Probing Lepton Number Violation via Majorana Neutrinos at Hadron Supercolliders

A. Datta; A. Pilaftsis; M. Guchait

REVIEW

Probing Lepton Number Violation via Majorana Neutrinos at Hadron Supercolliders

A. Datta, M. Guchait, A. Pilaftsis

High Energy Physics - Phenomenology · Submitted 10 Nov 1993 · 25 references

Pith's verdict: A solid, honest 1993 channel-by-channel feasibility study whose headline event numbers don't quite trace back to its own Table I.

T0 · AI review

How this review was made: An AI referee (selfhosted/deepseek-v4.1-flash) read the paper on November 13, 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 →

· 4 major objections · 8 minor · Ask about this paper · The compiled record · Read the full review →

Challenge this review Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗

Cite ▾

arXiv IDhep-ph/9311257 (version 1)

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

CitationA. Datta, A. Pilaftsis, M. Guchait. "Probing Lepton Number Violation via Majorana Neutrinos at Hadron Supercolliders." arXiv:hep-ph/9311257 (1993). https://pith.science/paper/JNODTQRT

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

Worth your time if you work on heavy Majorana neutrino searches, but read it for the channel compilation, not the event counts. What's actually new is the systematic sweep: differential cross sections for all eight production routes (A–H) collected in one place, Eqs. 8–15, and then ranked. That ranking — W-mediated single production pp → W* → lN dominates in three generations, Higgs fusion gg → H* → NN dominates in four — is the durable result, and it is still the right qualitative picture. They are also honest about their machinery: equivalence theorem where it applies, EVBA where it doesn't, and they drop process D from the final analysis rather than lean on it. The four-generation tables are explicitly scaled by R(2)4G, which is unbounded, so nobody can mistake them for predictions. That is good practice and I'd like to see more of it. Two soft spots. The first they admit: the 16–48 events in Eq. 24 assume R(1)3G at its upper bound of 0.02, and they say plainly that a smaller mixing kills the signal. Fine — it is an upper estimate and labeled as conservative, so I won't count it against them. The second they don't address, and it is the one I'd push on. Table I gives process B at LHC as (1–2)×10^-3 × R(1) pb. With R(1)=0.02 and 4×10^5 pb^-1/yr that is 8–16 events, not 48, and the pT2 > 80 GeV cut should push it lower still. I cannot reconstruct Eq. 24 from the quoted cross section. Related: Eq. 16's final factor is written as Γ(N→l+qq')/Γ(N→l qq'), which is literally one — presumably a typo for the total width, but as printed it hides the LNV branching ratio. Either way the headline number isn't traceable and it errs high. Minor: the cut doing all the background-killing work (pT2 > 80 GeV with ETAC < 10 GeV) is imported from an unpublished TIFR preprint [22], not re-derived here. Bottom line: a competent, useful paper with one number that needs fixing. Send it out; ask for the Table I / Eq. 24 reconciliation and the branching ratio in Eq. 16.

Referee report

Significance

The paper is a useful and reasonably complete survey of heavy-Majorana-neutrino production at hadron colliders, and its main structural conclusions — that single W-mediated production dominates in three-generation models while Higgs-mediated pair production dominates in the four-generation scenario — are physically well motivated and worth putting on record. The strengths are real: explicit differential cross sections are given for all eight subprocesses (Eqs. 8–15), the approximations used (equivalence theorem, effective vector boson approximation) are named and their domain of validity stated, process D is conservatively excluded from the final numbers even though it is comparable to B, and the mixing parameter R(1)3G is treated explicitly as an upper bound rather than a prediction. The quoted event rates in Eq. (24) and Tables IIa/IIb are falsifiable and can be checked against a full detector simulation, which is exactly what a paper of this kind should supply.

Major objections (4)

[§II.2, Eq. (16)] The final factor of Eq. (16) is written as ∫dΓ(Nα → l+ q qbar')/Γ(Nα → l q qbar'), which is unity by construction: the integral of a differential width over the full phase space divided by the corresponding total width is 1. What the LSD rate requires is the lepton-number-violating branching ratio Br(N → l+ q qbar'), which for a heavy Majorana neutrino of 200–400 GeV is roughly one third to one half of the total width once the Z- and Higgs-mediated channels and the τ channel are included. As printed, Eq. (16) therefore overcounts the signal by a factor of order two to three, and this factor propagates directly into the headline numbers of Eq. (24). Please replace the ratio by the explicit branching ratio, state the total width Γ_N and the partial widths used, and update Eq. (24) accordingly.
[§II.3, Eq. (24) and Table I] The event numbers in Eq. (24) are not traceable to the cross sections quoted in Table I. Table I lists process B at LHC as 1–2 × 10^-3 × R(1) pb over mN = 200–1000 GeV; with R(1)3G = 0.02 and the stated luminosity of 4 × 10^5 pb^-1 yr^-1 this gives roughly 8–16 events per year, whereas Eq. (24) quotes 48 events at mN = 200 GeV and 32 at 300 GeV. The gap is a factor of three to six, and it runs the wrong way: Eq. (24) is stated to include the pT2 > 80 GeV cut, which should reduce the rate relative to the uncut Table I entry, not increase it. Please show the explicit chain from the Table I cross section through the branching ratio, the cut efficiency and the luminosity to the numbers in Eq. (24), or correct the numbers.
[§II.3, Eq. (24)] The event rates in Eq. (24) assume an integrated luminosity of 4 × 10^5 pb^-1 yr^-1 for the LHC, which is a factor of about four above the standard high-luminosity design value of 10^5 pb^-1 yr^-1. Since the entire three-generation observability claim scales linearly with this number, the assumption should be stated explicitly in the text and in the table caption, and the rates should also be quoted at 10^5 pb^-1 yr^-1 so that the reader can judge the claim against the baseline machine. The same remark applies to the SSC numbers quoted in the surrounding discussion.
[§II.3, Ref. [22]] The quantitative claim that the ttbar background is eliminated — 'for the isolation cut of ETAC < 10 GeV, a kinematical cut pT2 > 80 GeV suffices to kill the background completely' — rests on Ref. [22], which is cited only as an unpublished TIFR preprint (TIFR/TH/93-23) with no journal reference. This is the load-bearing step for the background-free character of the signal, and the paper's own parton-level Fig. 5 is explicitly noted not to be fully realistic because of jet fragmentation. Please supply a journal reference for Ref. [22], or present the ISAJET-level result here, or soften the 'completely' to a quantitative residual background estimate.

Minor objections (8)

[Table I header] The column headings read 'LHC (√s = 16) TeV' and 'SSC (√s = 16) TeV'; the SSC centre-of-mass energy is 40 TeV, so the second heading appears to be a typographical error. Please correct it, since the SSC entries are used in the comparison at the end of §II.3.
[§II.2, Eq. (8)] The notation |B2lα|^2 in Eq. (8) is ambiguous and should presumably read |Blα|^4. In addition, as printed the factors m2α (m2α − m2β)^2 M4W appear in the numerator, which is dimensionally inconsistent for a cross section; please check the typesetting of this equation.
[§II.1, Eq. (3)] The parentheses in the Higgs Lagrangian of Eq. (3) are unbalanced (there are extra closing brackets in each of the three terms), which makes the γ5 structure hard to read. Please retypeset Eq. (3).
[§II.2, Eq. (15)] For the νν channel the Higgs coupling in Eq. (3) scales as mν Cνν rather than mN Cνν, whereas the prefactor of Eq. (15) is written as m2N/M4W with |Cαβ|^2. Please state explicitly which mass factor applies to which channel (νν, νN, NN), since the choice affects the Table II rates by a factor of order (mN/mν)^2.
[§II.2, Eq. (21)] The text refers to 'Schwartz's inequality'; the standard spelling is Schwarz's inequality.
[§II.3, after Eq. (24)] The statement that including LSD pairs of both signs multiplies the numbers by 'a factor of 1.5 (approximately)' is not explained; for symmetric e and μ acceptance one would expect a factor closer to 2. Please clarify which charge and flavour combinations are already included in the left column.
[Fig. 5 caption] The caption describes only the background pT2 distribution, but the text states that the signal distribution is shown for comparison. Please update the caption to mention both curves and to identify which histogram is which.
[Whole manuscript] The text contains pervasive spacing artifacts ('Ind ia', 'n umber', 'co mputed', 'g auge', 'corr esponding', 'neutr inos', 'hadro n', 'at tention', 'describ ed', 'obser ving', 'Productio n', 'Lagran gian', 'we have have used'). These should be cleaned up before publication.

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

The paper

The paper claims

Heavy Majorana neutrinos produced singly through a virtual W could yield observable like-sign dilepton pairs at the LHC, with rates that depend linearly on an unmeasured lepton-mixing parameter.

The reading

The paper asks whether lepton number violation, the process that would tell us neutrinos are their own antiparticles, can actually be seen at a hadron collider. Its strategy is to enumerate every way a heavy Majorana neutrino can be made in a model where the Standard Model gauge group is extended only by heavy neutrino mass terms, then to identify which production channel dominates and how large the resulting like-sign dilepton signal is. The answer in the three-generation case is single production, $pp to W^* to l N_alpha$, followed by the lepton-number-violating decay of $N_alpha$; pair production and $Z$- or Higgs-mediated channels are far smaller. After imposing a lepton-isolation cut and a $p_{T2} > 80$ GeV cut that removes the $tbar t$ background, the authors estimate 16 to 48 like-sign dilepton events per year at the LHC for heavy neutrino masses of 200 to 400 GeV, provided the mixing parameter sits at its experimental upper bound of about 0.02. In a four-generation variant, Higgs-mediated pair production of the new neutrinos can be far larger and is not suppressed by a small mixing angle at all.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the like-sign dilepton signal itself: two same-charge leptons produced when a heavy Majorana neutrino is made in association with a charged lepton and then decays leptonically, so that the final state carries two units of lepton number. Because the neutrino is its own antiparticle, the charges need not balance, and that is the observable signature. The argument is carried by two suppression factors, $R^{(1)}$ for single production and $R^{(2)}$ for pair production, which package all the unknown mixing-matrix entries $B_{l alpha}$ and $C_{alpha beta}$ into quantities bounded by the experimental limits on $|B_{l alpha}|^2$. The other piece of machinery is the background-killing cut: because a lepton from a $b$ decay sits inside a narrow hadronic cone while a lepton from heavy-neutrino or top decay is isolated, requiring less than 10 GeV of transverse energy within a 0.4 radian cone, together with $p_{T2} > 80$ GeV, removes the $t bar t$ background that would otherwise swamp the signal.

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is a ranking of production channels plus a feasibility estimate. Of the eight parton-level processes the authors write down for a three-generation $SU(2)_L otimes U(1)_Y$ model, only $pp to W^* to l N_alpha$ and $pp to W^* gamma^* to l N_alpha$ have cross sections large enough to matter; the vector-boson fusion channel $W^*W^* to ll$ is free of Standard Model background but suppressed by an extra factor $R^{(1)2}_{3G} simeq 10^{-4}$, and the $Z$- and Higgs-mediated pair channels carry couplings of order $xi^2$. The like-sign dilepton yield is then controlled by the ratio $R^{(1)}_{3G} = sum_{l_i l_j} |B_{l_i alpha}|^2 |B_{l_j alpha}|^2 / sum_{l_m} |B_{l_m alpha}|^2$, bounded above by $(s^nu_e_L)^2 + (s^nu_mu_L)^2 simeq 0.02$ from LEP and low-energy fits. Using that bound, an integrated luminosity of $4 times 10^5$ pb$^{-1}$/yr, and cuts $E_{TAC} < 10$ GeV and $p_{T2} > 80$ GeV, the paper quotes 48, 32 and 16 events per year at the LHC for $m_N = 200, 300, 400$ GeV, roughly a factor 1.5 more if both dilepton charges are counted. For the four-generation Hill-Paschos scenario the authors instead find that $gg to H^* to N_alpha N_beta$ dominates, with the relevant ratio $R^{(2)}_{4G}$ approaching unity when $m_N gg m_nu$, and they tabulate 7200 to 34000 events per year at the LHC (times $R^{(2)}_{4G}$) as the Higgs mass is varied from 200 to 1000 GeV.

Load-bearing premise

That the lepton-number-violating mixing parameter $R^{(1)}_{3G}$ sits at its experimental upper bound of about 0.02; the quoted 16 to 48 events per year scale linearly with this quantity, and the authors themselves say the signal may remain elusive if it is much smaller.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

A like-sign dilepton search at the LHC with an isolation cut and $p_{T2} > 80$ GeV is the appropriate experimental handle on Majorana neutrino masses below about 400 GeV in this class of models.
Because the three-generation rate scales as $R^{(1)}_{3G}$ and the four-generation pair rate as $R^{(2)}_{4G}$, the same signal cannot by itself distinguish three from four neutrino generations; only the size of the rate, not its existence, carries that information.
In the four-generation scenario the Higgs-mediated channel gives background-free samples at both LHC and SSC energies, so an on-shell Higgs resonance decaying to heavy neutrino pairs would be a second, independent probe.
If the mixing parameters fall well below their current upper bounds, the like-sign dilepton signal becomes unobservable at hadron colliders, so a null result constrains the mixings rather than the Majorana mass scale.
The SSC case is left inconclusive: cross sections are only a factor 2 to 2.5 larger while the yearly luminosity is far smaller.

Reading between the lines

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

The paper's event counts are upper estimates rather than predictions, since they sit at the edge of the allowed mixing range; a useful way to read the numbers is as a statement about how much luminosity would be needed per unit of $R^{(1)}_{3G}$.
The authors deliberately set aside jet-level information (two jets for signal versus four for background) and missing transverse energy, both of which they note could strengthen the separation; a modern analysis using those handles would likely push the reach past 400 GeV without new luminosity.
The heavy-neutrino mass region the paper targets, a few hundred GeV with electroweak-scale Majorana masses, is exactly where a low-scale see-saw would sit, so the negative or positive outcome of this search is a direct test of whether neutrino mass generation happens near the electroweak scale rather than at a grand-unification scale.
The dependence on a mixing angle bounded only from above means the interesting experimental question is symmetric: seeing the signal fixes a mixing, and not seeing it converts a collider null result into an upper bound competitive with LEP and low-energy constraints.

Original abstract

The possibility of discovering heavy Majorana neutrinos and lepton number violation via the like sign dilepton signal at hadron super- colliders is investigated. The cross-sections for the production of these neutrinos singly as well as in pairs are computed both in three and four generation scenarios within the framework of the gauge group $SU(2)_L \otimes U(1)_Y$ and the dominant processes are identified. The suppression of the Standard model background by suitable kinematical cuts is also discussed.

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, 2,985 input tokens, $0.0001 reported.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.02 · states limitation 0.10 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.20 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.06 · compares with prior results 0.14 · mentions code or data availability 0.01.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

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

The possibility of discovering heavy Majorana neutrinos and lepton number violation via the like sign dilepton signal at hadron super- colliders is investigated. The cross-sections for the production of these neutrinos singly as well as in pairs are computed both in three and four generation scenarios within the framework of the gauge group $SU(2)_L \otimes U(1)_Y$ and the dominant processes are identified. The suppression of the Standard model background by suitable kinematical cuts is also discussed.

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 possibility of discovering heavy Majorana neutrinos and lepton number violation via the like sign dilepton signal at hadron super- colliders is investigated.	contribution 0.94	0.53	0.12	hedged possibility 0.91
s1	The cross-sections for the production of these neutrinos singly as well as in pairs are computed both in three and four generation scenarios within the framework of the gauge group $SU(2)_L \otimes U(1)_Y$ and the dominant processes are identified.	contribution 0.48	0.92	0.09	asserted 1.00
s2	The suppression of the Standard model background by suitable kinematical cuts is also discussed.	method 0.84	0.66	0.05	asserted 0.73

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: theoretical result 0.83 · evidence from simulation or computation 0.96.

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.** Feynman graphs responsible for the subprocess (A):

Figures reproduced from arXiv:hep-ph/9311257 by the authors.

References

Works cited (25)

[22]

N.K. Mondal and D.P. Roy, TIFR preprint, TIFR/TH/93-23

View on Pith
[1]

Review of Particle Properties, Phys. Rev. D45 (1992) S1

View on Pith 1992
[2]

T. Yanagida, Proceedings of the Workshop on Uniﬁed Theory and Baryon Number of the Universe , eds. O. Swada and A. Sugamoto (KEK, 1979) p. 95; M. Gell-Mann, P. Ramond, and R. Slansky, Supergravity, eds. P. van Nieuwenhuizen and D. Friedman (North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1979) p. 315

View on Pith 1979
[3]

For reviews see, for example, P. Langacker, Phys. Rep. C72 (1981) 185; R.N. Moha- patra, Uniﬁcation and Supersymmetry, (Springer–Verlag, New Yo rk, 1986)

View on Pith 1981
[4]

D.A. Dicus and P. Roy, Phys. Rev. D44 (1991) 1593; W. Buchm¨ uller and C. Greub, Phys. Lett. B256 (1991) 465; Nucl. Phys. B363 (1991) 345; J. Maalampi, K. Mursula and R. Vuopionper¨ a,Nucl. Phys. B363 (1992) 23; D. Choudhury, R.M. Godbole and P. Roy, Phys. Lett. B308 (1993) 394

View on Pith 1991
[5]

C.T. Hill and E.A. Paschos, Phys. Lett. B241 (1990) 96; C.T. Hill, M.A. Luty and E.A. Paschos, Phys. Rev. D43 (1991) 3011; G. Jungman and M.A. Luty, Nucl. Phys. B361 (1991) 24

View on Pith 1990
[6]

A. Datta and A. Pilaftsis, Phys. Lett. B278 (1992) 162

View on Pith 1992
[7]

W. Buchm¨ uller and D. Wyler, Phys. Lett. B249 (1990) 458

View on Pith 1990
[8]

P. Langacker and D. London, Phys. Rev. D38 (1988) 886

View on Pith 1988
[9]

G. Bhattacharyya etal., Mod. Phys. Lett. A6 (1991) 2921; E. Nardi, E. Roulet and D. Tommasini, Nucl. Phys. B386 (1992) 239

View on Pith 1991
[10]

A. Pilaftsis, Z. Phys. C55 (1992) 275. 20

View on Pith 1992
[11]

A. Pilaftsis, Phys. Lett. B285 (1992) 68; J.G. K¨ orner, A. Pilaftsis and K. Schilcher, Phys. Rev. D47 (1993) 1080; Phys. Lett. B300 (1993) 381; J. Bernab´ eu, J.G. K¨ orner, A. Pilaftsis and K. Schilcher, Phys. Rev. Lett. 71 (1993) 2695

View on Pith 1992
[12]

See, for instance, S. Dawson and S. Willenbrock, Phys. Lett. B211 (1988) 200

View on Pith 1988
[13]

A. Martin, R. Roberts and J. Stirling, Phys. Rev. D43 (1991) 3648

View on Pith 1991
[14]

S. Dawson, Nucl. Phys. B249 (1984) 42

View on Pith 1984
[15]

P.W. Johnson, F.J. Olness and W.-K. Tung, Phys. Rev. D36 (1987) 291; R.M. God- bole, S.D. Rindani, Phys. Lett. B190 (1987) 192

View on Pith 1987
[16]

see Fig. 4 of R.P. Kauﬀman, Phys. Rev. D41 (1990) 3343. Also, Table II of this work shows that the analytical expressions for the relevant for us sub process reactions will not have any hard relative dependence of √ ˆs but only a very soft one which is loga- rithmic. This clearly indicates that the numerical results of Fig. 4 will q ualitatively be still ...

View on Pith 1990
[17]

D.A. Dicus, M. Karatas, P. Roy, Phys. Rev. D44 (1991) 2033

View on Pith 1991
[18]

A. Datta, M. Guchait and D.P. Roy, Phys. Rev. D47 (1993) 961

View on Pith 1993
[19]

R.M. Godbole, S. Pakvasa, D.P. Roy, Phys. Rev. Lett. 50 (1983) 1539; V. Barger, A. Martin and R.J.N. Phillips, Phys. Rev. D28 (1983) 145

View on Pith 1983
[20]

D.P. Roy, Phys. Lett. B196 (1987) 395

View on Pith 1987
[21]

F.E. Paige and S.D. Protopopesu, ISAJET program, Brookhaven preprint BNL- 38034 (1986)

View on Pith 1986
[23]

R.N. Mohapatra and X. Zhang, Phys. Lett. B305 (1993) 106. 21

View on Pith 1993
[24]

M.E. Peskin and T. Takeuchi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 65 (1990) 964; Phys. Rev. D46 (1992) 381; G. Altarelli and R. Barbieri, Phys. Lett. B253 (1990) 161; G. Altarelli, R. Barbieri and S. Jadach, Nucl. Phys. B369 (1992) 3

View on Pith 1990
[25]

In fact, the mass parameters mE, mν and mN cannot be arbitrarily large, since they are restricted by renormalization-group-triviality bounds (see als o [5]) and constraints from electroweak oblique parameters. The latter has been discuss ed by S. Bertolini and A. Sirlin, Phys. Lett. B257 (1991) 179; E. Gates and J. Terning, Phys. Rev. Lett. 67 (1991) 1840...

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1991

Forward citations

Cited by 40 Pith papers

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

Dominant Thermal Resonant Mechanism for Low-Scale Leptogenesis
hep-ph 2026-01 unverdicted novelty 7.0 of 10

Thermal Resonant Leptogenesis produces the observed baryon asymmetry via a dominant thermal channel from Higgs decays and lepton-doublet coherences, without requiring quasi-degenerate sterile neutrinos.
Search for heavy neutral leptons in final states with electrons, muons, and hadronically decaying tau leptons in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV
hep-ex 2024-02 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

No heavy neutral lepton signal appears in 138 fb^-1 of CMS trilepton data, and the resulting 95% CL limits on |V_lN|^2 improve on prior prompt searches by up to a factor of ten, adding the first tau-neutrino-coupling ...
Heavy Neutrinos with Dynamic Jet Vetoes: Multilepton Searches at $\sqrt{s} = 14,~27,$ and $100$ TeV
hep-ph 2018-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

A dynamic jet veto, set per event to the leading charged lepton's transverse momentum, improves projected LHC sensitivity to heavy-neutrino mixing by about an order of magnitude in the trilepton channel.
Majorana Higgses at colliders
hep-ph 2016-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Gluon fusion through the Higgs portal can produce the Left-Right triplet Higgs at the LHC, and its decays to two or four heavy Majorana neutrinos give same-sign multilepton plus displaced-vertex signals projected to r...
Testing the low scale seesaw and leptogenesis
hep-ph 2016-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Combining past search bounds, neutrino oscillation data and the requirement to reproduce the observed baryon asymmetry leaves a mapped, narrow region of heavy neutrino mass and flavour mixing that future experiments c...

Show 35 more citing papers

Flavour Covariant Transport Equations: an Application to Resonant Leptogenesis
hep-ph 2014-04 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Flavour-covariant transport equations with rank-4 rate tensors predict up to an order-of-magnitude larger lepton asymmetry in resonant leptogenesis than flavour-diagonal treatments.
New Production Mechanism for Heavy Neutrinos at the LHC
hep-ph 2013-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Photon-assisted t-channel W-gamma fusion produces heavy Majorana neutrinos at the LHC more copiously than s-channel W exchange above roughly 300 GeV, improving direct limits on light-to-heavy neutrino mixing.
The Search for Heavy Majorana Neutrinos
hep-ph 2009-01 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

Resonant exchange of a heavy Majorana neutrino would enhance 36 lepton-number-violating tau and meson decays, and existing null searches already bound the relevant mixing products to roughly 10^-6 to 10^-9, while the ...
Distinguishing seesaw models at LHC with multi-lepton signals
hep-ph 2008-08 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

The trilepton final state l+l+l- (and its conjugate) is the strongest LHC discovery channel for scalar triplet seesaw models, and matches or beats the usual like-sign dilepton mode for heavy Majorana neutrinos and fer...
Heavy neutrino signals at large hadron colliders
hep-ph 2007-03 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

Realistic Standard Model backgrounds cut the LHC's 5-sigma reach for a muon-coupled heavy Majorana neutrino from about 400 GeV to about 200 GeV.
Long-lived TeV-scale right-handed neutrino production at the LHC in gauged $U(1)_X$ model
hep-ph 2019-06 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

In the gauged U(1)_X model the maximum right-handed neutrino decay length scales as 1/m_lightest, so a lightest active neutrino mass below about 10^-5 eV yields a long-lived TeV-scale RHN with a displaced-vertex signa...
Search for heavy Majorana neutrinos in same-sign dilepton channels in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s} =$ 13 TeV
hep-ex 2018-06 accept novelty 5.0 of 10

No same-sign dilepton excess is observed in 35.9 fb^-1 of 13 TeV CMS data, yielding 95% CL upper limits on heavy Majorana neutrino mixing |VeN|^2 and |VmuN|^2 for masses from 20 to 1600 GeV.
Phenomenology of GeV-scale Heavy Neutral Leptons
hep-ph 2018-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

The paper assembles and revises the production and decay phenomenology of GeV-scale heavy neutral leptons, adds QCD corrections and previously omitted channels, and tabulates which channels matter at which mass.
Searches for light sterile neutrinos with multitrack displaced vertices
hep-ph 2018-01 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

With a prompt-lepton trigger and relaxed displaced-vertex cuts, the 13 TeV LHC at 300 inverse femtobarns could probe sterile neutrino masses of 10 to 20 GeV for right-handed W boson masses of 2 to 3.5 TeV.
Jet substructure shedding light on heavy Majorana neutrinos at the LHC
hep-ph 2017-09 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Using jet substructure to tag boosted W bosons as fat-jets, the authors project that the 13 TeV LHC with 3000 fb^-1 can probe heavy Majorana neutrino mixing |V_muN|^2 down to 3.4x10^-4 at M_N = 300 GeV.
Shedding Light on Neutrino Masses with Dark Forces
hep-ph 2016-04 accept novelty 5.0 of 10

Displaced decays of right-handed neutrinos pair-produced through a B-L gauge boson give the high-luminosity LHC and SHiP sensitivity to see-saw-scale neutrino mixing, and can serve as the discovery channel for the new force.
Lepton Number Violation and `Diracness' of massive neutrinos composed of Majorana states
hep-ph 2016-04 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Two degenerate heavy Majorana neutrinos with opposite CP parities can mimic a Dirac neutrino, and the ratio of same-sign to opposite-sign dilepton events at the LHC measures how Dirac-like the pair is.
Search for heavy Majorana neutrinos in e+/- e+/- plus jets and e+/- mu+/- plus jets events in proton-proton collisions at sqrt(s) = 8 TeV
hep-ex 2016-03 accept novelty 5.0 of 10

No same-sign dilepton excess appears in 19.7 fb^-1 of 8 TeV CMS data, yielding the first direct limits on the electron-muon heavy-neutrino mixing combination and the tightest |VeN|^2 limits above 200 GeV.
Improved bounds on the heavy neutrino productions at the LHC
hep-ph 2015-10 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Adding one-jet, two-jet and photon-mediated production channels to zero-jet analyses tightens LHC upper bounds on light-heavy neutrino mixing angles relative to prior zero-jet-only recasts.
Disambiguating Seesaw Models using Invariant Mass Variables at Hadron Colliders
hep-ph 2015-10 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Relationships among kinematic endpoints of invariant mass variables distinguish the event topologies of TeV-scale seesaw models that share the same dilepton-plus-dijet collider signature.
QCD Corrections to Pair Production of Type III Seesaw Leptons at Hadron Colliders
hep-ph 2015-09 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

NLO QCD corrections to Type III seesaw triplet lepton pair production raise the Drell-Yan rate by 10 to 40 percent with largely flat kinematic K-factors, and the resummed dilepton transverse momentum spectrum shifts s...
Search for Heavy Right-Handed Neutrinos at the LHC and Beyond in the Same-Sign Same-Flavor Leptons Final State
hep-ph 2015-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

MadGraph plus Delphes simulations show that same-sign dilepton plus dijet searches can reach heavy Majorana neutrino masses of several TeV at 13 TeV, and up to about 10 TeV at a 100 TeV collider, if jet-to-lepton fake...
Multilepton and Lepton Jet Probes of Sub-Weak-Scale Right-Handed Neutrinos
hep-ph 2015-04 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Two targeted LHC analyses, a displaced muon jet plus prompt lepton and an OSSF-free trilepton search, are projected to probe sterile-neutrino mixing angles down to 10^-4 to 10^-3 for masses between the charm and W masses.
Prospects of Heavy Neutrino Searches at Future Lepton Colliders
hep-ph 2015-03 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

At 500 GeV with 100 inverse femtobarns, a lepton collider could probe heavy neutrino mixing down to about 10^-4 for masses up to 400 GeV, roughly ten times better than current limits.
Search for heavy Majorana neutrinos in mu+/- mu+/- + jets events in proton-proton collisions at sqrt(s) = 8 TeV
hep-ex 2015-01 accept novelty 5.0 of 10

CMS observes no same-sign dimuon excess at 8 TeV and excludes heavy Majorana neutrino mixing above |V_muN|^2 = 0.0047 at 90 GeV, 0.0123 at 200 GeV, and 0.583 at 500 GeV.
Heavy Majorana Neutrinos from $W\gamma$ Fusion at Hadron Colliders
hep-ph 2014-11 accept novelty 5.0 of 10

Photon-induced W-gamma fusion overtakes Drell-Yan production of a heavy Majorana neutrino near 1 TeV at the 14 TeV LHC and 770 GeV at a 100 TeV collider, extending same-sign dimuon discovery reach to about 1070 GeV wi...
Kadanoff-Baym Approach to Flavour Mixing and Oscillations in Resonant Leptogenesis
hep-ph 2014-10 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

In the Kadanoff-Baym formalism, heavy-neutrino flavour mixing and flavour oscillations are separate effects, and the standard quasi-particle ansatz for the dressed heavy-neutrino propagator captures only the oscillations.
Direct Bounds on Electroweak Scale Pseudo-Dirac Neutrinos from $\sqrt s=8$ TeV LHC Data
hep-ph 2014-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

CMS 8 TeV multilepton data exclude light-heavy neutrino mixing above roughly 2e-3 at 100 GeV for pseudo-Dirac neutrinos, extending direct collider reach to about 500 GeV.
Natural TeV-Scale Left-Right Seesaw for Neutrinos and Experimental Tests
hep-ph 2013-09 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

A Z4-cubed left-right seesaw with the Kersten-Smirnov texture fits charged lepton and neutrino data and predicts lepton-flavor-violating rates near current experimental limits.
Impact of massive neutrinos on the Higgs self-coupling and electroweak vacuum stability
hep-ph 2012-03 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Large flavor rotations in the Dirac neutrino Yukawa matrix let TeV-scale right-handed neutrinos lower the electroweak vacuum stability cutoff and narrow the Higgs mass window, contrary to the naive expectation that lo...
Non-unitarity effects in a realistic low-scale seesaw model
hep-ph 2009-03 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Correlations among the non-unitarity parameters in the inverse seesaw model tighten the generic bounds by up to an order of magnitude, and a short-baseline neutrino factory can probe the largest entry at the few times...
Review of searches for vector-like quarks, vector-like leptons, and heavy neutral leptons in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV at the CMS experiment
hep-ex 2024-05 accept novelty 4.0 of 10

CMS Run 2 searches for new heavy fermions are summarized, and combined VLQ limits exclude T quarks below about 1.48 TeV and B quarks below about 1.49 TeV for any third-generation decay.
Probing right handed neutrinos at the LHeC and lepton colliders using fat jet signatures
hep-ph 2018-11 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

Boosted fat-jet searches at a 1.3 to 1.8 TeV LHeC and at 1 and 3 TeV lepton colliders could probe electron-flavor heavy neutrino mixing down to about 10^-5 for neutrino masses up to roughly 2.9 TeV.
Constraining Sterile Neutrinos from Precision Higgs Data
hep-ph 2017-04 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

Using 8 TeV LHC Higgs data in the h to WW* to 2 lepton 2 neutrino channel, the authors bound the active-sterile neutrino mixing parameter below roughly 10^-3 to 10^-2 for sterile neutrino masses between 70 and 110 GeV.
Production of Heavy neutrino in next-to-leading order QCD at the LHC and beyond
hep-ph 2016-04 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

NLO QCD corrections stabilize heavy neutrino production cross sections against scale variation, and recasting 8 TeV search limits yields prospective mixing-angle bounds at 14 TeV and 100 TeV colliders.
Search for heavy Majorana neutrinos in mu+mu+[mu-mu-]+jets and e+e+[e-e-]+jets events in pp collisions at sqrt(s) = 7 TeV
hep-ex 2012-07 accept novelty 4.0 of 10

CMS observes no same-sign dilepton excess in 4.98 fb^-1 of 7 TeV data and sets 95% CL upper limits on |V_muN|^2 and |V_eN|^2 for heavy Majorana neutrino masses from about 60 to 210 GeV.
Neutrinoless Double-Beta Decay: A Roadmap for Matching Theory to Experiment
hep-ph 2022-03 accept novelty 3.0 of 10

The paper lays out a multi-scale effective-field-theory, lattice-QCD, and ab initio nuclear program for turning a neutrinoless double-beta decay signal into an identified microscopic mechanism.
Neutrinos and Collider Physics
hep-ph 2015-02 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

The paper reviews collider and low-energy probes of TeV-scale seesaw models, compiling current limits on heavy sterile neutrino mixing and projecting future LHC, beam-dump, and lepton-collider sensitivities.
The Phenomenology of Right Handed Neutrinos
hep-ph 2013-03 accept novelty 3.0 of 10

Right-handed neutrinos with masses from eV to the GUT scale can plausibly address neutrino oscillations, baryogenesis, dark matter, and dark radiation, but the evidence remains indirect and scenario-dependent.
Lepton Number Violation: Seesaw Models and Their Collider Tests
hep-ph 2017-11 accept novelty 2.0 of 10

A comprehensive review of collider searches for lepton number violation in seesaw models, compiling current limits and future reach across Type I, II, III, and radiative neutrino mass scenarios.

How the literature uses it

40 arXiv papers cite this in 55 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 · 40 sentences without a confident label

Cites it as background 14 papers

This decay has been studied extensively, both theoretically [ref] and experimentally [ref] , as a signal of LNV.

CP Violation in Rare Lepton-Number-Violating $W$ Decays at the LHC · Introduction · 0.88
The collider signatures of right-handed neutrinos have been extensively studied in the literature [ref] .

Probing sterile neutrinos in the framework of inverse seesaw mechanism through leptoquark productions · Present status, constraints and choice of Benchmark Points · 1.00
In particular, the production of Majorana neutrinos via $e^+e^-$, $e^- γ$, $γγ$ and hadronic collision have been extensively investigated in the past [ref] .

Majorana neutrinos production at LHeC in an effective approach · Introduction · 0.97

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] [22]

N.K. Mondal and D.P. Roy, TIFR preprint, TIFR/TH/93-23

View on Pith

[2] [1]

Review of Particle Properties, Phys. Rev. D45 (1992) S1

View on Pith 1992

[3] [2]

T. Yanagida, Proceedings of the Workshop on Uniﬁed Theory and Baryon Number of the Universe , eds. O. Swada and A. Sugamoto (KEK, 1979) p. 95; M. Gell-Mann, P. Ramond, and R. Slansky, Supergravity, eds. P. van Nieuwenhuizen and D. Friedman (North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1979) p. 315

View on Pith 1979

[4] [3]

For reviews see, for example, P. Langacker, Phys. Rep. C72 (1981) 185; R.N. Moha- patra, Uniﬁcation and Supersymmetry, (Springer–Verlag, New Yo rk, 1986)

View on Pith 1981

[5] [4]

D.A. Dicus and P. Roy, Phys. Rev. D44 (1991) 1593; W. Buchm¨ uller and C. Greub, Phys. Lett. B256 (1991) 465; Nucl. Phys. B363 (1991) 345; J. Maalampi, K. Mursula and R. Vuopionper¨ a,Nucl. Phys. B363 (1992) 23; D. Choudhury, R.M. Godbole and P. Roy, Phys. Lett. B308 (1993) 394

View on Pith 1991

[6] [5]

C.T. Hill and E.A. Paschos, Phys. Lett. B241 (1990) 96; C.T. Hill, M.A. Luty and E.A. Paschos, Phys. Rev. D43 (1991) 3011; G. Jungman and M.A. Luty, Nucl. Phys. B361 (1991) 24

View on Pith 1990

[7] [6]

A. Datta and A. Pilaftsis, Phys. Lett. B278 (1992) 162

View on Pith 1992

[8] [7]

W. Buchm¨ uller and D. Wyler, Phys. Lett. B249 (1990) 458

View on Pith 1990

[9] [8]

P. Langacker and D. London, Phys. Rev. D38 (1988) 886

View on Pith 1988

[10] [9]

G. Bhattacharyya etal., Mod. Phys. Lett. A6 (1991) 2921; E. Nardi, E. Roulet and D. Tommasini, Nucl. Phys. B386 (1992) 239

View on Pith 1991

[11] [10]

A. Pilaftsis, Z. Phys. C55 (1992) 275. 20

View on Pith 1992

[12] [11]

A. Pilaftsis, Phys. Lett. B285 (1992) 68; J.G. K¨ orner, A. Pilaftsis and K. Schilcher, Phys. Rev. D47 (1993) 1080; Phys. Lett. B300 (1993) 381; J. Bernab´ eu, J.G. K¨ orner, A. Pilaftsis and K. Schilcher, Phys. Rev. Lett. 71 (1993) 2695

View on Pith 1992

[13] [12]

See, for instance, S. Dawson and S. Willenbrock, Phys. Lett. B211 (1988) 200

View on Pith 1988

[14] [13]

A. Martin, R. Roberts and J. Stirling, Phys. Rev. D43 (1991) 3648

View on Pith 1991

[15] [14]

S. Dawson, Nucl. Phys. B249 (1984) 42

View on Pith 1984

[16] [15]

P.W. Johnson, F.J. Olness and W.-K. Tung, Phys. Rev. D36 (1987) 291; R.M. God- bole, S.D. Rindani, Phys. Lett. B190 (1987) 192

View on Pith 1987

[17] [16]

see Fig. 4 of R.P. Kauﬀman, Phys. Rev. D41 (1990) 3343. Also, Table II of this work shows that the analytical expressions for the relevant for us sub process reactions will not have any hard relative dependence of √ ˆs but only a very soft one which is loga- rithmic. This clearly indicates that the numerical results of Fig. 4 will q ualitatively be still ...

View on Pith 1990

[18] [17]

D.A. Dicus, M. Karatas, P. Roy, Phys. Rev. D44 (1991) 2033

View on Pith 1991

[19] [18]

A. Datta, M. Guchait and D.P. Roy, Phys. Rev. D47 (1993) 961

View on Pith 1993

[20] [19]

R.M. Godbole, S. Pakvasa, D.P. Roy, Phys. Rev. Lett. 50 (1983) 1539; V. Barger, A. Martin and R.J.N. Phillips, Phys. Rev. D28 (1983) 145

View on Pith 1983

[21] [20]

D.P. Roy, Phys. Lett. B196 (1987) 395

View on Pith 1987

[22] [21]

F.E. Paige and S.D. Protopopesu, ISAJET program, Brookhaven preprint BNL- 38034 (1986)

View on Pith 1986

[23] [23]

R.N. Mohapatra and X. Zhang, Phys. Lett. B305 (1993) 106. 21

View on Pith 1993

[24] [24]

M.E. Peskin and T. Takeuchi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 65 (1990) 964; Phys. Rev. D46 (1992) 381; G. Altarelli and R. Barbieri, Phys. Lett. B253 (1990) 161; G. Altarelli, R. Barbieri and S. Jadach, Nucl. Phys. B369 (1992) 3

View on Pith 1990

[25] [25]

In fact, the mass parameters mE, mν and mN cannot be arbitrarily large, since they are restricted by renormalization-group-triviality bounds (see als o [5]) and constraints from electroweak oblique parameters. The latter has been discuss ed by S. Bertolini and A. Sirlin, Phys. Lett. B257 (1991) 179; E. Gates and J. Terning, Phys. Rev. Lett. 67 (1991) 1840...

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 1991