1: \documentclass[11pt]{article}
2: \usepackage[dvips]{graphicx,psfrag}
3: \def\baselinestretch{1.2}
4: \topmargin=0.0in
5: \topskip=0pt
6: \textwidth = 16.2cm
7: \textheight = 24.0cm
8: \lineskip=12pt
9: \headheight = 0.0cm
10: \headsep = 0.0cm
11: \oddsidemargin=0.0cm
12: \evensidemargin=0.0cm
13: \marginparsep=0in
14: \parindent=1.3em
15: \setcounter{page}{1}
16:
17: % ======================================================================== %
18: \begin{document}
19: % ------------------------------------------------------------------------ %
20: \title{Exact Formula of Probability and CP Violation\\
21: for Neutrino Oscillations in Matter}
22: %
23: \author{
24: {K. Kimura$^1$}\thanks{E-mail address:kimukei@eken.phys.nagoya-u.ac.jp}
25: {, A. Takamura$^{1,2}$}\thanks
26: {E-mail address:takamura@eken.phys.nagoya-u.ac.jp}
27: {, and H. Yokomakura$^1$}\thanks{E-mail address:yoko@eken.phys.nagoya-u.ac.jp}
28: \\
29: \\
30: \\
31: {\small \it $^1$Department of Physics, Nagoya University,}
32: {\small \it Nagoya, 464-8602, Japan}\\
33: {\small \it $^2$Department of Mathematics,
34: Toyota National Collage of Technology}\\
35: {\small \it Eisei-cho 2-1, Toyota-shi, 471-8525, Japan}}
36: \date{}
37: \maketitle
38: % ------------------------------------------------------------------------ %
39: \vspace{-11cm}
40: \begin{flushright}
41: %hep-ph/0005075\\
42: %DPNU-02-05\\
43: %KEK-TH-692\\
44: \end{flushright}
45: \vspace{10.5cm}
46: \vspace{-2.5cm}
47: % ======================================================================== %
48: %
49: % abstract
50: %
51: % ------------------------------------------------------------------------ %
52: \vspace{1cm}
53: \begin{abstract}
54: Within the framework of the standard three neutrino scenario,
55: we derive an exact and simple formula of
56: the oscillation probability
57: $P(\nu_e \to \nu_{\mu})$ in constant matter by using a new method.
58: From this formula, it is found that
59: the matter effects can be separated from the pure
60: CP violation effects.
61: Furthermore, the oscillation probability can be written in the form,
62: $P(\nu_e \to \nu_{\mu})=A\cos \delta+B\sin\delta+C$,
63: in the standard parametrization without any approximation.
64: We also demonstrate that the approximate formula in high-energy
65: can be easily reproduced from this as an example.
66: \end{abstract}
67:
68: %{\sf PACS:12.15.Ff, 14.60.Pq, 23.40.Bw.}%
69:
70:
71: \section{Introduction}
72: \hspace*{\parindent}
73: Just like the quark system,
74: it has been shown from the atmospheric neutrino experiments
75: \cite{atmospheric} and the solar neutrino experiments
76: \cite{solar} that neutrinos have finite mass and
77: finite mixing.
78: In this situation, it is extremely interesting to investigate
79: the CP phase in the lepton sector.
80: Fortunately, recent report from SNO experiment \cite{SNO}
81: favors the LMA MSW solutions to the solar neutrino problem.
82: This means that the measurements of CP phase may be
83: possible because of the large 1-2 mixing angle and the
84: large 1-2 mass difference.
85:
86: In order to measure the CP phase,
87: the long-baseline experiments such as
88: the JHF experiment \cite{JHF} and
89: the neutrino factory experiments \cite{nu-factory}
90: are planned.
91: In the past, the asymmetries
92: $\Delta P_{CP} =P(\nu_{\alpha} \to \nu_{\beta})-
93: P(\bar{\nu}_{\alpha} \to \bar{\nu}_{\beta})$ and
94: $\Delta P_T =P(\nu_{\alpha} \to \nu_{\beta})
95: -P(\nu_{\beta} \to \nu_{\alpha})$ have been considered
96: as the main approach to measure the CP phase $\delta$
97: \cite{Harrison, Sato, Parke, other1}.
98: These are methods to measure the direct CP violation term
99: which depends on $\sin \delta$.
100: However, the measurement of $\Delta P_{CP}$
101: is not directly related to
102: the discovery of CP phase, because of
103: fake CP violating effects from the earth matter.
104: $\Delta P_T$ is a pure T violating observable, but
105: it has its own experimental difficulties.
106: So, alternative approach has been recently considered in
107: \cite{Cervera, Freund, Minakata, Lipari, Freund2}.
108: This is an attempt to obtain the information on
109: the CP phase totally from the probabilities itself,
110: not only the direct CP violation term but also
111: the indirect CP violation term which depends on $\cos \delta$.
112: In these papers the oscillation probability is written approximately
113: in the form,
114: $P(\nu_e \to \nu_{\mu})\simeq A\cos\delta+B\sin\delta+C$.
115: The extra information which is proportional to $\cos \delta$
116: will lead us to the value of $\delta$ in spite of the matter effect.
117: In order to obtain more precise information,
118: it is highly desirable to have an exact expression for
119: $P(\nu_e \to \nu_{\mu})$.
120: Some attempts to derive the exact formula have been made
121: in the context of three neutrino scenarios
122: \cite{Barger1, Zaglauer, Xing, Ohlsson}.
123: These formulae are useful for numerical calculation.
124: However, the precise CP dependence of $P(\nu_e \to \nu_{\mu})$
125: has not been investigated
126: sufficiently \cite{Zaglauer}.
127:
128: To describe our approach, let us review the work of
129: Naumov \cite{Naumov} and
130: Harrison-Scott \cite{Harrison}.
131: The Hamiltonian $\tilde{H}$ in matter
132: is related to $H$ in vacuum as
133: \begin{eqnarray}
134: \tilde{H}=H+\frac{1}{2E}{\rm diag}(a, 0, 0),
135: \end{eqnarray}
136: where $a\equiv 2\sqrt{2}G_F N_e E$, $G_F$ is Fermi constant
137: and $N_e$ is the electron density in matter.
138: In particular, taking the products of non-diagonal elements,
139: \begin{eqnarray}
140: {\rm Im}(\tilde{H}_{e\mu}\tilde{H}_{\mu\tau}\tilde{H}_{\tau e})
141: ={\rm Im}(H_{e\mu}H_{\mu\tau}H_{\tau e}),
142: \end{eqnarray}
143: one obtains the following identity, which we call
144: Naumov-Harrison-Scott identity,
145: \begin{eqnarray}
146: \tilde{\Delta}_{12}\tilde{\Delta}_{23}\tilde{\Delta}_{31}
147: \tilde{J}=\Delta_{12}\Delta_{23}\Delta_{31}J,
148: \end{eqnarray}
149: in CP-odd part, where
150: $\Delta_{ij} \equiv m_i^2-m_j^2$,
151: $J\equiv {\rm Im} J_{e\mu}^{12}$ is Jarlskog factor
152: \cite{Jarlskog}, $J_{\alpha \beta}^{ij}\equiv
153: U_{\alpha i}U_{\beta i}^* U_{\alpha j}^* U_{\beta j}$ and
154: $U$ is the Maki-Nakagawa-Sakata (MNS) matrix \cite{MNS}.
155: Here the quantities expressed by the tilde include the matter effects.
156: From this identity, $\tilde{J}$ can be expressed in terms of
157: effective masses and the parameters of the Hamiltonian in vacuum.
158: As effective masses shown in \cite{Barger1, Zaglauer, Xing}
159: do not depend on the CP phase,
160: $\tilde{J}$ can be completely expressed by the linear term in
161: $\sin \delta$.
162: The reason why the CP dependence becomes simple is
163: that $\tilde{J}$ is the products of four $\tilde{U}$'s.
164: Complicated matter effects included in
165: a $\tilde{U}$ are partially canceled in $\tilde{J}$.
166: \footnote{The calculation of a $\tilde{U}$ is performed
167: by diagonalizing $\tilde{H}$ in Ref. \cite{Xing}.}
168:
169: In this letter, we calculate $\tilde{U}\tilde{U}^*$.
170: We use some matter invariant identities
171: such as Naumov-Harrison-Scott identity
172: and express not only $\tilde{J}$ but also
173: ${\rm Re}\tilde{J}_{e\mu}^{ij}$
174: with the effective masses and the parameters in vacuum.
175: The exact formula obtained in this method
176: is very simple and the matter effects come in only through
177: effective masses.
178: We show that
179: ${\rm Re}\tilde{J}_{e\mu}^{ij}$ has only
180: a linear term in $\cos \delta$.
181: That is, we prove that the oscillation probability in matter
182: can be written in the form
183: \begin{eqnarray}
184: P(\nu_e \to \nu_{\mu})=A\cos\delta+B\sin\delta+C
185: \end{eqnarray}
186: without any approximation.
187:
188: Another merit of our result
189: is that the exact formula immediately reduces to the well-known
190: approximate formulae both in low-energy \cite{Sato} and
191: in high-energy \cite{Cervera, Freund}.
192: We demonstrate that the approximate formula in high-energy
193: can be easily reproduced from our exact formula as an example.
194: Finally, we numerically calculate
195: the coefficients $A$, $B$ and $C$.
196:
197:
198: \section{Exact Formula of the Oscillation Probability}
199: \hspace*{\parindent}
200: The flavor and mass eigenstates are related by the MNS matrix
201: $\tilde{U}_{\alpha i}$ in matter, where $\alpha=e, \mu, \tau$ is
202: the flavor index, $i=1, 2, 3$ is the mass index.
203: The amplitude for $\nu_e$ to $\nu_{\mu}$ transition is given by
204: \begin{eqnarray}
205: A(\nu_e \to \nu_{\mu})
206: =\sum_{i=1}^3
207: \tilde{U}_{ei}^* e^{-i\frac{\lambda_i}{2E}L}\tilde{U}_{\mu i},
208: \label{1}
209: \end{eqnarray}
210: and the oscillation probability is also given by
211: \begin{eqnarray}
212: P(\nu_e \to \nu_{\mu})=|A(\nu_e \to \nu_{\mu})|^2
213: \label{22},
214: \end{eqnarray}
215: from the amplitude, where $L$ stands for the baseline length.
216:
217: We note from (\ref{1}) that the amplitude
218: depends only on the products
219: $\tilde{U}_{e i}\tilde{U}_{\mu i}^*$.
220: One of the important points in this letter is that
221: these products can be easily calculated from identities
222: which we derive below.
223:
224: From the unitarity relation and the other two
225: relations,
226: \begin{eqnarray}
227: \tilde{H}_{e\mu} &=& H_{e\mu}=p/(2E),
228: \label{30} \\
229: \tilde{H}_{e \tau}\tilde{H}_{\tau\mu}
230: -\tilde{H}_{e\mu}\tilde{H}_{\tau\tau} &=&
231: H_{e\tau}H_{\tau\mu}-H_{e\mu}H_{\tau\tau}
232: =q/(2E)^2, \label{2}
233: \end{eqnarray}
234: three identities on the products
235: $\tilde{U}_{ei}\tilde{U}_{\mu i}^*$ can be obtained as follows:
236: \begin{eqnarray}
237: \sum_{i=1}^3\tilde{U}_{ei}\tilde{U}_{\mu i}^*
238: &=&\sum_{i=1}^3 U_{ei} U_{\mu i}^*=0,
239: \label{3} \\
240: \sum_{i=1}^3 \lambda_i \tilde{U}_{ei}\tilde{U}_{\mu i}^*
241: &=&\sum_{i=1}^3 m_i^2 U_{ei}U_{\mu i}^*=p,
242: \label{4} \\
243: \sum_{(ijk)}^{{\rm cyclic}}
244: \lambda_j \lambda_k \tilde{U}_{ei}\tilde{U}_{\mu i}^*
245: &=&\sum_{(ijk)}^{{\rm cyclic}}
246: m_j^2 m_k^2 U_{ei}U_{\mu i}^*=q,
247: \label{5}
248: \end{eqnarray}
249: where $p$ and $q$ are constants
250: determined by the parameters in vacuum and
251: the sum is over $(ijk)=(123), (231), (312)$.
252: We use the relation
253: $\tilde{U}_{\tau i}\tilde{U}_{ej}
254: -\tilde{U}_{ei}\tilde{U}_{\tau j}
255: =\tilde{U}_{\mu k}^* ({\rm det} \tilde{U})$ etc,
256: obtained from the formula
257: $\tilde{U}^{\dagger}=\tilde{U}^{-1}=
258: \tilde{\cal{U}}({\rm det} \tilde{U})^{-1}$,
259: where $\tilde{\cal{U}}$ represents the cofactor matrix.
260:
261: Solving the simultaneous equations for the products
262: $\tilde{U}_{ei}\tilde{U}_{\mu i}^*$, we obtain
263: \begin{eqnarray}
264: \tilde{U}_{ei}\tilde{U}_{\mu i}^*=\frac{p\lambda_i+q}
265: {\tilde{\Delta}_{ji}\tilde{\Delta}_{ki}} \label{206},
266: \end{eqnarray}
267: where $(ijk)$ takes $(123),(231),(312)$.
268: From the definition $\tilde{J}_{e\mu}^{ij}
269: =\tilde{U}_{ei}\tilde{U}_{\mu i}^*
270: (\tilde{U}_{ej}\tilde{U}_{\mu j}^*)^*$,
271: the exact formula of the oscillation probability is given by
272: \begin{eqnarray}
273: P(\nu_e \to \nu_{\mu})
274: =-4\sum_{(ij)}^{{\rm cyclic}}{\rm Re}\tilde{J}_{e\mu}^{ij}
275: \sin^2 \left(\frac{\tilde{\Delta}_{ij}L}{4E}\right)
276: - 2\sum_{(ij)}^{{\rm cyclic}}\tilde{J}
277: \sin \left(\frac{\tilde{\Delta}_{ij}L}{2E}\right) \label{200},
278: \end{eqnarray}
279: where the sum is over $(ij)=(12),(23),(31)$ and
280: \begin{eqnarray}
281: {\rm Re}\tilde{J}_{e\mu}^{ij}&=&
282: \frac{|p|^2 \lambda_i \lambda_j+|q|^2
283: +{\rm Re}(pq^*)(\lambda_i+\lambda_j)}
284: {\tilde{\Delta}_{ij}\tilde{\Delta}_{12}\tilde{\Delta}_{23}
285: \tilde{\Delta}_{31}}, \label{6} \\
286: \tilde{J}&=&\frac{{\rm Im}(pq^*)}
287: {\tilde{\Delta}_{12}\tilde{\Delta}_{23}
288: \tilde{\Delta}_{31}}. \label{7}
289: \end{eqnarray}
290: We find that the matter effects are confined in
291: the effective masses only.
292: We can obtain the probability for antineutrinos,
293: $\bar{\nu}_e \to \bar{\nu}_{\mu}$,
294: by exchanging $a \to -a$ and $\delta \to -\delta$
295: in $\tilde{\Delta}_{ij}$ and $\tilde{J}_{e\mu}^{ij}$ of
296: Eq. (\ref{200}).
297:
298: Let us comment on the
299: relation between our result and that of other authors.
300: The second identity (\ref{4}) is also given in Ref. \cite{Xing2}.
301: The third identity (\ref{5}) is new and play an
302: important role in deriving our exact formula.
303: The similar expression to (\ref{206}) is given in
304: Ref. \cite{Ohlsson}
305: as the result of the calculation of $e^{-i\tilde{H}L}$,
306: although the CP phase has not been considered.
307: \footnote{We notice that the expression of $\tilde{U}\tilde{U}^*$
308: in (\ref{206}) is also derived from Eq. (4) in Ref. \cite{Harrison2}
309: after some calculations \cite{Harrison3}.}
310: Next, ${\rm Im}(pq^*)$ in (\ref{7}) are rewritten as
311: \begin{eqnarray}
312: {\rm Im}(pq^*)=1/(2E)^3{\rm Im}(H_{e\mu}H_{\mu\tau}
313: H_{\tau e})=
314: \Delta_{12}\Delta_{23}\Delta_{31}J,\label{205}
315: \end{eqnarray}
316: from (\ref{30}) and (\ref{2}).
317: Naumov-Harrison-Scott identity is reproduced by
318: substituting (\ref{205}) into (\ref{7}).
319:
320:
321:
322: \section{Separation of CP odd/even Parts}
323: \hspace*{\parindent}
324: In this section, we give a concrete expression
325: for the oscillation probability
326: and then, we study the dependence of the oscillation probability on
327: the CP phase.
328:
329: First let us consider the constants $p$ and $q$.
330: We use the standard parametrization
331: \begin{eqnarray}
332: U_{\alpha i}&=&\left(
333: \begin{array}{ccc}
334: c_{13}c_{12} & c_{13}s_{12} & s_{13}e^{-i\delta} \\
335: -c_{23}s_{12}-s_{23}s_{13}c_{12}e^{i\delta}
336: & c_{23}c_{12}-s_{23}s_{13}s_{12}e^{i\delta}
337: & s_{23}c_{13} \\
338: s_{23}s_{12}-c_{23}s_{13}c_{12}e^{i\delta}
339: & -s_{23}c_{12}-c_{23}s_{13}s_{12}e^{i\delta}
340: & c_{23}c_{13}
341: \end{array}
342: \right),
343: \end{eqnarray}
344: where
345: $\sin \theta_{ij}=s_{ij}$,
346: $\cos \theta_{ij}=c_{ij}$.
347: In addition, as the neutrino oscillation probabilities
348: do not depend on the mass itself, but the mass square differences,
349: we take $m_1^2=0, m_2^2=\Delta_{21}$ and
350: $m_3^2=\Delta_{31}$ without loss of generality.
351: So, $p$ and $q$ are given by
352: \begin{eqnarray}
353: p=p_1 e^{-i\delta}+p_2, \hspace{0.5cm}
354: q=q_1 e^{-i\delta}+q_2,
355: \end{eqnarray}
356: where $p_i$ and $q_i$ are real numbers;
357: \begin{eqnarray}
358: &&p_1=(\Delta_{31}-\Delta_{21}s_{12}^2)
359: s_{23}s_{13}c_{13}, \hspace{0.5cm}
360: p_2=\Delta_{21}s_{12}c_{12}c_{23}c_{13}, \label{32} \\
361: &&q_1=-\Delta_{31}\Delta_{21}c_{12}^2 s_{23}s_{13}c_{13},
362: \hspace{0.5cm}
363: q_2=-\Delta_{31}\Delta_{21}s_{12}c_{12}c_{23}c_{13}.
364: \label{33}
365: \end{eqnarray}
366: Then, we have
367: \begin{eqnarray}
368: |p|^2&=&p_1^2+p_2^2+2p_1 p_2 \cos \delta, \\
369: |q|^2&=&q_1^2+q_2^2+2q_1 q_2 \cos \delta, \\
370: {\rm Re}(pq^*)&=&p_1 q_1+p_2 q_2
371: +(p_1 q_2+q_1 p_2)\cos \delta, \\
372: {\rm Im}(pq^*)&=&(p_2 q_1-p_1 q_2)\sin \delta.
373: \end{eqnarray}
374: Therefore, the oscillation probability can be written in the form
375: \begin{eqnarray}
376: P(\nu_e \to \nu_{\mu})=A\cos \delta+B\sin \delta+C,
377: \label{8}
378: \end{eqnarray}
379: from (\ref{200})-(\ref{7}).
380: Note that $A, B$ and $C$ are independent of $\delta$
381: and the oscillation probability is expressed only by
382: the linear terms in $\cos \delta$ and $\sin \delta$
383: up to a constant as described below.
384: This is one of our main results.
385: Here
386: \begin{eqnarray}
387: A&=&\sum_{(ij)}^{{\rm cyclic}}A_{ij}
388: \sin^2 \left(\frac{\tilde{\Delta}_{ij}L}{4E}\right),
389: \label{31}
390: \\
391: B&=&\sum_{(ij)}^{{\rm cyclic}}B^{\prime}
392: \sin \left(\frac{\tilde{\Delta}_{ij}L}{2E}\right),
393: \label{203} \\
394: C&=&\sum_{(ij)}^{{\rm cyclic}}C_{ij}
395: \sin^2 \left(\frac{\tilde{\Delta}_{ij}L}{4E}\right),
396: \end{eqnarray}
397: are expressed by the products of the oscillation part
398: dependent on $L$ and $A_{ij}, B^{\prime}$ and $C_{ij}$.
399: And then, $A_{ij}, B^{\prime}$ and $C_{ij}$ are given by
400: \begin{eqnarray}
401: A_{ij}&=&\frac{-4[2p_1 p_2 \lambda_i \lambda_j+2q_1 q_2
402: +(p_1q_2+q_1 p_2)(\lambda_i+\lambda_j)]}
403: {\tilde{\Delta}_{ij}\tilde{\Delta}_{12}
404: \tilde{\Delta}_{23}\tilde{\Delta}_{31}}, \label{34} \\
405: B^{\prime}&=&\frac{-2(p_2 q_1-p_1 q_2)}
406: {\tilde{\Delta}_{12}\tilde{\Delta}_{23}\tilde{\Delta}_{31}},
407: \label{35} \\
408: C_{ij}&=&\frac{-4[(p_1^2+p_2^2) \lambda_i \lambda_j
409: +(q_1^2+q_2^2)
410: +(p_1q_1+q_2 p_2)(\lambda_i+\lambda_j)]}
411: {\tilde{\Delta}_{ij}\tilde{\Delta}_{12}
412: \tilde{\Delta}_{23}\tilde{\Delta}_{31}},
413: \label{36}
414: \end{eqnarray}
415: as the function of the masses and mixing angles.
416: Since the effective masses $\lambda_i$ shown in
417: \cite{Barger1, Zaglauer, Xing} do not depend on $\delta$,
418: the coefficients $A, B$ and $C$ are independent of $\delta$.
419:
420: Our analytic result given in (\ref{8})
421: should be compared with the result of \cite{Minakata} depicted in Fig. 1
422: obtained numerically.
423: The trajectory becomes an ellipse in the
424: bi-probability space when $\delta$ changes from $0$ to $2\pi$.
425: The CP dependence of the exact form of $P(\nu_e \to \nu_{\mu})$
426: given in (\ref{8}) becomes much simpler than the result in \cite{Zaglauer}.
427: By solving (\ref{8}) for $\sin \delta$ and $\cos \delta$
428: one obtain
429: \begin{eqnarray}
430: \sin \delta&=&\frac{B(P-C)
431: \pm A\sqrt{A^2+B^2-(P-C)^2}}
432: {A^2+B^2}, \label{201} \\
433: \cos \delta&=&\frac{A(P-C)
434: \mp B\sqrt{A^2+B^2-(P-C)^2}}
435: {A^2+B^2} \label{202}.
436: \end{eqnarray}
437: Thus, we can determine the value of CP phase except for the
438: ambiguity of the sign
439: from the measurement of the probability.
440: The sign ambiguity is understood as follows.
441: \begin{figure}
442: \begin{minipage}{7cm}
443: \begin{center}
444: \includegraphics[scale=0.7, bb=-40 460 282 700]{daen.ps}
445: \end{center}
446: \end{minipage}
447: \caption{An example of CP trajectory
448: \hspace{0.5cm} We take $P$ for the horizontal axis and
449: $\bar{P}$ for the vertical axis. The value of $\delta$ changes
450: from $0$ to $2\pi$.}
451: \label{fig:1} % Give a unique label
452: \end{figure}
453: If we measure the probability of the neutrino at a fixed energy
454: and a baseline, we find the solutions on a ``line a".
455: As shown in Fig. 1,
456: there are two intersections X and Y of ``line a" with
457: the CP trajectory.
458: This is the reason why the ambiguity due to the sign
459: appears in the analytic solutions (\ref{201}) and (\ref{202}).
460:
461: In order to resolve the sign ambiguity, we need to measure
462: more than two kinds of probabilities, for example, neutrino
463: and antineutrino.
464: We denote $P$ and $\bar{P}$ of the oscillation probabilities for
465: neutrino and antineutrino respectively as
466: \begin{eqnarray}
467: P&=&A \cos \delta
468: +B \sin \delta+C, \\
469: \bar{P}&=&\bar{A} \cos \delta
470: +\bar{B} \sin \delta+\bar{C}.
471: \end{eqnarray}
472: Then, CP phase can be determined by
473: \begin{eqnarray}
474: \sin \delta&=&\frac{(\bar{A} P-A \bar{P})
475: -(\bar{A} C-A \bar{C})}{\bar{A} B-A \bar{B}}, \label{100}\\
476: \cos \delta&=&\frac{(\bar{B} P-B \bar{P})
477: -(\bar{B} C-B \bar{C})}{\bar{B} A-B \bar{A}}, \label{101}
478: \end{eqnarray}
479: without the ambiguity of the sign.
480: This means that the solution is at X, the intersect of ``line a" and
481: ``line b".
482:
483: Although the value of CP phase is determined,
484: in principle, in (\ref{100}) and (\ref{101}),
485: there remain other ambiguities
486: included in $A$, $B$, $C$ and $\bar{A}$, $\bar{B}$, $\bar{C}$.
487: The methods to resolve these ambiguities are discussed
488: in the references for example \cite{Minakata, Burguet, Barger2, Kajita}.
489: We discuss the ambiguities due to the sign of mass
490: squared differences in Sec. 5.
491:
492:
493: \section{Simple Derivation of Approximate Formula}
494: \hspace*{\parindent}
495: In the previous section, we have shown that the exact formula of
496: the oscillation probability can be expressed as
497: $P(\nu_e \to \nu_{\mu})=A\cos \delta+B\sin \delta +C$.
498: In this section, we demonstrate that the approximate formula
499: seen in \cite{Cervera, Freund} is easily derived as an example
500: in the case of $m_1<m_2 \ll m_3$.
501: One obtains the approximate formula for other patterns of mass
502: hierarchy in the same way.
503:
504: Let us first consider the coefficient $B$ of $\sin \delta$.
505: $B$ is expressed in the form of the sum as (\ref{203}).
506: Note that, under the condition $x+y+z=0$, the identity
507: \begin{eqnarray}
508: \sin 2x+\sin 2y +\sin 2z=-4\sin x \sin y \sin z,
509: \end{eqnarray}
510: holds, and $B$ from (\ref{203}) is rewritten
511: in the form of product as
512: \begin{eqnarray}
513: B&=&\sum_{(ij)}^{{\rm cyclic}}B^{\prime}
514: \sin \left(\frac{\tilde{\Delta}_{ij}L}{2E}\right) \\
515: &=&-4B^{\prime}\sin \left(\frac{\tilde{\Delta}_{12}L}{4E}\right)
516: \sin \left(\frac{\tilde{\Delta}_{23}L}{4E}\right)
517: \sin \left(\frac{\tilde{\Delta}_{31}L}{4E}\right).
518: \end{eqnarray}
519: Next, let us consider the coefficient $A$ of $\cos \delta$.
520: Under the same condition as in deriving $B$, the identity
521: \begin{eqnarray}
522: \sin^2 x=-(\sin x \sin y \cos z+\sin x \cos y \sin z).
523: \end{eqnarray}
524: holds and $A$ is rewritten as
525: \begin{eqnarray}
526: A&=&\sum_{(ij)}^{{\rm cyclic}}A_{ij}\sin^2
527: \left(\frac{\tilde{\Delta}_{ij}L}{4E}\right) \\
528: &=&-\sum_{(ijk)}^{{\rm cyclic}}(A_{jk}+A_{ki})
529: \cos \left(\frac{\tilde{\Delta}_{ij}L}{4E}\right)
530: \sin \left(\frac{\tilde{\Delta}_{jk}L}{4E}\right)
531: \sin \left(\frac{\tilde{\Delta}_{ki}L}{4E}\right).
532: \end{eqnarray}
533:
534: Substituting (\ref{32}) and (\ref{33}) for $p$ and $q$ in
535: (\ref{34})-(\ref{36}),
536: $A$, $B$ and $C$ are rewritten with the masses and the mixings as
537: \begin{eqnarray}
538: A&=&\sum_{(ijk)}^{{\rm cyclic}}\frac{-8J_r \Delta_{21}
539: [\Delta_{31}\lambda_k(\lambda_k-\Delta_{31})
540: +A_k^{(1)}]}
541: {\tilde{\Delta}_{jk}^2\tilde{\Delta}_{ki}^2}
542: \cos \left(\frac{\tilde{\Delta}_{ij}L}{4E}\right)
543: \sin \left(\frac{\tilde{\Delta}_{jk}L}{4E}\right)
544: \sin \left(\frac{\tilde{\Delta}_{ki}L}{4E}\right),
545: \label{15} \\
546: B&=&\frac{8\Delta_{12} \Delta_{23} \Delta_{31}}
547: {\tilde{\Delta}_{12} \tilde{\Delta}_{23}
548: \tilde{\Delta}_{31}} J_r
549: \sin\left(\frac{\tilde{\Delta}_{12}L}{4E}\right)
550: \sin\left(\frac{\tilde{\Delta}_{23}L}{4E}\right)
551: \sin\left(\frac{\tilde{\Delta}_{31}L}{4E}\right),
552: \label{16} \\
553: C&=&\sum_{(ij)}^{{\rm cyclic}}
554: \frac{-4[s_{13}^2 (s_{23}^2 c_{13}^2
555: \Delta_{31}^2 \lambda_i \lambda_j
556: +C_{ij}^{(1)}
557: +C_{ij}^{(2a)})+C_{ij}^{(2b)}]}
558: {\tilde{\Delta}_{ij} \tilde{\Delta}_{12}
559: \tilde{\Delta}_{23}\tilde{\Delta}_{31}}
560: \sin^2 \left(\frac{\tilde{\Delta}_{ij}L}{4E}\right),
561: \label{17}
562: \end{eqnarray}
563: where $J_r=s_{12}c_{12}s_{23}c_{23}s_{13}c_{13}^2$, and
564: \begin{eqnarray}
565: A_k^{(1)}&=&\Delta_{21}\{\Delta_{31}\lambda_k
566: (c_{12}^2-s_{12}^2)+\lambda_k^2 s_{12}^2
567: -\Delta_{31}^2 c_{12}^2\}, \label{400} \\
568: C_{ij}^{(1)}&=&\Delta_{21}\Delta_{31}\{
569: -\lambda_i(\lambda_j s_{12}^2+\Delta_{31}c_{12}^2)
570: -\lambda_j(\lambda_i s_{12}^2+\Delta_{31}c_{12}^2)\}
571: s_{23}^2 c_{13}^2, \label{401}
572: \\
573: C_{ij}^{(2a)}&=&\Delta_{21}^2
574: (\lambda_i s_{12}^2+\Delta_{31}c_{12}^2)
575: (\lambda_j s_{12}^2+\Delta_{31}c_{12}^2)
576: s_{23}^2 c_{13}^2, \label{402}
577: \\
578: C_{ij}^{(2b)}&=&\Delta_{21}^2
579: (\lambda_i-\Delta_{31})(\lambda_j-\Delta_{31})
580: s_{12}^2 c_{12}^2 c_{23}^2 c_{13}^2. \label{403}
581: \end{eqnarray}
582: Note that these expressions are still exact.
583: In the limit of small $\Delta_{21}$, terms given in
584: Eqs. (\ref{400})-(\ref{403}) are higher order in $\Delta_{21}$
585: and can be ignored.
586: The superscripts of $A$ and $C$ stand for the power of $\Delta_{21}$,
587: and $(2a)$ represents the term proportional to $s_{13}^2$ and
588: $(2b)$ is the term independent of $s_{13}^2$.
589:
590: Finally, we obtain the well known approximate formula
591: by neglecting the smallest effective mass.
592: In the high energy neutrino
593: the smallest effective mass is $\lambda_1\simeq \Delta_{21}$.
594: Other effective masses $\lambda_2$ and $\lambda_3$,
595: correspond to $a$ or $\Delta_{31}$.
596: Accordingly, $A$, $B$ and $C$ are approximated by
597: \begin{eqnarray}
598: A&=&\frac{8J_r \Delta_{21}\Delta_{31}}
599: {a(\Delta_{31}-a)}
600: \cos \left(\frac{\Delta_{31}L}{4E}\right)
601: \sin \left(\frac{aL}{4E}\right)
602: \sin \left(\frac{(\Delta_{31}-a)L}{4E}\right),
603: \label{90} \\
604: B&=&\frac{8J_r \Delta_{21} \Delta_{31}}
605: {a(\Delta_{31}-a)}
606: \sin\left(\frac{\Delta_{31}L}{4E}\right)
607: \sin\left(\frac{aL}{4E}\right)
608: \sin\left(\frac{(\Delta_{31}-a)L}{4E}\right),
609: \label{91} \\
610: C&=&\frac{4\Delta_{31}^2}
611: {(\Delta_{31}-a)^2}
612: s_{23}^2 s_{13}^2 c_{13}^2
613: \sin^2 \left(\frac{(\Delta_{31}-a)L}{4E}\right),
614: \label{92}
615: \end{eqnarray}
616: under the condition $\Delta_{21}/\Delta_{31} < s_{13}$.
617: When $s_{13}$ is smaller than $(\Delta_{21}/\Delta_{31})$,
618: the term $C_{ij}^{(2b)}$ independent of $s_{13}$
619: becomes the dominant term.
620: Although the approximate formula derived here is in agreement with
621: the ones seen in \cite{Cervera, Freund},
622: the derivation is rather simple.
623: Moreover, one can easily reproduce the approximate formula
624: in low-energy \cite{Sato}.
625:
626:
627: \section{Numerical Analysis of CP odd/even Part}
628: \hspace*{\parindent}
629: In this section, we investigate the values of the coefficients
630: $A, B$ and $C$ in cases of neutrino and antineutrino
631: using the exact expressions.
632: We also investigate them changing
633: the signs of $\Delta_{31}$ and $\Delta_{21}$.
634:
635: In this numerical analysis,
636: we take $\theta_{12}=\pi/4$, $|\Delta_{21}|=10^{-4} {\rm eV}^2$,
637: $\theta_{23}=\pi/4$ and $|\Delta_{31}|=3 \times 10^{-3} {\rm eV}^2$
638: to be consistent with the LMA MSW solution to the solar neutrino
639: problem \cite{solar, SNO} and the zenith-angle dependences of atmospheric
640: neutrinos \cite{atmospheric}.
641: We also take $\theta_{13}=0.05$
642: within the upper bound of CHOOZ experiment \cite{CHOOZ}.
643: The baseline length is typically taken to be
644: $L=2900 {\rm km}$ and the matter density is taken to be
645: $3.2{\rm g/cm}^3$.
646:
647: In Fig. 2 we show the coefficients $A$, $B$ and $C$
648: changing with the energy $E$.
649: \psfrag{a}[][]{(a) $\nu_e \to \nu_{\mu}, m_1<m_2 \ll m_3$}
650: \psfrag{b}[][]{(b) $\bar{\nu}_e \to \bar{\nu}_{\mu}, m_1<m_2 \ll m_3$}
651: \psfrag{c}[][]{(c) $\nu_e \to \nu_{\mu}, m_3 \ll m_1<m_2$}
652: \psfrag{d}[][]{(d) $\bar{\nu}_e \to \bar{\nu}_{\mu}, m_3 \ll m_1<m_2$}
653: \psfrag{e}[][]{(e) $\nu_e \to \nu_{\mu}, m_2<m_1 \ll m_3$}
654: \psfrag{f}[][]{(f) $\bar{\nu}_e \to \bar{\nu}_{\mu}, m_2<m_1 \ll m_3$}
655: \psfrag{g}[][]{(g) $\nu_e \to \nu_{\mu}, m_3 \ll m_2 < m_1$}
656: \psfrag{h}[][]{(h) $\bar{\nu}_e \to \bar{\nu}_{\mu}, m_3 \ll m_2< m_1$}
657: \psfrag{egev}[][]{E (GeV)}
658: \begin{figure}
659: %\vspace*{0.5cm}
660: %\begin{minipage}{7cm}
661: \hspace{1cm}
662: \includegraphics[scale=1.1]{p2900km.eps}
663: %\end{minipage}
664: \caption{$A, B, C$ at $L=2900 \,{\rm km}$ \hspace{0.5cm}
665: The graphs of the left and right side correspond to the neutrino and the antineutrino
666: respectively.
667: The solid lines, the dotted lines and the dashed lines are for $A$,
668: $B$ and $C$ in all graphs.
669: And from top to bottom,
670: $(\Delta_{31}>0, \Delta_{21}>0)$, $(\Delta_{31}<0, \Delta_{21}>0)$,
671: $(\Delta_{31}>0, \Delta_{21}<0)$ and $(\Delta_{31}<0, \Delta_{21}<0)$ cases.}
672: \label{fig:2} % Give a unique label
673: \end{figure}
674: %
675: We observe that the sign of $A$ is opposite for example
676: in Fig. 2(a) and (d).
677: We also observe that $A$ and $B$ have the opposite sign
678: but $C$ has the same sign comparing Fig. 2(a) with (e).
679: In addition, some peaks have appeared in all graphs of Fig. 2
680: with the change of energy.
681: In case of $\Delta_{31}>0$,
682: the peaks around $6 \,{\rm GeV}$ in Fig. 2(a) for neutrinos
683: are enhanced compared with those in Fig. 2(b) for antineutrinos.
684: Inversely, in case of $\Delta_{31}<0$,
685: the peaks in Fig. 2(d) for antineutrinos are enhanced
686: compared with those in Fig. 2(c) for neutrinos.
687:
688: These features are understood qualitatively from
689: the approximate formula (\ref{90})-(\ref{92}).
690: First let us consider the sign of $A$, $B$ and $C$.
691: As we found from (\ref{90})-(\ref{92}), when the signs of
692: both $\Delta_{31}$ and $a$ change, the sign of $A$ becomes
693: opposite and the signs of $B$ and $C$ do not change.
694: On the other hand, when the sign of $\Delta_{21}$ changes,
695: the signs of both $A$ and $B$ change while the sign of $C$
696: does not change.
697: Next, let us consider the magnitude of the peak around $6 \,{\rm GeV}$.
698: These are strongly affected by the denominator $(\Delta_{31}-a)$.
699: Since the signs of $\Delta_{31}$ and $a$ are opposite
700: in Fig. 2(a) and (d),
701: the denominator $(\Delta_{31}-a)$ becomes small and
702: the magnitude of the peaks are enhanced.
703: On the other hand,
704: since the signs of $\Delta_{31}$ and $a$ are the same
705: in Fig. 2(b) and (c), the peaks are suppressed.
706: Finally, let us explain the position of the peak in Fig. 2(a) and (d)
707: around $6\, {\rm GeV}$.
708: Roughly, the peak energy is determined by the following:
709: \begin{eqnarray}
710: \sin \left[1.27\left(\frac{\Delta_{31}-a}{1 \,{\rm eV}^2}\right)
711: \left(\frac{L}{1 \,{\rm km}}\right)
712: \left(\frac{E}{1 \,{\rm GeV}}\right)^{-1}\right] \sim 1
713: \to E \simeq 6 \,{\rm GeV}
714: \hspace{0.5cm}{\rm (at} \,\, L=2900 \,{\rm km)}.
715: \end{eqnarray}
716: As pointed out by Parke and Weiler \cite{Parke}, and Lipari
717: \cite{Lipari}, the peak energy is lower than the energy
718: of 1-3 MSW resonance since the baseline length is short
719: compared with the earth diameter.
720: The above discussions on Fig. 2(a)-(e)
721: can be applied to other figures.
722:
723: We have studied how the magnitude of $A$, $B$ and $C$
724: change due to the sign of the mass squared differences.
725: In the case of $m_1<m_2 \ll m_3$, the coefficients have been
726: investigated in Ref. \cite{Cervera} by using the approximate formula.
727: These correspond to Fig. 2(a) and (b).
728: The sign of $\Delta_{31}$ is determined from the leading term $C$
729: as pointed out by many authors (for example see \cite{Cervera}).
730: On the other hand, the sign of $\Delta_{21}$ is determined from
731: next leading terms $A$ or $B$.
732: This means that the sign of $\Delta_{21}$ is simultaneously determined
733: in addition to the CP phase.
734: It may be interesting as the first observation of
735: the sign of $\Delta_{21}$ using artificial neutrino beam.
736:
737:
738: \section{Summary}
739: \hspace*{\parindent}
740: We have studied neutrino oscillations in constant matter
741: within the framework of the three neutrino scenario.
742: We summarize the results obtained in this letter.
743:
744: \begin{enumerate}
745: \renewcommand{\labelenumi}{(\roman{enumi})}
746:
747: \item We have derived an exact expression of the oscillation
748: probability by using a new method.
749: We have calculated $\tilde{U}\tilde{U}^*$ from the identities
750: without directly calculating single $\tilde{U}$.
751: Not only the derivation but also the result becomes simple
752: and the matter effects enter only through effective masses.
753:
754: \item We have obtained the CP dependence of the oscillation
755: probability exactly by using the standard parametrization.
756: It has been shown that the oscillation probability is in the form,
757: $P(\nu_e \to \nu_{\mu})=A\cos \delta+B\sin \delta+C$.
758: We have also demonstrated that the approximate formula in
759: high-energy can be easily reproduced from our result.
760:
761: \end{enumerate}
762:
763: Finally, let us comment on the oscillation probabilities
764: for other channels.
765: These probabilities are easily derived
766: in the same way as $P(\nu_e \to \nu_{\mu})$.
767: $P(\nu_e \to \nu_{\tau})$ has the same CP dependence as
768: $P(\nu_e \to \nu_{\mu})$.
769: However, $P(\nu_{\mu} \to \nu_{\tau})$ has the term
770: which depends on $\cos 2\delta$ in addition to the linear
771: terms in $\sin \delta$ and $\cos \delta$.
772:
773:
774: \vspace{20pt}
775: \noindent
776: {\Large {\bf Acknowledgement}}
777:
778: \noindent
779: The authors would like to thank Prof. A. I. Sanda
780: for reading the manuscript and making a number of
781: helpful suggestions.
782: We would like to thank Prof. H. Minakata and Prof. O. Yasuda
783: for discussions and valuable comments.
784:
785:
786:
787: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
788:
789: \bibitem{atmospheric}
790: Super-Kamiokande Collaboration, Y. Fukuda et al.,
791: Phys. Rev. Lett. \textbf{81}, (1998) 1562;
792: Phys. Lett. \textbf{B433}, (1998) 9;
793: Phys. Lett. \textbf{B436}, (1998) 33;
794: Phys. Rev. Lett. \textbf{82}, (1999) 2644.
795:
796: \bibitem{solar} GALLEX Collaboration, W. Hampel et al.,
797: Phys. Lett. \textbf{B447}, (1999) 127;
798: SAGE Collaboration, J. N. Abdurashitov et al.,
799: Phys. Rev. \textbf{C60} (1999) 055801;
800: Homestake Collaboration, B. T. Cleveland et al.,
801: Astrophys. J. \textbf{496}, (1998) 505;
802: Super-Kamiokande Collaboration, Y. Fukuda et al.,
803: Phys. Rev. Lett. \textbf{82}, (1999) 1810, ibid.
804: \textbf{82}, (1999) 2430.
805:
806: \bibitem{SNO} SNO Collaboration, Q. R. Ahmad et al.,
807: Phys. Rev. Lett. \textbf{87}, (2001) 071301.
808:
809: \bibitem{JHF} Y. Itow et al., hep-ex/0106019;
810: N. Okamura, M. Aoki, K. Hagiwara, Y. Hayato, T. Kobayashi,
811: T. Nakaya and K. Nishikawa, hep-ph/0104220; hep-ph/0112338.
812:
813: \bibitem{nu-factory} S. H. Geer, Phys. Rev.
814: \textbf{D57}, (1998) 6989.
815:
816: \bibitem{Harrison}
817: P. F. Harrison and W. G. Scott, Phys. Lett. \textbf{B476},
818: (2000) 349.
819:
820: \bibitem{Sato} J. Arafune, M. Koike and J. Sato, Phys. Rev.
821: \textbf{D56}, (1997) 3093;
822: Erratum ibid., \textbf{D60}, (1999) 119905.
823:
824: \bibitem{Parke} S. J. Parke and T. J. Weiler,
825: Phys. Lett. \textbf{B501}, (2001) 106.
826:
827: \bibitem{other1}
828: For example
829:
830: J. Arafune and J. Sato, Phys. Rev. \textbf{D55}, (1997) 1653;
831:
832: H. Minakata and H. Nunokawa, Phys. Lett. \textbf{B413}, (1997) 369,
833: Phys. Rev. \textbf{D57}, (1998) 4403;
834:
835: M. Bilenky, C. Giunti and W. Grimus, Phys. Rev.
836: \textbf{D58}, (1998) 033001;
837:
838: A. De Rujula, M. B. Gavela and P. Hernandez,
839: Nucl. Phys. \textbf{B547}, (1999) 21;
840:
841: K. Dick, M. Freund, M. Lindner and
842: A. Romanino, Nucl. Phys. \textbf{B562}, (1999) 29;
843:
844: M. Tanimoto, Phys. Lett. \textbf{B462}, (1999) 115;
845:
846: A. Donini, M. B. Gavela, P. Hernandez and
847: S. Rigolin, Nucl. Phys. \textbf{B574}, (2000) 23;
848:
849: A. Romanino, Nucl. Phys. \textbf{B574}, (2000) 675;
850:
851: O. Yasuda, Acta Phys. Polon. \textbf{B30}, (1999) 3089;
852:
853: J. Sato, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. \textbf{A451}, (2000) 36;
854:
855: M. Koike and J. Sato, Phys. Rev. \textbf{D61}, (2000) 073012;
856: Erratum ibid., \textbf{D62}, (2000) 079903;
857:
858: H. Minakata and H. Nunokawa, Phys. Lett. \textbf{B495},
859: (2000) 369;
860:
861: H. Yokomakura, K. Kimura and A. Takamura,
862: Phys. Lett. \textbf{B496}, (2000) 175;
863:
864: M. Koike, T. Ota and J. Sato, Phys. Rev. \textbf{D65}, (2002)
865: 053015;
866:
867: T. Miura, E. Takasugi, Y. Kuno and M. Yoshimura,
868: Phys. Rev. \textbf{D64}, (2001) 013002;
869:
870: I. Mocioiu and R. Shrock, JHEP 0111 (2001) 050;
871:
872: J. Pinney and O. Yasuda, Phys. Rev. \textbf{D64},
873: (2001) 093008.
874:
875:
876: \bibitem{Cervera} A. Cervera, A. Donini, M. B. Gavela,
877: J. J. Gomez Cadenas,
878: P. Hernandez, O. Mena and S. Rigolin, Nucl. Phys. \textbf{B579},
879: (2000) 17 [Erratum-ibid. \textbf{B593}, (2000) 731].
880:
881: \bibitem{Freund} M. Freund, Phys. Rev. \textbf{D64},
882: (2001) 053003.
883:
884: \bibitem{Minakata} H. Minakata and H. Nunokawa, JHEP 0110
885: (2001) 001.
886:
887: \bibitem{Lipari} P. Lipari, Phys. Rev. \textbf{D64}, (2001)
888: 033002.
889:
890: \bibitem{Freund2} M. Freund, P. Huber and M. Lindner, Nucl. Phys.
891: \textbf{B615}, (2001) 331.
892:
893: \bibitem{Barger1} V. Barger, K. Whisnant,
894: S. Pakvasa and R. J. N. Phillips,
895: Phys. Rev. \textbf{D22}, (1980) 2718;
896:
897: \bibitem{Zaglauer} H. W. Zaglauer and K. H. Schwarzer,
898: Z. Phys. \textbf{C40}, (1988) 273.
899:
900: \bibitem{Xing} Z. Xing, Phys. Lett. \textbf{B487}, (2000) 327.
901:
902: \bibitem{Ohlsson} T. Ohlsson and H. Snellman,
903: J. Math. Phys. \textbf{41},
904: (2000) 2768; Phys. Lett. \textbf{B474}, (2000) 153.
905:
906: \bibitem{Naumov} V. A. Naumov, Int. J. Mod. Phys.
907: \textbf{D1}, (1992) 379.
908:
909: \bibitem{Jarlskog} C. Jarlskog, Phys. Rev. Lett.
910: \textbf{55}, (1985) 1039.
911:
912: \bibitem{MNS} Z. Maki, M. Nakagawa, S. Sakata,
913: Prog. Theor. Phys. \textbf{28}, (1962) 870.
914:
915: \bibitem{Xing2} Z. Xing, Phys. Rev. \textbf{D64}, (2001) 033005.
916:
917: \bibitem{Harrison2} P. F. Harrison and W. G. Scott,
918: hep-ph/0203021.
919:
920: \bibitem{Harrison3} P. F. Harrison, private communication.
921:
922: \bibitem{Burguet} J. Burguet-Castell, M. B. Gavela,
923: J. J. Gomez-Cadenas,
924: P. Hernandez and O. Mena, Nucl. Phys. \textbf{B608}, (2001)
925: 301.
926:
927: \bibitem{Barger2} V. Barger, D. Marfatia and K. Whisnant,
928: hep-ph/0112119.
929:
930: \bibitem{Kajita} T. Kajita, H. Minakata and H. Nunokawa,
931: Phys. Lett. \textbf{B528}, (2002) 245.
932:
933: \bibitem{MSW} L. Wolfenstein, Phys. Rev. \textbf{D17},
934: (1978) 2369; \textbf{D20}, (1979) 2634;
935: S. P. Mikheyev and A. Yu Smirnov, Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. \textbf{42},
936: (1985) 913.
937:
938: \bibitem{CHOOZ} CHOOZ Collaboration, M. Apollonio et al.,
939: Phys. Lett. \textbf{B420}, (1998) 397;
940: Phys. Lett. \textbf{B466}, (1999) 415.
941:
942: \end{thebibliography}
943:
944:
945: \end{document}
946:
947:
948:
949:
950: