Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 81 references

Widen the Resonance at Ultra-High Energies: Novel Probes of Neutrino Self-interactions in the High-Mass Regime

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-03 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read If the lightest neutrino is still relativistic today, the cosmic neutrino background can turn ultra-high-energy neutrinos into a probe of new neutrino self-interactions down to coupling g ≈ 10^-3.

desk verdict Conditional but well-executed: the GRAND sensitivity reach for MeV–GeV νSI mediators follows from a widening-resonance mechanism that depends on the lightest neutrino mass eigenstate being relativistic today. read the letter →

arxiv 2512.00165 v2 pith:CQ4WRQZX submitted 2025-11-28 hep-ph astro-ph.COastro-ph.HEhep-ex

Pedro A. N. Machado , Isaac R. Wang , Xun-Jie Xu , Bei Zhou This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-phastro-ph.COastro-ph.HEhep-ex
keywords neutrinoself-interactionsultra-high-energyneutrinoscosmicbackgroundresonantabsorptionGRANDcosmogenicproductionrelativisticBoltzmannequation
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

The paper argues that a relativistic component of the cosmic neutrino background—allowed by oscillation data and hinted by recent cosmological measurements—would broaden the resonant absorption of ultra-high-energy neutrinos by over an order of magnitude in energy. This 'widened resonance' makes the cosmic neutrino background partially opaque to ultra-high-energy neutrinos, creating a smooth spectral dip rather than a narrow line. By solving the Boltzmann equation with a new semi-analytic model of cosmogenic neutrino production, the authors project that the future GRAND radio detector could see this dip and thereby probe neutrino self-interactions with mediator masses from MeV to about 1 GeV and couplings down to g ~ 10^-3, improving on current bounds by up to two orders of magnitude in the tau-philic case.

What carries the argument

The key object is the widened-resonance absorption rate for a relativistic cosmic neutrino background, Γ_abs,i ≈ g² m_φ² T / (16π E²) exp(−m_φ²/4TE), which replaces the delta-function resonance of the non-relativistic case with a Gaussian-like dependence on incoming neutrino energy. This rate, together with the resonant collision terms of the Boltzmann equation (Γ⁻_ν, Γ⁺_ν, Γ⁺_φ, Γ⁻_φ), determines the spectral dip and regeneration features. A second piece of machinery is the semi-analytic framework for cosmogenic ultra-high-energy neutrino production based on a parameterization of the neutrino spectrum per proton-photon interaction, which produces fluxes consistent with full simulations with

What would settle it

A cosmological measurement that forces the sum of neutrino masses well above the minimum oscillation value—so no mass eigenstate is relativistic today—would remove the thermal spread of the cosmic neutrino background and suppress the widened absorption, invalidating the projected sensitivity. More directly, if GRAND's measured ultra-high-energy neutrino spectrum shows no broad absorption dip at the predicted energies for parameters within the claimed reach, the widened-resonance mechanism would be falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery claim is that the thermal momentum spread of a relativistic cosmic-neutrino-background species changes the s-channel resonant scattering νν → φ → νν from a narrow absorption feature into a wide one, with an absorption rate Γ_abs ∝ (g² m_φ² T / E²) exp(−m_φ²/4TE). This broadens the accessible ultra-high-energy neutrino energy range around E_peak ≈ m_φ²/(8T), so that absorption affects a large portion of the observable spectrum. The authors show, with a full Boltzmann treatment and a likelihood analysis for GRAND, that this widened absorption yields projected sensitivities to neutrino self-interaction mediator masses up to 1 GeV and couplings down to g ~ 10^-3, exceeding

Load-bearing premise

The lightest neutrino mass eigenstate is relativistic today, with mass below the cosmic neutrino background temperature of about 0.16 meV, so that a thermal, relativistic cosmic neutrino background actually exists to scatter off.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • GRAND, with ten years of exposure, could detect the widened spectral dip and probe neutrino self-interactions with mediator masses up to about 1 GeV and couplings down to g ~ 10^-3 in the tau-philic scenario, two orders of magnitude beyond the current Z-invisible bound.
  • In the flavor-universal coupling case, the projected sensitivity beats rare-meson-decay bounds by a few-fold for mediator masses above about 10 MeV.
  • The absorption appears as a smooth, broad dip rather than a narrow line, making the probe robust to energy-resolution limitations and giving it statistical power from the wide affected energy range.
  • The semi-analytic cosmogenic production framework reproduces full simulation results within theoretical uncertainties, making BSM studies of ultra-high-energy neutrinos computationally cheaper.
  • The widened-resonance mechanism is general: it applies whenever both initial-state neutrinos have continuum energy distributions (e.g., the diffuse supernova neutrino background), extending the reach beyond ultra-high-energy neutrinos.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If recent baryon-acoustic-oscillation measurements confirm that the neutrino mass sum is near the minimum allowed by oscillations, the relativistic-cosmic-neutrino-background assumption becomes the default, making the widened resonance the standard expectation for ultra-high-energy neutrino propagation rather than a special scenario.
  • The same mechanism should widen the resonance for TeV–PeV neutrinos scattering on a relativistic cosmic neutrino background, so high-statistics TeV–PeV neutrino telescopes may reach smaller couplings than estimates that assume a non-relativistic background.
  • The semi-analytic production framework could be used to reinterpret the recent KM3NeT ultra-high-energy event: if a large ultra-high-energy flux is confirmed, the absorption dip would be even more pronounced than under the cosmogenic-only assumption, strengthening the discovery potential of neutrino self-interactions.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. This paper proposes that ultra-high-energy (UHE) cosmogenic neutrinos propagating through a relativistic cosmic neutrino background (CNB) can be resonantly absorbed by neutrino self-interactions (νSI) via s-channel mediator production (νν→φ→νν), and that the thermal spread of the CNB broadens the absorption feature in Eν ('widened resonance'). The authors derive the resonant absorption rate, build a Boltzmann transport code with resonant collision terms, introduce a semi-analytic framework for cosmogenic UHE neutrino production, and perform a binned Poisson likelihood forecast for GRAND with ten years of exposure. Their central result (Fig. 5) is that GRAND can probe scalar mediators of mass ~MeV–GeV with couplings g down to ~1e-3, which for ντ-philic couplings improves on current Z-invisible/BBN/IceCube bounds by up to two orders of magnitude, and for universal couplings is competitive with rare-meson-decay bounds. The entire projection is explicitly conditional on the lightest neutrino mass eigenstate remaining relativistic today, m1 < T_CNB ≈ 0.16 meV.

Significance. The calculation is coherent and the result, if the conditional scenario is realized, is significant: it opens a high-mass νSI parameter region (mφ up to ~1 GeV) that existing UHE-neutrino studies with a non-relativistic CNB do not reach, and it provides a useful semi-analytic cosmogenic-flux framework that can simplify future phenomenological studies. The sensitivity curves in Fig. 5 are outputs of a forward calculation, not fitted to the signal, and the derivation of Eq. (7) from the thermal CNB distribution is internally reasonable. The main caveat is external: the reach relies on m1 < T_CNB, a condition that is allowed by oscillation data and hinted at by DESI but not established. The paper should therefore be judged as a conditional sensitivity forecast rather than an unconditional discovery claim.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 1 and Eq. (7)] The entire widened-resonance absorption rate assumes the lightest neutrino mass eigenstate is relativistic today, m1 < T_CNB ≈ 0.16 meV. The paper states this as a condition and cites DESI, but it does not quantify the current status. If m1 > T_CNB, the CNB target is effectively monochromatic, the resonance is narrow (as in Ref. [32]), and the red sensitivity curves in Fig. 5 do not follow. Since this is the load-bearing physical assumption, please (i) quantify the current constraint/allowed range of m1 from oscillation data and cosmology (e.g., Σm from DESI+Planck), (ii) discuss how plausible m1 < T_CNB is in concrete neutrino-mass models, and (iii) ideally show how the projected sensitivity degrades as m1/T_CNB increases. This is not an internal derivation error, but it is essential for assessing the reach claim in the abstract.
  2. [Sec. 5, Eq. (28)] The likelihood is written as χ²(m, Γ, Emax | g, mφ), but the text says 'We include the parameters λ and m to account for astrophysical uncertainties in N_st,k and marginalize them.' The parameter λ is never defined in or near Eq. (28), and m is used both as the source-evolution index in Eq. (20) and as a nuisance in this sentence. This makes the statistical procedure unreproducible and directly affects the reported red contours. Please define the full likelihood with all nuisance parameters, specify their ranges and priors, and explain exactly how they enter N_st,k.
  3. [Sec. 3, Fig. 2] The validation of the semi-analytic cosmogenic flux is only qualitative: the text states consistency with simulations 'within the theoretical uncertainty,' but no numerical residual or error metric is given. Since Eq. (28) uses absolute event counts N_st,k derived from this flux, a systematic mismatch could bias the sensitivity projection. Please provide a quantitative comparison (e.g., per-bin ratio or χ² between the semi-analytic flux and the CRPropa/Ref. [32] benchmark) and state whether this uncertainty is included in the marginalized astrophysical nuisance parameters.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Fig. 1 caption] The caption contains an apparent artifact '19931126' that should be removed.
  2. [Sec. 5, text after Eq. (28)] The sentence 'marginalize over m∈[-3,3], Γ∈[2.0,3.0], and Emax∈[10^2,10^5] around two benchmark points' is confusing: is the full range scanned, or are m fixed to 0/3 for the pessimistic/optimistic curves while Γ and Emax are marginalized? Please clarify the exact scanning procedure.
  3. [Sec. 2.1, Eq. (5)] The CP-violating phase δ_CP is used in Eq. (5) before its values are introduced at the end of the subsection. Define δ_CP and the mixing parameters before Eq. (5) for readability.
  4. [General] The paper would benefit from releasing the Boltzmann-solver code or providing a brief reproducibility note, since the numerical solution of 800 coupled ODEs is central to the results but not documented in detail.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No circular reduction: the same-author formula Eq. (7) is parameter-free and the GRAND reach is an output; the m1<T_CNB condition is a physical assumption, not a circular input.

full rationale

No circular step is present. The paper's central sensitivity (Fig. 5) is obtained by solving the Boltzmann equation (Eq. 11) with the absorption rate (Eq. 7) and collision terms (Eqs. 13-16) inherited from Ref. [1], which shares three authors with this work. This is the only prominent self-citation in the derivation chain, but it does not reduce to an input-output identification: Eq. (7) is stated to follow from integrating the narrow-width cross section (Eq. 6) over the thermal CNB distribution, and Ref. [1] is a parameter-free, falsifiable result, not fitted to the present GRAND projections. The source term uses the semi-analytic cosmogenic neutrino framework from the external Ref. [72] and is validated against CRPropa-type simulations [32]; the astrophysical source parameters m, Gamma, and E_max are marginalized as nuisances rather than tuned to the nuSI signal. The projected sensitivity curves are outputs of the pipeline, not fitted to the signal. The paper's reach is conditional on the lightest neutrino mass eigenstate being relativistic today (m1<T_CNB~0.16 meV), which is an unproven physical assumption and a correctness risk, but not a definitional or circular step. The score of 2 reflects only the presence of a load-bearing same-author citation [1], with no circular reduction of the central claim.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 8 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The projection rests on the relativistic-CNB premise plus a simplified cosmogenic flux model with three marginalized source parameters. The scalar mediator is not invented here; it is standard νSI model-building. No new particles or forces are introduced by this paper.

free parameters (4)
  • source evolution index m = marginalized over [-3,3] in likelihood
    Controls redshift evolution of cosmogenic sources, Eq. (20); marginalized so sensitivity is not a prediction for a specific source class.
  • UHECR spectral index Γ = marginalized over [2.0,3.0]
    Injected proton spectrum Eq. (22); benchmark 2.5; marginalized to absorb astrophysical uncertainty.
  • UHECR cutoff E_max^p = marginalized over [10^2,10^5] (EeV)
    Exponential cutoff in Eq. (22); benchmark 250 EeV; affects cosmogenic flux normalization and shape.
  • λ (unidentified likelihood nuisance) = marginalized (undefined)
    Mentioned in Sec. 5 as a parameter marginalized with m, but not present in Eq. (28) or defined; if it is a flux normalization it is a free parameter.
assumptions (8)
  • domain assumption A neutrino mass eigenstate with m1 < T_CNB ≈ 0.16 meV exists and is thermally distributed today.
    Secs. 1 and 2.2; required for the widened resonance, Eq. (7). Without it the CNB resonance is narrow as in Ref. [32].
  • domain assumption Resonant s-channel scattering νν→φ→νν dominates; non-resonant terms ∝ g^4 are negligible.
    Sec. 2.3; valid for g≲1e-3 but not stated quantitatively.
  • domain assumption Cosmogenic UHE neutrino production is dominated by photopion production on CMB; other processes are negligible.
    Sec. 3; based on Kelner-Aharonian Ψ fits [72] and standard GZK estimates.
  • domain assumption UHECRs are all protons; composition uncertainty is absorbed by source-evolution parameter m.
    Sec. 3; needed to use Eqs. (21)-(22).
  • domain assumption After production, oscillations generate a nearly flavor-independent neutrino flux.
    Sec. 3; required for applying Eq. (24) and the source term in all flavors.
  • domain assumption GRAND's direction-averaged effective area and 10-year exposure from Ref. [83] are accurate.
    Sec. 5 and Fig. 4; drives event rates in Eq. (27).
  • domain assumption ΛCDM expansion with H0=67.36, Ωm=0.315, ΩΛ=0.685.
    Eq. (12); standard PDG values; affects propagation redshift.
  • domain assumption Neutrinos are Majorana and the new mediator is a real scalar coupled as in Eq. (2).
    Defines the νSI model under study; not derived in this paper.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Widen the Resonance at Ultra-High Energies: Novel Probes of Neutrino Self-interactions in the High-Mass Regime." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CQ4WRQZX

@misc{pith2026251200165,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Widen the Resonance at Ultra-High Energies: Novel Probes of Neutrino Self-interactions in the High-Mass Regime},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CQ4WRQZX}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2512.00165}
}
abstract

Neutrino self-interaction beyond the Standard Model is well motivated by the nonzero masses of neutrinos, which are the only known particles guaranteed to have new physics. Cosmic messengers, especially neutrinos, play a central role in probing new physics, as they provide experimental conditions far beyond the reach of laboratories and serve as the link between laboratory fundamental-physics discoveries and their roles in the Universe, where many new physics motivations originate. In this work, we propose a novel probe of neutrino self-interactions through ultra-high-energy neutrinos scattering off the cosmic neutrino background when the lightest neutrino species remains relativistic today. This allows us to ``Widen the Resonance'' of such scattering. Meanwhile, we also provide a semi-analytic framework for cosmogenic UHE neutrino production, avoiding computationally intensive simulations and yielding results precise enough for BSM studies. The widened resonance enables future ultrahigh-energy neutrino telescopes, in particular GRAND, to probe mediator masses from MeV to GeV, reaching couplings down to $g \sim 10^{-3}$ -- up to two orders of magnitude beyond current bounds. Our results enhance the discovery potential of $\nu$SI in the high-mass regime, potentially offering crucial insights into the connections between the neutrino sector and dark sector.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2512.00165 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Mean-free-path estimate of the νSI strength relevant to UHE neutrino propagation. The black dashed lines are obtained using Eq. (10), and the blue region is obtained by further imposing a finite range of Eν. where fX with X ∈ {ν1, ν2, ν3, ϕ} denotes the phase space distribution of particle X, Γ ± ν and Γ ± ϕ are production and depletion rates of ν and ϕ via scattering or decay processes, and Sν is the astrophysical … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Neutrino energy spectrum without νSI calculated using our semi-analytic framework, which is consistent with the result from computationally intensive simulations [32, 77] within the theoretical uncertainty characterized by the difference between the two solid or dashed lines. We show the results for our benchmark cases, Γ = 2.5, Emax = 250 EeV, with m = 0 and 3 being optimistic and pessimistic scenarios, respectivel… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. UHE neutrino fluxes modified by νSI. The left and right panels assume flavor universal and ντ -philic couplings, respectively. The upper panels present the flux spectrum, whereas the lower panels show the ratio of the modified flux to the standard one with free propagation. a perfectly diagonal gij . We then include the effect of neutrino regeneration from ϕ decay. Since the decay rate into each flavor is the same, … view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Left: direction-averaged effective area of GRAND for UHE tau neutrino detection. Right: our calculated event rates of UHE neutrinos at GRAND with ten years of exposure. We also use two histograms to show our energy binning. To observe the EAS, GRAND aims to measure the…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: (Main result of the paper.) Our projected sensitivities on νSI from UHE neutrinos absorbed by relativistic CNB, i.e., under the “widening the resonance” scenario, along with results from previous works. Red solid (dashed) curves: our sensitivities using the GRAND UHE n…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

81 extracted references · 68 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Widen the Resonance: Probing a New Regime of Neutrino Self-Interactions with Astrophysical Neutrinos,

    I. R. Wang, X.-J. Xu, and B. Zhou, “Widen the Resonance: Probing a New Regime of Neutrino Self-Interactions with Astrophysical Neutrinos,”Phys. Rev. Lett.135(2025) 181002, arXiv:2501.07624 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2025

  2. [32]

    Cosmogenic neutrinos as probes of new physics,

    L. P. S. Leal, D. Naredo-Tuero, and R. Z. Funchal, “Cosmogenic neutrinos as probes of new physics,” JHEP08(2025) 057,arXiv:2504.10576 [hep-ph]. 17

    arXiv 2025

  3. [2]

    Neutrino puzzle: Anomalies, interactions, and cosmological tensions,

    C. D. Kreisch, F.-Y. Cyr-Racine, and O. Doré, “Neutrino puzzle: Anomalies, interactions, and cosmological tensions,”Phys. Rev. D101(2020) no. 12, 123505,arXiv:1902.00534 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv 2020

  4. [3]

    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.123(2019) no. 19, 191102, arXiv:1905.02727 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv 2019

  5. [4]

    Revisiting neutrino self-interaction constraints fromZ andτdecays,

    V. Brdar, M. Lindner, S. Vogl, and X.-J. Xu, “Revisiting neutrino self-interaction constraints fromZ andτdecays,”Phys. Rev. D101(2020) no. 11, 115001,arXiv:2003.05339 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2020

  6. [5]

    Neutrino Self-Interactions and Double Beta Decay,

    F. F. Deppisch, L. Graf, W. Rodejohann, and X.-J. Xu, “Neutrino Self-Interactions and Double Beta Decay,”Phys. Rev. D102(2020) no. 5, 051701,arXiv:2004.11919 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2020

  7. [6]

    Updated constraints on massive neutrino self-interactions from cosmology in light of theH0 tension,

    S. Roy Choudhury, S. Hannestad, and T. Tram, “Updated constraints on massive neutrino self-interactions from cosmology in light of theH0 tension,”JCAP03(2021) 084,arXiv:2012.07519 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv 2021

  8. [7]

    Massive neutrino self-interactions and inflation,

    S. Roy Choudhury, S. Hannestad, and T. Tram, “Massive neutrino self-interactions and inflation,” JCAP10(2022) 018,arXiv:2207.07142 [astro-ph.CO]

    arXiv 2022

Show all 81 references
  1. [8]

    Resonant neutrino self-interactions and the H0 tension,

    J. Venzor, G. Garcia-Arroyo, J. De-Santiago, and A. Pérez-Lorenzana, “Resonant neutrino self-interactions and the H0 tension,”Phys. Rev. D108(2023) no. 4, 043536,arXiv:2303.12792 [astro-ph.CO]

    2023

  2. [9]

    New effects of non-standard self-interactions of neutrinos in a supernova,

    A. Das, A. Dighe, and M. Sen, “New effects of non-standard self-interactions of neutrinos in a supernova,”JCAP05(2017) 051,arXiv:1705.00468 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  3. [10]

    Core-collapse supernovae stymie secret neutrino interactions,

    S. Shalgar, I. Tamborra, and M. Bustamante, “Core-collapse supernovae stymie secret neutrino interactions,”Phys. Rev. D103(2021) no. 12, 123008,arXiv:1912.09115 [astro-ph.HE]

    2021 arXiv

  4. [11]

    Toward Powerful Probes of Neutrino Self-Interactions in Supernovae,

    P.-W. Chang, I. Esteban, J. F. Beacom, T. A. Thompson, and C. M. Hirata, “Toward Powerful Probes of Neutrino Self-Interactions in Supernovae,”Phys. Rev. Lett.131(2023) no. 7, 071002, arXiv:2206.12426 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  5. [12]

    Large Neutrino Secret Interactions Have a Small Impact on Supernovae,

    D. F. G. Fiorillo, G. G. Raffelt, and E. Vitagliano, “Large Neutrino Secret Interactions Have a Small Impact on Supernovae,”Phys. Rev. Lett.132(2024) no. 2, 021002,arXiv:2307.15115 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  6. [13]

    Supernova emission of secretly interacting neutrino fluid: Theoretical foundations,

    D. F. G. Fiorillo, G. G. Raffelt, and E. Vitagliano, “Supernova emission of secretly interacting neutrino fluid: Theoretical foundations,”Phys. Rev. D109(2024) no. 2, 023017,arXiv:2307.15122 [hep-ph]. 16

    2024 arXiv

  7. [14]

    Shedding light on neutrino self-interactions with solar antineutrino searches,

    Q.-f. Wu and X.-J. Xu, “Shedding light on neutrino self-interactions with solar antineutrino searches,” JCAP02(2024) 037,arXiv:2308.15849 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  8. [15]

    Cosmic neutrino cascades from secret neutrino interactions,

    K. C. Y. Ng and J. F. Beacom, “Cosmic neutrino cascades from secret neutrino interactions,”Phys. Rev. D90(2014) no. 6, 065035,arXiv:1404.2288 [astro-ph.HE]. [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 90, 089904 (2014)]

    2014 arXiv

  9. [16]

    IceCube PeV–EeV neutrinos and secret interactions of neutrinos,

    K. Ioka and K. Murase, “IceCube PeV–EeV neutrinos and secret interactions of neutrinos,”PTEP2014 (2014) no. 6, 061E01,arXiv:1404.2279 [astro-ph.HE]

    2014 arXiv

  10. [17]

    Bounds on secret neutrino interactions from high-energy astrophysical neutrinos,

    M. Bustamante, C. Rosenstrøm, S. Shalgar, and I. Tamborra, “Bounds on secret neutrino interactions from high-energy astrophysical neutrinos,”Phys. Rev. D101(2020) no. 12, 123024,arXiv:2001.04994 [astro-ph.HE]

    2020 arXiv

  11. [18]

    Probing secret interactions of astrophysical neutrinos in the high-statistics era,

    I. Esteban, S. Pandey, V. Brdar, and J. F. Beacom, “Probing secret interactions of astrophysical neutrinos in the high-statistics era,”Phys. Rev. D104(2021) no. 12, 123014,arXiv:2107.13568 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  12. [19]

    Resonant neutrino self-interactions,

    C. Creque-Sarbinowski, J. Hyde, and M. Kamionkowski, “Resonant neutrino self-interactions,”Phys. Rev. D103(2021) no. 2, 023527,arXiv:2005.05332 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  13. [20]

    Neutrino secret self-interactions: A booster shot for the cosmic neutrino background,

    A. Das, Y. F. Perez-Gonzalez, and M. Sen, “Neutrino secret self-interactions: A booster shot for the cosmic neutrino background,”Phys. Rev. D106(2022) no. 9, 095042,arXiv:2204.11885 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  14. [21]

    Probing non-standard neutrino interactions with a light boson from next galactic and diffuse supernova neutrinos,

    K. Akita, S. H. Im, and M. Masud, “Probing non-standard neutrino interactions with a light boson from next galactic and diffuse supernova neutrinos,”JHEP12(2022) 050,arXiv:2206.06852 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  15. [22]

    Probing self-interacting sterile neutrino dark matter with the diffuse supernova neutrino background,

    A. B. Balantekin, G. M. Fuller, A. Ray, and A. M. Suliga, “Probing self-interacting sterile neutrino dark matter with the diffuse supernova neutrino background,”Phys. Rev. D108(2023) no. 12, 123011, arXiv:2310.07145 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  16. [23]

    Testing secret interaction with astrophysical neutrino point sources,

    C. Döring and S. Vogl, “Testing secret interaction with astrophysical neutrino point sources,”JCAP07 (2024) 015,arXiv:2304.08533 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  17. [24]

    Dirac neutrinos andNeff,

    X. Luo, W. Rodejohann, and X.-J. Xu, “Dirac neutrinos andNeff,”JCAP06(2020) 058, arXiv:2005.01629 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  18. [25]

    Observational Constraints on Secret Neutrino Interactions from Big Bang Nucleosynthesis,

    G.-y. Huang, T. Ohlsson, and S. Zhou, “Observational Constraints on Secret Neutrino Interactions from Big Bang Nucleosynthesis,”Phys. Rev. D97(2018) no. 7, 075009,arXiv:1712.04792 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  19. [26]

    Sterile neutrinos with secret interactions—cosmological discord?,

    X. Chu, B. Dasgupta, M. Dentler, J. Kopp, and N. Saviano, “Sterile neutrinos with secret interactions—cosmological discord?,”JCAP11(2018) 049,arXiv:1806.10629 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  20. [27]

    Consequences of neutrino self interactions for weak decoupling and big bang nucleosynthesis,

    E. Grohs, G. M. Fuller, and M. Sen, “Consequences of neutrino self interactions for weak decoupling and big bang nucleosynthesis,”JCAP07(2020) 001,arXiv:2002.08557 [astro-ph.CO]

    2020 arXiv

  21. [28]

    Nef fconstraints on light mediators coupled to neutrinos: the dilution-resistant effect,

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

    2023 arXiv

  22. [29]

    Imprints of light dark matter on the evolution of cosmic neutrinos,

    I. R. Wang and X.-J. Xu, “Imprints of light dark matter on the evolution of cosmic neutrinos,”JCAP 05(2024) 050,arXiv:2312.17151 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  23. [30]

    Probing Long-Range Forces Between Neutrinos with Cosmic Structures,

    D. E. Kaplan, X. Luo, and S. Rajendran, “Probing Long-Range Forces Between Neutrinos with Cosmic Structures,”arXiv:2412.20766 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  24. [31]

    Implications of the KM3NeT Ultrahigh-energy Event on Neutrino Self-interactions,

    Y. He, J. Liu, X.-P. Wang, and Y.-M. Zhong, “Implications of the KM3NeT Ultrahigh-energy Event on Neutrino Self-interactions,”arXiv:2504.20163 [hep-ph]

  25. [33]

    Self-interacting neutrinos in light of recent CMB and LSS data,

    A. Poudou, T. Simon, T. Montandon, E. M. Teixeira, and V. Poulin, “Self-interacting neutrinos in light of recent CMB and LSS data,”Phys. Rev. D112(2025) no. 10, 103535,arXiv:2503.10485 [astro-ph.CO]

    2025 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Neutrino self-interactions: A white paper,

    J. M. Berrymanet al., “Neutrino self-interactions: A white paper,”Phys. Dark Univ.42(2023) 101267, arXiv:2203.01955 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  27. [35]

    High-energy and ultra-high-energy neutrinos: A Snowmass white paper,

    M. Ackermannet al., “High-energy and ultra-high-energy neutrinos: A Snowmass white paper,”JHEAp 36(2022) 55–110,arXiv:2203.08096 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Large Neutrino

    Y. Bai, K. Xie, and B. Zhou, “Large Neutrino ”Collider”,”arXiv:2510.13948 [hep-ph]

  29. [37]

    Are There Real Goldstone Bosons Associated with Broken Lepton Number?,

    Y. Chikashige, R. N. Mohapatra, and R. D. Peccei, “Are There Real Goldstone Bosons Associated with Broken Lepton Number?,”Phys. Lett. B98(1981) 265–268

    1981

  30. [38]

    Left-Handed Neutrino Mass Scale and Spontaneously Broken Lepton Number,

    G. B. Gelmini and M. Roncadelli, “Left-Handed Neutrino Mass Scale and Spontaneously Broken Lepton Number,”Phys. Lett. B99(1981) 411–415

    1981

  31. [39]

    Neutrino as the Supersymmetric Partner of the Majoron,

    C. S. Aulakh and R. N. Mohapatra, “Neutrino as the Supersymmetric Partner of the Majoron,”Phys. Lett. B119(1982) 136–140

    1982

  32. [40]

    Simplest Z-prime model,

    X.-G. He, G. C. Joshi, H. Lew, and R. R. Volkas, “Simplest Z-prime model,”Phys. Rev. D44(1991) 2118–2132

    1991

  33. [41]

    Non-universal minimal Z’ models: present bounds and early LHC reach,

    E. Salvioni, A. Strumia, G. Villadoro, and F. Zwirner, “Non-universal minimal Z’ models: present bounds and early LHC reach,”JHEP03(2010) 010,arXiv:0911.1450 [hep-ph]

    2010 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Dark matter and U(1)’ symmetry for the right-handed neutrinos,

    M. Lindner, D. Schmidt, and A. Watanabe, “Dark matter and U(1)’ symmetry for the right-handed neutrinos,”Phys. Rev. D89(2014) no. 1, 013007,arXiv:1310.6582 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  35. [43]

    New Scotogenic Model of Neutrino Mass withU(1)D Gauge Interaction,

    E. Ma, I. Picek, and B. Radovčić, “New Scotogenic Model of Neutrino Mass withU(1)D Gauge Interaction,”Phys. Lett. B726(2013) 744–746,arXiv:1308.5313 [hep-ph]

    2013 arXiv

  36. [44]

    A Neutrinophilic 2HDM as a UV Completion for the Inverse Seesaw Mechanism,

    E. Bertuzzo, P. A. N. Machado, Z. Tabrizi, and R. Zukanovich Funchal, “A Neutrinophilic 2HDM as a UV Completion for the Inverse Seesaw Mechanism,”JHEP11(2017) 004,arXiv:1706.10000 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Flavor Gauge Models Below the Fermi Scale,

    K. S. Babu, A. Friedland, P. A. N. Machado, and I. Mocioiu, “Flavor Gauge Models Below the Fermi Scale,”JHEP12(2017) 096,arXiv:1705.01822 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  38. [46]

    The Hubble tension and a renormalizable model of gauged neutrino self-interactions,

    M. Berbig, S. Jana, and A. Trautner, “The Hubble tension and a renormalizable model of gauged neutrino self-interactions,”Phys. Rev. D102(2020) no. 11, 115008,arXiv:2004.13039 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Theν R-philic scalar: its loop-induced interactions and Yukawa forces in LIGO observations,

    X.-J. Xu, “Theν R-philic scalar: its loop-induced interactions and Yukawa forces in LIGO observations,” JHEP09(2020) 105,arXiv:2007.01893 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  40. [48]

    How dark is theνR-philic dark photon?,

    G. Chauhan and X.-J. Xu, “How dark is theνR-philic dark photon?,”JHEP04(2021) 003, arXiv:2012.09980 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Enabling Strong Neutrino Self-Interaction with an Unparticle Mediator,

    S. Foroughi-Abari, K. J. Kelly, M. Rai, and Y. Zhang, “Enabling Strong Neutrino Self-Interaction with an Unparticle Mediator,”Phys. Rev. Lett.134(2025) no. 18, 181001,arXiv:2501.02049 [hep-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Multimessenger Astronomy and New Neutrino Physics,

    K. J. Kelly and P. A. N. Machado, “Multimessenger Astronomy and New Neutrino Physics,”JCAP10 (2018) 048,arXiv:1808.02889 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Origin of sterile neutrino dark matter via secret neutrino interactions with vector bosons,

    K. J. Kelly, M. Sen, W. Tangarife, and Y. Zhang, “Origin of sterile neutrino dark matter via secret neutrino interactions with vector bosons,”Phys. Rev. D101(2020) no. 11, 115031,arXiv:2005.03681 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Model of ’Calculable’ Majorana Neutrino Masses,

    K. S. Babu, “Model of ’Calculable’ Majorana Neutrino Masses,”Phys. Lett. B203(1988) 132–136. 18

    1988

  45. [53]

    Flavour Matters in Leptogenesis,

    A. Abada, S. Davidson, A. Ibarra, F. X. Josse-Michaux, M. Losada, and A. Riotto, “Flavour Matters in Leptogenesis,”JHEP09(2006) 010,arXiv:hep-ph/0605281

    2006 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Looking for the minimal inverse seesaw realisation,

    A. Abada and M. Lucente, “Looking for the minimal inverse seesaw realisation,”Nucl. Phys. B885 (2014) 651–678,arXiv:1401.1507 [hep-ph]. [55]DESICollaboration, A. G. Adameet al., “DESI 2024 VI: cosmological constraints from the measurements of baryon acoustic oscillations,”JCAP...

    2014 arXiv

  47. [56]

    The Diffuse Supernova Neutrino Background,

    J. F. Beacom, “The Diffuse Supernova Neutrino Background,”Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.60(2010) 439–462,arXiv:1004.3311 [astro-ph.HE]

    2010 arXiv

  48. [57]

    The fate of hints: updated global analysis of three-flavor neutrino oscillations,

    I. Esteban, M. C. Gonzalez-Garcia, M. Maltoni, T. Schwetz, and A. Zhou, “The fate of hints: updated global analysis of three-flavor neutrino oscillations,”JHEP09(2020) 178,arXiv:2007.14792 [hep-ph]. [58]http://www.nu-fit.org/

    2020 arXiv

  49. [59]

    TASI Lectures on Resonances,

    T. M. P. Tait, “TASI Lectures on Resonances,” 2009. www.physics.uci.edu/~ttait/tait-TASI08.pdf. [60]Particle Data GroupCollaboration, S. Navaset al., “Review of particle physics,”Phys. Rev. D110 (2024) no. 3, 030001

    2009

  50. [61]

    Ultrahigh energy cosmic rays and neutrino flux models,

    M. S. Muzio, “Ultrahigh energy cosmic rays and neutrino flux models,”Eur. Phys. J. ST234(2025) no. 16, 4939–4949,arXiv:2502.11834 [astro-ph.HE]

    2025 arXiv

  51. [62]

    Choked Jets and Low-Luminosity Gamma-Ray Bursts as Hidden Neutrino Sources,

    N. Senno, K. Murase, and P. Meszaros, “Choked Jets and Low-Luminosity Gamma-Ray Bursts as Hidden Neutrino Sources,”Phys. Rev. D93(2016) no. 8, 083003,arXiv:1512.08513 [astro-ph.HE]

    2016 arXiv

  52. [63]

    High-energy neutrinos from choked-jet supernovae: Searches and implications,

    P.-W. Chang, B. Zhou, K. Murase, and M. Kamionkowski, “High-energy neutrinos from choked-jet supernovae: Searches and implications,”Phys. Rev. D109(2024) no. 10, 103041,arXiv:2210.03088 [astro-ph.HE]

    2024 arXiv

  53. [64]

    Clash of the Titans: ultra-high energy KM3NeT event versus IceCube data,

    S. W. Li, P. Machado, D. Naredo-Tuero, and T. Schwemberger, “Clash of the Titans: ultra-high energy KM3NeT event versus IceCube data,”arXiv:2502.04508 [astro-ph.HE]. [65]KM3NeTCollaboration, S. Aielloet al., “Observation of an ultra-high-energy cosmic neutrino with KM3NeT,”Nat...

    2025 arXiv

  54. [66]

    Cosmogenic Neutrinos Through the GRAND Lens Unveil the Nature of Cosmic Accelerators,

    K. Møller, P. B. Denton, and I. Tamborra, “Cosmogenic Neutrinos Through the GRAND Lens Unveil the Nature of Cosmic Accelerators,”JCAP05(2019) 047,arXiv:1809.04866 [astro-ph.HE]

    2019 arXiv

  55. [67]

    Revealing the High-Redshift Star Formation Rate with Gamma-Ray Bursts,

    H. Yuksel, M. D. Kistler, J. F. Beacom, and A. M. Hopkins, “Revealing the High-Redshift Star Formation Rate with Gamma-Ray Bursts,”Astrophys. J. Lett.683(2008) L5–L8,arXiv:0804.4008 [astro-ph]

    2008 arXiv

  56. [68]

    The Cosmic Evolution of Fermi BL Lacertae Objects,

    M. Ajelloet al., “The Cosmic Evolution of Fermi BL Lacertae Objects,”Astrophys. J.780(2014) 73, arXiv:1310.0006 [astro-ph.CO]

    2014 arXiv

  57. [69]

    A simplified view of blazars: the neutrino background,

    P. Padovani, M. Petropoulou, P. Giommi, and E. Resconi, “A simplified view of blazars: the neutrino background,”Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.452(2015) no. 2, 1877–1887,arXiv:1506.09135 [astro-ph.HE]

    2015 arXiv

  58. [70]

    Blazar flares powered by plasmoids in relativistic reconnection,

    M. Petropoulou, D. Giannios, and L. Sironi, “Blazar flares powered by plasmoids in relativistic reconnection,”Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.462(2016) no. 3, 3325–3343,arXiv:1606.07447 [astro-ph.HE]. 19

    2016 arXiv

  59. [71]

    Gamma-ray luminosity function of BL Lac objects and contribution to the extragalactic gamma-ray background,

    Y. Qu, H. Zeng, and D. Yan, “Gamma-ray luminosity function of BL Lac objects and contribution to the extragalactic gamma-ray background,”Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.490(2019) no. 1, 758–765, arXiv:1909.07542 [astro-ph.HE]

    2019 arXiv

  60. [72]

    Energy spectra of gamma-rays, electrons and neutrinos produced at interactions of relativistic protons with low energy radiation,

    S. R. Kelner and F. A. Aharonian, “Energy spectra of gamma-rays, electrons and neutrinos produced at interactions of relativistic protons with low energy radiation,”Phys. Rev. D78(2008) 034013, arXiv:0803.0688 [astro-ph]. [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 82, 099901 (2010)]

    2008 arXiv

  61. [73]

    Determining the fraction of cosmic-ray protons at ultrahigh energies with cosmogenic neutrinos,

    A. van Vliet, R. Alves Batista, and J. R. Hörandel, “Determining the fraction of cosmic-ray protons at ultrahigh energies with cosmogenic neutrinos,”Phys. Rev. D100(2019) no. 2, 021302, arXiv:1901.01899 [astro-ph.HE]

    2019 arXiv

  62. [74]

    Cosmic rays at ultrahigh-energies (neutrino?),

    V. S. Berezinsky and G. T. Zatsepin, “Cosmic rays at ultrahigh-energies (neutrino?),”Phys. Lett. B28 (1969) 423–424

    1969

  63. [75]

    Cosmogenic Neutrinos: parameter space and detectabilty from PeV to ZeV,

    K. Kotera, D. Allard, and A. V. Olinto, “Cosmogenic Neutrinos: parameter space and detectabilty from PeV to ZeV,”JCAP10(2010) 013,arXiv:1009.1382 [astro-ph.HE]

    2010 arXiv

  64. [76]

    Cosmogenic neutrinos and ultra-high energy cosmic ray models,

    R. Aloisio, D. Boncioli, A. di Matteo, A. F. Grillo, S. Petrera, and F. Salamida, “Cosmogenic neutrinos and ultra-high energy cosmic ray models,”JCAP10(2015) 006,arXiv:1505.04020 [astro-ph.HE]. [77]CRPropaCollaboration, R. Alves Batista, A. Dundovic, M. Erdmann, K.-H. Kampert,...

    2015 arXiv

  65. [78]

    Energy loss of high-energy cosmic rays in pair-producing collisions with ambient photons,

    G. R. Blumenthal, “Energy loss of high-energy cosmic rays in pair-producing collisions with ambient photons,”Phys. Rev. D1(1970) 1596–1602

    1970

  66. [79]

    A Bump in the ultrahigh-energy cosmic ray spectrum,

    V. S. Berezinsky and S. I. Grigor’eva, “A Bump in the ultrahigh-energy cosmic ray spectrum,”Astron. Astrophys.199(1988) 1–12. [80]Pierre AugerCollaboration, A. Aabet al., “Measurement of the cosmic-ray energy spectrum above 2.5×1018 eV using the Pierre Auger Observatory,”Phys....

    1988 arXiv

  67. [82]

    Secondary neutrino and gamma-ray fluxes from SimProp and CRPropa,

    R. Alves Batista, D. Boncioli, A. di Matteo, and A. van Vliet, “Secondary neutrino and gamma-ray fluxes from SimProp and CRPropa,”JCAP05(2019) 006,arXiv:1901.01244 [astro-ph.HE]. [83]GRANDCollaboration, J. Álvarez-Muñizet al., “The Giant Radio Array for Neutrino Detection (GRA...

    2019 arXiv

  68. [84]

    Neutrino photon reactions in astrophysics and cosmology,

    D. Seckel, “Neutrino photon reactions in astrophysics and cosmology,”Phys. Rev. Lett.80(1998) 900–903,arXiv:hep-ph/9709290

    1998 arXiv

  69. [85]

    Hidden Glashow resonance in neutrino–nucleus collisions,

    I. Alikhanov, “Hidden Glashow resonance in neutrino–nucleus collisions,”Phys. Lett. B756(2016) 247–253,arXiv:1503.08817 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  70. [86]

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

    B. Zhou and J. F. Beacom, “W-boson and trident production in TeV–PeV neutrino observatories,” Phys. Rev. D101(2020) no. 3, 036010,arXiv:1910.10720 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  71. [87]

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

    B. Zhou and J. F. Beacom, “Neutrino-nucleus cross sections for W-boson and trident production,” Phys. Rev. D101(2020) no. 3, 036011,arXiv:1910.08090 [hep-ph]. [88]CTEQ-TEACollaboration, K. Xie, B. Zhou, and T. J. Hobbs, “The photon content of the neutron,” JHEP04(2024) 022,arX...

    2020 arXiv

  72. [89]

    Final state radiation from high and ultrahigh energy neutrino interactions,

    R. Plestid and B. Zhou, “Final state radiation from high and ultrahigh energy neutrino interactions,” Phys. Rev. D111(2025) no. 4, 043007,arXiv:2403.07984 [hep-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  73. [90]

    Lepton-Number-Charged Scalars and Neutrino Beamstrahlung,

    J. M. Berryman, A. De Gouvêa, K. J. Kelly, and Y. Zhang, “Lepton-Number-Charged Scalars and Neutrino Beamstrahlung,”Phys. Rev. D97(2018) no. 7, 075030,arXiv:1802.00009 [hep-ph]. [91]IceCubeCollaboration, R. Abbasiet al., “The IceCube high-energy starting event sample: Descript...

    2018 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 3, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.