1: \documentstyle[prd,aps,preprint,tighten,epsfig]{revtex}
2:
3: \begin{document}
4:
5: \draft
6:
7: \title{Model-independent Constraint on the Neutrino Mass Spectrum \\
8: from the Neutrinoless Double Beta Decay}
9: \author{\bf Zhi-zhong Xing}
10: \address{Institute of High Energy Physics, P.O. Box 918 (4),
11: Beijing 100039, China \\
12: ({\it Electronic address: xingzz@mail.ihep.ac.cn}) }
13: \maketitle
14:
15: \begin{abstract}
16: We present a concise formula to relate the effective mass term of
17: the neutrinoless double beta decay to a single neutrino mass,
18: two Majorana CP-violating phases and four observables of neutrino
19: oscillations for a generic neutrino mass spectrum. If the alleged
20: evidence for the neutrinoless double beta decay is taken into account,
21: one may obtain a rough but model-independent constraint on the absolute
22: scale of neutrino masses -- it is most likely to be
23: in the range between 0.1 eV and 1 eV.
24: \end{abstract}
25:
26: \pacs{PACS number(s): 14.60.Pq, 13.10.+q, 25.30.Pt}
27:
28: \newpage
29:
30: \section{Introduction}
31:
32: The solar and atmospheric neutrino oscillations observed
33: in the Super-Kamiokande experiment \cite{SK} have
34: provided convincing evidence that neutrinos are massive and lepton
35: flavors are mixed. If neutrinos are Majorana particles,
36: a complete description of the flavor mixing phenomenon in the framework
37: of three lepton families requires six real parameters:
38: three mixing angles, one Dirac-type CP-violating phase
39: and two Majorana-type CP-violating phases. So far some preliminary
40: knowledge on three flavor mixing angles and two neutrino mass-squared
41: differences have been achieved from current neutrino oscillation
42: experiments. It is likely to determine the Dirac-type CP-violating phase
43: from a new generation of accelerator neutrino
44: experiments with very long baselines, if the solar neutrino anomaly is
45: attributed to the large-angle Mikheyev-Smirnov-Wolfenstein (MSW)
46: oscillation \cite{MSW} and the flavor mixing angle
47: between the first and third lepton families is not too small.
48: To pin down two Majorana phases is practically impossible, however, since
49: all possible lepton-number-nonconserving processes induced by light
50: Majorana neutrinos are suppressed in magnitude by extremely small
51: factors compared to normal weak interactions \cite{FX01}.
52: The only experimental possibility to get some information on two
53: Majorana-type CP-violating phases is to measure the neutrinoless double
54: beta decay.
55:
56: Recently Klapdor-Kleingrothaus {\it et al} have reported their first
57: evidence for the existence of the neutrinoless double beta decay \cite{K}.
58: At the $95\%$ confidence level, the effective mass term of the neutrinoless
59: double beta decay is found to lie in the following range:
60: \begin{equation}
61: 0.05 ~ {\rm eV} \; \leq \; \langle m\rangle_{ee} \; \leq \; 0.84 ~ {\rm eV}
62: \; .
63: % (1)
64: \end{equation}
65: A number of authors have discussed the implications of this alleged
66: evidence on neutrino masses \cite{Glashow} and textures of the
67: neutrino mass matrix \cite{Ma,KS1,Uehara,Vissani,Hambye,KS2}.
68:
69: The purpose of this paper is two-fold. First, we present a concise
70: formula to relate $\langle m\rangle_{ee}$ to a single neutrino mass,
71: two Majorana phases and four observables of neutrino oscillations
72: for a generic neutrino mass spectrum. Second, we take the experimental
73: result in Eq. (1) seriously and
74: obtain a rough but model-independent constraint on the absolute
75: scale of neutrino masses -- it is most likely to be
76: in the range between 0.1 eV and 1 eV. This result implies that three
77: neutrino masses are nearly degenerate.
78:
79: \section{Formulation}
80:
81: Current experimental data \cite{SK,SNO}
82: indicate that solar and atmospheric neutrino
83: oscillations are dominated by $\nu_e \rightarrow \nu_\mu$ and
84: $\nu_\mu \rightarrow \nu_\tau$ transitions, respectively. The
85: neutrino mass-squared differences associated with solar and atmospheric
86: neutrino oscillations are thus defined as
87: \begin{eqnarray}
88: \Delta m^2_{\rm sun} & \equiv & \left | m^2_2 ~ - ~ m^2_1 \right | \; ,
89: \nonumber \\
90: \Delta m^2_{\rm atm} & \equiv & \left | m^2_3 ~ - ~ m^2_2 \right | \; ,
91: % (2)
92: \end{eqnarray}
93: where $m_i$ (for $i=1,2,3$) denote the mass eigenvalues of three
94: neutrinos. Without loss of generality, we require $m_i$ to be real and
95: positive. The observed hierarchy between
96: $\Delta m^2_{\rm sun}$ and $\Delta m^2_{\rm atm}$ can tell the
97: relative sizes of three neutrino masses, but it cannot shed any light
98: on the absolute value of $m_1$, $m_2$ or $m_3$. In order to show how the
99: absolute scale of neutrino masses can be constrained from the
100: neutrinoless double beta decay, we express $m_1$ and $m_2$ in terms of
101: $m_3$, $\Delta m^2_{\rm sun}$ and $\Delta m^2_{\rm atm}$ with the help
102: of Eq. (2) \cite{Beta}. The results are concisely summarized as
103: \begin{eqnarray}
104: m_1 & = & \sqrt{m^2_3 ~ + ~ p \Delta m^2_{\rm atm} ~ + ~
105: q \Delta m^2_{\rm sun}} \;\; ,
106: \nonumber \\
107: m_2 & = & \sqrt{m^2_3 ~ + ~ p \Delta m^2_{\rm atm}} \;\; ,
108: % (3)
109: \end{eqnarray}
110: where $p=\pm 1$ and $q=\pm 1$ stand for four possible patterns of the
111: neutrino mass spectrum:
112: $$
113: (p, q) = (+1, +1): ~~ m_1 > m_2 > m_3 \; ;
114: \eqno{\rm (4a)}
115: % (4a)
116: $$
117: $$
118: (p, q) = (-1, -1): ~~ m_1 < m_2 < m_3 \; ;
119: \eqno{\rm (4b)}
120: % (4b)
121: $$
122: $$
123: (p, q) = (+1, -1): ~~ m_1 < m_2 > m_3 \; ;
124: \eqno{\rm (4c)}
125: % (4c)
126: $$
127: $$
128: (p, q) = (-1, +1): ~~ m_1 > m_2 < m_3 \; .
129: \eqno{\rm (4d)}
130: % (4d)
131: $$
132: We see that $m_1 \approx m_2$ holds as a straightforward consequence
133: of $\Delta m^2_{\rm sun} \ll \Delta m^2_{\rm atm}$. The signs of
134: $p$ and $q$ can be determined from the future long-baseline
135: neutrino oscillation experiments with high-quality conventional
136: neutrino beams \cite{Hagiwara} or at neutrino factories \cite{Factory}.
137:
138: As solar and atmospheric neutrino oscillations are approximately
139: decoupled from each other, their mixing factors $\sin^2 2\theta_{\rm sun}$
140: and $\sin^2 2\theta_{\rm atm}$ may have simple relations with the
141: matrix elements of the lepton flavor mixing matrix $V$, which is
142: defined to link the neutrino mass eigenstates $(\nu_1, \nu_2, \nu_3)$ to
143: the neutrino flavor eigenstates $(\nu_e, \nu_\mu, \nu_\tau)$:
144: \setcounter{equation}{4}
145: \begin{equation}
146: \left ( \matrix{
147: \nu_e \cr
148: \nu_\mu \cr
149: \nu_\tau \cr} \right ) =
150: \left ( \matrix{
151: V_{e1} & V_{e2} & V_{e3} \cr
152: V_{\mu 1} & V_{\mu 2} & V_{\mu 3} \cr
153: V_{\tau 1} & V_{\tau 2} & V_{\tau 3} \cr} \right )
154: \left ( \matrix{
155: \nu_1 \cr
156: \nu_2 \cr
157: \nu_3 \cr} \right ) \; .
158: % (5)
159: \end{equation}
160: The mixing factor associated with the CHOOZ (or Palo Verde) reactor
161: neutrino oscillation experiment \cite{CHOOZ},
162: denoted as $\sin^2 2\theta_{\rm chz}$,
163: is also a simple function of the matrix elements of $V$ in the same
164: approximation. The explicit expressions of $\sin^2 2\theta_{\rm sun}$,
165: $\sin^2 2\theta_{\rm atm}$ and $\sin^2 2\theta_{\rm chz}$ read as
166: follows:
167: \begin{eqnarray}
168: \sin^2 2\theta_{\rm sun} & = & 4 |V_{e1}|^2 |V_{e2}|^2 \; ,
169: \nonumber \\
170: \sin^2 2\theta_{\rm atm} & = & 4 |V_{\mu 3}|^2
171: \left ( 1 - |V_{\mu 3}|^2 \right ) \; ,
172: \nonumber \\
173: \sin^2 2\theta_{\rm chz} & = & 4 |V_{e3}|^2
174: \left ( 1 - |V_{e3}|^2 \right ) \; .
175: % (6)
176: \end{eqnarray}
177: Taking the unitarity of $V$ into account, one may reversely express
178: $|V_{e1}|^2$, $|V_{e2}|^2$, $|V_{e3}|^2$ and $|V_{\mu 3}|^2$ in terms
179: of $\theta_{\rm sun}$, $\theta_{\rm atm}$ and $\theta_{\rm chz}$:
180: \begin{eqnarray}
181: |V_{e1}|^2 & = & \frac{1}{2} \left ( \cos^2\theta_{\rm chz}
182: + \sqrt{\cos^4\theta_{\rm chz} - \sin^2 2\theta_{\rm sun}} \right ) \; ,
183: \nonumber \\
184: |V_{e2}|^2 & = & \frac{1}{2} \left ( \cos^2\theta_{\rm chz}
185: - \sqrt{\cos^4\theta_{\rm chz} - \sin^2 2\theta_{\rm sun}} \right ) \; ,
186: \nonumber \\
187: |V_{e3}|^2 & = & \sin^2 \theta_{\rm chz} \; ,
188: \nonumber \\
189: |V_{\mu 3}|^2 & = & \sin^2 \theta_{\rm atm} \; .
190: % (7)
191: \end{eqnarray}
192: Current experimental data favor $\theta_{\rm chz} \ll 1$ and
193: $\theta_{\rm sum} \sim \theta_{\rm atm} \sim 1$, therefore
194: $|V_{e1}|^2 \sim |V_{e2}|^2 \sim |V_{\mu 3}|^2 \gg |V_{e3}|^2$
195: is expected to hold.
196:
197: Note that only the matrix elements $V_{e1}$, $V_{e2}$ and
198: $V_{e3}$ are relevant to the neutrinoless double beta decay. Without loss
199: of generality, one may redefine the phases of three charged lepton
200: fields in an appropriate way such that the phases of
201: $V_{e1}$ and $V_{e2}$ are purely of the Majorana type and
202: $V_{e3}$ is real \cite{FGM}. In other words,
203: \begin{equation}
204: \arg (V_{e1}) = \rho \; , ~~ \arg (V_{e2}) = \sigma \; ,
205: ~~ \arg (V_{e3}) = 0 \; .
206: % (8)
207: \end{equation}
208: Of course $\rho$ and $\sigma$ do not have any effect on CP or T
209: violation in normal neutrino-neutrino and antineutrino-antineutrino
210: oscillations \cite{Xing00}. With the help of Eqs. (3),
211: (7) and (8), we then arrive at a model-independent expression for
212: the effective mass term of the neutrinoless double beta decay:
213: \small
214: \begin{eqnarray}
215: \langle m \rangle_{ee} & = & \left | m_1 V^2_{e1} ~ + ~
216: m_2 V^2_{e2} ~ + ~ m_3 V^2_{e3} \right |
217: \nonumber \\
218: & = & \left | m_3 \sin^2 \theta_{\rm chz} ~
219: + ~ \frac{\cos^2\theta_{\rm chz}}{2}
220: \left ( \sqrt{m^2_3 + p \Delta m^2_{\rm atm} + q \Delta m^2_{\rm sun}}
221: ~ e^{2i\rho} + \sqrt{m^2_3 + p \Delta m^2_{\rm atm}} ~ e^{2i\sigma} \right )
222: \right .
223: \nonumber \\
224: && \left . + \frac{\sqrt{\cos^4\theta_{\rm chz} - \sin^2 2\theta_{\rm sun}}}
225: {2}\left (\sqrt{m^2_3 + p \Delta m^2_{\rm atm} + q \Delta m^2_{\rm sun}}
226: ~ e^{2i\rho} - \sqrt{m^2_3 + p \Delta m^2_{\rm atm}} ~ e^{2i\sigma} \right )
227: \right | \; .
228: % (9)
229: \end{eqnarray}
230: \normalsize
231: One can see that $\langle m\rangle_{ee}$ consists of three unknown
232: parameters: $m_3$, $\rho$ and $\sigma$, which are unable to be determined
233: from any neutrino oscillation experiments. Once $\Delta m^2_{\rm sun}$,
234: $\Delta m^2_{\rm atm}$, $\theta_{\rm sun}$, $\theta_{\rm atm}$ and
235: $\theta_{\rm chz}$ are measured to an acceptable degree of accuracy, we
236: will be able to get a useful constraint on the absolute neutrino mass $m_3$
237: for arbitrary values of $\rho$ and $\sigma$ from the observation of
238: $\langle m\rangle_{ee}$. If the magnitude of $m_3$ could roughly be known
239: from some cosmological constraints, it would be likely to obtain some
240: loose but instructive information on the Majorana phases $\rho$ and
241: $\sigma$ by confronting Eq. (9) with the experimental result of
242: $\langle m\rangle_{ee}$. Anyway further progress in our
243: theoretical understanding of the origin of neutrino masses and CP
244: violation is crucial for a complete determination
245: of the free parameters under discussion.
246:
247: \section{Illustration}
248:
249: Now let us illustrate the dependence of $\langle m\rangle_{ee}$ on $m_3$,
250: $\rho$ and $\sigma$ numerically.
251: Assuming that the solar neutrino anomaly is attributed
252: to the large-angle MSW effect \cite{MSW},
253: we typically take $\Delta m^2_{\rm sun} = 5\cdot 10^{-5} ~ {\rm eV}^2$
254: and $\sin^2 2\theta_{\rm sun} = 0.8$. We choose
255: $\Delta m^2_{\rm atm} = 3\cdot 10^{-3} ~ {\rm eV}^2$ and
256: $\sin^2 2\theta_{\rm atm} =1$ for the atmospheric neutrino oscillation.
257: In addition, we use the typical value $\sin^2 2\theta_{\rm chz} =0.05$
258: in our numerical calculations, which is consistent with the upper bound
259: $\sin^2 2\theta_{\rm chz} <0.1$ from the CHOOZ reactor neutrino
260: experiment \cite{CHOOZ}
261: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
262: \footnote{Note that $\sin^2 2\theta_{\rm chz} \sim 0.05$ is also favored
263: in a number of phenomenological models of lepton mass matrices.
264: See Ref. \cite{Review} for a review with extensive references.}.
265: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
266: The Majorana phases $\rho$ and $\sigma$ are completely unknown. To
267: illustrate, we consider four instructive possibilities for $\rho$ and
268: $\sigma$: (1) $\rho = \sigma = 0$; (2) $\rho = \pi/4$ and $\sigma = 0$;
269: (3) $\rho = 0$ and $\sigma = \pi/4$; and (4)
270: $\rho =\sigma = \pi/4$. Our results for $\langle m\rangle_{ee}$ as a function
271: of $m_3$ are shown in FIG. 1, where all possible patterns of
272: the neutrino mass spectrum as listed in Eq. (4) have been taken into account.
273: Some comments are in order.
274:
275: (1) A careful analysis shows that
276: the result of $\langle m\rangle_{ee}$ is essentially insensitive to
277: the sign of $q$. In other words, the cases $m_1 > m_2$ and $m_1 < m_2$
278: are almost indistinguishable in the neutrinoless double beta decay.
279: This feature is a straightforward consequence of the hierarchy
280: $\Delta m^2_{\rm sun} \ll \Delta m^2_{\rm atm}$. As shown in Eq. (9),
281: the contribution of $q\Delta m^2_{\rm sun}$ to $\langle m\rangle_{ee}$
282: is negligible unless a complete cancellation between $m^2_3$ and
283: $p\Delta m^2_{\rm atm}$ terms happens to take place.
284:
285: (2) When $p =-1$ (i.e., $m_2 < m_3$), Eq. (3) implies that
286: $m_3$ has the following lower bound
287: \begin{equation}
288: m_3 \; \geq \; \left \{ \matrix{
289: \sqrt{\Delta m^2_{\rm atm}} ~~~~~~ (q=+1) \; , ~~~~~~~~~~~~ \cr\cr
290: \sqrt{\Delta m^2_{\rm atm} + \Delta m^2_{\rm sun}} ~~~~~~ (q=-1) \; . }
291: \right .
292: % (10)
293: \end{equation}
294: In view of the typical inputs of $\Delta m^2_{\rm atm}$ and
295: $\Delta m^2_{\rm sun}$ taken above, we obtain
296: $m_3 \geq 0.0548$ eV for $q=+1$ and $m_3 \geq 0.0552$ eV for $q=-1$.
297: Such lower bounds of $m_3$ have indeed been reflected in FIG. 1.
298:
299: (3) We find that it is numerically difficult to distinguish between the
300: possibilities $\rho =\sigma =0$ and $\rho =\sigma =\pi/4$.
301: The reason is simply that the second term on the right-hand side of
302: Eq. (9) dominates over the other two terms, when $\rho =\sigma$ is taken.
303: Hence the value of $\langle m\rangle_{ee}$ becomes insensitive to the
304: explicit values of two identical Majorana phases. One can also see that
305: the possibility of $\rho =0$ and $\sigma =\pi/4$ is almost indistinguishable
306: from the possibility of $\rho =\pi/4$ and $\sigma =0$. In this specific case
307: the first term on the right-hand side of Eq. (9) plays an insignificant role,
308: therefore the magnitude of $\langle m\rangle_{ee}$ is essentially invariant
309: under an exchange of the values between $\rho$ and $\sigma$.
310:
311: (4) We observe that the changes of $\langle m\rangle_{ee}$ are rather
312: mild for the typical values of $\rho$ and $\sigma$ chosen above.
313: If reasonable inputs of $\sin^2 2\theta_{\rm sun}$, $\sin^2 2\theta_{\rm atm}$
314: and $\sin^2 2\theta_{\rm chz}$ are taken
315: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
316: \footnote{Only in a few extreme cases (e.g.,
317: $\cos^4 \theta_{\rm chz} \approx \sin^2 2\theta_{\rm sun}$ and
318: $\rho \approx -\sigma$), which seem quite unlikely, large cancellations
319: may take place in $\langle m\rangle_{ee}$ and make its magnitude
320: significantly suppressed.},
321: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
322: a careful numerical scan shows that the magnitude of $\langle m\rangle_{ee}$
323: does not undergo any dramatic changes for arbitrary $\rho$ and $\sigma$.
324: Thus a rough but model-independent
325: constraint on the absolute scale of neutrino masses can be obtained from
326: the observation of $\langle m\rangle_{ee}$. In view of the alleged
327: experimental region
328: of $\langle m\rangle_{ee}$ in Eq. (1), we find that $m_3$ is most likely to
329: lie in the range 0.1 eV $\leq m_3 \leq$ 1 eV (see FIG. 1).
330: This result is irrelevant to the details of four possible patterns of
331: the neutrino mass spectrum. Note that $m_3 \geq 0.1$ eV
332: implies that both $m_1 \approx m_3$ and $m_2 \approx m_3$ hold, as one
333: can see from Eq. (3). Therefore three neutrino masses
334: are nearly degenerate. Taking $m_3 = 0.5$ eV
335: for example, we obtain $m_1 + m_2 +m_3 \approx 3 m_3 \approx 1.5$ eV.
336: Such a sum of three neutrino masses can be translated in cosmology
337: to $\Omega_\nu h^2 \approx 0.016$, where
338: $\Omega_\nu$ is the fraction of the critical density contributed by
339: neutrinos and $h$ is the dimensionless Hubble constant. This typical
340: result is consistent with $\Omega_\nu h^2 \approx 0.05$ \cite{Wang},
341: extracted from the CMB measurements and galaxy cluster surveys.
342:
343: \section{Conclusion}
344:
345: We have presented a concise formula to relate the effective mass term of
346: the neutrinoless double beta decay to a single neutrino mass, two Majorana
347: phases and four observables of neutrino oscillations for four possible
348: patterns of the neutrino mass spectrum. Taking into account the alleged
349: evidence for the neutrinoless double beta decay, we have obtained a
350: rough but model-independent constraint on the absolute scale of active
351: neutrino masses: 0.1 eV $\leq m_3 \leq$ 1 eV.
352: This result implies that three neutrino masses are nearly degenerate.
353:
354: If the existence of the neutrinoless double beta decay can be confirmed,
355: it will be desirable to build new phenomenological models of lepton
356: mass matrices which can accommodate three neutrinos of nearly
357: degenerate masses and reflect their Majorana nature. Further studies
358: of various lepton-number-violating processes will also become more
359: realistic and important.
360:
361: \vspace{0.3cm}
362:
363: \acknowledgments{
364: The author is grateful to H. Fritzsch and X.M. Zhang for stimulating
365: discussions. This work was supported in part by National Natural Science
366: Foundation of China.
367:
368: {\it Note added}: When this paper was being completed, the preprint of
369: Minakata and Sugiyama \cite{Minakata} appeared. Their best-fit analysis
370: leads to 0.11 eV $\leq \langle m\rangle_\beta \leq$ 1.3 eV for
371: the mass parameter in the single beta decay experiments. This result
372: is consistent with ours for the absolute scale of neutrino masses.}
373:
374: \newpage
375: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
376:
377: \bibitem{SK} Y. Fukuda {\it et al.}, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 81}, 1562
378: (1998); {\it ibid.} {\bf 81}, 4279 (1998);
379: http://www-sk.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp/dpc/sk/.
380:
381: \bibitem{MSW} S.P. Mikheyev and A. Yu Smirnov, Yad. Fiz.
382: (Sov. J. Nucl. Phys.) {\bf 42}, 1441 (1985);
383: L. Wolfenstein, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 17}, 2369 (1978).
384:
385: \bibitem{FX01} J. Schechter and J.W.F. Valle,
386: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 23}, 1666 (1981);
387: H. Fritzsch and Z.Z. Xing, Phys. Lett. B {\bf 517}, 363 (2001).
388:
389: \bibitem{K} H.V. Klapdor-Kleingrothaus, A. Dietz, H.L. Harney,
390: and I.V. Krivosheina, Mod. Phys. Lett. A {\bf 16}, 2409 (2002).
391:
392: \bibitem{Glashow} V. Barger, S.L. Glashow, D. Marfatia, and K. Whisnant,
393: hep-ph/0201262.
394:
395: \bibitem{Ma} E. Ma, hep-ph/0201225.
396:
397: \bibitem{KS1} H.V. Klapdor-Kleingrothaus and U. Sarkar,
398: hep-ph/0201226.
399:
400: \bibitem{Uehara} Y. Uehara, hep-ph/0201277.
401:
402: \bibitem{Vissani} F. Feruglio, A. Strumia, and F. Vissani, hep-ph/0201291.
403:
404: \bibitem{Hambye} T. Hambye, hep-ph/0201307.
405:
406: \bibitem{KS2} H.V. Klapdor-Kleingrothaus and U. Sarkar,
407: hep-ph/0202006.
408:
409: \bibitem{SNO} SNO Collaboration, Q.R. Ahmad {\it et al.},
410: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 87}, 071301 (2001).
411:
412: \bibitem{Beta} F. Vassani, JHEP {\bf 9906}, 022 (1999);
413: S.M. Bilenkii, C. Giunti, W. Grimus,
414: B. Kayser, and S.T. Petcov, Phys. Lett. B {\bf 465}, 193 (1999);
415: H.V. Klapdor-Kleingrothaus, H. P$\rm\ddot{a}$s,
416: and A.Yu. Smirnov, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 63}, 073005 (2001);
417: S.M. Bilenky, S. Pascoli, and S.T. Petcov,
418: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 64}, 053010 (2001);
419: Z.Z. Xing, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 64}, 093013 (2001).
420:
421: \bibitem{Hagiwara} M. Aoki {\it et al.}, hep-ph/0112338;
422: and references therein.
423:
424: \bibitem{Factory} B. Autin {\it et al.}, CERN 99-02 (1999);
425: D. Ayres {\it et al.}, physics/9911009;
426: C. Albright {\it et al.}, hep-ex/0008064; and references therein.
427:
428: \bibitem{CHOOZ} CHOOZ Collaboration, M. Apollonio {\it et al.},
429: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 420}, 397 (1998);
430: Palo Verde Collaboration, F. Boehm {\it et al.},
431: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 84}, 3764 (2000).
432:
433: \bibitem{FGM} P.H. Frampton, S.L. Glashow, and D. Marfatia,
434: hep-ph/0201008;
435: Z.Z. Xing, hep-ph/0201151 (accepted for publication in Phys. Lett. B).
436:
437: \bibitem{Xing00} Z.Z. Xing, Phys. Lett. B {\bf 487}, 327 (2000);
438: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 64}, 073014 (2001).
439:
440: \bibitem{Review} H. Fritzsch and Z.Z. Xing,
441: Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. {\bf 45}, 1 (2000).
442:
443: \bibitem{Wang} X. Wang, M. Tegmark, and M. Zaldarriaga,
444: astro-ph/0105091.
445:
446: \bibitem{Minakata} H. Minakata and H. Sugiyama, hep-ph/0202003.
447:
448: \end{thebibliography}
449:
450: \newpage
451:
452: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Fig. 1 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
453: \begin{figure}
454: \vspace{-0.2cm}
455: \epsfig{file=fig.ps,bbllx=1cm,bblly=4cm,bburx=20cm,bbury=32cm,%
456: width=15cm,height=22cm,angle=0,clip=}
457: \vspace{-10.3cm}
458: \caption{Illustrative dependence of $\langle m\rangle_{ee}$ on $m_3$ for the
459: neutrino mass spectrum $m_2 > m_3$ (curves a and b) and the
460: neutrino mass spectrum
461: $m_2 < m_3$ (curves c and d), where we have typically taken
462: $\{\rho, \sigma \} = \{0, 0 \}$ or $\{ \pi/4, \pi/4 \}$ (curves a and c)
463: and $\{\rho, \sigma \} = \{ 0, \pi/4 \}$ or $\{ \pi/4, 0 \}$
464: (curves b and d). The region between two dashed lines corresponds
465: to the experimentally allowed values of $\langle m\rangle_{ee}$ at the $95\%$
466: confidence level.}
467: \end{figure}
468: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
469:
470:
471: \end{document}
472: