This paper was converted on www.awesomepapers.org from LaTeX by an anonymous user.
Want to know more? Visit the Converter page.

\tocauthor

Riya Barick, Amitabha Laihiri 11institutetext: S. N. Bose National Centre for Basic Sciences, Salt Lake, WB 700106, India.
11email: [email protected] ; [email protected]
Presented by Riya Barick at the XXVI DAE-BRNS HEP Symposium,
19-23 Dec 2024, Varanasi

Exploring the Effect of Chiral Torsion on Neutrino Oscillation in Long Baseline Experiments

Riya Barick    Amitabha Lahiri
Abstract

In curved spacetime, neutrinos experience an extra contribution to their effective Hamiltonian coming from a torsion-induced four-fermion interaction that is diagonal in mass basis and also causes neutrino mixing while propagating through fermionic matter. This geometrical quartic interaction term appears as the modification to the neutrino mass term and significantly influences both neutrino conversion and survival probabilities. Since this term varies linearly with matter density, long baseline (LBL) experiments would be a good choice to probe this effect. We put bounds on torsional coupling parameters and also see the impact of torsion on physics sensitivities in the DUNE experiment.

keywords:
Chiral torsion, neutrino oscillation, DUNE simulation.

1 Introduction

The dynamics of fermions in curved spacetime require a spin connection which has two components, one is torsion free Levi-Civita connection and the other is contorsion, expressed as Aμ=abωμ+abΛμ.ab\,A_{\mu}{}^{ab}=\omega_{\mu}{}^{ab}+\Lambda_{\mu}{}^{ab}\,. Most generally, the contorsion Λμab\Lambda_{\mu}{}^{ab} couples chirally and it is non-dynamical thus can be integrated out from the theory, leaving an effective quartic interaction term [1]

12(i(λiVψ¯iγaψi+λiAψ¯iγaγ5ψi))2,-\frac{1}{2}(\sum\limits_{i}(\lambda^{V}_{i}\bar{\psi}^{i}\gamma_{a}\psi^{i}+\lambda^{A}_{i}\bar{\psi}^{i}\gamma_{a}\gamma^{5}\psi^{i}))^{2}\,, (1)

which is diagonal in the mass basis (NSI in mass basis). Here the λ\lambda’s are non-universal geometrical coupling constants to be determined from experiments. Since this is a fundamental interaction, all fermions experience this effect. If we consider the propagation of neutrinos within the Earth matter at constant density, the interaction with the background is given by [1]

(i=1,2,3(λiLν¯iγaLνi+λiRν¯iγaRνi))×(f=e,u,d(λfVf¯γaf+λfAf¯γaγ5f)).-(\sum\limits_{i=1,2,3}(\lambda_{i}^{L}\bar{\nu}_{i}\gamma_{a}L\nu_{i}+{\lambda_{i}^{R}\bar{\nu}_{i}\gamma_{a}R\nu_{i}}))\times(\sum_{f=e,u,d}(\lambda_{f}^{V}\bar{f}\gamma_{a}f+\lambda_{f}^{A}\bar{f}\gamma_{a}\gamma^{5}f))\,. (2)

The geometrical contribution in the second term is reduced to the weighted number density of background fermions n~=fλfnf.\tilde{n}=\sum_{f}\lambda_{f}n_{f}\,. This is analogous to the Wolfenstein effect for weak interactions, but with different coupling constants for different fermions. Also, we have assumed that only left handed neutrinos exist in nature, so the effective contribution to the Hamiltonian is i=1,2,3(λiνi𝕃νi)n~\sum\limits_{i=1,2,3}(\lambda_{i}{\nu}_{i}^{\dagger}\mathbb{L}\nu_{i})\,\tilde{n} .

2 Neutrino Oscillation in Matter

Neutrino flavor eigenstates |να\ket{\nu_{\alpha}}, can be expressed in terms of mass eigenstates |νi\ket{\nu_{i}}, as |να=iUαi|νi,\ket{\nu_{\alpha}}=\sum_{i}U^{*}_{\alpha i}\ket{\nu_{i}}\,, where U is the PMNS matrix. The Schrödinger equation in flavor basis is given by [2]

i(d/dt)|νe,νμ,ντ=[2Δ~/L][Udiag(0,α~,1)UT+diag(A~,0,0)]|νe,νμ,ντ,i({d/}{dt})\ket{\nu_{e},\nu_{\mu},\nu_{\tau}}=[2\tilde{\Delta}/L][U^{*}\mathrm{diag}(0,\tilde{\alpha},1)U^{T}+\mathrm{diag}(\tilde{A},0,0)]\ket{\nu_{e},\nu_{\mu},\nu_{\tau}}\,, (3)

where α~=Δm~212Δm~312,\tilde{\alpha}=\frac{\Delta\tilde{m}^{2}_{21}}{\Delta\tilde{m}^{2}_{31}}\,, A~=22GFneEΔm~312andΔ~=Δm~312L4E\tilde{A}=\frac{2\sqrt{2}G_{F}n_{e}E}{\Delta\tilde{m}^{2}_{31}}\,\mathrm{and}\,\tilde{\Delta}=\frac{\Delta\tilde{m}^{2}_{31}L}{4E}. Torsion induced mass-squared difference Δm~ij2:=Δmij2+2n~Eλij\Delta\tilde{m}^{2}_{ij}:=\Delta m^{2}_{ij}+2\tilde{n}E\lambda_{ij} where n~=(λe+3λu+3λd)ne\tilde{n}=(\lambda_{e}+3\lambda_{u}+3\lambda_{d})n_{e} and λij=λiλj\lambda_{ij}=\lambda_{i}-\lambda_{j}. In Eq 3, we have not mentioned the term proportional to the identity matrix, since it has no effect on oscillation. We have solved this equation using perturbation technique assuming α~andsinθ13\tilde{\alpha}\,\mathrm{and}\,\sin\theta_{13} as small parameters [2, 3] and have calculated neutrino conversion and survival probabilities in presence of torsion, given by

Pμe=\displaystyle P_{\mu e}= 4sin2θ13sin2θ23sin2(A~1)Δ~(A~1)2+α~2cos2θ23sin2(2θ12)sin2(A~Δ~)A~2\displaystyle{4\sin^{2}\theta_{13}\sin^{2}\theta_{23}\frac{\sin^{2}(\tilde{A}-1)\tilde{\Delta}}{(\tilde{A}-1)^{2}}}+{\tilde{\alpha}^{2}\cos^{2}\theta_{23}\sin^{2}(2\theta_{12})\frac{\sin^{2}(\tilde{A}\tilde{\Delta})}{\tilde{A}^{2}}}
+2α~sinθ13sin2θ12sin2θ23cos(Δ~+δCP)sinA~Δ~A~sin(A~1)Δ~A~1,\displaystyle+2\tilde{\alpha}\sin\theta_{13}\sin{2\theta_{12}}\sin{2\theta_{23}}\cos(\tilde{\Delta}+\delta_{CP})\frac{\sin{\tilde{A}\tilde{\Delta}}}{\tilde{A}}\frac{\sin{(\tilde{A}-1)\tilde{\Delta}}}{\tilde{A}-1}\,, (4)
Pμμ=\displaystyle P_{\mu\mu}= 1sin2(2θ23)sin2Δ~+O(α~,sinθ13).\displaystyle 1-{\sin^{2}(2\theta_{23})\sin^{2}\tilde{\Delta}}+O(\tilde{\alpha},\sin\theta_{13})\,. (5)

For antineutrinos, the corresponding probabilities can be obtained by making the replacements δCPδCP,A~A~,andΔm~ij2:=Δmij22n~Eλij\delta_{CP}\to-\delta_{CP},\quad\tilde{A}\to-\tilde{A},\quad\text{and}\quad\Delta\tilde{m}^{2}_{ij}:=\Delta m^{2}_{ij}-2\tilde{n}E\lambda_{ij}\, in the above formulas.

3 Results and Discussions

We have explored the effect of spacetime in the DUNE experiment which is an upcoming long baseline (LBL) experiment, focusing on its far detector with a baseline of 1300 km from Fermilab, USA to SURF, South Dakota. We have simulated DUNE using the General Long Baseline Experiment Simulator (GLoBES)[4, 5], a C-based framework, based on the technical design report provided in [6], taking a total runtime of 13 years (6.5 years ν\nu + 6.5 years ν¯\bar{\nu}). We have modified the GLoBES framework accordingly to incorporate the effects of geometrical four-fermion interaction. To do the statistical analysis we have used the formula

χ2=2i[NitestNitrueNitruelog(Nitest/Nitrue)],\chi^{2}=2\sum_{i}[N^{\rm test}_{i}-N^{\rm true}_{i}-N^{\rm true}_{i}\log(N^{\rm test}_{i}/N^{\rm true}_{i})]\,,

where NiN_{i} is the event number in the ii-th energy bin. In Fig. 1, we have shown the bounds of λ21\lambda_{21} and λ31\lambda_{31} in DUNE. We have taken the standard interaction (SI) in the true scenario and torsion in the test scenario, with the other neutrino oscillation parameters kept fixed for both. The neutrino mixing parameters used in this proceeding are based on [7]. For two degrees of freedom 1σ,2σand 3σ1\sigma\,,2\sigma\,\mathrm{and}\,3\sigma correspond to χ2=2.3,6.18and 11.83\chi^{2}=2.3\,,6.18\,\mathrm{and}\,11.83 respectively. It is clear from Fig. 1 that the contour for normal mass ordering (NO) is bigger than that of inverted ordering (IO). Consider λ\lambda in the unit of GF\sqrt{G_{F}}.

Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Figure 1: Bounds on λ21\lambda_{21} and λ31\lambda_{31} when λe,u,d=0.1\lambda_{e,u,d}=0.1(left) and 0.010.01 (right) in DUNE.

When background torsion λe,u,d=0.1\lambda_{e,u,d}=0.1, we get the following bound 0.12λ210.12-0.12\leq\lambda_{21}\leq 0.12 and 0.13λ310.13-0.13\leq\lambda_{31}\leq 0.13 while for λe,u,d=0.01\lambda_{e,u,d}=0.01, we get 1.2λ211.2-1.2\leq\lambda_{21}\leq 1.2 and 1.3λ311.3,-1.3\leq\lambda_{31}\leq 1.3\,, at 3σ\sigma C.L. for NO.

Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Figure 2: Appearance and disappearance probability vs. Energy, for ν\nu and ν¯,\bar{\nu}, at DUNE.

Fig. 2 shows the effect of geometry on νμνe\nu_{\mu}\to\nu_{e} and ν¯μν¯e\bar{\nu}_{\mu}\to\bar{\nu}_{e} conversion and νμ\nu_{\mu} and ν¯μ\bar{\nu}_{\mu} survival probability. Positive λij\lambda_{ij} enhances the conversion probability while negative λij\lambda_{ij} suppresses it at the first oscillation peak and their effects are symmetric about the SI plot. The effect of geometry on survival probability is very small in this baseline.

Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Figure 3: ΔPμe(=PμeTorPμeSI)\Delta P_{\mu e}(=P^{Tor}_{\mu e}-P^{SI}_{\mu e}) in (λijδCP)(\lambda_{ij}-\delta_{CP}) plane at E = 2.5 GeV for DUNE.

In Fig. 3 we have plotted ΔPμe=PμeTorPμeSI,\Delta P_{\mu e}=P^{Tor}_{\mu e}-P^{SI}_{\mu e}\,, in the (λijδCP)(\lambda_{ij}-\delta_{CP}) plane at E = 2.5 GeV for DUNE to see the impact of spacetime on PμeP_{\mu e} in the δCP\delta_{CP} parameter space [8]. Here PμeTorP^{Tor}_{\mu e} is the probability in presence of torsion and PμeSIP^{SI}_{\mu e} is the standard oscillation probability. We observe that λ21\lambda_{21} and λ31\lambda_{31} have different impacts — ΔPμe\Delta P_{\mu e} is an order of magnitude larger for λ21\lambda_{21} than for λ31\lambda_{31}.

Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Figure 4: δCP\delta_{CP} constraining capability of DUNE in presence of λij(GF)\lambda_{ij}(\sqrt{G_{F}}) .

Fig. 4 represents the sensitivity of DUNE to constrain δCP\delta_{CP} in presence of torsion. We have chosen δCPtrue=90\delta^{true}_{CP}=-90^{\circ}(CP-violating value) and 00^{\circ} (CP-conserving value) and λ21true=λ31true=0.06GF.\lambda^{true}_{21}=\lambda^{true}_{31}=0.06\sqrt{G_{F}}\,. We observe that in presence of λ21,\lambda_{21}\,, δCP\delta_{CP} is constrained [60:120]\sim[-60^{\circ}:-120^{\circ}] for δCPtrue=90,\delta^{true}_{CP}=-90^{\circ}, whereas for δCPtrue=0\delta^{true}_{CP}=0^{\circ} we get a relatively better constraint on δCP,\delta_{CP}\,, although it spreads widely along λ21\lambda_{21} range. The right panel shows that, δCP\delta_{CP} constraining is better for δCPtrue=0\delta^{true}_{CP}=0^{\circ} than 90,-90^{\circ}\,,but the constraint for λ31\lambda_{31} is comparable.

Acknowledgements : The authors thank I. Ghose, S. Goswami, and S. K. Raut for fruitful discussions.

References

  • [1] S. Chakrabarty and A. Lahiri, Eur. Phys. J. C 79, no.8, 697 (2019).
  • [2] R. Barick, I. Ghose and A. Lahiri, Eur. Phys. J. Plus 139, no.6, 461 (2024).
  • [3] R. Barick, I. Ghose and A. Lahiri, LHEP 2023, 362 (2023).
  • [4] P. Huber, M. Lindner and W. Winter, Comput. Phys. Commun. 167, 195 (2005).
  • [5] P. Huber et al., Comput. Phys. Commun. 177, 432-438 (2007).
  • [6] B. Abi et al. [DUNE], [arXiv:2103.04797 [hep-ex]].
  • [7] I. Esteban et al., JHEP 09, 178 (2020), NuFIT 5.2 (2022).
  • [8] A. Sarker, D. Bezboruah, A. Medhi and M. M. Devi, [arXiv:2406.15307 [hep-ph]].