Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 27 references

Electron-coupled neutrino interactions beyond the Standard Model change the primordial helium and deuterium yields, and this paper provides the first full BBN calculation of that change.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-02 20:07 UTC pith:CRZBCTGO

load-bearing objection Solid first BBN calculation for electron NSI; the D/H complementarity claim is plausible but not isolated from Neff-driven effects, and the modified BBN code isn't released. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2602.23915 v2 pith:CRZBCTGO submitted 2026-02-27 hep-ph astro-ph.CO

Impact of non-standard neutrino-electron interactions on Big Bang Nucleosynthesis

Julien Froustey , Stefano Gariazzo , Jaume Moncho , Sergio Pastor , Ofelia Pisanti This is my paper
classification hep-ph astro-ph.CO PACS 98.80.Ft14.60.Lm
keywords neutrino non-standard interactionsBig Bang nucleosynthesishelium-4 mass fractiondeuterium abundanceNeffneutrino decouplingprimordial abundancescosmology
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper sets out to show that non-standard neutrino interactions with electrons—quantified by dimensionless couplings ε—leave a measurable imprint on the light-element yields of Big Bang Nucleosynthesis, even though they do not directly alter the neutron–proton weak rates. A sympathetic reader should care because BBN offers a probe of neutrino physics at MeV temperatures and early cosmic times, complementary to laboratory experiments. The central results are that the primordial helium mass fraction Yp closely tracks the effective number of relativistic species Neff, while the deuterium-to-hydrogen ratio is governed by the modified thermal history caused by prolonged neutrino–plasma coupling. On this basis, the paper extracts one-at-a-time cosmological bounds on the NSI parameters and shows they are weaker than, but complementary to, terrestrial constraints.

Core claim

For the first time, the paper computes how neutral-current NSI between neutrinos and electrons affect Big Bang Nucleosynthesis, focusing on Yp and the deuterium-to-hydrogen ratio. It finds that Yp behaves nearly identically to Neff as a function of the NSI parameters, with minima where the new couplings cancel the Standard Model couplings, because helium production is set mainly by the expansion rate. In contrast, deuterium responds chiefly to the modified time–temperature relation induced by the longer-lived neutrino–electron coupling, so its abundance moves opposite to the Neff-driven expectation. The resulting cosmological 1σ constraints on each ε are less stringent than current experimen

What carries the argument

The central object is the NSI-modified coupling structure inserted into the neutrino collision integrals: diagonal electron couplings are shifted as g_L + ε_αα and g_R + ε_αα, off-diagonal couplings enter through sums of |ε_αβ|², and the matter potential for oscillations picks up vector NSI corrections. These substitutions turn the dimensionless NSI parameters into altered interaction rates, which a density-matrix Boltzmann evolution converts into distorted neutrino momentum spectra. Those distorted spectra then set both the expansion history and the weak rates that control the neutron-to-proton ratio, and they are fed into a nuclear-network calculation to obtain the final light-element abun

Load-bearing premise

Everything rests on the assumption that the full effect of NSI is captured by the real-coupling substitutions in Eqs. (10)–(12), involving only neutral-current neutrino–electron interactions and no other operator structures.

What would settle it

If a laboratory experiment established a complex phase or an additional operator that changes the collision-integral structure, the predicted abundance curves would no longer apply; more directly, a precise future measurement of Yp and D/H at a known baryon density that falls outside every curve the paper computes for real ε would falsify the map.

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

If this is right

  • Helium-4 can be used as a nearly direct tracer of Neff in this NSI scenario, since its abundance is dominated by the expansion rate rather than by spectral details.
  • Deuterium is not a Neff tracer: it is governed by the altered thermal history, so measuring both Yp and D/H can break degeneracies between expansion and interaction effects.
  • The cosmological 1σ bounds derived for each ε are weaker than laboratory limits but are sensitive to neutrino interactions at MeV temperatures, adding a genuinely independent window.
  • Updates in the observationally inferred primordial deuterium abundance change the strength of the derived NSI constraints, so observational systematics directly affect the conclusions.
  • The two-parameter scans show elliptical and symmetric structures that can be used to anticipate how future joint measurements of Yp and D/H will shrink the allowed NSI parameter space.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The paper scans one or two parameters at a time; if all NSI parameters were varied and marginalized simultaneously, the cosmological allowed regions could be substantially wider, which would further weaken the comparison with terrestrial bounds.
  • If a UV completion introduces complex NSI phases or additional operator structures beyond the real couplings assumed in Eqs. (10)–(12), the computed abundance curves would shift, so the same numerical pipeline could be rerun to test those models.
  • The near-proportionality between Yp and Neff implies that any other new physics that changes Neff without distorting neutrino spectra would mimic the helium signature; deuterium is the observable that separates such scenarios.
  • The mapping established here could be calibrated so that a future precise CMB measurement of Neff directly translates into bounds on electron NSI, without recomputing the full BBN network each time.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies neutral-current non-standard interactions (NSI) of neutrinos with electrons during neutrino decoupling and Big Bang Nucleosynthesis (BBN). It uses the public code FortEPiaNO to compute neutrino spectra with NSI-modified collision integrals and feeds them into a modified version of PArthENoPE to predict the primordial helium mass fraction Yp and deuterium abundance D/H. The authors scan one NSI parameter at a time (with selected two-dimensional scans), fix η10 = 6.12, and compare their predictions with 1σ observational abundance bands and terrestrial 90% C.L. limits. The paper claims to provide, for the first time, a full BBN study of neutrino-electron NSI and argues that D/H offers a complementary probe because it is sensitive to the modified thermal history induced by prolonged neutrino–plasma coupling.

Significance. The computation is a genuinely useful numerical extension of Ref. [12] and the authors are to be credited for basing their pipeline on two public, previously validated codes and for explicitly reproducing Neff = 3.044 and the Neff results of Ref. [12]. The paper does not fit NSI to BBN data; it computes abundance curves and overlays observational bands, which is a legitimate way to display sensitivity. If the D/H mechanism were properly decomposed, the resulting map from electron-NSI parameters to Yp and D/H would provide a complementary cosmological probe. The presentation is generally clear, and the figures are informative. However, as detailed below, the central interpretative claim about D/H is not yet substantiated, and the quantitative bounds lack an uncertainty budget.

major comments (3)
  1. [§4, Figs. 3–5] The central claim that D/H is a complementary probe because it is 'particularly affected by the modified thermal evolution' is not supported by a controlled decomposition. NSI changes both (i) the Hubble rate through Neff and the associated T–time relation and (ii) the ν_e spectra entering the charged-current weak rates (15)–(17). The paper never separates these channels, e.g., by evolving BBN with standard Fermi–Dirac spectra but the modified expansion history, or vice versa. Fig. 3 shows D/H decreasing for both signs of the NSI parameters, including regions where Neff decreases (e.g., ε^L_ee near −g̃_L), so the statement that 'neutrinos remain coupled longer' cannot hold there. Without this separation, the attribution of D/H shifts to 'prolonged coupling' and the claimed complementarity are unsubstantiated.
  2. [§4, Table 2, Fig. 3] The quoted 1σ BBN constraints are read off central-value curves against observational bands with η10 fixed to 6.12. Nuclear-reaction uncertainties, the neutron-lifetime uncertainty, and PArthENoPE's theoretical error are not propagated. Since the abundance curves are steep in the interesting parameter regions, including a theory-error budget could materially broaden the allowed intervals. The paper should state the dominant theoretical uncertainty or show a conservative band before advertising these as cosmological bounds.
  3. [§3, Eqs. (10)–(13)] The implementation implicitly assumes real NSI couplings: only |ε_αβ|² appears in the collision terms and εV_αβ = ε^L_αβ + ε^R_αβ in the matter potential. For complex off-diagonal couplings, phases enter the forward-scattering potential in Eq. (6) but do not appear in the rates (10)–(12). The real one-parameter scans therefore cover only a slice of the parameter space. The reality assumption should be stated explicitly, and a test with, e.g., a complex phase for ε^L_eτ should be reported to assess the robustness of the off-diagonal bounds.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§4] The statement that 'in the presence of NSI neutrinos remain coupled longer' is too broad; near cancellation minima, e.g., ε^L_ee ≈ −g̃_L, the coupling is suppressed and decoupling occurs earlier. The wording should be qualified.
  2. [Table 2] The caption refers to the '2025 update of [24]', but Ref. [24] is the 2024 PDG review. Please cite the actual updated source or adjust the text.
  3. [Abstract / §1] The term 'full study' overstates the scope: the paper excludes muon-sector NSI and scans only real one-parameter (plus selected two-dimensional) directions. Please adjust the wording to match the actual parameter space treated.
  4. [Figs. 4–6 captions] The white-shaded regions are described as 90% C.L. experimental bounds obtained varying one parameter at a time, but they are shown in two-dimensional planes. Clarify that these are projections of one-dimensional limits, not two-dimensional exclusions.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: NSI parameters are scanned inputs, BBN abundances are computed outputs, and observational bands are applied after the calculation.

full rationale

The derivation chain is a forward calculation. The NSI parameters enter through the effective Lagrangian (Eq. 4) and modify the collision integrals via the coupling substitutions in Eqs. (10)-(12); these substitutions are derived from the Lagrangian structure, not fitted to BBN yields. Neutrino spectra are computed with FortEPiaNO and then fed into a modified PArthENoPE to obtain Yp and D/H (Sec. 4). The observational values in Table 2 act as comparison benchmarks, not as inputs to the computation; constraints are read off after the calculation. The statement that Yp tracks Neff is an output correlation, not a definition. The 'first time' claim is a novelty statement, not a circular derivation. The paper does rely on the authors' own public codes (FortEPiaNO, PArthENoPE) and on the earlier Neff study [12], but those are externally benchmarked and reproduce the standard Neff = 3.044, so they constitute reproducible tooling rather than load-bearing self-citation. The deuterium explanation in terms of modified thermal history is an interpretation of the numerical results, not a step that reduces to an input. No 'prediction' is equivalent by construction to a fitted parameter, and no imported uniqueness theorem forces the results.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper imports the full neutrino-decoupling and BBN machinery from prior work, much of it by the same group, and contributes scans over NSI parameters plus the spectral transfer into BBN. The main burden is the assumed operator structure of the NSI, the fixed baryon density, and the one-at-a-time scan design; no new particles or mediators are invented.

free parameters (2)
  • η10 (baryon-to-photon ratio) = 6.12
    Taken from the Planck best fit [7,24] and fixed, not marginalized; BBN yields are sensitive to it, so the quoted NSI constraints ignore baryon-density uncertainty.
  • NSI scan values ε^L,R_αβ = one-at-a-time ranges extending beyond lab bounds
    Not fitted to BBN data—they are the scanned model inputs—but chosen by hand, and the central maps depend on the assumed ranges and on the one-at-a-time restriction.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption Density-matrix Boltzmann equation Eq. (6) with collision integrals I(ϱ) from [5] correctly describes neutrino decoupling including flavour oscillations and NSI-modified scattering/annihilation.
    The whole Neff and spectral calculation imports the quantum-kinetic framework of [5,21]; no independent derivation is included beyond reproducing [12].
  • domain assumption Only neutral-current neutrino-electron NSI with real ε matter at MeV temperatures; NSI with muons, quarks, and charged-current-like operators are neglected.
    Lagrangian Eq. (4) and §2; muon-sector exclusion is justified by terrestrial bounds in §3, but this makes the abstract's 'full study' incomplete.
  • domain assumption Standard BBN nuclear network in PArthENoPE with adopted neutron lifetime and reaction rates is correct; no new physics enters nucleosynthesis besides modified neutrino inputs.
    §4; PArthENoPE references [25-27]. Yields depend on these inputs, and no theory error bars are shown.
  • domain assumption NSI effects propagate to BBN only through neutrino spectra; the direct charged-current weak rates in Eqs. (15)-(17) retain their Standard Model form.
    Reactions (15)-(17) are Standard Model charged-current processes; modified ν_e spectra change rates indirectly. If NSI also modified these vertices directly, the bounds would differ.
  • ad hoc to paper η10 is fixed to 6.12 and only one NSI parameter is varied at a time when deriving constraints.
    §4; this avoids marginalisation and ignores baryon-density uncertainty, making the derived constraints approximate and not directly comparable to global fits.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 11244 in / 15666 out tokens · 157276 ms · 2026-08-02T20:07:51.626583+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Neutrino non-standard interactions (NSI) with electrons, predicted in many extended theoretical models of particle physics, are known to alter the picture of neutrino decoupling from the cosmic plasma. We update previous analyses of neutrino decoupling in the presence of NSI with electrons, extending the parameter space in order to provide, for the first time, a full study of their effect on the production of light elements during Big Bang Nucleosynthesis (BBN). We compare the BBN bounds on non-universal and flavour-changing NSI parameters with the constraints from terrestrial experiments. Our results show that the limits from BBN are significantly less stringent than the experimental bounds, but they are complementary and can provide a test of neutrino physics at different temperature scales and epochs.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2602.23915 by Jaume Moncho, Julien Froustey, Ofelia Pisanti, Sergio Pastor, Stefano Gariazzo.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Values of Neff as a function of non-universal NSI parameters, ε L αα in the left panel and ε R αα in the right panel, for α = {e, τ}. The dashed line corresponds to the standard prediction Neff = 3.044, and the shaded region corresponds to ±0.02, which is the expected 1σ uncertainty from future cosmological observations [22]. The shaded vertical bands correspond to the 90% C.L. bounds shown in [PITH_FULL_… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Values of Neff as a function of two diagonal NSI parameters. Left panel: ε L ee - ε R ee; right panel: ε L ee - ε L ττ . White￾shaded regions correspond to the 90% C.L. experimental bounds obtained varying one parameter at a time ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Primordial abundances of helium-4 (mass fraction) and deuterium (number density normalised to hydrogen) as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Values of Yp when varying two diagonal NSI parameters simultaneously. Top left panel: ε L ee - ε R ee; top right panel: ε L ττ - ε R ττ ; bottom left panel: ε L ee - ε L ττ ; bottom right panel: ε R ee - ε R ττ . White-shaded regions correspond to the 90% C.L. experimental bounds obtained varying one parameter at a time ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Same as Fig. 4, but for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Values of Yp (left panel) and 2H/H (right panel) for the simultaneous variation of the flavour-changing NSI parameters ε L eτ and ε R eτ . White-shaded regions correspond to the 90% C.L. experimental bounds obtained varying one parameter at a time ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_6.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

27 extracted references · 3 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    P. F. de Salas, et al., 2020 Global reassessment of the neutrino oscillation picture, JHEP 02 (2021) 071. arXiv:2006.11237,doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2021)071. 12

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  2. [2]

    Farzan, M

    Y. Farzan, M. Tórtola, Neutrino oscillations and Non-Standard Interactions, Front. in Phys. 6 (2018) 10.arXiv:1710.09360,doi:10.3389/fphy.2018.00010

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  3. [3]

    Akita, M

    K. Akita, M. Yamaguchi, A precision calculation of relic neutrino decoupling, JCAP 08 (2020) 012. arXiv:2005.07047,doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2020/08/012

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  4. [4]

    Froustey, C

    J. Froustey, C. Pitrou, M. C. Volpe, Neutrino decoupling including flavour oscillations and primordial nucleosynthesis, JCAP 12 (2020) 015.arXiv:2008.01074,doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2020/12/015

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  5. [5]

    J. J. Bennett, G. Buldgen, P. F. De Salas, M. Drewes, S. Gariazzo, S. Pastor, Y. Y. Y. Wong, Towards a precision calculation ofNeff in the Standard Model II: Neutrino decoupling in the presence of flavour oscillations and finite-temperature QED, JCAP 04 (2021) 073.arXiv:2012.02726,doi:10.1007/ JCAP04(2021)073

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  6. [6]

    Lesgourgues, G

    J. Lesgourgues, G. Mangano, G. Miele, S. Pastor, Neutrino Cosmology, Cambridge University Press, 2013.doi:10.1017/CBO9781139012874

    work page doi:10.1017/cbo9781139012874 2013

  7. [7]

    Aghanim, et al., Planck 2018 results

    N. Aghanim, et al., Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters, Astron. Astrophys. 641 (2020) A6.arXiv:1807.06209,doi:10.1051/0004-6361/201833910

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  8. [8]

    Berezhiani, A

    Z. Berezhiani, A. Rossi, Limits on the nonstandard interactions of neutrinos from e+ e- colliders, Phys. Lett. B 535 (2002) 207–218.arXiv:hep-ph/0111137,doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(02)01767-7

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  9. [9]

    Davidson, C

    S. Davidson, C. Peña Garay, N. Rius, A. Santamaria, Present and future bounds on nonstandard neutrino interactions, JHEP 03 (2003) 011.arXiv:hep-ph/0302093,doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2003/ 03/011

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  10. [10]

    Mangano, G

    G. Mangano, G. Miele, S. Pastor, T. Pinto, O. Pisanti, P. D. Serpico, Effects of non-standard neutrino- electron interactions on relic neutrino decoupling, Nucl. Phys. B 756 (2006) 100–116.arXiv:hep-ph/ 0607267,doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2006.09.002

    work page doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2006.09.002 2006

  11. [11]

    P. F. de Salas, S. Pastor, Relic neutrino decoupling with flavour oscillations revisited, JCAP 07 (2016) 051.arXiv:1606.06986,doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2016/07/051

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  12. [12]

    P. F. de Salas, S. Gariazzo, P. Martínez-Miravé, S. Pastor, M. Tórtola, Cosmological radiation density with non-standard neutrino-electron interactions, Phys. Lett. B 820 (2021) 136508.arXiv:2105.08168, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2021.136508

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  13. [13]

    Barenboim, S

    G. Barenboim, S. Gariazzo, A. Sánchez-Vargas, Big Bang Nucleosynthesis as a probe of non-standard neutrino interactions and non-unitary three-neutrino mixing, JCAP 08 (2025) 005.arXiv:2503.21998, doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2025/08/005

    arXiv 2025

  14. [14]

    Coloma, M

    P. Coloma, M. C. Gonzalez-Garcia, M. Maltoni, J. P. Pinheiro, S. Urrea, Global constraints on non- standard neutrino interactions with quarks and electrons, JHEP 08 (2023) 032.arXiv:2305.07698, doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2023)032

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  15. [15]

    Martínez-Miravé, Neutrino properties from the laboratory and the cosmos, Ph.D

    P. Martínez-Miravé, Neutrino properties from the laboratory and the cosmos, Ph.D. thesis, Valencia U. (2023).arXiv:2309.15446

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  16. [16]

    Bolaños, O

    A. Bolaños, O. G. Miranda, A. Palazzo, M. A. Tórtola, J. W. F. Valle, Probing non-standard neutrino- electron interactions with solar and reactor neutrinos, Phys. Rev. D 79 (2009) 113012.arXiv:0812. 4417,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.79.113012

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.79.113012 2009

  17. [17]

    Deniz, et al., Constraints on Non-Standard Neutrino Interactions and Unparticle Physics with Neutrino-Electron Scattering at the Kuo-Sheng Nuclear Power Reactor, Phys

    M. Deniz, et al., Constraints on Non-Standard Neutrino Interactions and Unparticle Physics with Neutrino-Electron Scattering at the Kuo-Sheng Nuclear Power Reactor, Phys. Rev. D 82 (2010) 033004. arXiv:1006.1947,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.82.033004. 13

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  18. [18]

    Coloma, M

    P. Coloma, M. C. Gonzalez-Garcia, M. Maltoni, J. P. Pinheiro, S. Urrea, Constraining new physics with Borexino Phase-II spectral data, JHEP 07 (2022) 138, [Erratum: JHEP 11 (2022) 138].arXiv: 2204.03011,doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2022)138

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  19. [19]

    Barranco, O

    J. Barranco, O. G. Miranda, C. A. Moura, J. W. F. Valle, Constraining non-standard neutrino-electron interactions, Phys. Rev. D 77 (2008) 093014.arXiv:0711.0698,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.77.093014

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  20. [20]

    S. K. Agarwalla, F. Lombardi, T. Takeuchi, Constraining Non-Standard Interactions of the Neutrino with Borexino, JHEP 12 (2012) 079.arXiv:1207.3492,doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2012)079

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  21. [21]

    Gariazzo, P

    S. Gariazzo, P. F. de Salas, S. Pastor, Thermalisation of sterile neutrinos in the early Universe in the 3+1 scheme with full mixing matrix, JCAP 07 (2019) 014.arXiv:1905.11290,doi:10.1088/ 1475-7516/2019/07/014

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  22. [22]

    Ade, et al., The Simons Observatory: Science goals and forecasts, JCAP 02 (2019) 056.arXiv: 1808.07445,doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2019/02/056

    P. Ade, et al., The Simons Observatory: Science goals and forecasts, JCAP 02 (2019) 056.arXiv: 1808.07445,doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2019/02/056

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  23. [23]

    B. D. Fields, K. A. Olive, T.-H. Yeh, C. Young, Big-Bang Nucleosynthesis after Planck, JCAP 03 (2020) 010, [Erratum: JCAP 11 (2020) E02].arXiv:1912.01132,doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2020/03/010

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  24. [24]

    Navas, et al., Review of particle physics, Phys

    S. Navas, et al., Review of particle physics, Phys. Rev. D 110 (2024) 030001.doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 110.030001

    doi:10.1103/physrevd 2024

  25. [25]

    Pisanti, A

    O. Pisanti, A. Cirillo, S. Esposito, F. Iocco, G. Mangano, G. Miele, P. D. Serpico, PArthENoPE: Public Algorithm Evaluating the Nucleosynthesis of Primordial Elements, Comput. Phys. Commun. 178 (2008) 956–971.arXiv:0705.0290,doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2008.02.015

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  26. [26]

    Consiglio, P

    R. Consiglio, P. F. de Salas, G. Mangano, G. Miele, S. Pastor, O. Pisanti, PArthENoPE reloaded, Comput. Phys. Commun. 233 (2018) 237–242.arXiv:1712.04378,doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2018.06.022

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  27. [27]

    271 (2022) 108205.arXiv:2103.05027,doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2021.108205

    S.Gariazzo, P.F.deSalas, O.Pisanti, R.Consiglio, PArthENoPErevolutions, Comput.Phys.Commun. 271 (2022) 108205.arXiv:2103.05027,doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2021.108205. 14

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022