Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 131 references

Collective neutrino oscillations starting within ~10 km of the proto-neutron star surface can explain the solar abundances of key proton-rich nuclides like molybdenum, ruthenium, and niobium-92.

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

2026-08-01 23:29 UTC pith:IKJM4KW4

load-bearing objection A careful and genuinely new mapping of νp-process yields to the flavor-conversion radius, whose central claim is plausible but rests on an idealized equilibration prescription and a fitted radius. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.15392 v1 pith:IKJM4KW4 submitted 2026-07-16 hep-ph astro-ph.HEastro-ph.SRnucl-th

Solar-System Abundances of p-Nuclides Probe Collective Neutrino Oscillations in Supernovae

Alexander Friedland , Derek J. Li , Giuseppe Lucente , Payel Mukhopadhyay , Ian Padilla-Gay , Amol V. Patwardhan This is my paper
classification hep-ph astro-ph.HEastro-ph.SRnucl-th
keywords p-nuclidesνp-processcollective neutrino oscillationsfast collective oscillationscore-collapse supernovaeproto-neutron starnucleosynthesissolar abundances
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.

Collective neutrino oscillations in core-collapse supernovae have not yet been directly observed, but this paper claims they leave a specific fingerprint in the solar-system abundances of proton-rich nuclides. Using a 20-solar-mass supernova model and a self-consistent calculation of the neutrino-driven outflow, the authors show that without flavor mixing the νp-process underproduces 92,94Mo, 96,98Ru, and 92Nb by about an order of magnitude. If mixing begins within roughly 10 km of the proto-neutron star surface—modeled as complete instantaneous flavor equilibration—the yields jump by up to two orders of magnitude and match meteoritic values. The paper concludes that these p-nuclide abundances are a probe of the onset radius of collective oscillations, and that the required near-surface conversion points to the fast collective oscillation mechanism.

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that collective neutrino flavor conversion starting within ~10 km of the proto-neutron star surface—and only such 'near' conversion—brings the νp-process yields of the p-nuclides 92,94Mo, 96,98Ru, and the long-lived radionuclide 92Nb into agreement with solar abundances. This is established by computing, for a benchmark 20 M☉ progenitor with a 1.93 M☉ proto-neutron star, the full time-dependent outflow for each assumed equilibration radius Δr_mix, and then post-processing the trajectories with a nuclear network. Near conversion raises the electron fraction toward 0.6 and increases heating enough to occasionally push the outflow into a supersonic regime, effects t

What carries the argument

The central object is a conversion-radius prescription: flavor equilibration is modeled as happening instantaneously and completely at a radius r_mix = R_PNS + Δr_mix, after which every neutrino flavor shares the same spectrum, f'_νe = f'_νx = (f_νe + 2 f_νx)/3 and similarly for antineutrinos. This gives a one-parameter family of scenarios. What makes the parameter meaningful is the self-consistent treatment: for each Δr_mix, the hydrodynamics of the neutrino-driven outflow is re-solved (since the extra heating can switch the outflow from subsonic to supersonic), and the resulting trajectories are run through a nuclear reaction network to get yields. The outputs are time-averaged yields and

Load-bearing premise

The strongest assumption is that collective conversion can be treated as complete, instantaneous flavor equilibration at a single radius; if actual oscillations are less complete or spread over a range of radii, the computed yield enhancements and the inferred ~10 km onset could change.

What would settle it

Run a multi-dimensional core-collapse supernova simulation with multi-angle neutrino transport that resolves the fast flavor instability; if the resulting conversion begins beyond ~30 km from the proto-neutron star or achieves only partial flavor equilibration, the paper's central claim is falsified.

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

If this is right

  • If the paper is correct, a supernova that hosts fast collective oscillations within ~10 km of the proto-neutron star will be an efficient producer of Mo, Ru, and Nb-92, while a supernova where conversion starts farther out will not reach solar levels.
  • The observed solar p-nuclide pattern becomes a spatial diagnostic: near conversion (≲30 km) boosts yields by 10–60×, far conversion (≳40 km) by only 2–3×.
  • The long-lived radionuclide 92Nb, with its broadened production window and up to 100-fold enhancement, provides a separate, time-resolved check on the νp-process that earlier studies had used to argue against it.
  • Hydrodynamic feedback is essential: ignoring the oscillation-induced heating and possible transonic transition would change the yields and could mask the radius dependence the paper reports.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The inferred ≤10 km onset is a proxy: the paper compares it with typical fast vs slow collective oscillation scales, but does not simulate the conversion dynamics itself. A future calculation that predicts an onset radius from first principles could strengthen or break the identification.
  • If near-surface conversion is indeed responsible, then the solar inventory of p-nuclides would be direct evidence that neutrino flavor mixing occurs in supernovae, linking nuclear astrophysics to neutrino physics in a way that is testable with a Galactic supernova neutrino burst.
  • A testable extension: run the same mixing-radius mapping with partial conversion or spectral-swap prescriptions rather than full equilibration. The yields of 92,94Mo relative to 96,98Ru may distinguish these microphysical models, since the harder mixed-antineutrino spectrum affects the neutron production differently.
  • The near-criticality of the outflow suggests that the mechanism is sensitive to progenitor structure and PNS mass; scanning these parameters could identify which supernovae contribute the solar p-nuclides and which do not.

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 / 5 minor

Summary. This Letter argues that the solar-system abundances of the p-nuclides 92,94Mo, 96,98Ru and of the extinct radionuclide 92Nb can diagnose the radius at which collective neutrino oscillations begin in core-collapse supernovae. Using a 20 M_sun Garching progenitor with a 1.93 M_sun PNS, the authors model the νp-process by recomputing the neutrino-driven outflow hydrodynamics for each oscillation scenario and post-processing tracer trajectories with SkyNet. Flavor conversion is prescribed as complete instantaneous flavor equilibration at radius R_PNS + Δr_mix (SM C, Eq. S7), with Δr_mix scanned from 1 to 3000 km. They find that near conversions (Δr_mix ≲ 10 km) enhance p-nuclide yields by up to two orders of magnitude and bring the isotopes into agreement with meteoritic solar thresholds, whereas far conversions are insufficient. The authors conclude that the observed p-nuclide pattern indicates fast collective oscillations occurring close to the PNS surface.

Significance. If correct, this would provide a new astrophysical probe of collective neutrino oscillations and connect an otherwise elusive quantum phenomenon to a long-standing nucleosynthesis puzzle. The paper has real strengths: it uses public, modern supernova simulations, a detailed GR steady-state outflow model, an open nuclear reaction network with important corrections (medium-enhanced triple-α, 92Nb decay), and it systematically scans the mixing radius in two progenitor models. The inclusion of hydrodynamic feedback, especially the near-critical transonic transition, is a clear improvement over earlier νp-process studies. The principal caveat is that all quantitative yield results and the inferred radius threshold rest on the idealized complete-instantaneous-equilibration prescription of SM C, Eq. (S7); the sharp 'and only then' conclusion would be substantially strengthened by a partial-conversion sensitivity study.

major comments (3)
  1. [SM C, Eq. (S7); Fig. 3; Conclusions] The central quantitative map of ⟨Y_A⟩ versus Δr_mix is computed under complete instantaneous flavor equilibration, f'_νe = (f_νe + 2 f_νx)/3 and analogously for antineutrinos. As the authors note in footnote 90, this is an approximate limiting case and lepton-flavor-number conservation constrains full equilibration. All yield enhancements in Fig. 3, the heating-rate boost in SM C (Fig. S4), and the inferred threshold Δr_mix ≲ 10 km scale with the degree of ν_x → ν_e transfer. No sensitivity study is presented for partial conversion, spectral swaps, or flavor-equilibration efficiency. The Conclusions claim that solar agreement is achieved 'when oscillations occur close to the PNS surface, and only then' is therefore not yet established for realistic FCO outcomes. Please add a conversion-efficiency parameter (e.g., ε ∈ [0,1] interpolating between no mixing and full equipartition) or equiva
  2. [Abstract; Discussion; Conclusions; Refs. [21-25]] The abstract's 'indicating fast collective oscillations' and the Discussion's assignment of near conversion to FCO (and far conversion to SCO) rely on identifying the scanned free parameter Δr_mix with the FCO radius obtained from cited literature. The calculation itself does not derive an oscillation radius; Δr_mix is a scanned parameter, and the best-match radius is selected a posteriori. This is not internally inconsistent, but the claim as worded is stronger than the evidence. Either show that FCO in this specific 20 M_sun model is expected to begin within ~10 km, or explicitly flag this as an external identification and temper the wording to 'consistent with FCO'.
  3. [SM B; Table S1; Eq. (S10); Fig. 3] Spectral moments are frozen at their t = 3.5 s values for all launch times t_launch ∈ [1,10] s (Table S1 and Eqs. S4-S5). The paper states that the moments vary only mildly during the first ~5 s, but the time-averaged yields in Eq. (S10) integrate over the whole window, and the near-conversion result is sensitive to the balance between the Y_e boost and transonic clipping. Since production rates (Fig. 2) extend to late times, a quantitative test with time-dependent spectral parameters, or at least an estimate of the resulting yield uncertainty, is needed to confirm the robustness of the Δr_mix threshold.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Fig. 2; Fig. S7 captions] The captions appear to label both the upper and lower rows as 'Upper panels'; the lower panels should be labeled explicitly. In Fig. S7 the text also refers to panels a1, b1, c1, d1 but the caption does not define them consistently.
  2. [Abstract; Comparison with solar abundances] The abstract says 'best match' without defining a fitting criterion. Please specify the criterion used (e.g., Δr_mix ≲ 10 km for all listed species to enter the co-production band) or soften the wording.
  3. [Methods; Conclusions] The statement that agreement is reached 'without tuning any aspects of explosion' should acknowledge that Δr_mix is a free parameter that is scanned and then selected to match observations. This is a fair parametric study, but the word 'tuning' is misleading here.
  4. [Footnote 90] The limitation of the full-equilibration prescription is important enough to appear in the main text rather than only in a footnote, especially because it is load-bearing for the central conclusion.
  5. [SM D, Eq. (S13)] The 'solar abundance thresholds' in Fig. 3 are computed for the unmixed case only, as explained in SM D. This is conservative, but the caption could state this explicitly to avoid misreading.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

No structural circularity: the abundance agreement is a forward computation against independent meteoritic data, though the 'within ~10 km / and only then' claim is conditioned on a disclosed maximal-equilibration ansatz and the FCO attribution is imported from external literature.

specific steps
  1. other [Methods (main text); SM A; SM C Eq. (S7); footnote [90]]
    "Following existing literature [75], we model flavor conversion as complete instantaneous equilibration at a distance Δrmix from the PNS surface. ... We vary Δrmix as a free parameter to quantify the νp-process's sensitivity to conversion location. [90] This prescription should be viewed as a representative, approximate limiting case, since flavor equilibration is constrained by lepton-flavor number conservation [110, 111]."

    The headline claim—'best match within 10 km ... indicating fast collective oscillations' (Abstract) and 'and only then, the predicted abundances line up' (Conclusions)—is read off the Δrmix scan (Fig. 3), whose yield map is produced by the input prescription (Eq. S7): complete instantaneous flavor equilibration at the scanned radius, adopted from Ref. [75] rather than derived from FCO dynamics. This maximal ansatz is what makes near-conversion boosts large enough to clear the solar thresholds, so the exclusive 'and only then' statement is partly built from the assumed strongest-effect limit; footnote [90] and SM A ('which maximizes the effect of neutrino mixing') concede this and defer a partial-conversion study to [101]. The abundance computation is itself a genuine forward result against

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is largely self-contained and does not reduce to its inputs. The load-bearing calculation maps yields ⟨Y_A⟩ to the flavor-mixing radius Δr_mix using (i) the Garching 20 M⊙ benchmark (external), (ii) the steady-state GR hydrodynamics framework of the authors' prior JCAP paper [81] with SkyNet reaction-network post-processing, and (iii) meteoritic solar abundances [100] with the standard overproduction-factor ≥ 10 criterion [79, 129]. No parameter is fitted to the solar data: the unmixed case underproduces the p-nuclides and the near-mixing cases clear the thresholds, so the agreement is computed content, not enforced. The self-citations ([80], [81], [82]) are methodological and numerical frameworks, not uniqueness theorems invoked to forbid alternatives; the hydrodynamics framework is code-based and independently published, so per the review rules it counts as real evidence rather than circular support. The identification of the near/far radius regimes with FCO/SCO is imported from external references [21–25], [35–38], not from the present authors, so there is no 'uniqueness imported from authors' or 'ansatz smuggled via self-citation' chain. The one partial concern is flagged by the paper itself: the flavor-conversion input is complete, instantaneous equilibration (SM C, Eq. S7), an ansatz adopted from Ref. [75] and described in footnote [90] as 'a representative, approximate limiting case' and in SM A as a prescription that 'maximizes the effect of neutrino mixing.' Because the magnitude of the yield boost—and hence the exclusive claim that abundances line up 'and only then'—is generated by this maximal-conversion assumption, the inferred ≤10 km constraint and the FCO indication are conditional on it. The paper's own robustness argument covers only the asymptotic Y_e (SM A), not the hydrodynamic-feedback thresholds under partial-conversion outcomes, and it defers a quantitative study of such outcomes to future work [101]. This is a disclosed modeling limitation bearing on the strength of the physical conclusion (a correctness/robustness risk), not a definitional reduction of the prediction to the input. Verdict: no significant circularity; score 2 reflects the mild, disclosed assumption-dependence of the headline claim.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 6 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central parameter is Δr_mix, the flavor equilibration radius, which is scanned and effectively fit to solar abundances. Other inputs (luminosity fits, spectral moments, PNS mass) are inherited from public supernova simulations. The key ad hoc assumption is instantaneous full flavor equilibration, which maximizes the oscillation effect and shapes the quantitative conclusion. No new particles or forces are invented.

free parameters (2)
  • Δr_mix (flavor equilibration radius offset) = ≤10 km (best match; scanned 1–3000 km)
    Central free parameter. Yields and solar agreement are mapped against it; the conclusion that oscillations start within 10 km is this parameter's best-fit range, not a derived prediction.
  • front-shock velocity v_FS = 6000 km/s (benchmark), 7000 km/s (perturbed)
    Sets the outer boundary confining pressure; adopted from Garching simulation conventions but chosen by hand. Perturbing it changes yield normalization but not the qualitative conclusions.
axioms (6)
  • ad hoc to paper Complete instantaneous flavor equilibration at r_mix (Eq. S7).
    The paper replaces neutrino spectra with fully equilibrated ones beyond a chosen radius, maximizing the oscillation effect. Footnote [90] concedes this is an approximate limiting case constrained by lepton-flavor conservation.
  • domain assumption Steady-state, spherically symmetric GR outflow with time-snapshots captures the neutrino-driven wind.
    Hydrodynamics is solved as a boundary value problem with snapshots every 0.1 s (SM A); multi-dimensional and time-dependent transients are not included.
  • domain assumption The Garching 20 Msun / 1.93 Msun PNS simulation is representative of νp-process sites.
    The authors use one benchmark model plus one perturbation; other progenitors, PNS masses, and equations of state could change the yields and the inferred radius constraint.
  • domain assumption Pinched Fermi-Dirac spectra with moments frozen at t=3.5 s accurately represent neutrino distributions.
    Spectral parameters T_ν and η_ν are fixed from the simulation at t=3.5 s (SM B); time evolution of spectral shape is ignored.
  • domain assumption FCO occurs within ~10-30 km and SCO at 40-500 km from the PNS surface.
    The interpretation of Δr_mix thresholds as distinguishing fast versus slow collective oscillations is imported from cited literature, not derived in this paper.
  • standard math SkyNet with REACLIB v2.2 plus medium-enhanced triple-alpha provides reliable nucleosynthesis.
    The nuclear network and reaction rates are standard open-source tools; the paper modifies them as described in SM A.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 26121 in / 11131 out tokens · 113223 ms · 2026-08-01T23:29:00.716587+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Direct evidence for collective neutrino oscillations in core-collapse supernovae remains elusive. We show that this quantum phenomenon leaves a footprint on the abundance pattern of proton-rich nuclides in the solar system. Modeling the $\nu p$-process using a $20\,M_\odot$ progenitor, we map out the dependence of the total yields on the starting radius of the oscillations, self-consistently coupling hydrodynamics and nucleosynthesis. The oscillations boost key $p$-nuclides ($^{92,94}\text{Mo}$, $^{96,98}\text{Ru}$) and long-lived $^{92}\text{Nb}$ by up to two orders of magnitude, bringing their abundances into agreement with the observations. The best match is found when oscillations commence within $10\text{ km}$ of the proto-neutron star surface, indicating fast collective oscillations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.15392 by Alexander Friedland, Amol V. Patwardhan, Derek J. Li, Giuseppe Lucente, Ian Padilla-Gay, Payel Mukhopadhyay.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Electron fraction [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Time-averaged yields [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.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

131 extracted references · 101 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    J. T. Pantaleone,Neutrino oscillations at high densities,Phys. Lett.B287(1992) 128

    1992

  2. [2]

    Sigl and G

    G. Sigl and G. Raffelt,General kinetic description of relativistic mixed neutrinos,Nucl. Phys.B406(1993) 423

    1993

  3. [3]

    B. H. J. McKellar and M. J. Thomson,Oscillating doublet neutrinos in the early universe,Phys. Rev. D49(1994) 2710

    1994

  4. [4]

    Samuel,Neutrino oscillations in dense neutrino gases,Phys

    S. Samuel,Neutrino oscillations in dense neutrino gases,Phys. Rev. D48(1993) 1462

    1993

  5. [5]

    Y. Z. Qian and G. M. Fuller,Neutrino-neutrino scattering and matter enhanced neutrino flavor transformation in Supernovae,Phys. Rev.D51(1995) 1479 [astro-ph/9406073]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  6. [6]

    H. Duan, G. M. Fuller and Y.-Z. Qian,Collective neutrino oscillations,Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science60(2010) 569

    2010

  7. [7]

    Mirizzi, I

    A. Mirizzi, I. Tamborra, H.-T. Janka, N. Saviano, K. Scholberg, R. Bollig, L. H¨ udepohl and S. Chakraborty,Supernova Neutrinos: Production, Oscillations and Detection,Riv. Nuovo Cim.39(2016) 1 [1508.00785]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  8. [8]

    Chakraborty, R

    S. Chakraborty, R. Hansen, I. Izaguirre and G. Raffelt, Collective neutrino flavor conversion: Recent developments,Nucl. Phys. B908(2016) 366 [1602.02766]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  9. [9]

    Tamborra and S

    I. Tamborra and S. Shalgar,New Developments in Flavor Evolution of a Dense Neutrino Gas,Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.71(2021) 165 [2011.01948]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  10. [10]

    Capozzi and N

    F. Capozzi and N. Saviano,Neutrino Flavor Conversions in High-Density Astrophysical and Cosmological Environments,Universe8(2022) 94 [2202.02494]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  11. [11]

    Richers and M

    S. Richers and M. Sen,Fast Flavor Transformations, inHandbook of Nuclear Physics(I. Tanihata, H. Toki and T. Kajino, eds.), pp. 1–17. Springer, 2023. 2207.03561. DOI

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  12. [12]

    M. C. Volpe,Neutrinos from dense environments: Flavor mechanisms, theoretical approaches, observations, and new directions,Rev. Mod. Phys.96 (2024) 025004 [2301.11814]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  13. [13]

    Johns, S

    L. Johns, S. Richers and M.-R. Wu,Neutrino Oscillations in Core-Collapse Supernovae and Neutron Star Mergers,Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.75(2025) 399 [2503.05959]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  14. [14]

    R. F. Sawyer,Speed-up of neutrino transformations in a supernova environment,Phys. Rev. D72(2005) 045003 [hep-ph/0503013]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  15. [15]

    R. F. Sawyer,The multi-angle instability in dense neutrino systems,Phys. Rev. D79(2009) 105003 [0803.4319]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  16. [16]

    R. F. Sawyer,Neutrino cloud instabilities just above the neutrino sphere of a supernova,Phys. Rev. Lett. 116(2016) 081101 [1509.03323]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  17. [17]

    Dasgupta, A

    B. Dasgupta, A. Mirizzi and M. Sen,Fast neutrino flavor conversions near the supernova core with realistic flavor-dependent angular distributions,JCAP 02(2017) 019 [1609.00528]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  18. [18]

    Izaguirre, G

    I. Izaguirre, G. Raffelt and I. Tamborra,Fast Pairwise Conversion of Supernova Neutrinos: A Dispersion-Relation Approach,Phys. Rev. Lett.118 (2017) 021101 [1610.01612]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  19. [19]

    Chakraborty, R

    S. Chakraborty, R. S. Hansen, I. Izaguirre and G. Raffelt,Self-induced flavor conversion of supernova neutrinos on small scales,JCAP01(2016) 028 [1507.07569]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  20. [20]

    Chakraborty, R

    S. Chakraborty, R. S. Hansen, I. Izaguirre and G. Raffelt,Self-induced neutrino flavor conversion without flavor mixing,JCAP03(2016) 042 [1602.00698]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  21. [21]

    Nagakura, T

    H. Nagakura, T. Morinaga, C. Kato and S. Yamada, Fast-pairwise collective neutrino oscillations associated with asymmetric neutrino emissions in core-collapse supernova,1910.04288

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1910

  22. [22]

    Morinaga, H

    T. Morinaga, H. Nagakura, C. Kato and S. Yamada, Fast neutrino-flavor conversion in the preshock region of core-collapse supernovae,Phys. Rev. Res.2(2020) 012046 [1909.13131]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  23. [23]

    Abbar, H

    S. Abbar, H. Duan, K. Sumiyoshi, T. Takiwaki and M. C. Volpe,Fast Neutrino Flavor Conversion Modes in Multidimensional Core-collapse Supernova Models: the Role of the Asymmetric Neutrino Distributions, Phys. Rev. D101(2020) 043016 [1911.01983]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  24. [24]

    R. Glas, H. T. Janka, F. Capozzi, M. Sen, B. Dasgupta, A. Mirizzi and G. Sigl,Fast Neutrino Flavor Instability in the Neutron-star Convection Layer of Three-dimensional Supernova Models,Phys. Rev. D101(2020) 063001 [1912.00274]

    arXiv 2020

  25. [25]

    Nagakura, L

    H. Nagakura, L. Johns, A. Burrows and G. M. Fuller, Where, when, and why: Occurrence of fast-pairwise collective neutrino oscillation in three-dimensional core-collapse supernova models,Phys. Rev. D104 (2021) 083025 [2108.07281]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  26. [26]

    Padilla-Gay, I

    I. Padilla-Gay, I. Tamborra and G. G. Raffelt, Neutrino Flavor Pendulum Reloaded: The Case of Fast Pairwise Conversion,Phys. Rev. Lett.128(2022) 121102 [2109.14627]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  27. [27]

    Zaizen and H

    M. Zaizen and H. Nagakura,Simple method for determining asymptotic states of fast neutrino-flavor conversion,Phys. Rev. D107(2023) 103022 [2211.09343]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  28. [28]

    Nagakura and M

    H. Nagakura and M. Zaizen,Connecting small-scale to large-scale structures of fast neutrino-flavor 7 conversion,Phys. Rev. D107(2023) 063033 [2211.01398]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  29. [29]

    Xiong, M.-R

    Z. Xiong, M.-R. Wu, M. George, C.-Y. Lin, N. K. Largani, T. Fischer and G. Mart ´ ınez-Pinedo,Fast neutrino flavor conversions in a supernova: Emergence, evolution, and effects,Phys. Rev. D109 (2024) 123008 [2402.19252]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  30. [30]

    D. F. G. Fiorillo and G. G. Raffelt,Theory of neutrino slow flavor evolution. Part I. Homogeneous medium, JHEP04(2025) 146 [2412.02747]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  31. [31]

    D. F. G. Fiorillo and G. G. Raffelt,Theory of neutrino slow flavor evolution. Part II. Space-time evolution of linear instabilities,JHEP06(2025) 146 [2501.16423]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  32. [32]

    V. A. Kostelecky and S. Samuel,Selfmaintained coherent oscillations in dense neutrino gases,Phys. Rev. D52(1995) 621 [hep-ph/9506262]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  33. [33]

    Samuel,Bimodal coherence in dense selfinteracting neutrino gases,Phys

    S. Samuel,Bimodal coherence in dense selfinteracting neutrino gases,Phys. Rev. D53(1996) 5382 [hep-ph/9604341]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  34. [34]

    Pastor and G

    S. Pastor and G. Raffelt,Flavor oscillations in the supernova hot bubble region: Nonlinear effects of neutrino background,Phys. Rev. Lett.89(2002) 191101 [astro-ph/0207281]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  35. [35]

    H. Duan, G. M. Fuller and Y.-Z. Qian,Collective neutrino flavor transformation in supernovae,Phys. Rev. D74(2006) 123004 [astro-ph/0511275]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  36. [36]

    H. Duan, G. M. Fuller, J. Carlson and Y.-Z. Qian, Simulation of Coherent Non-Linear Neutrino Flavor Transformation in the Supernova Environment. 1. Correlated Neutrino Trajectories,Phys. Rev.D74 (2006) 105014 [astro-ph/0606616]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  37. [37]

    H. Duan, G. M. Fuller, J. Carlson and Y.-Z. Qian, Coherent Development of Neutrino Flavor in the Supernova Environment,Phys. Rev. Lett.97(2006) 241101 [astro-ph/0608050]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  38. [38]

    Hannestad, G

    S. Hannestad, G. G. Raffelt, G. Sigl and Y. Y. Y. Wong,Self-induced conversion in dense neutrino gases: Pendulum in flavour space,Phys. Rev. D74(2006) 105010 [astro-ph/0608695]. [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 76, 029901 (2007)]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  39. [39]

    Dasgupta and A

    B. Dasgupta and A. Dighe,Collective three-flavor oscillations of supernova neutrinos,Phys. Rev. D77 (2008) 113002 [0712.3798]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  40. [40]

    H. Duan, G. M. Fuller and Y.-Z. Qian,Stepwise spectral swapping with three neutrino flavors,Phys. Rev. D77(2008) 085016 [0801.1363]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  41. [41]

    Friedland,Self-refraction of supernova neutrinos: mixed spectra and three-flavor instabilities,Phys

    A. Friedland,Self-refraction of supernova neutrinos: mixed spectra and three-flavor instabilities,Phys. Rev. Lett.104(2010) 191102 [1001.0996]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  42. [42]

    Duan and A

    H. Duan and A. Friedland,Self-induced suppression of collective neutrino oscillations in a supernova,Phys. Rev. Lett.106(2011) 091101 [1006.2359]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  43. [43]

    Padilla-Gay, H.-H

    I. Padilla-Gay, H.-H. Chen, S. Abbar, M.-R. Wu and Z. Xiong,Flavor equilibration of supernova neutrinos: Exploring the dynamics of slow modes,Phys. Rev. D 112(2025) 043039 [2505.11588]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  44. [44]

    D. F. G. Fiorillo and G. G. Raffelt,Theory of neutrino fast flavor evolution. Part I. Linear response theory and stability conditions.,JHEP08(2024) 225 [2406.06708]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  45. [45]

    D. F. G. Fiorillo and G. G. Raffelt,Theory of neutrino fast flavor evolution. Part II. Solutions at the edge of instability,JHEP12(2024) 205 [2409.17232]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  46. [46]

    N. F. Bell, A. A. Rawlinson and R. F. Sawyer,Speedup through entanglement: Many body effects in neutrino processes,Phys. Lett.B573(2003) 86 [hep-ph/0304082]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  47. [47]

    Friedland and C

    A. Friedland and C. Lunardini,Do many particle neutrino interactions cause a novel coherent effect?, JHEP10(2003) 043 [hep-ph/0307140]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  48. [48]

    Friedland, B

    A. Friedland, B. H. J. McKellar and I. Okuniewicz, Construction and analysis of a simplified many-body neutrino model,Phys. Rev.D73(2006) 093002 [hep-ph/0602016]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  49. [49]

    Mezzacappa, E

    A. Mezzacappa, E. Endeve, O. E. Bronson Messer and S. W. Bruenn,Physical, numerical, and computational challenges of modeling neutrino transport in core-collapse supernovae,Liv. Rev. Comput. Astrophys.6(2020) 4 [2010.09013]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  50. [50]

    Y.-Z. Qian, G. M. Fuller, G. J. Mathews, R. Mayle, J. R. Wilson and S. E. Woosley,A Connection between flavor mixing of cosmologically significant neutrinos and heavy element nucleosynthesis in supernovae, Phys. Rev. Lett.71(1993) 1965

    1993

  51. [51]

    J. T. Pantaleone,Neutrino flavor evolution near a supernova’s core,Phys. Lett. B342(1995) 250 [astro-ph/9405008]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  52. [52]

    H. Duan, A. Friedland, G. McLaughlin and R. Surman,The influence of collective neutrino oscillations on a supernova r-process,J. Phys. G38 (2011) 035201 [1012.0532]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  53. [53]

    C. J. Horowitz and G. Li,Nucleosynthesis in Supernovae,Phys. Rev. Lett.82(1999) 5198 [astro-ph/9904171]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  54. [54]

    C. J. Horowitz and G. Li,Charge conjugation violating neutrino interactions in supernovae,Phys. Rev. D61 (2000) 063002 [astro-ph/9908219]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  55. [55]

    C. J. Horowitz,Weak magnetism for anti-neutrinos in supernovae,Phys. Rev. D65(2002) 043001 [astro-ph/0109209]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  56. [56]

    This subdominant but important effect boosts theν e cross sections on nucleons compared to those of ¯νe

  57. [57]

    Arnould, S

    M. Arnould, S. Goriely and K. Takahashi,The r-process of stellar nucleosynthesis: Astrophysics and nuclear physics achievements and mysteries,Phys. Rept.450(2007) 97 [0705.4512]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  58. [58]

    Kasen, B

    D. Kasen, B. Metzger, J. Barnes, E. Quataert and E. Ramirez-Ruiz,Origin of the heavy elements in binary neutron-star mergers from a gravitational wave event,Nature551(2017) 80 [1710.05463]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  59. [59]

    Thielemann and J

    F.-K. Thielemann and J. J. Cowan,The r-process: history, required conditions, astrophysical sites, and observations,European Physical Journal A62(2026) 105 [2601.17246]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  60. [60]

    Arnould and S

    M. Arnould and S. Goriely,The p-process of stellar nucleosynthesis: astrophysics and nuclear physics status,Phys. Rept.384(2003) 1

    2003

  61. [61]

    Rauscher, N

    T. Rauscher, N. Dauphas, I. Dillmann, C. Fr¨ ohlich, Z. F¨ ul¨ op and G. Gy¨ urky,Constraining the astrophysical origin of the p-nuclei through nuclear physics and meteoritic data,Reports on Progress in Physics76(2013) 066201 [1303.2666]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  62. [62]

    Frohlich, G

    C. Frohlich, G. Martinez-Pinedo, M. Liebendorfer, F. K. Thielemann, E. Bravo, W. R. Hix, K. Langanke and N. T. Zinner,Neutrino-induced nucleosynthesis of a>64 nuclei: the nu p-process,Phys. Rev. Lett.96 (2006) 142502 [astro-ph/0511376]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  63. [63]

    Pruet, R

    J. Pruet, R. D. Hoffman, S. E. Woosley, H. T. Janka 8 and R. Buras,Nucleosynthesis in early supernova winds. 2. the role of neutrinos,Astrophys. J.644 (2006) 1028 [astro-ph/0511194]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  64. [64]

    Wanajo,The rp-process in neutrino-driven winds, Astrophys

    S. Wanajo,The rp-process in neutrino-driven winds, Astrophys. J.647(2006) 1323 [astro-ph/0602488]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  65. [65]

    Schatz, L

    H. Schatz, L. Bildsten, A. Cumming and M. Wiescher, The Rapid Proton Process Ashes from Stable Nuclear Burning on an Accreting Neutron Star,Astrophys. J. 524(1999) 1014 [astro-ph/9905274]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  66. [66]

    Ehring, S

    J. Ehring, S. Abbar, H.-T. Janka, G. Raffelt and I. Tamborra,Fast Neutrino Flavor Conversions Can Help and Hinder Neutrino-Driven Explosions,Phys. Rev. Lett.131(2023) 061401 [2305.11207]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  67. [67]

    Ehring, S

    J. Ehring, S. Abbar, H.-T. Janka, G. Raffelt and I. Tamborra,Fast neutrino flavor conversion in core-collapse supernovae: A parametric study in 1D models,Phys. Rev. D107(2023) 103034 [2301.11938]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  68. [68]

    Nagakura,Roles of Fast Neutrino-Flavor Conversion on the Neutrino-Heating Mechanism of Core-Collapse Supernova,Phys

    H. Nagakura,Roles of Fast Neutrino-Flavor Conversion on the Neutrino-Heating Mechanism of Core-Collapse Supernova,Phys. Rev. Lett.130(2023) 211401 [2301.10785]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  69. [69]

    Wang and A

    T. Wang and A. Burrows,The Effect of the Fast-Flavor Instability on Core-Collapse Supernova Models,2503.04896

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  70. [70]

    Wang and A

    T. Wang and A. Burrows,The Effect of the Fast-flavor Instability on Core-collapse Supernova Models. II. Quasi-equipartition and the Impact of Various Angular Reconstruction Methods,Astrophys. J.997(2026) 325 [2511.20767]

    arXiv 2026

  71. [71]

    K. Mori, T. Takiwaki, K. Kotake and S. Horiuchi, Three-dimensional core-collapse supernova models with phenomenological treatment of neutrino flavor conversions,Publ. Astron. Soc. Jap.77(2025) L9 [2501.15256]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  72. [72]

    Gogilashvili and I

    M. Gogilashvili and I. Tamborra,Flavor Conversion Enhances or Suppresses Supernova Explodability Independent of the Progenitor Mass,2605.18972

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  73. [73]

    Gogilashvili and I

    M. Gogilashvili and I. Tamborra,Neutrino Flavor Conversion Shapes the Rate of Failed Core-collapse Supernovae,2605.16504

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  74. [74]

    Akaho, H

    R. Akaho, H. Nagakura, W. Iwakami, S. Furusawa, A. Harada, H. Okawa, H. Matsufuru, K. Sumiyoshi and S. Yamada,Bifurcated Impact of Neutrino Fast Flavor Conversion on Core-Collapse Supernovae Informed by Multiangle Neutrino Radiation Hydrodynamics,Phys. Rev. Lett.136(2026) 191002 [2601.08269]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  75. [75]

    Xiong, A

    Z. Xiong, A. Sieverding, M. Sen and Y.-Z. Qian, Potential Impact of Fast Flavor Oscillations on Neutrino-driven Winds and Their Nucleosynthesis, Astrophys. J.900(2020) 144 [2006.11414]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  76. [76]

    Martinez-Pinedo, B

    G. Martinez-Pinedo, B. Ziebarth, T. Fischer and K. Langanke,Effect of collective neutrino flavor oscillations on vp-process nucleosynthesis,Eur. Phys. J. A47(2011) 98 [1105.5304]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  77. [77]

    Sasaki, T

    H. Sasaki, T. Kajino, T. Takiwaki, T. Hayakawa, A. B. Balantekin and Y. Pehlivan,Possible effects of collective neutrino oscillations in three-flavor multiangle simulations of supernovaνpprocesses, Phys. Rev. D96(2017) 043013 [1707.09111]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  78. [78]

    A. B. Balantekin, M. J. Cervia, A. V. Patwardhan, R. Surman and X. Wang,Collective Neutrino Oscillations and Heavy-element Nucleosynthesis in Supernovae: Exploring Potential Effects of Many-body Neutrino Correlations,Astrophys. J.967(2024) 146 [2311.02562]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  79. [79]

    Wanajo, H.-T

    S. Wanajo, H.-T. Janka and S. Kubono,Uncertainties in the nu p-process: supernova dynamics versus nuclear physics,Astrophys. J.729(2011) 46 [1004.4487]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  80. [80]

    Friedland, P

    A. Friedland, P. Mukhopadhyay and A. V. Patwardhan,Successfulνp-process in neutrino-driven outflows in core-collapse supernovae,JCAP02(2025) 005 [2312.03208]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

Showing first 80 references.