1: \documentclass[12pt]{article}
2: \usepackage{epsfig}
3: %\usepackage{axodraw}
4: \textwidth=17cm
5: \textheight=22.5cm
6: \topmargin -1.5cm
7: \oddsidemargin -0.3cm
8: %\evensidemargin -0.8cm
9: %\def\beq{\begin{equation}}
10: %\def\eeq{\end{equation}}
11: \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}}
12: \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}}
13: \def\bq{\begin{quote}}
14: \def\eq{\end{quote}}
15: \def\nn{\nonumber}
16:
17: %\newcommand{\bea}{\begin{eqnarray}}
18: %\newcommand{\eea}{\end{eqnarray}}
19:
20: \parskip 0.3cm
21: \def\gappeq{\mathrel{\rlap
22: {\raise.5ex\hbox{$>$}}
23: {\lower.5ex\hbox{$\sim$}}}}
24: \def\lappeq{\mathrel{\rlap{\raise.5ex\hbox{$<$}}
25: {\lower.5ex\hbox{$\sim$}}}}
26: \def\simlt{\stackrel{<}{{}_\sim}}
27: \def\simgt{\stackrel{>}{{}_\sim}}
28: \newcommand{\ynu}[1]{\mathbf{Y}_{\nu}^{#1}}
29: \newcommand{\tynu}{\tilde{Y}_{\nu}}
30: \newcommand{\beq}{\begin{equation}}
31: \newcommand{\eeq}{\end{equation}}
32: \newcommand{\OO}[1]{\mathbf{\Omega}_{#1}}
33: \newcommand{\OP}[1]{\mathbf{\Omega'}_{#1}}
34: \newcommand{\YY}[1]{\mathbf{\tilde{Y}}_\nu^{#1}}
35: \newcommand{\Un}[1]{\mathbf{U}_\nu^{#1}}
36: \newcommand{\Ur}[1]{\mathbf{U}_N^{#1}}
37: \def\tmi{\tilde{m}_1}
38: \def\tim{\tilde{m}_1}
39: \def\bmeg{BR(\mu\to e\gamma)}
40: \def\bteg{BR(\tau\to e\gamma)}
41: \def\btmg{BR(\tau\to \mu\gamma)}
42: \def\msl{\tilde{\mathbf{m}}_L^2}
43: \def\mmaj{\mathbf{M}_R}
44: \def\arg{\mathrm{arg}\,}
45: \def\ch{\mathrm{cosh}\,}
46: \def\sh{\mathrm{sinh}\,}
47: \def\th{\mathrm{tanh}\,}
48:
49: \begin{document}
50: \pagestyle{empty}
51: \begin{flushright}
52: {\bf IFT-04/05\\
53: \bf hep-ph/0401219\\
54: \bf \today}
55: \end{flushright}
56: \vspace*{5mm}
57: \begin{center}
58: {\bf Degenerate minimal see-saw and leptogenesis.}
59: \\
60: \vspace*{1cm}
61: Krzysztof Turzy\'nski
62: \\
63: Institute of Theoretical Physics, Warsaw University, \\
64: Ho\.za 69, 00-681 Warsaw, Poland
65: \vskip 1.0cm
66:
67: \vspace*{1.7cm}
68: {\bf Abstract}
69: \end{center}
70: \vspace*{5mm}
71: \noindent
72: {\small We analyze the most general version of the supersymmetric minimal see-saw model with only two right-chiral neutrinos which are degenerate in masses at the scale of Grand Unification. We study the renormalization effects that give rise to non-zero CP asymmetries in the decays of these neutrinos and find that their resonant enhancement due to small mass splitting is partly compensated by other RG effects in the running of the neutrino Yukawa couplings. In spite of this compensation, the CP asymmetries can be large enough for successful thermal leptogenesis. Moreover, they depend very weakly on the right-chiral neutrino masses and the resulting leptogenesis can be successful for very low reheating temerature, thereby allowing to overcome the gravitino problem.
73: }
74: \vspace*{1.0cm}
75: \date{\today}
76:
77: %\noindent PACS numbers: \ldots
78:
79: %\rule[.1in]{16.5cm}{.002in}
80: \vspace*{0.2cm}
81:
82: \vfill\eject
83: \newpage
84:
85: \setcounter{page}{1}
86: \pagestyle{plain}
87:
88: The minimal version of the see-saw mechanism \cite{GERASL} can be obtained by adding two very heavy gauge singlets $N^1$ and $N^2$ to the spectrum of the Standard Model \cite{Frampton:2002qc,Kuchimanchi:2002yu}. Their interactions can be described by the following potential:
89: \beq
90: \label{potential}
91: \Delta\mathcal{L} = -\epsilon_{ij}H_i N^K \ynu{KA} \ell^A_j - \frac{1}{2}\mathbf{M}^{KL} N^K N^L + H.c.
92: \eeq
93: where $H$ and $\ell^A$ are Higgs and lepton doublets, $N^K$, $K=1,2$ denote the right-chiral neutrinos, $\mathbf{M}^{KL}$ is their Majorana mass matrix and $\ynu{KA}$ is the $2\times 3$ matrix of the neutrino Yukawa couplings.
94: Integrating out the fields $N^1$ and $N^2$ provides (after the electroweak symmetry breaking in the low-energy
95: effective theory) the left-chiral neutrinos with small Majorana masses:
96: \beq
97: \mathbf{m}_\nu = -\frac{\langle H\rangle^2}{2} \ynu{T} \mathbf{M}^{-1} \ynu{}
98: \eeq
99: where $\mathbf{m}_\nu$ has only two non-zero eigenvalues $m_{\nu_2}$ and $m_{\nu_3}$, as the rank of $\mathbf{m}_\nu$ cannot exceed that of $\mathbf{M}$. Their values are $m_{\nu_2}=\sqrt{\Delta m_\mathrm{sol}^2}$, $m_{\nu_3}\approx \sqrt{\Delta m_\mathrm{atm}^2}$ (normal hierarchy) or $m_{\nu_2},\,\,m_{\nu_3}\approx\sqrt{\Delta m_\mathrm{atm}^2}$, $m_{\nu_3}^2-m_{\nu_2}^2=\Delta m_\mathrm{sol}^2$ (inverse hierarchy), which accounts for the solar and atmospheric oscillations with differences of the masses squared $\Delta m_\mathrm{sol}^2\approx 7\times 10^{-5}\,\mathrm{eV}$ and $\Delta m_\mathrm{atm}^2\approx 2\times 10^{-3}\,\mathrm{eV}$.
100:
101: It is known that the CP violating decays of the right-chiral neutrinos can produce lepton asymmetry, which is subsequently transformed into baryon asymmetry via sphaleron transitions \cite{Fukugita:1986hr}. This possibility of explaining the measured baryon asymmetry of the Universe \cite{Spergel:2003cb} has been investigated in many papers with either minimal \cite{Frampton:2002qc,Barger:2003gt,Ibarra:2003up} or non-minimal see-saw models (see e.g. \cite{Buchmuller:2003gz}).
102:
103: It has been shown \cite{Chankowski:2003rr} that with the minimal see-saw mechanism, the wash-out processes are generically very efficient and one needs the reheating temperature after inflation $T_{RH}\simgt 2\times 10^{11}\,\mathrm{GeV}$ in order to generate sufficient lepton asymmetry in the decays of the lightest right-chiral neutrino\footnote{this bound is derived by assuming that $T_{RH}$ is larger than the relevant right-chiral neutrino mass, not at least 10 times larger, as in \cite{Chankowski:2003rr}}. This creates a problem, because in supersymmetric theories, overpoduction of gravitinos that destroys nucleosynthesis \cite{gravitino} may occur already for $T_{RH}\simgt 10^7\,\mathrm{GeV}$ \cite{g_bound}.
104:
105: One possible way of circumventing this problem is to assume that the two right-chiral neutrinos are almost degenerate in masses, which enhances the CP asymmetries in the decays of both right-chiral neutrinos contributing to the lepton asymmetry \cite{Flanz:1994yx} and allows lowering the reheating temperature \cite{Ellis:2002eh,Chankowski:2003rr}. The natural idea that such a tiny splitting of the masses of the right-chiral neutrinos might result from the renormalization group (RG) evolution of the neutrino parameters with exact mass degeneracy at some higher (presumably the GUT) scale has been recently investigated in \cite{GonzalezFelipe:2003fi} in the framework of a model with one texture zero in the neutrino Yukawa matrix. Furthermore, in \cite{GonzalezFelipe:2003fi} the element $\Un{13}$ of the neutrino mixing matrix was required to be very small compared to the maximal value allowed by experiment. The purpose of this note is to extend these results to general minimal see-saw models with degenerate right-chiral neutrinos and to point out some important features of the RG analysis which have not been taken into account before. Motivated by the gravitino problem, we perform the calculations in the MSSM.
106:
107: In the full theory at high energies, one can remove the unphysical parameters by a unitary transformation $N^K\to \Ur{KL}N^L$ which diagonalizes the mass matrix $\mathbf{M}$, i.e. $\Ur{T}\mathbf{M}\Ur{}=\textrm{diag}(M_1,M_2)$. Similarly, the lepton doublets are transformed to the basis in which the Yukawa matrix of the charged leptons is diagonal, $\ell^A\to \mathbf{U}_\ell^{AB}\ell^B$. Then the neutrino Yukawa couplings also change, i.e. $\ynu{}\to \Ur{T}\ynu{}\mathbf{U}_\ell$. This basis is convenient, since it directly corresponds to the interactions of the separate right-chiral neutrinos. The RG equations for $M_i$ and $\ynu{}$ written in this basis can be obtained by using the methods outlined in \cite{Babu:im,Chankowski:2001mx}:
108: \begin{eqnarray}
109: \label{RGEM}
110: \frac{d\,}{dt} M_K &=& 4\left( \ynu{}\ynu{\dagger}\right)_{KK} M_K \\
111: \frac{d\,}{dt} \ynu{KA} &=& K_Y \ynu{KA} + y_{e_A}^2 \ynu{KA}+ 3\left( \ynu{}\ynu{\dagger}\right)_{KL}\ynu{LA} - \nonumber\\
112: & & -2(1-\delta_{LK})\left(\frac{M_L+M_K}{M_L-M_K}\mathsf{Re}\left( \ynu{}\ynu{\dagger}\right)_{KL}+i\frac{M_L-M_K}{M_L+M_K}\mathsf{Im}\left( \ynu{}\ynu{\dagger}\right)_{KL} \right) \ynu{LA} + \nonumber\\
113: \label{RGEyukawa}
114: & & +(1-\delta_{AB})\frac{y_{e_B}^2+y_{e_A}^2}{y_{e_B}^2-y_{e_A}^2}\left( \ynu{\dagger}\ynu{}\right)_{AB} \ynu{KB}
115: \end{eqnarray}
116: where $K_Y=-3g_2^2-\frac{3}{5}g_1^2+3\sum_B y_{u_B}^2+\mathsf{Tr}(\ynu{\dagger}\ynu{})$, $y_{u_A}$ and $y_{e_A}$ are the Yukawa couplings of the up-type quarks and the charged leptons, respectively, and $t=\frac{1}{16\pi^2}\ln(\mu/M_X)$.
117:
118: The reduction of the number of parameters in the neutrino sector with respect to the conventional see-saw mechanism with three right-chiral neutrinos does not completely remove the ambiguity in extracting the Yukawa couplings $\ynu{KA}$ from the low energy data and the masses of the right-chiral neutrinos. Rather one has \cite{Casas:2001sr}:
119: \beq
120: \ynu{KA} = \frac{\sqrt{M_Km_{\nu_a}}}{\langle H\rangle} \OO{Ka} \Un{Aa*}
121: \eeq
122: where $\Un{}$ is the neutrino mixing matrix and $\OO{}$ is an arbitrary $2\times 3$ complex matrix satisfying the condition $\OO{}^T\OO{}=\mathrm{diag}(0,1,1)$. The matrix $\OO{}$ can be conveniently parametrized with a complex 'angle' $\omega$ \cite{Ibarra:2003up}:
123: \beq
124: \label{omegapar}
125: \OO{} = \left( \begin{array}{ccc} 0 & \cos\omega & \sin\omega \\ 0 & -\sin\omega & \cos\omega \end{array}\right)
126: \eeq
127: Denoting the non-zero $2\times 2$ submatrix in (\ref{omegapar}) by $\OP{}$ and substituting $\omega=\alpha-i\beta$, we obtain:
128: \beq
129: \label{oprim}
130: \OP{} = \left( \begin{array}{cc} \cos\alpha & \sin\alpha \\ -\sin\alpha & \cos\alpha \end{array}\right)\left( \begin{array}{cc} \ch\beta & -i\,\sh\beta \\ i\,\sh\beta & \ch\beta \end{array}\right)
131: \eeq
132:
133: If $M_1=M_2=M$ at a certain scale $M_X$, there seems to be a freedom of rotation $N^K\to \mathbf{R}^{KL}N^L$, $\mathbf{R}^T\mathbf{R}=\mathbf{1}$ which does not affect the diagonal Majorana mass matrix of the right-chiral neutrinos, but rotates the Yukawa couplings:
134: \beq
135: \label{rotation0}
136: \ynu{}\to \YY{}\equiv\left( \begin{array}{cc} \cos\alpha' & \sin\alpha' \\ -\sin\alpha' & \cos\alpha' \end{array}\right)\ynu{}
137: \eeq
138: However, this apparent freedom must be utilized to assure that the RG equation (\ref{RGEyukawa}) is non-singular
139: \beq
140: \label{rotation}
141: \mathsf{Re}\left(\YY{}\YY{\dagger}\right)_{12} = 0
142: \eeq
143: i.e. quantum corrections unambiguously choose the basis in which the right-chiral neutrinos are mass eigenstates and their mixing matrix is a continuous function of the renormalization scale \cite{Chankowski:2001mx}. The rotation (\ref{rotation0}) can be absorbed into the definition of $\OP{}$ in (\ref{oprim}) and replaced with a constraint on $\OP{}$:
144: \beq
145: \label{consomega}
146: 0 = \mathsf{Re}\left(\YY{}\YY{\dagger}\right)_{12}=\frac{Mm_{\nu_3}}{\langle H\rangle^2} \mathsf{Re}\left(\OP{}\mathrm{diag}(0,\rho,1)\OP{}^\dagger\right)_{12} = \frac{Mm_{\nu_3}}{\langle H\rangle^2}(1-\rho)\cos\alpha\sin\alpha
147: \eeq
148: where $\rho=m_{\nu_2}/m_{\nu_3}$. There are two physically equivalent solutions of (\ref{consomega}), namely $\cos\alpha=0$ or $\sin\alpha=0$. The rotation (\ref{rotation0}) leaves $\mathsf{Im}\left(\YY{}\YY{\dagger}\right)_{12}$ intact, since:
149: \beq
150: \label{imyy}
151: \mathsf{Im}\left(\YY{}\YY{\dagger}\right)_{12}=-\frac{Mm_{\nu_3}}{\langle H\rangle^2}(1+\rho)\,\ch\beta\,\sh\beta
152: \eeq
153: Of course, the constraint (\ref{rotation}) must be satisfied at the scale at which the two right-chiral neutrinos have exactly equal tree level masses. At other scales, small values of $\delta_N\equiv 1-M_1/M_2$ and $\mathsf{Re}\left(\YY{}\YY{\dagger}\right)_{12}$ are generated radiatively. The solutions of the RG equations (\ref{RGEM}) and (\ref{RGEyukawa}) in the leading logarithm approximation are:
154: \begin{eqnarray}
155: \label{soldelta}
156: \delta_N &\approx & \pm\frac{4Mm_{\nu_3}(1-\rho)}{\langle H\rangle^2}\Delta t \\
157: \label{solre}
158: \mathsf{Re}\left(\YY{}\YY{\dagger}\right)_{12} &\approx & \pm\sqrt{\rho} \frac{Mm_{\nu_3}}{\langle H\rangle^2} \mathsf{Re}\left(\Un{32*}\Un{33}\right) y_\tau^2 \Delta t
159: \end{eqnarray}
160: where $\Delta t=\frac{1}{16\pi^2}\ln (M_X/M)$.
161:
162: A nonzero value of $\delta_N$ leads to nonvanishing CP asymmetries at the scale $M$ at which the right-chiral neutrinos decay. For small mass splittings these asymmetries are given by \cite{Pilaftsis:1998pd}:
163: \beq
164: \epsilon_i \approx - \frac{\mathsf{Im}\left(\left(\YY{}\YY{\dagger}\right)_{12}^2\right)}{\left(\YY{}\YY{\dagger}\right)_{11}\left(\YY{}\YY{\dagger}\right)_{22}} \times \frac{8\pi\delta_N\left(\YY{}\YY{\dagger}\right)_{ii}}{(8\pi\delta_N)^2+\left(\YY{}\YY{\dagger}\right)_{ii}^2}
165: \eeq
166: In the two different regimes this formula can be further simplified:
167: \begin{eqnarray}
168: \label{cpassdefNH}
169: \epsilon_i \approx - \frac{\mathsf{Im}\left(\left(\YY{}\YY{\dagger}\right)_{12}^2\right)}{8\pi\delta_N \left(\YY{}\YY{\dagger}\right)_{ii}} \propto \frac{\mathsf{Re}\left(\YY{}\YY{\dagger}\right)_{12}}{\delta_N} & \textrm{for} & \delta_N\gg \left(\YY{}\YY{\dagger}\right)_{ii}/8\pi \\
170: \label{cpassdefIH}
171: \epsilon_i = - \frac{8\pi\,\mathsf{Im}\left(\left(\YY{}\YY{\dagger}\right)_{12}^2\right)\,\delta_N}{\left(\YY{}\YY{\dagger}\right)_{ii}\left(\YY{}\YY{\dagger}\right)_{11}\left(\YY{}\YY{\dagger}\right)_{22}} & \textrm{for} & \delta_N\ll \left(\YY{}\YY{\dagger}\right)_{ii}/8\pi
172: \end{eqnarray}
173: The factor $(1-\rho)$ is larger by two orders of magnitude for the normal hierarchy of the light neutrino masses compared to the inverse hierarchy. Consequently, as follows from (\ref{soldelta}), the values of $\delta_N$ generated radiatively are much smaller in the former case. It is easy to check that for $M_X\simgt 10M$ the formula (\ref{cpassdefNH}) applies to the normal hierarchy of the light neutrino masses, while (\ref{cpassdefIH}) corresponds to the inverse hierarchy. Substituting the results (\ref{imyy}), (\ref{soldelta}) and (\ref{solre}) to (\ref{cpassdefNH}) we obtain:
174: \begin{eqnarray}
175: \label{soleps1}
176: \epsilon_1 &\approx& \frac{\sqrt{\rho}(1+\rho)\th\beta}{16\pi (1-\rho)(\rho+\mathrm{tanh}^2\beta)} \mathsf{Re}\left(\Un{32*}\Un{33}\right) y_\tau^2 \\
177: \label{soleps2}
178: \epsilon_2 &\approx& \frac{\sqrt{\rho}(1+\rho)\th\beta}{16\pi (1-\rho)(1+\rho\,\mathrm{tanh}^2\beta)} \mathsf{Re}\left(\Un{32*}\Un{33}\right) y_\tau^2
179: \end{eqnarray}
180: for $\sin\alpha=0$. If $\cos\alpha=0$, we should interchange $\epsilon_1$ and $\epsilon_2$ in (\ref{soleps1}) and (\ref{soleps2}). As it is clear from (\ref{cpassdefNH}) in the regime $\delta_N\gg\left(\YY{}\YY{\dagger}\right)_{ii}/8\pi$ the dependence on $\Delta t$ cancels out. As a result, in the case of normal hierarchy the asymmetries $\epsilon_i$ depend on the right-chiral neutrino masses
181: only very weakly throught the dependence of $y_\tau^2$ on the renormalization scale. Since $y_\tau^2$ is a monotonic function of the renormalization scale, we shall use $y_\tau^2 = (y_\tau^2(M_X)+y_\tau^2(M))/2$.
182:
183: Similarly, substituting (\ref{imyy}), (\ref{soldelta}) and (\ref{solre}) to (\ref{cpassdefIH}), we get:
184: \begin{eqnarray}
185: \label{soleps1ih}
186: \epsilon_1 &=& \frac{\sqrt{\rho}(1-\rho^2)\th\beta}{4\pi^3(\rho+\mathrm{tanh}^2\beta)(1+\rho\,\mathrm{tanh}^2\beta)^2} \mathsf{Re}\left(\Un{32*}\Un{33}\right) y_\tau^2 \ln^2\frac{M_X}{M} \\
187: \label{soleps2ih}
188: \epsilon_2 &=& \frac{\sqrt{\rho}(1-\rho^2)\th\beta}{4\pi^3(1+\rho\,\mathrm{tanh}^2\beta)(\rho+\mathrm{tanh}^2\beta)^2} \mathsf{Re}\left(\Un{32*}\Un{33}\right) y_\tau^2 \ln^2\frac{M_X}{M}
189: \end{eqnarray}
190: Since $\rho\approx 1$ for the inverse hierarchy, $\epsilon_1\approx\epsilon_2$. Note that the dependence on $M$ is much stronger for the inverse hierarchy than for the normal hierarchy due to $\ln^2(M_X/M)$ factors in (\ref{soleps1ih}) and (\ref{soleps2ih}).
191:
192: The results of the numerical integration of the full RG equations and the approximate analytic formulae (\ref{soleps1})--(\ref{soleps2}) and (\ref{soleps1ih})--(\ref{soleps2ih}) are presented in Figure \ref{fi1} as functions of $\beta$, which is the only parameter which cannot be constrained by the parameters of the effective theory at low energies. We chose $\Un{13}=\sin\theta_{13}e^{-i\delta}=0.1i$ and the Majorana phase $\phi_2=1/20$. Interestingly, it is possible to fine-tune the low-energy Majorana phase $\phi_2$ so that $\mathsf{Re}\left(\YY{}\YY{\dagger}\right)_{12}$ is not generated in the leading logarithm approximation and the resulting CP asymmetries are strongly suppressed. We also set the ratio of the vacuum expectation values $\tan\beta_H=\frac{\langle H_u \rangle}{\langle H_d \rangle}=10$. Note that eqs. (\ref{soleps1})--(\ref{soleps2}) provide accuracy about 10--20\% and eqs. (\ref{soleps1ih})--(\ref{soleps2ih}) about a few per cent for vastly different values of $M_N$.
193:
194: The generated baryon asymmetry depends not only on the CP asymmetries, but also on the strength of the wash-out processes. Since the latter depend very weakly on $\tan\beta_H$, the presence of $y_\tau^2$ in (\ref{soleps1})--(\ref{soleps2}) and (\ref{soleps1ih})--(\ref{soleps2ih}) introduces a strong dependence of leptogenesis on $\tan\beta_H$, i.e. $\epsilon_i \sim \tan^2\beta_H$. In the case of the normal hierarchy, for $M_N\simlt 10^{10}\,\mathrm{GeV}$, one needs $\epsilon_1\sim 10^{-4}$ for successful leptogenesis \cite{Chankowski:2003rr}. Figure \ref{fi1} shows this is a realistic value for rather large $\tan\beta_H\sim 30$. For the inverse hierarchy, the wash-out is roughly twice as big as for the normal hierarchy \cite{Buchmuller:2002rq} and successful leptogenesis can be obtained in this case, as well, by adjusting $\tan\beta_H$ and/or $M_X/M$. The dependence of $\tan\beta_H$ is crucial for successful leptogenesis. In particular, in the non-supersymmetric case $y_\tau^2$ is smaller by a factor $\mathcal{O}(10^2)$ than the value obtained for supersymmetry with $\tan\beta_H=10$ and the mechanism considered here cannot work.
195:
196: \begin{figure}
197: \includegraphics*[height=8cm]{degNH.ps}
198: \hspace{1cm}
199: \includegraphics*[height=8cm]{degIH.ps}
200: \caption{CP asymmetries $\epsilon_1$ and $\epsilon_2$ as functions of $\beta$ for normal and inverse hierarchy of neutrino masses. Dashed, solid and dotted lines correspond to $M=10^{13},10^{11},10^7\,\mathrm{GeV}$, respectively. Thick lines correspond to numerical integration of the full RG equations and thin lines to the analytic formulae (\ref{soleps1})--(\ref{soleps2}) and (\ref{soleps1ih})--(\ref{soleps2ih}). \label{fi1}}
201: \end{figure}
202:
203: Note that if we adopted a 'texture zero' model, as done in Ref. \cite{GonzalezFelipe:2003fi}, we could easily determine $\beta$ in terms of the low energy parameters. For instance, $\ynu{21}=0$ leads to the prediction:
204: \beq
205: \th\beta \approx \frac{\tan\theta_{13}\sin(\phi_2+\delta)}{\sqrt{\rho}\sin\theta_{12}}+\mathcal{O}\left(\frac{\tan^2\theta_{13}}{\rho}\right)
206: \eeq
207: and then the CP violation required for leptogenesis is directly connected to the low energy CP violation.
208:
209: The minimal see-saw model can be considered a limiting case of the three-right-chiral-neutrino models in which one of the right-chiral neutrinos effectively decouples (either because it is very heavy or because of its vanishingly small Yukawa couplings) \cite{King:1998jw}. To the extent to which the effects of the this right-chiral neutrino can be neglected in the see-saw formula the results considered here apply also to the three neutrino models. There are also models in which the exchange of one of the right-chiral neutrinos gives mass solely to the heaviest light neutrino and the minimal see-saw formalism can be applied to the $\nu_1$, $\nu_2$ sector \cite{Jezabek:2002qu}.
210:
211: In conclusion, by detailed examination of the RG effects in the right-chiral neutrino sector we obtained the formulae for the CP asymmetries in the supersymmetric minimal see-saw models with degenerate masses of the right-chiral neutrinos. We argued that such models can lead to successful thermal leptogenesis, even though resonant enhancement of the CP asymmetries resulting from small splittings of the masses of the right-chiral neutrinos generated radiatively is partly compensated by small values of $\mathsf{Re}\left(\YY{}\YY{\dagger}\right)$, also generated radiatively. Since, especially for the normal hierarchy of the light neutrino masses, the CP asymmetries depend very weakly on the mass scale of the right-chiral neutrinos, the reheating temperature can be low enough to avoid the gravitino problem.
212:
213: \vskip0.3cm
214: \noindent{\bf Acknowledgments} K.T. would like to thank Marek Je\.zabek for discussion about leptogenesis with degenerate right-chiral neutrinos and Stefan Pokorski for fruitful discussions and reading the manuscript. Piotr H. Chankowski deserves credit for continuous support. The work was partially supported by the Polish State Committee for Scientific Research grant 2 P03B 129 24 for years 2003-2005.
215:
216:
217: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
218:
219: \bibitem{GERASL} M. Gell-Mann, P. Ramond and R. Slansky, in {\sl Proceedings
220: of the Supergravity Stony Brook Workshop}, New York, 1979
221: (eds. P. van Nieuvenhuizen and D.Z. Freedman, North-Holland,
222: Amsterdam); T. Yanagida, in {\sl Proceedings of the Workshop
223: on Unified Theories and Baryon Number in the Universe},
224: Tsukuba, Japan, 1979 (eds. A. Sawada and A. Sugamoto,
225: KEK Report No. 79-18, Tsukuba); R.~N.~Mohapatra and G.~Senjanovic,
226: %``Neutrino Mass And Spontaneous Parity Nonconservation,''
227: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 44} (1980) 912.
228:
229: \bibitem{Frampton:2002qc}
230: P.~H.~Frampton, S.~L.~Glashow and T.~Yanagida,
231: %``Cosmological sign of neutrino CP violation,''
232: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 548} (2002) 119
233: [arXiv:hep-ph/0208157];
234: M.~Raidal and A.~Strumia,
235: %``Predictions of the most minimal see-saw model,''
236: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 553} (2003) 72
237: [arXiv:hep-ph/0210021].
238:
239: \bibitem{Kuchimanchi:2002yu}
240: R.~Kuchimanchi and R.~N.~Mohapatra,
241: %``Bimaximal neutrino mixing from a local SU(2) horizontal symmetry,''
242: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 66} (2002) 051301
243: [arXiv:hep-ph/0207110];
244: R.~Kuchimanchi and R.~N.~Mohapatra,
245: %``Testing leptonic SU(2) horizontal symmetry using neutrino mixings,''
246: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 552} (2003) 198
247: [arXiv:hep-ph/0207373].
248:
249: \bibitem{Fukugita:1986hr}
250: M.~Fukugita and T.~Yanagida,
251: %``Baryogenesis Without Grand Unification,''
252: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 174} (1986) 45.
253:
254: \bibitem{Spergel:2003cb}
255: D.~N.~Spergel {\it et al.},
256: %``First Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations:
257: %Determination of Cosmological Parameters,''
258: Astrophys.\ J.\ Suppl.\ {\bf 148} (2003) 175
259: [arXiv:astro-ph/0302209].
260:
261: \bibitem{Barger:2003gt}
262: V.~Barger, D.~A.~Dicus, H.~J.~He and T.~j.~Li,
263: %``Structure of cosmological CP violation via neutrino seesaw,''
264: arXiv:hep-ph/0310278;
265:
266: \bibitem{Ibarra:2003up}
267: A.~Ibarra and G.~G.~Ross,
268: %``Neutrino phenomenology: The case of two right handed neutrinos,''
269: arXiv:hep-ph/0312138.
270:
271: \bibitem{Buchmuller:2003gz}
272: W.~Buchmuller, P.~Di Bari and M.~Plumacher,
273: %``The neutrino mass window for baryogenesis,''
274: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 665} (2003) 445
275: [arXiv:hep-ph/0302092];
276: G.~F.~Giudice, A.~Notari, M.~Raidal, A.~Riotto and A.~Strumia,
277: %``Towards a complete theory of thermal leptogenesis in the SM and MSSM,''
278: arXiv:hep-ph/0310123.
279:
280: \bibitem{Chankowski:2003rr}
281: P.~H.~Chankowski and K.~Turzynski,
282: %``Limits on T(reh) for thermal leptogenesis with hierarchical neutrino masses,''
283: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 570} (2003) 198
284: [arXiv:hep-ph/0306059].
285:
286: \bibitem{gravitino}
287: J.~R.~Ellis, J.~E.~Kim and D.~V.~Nanopoulos,
288: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 145} (1984) 181;
289: M.~Y.~Khlopov and A.~D.~Linde,
290: %``Is It Easy To Save The Gravitino?,''
291: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 138} (1984) 265;
292: J.~R.~Ellis, D.~V.~Nanopoulos and S.~Sarkar,
293: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 259} (1985) 175;
294: J.~R.~Ellis, D.~V.~Nanopoulos, K.~A.~Olive and S.~J.~Rey,
295: Astropart.\ Phys.\ {\bf 4} (1996) 371;
296: M.~Kawasaki and T.~Moroi,
297: Prog.\ Theor.\ Phys.\ {\bf 93} (1995) 879;
298: T.~Moroi, Ph.D. thesis, arXiv:hep-ph/9503210;
299: M.~Bolz, A.~Brandenburg and W.~Buchm\"uller,
300: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 606} (2001) 518.
301:
302: \bibitem{g_bound}
303: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 145} (1984) 181;
304: M.~Y.~Khlopov and A.~D.~Linde,
305: %``Is It Easy To Save The Gravitino?,''
306: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 138} (1984) 265;
307: I.~V.~Falomkin, G.~B.~Pontecorvo, M.~G.~Sapozhnikov, M.~Y.~Khlopov, F.~Balestra and G.~Piragino,
308: %``Low-Energy Anti-P He-4 Annihilation And Problems Of The Modern Cosmology,
309: %GUT And Susy Models,''
310: Nuovo Cim.\ A {\bf 79} (1984) 193
311: [Yad.\ Fiz.\ {\bf 39} (1984) 990];
312: \bibitem{Khlopov:1993ye}
313: M.~Y.~Khlopov, Y.~L.~Levitan, E.~V.~Sedelnikov and I.~M.~Sobol,
314: %``Inequilibrium cosmological light element nucleosynthesis. Calculations by
315: %the Monte Carlo method,''
316: Yad. Fiz. {\bf 57} (1994) 1466;
317: K.~Kohri,
318: %``Primordial nucleosynthesis and hadronic decay of a massive particle with a
319: %relatively short lifetime,''
320: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 64} (2001) 043515
321: [arXiv:astro-ph/0103411].
322:
323:
324: \bibitem{Flanz:1994yx}
325: M.~Flanz, E.~A.~Paschos and U.~Sarkar,
326: %``Baryogenesis from a lepton asymmetric universe,''
327: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 345} (1995) 248
328: [Erratum-ibid.\ B {\bf 382} (1996) 447]
329: [arXiv:hep-ph/9411366];
330: M.~Flanz, E.~A.~Paschos, U.~Sarkar and J.~Weiss,
331: %``Baryogenesis through mixing of heavy Majorana neutrinos,''
332: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 389} (1996) 693
333: [arXiv:hep-ph/9607310].
334:
335: \bibitem{Ellis:2002eh}
336: J.~R.~Ellis, M.~Raidal and T.~Yanagida,
337: %``Observable consequences of partially degenerate leptogenesis,''
338: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 546} (2002) 228
339: [arXiv:hep-ph/0206300];
340: M.~Fujii, K.~Hamaguchi and T.~Yanagida,
341: %``Leptogenesis with almost degenerate Majorana neutrinos,''
342: Phys.\ Rev.\ D {\bf 65} (2002) 115012
343: [arXiv:hep-ph/0202210]..
344:
345: \bibitem{GonzalezFelipe:2003fi}
346: R.~Gonzalez Felipe, F.~R.~Joaquim and B.~M.~Nobre,
347: %``Radiatively induced leptogenesis in a minimal seesaw model,''
348: arXiv:hep-ph/0311029.
349:
350: \bibitem{Babu:im}
351: K.~S.~Babu,
352: %``Renormalization Group Analysis Of The Kobayashi-Maskawa Matrix,''
353: Z.\ Phys.\ C {\bf 35} (1987) 69.
354:
355: \bibitem{Chankowski:2001mx}
356: P.~H.~Chankowski, W.~Krolikowski and S.~Pokorski,
357: %``Fixed points in the evolution of neutrino mixings,''
358: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 473} (2000) 109
359: [arXiv:hep-ph/9910231];
360: J.~A.~Casas, J.~R.~Espinosa, A.~Ibarra and I.~Navarro,
361: %``General RG equations for physical neutrino parameters and their
362: %phenomenological implications,''
363: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 573} (2000) 652
364: [arXiv:hep-ph/9910420];
365: P.~H.~Chankowski and S.~Pokorski,
366: %``Quantum corrections to neutrino masses and mixing angles,''
367: Int.\ J.\ Mod.\ Phys.\ A {\bf 17} (2002) 575
368: [arXiv:hep-ph/0110249].
369:
370: \bibitem{Casas:2001sr}
371: J.~A.~Casas and A.~Ibarra,
372: %``Oscillating neutrinos and mu $\to$ e, gamma,''
373: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 618} (2001) 171
374: [arXiv:hep-ph/0103065].
375:
376: \bibitem{Pilaftsis:1998pd}
377: L.~Covi, E.~Roulet and F.~Vissani,
378: %``CP violating decays in leptogenesis scenarios,''
379: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 384} (1996) 169
380: [arXiv:hep-ph/9605319];
381: A.~Pilaftsis,
382: %``Heavy Majorana neutrinos and baryogenesis,''
383: Int.\ J.\ Mod.\ Phys.\ A {\bf 14} (1999) 1811
384: [arXiv:hep-ph/9812256].
385:
386: \bibitem{Buchmuller:2002rq}
387: W.~Buchmuller, P.~Di Bari and M.~Plumacher,
388: %``Cosmic microwave background, matter-antimatter asymmetry and neutrino
389: %masses,''
390: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 643} (2002) 367
391: [arXiv:hep-ph/0205349].
392:
393: \bibitem{King:1998jw}
394: S.~F.~King,
395: %``Atmospheric and solar neutrinos with a heavy singlet,''
396: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 439} (1998) 350
397: [arXiv:hep-ph/9806440];
398: S.~Davidson and S.~F.~King,
399: %``Bi-maximal neutrino mixing in the MSSM with a single right-handed
400: %neutrino,''
401: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 445} (1998) 191
402: [arXiv:hep-ph/9808296];
403: S.~F.~King,
404: %``Atmospheric and solar neutrinos from single right-handed neutrino dominance
405: %and U(1) family symmetry,''
406: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 562} (1999) 57
407: [arXiv:hep-ph/9904210];
408: Q.~Shafi and Z.~Tavartkiladze,
409: %``Neutrino mixings and fermion masses in supersymmetric SU(5),''
410: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 451} (1999) 129
411: [arXiv:hep-ph/9901243];
412: S.~F.~King,
413: %``Large mixing angle MSW and atmospheric neutrinos from single right-handed
414: %neutrino dominance and U(1) family symmetry,''
415: Nucl.\ Phys.\ B {\bf 576} (2000) 85
416: [arXiv:hep-ph/9912492].
417:
418: \bibitem{Jezabek:2002qu}
419: M.~Jezabek and P.~Urban,
420: %``A hidden hierarchy of neutrino masses,''
421: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 541} (2002) 142
422: [arXiv:hep-ph/0206080].
423:
424:
425:
426: \end{thebibliography}
427:
428: \end{document}
429:
430:
431: