-to-bin non-Poissonian systematic floor exceeds 0.5 percent, or tau selection reaches a signal-to-background ratio well below 0.1, the projected sterile and double-Planck sensitivities in Fig. 3 and the accompanying tables cannot be realized.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the neutrino beam from a TeV-scale muon accelerator is an ideal source for existing and planned gigaton neutrino telescopes, and that the pairing—dubbed the neutrino kaleidoscope—would be the first high-energy, long-baseline neutrino experiment with an intense, precisely controlled flux. At baselines of order 10,000 km and neutrino energies around 1–5 TeV, two non-standard oscillation scenarios come within reach. An eV-squared sterile neutrino produces a matter-enhanced oscillation resonance while the beam crosses the Earth's core; because the detector's annular-radius bins contain different neutrino-energy spectra, the oscillation is visible even without precise per-event energy reconstruction, and the projected sensitivity at $\Delta m^2 \sim 1\,\mathrm{eV}^2$ extends orders of magnitude beyond existing and planned terrestrial limits. A Lorentz-violating potential in the $\nu_\mu$–$\nu_\tau$ system, as parameterized by the Standard-Model Extension, would imprint variations at the sidereal frequency and its harmonics; one year of a 5 TeV beam would improve current bounds on the dimension-three and dimension-four coefficients by two or more orders of magnitude, and a tau-enriched sample or a 50 TeV beam would reach dimension-six coefficients within a factor of a few of $E_P^{-2}$. This last point is the paper's headline reach: the first terrestrial, model-independent sensitivity to double-Planck-suppressed Lorentz violation from quantum gravity.

Load-bearing premise

The reach estimates assume a gigaton telescope can keep normalization systematics near 1 percent and uncorrelated bin-to-bin systematics near 0.5 percent at TeV energies, plus tau identification at a signal-to-background ratio of 0.1; if real detectors cannot hold that systematic budget, the orders-of-magnitude improvements shrink or disappear.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • An eV-scale sterile neutrino would show up as a distortion of the radial event distribution in the telescope, and the projected exclusion region extends orders of magnitude beyond every existing and planned terrestrial search.
  • A single year of 5 TeV beam data would improve current limits on the dimension-three and dimension-four Standard-Model Extension coefficients by at least two orders of magnitude, and a tau-enriched sample or a 50 TeV beam would reach dimension-six coefficients of order $E_P^{-2}$, the first terrestrial access to double-Planck-suppressed Lorentz violation.
  • The same beam would also constrain non-standard neutrino-matter potentials to $\epsilon_{\mu\tau} \sim 5\times10^{-5}$, corresponding in radiative neutrino-mass models to new physics near 10 TeV.
  • Rare dimuon processes—charm production, trident production, and W-boson production—would occur at rates of thousands to millions per year in the interaction-point configuration, opening a new channel to test lepton-flavor symmetries and the strong interaction.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Because the neutrino flux is a by-product of a muon accelerator, a kaleidoscope could run parasitically during collider operation; the trade-off between pointing a straight section at the telescope and serving the collision program is an engineering choice the paper leaves to future accelerator design.
  • The paper quotes combined sensitivities for Lorentz-violating coefficients; a spectral analysis that separates the $L$-dependent dimension-three operators from the $L E$-dependent dimension-four operators would directly test the Lorentz-violation interpretation of any sidereal signal.
  • The paper's three pairings all assume one source location; a source in the opposite hemisphere would cross the Earth's core and mantle with different geometries, shifting the sterile resonance energies and sidereal modulations in ways the authors do not optimize.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes pairing a TeV-scale muon accelerator as a neutrino source with a gigaton-scale neutrino telescope, a configuration dubbed the "neutrino kaleidoscope," and studies its sensitivity to non-standard neutrino oscillations. Three concrete baselines are considered: Fermilab to P-ONE, KM3NeT, and IceCube, which sample crust-, mantle-, and core-crossing trajectories. The sterile-neutrino analysis uses a two-flavor active-sterile Hamiltonian with the PREM Earth density and projects exclusions on sin^2(2θ)-Δm^2 that reach orders of magnitude beyond existing and planned experiments, provided the assumed 1% normalization and 0.5% uncorrelated per-bin systematics hold. The Lorentz-violation analysis searches for sidereal variations in νμ disappearance and ντ appearance using the Standard-Model Extension, reporting sensitivities to a_L and c_L coefficients that improve on IceCube and MINOS by two or more orders of magnitude, and estimating dimension-6 sensitivities that, for tau-enriched or 50 TeV configurations, reach the double-Planck-suppressed regime. The paper also briefly discusses anomalous matter potentials and rare dimuon interactions. The central message is that a TeV muon accelerator paired with a gigaton telescope would constitute a powerful, high-rate long-baseline neutrino facility for new-physics searches.

Significance. If the projected sensitivities hold, the neutrino kaleidoscope would open a qualitatively new window: a controlled, high-intensity TeV neutrino beam over terrestrial baselines, with event rates high enough to probe sub-percent oscillation effects. The sterile-neutrino search would benefit from a matter resonance and a pure νμ beam, and the Lorentz-violation search would improve on existing sidereal-variation limits by orders of magnitude, with the tau-enriched or high-energy configurations approaching the quantum-gravity-motivated Planck-scale regime in a model-independent way. The calculations are transparently described and follow established methods: the sterile analysis uses the standard two-flavor matter Hamiltonian with PREM densities, and the SME analysis uses the standard Sun-centered frame with the Fourier procedure of the MINOS sidereal analysis. The paper is appropriately cautious in some places, but the conclusion states the headline double-Planck claim more strongly than the body's conditional statements support.

major comments (3)
  1. [Appendix A, Eq. (A2)] The conclusion states unconditionally that the neutrino kaleidoscope "provides the first terrestrial access to double-Planck suppressed sidereal variations," but Table II shows that only the "Tau-enriched" rows (S/B(ντ)=0.1) and the "High-energy" rows (Eμ=50 TeV) reach the O(E_P^-2) regime; the nominal 5 TeV νμ rows are at 5.2e2-2.8e3/E_P^2. Since the S/B=0.1 benchmark is introduced in Section IV as a hypothetical assumption with no detector-level simulation, and the 50 TeV beam is an order of magnitude above the stated 5 TeV baseline, the double-Planck claim should be explicitly conditional on these configurations. Because the tau-enriched sensitivity scales roughly as sqrt(1+1/r) in the signal-to-background ratio r, a value of r=0.01 would push the P-ONE dimension-6 bound above 10/E_P^2, erasing the double-Planck reach; the manuscript should either provide a detector-level estimate of the reachable S/B or quote the sensitivity as a function of S/B.
  2. [Appendix A, Eq. (A2)] The SME sensitivity calculation appears to drop the standard mass-mixing term, with Appendix A stating that this is valid when Δm^2/(4E) is much smaller than h_eff. At the quoted limits this condition is not satisfied: for P-ONE, a_X_L = 1.0e-25 GeV is about 1e-16 eV, comparable to Δm^2/(4E) ≈ 1.25e-16 eV at E=5 TeV. Moreover, for the tau-enriched dimension-6 sensitivity, the signal in Eq. (3) is precisely the interference between Δm^2/(4E) sin2θ23 and V_μτ, so dropping the mass term changes the predicted modulation. The calculation should include the full two-flavor Hamiltonian of Eq. (2) or should demonstrate numerically that omitting the mass term changes the quoted limits by less than the stated precision.
  3. [Section III, Fig. 3] The sterile-neutrino exclusion is computed with 1% normalization and 0.5% uncorrelated per-annular-bin uncertainties, and these systematics dominate given event rates of 10^8-10^11. The paper does not justify these values or explore their impact on the projected reach. Since the claimed "orders-of-magnitude improvement" is systematics-limited rather than statistics-limited, the authors should provide a scan of the sensitivity as a function of the assumed uncorrelated systematic (for example 0.1%-5%) and of the bin width, or should soften the conclusion to state this systematic precondition explicitly.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section III] The text says the likelihood analysis uses bins of 10 m, while Fig. 2 and its caption use 30 m annular bins; please reconcile the bin width.
  2. [Section III] There is a typo, "with with a binned likelihood analysis," in the first paragraph of Section III.
  3. [Section IV] The word "perviously" should be "previously" in the sentence "Sidereal variations from Lorentz violation have been perviously investigated."
  4. [Supplemental Table II] The text contains typos, "sensntivity" and "suppresesed," which should be corrected to "sensitivity" and "suppressed."
  5. [Fig. 2] The axis label "10M / TeV / 1015 +" appears garbled; it should likely read "10^5 / TeV / 10^15 µ+" or similar.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the sensitivity projections are computed from standard SME/PREM inputs and external analysis methods; the assumed systematics and S/B=0.1 tau benchmark are stated inputs, not fitted to the claimed results.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained and non-circular. Sterile-neutrino sensitivities are obtained by numerically integrating the standard 3+1 matter Hamiltonian (Eq. 1) with the PREM density profile and a binned likelihood; the only free inputs are explicitly stated assumptions on normalization and per-bin uncorrelated systematics, which are projection benchmarks rather than parameters fitted to the claimed signal. The Lorentz-violation reach is obtained from the SME effective Hamiltonian (Eq. A1), the sidereal decomposition of Ref. [70], the Fourier-analysis procedure of Ref. [76], and the dimensional-scaling relation |p|^{d-3}|A^d_c| ≈ |A^3_c| of Ref. [85]. None of these inputs contains the target result: the d=6 sensitivities in Table II are arithmetic consequences of the d=3 sensitivities scaled by (E_mu/2)^3, and the tau-enriched entries explicitly rest on a labeled S/B=0.1 benchmark rather than a fitted or predicted sample purity. The paper flags that nu_tau identification at TeV energies is difficult and that the 50 TeV beam is an alternative configuration, so the double-Planck conclusion is conditional on these benchmarks. That the conclusion states the claim unconditionally is a soundness or presentation issue, not circularity: no equation reduces to its own output, no parameter is fitted and then renamed a prediction, and no load-bearing argument relies on a self-citation. External comparisons to IceCube and MINOS limits provide independent anchoring. Score 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 8 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central projections rest on the accelerator and detector assumptions listed above. The SME and MSW frameworks are standard inputs from prior literature; the accelerator intensity, systematic uncertainties, and tau-tagging benchmark are chosen for this study and have not been demonstrated at the required level.

free parameters (8)
  • Annual muon decay rate (beam dump scenario) = 2e14 decays/year
    Nominal baseline in Section II; all event-rate and sensitivity numbers scale with this rate.
  • Integrated decays for sterile sensitivity = 1e15 mu+ decays
    Fig. 3 uses 1e15 decays, which is five times the nominal yearly rate; exposure time is not specified in the caption.
  • Detector active mass = 1 gigaton
    Assumed active mass for P-ONE, KM3NeT, and IceCube event-rate calculations.
  • Normalization uncertainty = 1%
    Assumed systematic uncertainty in the sterile neutrino likelihood; it sets the floor of the reach in Fig. 3.
  • Uncorrelated systematic uncertainty per annular bin = 0.5%
    Added in Fig. 3 dashed curve; no detector-level derivation is provided.
  • Muon beam energy = 5 TeV nominal, 50 TeV high-energy scenario
    Baseline energies used for SME and d=6 sensitivity scaling.
  • nu_tau sample signal-to-background ratio = 0.1
    Assumed benchmark for the tau-appearance analysis; the paper states this is hypothetical.
  • Annular radius bin width = 10 m in text, 30 m in figure captions
    Inconsistency in the sterile analysis; affects the sensitivity calculation.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption SME effective field theory describes quantum-gravity-induced Lorentz violation, with renormalizable dimension-3 and dimension-4 mu-tau operators dominating at TeV energies.
    Section IV and Appendix A use the SME Hamiltonian of Refs. [65,70,75] without testing alternative frameworks.
  • domain assumption Active-sterile oscillations follow the two-flavor 3+1 Hamiltonian in Eq. 1 with a matter potential ±G_F N_e/sqrt(2).
    Section III relies on the standard MSW treatment and PREM density.
  • domain assumption Standard mass-mixing oscillations are negligible in the LIV analysis.
    Appendix A states the condition Δm^2/(4E) << h_eff; this is not verified near the quoted sensitivity limits where the two scales may be comparable.
  • domain assumption A future muon accelerator can deliver an intense, collimated 5 TeV muon beam pointed at a telescope with ~0.1 µrad divergence and 2e14 to 1e15 decays per year.
    Section II; the entire paper is a projection built on these accelerator parameters.
  • domain assumption Gigaton neutrino telescopes can achieve the assumed energy and radius reconstruction and systematic control, including a nu_tau-enriched sample with S/B = 0.1.
    Sections III and IV; no detector simulation or background study is presented.
  • domain assumption Equation (5), |p|^{d-3}|A_d_c| ≈ |A_3_c|, correctly maps dimension-3 sensitivity to higher-dimensional SME coefficients.
    Section IV and Supplemental Methods; taken from Ref. [85] and used to claim double-Planck-suppressed reach.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The Neutrino Kaleidoscope: Searches for Non-Standard Neutrino Oscillations at Neutrino Telescopes with a TeV Muon Accelerator Source." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/7NDJMPOB

@misc{pith2026250809249,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The Neutrino Kaleidoscope: Searches for Non-Standard Neutrino Oscillations at Neutrino Telescopes with a TeV Muon Accelerator Source},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/7NDJMPOB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.09249}
}
abstract

Muon accelerators, a potential technology for enabling $\mathcal{O}$(10 TeV) parton center of mass energy collisions, would also source an intense, collimated beam of neutrinos at TeV energies. The energy and size of this beam would be excellently matched as a source for existing and planned neutrino telescopes: gigaton-sized detectors of astrophysical neutrinos at and above TeV energies. In this paper, we introduce the technical considerations and scientific reach of pairing a muon accelerator source of neutrinos with a neutrino telescope detector, a combination we dub the ''Neutrino Kaleidoscope''. In particular, such a pairing would enable searches for non-standard oscillations of the beam neutrinos as they traverse the earth between source and detector. These non-standard neutrino oscillations could be sourced by Lorentz invariance violation, which a neutrino kaleidoscope could probe up to the quantum gravity-motivated Planck scale. Such a search would also have a reach on sterile neutrinos orders of magnitude beyond existing terrestrial limits. Finally, we touch on some of the non-oscillation potential of a neutrino kaleidoscope.

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. The Forward Neutrino Flux and its Secondaries at a 10 TeV Muon Collider

    hep-ph 2026-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A beam-dynamics-aware simulation of a 10 TeV muon collider finds an intense forward neutrino beam with about 10^9 neutrino interactions per year in a 3.2 tonne detector and about two rock-produced muons per bunch crossing.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

97 extracted references · 18 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    The IceCube Neu- trino Observatory: Instrumentation and Online Sys- tems,

    M. G. Aartsenet al.(IceCube), “The IceCube Neu- trino Observatory: Instrumentation and Online Sys- tems,” JINST12, P03012 (2017), [Erratum: JINST 19, E05001 (2024)], arXiv:1612.05093 [astro-ph.IM]

    arXiv 2017

  2. [2]

    The Design and Perfor- manceofIceCubeDeepCore,

    R. Abbasiet al.(IceCube), “The Design and Perfor- manceofIceCubeDeepCore,” Astropart.Phys.35,615– 624 (2012), arXiv:1109.6096 [astro-ph.IM]. 7 102 103 104 105 E [GeV] 10 44 10 42 10 40 10 38 /E [cm2/GeV/nucleon] CC DIS CC DIS q (c + ) q + (c ) ( ) Trident + ( ) WBP + FIG. 6. The total CC DIS cross section for muon neutri- nos [99], and cross sections for ...

    arXiv 2012

  3. [3]

    A search for extremely- high-energy neutrinos and first constraints on the ultra- high-energy cosmic-ray proton fraction with IceCube,

    R. Abbasiet al.(IceCube), “A search for extremely- high-energy neutrinos and first constraints on the ultra- high-energy cosmic-ray proton fraction with IceCube,” (2025), arXiv:2502.01963 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2025

  4. [4]

    Observation of an ultra- high-energy cosmic neutrino with KM3NeT,

    S. Aielloet al.(KM3NeT), “Observation of an ultra- high-energy cosmic neutrino with KM3NeT,” Nature 638, 376–382 (2025), [Erratum: Nature 640, E3 (2025)]

    2025

  5. [5]

    eV-Scale Sterile Neutrino Search Using Eight Years of Atmospheric Muon Neutrino Data from the IceCube Neutrino Observatory,

    M. G. Aartsenet al.(IceCube), “eV-Scale Sterile Neutrino Search Using Eight Years of Atmospheric Muon Neutrino Data from the IceCube Neutrino Observatory,” Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 141801 (2020), arXiv:2005.12942 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 2020

  6. [6]

    Search for an eV-Scale Sterile Neutrino Using Improved High-EnergyνµEvent Reconstruction in IceCube,

    R. Abbasiet al.((IceCube Collaboration)∥, IceCube), “Search for an eV-Scale Sterile Neutrino Using Improved High-EnergyνµEvent Reconstruction in IceCube,” Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 201804 (2024), arXiv:2405.08070 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 2024

  7. [8]

    Test of Lorentz invariance with atmospheric neutrinos

    K. Abeet al.(Super-Kamiokande), “Test of Lorentz in- variance with atmospheric neutrinos,” Phys. Rev. D91, 052003 (2015), arXiv:1410.4267 [hep-ex]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2015

  8. [9]

    Strong Constraints on Neu- trino Nonstandard Interactions from TeV-Scaleνu Dis- appearance at IceCube,

    R. Abbasiet al.(IceCube), “Strong Constraints on Neu- trino Nonstandard Interactions from TeV-Scaleνu Dis- appearance at IceCube,” Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 011804 (2022), arXiv:2201.03566 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 2022

Show all 97 references
  1. [10]

    A Muon Collider Facility for Physics Discovery,

    D. Stratakiset al.(Muon Collider), “A Muon Collider Facility for Physics Discovery,” (2022), arXiv:2203.08033 [physics.acc-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  2. [11]

    Towards a muon collider,

    Carlotta Accetturaet al., “Towards a muon collider,” Eur. Phys. J. C83, 864 (2023), [Erratum: Eur.Phys.J.C 84, 36 (2024)], arXiv:2303.08533 [physics.acc-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  3. [12]

    The muon Smasher’s guide,

    Hind Al Aliet al., “The muon Smasher’s guide,” Rept. Prog. Phys.85, 084201 (2022), arXiv:2103.14043 [hep- ph]

    2022 arXiv

  4. [13]

    Muon Collider Forum report,

    K. M. Blacket al., “Muon Collider Forum report,” JINST19, T02015 (2024), arXiv:2209.01318 [hep-ex]

    2024 arXiv

  5. [14]

    European Strategy for Particle Physics – Accelerator R&D Roadmap,

    C. Adolphsenet al., “European Strategy for Particle Physics – Accelerator R&D Roadmap,” CERN Yel- low Rep. Monogr.1, 1–270 (2022), arXiv:2201.07895 [physics.acc-ph]

    2022

  6. [15]

    The Potential for Neutrino Physics at Muon Colliders and Dedicated High Current Muon Storage Rings,

    Ikaros I. Y. Bigiet al., “The Potential for Neutrino Physics at Muon Colliders and Dedicated High Current Muon Storage Rings,” Phys. Rept.371, 151–230 (2002), arXiv:hep-ph/0106177

    2002 arXiv

  7. [16]

    Interim report for the International Muon Collider Collaboration (IMCC),

    Carlotta Accetturaet al.(International Muon Collider), “Interim report for the International Muon Collider Collaboration (IMCC),” CERN Yellow Rep. Monogr. 2/2024, 176 (2024), arXiv:2407.12450 [physics.acc-ph]

    2024

  8. [17]

    Neutrino physics at muon collid- ers,

    Bruce J. King, “Neutrino physics at muon collid- ers,” AIP Conf. Proc.441, 132–139 (1998), arXiv:hep- ex/9907035

    1998

  9. [18]

    The Neutrino Slice at Muon Colliders,

    Luc Bojorquez-Lopez, Matheus Hostert, Carlos A. Argüelles, and Zhen Liu, “The Neutrino Slice at Muon Colliders,” (2024), arXiv:2412.14115 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  10. [19]

    Electroweak Observables in Neutrino-Electron Scattering from a Muon Storage Ring,

    André de Gouvêa and Adrian Thompson, “Electroweak Observables in Neutrino-Electron Scattering from a Muon Storage Ring,” (2025), arXiv:2505.00152 [hep- ph]

    2025

  11. [20]

    Potential hazards from neutrino radia- tion at muon colliders,

    Bruce J. King, “Potential hazards from neutrino radia- tion at muon colliders,” (1999), arXiv:physics/9908017

    1999 arXiv

  12. [21]

    Submarine neutrino communication,

    Patrick Huber, “Submarine neutrino communication,” Phys. Lett. B692, 268–271 (2010), arXiv:0909.4554 [hep-ph]

    2010 arXiv

  13. [22]

    Destruction of nuclear bombs using ultrahigh- energy neutrino beam,

    Hirotaka Sugawara, Hiroyuki Hagura, and Toshiya Sanami, “Destruction of nuclear bombs using ultrahigh- energy neutrino beam,” (2003), arXiv:hep-ph/0305062

    2003 arXiv

  14. [23]

    Shadowing of ultrahigh-energy neutrinos,

    A. Nicolaidis and A. Taramopoulos, “Shadowing of ultrahigh-energy neutrinos,” Phys. Lett. B386, 211– 216 (1996), arXiv:hep-ph/9603382

    1996 arXiv

  15. [24]

    FromeVtoEeV:Neu- trino Cross Sections Across Energy Scales,

    J.A.FormaggioandG.P.Zeller,“FromeVtoEeV:Neu- trino Cross Sections Across Energy Scales,” Rev. Mod. Phys.84, 1307–1341 (2012), arXiv:1305.7513 [hep-ex]

    2012 arXiv

  16. [25]

    Prelimi- nary reference earth model,

    Adam M. Dziewonski and Don L. Anderson, “Prelimi- nary reference earth model,” Physics of the Earth and Planetary Interiors25, 297–356 (1981)

    1981

  17. [26]

    The Pacific Ocean Neutrino Experiment,

    Matteo Agostiniet al.(P-ONE), “The Pacific Ocean Neutrino Experiment,” Nature Astron.4, 913–915 (2020), arXiv:2005.09493 [astro-ph.HE]

    2020 arXiv

  18. [27]

    Letter of in- tent for KM3NeT 2.0,

    S. Adrian-Martinezet al.(KM3Net), “Letter of in- tent for KM3NeT 2.0,” J. Phys. G43, 084001 (2016), arXiv:1601.07459 [astro-ph.IM]

    2016 arXiv

  19. [28]

    Baikal-GVD: sta- tus and prospects,

    A. D. Avrorinet al.(Baikal-GVD), “Baikal-GVD: sta- tus and prospects,” EPJ Web Conf.191, 01006 (2018), arXiv:1808.10353 [astro-ph.IM]

    2018 arXiv

  20. [29]

    IceCube-Gen2: the window to the extreme Universe,

    M. G. Aartsenet al.(IceCube-Gen2), “IceCube-Gen2: the window to the extreme Universe,” J. Phys. G48, 060501 (2021), arXiv:2008.04323 [astro-ph.HE]

    2021

  21. [30]

    A multi-cubic-kilometre neutrino telescope in the western Pacific Ocean,

    Z. P. Yeet al.(TRIDENT), “A multi-cubic-kilometre neutrino telescope in the western Pacific Ocean,” Nature Astron.7, 1497–1505 (2023), arXiv:2207.04519 [astro- ph.HE]

    2023

  22. [31]

    A proposed deep sea Neutrino Observatory in the Nanhai,

    Huiming Zhang, Yudong Cui, Yunlei Huang, Sujie Lin, Yihan Liu, Zijian Qiu, Chengyu Shao, Yihan Shi, Caijin Xie, and Lili Yang, “A proposed deep sea Neutrino Observatory in the Nanhai,” (2024), arXiv:2408.05122 [astro-ph.HE]

    2024 arXiv

  23. [32]

    Proposal for the High Energy Neutrino Telescope,

    Tian-Qi Huang, Zhen Cao, Mingjun Chen, Jiali Liu, Zike Wang, Xiaohao You, and Ying Qi, “Proposal for the High Energy Neutrino Telescope,” PoSICRC2023, 1080 (2023)

    2023

  24. [33]

    Probing the LSND mass scale and four neutrino scenarios with a neutrino telescope,

    H. Nunokawa, O. L. G. Peres, and R. Zukanovich Fun- chal, “Probing the LSND mass scale and four neutrino scenarios with a neutrino telescope,” Phys. Lett. B562, 279–290 (2003), arXiv:hep-ph/0302039. 8

    2003 arXiv

  25. [34]

    Signature of sterile species in atmo- spheric neutrino data at neutrino telescopes,

    Sandhya Choubey, “Signature of sterile species in atmo- spheric neutrino data at neutrino telescopes,” JHEP12, 014 (2007), arXiv:0709.1937 [hep-ph]

    2007 arXiv

  26. [35]

    Non-standard interactions with high- energy atmospheric neutrinos at IceCube,

    Jordi Salvado, Olga Mena, Sergio Palomares-Ruiz, and Nuria Rius, “Non-standard interactions with high- energy atmospheric neutrinos at IceCube,” JHEP01, 141 (2017), arXiv:1609.03450 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  27. [36]

    Prob- ing the Planck scale with neutrino oscillations,

    Ram Brustein, David Eichler, and Stefano Foffa, “Prob- ing the Planck scale with neutrino oscillations,” Phys. Rev. D65, 105006 (2002), arXiv:hep-ph/0106309

    2002 arXiv

  28. [37]

    Lorentz and CPT violation in the neutrino sector,

    V. Alan Kostelecky and Matthew Mewes, “Lorentz and CPT violation in the neutrino sector,” Phys. Rev. D70, 031902 (2004), arXiv:hep-ph/0308300

    2004 arXiv

  29. [39]

    Hasnip,DUNE-PRISM - a new method to measure neutrino oscillations, Ph.D

    C. Hasnip,DUNE-PRISM - a new method to measure neutrino oscillations, Ph.D. thesis, Oxford University, Oxford U. (2023)

    2023

  30. [40]

    First design of a 10 TeV centre of mass energy muon collider,

    KyriacosSkoufaris, ChristianCarli, DanielSchulte, and Pantaleo Raimondi, “First design of a 10 TeV centre of mass energy muon collider,” JACoWIP AC2023, MOPL064 (2023)

    2023

  31. [41]

    Introduction to Transverse Beam Dy- namics,

    B. J. Holzer, “Introduction to Transverse Beam Dy- namics,” inCERN Accelerator School: Course on Superconductivity for Accelerators(2013) pp. 27–45, arXiv:1404.0923 [physics.acc-ph]

    2013 arXiv

  32. [42]

    Our proposal is quite different in that it benefits from the higher inten- sities, energies, and collimation of the neutrino flux from a muon collider

    The ORCA detector of the KM3NeT experiment has previously been considered as a far detector option in a low-energy neutrino beamline [100]. Our proposal is quite different in that it benefits from the higher inten- sities, energies, and collimation of the neutrino flux from a ...

  33. [43]

    Methods and stability tests associated with the sterile neutrino search using improved high-energyνµevent reconstruction in IceCube,

    R. Abbasiet al.((IceCube Collaboration)∥, IceCube), “Methods and stability tests associated with the sterile neutrino search using improved high-energyνµevent reconstruction in IceCube,” Phys. Rev. D110, 092009 (2024), arXiv:2405.08077 [hep-ex]

    2024

  34. [44]

    Observation of high- energy neutrinos from the Galactic plane,

    R. Abbasiet al.(IceCube), “Observation of high- energy neutrinos from the Galactic plane,” Science380, adc9818 (2023), arXiv:2307.04427 [astro-ph.HE]

    2023

  35. [45]

    Muon track reconstruc- tion and data selection techniques in AMANDA,

    J. Ahrenset al.(AMANDA), “Muon track reconstruc- tion and data selection techniques in AMANDA,” Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A524, 169–194 (2004), arXiv:astro- ph/0407044

    2004

  36. [46]

    An improved method for measuring muon energy using the truncated mean of dE/dx,

    R. Abbasiet al.(IceCube), “An improved method for measuring muon energy using the truncated mean of dE/dx,” Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A703, 190–198 (2013), arXiv:1208.3430 [physics.data-an]

    2013 arXiv

  37. [47]

    A Convolutional Neural Net- work based Cascade Reconstruction for the IceCube Neutrino Observatory,

    R. Abbasiet al., “A Convolutional Neural Net- work based Cascade Reconstruction for the IceCube Neutrino Observatory,” JINST16, P07041 (2021), arXiv:2101.11589 [hep-ex]

    2021

  38. [48]

    Neutrino Oscillations in Matter,

    L. Wolfenstein, “Neutrino Oscillations in Matter,” Phys. Rev. D17, 2369–2374 (1978)

    1978

  39. [49]

    Resonance Am- plification of Oscillations in Matter and Spectroscopy of Solar Neutrinos,

    S. P. Mikheyev and A. Yu. Smirnov, “Resonance Am- plification of Oscillations in Matter and Spectroscopy of Solar Neutrinos,” Sov. J. Nucl. Phys.42, 913–917 (1985)

    1985

  40. [50]

    Nonadiabatic Level Crossing in Res- onantNeutrinoOscillations,

    Stephen J. Parke, “Nonadiabatic Level Crossing in Res- onantNeutrinoOscillations,” Phys.Rev.Lett.57,1275– 1278 (1986), arXiv:2212.06978 [hep-ph]

    1986 arXiv

  41. [51]

    Ana- lytical calculations of four neutrino oscillations in mat- ter,

    Yuki Kamo, Satoshi Yajima, Yoji Higasida, Shin-Ichiro Kubota, Shoshi Tokuo, and Jun-Ichi Ichihara, “Ana- lytical calculations of four neutrino oscillations in mat- ter,” Eur. Phys. J. C28, 211–221 (2003), arXiv:hep- ph/0209097

    2003

  42. [52]

    Double cascade reconstruction in KM3NeT/ARCA,

    ThijsvanEedenandAartHeijboer(KM3NeT),“Double cascade reconstruction in KM3NeT/ARCA,” JINST16, C09021 (2021), arXiv:2205.03613 [astro-ph.IM]

    2021 arXiv

  43. [53]

    Search for sterile neutri- nos in MINOS and MINOS+ using a two-detector fit,

    P. Adamsonet al.(MINOS+), “Search for sterile neutri- nos in MINOS and MINOS+ using a two-detector fit,” Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 091803 (2019), arXiv:1710.06488 [hep-ex]

    2019 arXiv

  44. [54]

    A Proposal for a Three Detector Short- Baseline Neutrino Oscillation Program in the Fermi- lab Booster Neutrino Beam,

    R. Acciarriet al.(MicroBooNE, LAr1-ND, ICARUS- WA104), “A Proposal for a Three Detector Short- Baseline Neutrino Oscillation Program in the Fermi- lab Booster Neutrino Beam,” (2015), arXiv:1503.01520 [physics.ins-det]

    2015

  45. [55]

    Dual-Baseline Search for Active-to-Sterile Neutrino Oscillations in NOvA,

    M. A. Aceroet al.(NOvA), “Dual-Baseline Search for Active-to-Sterile Neutrino Oscillations in NOvA,” Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 081804 (2025), arXiv:2409.04553 [hep- ex]

    2025 arXiv

  46. [56]

    NuSTEC White Pa- per: Status and challenges of neutrino–nucleus scat- tering,

    L. Alvarez-Rusoet al.(NuSTEC), “NuSTEC White Pa- per: Status and challenges of neutrino–nucleus scat- tering,” Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.100, 1–68 (2018), arXiv:1706.03621 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  47. [57]

    Improved short-baseline neutrino oscillation search and energy spectrum measurement with the PROSPECT exper- iment at HFIR,

    M. Andriamiradoet al.(PROSPECT), “Improved short-baseline neutrino oscillation search and energy spectrum measurement with the PROSPECT exper- iment at HFIR,” Phys. Rev. D103, 032001 (2021), arXiv:2006.11210 [hep-ex]

    2021 arXiv

  48. [58]

    Physics Opportunities with PROSPECT-II,

    M. Andriamiradoet al., “Physics Opportunities with PROSPECT-II,” inSnowmass 2021(2022) arXiv:2202.12343 [hep-ex]

    2022 arXiv

  49. [59]

    STEREO neutrino spec- trum of 235U fission rejects sterile neutrino hypothesis,

    H. Almazánet al.(STEREO), “STEREO neutrino spec- trum of 235U fission rejects sterile neutrino hypothesis,” Nature613, 257–261 (2023), arXiv:2210.07664 [hep-ex]

    2023 arXiv

  50. [60]

    Search for a Sub-eV Sterile Neutrino using Daya Bay’s Full Dataset,

    F. P. Anet al.(Daya Bay), “Search for a Sub-eV Sterile Neutrino using Daya Bay’s Full Dataset,” Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 051801 (2024), arXiv:2404.01687 [hep-ex]

    2024

  51. [61]

    Search for electron-neutrino tran- sitions to sterile states in the BEST experiment,

    V. V. Barinovet al., “Search for electron-neutrino tran- sitions to sterile states in the BEST experiment,” Phys. Rev. C105, 065502 (2022), arXiv:2201.07364 [nucl-ex]

    2022 arXiv

  52. [62]

    The Unpredictability of Quantum Gravity,

    S. W. Hawking, “The Unpredictability of Quantum Gravity,” Commun. Math. Phys.87, 395–415 (1982)

    1982

  53. [63]

    Spontaneous Breaking of Lorentz Symmetry in String Theory,

    V. Alan Kostelecky and Stuart Samuel, “Spontaneous Breaking of Lorentz Symmetry in String Theory,” Phys. Rev. D39, 683 (1989)

    1989

  54. [64]

    Quantum gravity phenomenology at the dawn of the multi-messenger era—A review,

    A. Addaziet al., “Quantum gravity phenomenology at the dawn of the multi-messenger era—A review,” Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.125, 103948 (2022), arXiv:2111.05659 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  55. [65]

    Lorentz violat- ing extension of the standard model,

    Don Colladay and V. Alan Kostelecky, “Lorentz violat- ing extension of the standard model,” Phys. Rev. D58, 116002 (1998), arXiv:hep-ph/9809521

    1998 arXiv

  56. [66]

    Data Tables for Lorentz and CPT Violation,

    V. Alan Kostelecky and Neil Russell, “Data Tables for Lorentz and CPT Violation,” Rev. Mod. Phys.83, 11– 31 (2011), arXiv:0801.0287 [hep-ph]

    2011

  57. [67]

    On Lorentz vio- lation in Horava-Lifshitz type theories,

    Maxim Pospelov and Yanwen Shang, “On Lorentz vio- lation in Horava-Lifshitz type theories,” Phys. Rev. D 85, 105001 (2012), arXiv:1010.5249 [hep-th]

    2012 arXiv

  58. [68]

    High- energy tests of Lorentz invariance,

    Sidney R. Coleman and Sheldon L. Glashow, “High- energy tests of Lorentz invariance,” Phys. Rev. D59, 116008 (1999), arXiv:hep-ph/9812418

    1999 arXiv

  59. [69]

    Lorentz and CPT violation in neutrinos,

    V. Alan Kostelecky and Matthew Mewes, “Lorentz and CPT violation in neutrinos,” Phys. Rev. D69, 016005 (2004), arXiv:hep-ph/0309025. 9

    2004 arXiv

  60. [70]

    Lorentz vio- lation and short-baseline neutrino experiments,

    V. Alan Kostelecky and Matthew Mewes, “Lorentz vio- lation and short-baseline neutrino experiments,” Phys. Rev. D70, 076002 (2004), arXiv:hep-ph/0406255

    2004 arXiv

  61. [71]

    Search for a Lorentz- violating sidereal signal with atmospheric neutri- nos in IceCube,

    R. Abbasiet al.(IceCube), “Search for a Lorentz- violating sidereal signal with atmospheric neutri- nos in IceCube,” Phys. Rev. D82, 112003 (2010), arXiv:1010.4096 [astro-ph.HE]

    2010 arXiv

  62. [72]

    Neutrino Interfer- ometry for High-Precision Tests of Lorentz Symme- try with IceCube,

    M. G. Aartsenet al.(IceCube), “Neutrino Interfer- ometry for High-Precision Tests of Lorentz Symme- try with IceCube,” Nature Phys.14, 961–966 (2018), arXiv:1709.03434 [hep-ex]

    2018 arXiv

  63. [73]

    thesis, Harvard U

    Barbara Julia Skrzypek,The Case of the Missing Neutrino: Astrophysical Messengers of Planck-Scale Physics, Ph.D. thesis, Harvard U. (main) (2024)

    2024

  64. [74]

    Search for quantum grav- ity using astrophysical neutrino flavour with IceCube,

    R. Abbasiet al.(IceCube), “Search for quantum grav- ity using astrophysical neutrino flavour with IceCube,” Nature Phys.18, 1287–1292 (2022), arXiv:2111.04654 [hep-ex]

    2022

  65. [75]

    CPT violation and the standard model,

    Don Colladay and V. Alan Kostelecky, “CPT violation and the standard model,” Phys. Rev. D55, 6760–6774 (1997), arXiv:hep-ph/9703464

    1997 arXiv

  66. [76]

    Testing Lorentz Invari- ance and CPT Conservation with NuMI Neutrinos in the MINOS Near Detector,

    P. Adamsonet al.(MINOS), “Testing Lorentz Invari- ance and CPT Conservation with NuMI Neutrinos in the MINOS Near Detector,” Phys. Rev. Lett.101, 151601 (2008), arXiv:0806.4945 [hep-ex]

    2008 arXiv

  67. [77]

    A Search for Lorentz Invariance and CPT Violation with the MINOS Far Detector,

    P. Adamsonet al.(MINOS), “A Search for Lorentz Invariance and CPT Violation with the MINOS Far Detector,” Phys. Rev. Lett.105, 151601 (2010), arXiv:1007.2791 [hep-ex]

    2010 arXiv

  68. [78]

    Tests of Lorentz viola- tion in anti-nu(mu) —>anti-nu(e) oscillations,

    L. B. Auerbachet al.(LSND), “Tests of Lorentz viola- tion in anti-nu(mu) —>anti-nu(e) oscillations,” Phys. Rev. D72, 076004 (2005), arXiv:hep-ex/0506067

    2005 arXiv

  69. [79]

    Test of Lorentz and CPT violation with Short Baseline Neu- trino Oscillation Excesses,

    A. A. Aguilar-Arevaloet al.(MiniBooNE), “Test of Lorentz and CPT violation with Short Baseline Neu- trino Oscillation Excesses,” Phys. Lett. B718, 1303– 1308 (2013), arXiv:1109.3480 [hep-ex]

    2013 arXiv

  70. [80]

    Detection of astrophysical tau neutrino candidates in IceCube,

    R. Abbasiet al.(IceCube), “Detection of astrophysical tau neutrino candidates in IceCube,” Eur. Phys. J. C 82, 1031 (2022), arXiv:2011.03561 [hep-ex]

    2022

  71. [81]

    Echo Technique to Distinguish Flavors of As- trophysical Neutrinos,

    Shirley Weishi Li, Mauricio Bustamante, and John F. Beacom, “Echo Technique to Distinguish Flavors of As- trophysical Neutrinos,” Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 151101 (2019), arXiv:1606.06290 [astro-ph.HE]

    2019 arXiv

  72. [82]

    Supersymmetry and Lorentz violation,

    M. S. Berger and V. Alan Kostelecky, “Supersymmetry and Lorentz violation,” Phys. Rev. D65, 091701 (2002), arXiv:hep-th/0112243

    2002 arXiv

  73. [83]

    Lorentz violating supersymmetric quantum electrodynamics,

    PavelA.Bolokhov, StefanGrootNibbelink, andMaxim Pospelov, “Lorentz violating supersymmetric quantum electrodynamics,” Phys. Rev. D72, 015013 (2005), arXiv:hep-ph/0505029

    2005 arXiv

  74. [84]

    Noncommu- tative field theory and Lorentz violation,

    Sean M. Carroll, Jeffrey A. Harvey, V. Alan Kostelecky, Charles D. Lane, and Takemi Okamoto, “Noncommu- tative field theory and Lorentz violation,” Phys. Rev. Lett.87, 141601 (2001), arXiv:hep-th/0105082

    2001 arXiv

  75. [85]

    Neutrinos with Lorentz-violating operators of arbitrary dimension,

    Alan Kostelecky and Matthew Mewes, “Neutrinos with Lorentz-violating operators of arbitrary dimension,” Phys. Rev. D85, 096005 (2012), arXiv:1112.6395 [hep- ph]

    2012 arXiv

  76. [86]

    Status of non-standard neutrino interactions,

    Tommy Ohlsson, “Status of non-standard neutrino interactions,” Rept. Prog. Phys.76, 044201 (2013), arXiv:1209.2710 [hep-ph]. [87]Neutrino Non-Standard Interactions: A Status Report, Vol. 2 (2019) arXiv:1907.00991 [hep-ph]

    2013 arXiv

  77. [88]

    Neutrino oscillations and Non-Standard Interactions,

    Y. Farzan and M. Tortola, “Neutrino oscillations and Non-Standard Interactions,” Front. in Phys.6, 10 (2018), arXiv:1710.09360 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  78. [89]

    Non-standard neutrino interactions at DUNE,

    André de Gouvêa and Kevin J. Kelly, “Non-standard neutrino interactions at DUNE,” Nucl. Phys. B908, 318–335 (2016), arXiv:1511.05562 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  79. [90]

    Non-Standard Interactions in Radia- tive Neutrino Mass Models,

    K. S. Babu, P. S. Bhupal Dev, Sudip Jana, and Anil Thapa, “Non-Standard Interactions in Radia- tive Neutrino Mass Models,” JHEP03, 006 (2020), arXiv:1907.09498 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  80. [91]

    A Theory of Lepton Number Violation, Neu- trino Majorana Mass, and Oscillation,

    A. Zee, “A Theory of Lepton Number Violation, Neu- trino Majorana Mass, and Oscillation,” Phys. Lett. B 93, 389 (1980), [Erratum: Phys.Lett.B 95, 461 (1980)]

    1980

  81. [92]

    Dimuons in neu- trino telescopes: New predictions and first search in IceCube,

    Bei Zhou and John F. Beacom, “Dimuons in neu- trino telescopes: New predictions and first search in IceCube,” Phys. Rev. D105, 093005 (2022), arXiv:2110.02974 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  82. [93]

    Cross sections and inelasticity distribu- tions of high-energy neutrino deep inelastic scattering,

    Philip L. R. Weigel, Janet M. Conrad, and Alfonso Garcia-Soto, “Cross sections and inelasticity distribu- tions of high-energy neutrino deep inelastic scattering,” Phys. Rev. D111, 043044 (2025), arXiv:2408.05866 [hep-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  83. [94]

    Charm physics with neutrinos,

    Giovanni De Lellis, Pasquale Migliozzi, and Pietro San- torelli, “Charm physics with neutrinos,” Phys. Rept. 399, 227–320 (2004), [Erratum: Phys.Rept. 411, 323– 324 (2005)]

    2004

  84. [95]

    Neutrino-nucleus cross sections for W-boson and trident production,

    Bei Zhou and John F. Beacom, “Neutrino-nucleus cross sections for W-boson and trident production,” Phys. Rev. D101, 036011 (2020), arXiv:1910.08090 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  85. [96]

    W-boson and trident production in TeV–PeV neutrino observatories,

    Bei Zhou and John F. Beacom, “W-boson and trident production in TeV–PeV neutrino observatories,” Phys. Rev. D101, 036010 (2020), arXiv:1910.10720 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  86. [97]

    The LHC as a Neutrino-Ion Collider,

    Juan M. Cruz-Martinez, Max Fieg, Tommaso Giani, Pe- ter Krack, Toni Mäkelä, Tanjona R. Rabemananjara, and Juan Rojo, “The LHC as a Neutrino-Ion Collider,” Eur. Phys. J. C84, 369 (2024), arXiv:2309.09581 [hep- ph]

    2024 arXiv

  87. [98]

    Neutrino Trident Produc- tion: A Powerful Probe of New Physics with Neu- trino Beams,

    Wolfgang Altmannshofer, Stefania Gori, Maxim Pospelov, and Itay Yavin, “Neutrino Trident Produc- tion: A Powerful Probe of New Physics with Neu- trino Beams,” Phys. Rev. Lett.113, 091801 (2014), arXiv:1406.2332 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  88. [99]

    The high energy neutrino cross-section in the Standard Model and its uncertainty,

    Amanda Cooper-Sarkar, Philipp Mertsch, and Subir Sarkar, “The high energy neutrino cross-section in the Standard Model and its uncertainty,” JHEP08, 042 (2011), arXiv:1106.3723 [hep-ph]

    2011 arXiv

  89. [100]

    Study of light sterile neutrino at the long-baseline experiment options at KM3NeT,

    Dinesh Kumar Singha, Monojit Ghosh, Rudra Majhi, and Rukmani Mohanta, “Study of light sterile neutrino at the long-baseline experiment options at KM3NeT,” Phys. Rev. D107, 075039 (2023), arXiv:2211.01816 [hep-ph]. Supplemental Methods and Tables – S1 Appendix A: More details o...

    2023 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.