1: \documentclass[11pt]{article}

2: \usepackage{moriond}

3: \bibliographystyle{h-elsevier2}

4: %

5: \usepackage{float}

6: \usepackage{floatflt}

7: \usepackage{subfigure}

8: \renewcommand{\subfigtopskip}{0pt}

9: \renewcommand{\subfigcapskip}{0pt}

10: \renewcommand{\subfigbottomskip}{0pt}

11: %

12: \usepackage[centertags]{amsmath}

13: \allowdisplaybreaks[1]

14: \numberwithin{equation}{section}

15: %

16: \usepackage{amsbsy}

17: \usepackage{amsfonts}

18: \usepackage{amssymb}

19: \usepackage[dvips]{graphicx}

20: \usepackage{url}

21: %

22: \begin{document}

23: \vspace*{4cm}

24: \title{Status of Neutrino Fits}

25: 

26: \author{C. Giunti}

27: 

28: \address{INFN, Sezione di Torino, and Dipartimento di Fisica Teorica,

29: \\

30: Universit\`a di Torino,

31: Via P. Giuria 1, I--10125 Torino, Italy}

32: 

33: \maketitle

34: 

35: \abstracts{

36: I review

37: the current status of

38: solar, KamLAND, atmospheric and K2K neutrino experiments,

39: implications for three-neutrino mixing

40: and upper bounds for the neutrino masses.

41: }

42: 

43: \raisebox{3.0cm}[0pt][0pt]{

44: \begin{minipage}[t]{0.905\textwidth}

45: \begin{center}

46: \includegraphics*[bb=14 14 252 240, width=4cm]{fig/f02.eps.pdf.eps}

47: \end{center}

48: \end{minipage}

49: }

50: 

51: \null

52: \vspace{-2.5cm}

53: \null

54: 

55: \section{Introduction}

56: \label{Introduction}

57: 

58: The last five years have been extraordinary for neutrino physics,

59: with the

60: Super-Kamiokande evidence of atmospheric neutrino oscillations~\cite{Fukuda:1998mi},

61: the SNO evidence of solar neutrino oscillations~\cite{Ahmad:2001an,Ahmad:2002jz},

62: the KamLAND~\cite{hep-ex/0212021} and K2K~\cite{Ahn:2002up}

63: confirmations of these evidences with neutrinos from controlled laboratory

64: sources.

65: As a result of the findings of these and other important experiments,

66: a scenario of bilarge mixing of three neutrinos has emerged as

67: favored by the data.

68: 

69: In this review I briefly summarize the results

70: of solar, KamLAND, atmospheric and K2K neutrino experiments

71: in Sections~\ref{Solar Neutrino Experiments and KamLAND}

72: and

73: \ref{Atmospheric Neutrino Experiments and K2K}

74: and their interpretation in terms of two-neutrino oscillations.

75: In Section~\ref{Three-Neutrino Mixing} I describe the three-neutrino mixing

76: schemes favored by neutrino oscillation data

77: and I discuss the open problem of the determination

78: of the absolute neutrino mass scale,

79: including the recent stringent limit~\cite{Spergel:2003cb}

80: from cosmological data.

81: Conclusions are drawn in Section~\ref{Conclusions}.

82: 

83: \section{Solar Neutrino Experiments and KamLAND}

84: \label{Solar Neutrino Experiments and KamLAND}

85: 

86: The Solar Neutrino Problem

87: consists in a deficit of electron neutrinos

88: arriving on Earth with respect to the

89: flux predicted by the Standard Solar Model~\cite{Bahcall:2002ng} (SSM).

90: It was discovered in the Homestake experiment~\cite{Cleveland:1998nv}

91: in the late 60's and later confirmed

92: by the Kamiokande~\cite{Fukuda:1996sz},

93: SAGE~\cite{Abdurashitov:2002nt},

94: GALLEX~\cite{Hampel:1998xg},

95: GNO~\cite{Altmann:2000ft},

96: Super-Kamiokande~\cite{Fukuda:2002pe}

97: and SNO~\cite{Ahmad:2002jz}

98: experiments.

99: Table~\ref{sundata} shows the main characteristics of

100: the rates measured in solar neutrino experiments.

101: One can see that all the experiments measuring

102: exclusively~\footnote{

103: The radiochemical experiments

104: Homestake~\cite{Cleveland:1998nv},

105: SAGE~\cite{Abdurashitov:2002nt},

106: GALLEX~\cite{Hampel:1998xg},

107: GNO~\cite{Altmann:2000ft}.

108: }

109: or mainly~\footnote{

110: The cross section of $\nu_e$ in the ES reaction in

111: Kamiokande,

112: Super-Kamiokande

113: and SNO

114: is about six times larger than the cross section of $\nu_{\mu,\tau}$.

115: In the discussion of solar neutrino experiments

116: $\nu_{\mu}$ and $\nu_{\tau}$

117: are considered together, because they are indistinguishable

118: due to the low energy that does not allow charged-current

119: reactions with production of $\mu$ or $\tau$.

120: }

121: electron neutrinos

122: observe a suppression between

123: about 1/3 and 1/2 of the electron neutrino flux

124: with respect to the BP2000~\cite{Bahcall:2000nu}

125: SSM prediction.

126: 

127: \begin{table}[t]

128: \begin{center}

129: \footnotesize

130: \setlength{\arraycolsep}{0pt}

131: \begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|}

132: \hline

133: Experiment

134: &

135: Reaction

136: &

137: $

138: \begin{array}{c}

139: E_{\mathrm{th}}

140: \\

141: \text{(MeV)}

142: \end{array}

143: $

144: &

145: $

146: \begin{array}{c}

147: \text{$\nu$ Flux}

148: \\

149: \text{Sensitivity}

150: \end{array}

151: $

152: &

153: $

154: \begin{array}{c}

155: \text{Operating}

156: \\

157: \text{Time}

158: \end{array}

159: $

160: &

161: $

162: \displaystyle

163: \frac

164: { R^{\mathrm{exp}} }

165: { R^{\mathrm{BP2000}} }

166: $

167: \\

168: \hline

169: \hline

170: SAGE

171: &

172: &

173: &

174: &

175: $1990-2001$

176: &

177: $ 0.55 \pm 0.05 $

178: \text{\protect{\cite{Abdurashitov:2002nt}}}

179: \vphantom{$\Big|$}

180: \\

181: \cline{1-1}

182: \cline{5-6}

183: GALLEX

184: &

185: \text{CC:}

186: $

187: \nu_e + {}^{71}\mathrm{Ga} \to {}^{71}\mathrm{Ge} + e^-

188: $

189: &

190: $ 0.233 $

191: &

192: \begin{tabular}{c}

193: \vphantom{$\Big|$}

194: $pp$,

195: ${^7\mathrm{Be}}$,

196: ${^8\mathrm{B}}$,

197: \\

198: \vphantom{$\Big|$}

199: $pep$,

200: $hep$,

201: \\

202: \vphantom{$\Big|$}

203: ${^{13}\mathrm{N}}$,

204: ${^{15}\mathrm{O}}$,

205: ${^{17}\mathrm{F}}$

206: \end{tabular}

207: &

208: $1991-1997$

209: &

210: $ 0.61 \pm 0.06 $

211: \text{\protect{\cite{Hampel:1998xg}}}

212: \vphantom{$\Big|$}

213: \\

214: \cline{1-1}

215: \cline{5-6}

216: GNO

217: &

218: &

219: &

220: &

221: $1998-2000$

222: &

223: $ 0.51 \pm 0.08 $

224: \text{\protect{\cite{Altmann:2000ft}}}

225: \vphantom{$\Big|$}

226: \\

227: \hline

228: Homestake

229: &

230: \text{CC:}

231: $

232: \nu_e + ^{37}\mathrm{Cl}

233: \to

234: ^{37}\mathrm{Ar} + e^-

235: $

236: &

237: $ 0.814 $

238: &

239: \begin{tabular}{c}

240: ${^7\mathrm{Be}}$,

241: ${^8\mathrm{B}}$,

242: \\

243: $pep$,

244: $hep$,

245: \\

246: ${^{13}\mathrm{N}}$,

247: ${^{15}\mathrm{O}}$,

248: ${^{17}\mathrm{F}}$

249: \end{tabular}

250: &

251: $1970-1994$

252: &

253: $ 0.34 \pm 0.03 $

254: \text{\protect{\cite{Cleveland:1998nv}}}

255: \vphantom{$\Big|$}

256: \\

257: \hline

258: Kamiokande

259: &

260: &

261: $ 6.75 $

262: &

263: &

264: $

265: \begin{array}{c}

266: 1987-1995

267: \\

268: \text{2079 days}

269: \end{array}

270: $

271: &

272: $ 0.55 \pm 0.08 $

273: \text{\protect{\cite{Fukuda:1996sz}}}

274: \vphantom{$\Big|$}

275: \\

276: \cline{1-1}

277: \cline{3-3}

278: \cline{5-6}

279: Super-Kam.

280: &

281: \raisebox{0.45cm}[0pt][0pt]

282: {\text{ES:} $ \nu + e^- \to \nu + e^- $}

283: &

284: $ 4.75 $

285: &

286: &

287: $

288: \begin{array}{c}

289: 1996-2001

290: \\

291: \text{1496 days}

292: \end{array}

293: $

294: &

295: $ 0.465 \pm 0.015 $

296: \text{\protect{\cite{Fukuda:2002pe}}}

297: \vphantom{$\Big|$}

298: \\

299: \cline{1-3}

300: \cline{5-6}

301: &

302: \text{CC:}

303: $ \nu_e + d \to p + p + e^- $

304: &

305: $ 6.9 $

306: &

307: ${^8\mathrm{B}}$

308: &

309: &

310: $ 0.35 \pm 0.02 $

311: \text{\protect{\cite{Ahmad:2002jz}}}

312: \vphantom{$\Big|$}

313: \\

314: \cline{2-3}

315: \cline{6-6}

316: SNO

317: &

318: \text{NC:}

319: $ \nu + d \to p + n + \nu $

320: &

321: $ 2.2 $

322: &

323: &

324: $

325: \begin{array}{c}

326: 1999-2002

327: \\

328: \text{306.4 days}

329: \end{array}

330: $

331: &

332: $ 1.01 \pm 0.13 $

333: \text{\protect{\cite{Ahmad:2002jz}}}

334: \vphantom{$\Big|$}

335: \\

336: \cline{2-3}

337: \cline{6-6}

338: &

339: \text{ES:}

340: $ \nu + e^- \to \nu + e^- $

341: &

342: $ 5.2 $

343: &

344: &

345: &

346: $ 0.47 \pm 0.05 $

347: \text{\protect{\cite{Ahmad:2002jz}}}

348: \vphantom{$\Big|$}

349: \\

350: \hline

351: \end{tabular}

352: \end{center}

353: \caption{ \label{sundata}

354: Main characteristics of the rates measured in solar neutrino experiments.

355: CC = Charged Current;

356: NC = Neutral Current;

357: ES = Elastic Scattering;

358: $E_{\mathrm{th}}$ = Energy threshold.

359: The last column shows the measured rate normalized to the

360: BP2000~\protect\cite{Bahcall:2000nu}

361: Standard Solar Model (SSM) prediction.

362: }

363: \end{table}

364: 

365: In 2001~\cite{Ahmad:2001an} the SNO experiment

366: measured the solar neutrino flux through the

367: CC and ES reactions listed in Table~\ref{sundata}.

368: A comparison of the SNO CC rate and the

369: Super-Kamiokande ES rate

370: %~\cite{Fukuda:2001nj}

371: (which is compatible with the SNO ES rate,

372: but more precise because of higher statistics)

373: allowed the SNO Collaboration to claim a first $3.3\sigma$

374: evidence in favor of

375: $\nu_e\to\nu_{\mu,\tau}$

376: transitions in the solar neutrino flux.

377: The $\nu_{\mu,\tau}$ produced in these transitions

378: interact through the ES reaction causing an increase

379: of the ES rate

380: with respect to the CC rate,

381: normalized to the SSM prediction.

382: 

383: In 2002~\cite{Ahmad:2002jz},

384: the observation by the SNO experiment of a rate

385: compatible with the SSM prediction

386: through the NC reaction

387: marked the triumph of the SNO experiment,

388: allowing the SNO Collaboration to proof the

389: existence of

390: $\nu_e\to\nu_{\mu,\tau}$

391: transitions in the solar neutrino flux

392: using only its own data,

393: simply by the comparison of the fluxes measured

394: through the CC and NC reactions:

395: $

396: \Phi_{\nu_{\mu,\tau}}^{\mathrm{SNO}}

397: =

398: \Phi_{\mathrm{NC}}^{\mathrm{SNO}}

399: -

400: \Phi_{\mathrm{CC}}^{\mathrm{SNO}}

401: =

402: \left( 3.33 \pm 0.65 \right) \times 10^6 \, \mathrm{cm}^{-2} \, \mathrm{s}^{-1}

403: $.

404: The model-independent evidence in favor of

405: $\nu_e\to\nu_{\mu,\tau}$

406: transitions

407: is at the level of $5.1\sigma$.

408: Moreover,

409: the total flux of active neutrinos

410: measured in the SNO NC reaction

411: is perfectly compatible with

412: the SSM flux,

413: providing a strong evidence in favor of

414: the correctness of the SSM

415: (that was questioned before)

416: and restricting possible

417: transitions of solar $\nu_e$'s into sterile neutrinos.

418: %~\cite{Bahcall:2002hv}.

419: 

420: The SNO measurements have solved the long-standing

421: Solar Neutrino Problem

422: proving that it is due to new neutrino physics,

423: because no astrophysical explanation can

424: generate the observed $\nu_{\mu,\tau}$'s.

425: 

426: The simplest known explanation of the appearance of

427: $\nu_{\mu,\tau}$

428: in the solar neutrino flux is neutrino oscillations

429: due to neutrino mixing~\footnote{

430: B. Pontecorvo discovered neutrino oscillations in

431: 1958-59~\cite{Pontecorvo:1957cp,Pontecorvo-58}

432: and worked on the theory and phenomenology of neutrino oscillations

433: for many years (see the review in Ref.~\cite{Bilenky-Pontecorvo-PR-78}).

434: It is interesting to notice that

435: Pontecorvo predicted a possible

436: suppression of the solar electron neutrino flux in

437: 1967~\cite{Pontecorvo-68},

438: before the first data of the Homestake experiment,

439: which was aimed at the observation of solar $^{8}\mathrm{B}$

440: in order to check the thermonuclear origin of the Sun

441: energy~\cite{Bahcall:1964gx,Davis:1964hf}.

442: }:

443: the left-handed neutrino fields

444: $\nu_{\alpha L}$ ($\alpha=e,\mu,\tau$),

445: which appear in the weak charged current

446: $

447: j^{\mathrm{CC}}_{\rho}

448: =

449: 2

450: \sum_{\alpha=e,\mu,\tau}

451: \overline{\nu_{\alpha L}} \gamma_\rho \alpha

452: $,

453: are mixings of the neutrino fields $\nu_k$

454: with masses $m_k$ ($k=1,2,3,\ldots$)

455: according to the relation

456: $

457: \nu_{\alpha L}

458: =

459: \sum_k

460: U_{\alpha k}

461: \nu_{k L}

462: $,

463: where $U$ is the unitary mixing matrix.

464: The modification of the oscillation probability

465: due to neutrino propagation in the Sun and the Earth

466: (MSW effect~\cite{Wolfenstein:1978ue,Mikheev:1986wj})

467: must be taken into account.

468: 

469: \begin{figure}[t]

470: \begin{minipage}[t]{0.47\textwidth}

471: \includegraphics*[bb=0 0 434 360, width=0.90\textwidth]{fig/kamland-0212021-f04.eps}

472: \caption{ \label{kamland-0212021-f04}

473: Ratio of measured to expected $\bar\nu_e$ flux in reactor 

474: experiments~\protect\cite{hep-ex/0212021}.

475: The shaded region (dotted curve) corresponds to the 95\% C.L. LMA

476: region (best-fit)~\protect\cite{Fogli:2002pt}.

477: % $\Delta{m}^{2}_{\mathrm{SUN}} = 5.5 \times 10^{-5} \, \mathrm{eV}^{2}$

478: % and

479: % $\sin^{2}2\vartheta_{\mathrm{SUN}} = 0.83$.

480: }

481: \end{minipage}

482: \hfill

483: \begin{minipage}[t]{0.47\textwidth}

484: \begin{center}

485: \includegraphics*[bb=0 0 567 539, width=0.78\textwidth]{fig/kamland-0212021-f06.eps}

486: \end{center}

487: \caption{ \label{kamland-0212021-f06}

488: KamLAND~\protect\cite{hep-ex/0212021}

489: excluded and allowed regions at 95\% C.L.

490: ($\theta=\vartheta_{\mathrm{SUN}}$

491: and

492: $\Delta{m}^{2}=\Delta{m}^{2}_{\mathrm{SUN}}$).

493: The dark area is the 95\% C.L. LMA

494: region~\protect\cite{Fogli:2002pt}.

495: The thick dot is the best fit of

496: KamLAND data.

497: }

498: \end{minipage}

499: \end{figure}

500: 

501: The data of solar neutrino experiments

502: have been analyzed in several papers

503: (see Ref.~\cite{Giunti:2003tc} and references therein)

504: in terms of two-neutrino $\nu_e\to\nu_{\mu,\tau}$

505: oscillations,

506: leading to a rather compelling indication

507: in favor of the so-called LMA region

508: in the plane of the mixing parameters

509: $\tan^2\vartheta_{\mathrm{SUN}}$, $\Delta{m}^2_{\mathrm{SUN}}$

510: ($\vartheta_{\mathrm{SUN}}$ is the effective two-neutrino mixing angle

511: and

512: $\Delta{m}^2_{\mathrm{SUN}}$ is the squared mass difference;

513: see Refs.~\cite{Bilenky-Pontecorvo-PR-78,BGG-review-98}),

514: at

515: $\tan^2\vartheta_{\mathrm{SUN}} \approx 0.4$

516: and

517: $\Delta{m}^2_{\mathrm{SUN}} \approx 5 \times 10^{-5} \, \mathrm{eV}^2$.

518: 

519: In December 2002 the KamLAND Collaboration

520: published a spectacular confirmation of the

521: LMA region obtained with their

522: long-baseline reactor $\bar\nu_e$

523: oscillation experiment~\cite{hep-ex/0212021}

524: (see also the contribution of K.~Inoue in these Proceedings).

525: As shown in Fig.~\ref{kamland-0212021-f04},

526: KamLAND is the first reactor experiment that finds

527: a suppression of the measured $\bar\nu_e$ flux with respect to

528: the original one,

529: thanks to the larger source-detector distance.

530: The measured suppression is

531: $

532: R^{\bar\nu_e}_{\mathrm{KamLAND}}

533: =

534: 0.611 \pm 0.085 \pm 0.041

535: $.

536: Figure~\ref{kamland-0212021-f06}

537: shows the regions in the

538: $\sin^2 2\vartheta_{\mathrm{SUN}}$--$\Delta{m}^2_{\mathrm{SUN}}$

539: plane allowed by the KamLAND data.

540: One can see that there are two areas of overlap

541: with the LMA region obtained from solar neutrino data.

542: Therefore,

543: the KamLAND result is perfectly compatible with

544: solar neutrino data and one can expect that

545: a combined fit would yield two allowed subareas of the

546: LMA region.

547: Indeed,

548: this is what happens, as shown in

549: Fig.~\ref{maltoni-0212129-f02}~\cite{hep-ph/0212129}

550: (see Ref.~\cite{Giunti:2003tc} and references therein

551: for similar results obtained by other authors).

552: The best-fit point is~\cite{hep-ph/0212129}

553: \begin{equation}

554: \tan^2 \vartheta_{\mathrm{SUN}}

555: \simeq

556: 0.46

557: \,,

558: \qquad

559: \Delta{m}^2_{\mathrm{SUN}}

560: \simeq

561: 6.9 \times 10^{-5} \, \mathrm{eV}^2

562: \,,

563: \label{sun-bf}

564: \end{equation}

565: and

566: $0.29 < \tan^2\vartheta_{\mathrm{SUN}} < 0.86$

567: at 99.73\% C.L.

568: 

569: Figure~\ref{bahcall-0212147-f06}~\cite{hep-ph/0212147}

570: shows that the fraction of transitions of

571: solar $\nu_e$'s into sterile neutrinos,

572: given by $\sin^2\eta$,

573: is limited

574: ($\sin^2\eta < 0.52$

575: at $3\sigma$),

576: and the measured total flux of solar $^8\mathrm{B}$ neutrinos

577: is in perfect agreement with the one predicted by the SSM,

578: $\Phi_{^8\mathrm{B}} = 1.00 \pm 0.06 \, \Phi_{^8\mathrm{B}}^{\mathrm{SSM}}$.

579: 

580: The increase of statistics of KamLAND data

581: will hopefully allow to distinguish among the two LMA regions

582: shown in Fig.~\ref{maltoni-0212129-f02}

583: in the near future

584: (see the contribution of K.~Inoue in these Proceedings).

585: 

586: \begin{figure}[t]

587: \begin{minipage}[t]{0.47\textwidth}

588: \includegraphics*[bb=6 21 439 436, width=0.80\textwidth]{fig/maltoni-0212129-f02.eps}

589: \caption{ \label{maltoni-0212129-f02}

590: Allowed 90\%, 95\%, 99\%, 99.73\% ($3\sigma$) C.L. regions

591: obtained from the fit of solar and KamLAND

592: data~\protect\cite{hep-ph/0212129}

593: ($\theta=\vartheta_{\mathrm{SUN}}$

594: and

595: $\Delta{m}^{2}=\Delta{m}^{2}_{\mathrm{SUN}}$).

596: The lines delimit the allowed regions from solar data.

597: % The star (dot)

598: % is the best-fit point from the combined

599: % (solar) analysis.

600: }

601: \end{minipage}

602: \hfill

603: \begin{minipage}[t]{0.47\textwidth}

604: \includegraphics*[bb=18 254 278 550, width=0.68\textwidth]{fig/bahcall-0212147-f06.eps}

605: \caption{ \label{bahcall-0212147-f06}

606: Allowed 90\%, 95\%, 99\%, 99.73\% ($3\sigma$) C.L. regions~\protect\cite{hep-ph/0212147}

607: in the $\mathrm{f_{B,total}}$--$\sin^2\eta$ plane,

608: where $\mathrm{f_{B,total}}=\Phi_{^8\mathrm{B}}/\Phi_{^8\mathrm{B}}^{\mathrm{SSM}}$

609: and

610: $\sin^2\eta$ is the fraction of sterile neutrinos in the solar flux.

611: % The best-fit point is marked by a star.

612: }

613: \end{minipage}

614: \end{figure}

615: 

616: \section{Atmospheric Neutrino Experiments and K2K}

617: \label{Atmospheric Neutrino Experiments and K2K}

618: 

619: In 1998 the Super-Kamiokande experiment discovered~\cite{Fukuda:1998mi}

620: an up-down asymmetry of high-energy events generated

621: by atmospheric $\nu_\mu$'s,

622: confirming the atmospheric neutrino anomaly

623: discovered about ten years earlier by the

624: Kamiokande~\cite{Hirata:1992ku}

625: and

626: IMB~\cite{Becker-Szendy:1992hq}

627: experiments.

628: 

629: Cosmic rays interacting with nuclei in the atmosphere produce pions,

630: which decaying produce muons and neutrinos.

631: The muons that decay before hitting the ground

632: produce more neutrinos.

633: These neutrinos from pion and muon decay in the atmosphere are called ``atmospheric neutrinos''.

634: In the late 80's the

635: Kamiokande

636: and

637: IMB

638: experiments discovered an anomaly in the ratio of events produced

639: by muon and electron neutrinos

640: with respect to the calculated one~\cite{Gaisser:2002jj},

641: that indicated a disappearance

642: of atmospheric muon neutrinos.

643: 

644: From simple geometry,

645: the fluxes of high energy neutrinos

646: (whose parent cosmic rays are not deflected by the magnetic field of the Earth)

647: coming from above and below are equal.

648: The $7\sigma$ Super-Kamiokande up-down asymmetry of high-energy $\nu_\mu$ events,

649: $

650: A_{\mu}

651: =

652: \left[ \left(U-D\right) / \left(U+D\right) \right]_{\mu}

653: =

654: - 0.311 \pm 0.043 \pm 0.01

655: $,

656: is a model-independent proof of the disappearance

657: of atmospheric muon neutrinos

658: generated on the other side of the Earth.

659: 

660: The simplest explanation of the disappearance of

661: atmospheric muon neutrinos

662: is neutrino oscillations.

663: The hypothesis of

664: $\nu_\mu \to \nu_\tau$ transitions

665: provides the best fit of the atmospheric neutrino data

666: (the $\nu_\mu \leftrightarrows \nu_e$ channel

667: is practically excluded

668: and the $\nu_\mu \to \nu_s$ channel

669: is strongly disfavored)~\cite{hep-ex/0206016}.

670: The data of the Soudan-2~\cite{Allison:1999ms} and MACRO~\cite{Ambrosio:2003yz}

671: atmospheric neutrino experiments

672: confirm this interpretation,

673: albeit with less precision than the Super-Kamiokande experiment.

674: 

675: The regions in the $\sin^2 2\vartheta_{\mathrm{ATM}}$--$\Delta{m}^2_{\mathrm{ATM}}$

676: plane allowed by Super-Kamiokande atmospheric neutrino data

677: are shown in Fig.~\ref{k2k-0210030-f09}:

678: the small regions centered around the best-fit point

679: \begin{equation}

680: \sin^2 2\vartheta_{\mathrm{ATM}} = 1

681: \,,

682: \qquad

683: \Delta{m}^2_{\mathrm{ATM}} = 2.5 \times 10^{-3} \, \mathrm{eV}^2

684: \,.

685: \label{SK-atm-bf}

686: \end{equation}

687: 

688: The oscillation explanation of the disappearance of

689: atmospheric muon neutrinos

690: has been recently confirmed in

691: the long-baseline accelerator K2K experiment~\cite{Ahn:2002up}

692: in which muon neutrinos

693: are produced in a laboratory

694: by pion decay.

695: The K2K experiment measured 56 events instead of

696: $80.1 {}^{+6.2}_{-5.4}$

697: events expected in absence of oscillations,

698: with a probability smaller than 1\% that the suppression is due

699: to a statistical fluctuation.

700: The large allowed regions

701: in Fig.~\ref{k2k-0210030-f09},

702: obtained from a two-neutrino oscillation fit of the K2K data,

703: are in beautiful agreement

704: with the Super-Kamiokande allowed regions

705: from atmospheric data.

706: 

707: Figure~\ref{fogli-0303064-f01}

708: shows the allowed region in the

709: $\sin^2 2\vartheta_{\mathrm{ATM}}$--$\Delta{m}^2_{\mathrm{ATM}}$

710: plane

711: resulting from a combined fit of the Super-Kamiokande atmospheric data

712: and K2K data~\cite{hep-ph/0303064}.

713: The main effect of the K2K data is to

714: slightly lower the upper bound on

715: $\Delta{m}^2_{\mathrm{ATM}}$,

716: because a

717: $\Delta{m}^2_{\mathrm{ATM}} \sim (4-6) \times 10^{-3} \, \mathrm{eV}$

718: would produce an unobserved suppression of the K2K energy spectrum peak~\cite{hep-ph/0303064}.

719: 

720: In the near future K2K will take more data,

721: hopefully confirming the agreement with the Super-Kamiokande

722: evidence of atmospheric neutrino oscillations.

723: Within some years the long-baseline accelerator experiments

724: MINOS and CNGS

725: will improve the precision of the

726: determination of

727: $\sin^2 2\vartheta_{\mathrm{ATM}}$

728: and

729: $\Delta{m}^2_{\mathrm{ATM}}$

730: and will check the

731: $\nu_\mu\to\nu_\tau$

732: explanation

733: (see Ref.~\cite{hep-ex/0205043}).

734: 

735: \begin{figure}[t]

736: \begin{minipage}[l]{0.47\textwidth}

737: \includegraphics*[bb=20 145 551 646, width=\textwidth]{fig/k2k-0210030-f09.eps}

738: \caption{ \label{k2k-0210030-f09}

739: Allowed K2K regions (large) compared with the

740: atmospheric Super-Kamiokande allowed regions

741: (small regions)~\protect\cite{hep-ex/0210030}.

742: % $\sin^2 2\vartheta_{\mathrm{ATM}} \approx 1$

743: % and

744: % $\Delta{m}^2_{\mathrm{ATM}}

745: % \approx 2.5 \times 10^{-3} \, \mathrm{eV}^2$)~\protect\cite{hep-ex/0210030}.

746: $\theta=\vartheta_{\mathrm{ATM}}$

747: and

748: $\Delta{m}^{2}=\Delta{m}^{2}_{\mathrm{ATM}}$.

749: }

750: \end{minipage}

751: \hfill

752: \begin{minipage}[l]{0.47\textwidth}

753: \begin{center}

754: \includegraphics*[bb=42 299 86 509, scale=0.9]{fig/fogli-0303064-f01.eps.pdf.eps}

755: \includegraphics*[bb=398 299 536 509, scale=0.9]{fig/fogli-0303064-f01.eps.pdf.eps}

756: \end{center}

757: \caption{ \label{fogli-0303064-f01}

758: Regions

759: % $\sin^2 2\vartheta$--$\Delta{m}^2$

760: allowed by a combined fit of the Super-Kamiokande atmospheric data

761: and K2K data~\protect\cite{hep-ph/0303064}

762: ($\vartheta=\vartheta_{\mathrm{ATM}}$

763: and

764: $\Delta{m}^{2}=\Delta{m}^{2}_{\mathrm{ATM}}$).

765: % The best-fit point is at

766: % $\sin^2 2\vartheta_{\mathrm{ATM}} = 1$,

767: % $\Delta{m}^2_{\mathrm{ATM}} = 2.6 \times 10^{-3} \, \mathrm{eV}^2$.

768: }

769: \end{minipage}

770: \end{figure}

771: 

772: \section{Three-Neutrino Mixing}

773: \label{Three-Neutrino Mixing}

774: 

775: The results of solar, KamLAND, atmospheric and K2K neutrino experiments

776: can be explained comfortably by the hypothesis of

777: three-neutrino mixing,

778: which is the simplest and most natural one

779: given our knowledge of the existence of only tree active flavor neutrinos,

780: $\nu_e$, $\nu_\mu$ and $\nu_\tau$~\footnote{

781: Although the number of active flavor neutrinos is known to be three,

782: the number of massive neutrinos could be larger than three,

783: if there are sterile neutrinos

784: (see Ref.~\cite{BGG-review-98}).

785: The additional massive neutrinos may be needed

786: in order to generate a $\Delta{m}^2$ of the

787: order of 1 eV necessary to explain the

788: $\bar\nu_\mu\to\bar\nu_e$

789: transitions observed in the short-baseline LSND experiment~\cite{LSND}.

790: The existence of these transitions is

791: under investigation in the MiniBooNE experiment~\cite{hep-ex/0210020}.

792: }.

793: Figure~\ref{3nu}

794: shows the two three-neutrino schemes compatible with

795: the hierarchy of solar and atmospheric $\Delta{m}^2$'s

796: in Eqs.~(\ref{sun-bf}) and (\ref{SK-atm-bf}).

797: Since the absolute scale of neutrino masses is not fixed by oscillation data,

798: the two schemes allow a hierarchy

799: (normal or inverted)

800: of the neutrino masses

801: if one mass is much smaller than the other two,

802: or an almost degeneracy of the three neutrino masses,

803: as shown in Figs.~\ref{smn} and \ref{smi}.

804: 

805: The hierarchy $\Delta{m}^2_{\mathrm{SUN}} \ll \Delta{m}^2_{\mathrm{ATM}}$

806: implies that

807: solar (and KamLAND) neutrino oscillations depend only on the

808: first row of the mixing matrix

809: ($U_{e1}$, $U_{e2}$, $U_{e3}$)

810: and

811: atmospheric (and K2K) neutrino oscillations depend only on the

812: third column of the mixing matrix

813: ($U_{e3}$, $U_{\mu3}$, $U_{\tau3}$).

814: Indeed,

815: since $\nu_\mu$ and $\nu_\tau$ are indistinguishable

816: in solar neutrino experiments

817: (because of the low energy that allows only neutral-current interactions),

818: solar neutrino oscillations can be expressed in terms of the

819: probability of $\nu_e$ disappearance,

820: which depends only on the elements

821: $U_{e1}$, $U_{e2}$, $U_{e3}$

822: of the mixing matrix.

823: In the case of atmospheric neutrino oscillations,

824: since $\Delta{m}^2_{\mathrm{SUN}}=\Delta{m}^2_{21}$

825: is too small to have any effect,

826: $\nu_1$ and $\nu_2$ are indistinguishable

827: and all probabilities depend on

828: $|U_{\alpha3}|^2=1-|U_{\alpha1}|^2-|U_{\alpha2}|^2$,

829: for

830: $\alpha=e,\mu,\tau$

831: (in other words,

832: the oscillations are CP-invariant and do not depend on the mixing angle $\theta_{12}$

833: in the standard parameterization of the mixing matrix;

834: see Ref.~\cite{Giunti:1998fx}).

835: 

836: \begin{floatingfigure}[l]{0.43\textwidth}

837: \begin{flushleft}

838: \begin{minipage}[t]{0.43\textwidth}

839: \setlength{\tabcolsep}{0cm}

840: \begin{tabular}{lr}

841: \includegraphics*[bb=181 466 428 775, width=0.49\textwidth]{fig/3nun.eps}

842: &

843: \includegraphics*[bb=183 466 432 775, width=0.49\textwidth]{fig/3nui.eps}

844: \\

845: ``normal''

846: &

847: ``inverted''

848: \end{tabular}

849: \caption{ \label{3nu}

850: The two three-neutrino schemes allowed by the hierarchy

851: $\Delta{m}^2_{\mathrm{SUN}} \ll \Delta{m}^2_{\mathrm{ATM}}$.

852: The massive neutrinos are labeled in order to have

853: $\Delta{m}^2_{\mathrm{SUN}}=\Delta{m}^2_{21}$

854: and

855: $\Delta{m}^2_{\mathrm{ATM}}=|\Delta{m}^2_{31}|$.

856: }

857: \end{minipage}

858: \end{flushleft}

859: \end{floatingfigure}

860: 

861: The only element of the mixing matrix

862: that connects solar and atmospheric neutrino oscillations is

863: $U_{e3}$.

864: Therefore, any information on the value of

865: $U_{e3}$

866: is of crucial importance for the interpretation of

867: solar and atmospheric neutrino data

868: in the framework of three-neutrino mixing.

869: Such very important information comes from the

870: CHOOZ~\cite{Apollonio:2003gd}

871: and

872: Palo Verde~\cite{Boehm:2001ik}

873: long-baseline reactor experiments,

874: which did not observe any disappearance of $\bar\nu_e$'s

875: through oscillations due to $\Delta{m}^2_{\mathrm{ATM}}$,

876: leading to the upper bound

877: $

878: |U_{e3}|^2 < 5 \times 10^{-2}

879: $

880: (99.73\% C.L.)~\cite{Fogli:2002pb}.

881: This limit is very important,

882: because it means that solar and atmospheric neutrino oscillations

883: are practically decoupled effective two-neutrino oscillations~\cite{Bilenky:1998tw}.

884: Hence, the analyses of solar and atmospheric neutrino data

885: in terms of two-neutrino mixing

886: give information on three-neutrino mixing.

887: 

888: Expressing

889: the mixing angles measured in solar--KamLAND,

890: atmospheric--K2K and CHOOZ--Palo Verde experiments

891: in terms of the elements of the mixing matrix as

892: $

893: \sin^2 2 \vartheta_{\mathrm{SUN}} = 4 |U_{e1}|^2 |U_{e2}|^2

894: $,

895: $

896: \sin^2 2 \vartheta_{\mathrm{ATM}} = 4 |U_{\mu3}|^2 \left( 1 - |U_{\mu3}|^2 \right)

897: $,

898: $

899: \sin^2 2 \vartheta_{\mathrm{CH-PV}} = 4 |U_{e3}|^2 \left( 1 - |U_{e3}|^2 \right)

900: $,

901: the results of these experiments imply the

902: so-called bilarge mixing matrix~\cite{hep-ph/0212142}

903: \begin{equation}

904: |U|

905: \simeq

906: \begin{pmatrix}

907: 0.70-0.87 & 0.50-0.69 & 0.00-0.16

908: \\

909: 0.20-0.61 & 0.34-0.73 & 0.60-0.80

910: \\

911: 0.21-0.63 & 0.36-0.74 & 0.58-0.80

912: \end{pmatrix}

913: \,,

914: \label{mixmat}

915: \end{equation}

916: in which all the elements are large, except $U_{e3}$.

917: In the future,

918: the most pressing task is to measure the value of

919: $|U_{e3}|$

920: (see the contribution of M. Mezzetto in these Proceedings),

921: because if $|U_{e3}|$ is not too small,

922: in future experiments

923: it may be possible to distinguish between the normal and inverted schemes in Fig.~\ref{3nu}

924: (through different matter effects)

925: and to measure CP violation in neutrino oscillations.

926: 

927: Another important open question is the

928: absolute value of neutrino masses (see Ref.~\cite{Bilenky:2002aw}).

929: The Mainz and Troitsk tritium $\beta$-decay experiments

930: provide the upper bound

931: $m_{\nu_e} < 2.2 \, \mathrm{eV}$

932: (95\% C.L.)~\cite{hep-ex/0210050}

933: on the effective electron neutrino mass,

934: which translates into an upper bound of

935: $2.2 \, \mathrm{eV}$ for all the three neutrino masses,

936: because of the small $\Delta{m}^2$'s

937: in Eqs.~(\ref{sun-bf}) and (\ref{SK-atm-bf}).

938: In the future the KATRIN experiment~\cite{hep-ex/0109033}

939: will explore $m_{\nu_e}$ down to about

940: $0.3 \, \mathrm{eV}$.

941: 

942: A rather tight upper bound for the

943: neutrino masses has been obtained very recently

944: through a combined analysis of cosmological data,

945: following the first results of the WMAP satellite experiment~\cite{Spergel:2003cb}

946: (see also the contribution of M.~Limon in these Proceedings).

947: The fit of Cosmic Microwave background (CMB) and Large Scale Structure (LSS) data

948: in the framework of standard Big-Bang cosmology

949: gives the upper bound

950: \begin{equation}

951: \sum_k m_k < 0.71 \, \mathrm{eV}

952: \qquad

953: \text{(95\% confidence)}

954: \,.

955: \label{WMAP}

956: \end{equation}

957: This limit is shown by the horizontal dotted line in

958: Figs.~\ref{smn} and \ref{smi},

959: with the sum of neutrino masses given by the dashed line.

960: From these figures it is clear that

961: the limit can be saturated only if the three neutrino masses are

962: almost degenerate, in both normal and inverted schemes.

963: Therefore,

964: as shown by the vertical dotted line in

965: Figs.~\ref{smn} and \ref{smi},

966: the cosmological upper limit on each neutrino mass is one third of that in Eq.~(\ref{WMAP}):

967: $m_k < 0.23 \, \mathrm{eV}$

968: (95\% confidence).

969: This upper bound is very impressive and appears already

970: stronger than the sensitivity of about

971: $0.3 \, \mathrm{eV}$

972: of the future KATRIN experiment~\cite{hep-ex/0109033}.

973: Let me however emphasize that the KATRIN experiment

974: is nevertheless very important to confirm the cosmological bound,

975: which follows from several plausible but not certain assumptions.

976: Even more interesting would be a measurement of

977: a neutrino mass above the cosmological bound,

978: which would demand a non-standard explanation.

979: 

980: \begin{figure}[t]

981: \begin{minipage}[t]{0.47\textwidth}

982: \includegraphics*[bb=118 426 465 753, width=\textwidth]{fig/smn.eps}

983: \caption{ \label{smn}

984: Values of the neutrino masses as functions of the lightest mass $m_1$

985: in the normal scheme in Fig.~\ref{3nu}.

986: }

987: \end{minipage}

988: \hfill

989: \begin{minipage}[t]{0.47\textwidth}

990: \includegraphics*[bb=118 426 465 753, width=\textwidth]{fig/smi.eps}

991: \caption{ \label{smi}

992: Values of the neutrino masses as functions of the lightest mass $m_3$

993: in the inverted scheme in Fig.~\ref{3nu}.

994: }

995: \end{minipage}

996: \end{figure}

997: 

998: \section{Conclusions}

999: \label{Conclusions}

1000: 

1001: We have seen that the last years have been exceptionally fruitful

1002: for neutrino physics.

1003: Important experimental discoveries

1004: give us a rather convincing picture of neutrino mixing.

1005: However,

1006: there are still important questions that need to be clarified:

1007: %

1008: %\renewcommand{\labelenumi}{\theenumi}

1009: %\renewcommand{\theenumi}{(\arabic{enumi})}

1010: %

1011: \begin{enumerate}

1012: %

1013: \setlength{\topsep}{0cm}

1014: \setlength{\partopsep}{0cm}

1015: \setlength{\parsep}{0cm}

1016: \setlength{\itemsep}{0cm}

1017: %

1018: \item

1019: Which is the absolute scale of neutrino masses?

1020: At present we have only upper bounds from direct measurements and

1021: from cosmological data.

1022: %

1023: \item

1024: Are neutrinos Dirac or Majorana particles?

1025: There is a strong experimental effort to detect

1026: neutrinoless double-$\beta$ decay,

1027: whose existence would imply that neutrinos are Majorana particles

1028: (which is theoretically favored, especially in view of the see-saw mechanism).

1029: %

1030: \item

1031: Are the

1032: $\bar\nu_\mu\to\bar\nu_e$

1033: transitions observed in the short-baseline LSND experiment~\cite{LSND} real?

1034: The answer will hopefully come soon from the MiniBooNE experiment~\cite{hep-ex/0210020}.

1035: %

1036: \item

1037: Which is the number of massive neutrinos?

1038: If it is larger than three there may be transitions of active neutrinos into

1039: sterile states in oscillation experiments.

1040: %

1041: \item

1042: If the three-neutrino mixing scheme will be confirmed,

1043: is it normal or inverted?

1044: These two schemes may be distinguished in future

1045: long-baseline experiments

1046: through different matter effects if $|U_{e3}|$ is not too small.

1047: Eventually,

1048: the two schemes may be distinguished

1049: by a direct measurement of all three masses.

1050: %

1051: \item

1052: Is there CP violation in the lepton sector?

1053: The possibility to measure CP violation in future long-baseline experiments

1054: is currently under study

1055: (see the contribution of M. Mezzetto in these Proceedings).

1056: %

1057: \end{enumerate}

1058: In conclusion,

1059: I think that the future promises to be very interesting for neutrino physics.

1060: 

1061: \section*{References}

1062: 

1063: %\input{bibtex/bib.tex}

1064: 

1065: \begin{thebibliography}{10}

1066: 

1067: \bibitem{Fukuda:1998mi}

1068: Super-Kamiokande, Y. Fukuda et~al.,

1069: \newblock Phys. Rev. Lett. 81 (1998) 1562, hep-ex/9807003.

1070: 

1071: \bibitem{Ahmad:2001an}

1072: SNO, Q.R. Ahmad et~al.,

1073: \newblock Phys. Rev. Lett. 87 (2001) 071301, nucl-ex/0106015.

1074: 

1075: \bibitem{Ahmad:2002jz}

1076: SNO, Q.R. Ahmad et~al.,

1077: \newblock Phys. Rev. Lett. 89 (2002) 011301, nucl-ex/0204008.

1078: 

1079: \bibitem{hep-ex/0212021}

1080: KamLAND, K. Eguchi et~al.,

1081: \newblock Phys. Rev. Lett. 90 (2003) 021802, hep-ex/0212021.

1082: 

1083: \bibitem{Ahn:2002up}

1084: K2K, M.H. Ahn et~al.,

1085: \newblock Phys. Rev. Lett. 90 (2003) 041801, hep-ex/0212007.

1086: 

1087: \bibitem{Spergel:2003cb}

1088: D.N. Spergel et~al.,

1089: \newblock astro-ph/0302209.

1090: 

1091: \bibitem{Bahcall:2002ng}

1092: J.N. Bahcall,

1093: \newblock AAPPS Bull. 12N4 (2002) 12, astro-ph/0209080.

1094: 

1095: \bibitem{Cleveland:1998nv}

1096: Homestake, B.T. Cleveland et~al.,

1097: \newblock Astrophys. J. 496 (1998) 505.

1098: 

1099: \bibitem{Fukuda:1996sz}

1100: Kamiokande, Y. Fukuda et~al.,

1101: \newblock Phys. Rev. Lett. 77 (1996) 1683.

1102: 

1103: \bibitem{Abdurashitov:2002nt}

1104: SAGE, J.N. Abdurashitov et~al.,

1105: \newblock J. Exp. Theor. Phys. 95 (2002) 181, astro-ph/0204245.

1106: 

1107: \bibitem{Hampel:1998xg}

1108: GALLEX, W. Hampel et~al.,

1109: \newblock Phys. Lett. B447 (1999) 127.

1110: 

1111: \bibitem{Altmann:2000ft}

1112: GNO, M. Altmann et~al.,

1113: \newblock Phys. Lett. B490 (2000) 16, hep-ex/0006034.

1114: 

1115: \bibitem{Fukuda:2002pe}

1116: Super-Kamiokande, S. Fukuda et~al.,

1117: \newblock Phys. Lett. B539 (2002) 179, hep-ex/0205075.

1118: 

1119: \bibitem{Bahcall:2000nu}

1120: J.N. Bahcall et~al.,

1121: \newblock Astrophys. J. 555 (2001) 990, astro-ph/0010346.

1122: 

1123: \bibitem{Pontecorvo:1957cp}

1124: B. Pontecorvo,

1125: \newblock Sov. Phys. JETP 6 (1957) 429,

1126: \newblock [Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 33, 549 (1957)].

1127: 

1128: \bibitem{Pontecorvo-58}

1129: B. Pontecorvo,

1130: \newblock Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 34 (1958) 247,

1131: \newblock [Sov. Phys. JETP 7, 172 (1958)].

1132: 

1133: \bibitem{Bilenky-Pontecorvo-PR-78}

1134: S.M. Bilenky and B. Pontecorvo,

1135: \newblock Phys. Rept. 41 (1978) 225.

1136: 

1137: \bibitem{Pontecorvo-68}

1138: B. Pontecorvo,

1139: \newblock Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 53 (1967) 1717,

1140: \newblock [Sov. Phys. JETP 26, 984 (1968)].

1141: 

1142: \bibitem{Bahcall:1964gx}

1143: J.N. Bahcall,

1144: \newblock Phys. Rev. Lett. 12 (1964) 300.

1145: 

1146: \bibitem{Davis:1964hf}

1147: R. Davis,

1148: \newblock Phys. Rev. Lett. 12 (1964) 303.

1149: 

1150: \bibitem{Wolfenstein:1978ue}

1151: L. Wolfenstein,

1152: \newblock Phys. Rev. D17 (1978) 2369.

1153: 

1154: \bibitem{Mikheev:1986wj}

1155: S.P. Mikheev and A.Y. Smirnov,

1156: \newblock Nuovo Cim. C9 (1986) 17.

1157: 

1158: \bibitem{Fogli:2002pt}

1159: G.L. Fogli et~al.,

1160: \newblock Phys. Rev. D66 (2002) 053010, hep-ph/0206162.

1161: 

1162: \bibitem{Giunti:2003tc}

1163: C. Giunti and M. Laveder,

1164: \newblock hep-ph/0301276.

1165: 

1166: \bibitem{BGG-review-98}

1167: S.M. Bilenky et~al.,

1168: \newblock Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 43 (1999) 1, hep-ph/9812360.

1169: 

1170: \bibitem{hep-ph/0212129}

1171: M. Maltoni, T. Schwetz and J. Valle,

1172: \newblock hep-ph/0212129.

1173: 

1174: \bibitem{hep-ph/0212147}

1175: J.N. Bahcall et~al.,

1176: \newblock JHEP 0302 (2003) 009, hep-ph/0212147.

1177: 

1178: \bibitem{Hirata:1992ku}

1179: Kamiokande-II, K.S. Hirata et~al.,

1180: \newblock Phys. Lett. B280 (1992) 146.

1181: 

1182: \bibitem{Becker-Szendy:1992hq}

1183: R. Becker-Szendy et~al.,

1184: \newblock Phys. Rev. D46 (1992) 3720.

1185: 

1186: \bibitem{Gaisser:2002jj}

1187: T.K. Gaisser and M. Honda,

1188: \newblock Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 52 (2002) 153, hep-ph/0203272.

1189: 

1190: \bibitem{hep-ex/0206016}

1191: Super-Kamiokande, M.B. Smy,

1192: \newblock hep-ex/0206016.

1193: 

1194: \bibitem{Allison:1999ms}

1195: Soudan-2, W.W.M. Allison et~al.,

1196: \newblock Phys. Lett. B449 (1999) 137, hep-ex/9901024.

1197: 

1198: \bibitem{Ambrosio:2003yz}

1199: MACRO, M. Ambrosio et~al.,

1200: \newblock hep-ex/0304037.

1201: 

1202: \bibitem{hep-ph/0303064}

1203: G. Fogli et~al.,

1204: \newblock hep-ph/0303064.

1205: 

1206: \bibitem{hep-ex/0205043}

1207: A. Weber,

1208: \newblock hep-ex/0205043.

1209: 

1210: \bibitem{hep-ex/0210030}

1211: Y. Oyama,

1212: \newblock hep-ex/0210030.

1213: 

1214: \bibitem{LSND}

1215: LSND, A. Aguilar et~al.,

1216: \newblock Phys. Rev. D64 (2001) 112007, hep-ex/0104049.

1217: 

1218: \bibitem{hep-ex/0210020}

1219: MiniBooNE, A. Bazarko,

1220: \newblock hep-ex/0210020.

1221: 

1222: \bibitem{Giunti:1998fx}

1223: C. Giunti, C.W. Kim and M. Monteno,

1224: \newblock Nucl. Phys. B521 (1998) 3, hep-ph/9709439.

1225: 

1226: \bibitem{Apollonio:2003gd}

1227: M. Apollonio et~al.,

1228: \newblock Eur. Phys. J. C27 (2003) 331, hep-ex/0301017.

1229: 

1230: \bibitem{Boehm:2001ik}

1231: F. Boehm et~al.,

1232: \newblock Phys. Rev. D64 (2001) 112001, hep-ex/0107009.

1233: 

1234: \bibitem{Fogli:2002pb}

1235: G.L. Fogli et~al.,

1236: \newblock Phys. Rev. D66 (2002) 093008, hep-ph/0208026.

1237: 

1238: \bibitem{Bilenky:1998tw}

1239: S.M. Bilenky and C. Giunti,

1240: \newblock Phys. Lett. B444 (1998) 379, hep-ph/9802201.

1241: 

1242: \bibitem{hep-ph/0212142}

1243: W.L. Guo and Z.Z. Xing,

1244: \newblock Phys. Rev. D67 (2003) 053002, hep-ph/0212142.

1245: 

1246: \bibitem{Bilenky:2002aw}

1247: S.M. Bilenky et~al., Phys. Rept. 379 (2003) 69, hep-ph/0211462.

1248: 

1249: \bibitem{hep-ex/0210050}

1250: C. Weinheimer,

1251: \newblock hep-ex/0210050.

1252: 

1253: \bibitem{hep-ex/0109033}

1254: KATRIN, A. Osipowicz et~al.,

1255: \newblock hep-ex/0109033.

1256: 

1257: \end{thebibliography}

1258: 

1259: \end{document}

1260: