Measurement of electron-neutrino electron elastic scattering

A. Fazely; A. Malik; D.H. White; D.O. Caldwell; D. Smith; E.D. Church; G.B. Mills; G.J. VanDalen; G.T. Garvey; I. Stancu

REVIEW

Measurement of electron-neutrino electron elastic scattering

LSND Collaboration: L.B. Auerbach, R.L. Burman, D.O. Caldwell, E.D. Church, J.B. Donahue, A. Fazely, G.T. Garvey, R.M. Gunasingha

show 16 more authors

R. Imlay, W.C. Louis, R. Majkic, A. Malik, W. Metcalf, G.B. Mills, V. Sandberg, D. Smith, I. Stancu, M. Sung, R. Tayloe, G.J. VanDalen, W. Vernon, N. Wadia, D.H. White, S. Yellin

High Energy Physics - Experiment · Submitted 22 Jan 2001 · 36 references

Pith's verdict: A solid second measurement of νe–e elastic scattering; the physics holds, but Section 6's 'approximately 6 events' contradicts Table 3's 51-event subtraction and should be fixed.

T0 · AI review

How this review was made: An AI referee (selfhosted/deepseek-v4.1-flash) read the paper on October 29, 2026 and answered a fixed list of questions about it. T0 is the starting level every paper gets. The levels describe how deeply Pith has checked the paper, never the authors.

T0 AI review An AI read the paper and answered a fixed list of questions.
T1 Audit Automatic checks that the references and files the paper relies on exist and match.
T2 Compute The paper's code or calculations re-run with the same results.
T3 Formal statement The claims written out in a formal math language a computer can read.
T4 Proof Those claims proved, and the proof checked by computer.

How Pith checks papers →

· 1 major objection · 12 minor · Ask about this paper · The compiled record · Read the full review →

Challenge this review Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗

Cite ▾

arXiv IDhep-ex/0101039 (version 1)

Pith IDSPQLQXE7, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review

CitationA. Fazely, A. Malik, D.H. White, D.O. Caldwell, D. Smith, E.D. Church, G.B. Mills, G.J. VanDalen, G.T. Garvey, I. Stancu, J.B. Donahue, LSND Collaboration: L.B. Auerbach, M. Sung, N. Wadia, R. Imlay, R.L. Burman, R. Majkic, R.M. Gunasingha, R. Tayloe, S. Yellin, V. Sandberg, W.C. Louis, W. Metcalf, W. Vernon. "Measurement of electron-neutrino electron elastic scattering." arXiv:hep-ex/0101039 (2001). https://pith.science/paper/SPQLQXE7

Cite this reviewBibTeX for Pith's review of this paper

Claim paper

Why Pith says this

Highlight any text to comment on it.

Editor's note

read the letter

This is the LSND νe–e elastic scattering paper — the second independent measurement of the reaction after E225, and the one that pins down the CC–NC destructive interference term. The physics is sound and has held up: σ = [10.1 ± 1.1 ± 1.0] × E_νe × 10⁻⁴⁵ cm², I = −1.01 ± 0.13 ± 0.12 against I_SM = −1.09. Nothing here overturns anything, and it isn't meant to; it's a confirmation with independent systematics, plus FCNC and charge-radius limits that still get cited. The magnetic-moment bound is a modest improvement on what came before, not a leap. What it does well: the background control is genuinely careful. Beam-off subtraction with a per-year duty ratio, Michel-electron control samples for the PID cut, laser events for the veto acceptances, and a lookback window to kill muons that fire too few veto PMTs. The systematic budget is honest and dominated by the 7% flux and 6% fiducial-volume numbers, which are the right things to dominate. Soft spots, in order of how much they matter. First, Section 6 says the DIF νμ and ν̄μ contribution is 'approximately 6 events from νμ scattering and < 1 event from ν̄μ scattering,' then says these are 'shown in Table 3.' Table 3 subtracts 24 νμe and 27 ν̄μe events — 51, not 6. Presumably 6 is the DIF piece and the rest is DAR, but the paper never says so, never gives the DAR fluxes, and never quantifies the 'insensitive to this choice' claim. A reader would come away thinking the correction is ~2% when it's 27% of the signal. A ±20% error on 51 events is ±5% on the signal, below the quoted systematics but not nothing. This is the one thing I'd make them fix. Second, Eq. 11 defines I using SM values for σ_CC and σ_NC, so 'I agrees with the SM' partly restates 'σ agrees with the SM.' The paper is upfront about it, so it's a framing note, not a flaw. Third, the magnetic-moment step (242 observed vs 229 expected → fewer than 55 events at 90% CL) doesn't give the prescription. Minor. Who should read it: anyone working on neutrino electromagnetic properties, FCNC, or low-energy precision electroweak tests. It's a well-executed measurement from a detector that no longer exists, so reproducibility is limited to the written record — but the record is good. Recommendation: yes, send it out. The Section 6/Table 3 inconsistency is exactly what a referee should catch, and the rest is solid.

Referee report

Major objections (1)

[Section 6 and Table 3] Section 6 states that the νμ and ν̄μ elastic-scattering background is 'approximately 6 events from νμ scattering and < 1 event from ν̄μ scattering,' but Table 3 subtracts 24 νμe and 27 ν̄μe events, i.e. 51 events, which is 27% of the 191-event νe signal (21% of the 242-event total elastic sample). The text appears to quote only the DIF component, while Table 3 includes the DAR νμ from π+ → μ+νμ and the DAR ν̄μ from μ+ → e+νeν̄μ; the paper never states the DAR νμ and ν̄μ fluxes separately (Section 2 says only 'almost equal intensities') nor the cross sections used. This is a load-bearing part of the cross-section extraction, and the current description would lead a reader to believe the correction is ~2% rather than 27%. The text and table must be reconciled, the DAR fluxes and cross sections stated explicitly, and the 'insensitive to this choice' claim quantified: a ±20% uncertainty on the 51-event subtraction is ±10 events, i.e. ±5% on the signal and ±0.5 on the 10.1 coefficient of Eq. (8), which is below the quoted ±1.0 systematic but not negligible relative to the 3% neutrino-background systematic.

Minor objections (12)

[Section 7, Eq. (11)] The interference parameter I is obtained by substituting the SM values of σ_CC and σ_NC into Eq. (11), so the agreement I = −1.01 with I_SM = −1.09 is a consistency check on σ_exp rather than an independent measurement of the interference term. The paper is transparent about the substitution, but a sentence stating this explicitly would prevent over-reading.
[Section 7, Eq. (16)] Eq. (16) as printed is dimensionally inconsistent: (σ_exp − σ_SM) × 4σ0(1 − 2 sin²θ_W) has units of cross section squared, whereas 1 − f_ee is dimensionless. The intended expression is presumably (σ_exp − σ_SM)/[4σ0(1 − 2 sin²θ_W)]; please correct or clarify.
[Abstract and Section 1] 'Charge current' should read 'charged current' in the abstract and in Section 1.
[Section 2] 'The flux of νe used for the measurements reported here arise from' should read 'arises from.'
[Section 3] 'Ocassionally' should read 'Occasionally.'
[Section 4] 'Fortuately' should read 'Fortunately.'
[Section 7] 'ratiative corrections' should read 'radiative corrections.'
[References [34] and [36]] 'R.C. Allen et at.' should read 'R.C. Allen et al.' in both references.
[Table 1] The reaction is written 'νe + e → νe + e'; the electron should carry its superscript minus, as elsewhere in the paper.
[Figure 3] The axis label reads 'χtot ,' but the text defines the variable as χ′_tot; please make the label consistent.
[Section 6 and Figure 8] The background shape used in the cos θ fit is taken from the LSNDMC simulation and the νC angular distributions are deferred to a companion paper [28]; a brief statement of how well the fitted background shape is constrained by the present data would help the reader assess the 59 ± 5 event subtraction.
[Section 5] It would help to state explicitly whether the 2.72 × 10^31 electrons quoted for the fiducial volume is the count after all selection cuts or only after the geometric fiducial cut.

How Pith checks papers → · Full audit of this paper →

The paper

The paper claims

LSND measures the rate at which electron neutrinos bounce off electrons and finds the destructive interference between the weak charged-current and neutral-current channels, at the size the Standard Model predicts.

The reading

Electron neutrinos scattering off electrons is one of the few reactions where the Standard Model predicts that two quantum pathways — exchange of a $W$ boson and exchange of a $Z$ boson — add together with opposite signs and largely cancel. The LSND collaboration ran a stopped-pion neutrino beam at Los Alamos and collected 191 $^{+22}_{-22}$ elastic-scattering events above background, then converted that count into a cross section and into a single number, the interference parameter $I$, that isolates the cancellation term. They report $I = -1.01^{+0.13}_{+0.12}$ (statistical and systematic added separately) against a Standard Model expectation of $I^{SM} = -1.09$, and a cross section of $[10.1^{+1.1}_{+1.0}]$ in units of $10^{-45} E_ν$ cm$^2$ versus a predicted $9.3$ in the same units. If the result holds, it is a direct, purely leptonic confirmation that the two weak neutral and charged amplitudes are coherent and interfere as advertised — the same structure that underlies the measured value of $sin^2 θ_W$ and that any new neutrino physics would have to leave intact. The same data set is then used to bound neutrino flavor-changing neutral currents, the electron-neutrino charge radius, and the muon-neutrino magnetic moment.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing quantity is the interference parameter $I$, the coefficient of the term $2 I σ_0$ that appears when the $ν_e e^-$ cross section is written as $σ_{CC} + σ_I + σ_{NC}$. Because the charged-current amplitude enters the differential cross section as $(g_L + 2)^2$ rather than $g_L^2$, the interference is large and negative — roughly $-2σ_0$ in the Standard Model — so a total-rate measurement, not a delicate asymmetry, is enough to see it. The experimental machinery that makes the extraction possible is the angular separation: elastically scattered electrons are thrown sharply forward, peaking above $cos θ > 0.9$, while electrons from $^{12}C(ν_e, e^-)^{12}N$ and $^{13}C(ν_e, e^-)$ have a broad, nearly linear distribution in $cos θ$ that peaks backward. Fitting the observed $cos θ$ distribution to a forward-peaked elastic template plus a smooth background shape yields $59 ± 5$ background events under the peak, leaving 191 elastic events after also subtracting 24 $ν_μ e$ and 27 $ν̄_μ e$ events. Cosmic-ray background is removed by subtracting beam-off data scaled by the duty ratio of 0.0632, with particle identification separating electrons from neutron-induced events via the combined variable $χ_α = χ'_{tot} + 10(1-α)$.

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the total cross section for $ν_e + e^- → ν_e + e^-$ has been measured with enough precision to resolve its interference term. Splitting the cross section into a pure charged-current piece $σ_{CC} = 4σ_0$, a neutral-current piece $σ_{NC} = 0.37σ_0$, and an interference piece $σ_I = 2 I σ_0$, the collaboration extracts $I$ from the measured total rate alone, since $I = σ_{exp}/(2σ_0) - 2.18$. They obtain $I = -1.01 ± 0.13(stat.) ± 0.12(syst.)$, in agreement with the Standard Model value $I^{SM} = -1.09$ that follows from $I = 2g_L = -2 + 4 sin^2 θ_W$ once radiative corrections are included. The corresponding cross section, $[10.1 ± 1.1 ± 1.0] × E_{ν_e}(MeV) × 10^{-45}$ cm$^2$, agrees with the predicted $9.3$ in the same units and with the earlier E225 measurement of $[10.0 ± 1.5 ± 0.9]$. Solving instead for the weak mixing angle gives $sin^2 θ_W = 0.248 ± 0.051$, and the residual agreement with collider values is converted into bounds on the electron-neutrino charge radius, $-2.97 × 10^{-32} < ⟨r^2⟩ < 4.14 × 10^{-32}$ cm$^2$, on flavor-changing neutral couplings, $1 - f_{ee} < 0.32$ at 90% confidence, and on magnetic moments, $μ_{ν_e} < 1.1 × 10^{-9} μ_{Bohr}$ and $μ_{ν_μ} < 6.8 × 10^{-10} μ_{Bohr}$.

Load-bearing premise

The 51 events attributed to muon-neutrino and antimuon-neutrino scattering on electrons — about a fifth of the elastic sample — are subtracted using theoretical cross sections rather than measured in the same detector, and the paper asserts without quantifying that the answer is insensitive to that choice.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

The charged-current and neutral-current amplitudes in neutrino-electron scattering are confirmed to be coherent and to interfere destructively at the predicted strength, which is the same coherence that makes the reaction a sensitive probe of $sin^2 θ_W$.
Any new physics that couples differently to the two channels — an extra $Z'$, a neutrino charge radius, or flavor-changing neutral currents — is bounded: $1 - f_{ee} < 0.32$ and $f_{eμ}^2 + f_{eτ}^2 < 0.54$ at 90% confidence.
The muon-neutrino magnetic moment is capped at $6.8 × 10^{-10} μ_{Bohr}$, slightly tighter than previous laboratory limits, and the electron-neutrino magnetic moment at $1.1 × 10^{-9} μ_{Bohr}$.
The electron-neutrino mean squared charge radius is constrained to roughly $|⟨r^2⟩| < 4 × 10^{-32}$ cm$^2$, corresponding to internal electromagnetic structure at the $10^{-16}$ cm scale.
The measured cross section provides an independent, low-energy anchor for the same electroweak couplings that reactor and accelerator neutrino experiments extract at other energies.

Reading between the lines

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

The interference term is the cleanest handle on coherence between two gauge-boson exchange amplitudes in the leptonic sector; a future stopped-pion experiment with a few times the exposure could push the uncertainty on $I$ below the roughly 10% level reported here and turn this from a confirmation into a precision constraint on non-standard neutral currents.
Because $I$ is extracted from a total rate rather than a shape, its dominant systematic is the 7% decay-at-rest flux normalization inherited from a separate calibration experiment and beam-dump simulation; a dedicated flux measurement, or a ratio measurement against a reaction with the same flux, would attack the largest error bar directly.
The same forward-peak-versus-isotropic angular separation used here generalizes to any low-energy neutrino source, so a reactor or spallation-source measurement of $ν_e e^-$ scattering with different systematics would test whether the agreement with the Standard Model survives a change of neutrino production mechanism.
If the theoretical $ν_μ e$ and $ν̄_μ e$ cross sections used for background subtraction were wrong at the tens-of-percent level, the extracted $I$ would shift measurably, so an in-situ measurement of those channels in the same detector would tighten the result without new beam time.

Original abstract

The cross section for the elastic scattering reaction nu_e+e- -> nu_e+e- was measured by the Liquid Scintillator Neutrino Detector using a mu+ decay-at-rest nu_e beam at the Los Alamos Neutron Science Center. The standard model of electroweak physics predicts a large destructive interference between the charge current and neutral current channels for this reaction. The measured cross section, sigma_{nu_e e-}=[10.1 +- 1.1(stat.) +- 1.0(syst.)]x E_{nu_e} (MeV) x 10^{-45} cm^2, agrees well with standard model expectations. The measured value of the interference parameter, I=-1.01 +- 0.13(stat.) +- 0.12(syst.), is in good agreement with the standard model expectation of I^{SM}=-1.09. Limits are placed on neutrino flavor-changing neutral currents. An upper limit on the muon-neutrino magnetic moment of 6.8 x 10^{-10} mu_{Bohr} is obtained using the nu_mu and \bar{nu}_mu fluxes from pi+ and mu+ decay.

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged, kept beside the review and separate from it. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Compiled by classifier-1.13-20260917 via OpenRouter, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 5,142 input tokens, $0.0002 reported.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.03 · states limitation 0.29 · human participants 0.02 · controlled comparison 0.11 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.99 · compares with prior results 0.63 · mentions code or data availability 0.02.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v1. Results and the main claim are underlined; show every role.

The cross section for the elastic scattering reaction nu_e+e- -> nu_e+e- was measured by the Liquid Scintillator Neutrino Detector using a mu+ decay-at-rest nu_e beam at the Los Alamos Neutron Science Center. The standard model of electroweak physics predicts a large destructive interference between the charge current and neutral current channels for this reaction. The measured cross section, sigma_{nu_e e-}=[10.1 +- 1.1(stat.) +- 1.0(syst.)]x E_{nu_e} (MeV) x 10^{-45} cm^2, agrees well with standard model expectations. The measured value of the interference parameter, I=-1.01 +- 0.13(stat.) +- 0.12(syst.), is in good agreement with the standard model expectation of I^{SM}=-1.09. Limits are placed on neutrino flavor-changing neutral currents. An upper limit on the muon-neutrino magnetic moment of 6.8 x 10^{-10} mu_{Bohr} is obtained using the nu_mu and \bar{nu}_mu fluxes from pi+ and mu+ decay.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#	sentence	role	the authors' own work	states the main conclusion	strength
s0	The cross section for the elastic scattering reaction nu_e+e- -> nu_e+e- was measured by the Liquid Scintillator Neutrino Detector using a mu+ decay-at-rest nu_e beam at the Los Alamos Neutron Science Center.	method 0.53	0.97	0.05	asserted 1.00
s1	The standard model of electroweak physics predicts a large destructive interference between the charge current and neutral current channels for this reaction.	background 1.00	0.04	0.06	asserted 1.00
s2	The measured cross section, sigma_{nu_e e-}=[10.1 +- 1.1(stat.) +- 1.0(syst.)]x E_{nu_e} (MeV) x 10^{-45} cm^2, agrees well with standard model expectations.	result 1.00	0.97	0.51	asserted 0.98
s3	The measured value of the interference parameter, I=-1.01 +- 0.13(stat.) +- 0.12(syst.), is in good agreement with the standard model expectation of I^{SM}=-1.09.	result 0.99	0.96	0.30	asserted 0.97
s4	Limits are placed on neutrino flavor-changing neutral currents.	result 0.96	0.91	0.05	asserted 0.95
s5	An upper limit on the muon-neutrino magnetic moment of 6.8 x 10^{-10} mu_{Bohr} is obtained using the nu_mu and \bar{nu}_mu fluxes from pi+ and mu+ decay.	result 1.00	0.95	0.05	asserted 1.00

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: empirical study 1.00 · evidence from observation or experiment 1.00.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read

arXiv listing abstract v1

not examined

full text
figures and tables
references and citing sentences
relations to other papers

levels run

P abstract

not run

S sections
T body sentences
C citations
R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

Figures

**Figure 1.** Flux shape of neutrinos from pion and muon decay at rest.

**Figure 2.** Detector enclosure and target area configuration, elev

**Figure 3.** Particle identification parameters (a) χtot′ and (b) χα for electrons and neutrons. In the present analysis we require χα < 4.0 as indicated by the arrow in (b). y (cm) Events (a) Beam On Beam Off y (cm) Events (b) Beam Excess Monte Carlo 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 -150 -100 -50 0 50 100 150 200 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 -150 -100 -50 0 50 100 150 200

**Figure 4.** The y distribution of inclusive electrons (a) for beam-on events and for beam-off events corrected by the duty ratio (cross hatched), and (b) beamexcess events compared with Monte Carlo expectations (solid line). 18

**Figure 5.** Distribution of the distance between reconstructed pos

**Figure 6.** The distribution of time between the primary and the veto s

**Figure 7.** The χα distribution of the beam-excess inclusive electron sample. The histogram shows the χα distribution of Michel electrons weighted and normalized to the same area. cosθ Events Data (a) MC Background (b) 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 -1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 0.8 0.85 0.9 0.95 1

**Figure 8.** The observed cos θ distribution of the beam-excess inclusive electron sample (a) for all angles and (b) for cos θ > 0.8. The solid line shows a fit to the data by the method explained in the text. The hatched histogram shows the estimated background level from neutrino reactions other than νe elastic scattering. 20

**Figure 9.** The expected distributions of cos θ for (a) νe− elastic scattering, (b) 12C(νe, e−) 12Ng.s., (c) 12C(νe, e−) 12N∗ , and (d) 13C(νe, e−) 13X. Straight line fits are shown in (b), (c) and (d). Electron Energy (MeV) Events Data MC Background 0 10 20 30 40 50 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

**Figure 10.** The observed and expected (solid line) distributions of be

**Figure 11.** The spatial distribution of the electron for beam-exces

Figures reproduced from arXiv:hep-ex/0101039 by the authors.

References

Works cited (36)

[1]

L.A. Ahrens et al. , Phys. Rev. D 41, 3297 (1990)

View on Pith 1990
[2]

J. Dorenbasch et al. , Z. Phys. C 41, 567 (1989)

View on Pith 1989
[3]

P. Vilain et al. , Phys. Lett. B 335, 246 (1994)

View on Pith 1994
[4]

R.C. Allen et al. , Phys. Rev. D 47, 11 (1993)

View on Pith 1993
[5]

S. Sarantakos, A. Sirlin and W.J. Marciano, Nucl. Phys. 39 563 (1983)

View on Pith 1983
[6]

L.M. Sehgal, Phys. Lett. B 55, 205 (1975)

View on Pith 1975
[7]

Robert E. Shrock, Nucl. Phys. B 206, 359 (1982); B.W. Lee and R.E. Shrock, Phys. Rev. D 16, 1444 (1977)

View on Pith 1982
[8]

G. De Grassi, A. Sirlin and W.J. Marciano, Phys. Rev. D 39, 287 (1989)

View on Pith 1989
[9]

D. Geiregat et al. , Phys. Lett. B 245, 271 (1990)

View on Pith 1990
[10]

S.R. Mishra et al. , Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 3117 (1991)

View on Pith 1991
[11]

T. Adams et al. , Phys. Rev. D 61, 092001 (2000)

View on Pith 2000
[12]

F. Reines, H.S. Gurr and H. Sobel, Phys. Rev. Lett. 32, 315 (1977); a re- analysis with a better reactor ¯ νe spectrum suggests that the measurement was an upper limit, see P. Vogel and J. Engel, Phys. Rev. D 39, 3378 (1989)

View on Pith 1977
[13]

R. Barate et al. , ALEPH Coll., Phys. Lett. B 420, 128 (1998); P. Abreu et al. , DELPHI Coll., Phys. Lett. B 380 471 (1996); M. Acciarri et al. , L3 Coll., Phys. Lett. B 415 299 (1997); M. Acciarri et al. , L3 Coll., Phys. Lett. B 444 503 (1998); K. Ackerstaﬀ et al. , OPAL Coll., Eur. Phys. J. C 2 607 (1998); P.Abreu et al. , DELPHI Coll., Eur. Phys. J. C...

View on Pith 1998
[14]

C. Athanassopoulos et al. , LSND Collaboration, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A 388, 149 (1997). 14

View on Pith 1997
[15]

S. Willis et al. , Phys. Rev. Lett. 44, 522 (1980)

View on Pith 1980
[16]

D.A. Krakauer et al. , Phys. Rev. C 45, 2450 (1992)

View on Pith 1992
[17]

S.J. Freedman et al. , Phys. Rev. D 47, 811 (1993)

View on Pith 1993
[18]

R.C. Allen et al. , Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A 284, 347 (1989)

View on Pith 1989
[19]

R.L. Burman, M.E. Potter, and E.S. Smith, Nucl. Instrum. Metho ds Phys. Res. A 291, 621 (1990)

View on Pith 1990
[20]

R.A. Reeder et al. , Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A 334, 353 (1993)

View on Pith 1993
[21]

J. Napolitano et al., Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A 274, 152 (1989)

View on Pith 1989
[22]

K. McIlhany et al., Proceedings of the Conference on Computing in High Energy Physics, 1994 (LBL Report 35822, 357, 1995)

View on Pith 1994
[23]

C. Athanassopoulos et al. , LSND Collaboration, Phys. Rev. C 54, 2685 (1996); C. Athanassopoulos et al. , LSND Collaboration, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 3082 (1996)

View on Pith 1996
[24]

C. Athanassopoulos et al., Phys. Rev. C 58, 2489 (1998), C. Athanassopou- los et al. , Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 1774 (1998)

View on Pith 1998
[25]

C. Athanassopoulos et al. , LSND Collaboration, Phys. Rev. C 55, 2078 (1997)

View on Pith 1997
[26]

C. Athanassopoulos et al. , LSND Collaboration, Phys. Rev. C 56, 2806 (1997)

View on Pith 1997
[27]

N. Wadia, Ph.D. thesis, Louisiana State University, 1998

View on Pith 1998
[28]

L.B. Auerbach et al. , LSND Collaboration, to be submitted to Phys. Rev. C

View on Pith
[29]

B. Kayser, E. Fischbach, S.P. Rosen and H. Spivack, Phys. Rev . D 20, 87 (1979)

View on Pith 1979
[30]

P. Vilain et al. , Phys. Lett. B 335,246 (1994), L.A. Ahrens et al. , Phys. Rev. D 41, 3297 (1990), J. Dorenbosch et al. , Z. Phys. C 41, 567 (1989)

View on Pith 1994
[31]

Review of Particle Properties, Eur. Phys. J. C 15, 1 (2000)

View on Pith 2000
[32]

G. ’t Hooft, Phys. Lett. B 37, 195 (1971)

View on Pith 1971
[33]

M. Passera, hep-ph 0011190 (2000)

View on Pith 2000
[34]

R.C. Allen et at. , Phys. Rev. D 43, R1 (1991)

View on Pith 1991
[35]

L.B. Okun, Yad. Fiz 41, 1272 (1985) [Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 41,812 (1985)]

View on Pith 1985
[36]

R.C. Allen et at. , Phys. Rev. D 45, 975 (1992). 15 Table 1: The electron selection criteria and corresponding eﬃciencie s for the reaction νe + e → νe + e. Quantity Criteria Eﬃciency Fiducial volume D > 35 cm, 0.918 ±0.055 y > −120 cm Electron energy 18 < E e < 50 MeV 0.442 ±0.010 Particle ID χα < 4 0.940 ±0.018 In-time veto < 4 PMTs 0.988 ±0.010 Past ac...

View on Pith 1992

Forward citations

Cited by 57 Pith papers

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

Illuminating Light Dark Matter with Fixed-Target Experiments
hep-ph 2026-10 accept novelty 7.0 of 10

A doctoral thesis that advances the toolkit for light dark matter searches at fixed-target experiments, including statistical inference, global fits, and ab initio nuclear modeling.
Strong Constraints on Sub-GeV Dark Matter from SLAC Beam Dump E137
hep-ph 2014-06 accept novelty 7.0 of 10

The SLAC E137 beam-dump data exclude new regions of dark-photon and sub-GeV dark-matter parameter space, including part of the range that could explain the muon g-2 anomaly.
Precision tests of SM and new physics with the COHERENT Ge-mini and TEXONO data
hep-ph 2026-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

New constraints on neutrino electromagnetic properties, light mediators, and sterile-neutrino upscattering are derived from COHERENT Ge-mini and TEXONO data, with TEXONO giving particularly strong millicharge and magn...
Constraining the heavy leptophilic neutral gauge bosons through the $Z\to\ell^+\ell^-$, $W^\pm\to\ell^\pm\nu_\ell$, and $h\to\ell^+\ell^-$ decays
hep-ph 2026-03 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

One-loop corrections to W/Z/h leptonic widths exclude heavy leptophilic Z' regions (M ≳ O(1) TeV, g' ≳ 0.4) beyond LEP-2 and neutrino-trident limits.
Search for millicharged particles in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 13.6$ TeV
hep-ex 2025-06 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

No millicharged particles were found in 124.7 fb^-1 of 13.6 TeV data; milliQan sets the strongest limits to date for masses >= 0.45 GeV and charges <= 0.24 e.

Show 52 more citing papers

Dirt/Detector/Dump: Complementary BSM production at Short-Baseline Neutrino Facilities
hep-ph 2025-01 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Dump-produced heavy neutral leptons contribute substantially to short-baseline neutrino detector signals and can be separated from dirt and detector production by energy, angle, and timing.
Neff in the Standard Model at NLO is 3.043
hep-ph 2023-06 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

Including next-to-leading-order QED corrections to e+e- to neutrino-antineutrino annihilation during neutrino decoupling lowers the Standard Model effective number of neutrino species by 0.0007, yielding Neff = 3.0432(2).
New Constraints on Millicharged Particles from Cosmic-ray Production
hep-ph 2020-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Cosmic-ray collisions in the atmosphere produce a calculable flux of millicharged particles, and reusing Super-Kamiokande data yields new limits on their charge that are competitive with accelerator searches for masse...
The High-Energy Frontier of the Intensity Frontier: Closing the Dark Photon, Inelastic Dark Matter, and Muon g-2 Windows
hep-ph 2019-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Reanalysis of CHARM and NuCal beam-dump data nearly excludes inelastic dark matter as a full-abundance thermal relic in the MeV to GeV range for the benchmark splittings considered, and yields updated dark photon constraints.
Testing New Physics Explanations of MiniBooNE Anomaly at Neutrino Scattering Experiments
hep-ph 2018-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Neutrino-electron scattering sidebands at MINERvA and CHARM-II exclude the parameter space where a heavy dark neutrino with a light mediator could reproduce both the energy and angular distributions of the MiniBooNE excess.
Dark Matter, Millicharges, Axion and Scalar Particles, Gauge Bosons, and Other New Physics with LDMX
hep-ph 2018-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

LDMX's missing-momentum and displaced-decay channels would probe a wide range of sub-GeV dark-sector models, reaching parameter space beyond existing beam dumps and B-factories for dark matter, millicharges, dark phot...
Millicharged particles in neutrino experiments
hep-ph 2018-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Existing LSND and MiniBooNE data yield the leading constraints on millicharged particles for masses 5-35 MeV and 100-180 MeV respectively, and future neutrino experiments could probe 5 MeV to 5 GeV.
Dark Sectors at the Fermilab SeaQuest Experiment
hep-ph 2018-04 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

With a refurbished calorimeter, the existing SeaQuest spectrometer could probe GeV-scale dark photons, dark Higgs bosons, inelastic dark matter, leptophilic scalars and axion-like particles at sensitivities competitiv...
Dipole portal to heavy neutral leptons
hep-ph 2018-03 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

A comprehensive set of experimental and astrophysical constraints on a photon-coupled heavy neutral lepton excludes the dipole-based explanation of the LSND and MiniBooNE anomalies and sets sensitivity targets for SHi...
Cosmology and Accelerator Tests of Strongly Interacting Dark Matter
hep-ph 2018-01 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Vector mesons in a QCD-like dark sector, not pion self-interactions, typically set the dark matter relic abundance, widening the viable mass range and producing displaced-vertex signals at fixed-target experiments.
Testing Light Dark Matter Coannihilation With Fixed-Target Experiments
hep-ph 2017-03 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Inelastic dark matter that freezes out via coannihilation can be tested at fixed-target experiments, with existing data already excluding part of the thermal parameter space and planned experiments covering most of the rest.
Light dark matter in neutrino beams: production modelling and scattering signatures at MiniBooNE, T2K and SHiP
hep-ph 2016-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

An improved production model for sub-GeV dark matter in proton fixed-target experiments, including dark-photon bremsstrahlung and a new neutral-pion scattering channel, yields projected sensitivities for MiniBooNE, T2...
Testing GeV-Scale Dark Matter with Fixed-Target Missing Momentum Experiments
hep-ph 2014-11 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

A thin-target fixed-target experiment with near-target tracking, using the recoil electron's energy and transverse momentum, can probe vector-portal dark matter and invisibly decaying dark photons down to kinetic mixi...
DAEdALUS and Dark Matter Detection
hep-ph 2014-11 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

DAEdALUS/LENA would improve LSND's dark-photon kinetic-mixing bound by about an order of magnitude for light dark matter, and a re-analysis shows LSND already probes off-shell dark photon production in two regimes neg...
Searching for the light dark gauge boson in GeV-scale experiments
hep-ph 2009-04 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

A GeV-scale dark photon with coupling 10^-3 to 10^-5 of the photon is within reach of B-factories, meson factories, and especially a dedicated fixed-target experiment reaching 10^-5 to 10^-6.
Neutrino-Electron Scattering: General Constraints on Z' and Dark Photon Models
hep-ph 2018-02 conditional novelty 5.5 of 10

General exact formulas for Z-Z' mixing and neutrino-electron scattering yield bounds on Z' and dark photon models from TEXONO, CHARM-II, and GEMMA data.
A consistent neutrino determination of the low-energy weak mixing angle
hep-ph 2026-10 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

A global fit of coherent neutrino-nucleus and neutrino-electron scattering data yields sin²θ_W^low = 0.233 (+0.007, -0.006), consistent with the Standard Model plateau and with atomic parity violation in cesium.
Phenomenological implications of the high-precision COHERENT germanium CE$\nu$NS data
hep-ph 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0 of 10

High-precision COHERENT germanium CEνNS data yields state-of-the-art constraints on the weak mixing angle, neutrino charge radii, germanium neutron radius, and non-standard neutrino interactions via global analysis wi...
Elastic neutrino-electron scattering perspectives at nuclear reactors
hep-ph 2026-02 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Projections show CLOUD and TAO could improve low-energy weak mixing angle measurements to 8-11% via elastic neutrino-electron scattering, with competitive magnetic moment and NSI limits.
How Charged Can Neutrinos Be?
hep-ph 2025-04 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Mini-charged neutrinos are viable only for flavor-universal U(1)_X extensions such as U(1)_{B-L} and U(1)_L, and their experimental constraints are model-dependent, with upper bounds ranging from 10^-19 e to 10^-21 e.
Sensitivity study of a sapphire detector using Coherent Elastic Neutrino-Nucleus Scattering process
hep-ph 2025-02 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Projected sensitivities for the proposed ICNSE sapphire detector show it could constrain new scalar and vector mediator masses at reactor sites, though its neutrino magnetic moment and weak mixing angle reach would be modest.
Reactor antineutrinos CE$\nu$NS on germanium: CONUS+ and TEXONO as a new gateway to SM and BSM physics
hep-ph 2025-01 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

CONUS+ and TEXONO reactor CEνNS data are consistent with the Standard Model and yield the most stringent limit on the electron neutrino millicharge through neutrino-electron scattering.
Probing Standard Model and Beyond with Reactor CE$\nu$NS Data of CONUS+ experiment
hep-ph 2025-01 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Using CONUS+ reactor data, the authors constrain the weak mixing angle, neutrino electromagnetic properties, and light scalar and vector mediators, finding their most notable limit on neutrino millicharge when electro...
Impact of the Dresden-II and COHERENT neutrino scattering data on neutrino electromagnetic properties and electroweak physics
hep-ph 2022-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Combining Dresden-II reactor and COHERENT CsI/Ar coherent-scattering data, including neutrino-electron scattering, yields updated neutrino electromagnetic limits and a low-energy weak mixing angle, with a new best upp...
Constraining New Physics with Borexino Phase-II spectral data
hep-ph 2022-04 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Full spectral fits to Borexino Phase II data reproduce the collaboration's magnetic-moment bound and yield new, correlation-aware limits on neutrino non-standard interactions and on light vector, scalar, and pseudosca...
Extending the reach of FASER, MATHUSLA, and SHiP towards smaller lifetimes using secondary particle production
hep-ph 2019-11 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Scattering of a long-lived dark-sector particle in material just in front of FASER, MATHUSLA, or SHiP regenerates a shorter-lived partner, extending each experiment's reach to lifetimes far below its baseline.
Sensitivity of the COHERENT Experiment to Accelerator-Produced Dark Matter
hep-ex 2019-11 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

A planned 750-kg liquid argon detector at the Spallation Neutron Source would set leading projected limits on sub-GeV scalar dark matter over roughly two orders of magnitude in mass.
Neutrino, Electroweak and Nuclear Physics from COHERENT Elastic Neutrino-Nucleus Scattering with a New Quenching Factor
hep-ph 2019-08 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

A reanalysis of COHERENT scattering data with a new quenching factor tightens the neutron radius and weak angle measurements and produces the first lab limits on the muon neutrino charge and the muon-tau transition charge.
Hunting On- and Off-Axis for Light Dark Matter with DUNE-PRISM
hep-ph 2019-03 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Splitting DUNE near-detector data across multiple off-axis positions beats an on-axis-only run for sub-GeV scalar dark matter, because the dominant correlated flux uncertainty can be separated from the signal.
Neutrino Charge Radii from COHERENT Elastic Neutrino-Nucleus Scattering
hep-ph 2018-10 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

COHERENT CsI data yield 90% CL bounds on diagonal neutrino charge radii of order tens of 10^-32 cm^2 and the first bounds on transition charge radii below about 30 x 10^-32 cm^2.
Inelastic Dark Matter at the LHC Lifetime Frontier: ATLAS, CMS, LHCb, CODEX-b, FASER, and MATHUSLA
hep-ph 2018-10 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

For dark matter that couples only through a nearly degenerate excited state and a 10 to 100 GeV dark photon, existing and proposed LHC lifetime-frontier detectors can cover most of the cosmologically favored parameter space.
Exponentially Light Dark Matter from Coannihilation
hep-ph 2018-03 accept novelty 5.0 of 10

Coannihilation among non-degenerate dark states naturally produces thermal dark matter exponentially lighter than the weak scale, down to the keV scale, with a relic density independent of the dark matter's own couplings.
Neutrino Masses and Absence of Flavor Changing Interactions in the 2HDM from Gauge Principles
hep-ph 2017-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

An extra gauged U(1) with suitable charges can generate the discrete symmetry that suppresses flavor-changing neutral currents in the Type I Two Higgs Doublet Model while also permitting a seesaw mechanism for neutrin...
Dark Matter's secret liaisons: phenomenology of a dark U(1) sector with bound states
hep-ph 2016-12 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Once bound-state formation is included in both the relic abundance and the annihilation signals, dark matter coupled to a dark U(1) force is excluded for dark photon masses from roughly 1 MeV to 1 GeV across dark matt...
Measurement of Neutrino Flux from Neutrino-Electron Elastic Scattering
physics.ins-det 2015-12 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

A sample of 135 neutrino-electron elastic scattering candidates in MINERvA constrains the NuMI muon-neutrino flux uncertainty from 9% to 6% over 2 to 10 GeV.
Model independent constraints on four-lepton operators
hep-ph 2015-11 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

A global fit to LEP, Tevatron and low-energy data yields confidence intervals and a full correlation matrix for 16 combinations of dimension-6 four-lepton Wilson coefficients, with no flavor-universality assumption.
Leptophilic Dark Matter with $Z'$ interactions
hep-ph 2014-07 accept novelty 5.0 of 10

Leptophilic dark matter mediated by a Z' boson is strongly constrained by LUX direct detection, (g-2) measurements, and LHC four-lepton searches, with the vector-coupling case essentially excluded except near resonance.
Leptophobic Dark Matter at Neutrino Factories
hep-ph 2014-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

MiniBooNE's beam-dump run can probe a leptophobic dark matter model down to a baryonic fine-structure constant near 10^-6 for mediator masses up to about 1 GeV.
A Lower Bound on the Mass of Cold Thermal Dark Matter from Planck
hep-ph 2013-03 accept novelty 5.0 of 10

Cold thermal dark matter that remained in equilibrium with neutrinos, or with electrons and photons, after neutrino decoupling must be heavier than roughly 1 to 10 MeV, because its entropy transfer shifts the neutrino...
Leptophilic Dark Matter
hep-ph 2008-11 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

A broken U(1) under which only dark matter and leptons are charged explains the PAMELA/ATIC positron excess and, with tuning, the DAMA modulation.
Probing the Tau Neutrino Magnetic Moment via the $\mu^{-}\gamma \rightarrow \mu^{-}\nu\bar{\nu}$ Process at Future Muon Colliders
hep-ph 2026-09 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

Future muon colliders could improve the tau neutrino magnetic moment sensitivity by up to an order of magnitude compared to the current best direct limit.
When backgrounds become signals: neutrino interactions in xenon-based dark matter detectors
hep-ph 2025-09 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

Solar neutrino data from three xenon dark matter experiments provide updated standard-model tests and competitive limits on neutrino electromagnetic properties.
Neutrino magnetic moments: effective versus fundamental parameters
hep-ph 2025-05 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

Effective neutrino magnetic moments are experiment-dependent; using solar neutrino data from dark matter detectors, the authors derive new bounds on the fundamental Majorana transition moments and translate them into ...
Searching for long-lived particles from stopped pions and muons at the CiADS-BDE
hep-ph 2025-01 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

Projected 5-year sensitivity of the proposed CiADS-BDE shows reach beyond current bounds for HNLs, electrophilic and LFV ALPs, and RPV light binos.
Exploring the Standard Model and Beyond from the Evidence of CE$\nu$NS with Reactor Antineutrinos in CONUS+
hep-ph 2025-01 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

Fitting the CONUS+ reactor CEνNS event count yields sin²θW = 0.268 ± 0.047, µν < 5.6×10⁻¹⁰ µB, and NSI bounds similar to COHERENT, all consistent with the Standard Model.
Physics results from the first COHERENT observation of CE$\nu$NS in argon and their combination with cesium-iodide data
hep-ph 2020-05 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

Fitting the COHERENT argon CEνNS spectrum yields bounds on neutrino electric charges q_μμ and q_μτ at the 10^-8 e level, the only existing laboratory limits on those two quantities.
MeV scale leptonic force for cosmic neutrino spectrum and muon anomalous magnetic moment
hep-ph 2015-08 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

A 10 MeV L_mu minus L_tau gauge boson with coupling near 5e-4 can reproduce the IceCube spectral gap and the muon g-2 anomaly, but not the sharp 3 PeV edge.
White Paper on Light Sterile Neutrino Searches and Related Phenomenology
hep-ex 2022-03 accept novelty 3.0 of 10

A comprehensive review of the four short-baseline neutrino anomalies, the beyond-Standard-Model interpretations proposed for them, and the experimental portfolio needed to resolve them.
White Paper on New Opportunities at the Next-Generation Neutrino Experiments (Part 1: BSM Neutrino Physics and Dark Matter)
hep-ph 2019-07 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

Next-generation neutrino experiments can serve as powerful, complementary searches for dark matter and neutrino-sector new physics, but the community must build the simulation and analysis tools now.
Dark Sectors 2016 Workshop: Community Report
hep-ph 2016-08 accept novelty 3.0 of 10

The report consolidates the sub-GeV dark sector program into three concrete milestones (visible dark photon decays, accelerator-produced light dark matter, and low-threshold direct detection) and catalogs the experime...
Status of non-standard neutrino interactions
hep-ph 2012-09 accept novelty 2.0 of 10

A status review of non-standard neutrino interactions that collects the theoretical models, the experimental and phenomenological bounds, and the projected sensitivities of future experiments.
Electromagnetic Properties of Neutrinos
hep-ph 2012-07 accept novelty 1.0 of 10

A comprehensive review of neutrino electromagnetic form factors, dipole moments, charge radius, radiative decay, and spin-flavor precession, with experimental limits and theoretical predictions collected in one place.

How later papers used it

124 later papers cite it

Evidence: substantial. 121 of the citing papers share no author with it, and 48 of those carry a confident label from Pith's citation classifier.

Pith read 21 of the 183 citing sentences, choosing only those whose citation markers point at this paper alone, and wrote the paraphrases from them. The summary, the counts, the evidence level, the links and the quotes come from code; the summary counts the papers listed below. A later paper is listed under a label when Pith's citation classifier gives one of its sentences that label at probability 0.8 or more (0.95 for support), Pith's reading finds that the citing paper itself did it, and a second check confirms the paraphrase against the sentence. This section lists uses only. It does not list criticism or disagreement, so their absence here says nothing about how the paper has been received. Papers that share an author with this one are listed apart, under "By the same authors". A quote is the citing authors' own sentence, shown when their paper's licence is CC BY, CC BY-SA or CC0. JSON

4 later papers by other authors are listed below: 1 used its method or tool and 4 used its data or values. 1 of them appears under more than one label.

Uses its method or tool 1 of 2 papers with this label

Based its analysis at LSND on this paper's electron-neutrino elastic scattering search, respecting the fiducial geometry and energy cuts described in it.

Dipole portal to heavy neutral leptons (2018) · 0.90 · paraphrased: the licence does not allow quoting

Uses its data or values 4 of 38 papers with this label

Adopted the observed and expected distribution of beam-excess events at 18-50 MeV_ee published in Fig. 10 of this paper.

Constraints on Non-Standard Intermediate Boson Exchange Models from Neutrino-Electron Scattering (2017) · 1.00 · paraphrased: the licence does not allow quoting
Examined Fig. 1 and 10 of this paper and noted that the incident neutrino flux favors energies between 30-50 while the collected electron-like sample peaks around 22.

Dipole portal to heavy neutral leptons (2018) · 0.86 · paraphrased: the licence does not allow quoting
Estimated from Fig. 10 of this paper and Fig. 28 of another work that there are less than 20 decay-in-flight events above 140 MeV during the exposure.

Light Scalars and Dark Photons in Borexino and LSND Experiments (2017) · 0.99 · paraphrased: the licence does not allow quoting
where the LSND result is obtained from the general bound reported in Ref. [ref] (see discussion below).

Neutrino magnetic moments: effective versus fundamental parameters (2025) · Bounds from short-baseline experiments · 0.98

How the literature uses it

112 arXiv papers cite this in 171 sentences

Each citing sentence is taken from the citing paper's LaTeX source and typed by Pith's classifier. A label appears at probability 0.8 or more (0.95 for support), a contest at 0.7 or more; the quoted words are the citing authors'. How each label was checked · JSON

Papers citing it · 83 sentences without a confident label

Uses its method or tool 2 papers

To derive the constraint, we may follow the procedure used in [ref] to put an upper bound on the neutrino magnetic dipole moments.

Heavy Neutral Leptons from Stopped Muons and Pions · New constraint: LSND · 0.99
In order to obtain constraints, we base our analysis at LSND on an electron-neutrino elastic scattering search [ref] , respecting the fiducial geometry and energy cuts described in that paper.

Dipole portal to heavy neutral leptons · Backgrounds · 0.90

Uses its data or values 36 papers

We have analyzed all available measurements of the (anti)neutrino-electron scattering from the following reactor and accelerator experiments: first measurement of neutrino-electron scattering made by Reines, Gurr and Sobel (Irvine) [ref] , the Kurchatov institute group at the Krasnoyarsk reactor [ref] , the group from Gatchina at the Rovno reactor [ref] , MUNU at the Bugey reactor [ref] , LAMPF [ref] and LSND [ref] .

Improved limit on electron neutrino charge radius through a new evaluation of the weak mixing angle · Introduction · 1.00
They measured the flux-averaged cross-sections $σ̅_ν_e e^exp=(3.18±0.56)×10^-43 cm^2$ and $σ̅_ν_e e^exp=(3.19±0.48)×10^-43 cm^2$, respectively, corresponding to $σ_ν_e e^exp=(10.0±1.8)×10^-45 cm^2E̅_ν^/MeV$ and $σ_ν_e e^exp= (10.1±1.5)×10^-45 cm^2E̅_ν^/MeV$ [ref] with flux-averaged energy $E̅_ν≃31.7$ MeV, the statistical and systematic errors of each having been combined in quadrature.

Constraining Nonstandard Neutrino-Electron Interactions due to a New Light Spin-1 Boson · Constraints from $ν_e^e→νe$ · 1.00
The strongest terrestrial bounds on the magnetic moment include LSND [ref] , $μ_ν_μ < 6.8 ×10^-10$ $μ_B$, and GEMMA [ref] , $μ_ν_e < 3.2 ×10^-11$ $μ_B$.

Using DUNE to Shed Light on the Electromagnetic Properties of Neutrinos · Neutrino Magnetic Moment · 0.96

Compares with it 11 papers

We note that from this it appears that DUNE will be able to place the leading terrestrial constraint on the $ν_μ$ magnetic moment by exceeding the current bound from LSND [ref] , but still an order of magnitude worse compared to Borexino.

Using DUNE to Shed Light on the Electromagnetic Properties of Neutrinos · Neutrino Magnetic Moment · 0.93
By reinterpreting an existing analysis on $ν-e$ elastic scattering we find sensitivity to a large region of the DM parameter space still unconstrained by present experimental probes such as LSND [ref] , E137 [ref] , NA64 [ref] , BaBar [ref] and CRESST-II [ref] .

Hunting sub-GeV dark matter with NO$\nu$A near detector · Introduction · 0.92
Here, together with the various bounds obtained in this work we also show the 90% C.L. upper bounds on $|q_ν_μμ|$ obtained, respectively, in Ref. [ref] from the LSND [ref] bound on $|μ_ν_μ|$ and in the XMASS-I experiment [ref] from solar neutrino ES.[Also in the case of the XMASS-I limit, that is the most stringent one for $|q_ν_μμ|$, the electron-neutrino cross section is derived using an ab-initio multi-configuration relativistic random phase approximation [ref] that allows them to set more stringent limits.] Also in this case, the inclusion of the ES contribution significantly improves the bounds obtained for COHERENT, superseding the existing bounds from LSND concerning $|q_ν_eμ|$, while our bounds represent the only existing laboratory bounds for $|q_ν_eτ|$.

Impact of the Dresden-II and COHERENT neutrino scattering data on neutrino electromagnetic properties and electroweak physics · Neutrino electric charge · 0.92

Cites it as background 22 papers

At proton beam dump experiments LSND [ref] and MiniBooNE [ref] , a proton beam is incident on a target and the following chain of interactions occur producing DM: $p p →X π^0 ; π^0 →γA'; A' →DM DM$, where in the inclusive process, $p p →X π^0$, $X$ denotes an unspecified/unmeasured set of particles, whereas $π^0$ can also be $η$ in the case of MiniBooNE where the energy is sufficient.

Spin-1 Thermal Targets for Dark Matter Searches at Beam Dump and Fixed Target Experiments · LSND and MiniBooNE · 0.84
On the other hand, the Liquid Scintillator Neutrino Experiment (LSND) [ref] was conducted at Los Alamos National Laboratory between 1993 and 1998, primarily aimed at searching for short-baseline neutrino oscillations.

Neutrino magnetic moments: effective versus fundamental parameters · Bounds from short-baseline experiments · 0.92
They can arise in simple frameworks in which a new gauge boson kinetically mixes with the photon [ref] . mCPs in the MeV to several GeV range have been identified as interesting targets for experimental analyses, with limits set by SLAC's milliQ [ref] , LSND [ref] , Fermilab's miniBoone [ref] and ArgoNeuT [ref] , and proposed dedicated experiments [ref] .

Millicharged Cosmic Rays and Low Recoil Detectors · Introduction · 0.87

Discussion

Disagree with the review, or know something it missed? Leave a comment, highlight any passage above to comment on it, or challenge this review formally.

[1] [1]

L.A. Ahrens et al. , Phys. Rev. D 41, 3297 (1990)

View on Pith 1990

[2] [2]

J. Dorenbasch et al. , Z. Phys. C 41, 567 (1989)

View on Pith 1989

[3] [3]

P. Vilain et al. , Phys. Lett. B 335, 246 (1994)

View on Pith 1994

[4] [4]

R.C. Allen et al. , Phys. Rev. D 47, 11 (1993)

View on Pith 1993

[5] [5]

S. Sarantakos, A. Sirlin and W.J. Marciano, Nucl. Phys. 39 563 (1983)

View on Pith 1983

[6] [6]

L.M. Sehgal, Phys. Lett. B 55, 205 (1975)

View on Pith 1975

[7] [7]

Robert E. Shrock, Nucl. Phys. B 206, 359 (1982); B.W. Lee and R.E. Shrock, Phys. Rev. D 16, 1444 (1977)

View on Pith 1982

[8] [8]

G. De Grassi, A. Sirlin and W.J. Marciano, Phys. Rev. D 39, 287 (1989)

View on Pith 1989

[9] [9]

D. Geiregat et al. , Phys. Lett. B 245, 271 (1990)

View on Pith 1990

[10] [10]

S.R. Mishra et al. , Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 3117 (1991)

View on Pith 1991

[11] [11]

T. Adams et al. , Phys. Rev. D 61, 092001 (2000)

View on Pith 2000

[12] [12]

F. Reines, H.S. Gurr and H. Sobel, Phys. Rev. Lett. 32, 315 (1977); a re- analysis with a better reactor ¯ νe spectrum suggests that the measurement was an upper limit, see P. Vogel and J. Engel, Phys. Rev. D 39, 3378 (1989)

View on Pith 1977

[13] [13]

R. Barate et al. , ALEPH Coll., Phys. Lett. B 420, 128 (1998); P. Abreu et al. , DELPHI Coll., Phys. Lett. B 380 471 (1996); M. Acciarri et al. , L3 Coll., Phys. Lett. B 415 299 (1997); M. Acciarri et al. , L3 Coll., Phys. Lett. B 444 503 (1998); K. Ackerstaﬀ et al. , OPAL Coll., Eur. Phys. J. C 2 607 (1998); P.Abreu et al. , DELPHI Coll., Eur. Phys. J. C...

View on Pith 1998

[14] [14]

C. Athanassopoulos et al. , LSND Collaboration, Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A 388, 149 (1997). 14

View on Pith 1997

[15] [15]

S. Willis et al. , Phys. Rev. Lett. 44, 522 (1980)

View on Pith 1980

[16] [16]

D.A. Krakauer et al. , Phys. Rev. C 45, 2450 (1992)

View on Pith 1992

[17] [17]

S.J. Freedman et al. , Phys. Rev. D 47, 811 (1993)

View on Pith 1993

[18] [18]

R.C. Allen et al. , Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A 284, 347 (1989)

View on Pith 1989

[19] [19]

R.L. Burman, M.E. Potter, and E.S. Smith, Nucl. Instrum. Metho ds Phys. Res. A 291, 621 (1990)

View on Pith 1990

[20] [20]

R.A. Reeder et al. , Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A 334, 353 (1993)

View on Pith 1993

[21] [21]

J. Napolitano et al., Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A 274, 152 (1989)

View on Pith 1989

[22] [22]

K. McIlhany et al., Proceedings of the Conference on Computing in High Energy Physics, 1994 (LBL Report 35822, 357, 1995)

View on Pith 1994

[23] [23]

C. Athanassopoulos et al. , LSND Collaboration, Phys. Rev. C 54, 2685 (1996); C. Athanassopoulos et al. , LSND Collaboration, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 3082 (1996)

View on Pith 1996

[24] [24]

C. Athanassopoulos et al., Phys. Rev. C 58, 2489 (1998), C. Athanassopou- los et al. , Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 1774 (1998)

View on Pith 1998

[25] [25]

C. Athanassopoulos et al. , LSND Collaboration, Phys. Rev. C 55, 2078 (1997)

View on Pith 1997

[26] [26]

C. Athanassopoulos et al. , LSND Collaboration, Phys. Rev. C 56, 2806 (1997)

View on Pith 1997

[27] [27]

N. Wadia, Ph.D. thesis, Louisiana State University, 1998

View on Pith 1998

[28] [28]

L.B. Auerbach et al. , LSND Collaboration, to be submitted to Phys. Rev. C

View on Pith

[29] [29]

B. Kayser, E. Fischbach, S.P. Rosen and H. Spivack, Phys. Rev . D 20, 87 (1979)

View on Pith 1979

[30] [30]

P. Vilain et al. , Phys. Lett. B 335,246 (1994), L.A. Ahrens et al. , Phys. Rev. D 41, 3297 (1990), J. Dorenbosch et al. , Z. Phys. C 41, 567 (1989)

View on Pith 1994

[31] [31]

Review of Particle Properties, Eur. Phys. J. C 15, 1 (2000)

View on Pith 2000

[32] [32]

G. ’t Hooft, Phys. Lett. B 37, 195 (1971)

View on Pith 1971

[33] [33]

M. Passera, hep-ph 0011190 (2000)

View on Pith 2000

[34] [34]

R.C. Allen et at. , Phys. Rev. D 43, R1 (1991)

View on Pith 1991

[35] [35]

L.B. Okun, Yad. Fiz 41, 1272 (1985) [Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 41,812 (1985)]

View on Pith 1985

[36] [36]

R.C. Allen et at. , Phys. Rev. D 45, 975 (1992). 15 Table 1: The electron selection criteria and corresponding eﬃciencie s for the reaction νe + e → νe + e. Quantity Criteria Eﬃciency Fiducial volume D > 35 cm, 0.918 ±0.055 y > −120 cm Electron energy 18 < E e < 50 MeV 0.442 ±0.010 Particle ID χα < 4 0.940 ±0.018 In-time veto < 4 PMTs 0.988 ±0.010 Past ac...

View on Pith 1992