Pith.

High Energy Physics - Phenomenology · arXiv:hep-ph/0307058 v1 · submitted 4 Jul 2003

Neutrino Physics in the Seesaw Model

A. Broncano, M.B. Gavela, E. Jenkins

The paper says

“It is shown how low-energy measurements of the properties of light neutrinos suffice a priori to determine all couplings of the unobserved heavy neutrinos.”

from the abstract · picked out as the main claim by a classifier

Pith says

Pith has not reviewed this paper.

Get a Pith Review, $5

Reviews

Reviews by people

No person has reviewed this paper on Pith yet. A scientist listed on Pith can review it for a fee, and their review is published here whatever it concludes.

Request a human review

How Pith checks papers · The full audit of this paper

The paper

Abstract

The seesaw model of heavy and light Majorana neutrinos and its low-energy effective theory are studied, when the number of heavy neutrinos is equal to or less than the number of light lepton generations. We establish a general relationship between the high-energy parameters and the low-energy observables involving only the light fields. It is shown how low-energy measurements of the properties of light neutrinos suffice a priori to determine all couplings of the unobserved heavy neutrinos. CP violation is present in low-energy processes if seesaw-model leptogenesis creates the matter-antimatter asymmetry of the universe.

The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review

How the main claim is stated: asserted 1.00

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.03 · states limitation 0.29 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.02 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.04 · compares with prior results 0.05 · mentions code or data availability 0.02

The abstract, sentence by sentence

This table labels the abstract only (arXiv listing abstract v1). The number is the probability the classifier gave the label.

SentenceRoleThe authors' own workStates the main conclusionStrength
The seesaw model of heavy and light Majorana neutrinos and its low-energy effective theory are studied, when the number of heavy neutrinos is equal to or less than the number of light lepton generations. background 0.51 0.53 0.06 asserted 0.81
We establish a general relationship between the high-energy parameters and the low-energy observables involving only the light fields. contribution 0.60 0.92 0.21 asserted 1.00
It is shown how low-energy measurements of the properties of light neutrinos suffice a priori to determine all couplings of the unobserved heavy neutrinos. result 0.95 0.83 0.66 asserted 1.00
CP violation is present in low-energy processes if seesaw-model leptogenesis creates the matter-antimatter asymmetry of the universe. result 0.50 0.42 0.11 asserted 0.85

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: theoretical result 1.00 · evidence from proof or derivation 0.99

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

How the labels were made

Compiled by classifier-1.13-20260917 via OpenRouter, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 3,613 input tokens, $0.0002 reported.

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. This record as JSON

Cited by 14 Pith papers
How the literature uses it

19 arXiv papers cite this in 41 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 · 24 sentences without a confident label

Compares with it 3 papers
Cites it as support 2 papers
  • Given the fact that the number of primary invariants is equal to that of independent physical parameters, we reach the conclusion that inclusion of just one dimension-five and one dimension-six operator in the effective theory is already adequate to incorporate all physical information about the full theory, including the source of CP violation [ref] .

    Spelling Out Leptonic CP Violation in the Language of Invariant Theory · Introduction · 0.97

  • This nontrivial correspondence implies that for type-I seesaw model, which only extends the SM by adding gauge singlets, only one $d=5$ and one $d=6$ operator are already adequate to incorporate all physical information about the UV theory, including the sources of CP violation [ref] .

    CP violation and flavor invariants in the seesaw effective field theory · Connection between the full theory and the effective theory · 0.98

Cites it as background 8 papers
  • With the effective operators up to dimension-six (dim-6) or equivalently to the order of $𝒪 (M^-2)$, the tree-level Lagrangian of the type-I SEFT via integrating out right-handed neutrinos at the tree level has been known for a long time, which contains the unique dimension-five (dim-5) Weinberg operator [ref] and two dim-6 operators $^(1)_Hℓ$ and $^(3)_Hℓ$ [ref] .

    Complete One-loop Renormalization-group Equations in the Seesaw Effective Field Theories · Introduction · 0.83

  • So far we have discussed the interactions of the Majoron, but, of course, the right-handed neutrinos $N_R$ also mediate non-Majoron processes, discussed at length in the literature [ref] .

    The Majoron at two loops · Comparison with seesaw observables · 1.00

  • The seesaw model has been studied many times in the past in an EFT context, see Refs. [ref] .

    On expansions in neutrino effective field theory · Introduction · 0.97

Challenges and discussion

Know something about this paper? Leave a comment.

No comments yet.

Sign in to comment