1: %\documentstyle[prl,twocolumn,aps,epsfig,amssymb]{revtex}

2: \documentstyle[12pt,epsfig]{article}

3: %\documentclass[12pt]{report}

4: %\usepackage{amssymb}

5: %\usepackage{graphicx}

6: \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-1in}

7: \addtolength{\oddsidemargin}{30mm}

8: %\setlength{\topmargin}{-1in}

9: \setlength{\headheight}{30mm}

10: \setlength{\headsep}{0mm}

11: \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-0.7cm}

12: \setlength{\textwidth}{17cm}

13: \setlength{\topmargin}{-3cm}

14: \setlength{\textheight}{23.5cm}

15: \addtolength{\jot}{9pt}

16: \addtolength{\arraycolsep}{-3pt}

17: \renewcommand{\textfraction}{0}

18: %\renewcommand{\theequation}{\arabic{section}.\arabic{equation}}

19: %\pagestyle{plain}

20: 

21: % Gudrun definitions

22: \def\llgm{\left\lgroup\matrix}

23: \def\rrgm{\right\rgroup}

24: 

25: \def\beq{\begin{equation}}

26: \def\eeq{\end{equation}}

27: \def\be{\begin{equation}}

28: \def\ee{\end{equation}}

29: \def\bea{\begin{eqnarray}}

30: \def\eea{\end{eqnarray}}

31: \def\nnb{\nonumber}

32: \def\rt{\right}

33: \def\dgr{\dagger}

34: \def\lt{\left}

35: \def\Tr{\textrm Tr}

36: \newcommand{\wti}{\widetilde}

37: \newcommand{\gsim}{\lower.7ex\hbox{$\;\stackrel{\textstyle>}{\sim}\;$}}

38: \newcommand{\lsim}{\lower.7ex\hbox{$\;\stackrel{\textstyle<}{\sim}\;$}}

39: \renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\fnsymbol{footnote}}

40: 

41: \begin{document}

42: 

43: \begin{center}

44: \vspace{-3ex}{

45:                       \hfill hep-ph/0404042}\\[2mm]

46: {\LARGE\bf

47: Toward precision measurements in solar neutrinos} 

48: 

49: \vspace{0.6cm}

50: P. C. de Holanda$^a$, Wei Liao$^b$ and A. Yu. Smirnov$^{b,c}$\\ 

51: \vspace{0.3cm}

52: {\it $^a$ Instituto de F\'\i sica Gleb Wataghin - UNICAMP, 13083-970

53: Campinas SP, Brasil} \\

54: {\it $^b$ ICTP, Strada Costiera 11, 34014 Trieste, Italy} \\

55: {\it $^c$ Institute for Nuclear Research of Russian Academy of Sciences, 

56: Moscow 117312, Russia}

57: \end{center}

58: \begin{abstract}

59: Solar neutrino physics enters a stage of precision measurements. 

60: In this connection we present a precise analytic description of the 

61: neutrino conversion in the context of LMA MSW solution 

62: of the solar neutrino problem. Using the adiabatic perturbation theory 

63: we derive an analytic formula for the $\nu_e$ survival probability  

64: which takes into account the non-adiabatic corrections and the 

65: regeneration effect inside the Earth. The probability is averaged over 

66: the neutrino production region. We find that the non-adiabatic corrections 

67: are of the order $10^{-9}-10^{-7}$.   

68: Using the formula for the Earth regeneration effect 

69: we discuss features of the zenith angle dependence of the $\nu_e$ flux.  

70: In particular, we show that effects of small structures at the surface of 

71: the Earth can be important.

72: 

73: \end{abstract}

74: 

75: 

76: \section{Introduction}\label{sec1}

77: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

78: 

79: The LMA MSW solution~\cite{w,ms} has been identified

80: ~\cite{sno1}$-$\cite{ped03} as

81: the correct solution of the solar neutrino problem. 

82: The $2 \nu $ conversion probability of this solution

83: gives a very good description of all available data: 

84: no statistically significant 

85: deviation has been found so far. 

86: New physics effects beyond LMA, if exist, are below few per cent. 

87: 

88: The program of future solar neutrino studies includes 

89: 

90: 1). further tests of the LMA solution, in particular, searches for 

91: signatures of this solution such as the Day-Night asymmetry

92: and the distortion (``upturn") of the boron $\nu_e$

93: spectrum at low energies;

94: 

95: 

96: 2). precise determination of the oscillation parameters, especially 

97: the 1-2 mixing angle;

98: 

99: 3). searches for the sub-leading effects which originate from 

100: 

101: - 1-3 mixing, 

102: 

103: - sterile neutrino mixing, 

104:   

105: - non-standard neutrino interactions, 

106: 

107: - spin-flavor flip in the magnetic fields of the Sun, 

108: 

109: - violation of the fundamental symmetries 

110: (CPT, equivalence principle, {\it etc}.).\\

111: 

112: 

113: Already the present solar neutrino measurements have sensitivity 

114: at the level of few per cent.  

115: For instance, the predicted day-night asymmetry of the SuperKamiokande

116: signal is about $2\%$ which is comparable 

117: with the existing $1\sigma$ experimental error~\cite{sk-dn}. 

118: At SNO one expects the

119: $2-4\%$ asymmetry, consistent with the experimental

120: result~\cite{sno1} at the $1\sigma$ level.

121: 

122: Future experiments will have substantially higher 

123: sensitivity~\cite{BahPen,UNO,hyper-K,FREJUS}.

124: The solar neutrino studies enter a phase of 

125: precision measurements. \\

126: 

127: In this connection it is important 

128: 

129: \begin{itemize}

130: 

131: \item

132: 

133: to give precise description of the  LMA conversion, 

134: both in the Sun and in the Earth, taking into account various corrections; 

135: 

136: \item

137: to estimate accuracy of the approximations made; 

138: 

139: \item

140: 

141: to find  the precise {\it analytic} expressions for probabilities and 

142: observables 

143: as functions of the oscillation parameters 

144: ($\Delta m^2$, $\sin^2 \theta_{12}$). 

145: This will help to test the LMA solution and to

146: search for physics beyond LMA. 

147: 

148: 

149: \end{itemize}

150: 

151: We address these issues in the present paper.  

152: In section \ref{sec2} we consider the non-adiabatic corrections to the 

153: LMA conversion probability. We calculate these corrections for 

154: propagation inside the Sun and the Earth. In section \ref{sec3} we obtain

155: the analytical formula for the probability averaged 

156: over the distribution of

157: neutrino sources. In section \ref{sec4} we derive the analytic formula for 

158: the $\nu_e$ regeneration effect in the Earth. 

159: We present our conclusions in Section \ref{sec5}.

160: In the appendices A and B, alternative derivations of formulas

161: for the regeneration factor are given.

162: 

163: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

164: \section{Non-adiabatic corrections to the LMA solution}

165: \label{sec2}

166: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

167: 

168: According to the LMA MSW solution of the solar neutrino problem, a 

169: conversion of the solar electron neutrinos is driven by  

170: mixing of the two active neutrinos,

171: $\Psi_f \equiv (\nu_e, \nu_a)^T$ : 

172: \bea

173: \Psi_f = U(\theta) \Psi_{mass}, 

174: \eea 

175: where, in general, the mixing matrix is determined as 

176: \bea

177: U(\alpha) = 

178: \pmatrix{\cos\alpha & \sin \alpha \cr -\sin\alpha & \cos\alpha}, 

179: \label{matr}

180: \eea

181: and $\Psi_{mass} \equiv (\nu_1, \nu_2)^T$ is the vector of mass 

182: states. 

183: 

184: 

185: 

186: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

187: \subsection{LMA and Adiabaticity}

188: \label{sec2.1}

189: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

190: 

191: 

192: The main feature of the LMA solution is the adiabaticity of 

193: conversion. According to LMA the averaged $2\nu$ 

194: survival probability of the 

195: electron neutrinos is given  

196: by the adiabatic formula~\cite{ms,messiah,parke}: 

197: \bea

198: P_{ee} = \frac{1}{2}(1+ \cos 2\theta^0_m \cos 2\theta).  

199: \label{adprob}

200: \eea

201: Here $\theta$ is the vacuum mixing angle, $\theta^0_m=\theta_m(x_0)$

202: is the mixing angle in matter in the neutrino

203: production point, $x_0$, and the mixing angle in matter

204: is determined by

205: \bea

206: \cos 2\theta_{m}(V) = \frac{\cos 2 \theta - 2 E V /\Delta m^2}

207: {[(\cos 2\theta - 2 E V /\Delta m^2)^2 + \sin^2 2\theta ]^{1/2}}, ~~

208: V=\sqrt{2} G_F n_e(x).

209: \label{cost}

210: \eea

211: Here $\Delta m^2$ is the mass squared difference, 

212: $E$ is the neutrino energy, $V$ is the potential,

213: $G_F$ is the Fermi coupling constant 

214: and $n_e(x)$ is the number density of electrons in the point $x$. 

215: 

216: How precise the expression (\ref{adprob}) is, 

217: and what are the non-adiabatic corrections? To answer these

218: questions, 

219: we will elaborate on the adiabatic perturbation theory.

220: 

221: Dynamics of neutrino conversion is described in terms of the 

222: instantaneous eigenstates of the Hamiltonian in matter, 

223: $\nu_{1m}$, $\nu_{2m}$. Representing an arbitrary neutrino state as 

224: $|\nu \rangle = \psi_{1m} |\nu_{1m} \rangle + \psi_{2m} | \nu_{2m} \rangle$, 

225: we can write the evolution equation in the base $(\nu_{1m}$, $\nu_{2m})$

226: as~\cite{ms,messiah,ms87}

227: \bea

228: i \frac{d}{dx} \pmatrix{\psi_{1m} \cr \psi_{2m}} =

229: \pmatrix{-\frac{\Delta(x)}{4 E} & -i {\dot \theta}_m(x) \cr

230: i {\dot \theta}_m(x) & \frac{\Delta(x)}{4 E} } 

231: \pmatrix{\psi_{1m} \cr \psi_{2m}},

232: \label{evoleigen}

233: \eea

234: where 

235: \bea

236: \Delta(x) \equiv   \Delta m^2 \sqrt{(\cos 2\theta-2 E V(x)/ \Delta m^2)^2 

237: + \sin^2 2\theta} 

238: \label{massdiff}

239: \eea

240: and 

241: \be

242: {\dot \theta}_m(x) \equiv \frac{d \theta_m(x)}{dx}= 

243: \frac{E \Delta m^2 \sin2\theta}{\Delta(x)^2} \frac{d V(x)}{dx}.  

244: \label{tdot}

245: \ee

246: 

247: The adiabatic approximation corresponds to a situation when

248: \be 

249: \gamma \equiv \frac{4 E{|\dot \theta}_m|}{\Delta} \ll 1, 

250: \label{adcond}

251: \ee

252: and the off-diagonal terms in the Hamiltonian (\ref{evoleigen}) 

253: can be neglected. 

254: In this case there are no transitions between the eigenstates, 

255: and therefore the eigenstates propagate independently. The solution of 

256: (\ref{evoleigen}) is straightforward:

257: \be

258: \Psi_m^{ad}(x) = S^{ad} (x, x_0) \Psi_m (x_0),

259: \ee

260: where 

261: \be

262: \Psi_m^{ad}(x) = \pmatrix{ \psi_{1m}^{ad}(x) \cr

263: \psi_{2m}^{ad}(x)}, ~~~~

264: \Psi_m (x_0) = \pmatrix{ \psi_{1m}(x_0) \cr

265: \psi_{2m}(x_0)}, ~~~~

266: \label{defpsi}

267: \ee

268: and the adiabatic evolution matrix is

269: \be

270: S^{ad}(x, x_0) = S^{ad}(\Phi) = \pmatrix{e^{i \Phi (x)}& 0 \cr

271: 0 & e^{-i \Phi(x)}}.

272: \label{evad}

273: \ee

274: The adiabatic phase $\Phi(x)$ equals

275: \be

276: \Phi(x) = \frac{1}{4E} \int_{x_0}^x  dx' \Delta (x'). 

277: \ee

278: 

279: A state initially produced as the electron neutrino,   

280: $\psi_{1m}(x_0) = \cos\theta_m^0$, 

281: $\psi_{2m}(x_0) = \sin \theta_m^0$, evolves as 

282: \be

283: \nu (x) = \cos\theta_m^0 e^{i \Phi(x)}\nu_{1m} + 

284: \sin \theta_m^0 e^{-i\Phi(x)} \nu_{2m}. 

285: \ee

286: The incoherent survival probability (\ref{adprob})  

287: can be immediately obtained 

288: by averaging the matrix element squared, $|\langle \nu_e |\nu 

289: (x)\rangle|^2$, 

290: over the oscillations.\\ 

291: 

292: 

293: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

294: \subsection{Non-adiabatic corrections}

295: \label{sec2.2}

296: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

297: 

298: The non-adiabatic corrections correspond to transitions between

299: the instantaneous eigenstates. We calculate these corrections

300: by solving the equation (\ref{evoleigen}).

301: We will implement a perturbation 

302: theory using the fact that for LMA the adiabaticity parameter 

303: (\ref{adcond}) is very small.

304: 

305: 

306: Let us search for the solution of the  

307: equation (\ref{evoleigen}) in the form

308: \bea

309: \pmatrix{\psi_{1m}(x) \cr \psi_{2m}(x)} && = 

310: \pmatrix{1 & c(x) \cr -c^*(x) & 1}

311: \pmatrix{\psi_{1m}^{ad}(x)  \cr \psi_{2m}^{ad}(x)} \nnb \\

312: &&=\pmatrix{e^{i \Phi (x)}& c(x)e^{-i \Phi(x)} \cr -c^*(x) e^{i \Phi(x)} & 

313: e^{-i \Phi(x)}}

314: \pmatrix{\psi_{1m}(x_0) \cr \psi_{2m}(x_0)},

315: \label{evolnew}

316: \eea

317: where $|c(x)| \ll 1$ is supposed to hold everywhere along 

318: the neutrino trajectory. 

319: (We check this {\it a posteriori}). 

320: %This is equivalent to further rotation of the  basis of neutrino eigenstates.  

321: 

322: The expression (\ref{evolnew}) can be rewritten as   

323: \be

324: \Psi_m (x) = S(x, x_0) \Psi_m (x_0), 

325: \ee

326: where the evolution matrix equals

327: \be

328: S(x, x_0) \equiv C S^{ad} \approx \pmatrix{e^{i \Phi (x)}& c(x)e^{-i 

329: \Phi(x)} \cr 

330: -c^*(x) e^{i \Phi(x)} &

331: e^{-i \Phi(x)}}. 

332: \label{ev}

333: \ee

334: 

335: Inserting  (\ref{evolnew}) into (\ref{evoleigen}) we find 

336: the differential equation for $c(x)$ 

337: from the condition that the off-diagonal elements 

338: of the evolution equation for  $\psi_{im}$ are zero: 

339: \be

340: i \frac{d}{dx}c(x)= -\frac{\Delta(x)}{2 E} c(x)-i {\dot \theta}_m(x).

341: \label{evolc}

342: \ee

343: Here the first order terms in $c(x)$ and ${\dot  \theta}_m$ are kept only. 

344: In this approximation 

345: the energy gap between the states coincides 

346: with the adiabatic split $\Delta(x)$ given in Eq. (\ref{massdiff}). 

347: 

348: The solution of equation (\ref{evolc}) can be written 

349: in the following form 

350: \bea

351: c(x) =- 

352: \int^x_{x_0} dx' \frac{d \theta_m(x')}{dx'}

353: \exp \left[-i \int^{x'}_{x} dx'' \frac{\Delta(x'')}{2 E}\right].

354: \label{newsolutb}

355: \eea

356: The integration constant is fixed  by the

357: condition : $c(x) \to 0$ as ${\dot \theta}_m \to 0$, so that  $c(x_0)=0$. 

358: 

359: Since for the LMA solution the phase $\Phi(x)$ is a fast oscillating 

360: function, 

361: the integral in (\ref{newsolutb}) can be calculated 

362: using the following formula (essentially the integration by parts)

363: \bea

364: \int^b_a f(x) e^{i g(x)} dx

365: = \left[ -i \frac{f(x)}{g'(x)}+\frac{f'(x)}{g'^2(x)}-

366: \frac{f(x) g''(x)}{g'^3(x)}\right] e^{i g(x)}\bigg|^b_a + {\cal O}(1/g'^3)

367: \label{approxm}

368: \eea

369: which is valid for smooth functions of $f(x)$ and $g(x)$. Here 

370: $g'(x)\equiv dg(x)/dx$ 

371: and $f'(x) \equiv df(x)/dx$. The formula  gives very good approximation if

372: $f(x)/g'(x) \ll 1$. In the case of integral (\ref{newsolutb})

373: this condition coincides with the adiabaticity condition

374: (\ref{adcond}) which is well satisfied. \\

375: 

376: According to (\ref{approxm}) and (\ref{newsolutb}) we find

377: \bea

378: c(x_f) && =-i \frac{2 E}{\Delta(x)}\frac{{d \theta}_m(x)}{dx}

379: \exp \left[-i \int^x_{x_f} dx' \frac{\Delta(x')}{2 E}\right]\bigg|^{x=x_f}_{x=x_0} \nnb \\

380: && =-i {\rm sign}({\dot \theta}_m) \frac{\gamma(x)}{2}

381: \exp \left[- 2 i (\Phi(x)-\Phi(x_f)) \right] \bigg|^{x=x_f}_{x=x_0},

382: \label{csol1}

383: \eea

384: or explicitly

385: \bea

386: c(x_f)= - i \frac{2 E^2 \Delta m^2 \sin2\theta}

387: {\Delta(x)^3} \frac{d V(x)}{dx} \exp \left[-i \int^x_{x_f}

388: dx' \frac{\Delta(x')}{2 E}\right]\bigg|^{x=x_f}_{x=x_0},

389: \label{csol2}

390: \eea

391: where sign$({\dot \theta}_m)\equiv {\dot \theta}_m/|{\dot \theta}_m|$. 

392: 

393: We will apply this formula for neutrino propagation inside the Sun 

394: in section \ref{sec2.3} and inside the Earth in section \ref{sec4}.

395: 

396: 

397: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

398: \subsection{Non-adiabatic corrections for propagation inside the Sun}

399: \label{sec2.3}

400: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

401: 

402: The survival probability with the adiabaticity violation effect included 

403: can be written as  

404: \be

405: P_{ee} = \frac{1}{2}\left[1+ (1 - 2 P_c) \cos 2\theta^0_m \cos 

406: 2\theta\right],

407: \label{surprob}

408: \ee

409: where $P_c=|c(x_f)|^2$ is the jump probability $-$ 

410: the probability of transition 

411: $\nu_{2m} \rightarrow \nu_{1m}$ on the way from $x_0$ to $x_f$. 

412: 

413: Let us calculate $P_c$. Notice that for the LMA solution, 

414: one can not use the Landau-Zener

415: formula~\cite{LanZen} for $P_c$ for the following reasons.

416: The mixing angle in the final point of evolution, $x_f$, is

417: large. The adiabaticity parameter $|4 E {\dot \theta}_m/\Delta|$

418: is of the same order for all points

419: inside $0.3$ of the solar radius~\cite{fried}.

420: The point of maximal adiabaticity violation is not the resonant

421: point, though not far from it. Moreover, the resonance layer defined as

422: $|2 E V-\Delta m^2 \cos 2\theta| \lsim \Delta m^2 \sin 2\theta$, is

423: broad since the vacuum mixing angle is large. Futhermore, significant part 

424: of the neutrino flux is

425: produced inside the resonance region or does not cross the resonance region    

426: at all. 

427: 

428: The double exponential formula~\cite{PetKra} is not valid too.  

429: It requires production of neutrinos far above the resonance region in the 

430: density scale. This formula is not applied in the range

431: \be 

432: \frac{\Delta m^2}{2 E}\cos 2\theta \sim 

433: (1.6 - 8.0)\cdot 10^{-6} ~~\frac{{\rm eV}^2}{\rm MeV},   

434: \label{range}

435: \ee

436: for which the density in the production point turns out to be

437: close to the resonance density. 

438: For the best fit values of the LMA oscillation parameters the range

439: (\ref{range}) corresponds to 

440: $E = (2 - 15)$ MeV, that is, to the region of interest. 

441: 

442: Let us apply the results of section 2.2 for calculation of the

443: non-adiabatic corrections.

444: Notice that at the surface of

445: the Sun the effective potential $V$ is negligible  and

446: ${\dot \theta}_m$ can be taken zero. 

447: Using Eq. (\ref{csol2}) 

448: we find the transition amplitude $c(x_f)$ on the way from the 

449: production point to the surface of the Sun

450: in the leading order approximation as

451: \bea

452: c(x_f)= i \frac{2 E^2 \Delta m^2 \sin2\theta}

453: {\Delta(x)^3} \frac{d V(x)}{dx}\bigg|_{x=x_0} \times

454: \exp \left[i \int^{x_f}_{x_0} dx \frac{\Delta(x)}{2 E}\right].

455: \label{nonadinsunb}

456: \eea

457: Then the probability of  non-adiabatic transition 

458: is given by 

459: \be

460: P_c  =|c(x_f)|^2 = \frac{\gamma^2(x_0)}{4}

461: =\frac{1}{16 \pi^2} \frac{l^2_{osc}(x_0)}{h^2(x_0)}

462: \left[ \frac{2 E V(x_0) \Delta m^2 \sin 2\theta }{\Delta(x_0)^2} \right]^2, 

463: \label{nonadinsun}

464: \ee

465: where 

466: \be

467: h(x) \equiv  {V(x)}\left[\frac{d V(x)}{dx}\right]^{-1}, ~~~

468: l_{osc}(x) \equiv \frac{4 \pi E}{\Delta(x)}  

469: \ee

470: are the density height and the oscillation length in matter. 

471: 

472: The transition probability $P_c$ (\ref{nonadinsun}) 

473: depends only on parameters 

474: of the initial (production) point. 

475: One can understand this by noting that $l_{osc}(x)\ll h_c(x)$.

476: Therefore many oscillation lengths are obtained on the distance in which the

477: potential changes sizably. The 

478: non-adiabatic corrections 

479: are  averaged out being negligible along the trajectory of the neutrino 

480: except for the  boundaries of trajectory, {\it i.e.}, 

481: around the production point

482: or the point at the surface of the Sun. 

483: At the surface of the Sun the

484: contribution can be neglected because the potential is zero.

485: 

486: The probability is determined basically by  square of the  

487: ratio of the oscillation length and the density height. Second factor in 

488: (\ref{nonadinsun}) is of the order one. So, essentially $P_c \lsim

489: [l_{osc}(x_0)/4\pi h(x_0)]^2$.  

490: Using the best fit values of the LMA oscillation 

491: parameters we find from (\ref{nonadinsun})

492: \be

493: P_c = (10^{-9} - 10^{-7})\left(\frac{E}{10 ~{\rm MeV}}\right)^2. 

494: \label{pc}

495: \ee 

496: Here the numerical prefactor  depends on the production

497: point. As a function of $x_0$, the probability $P_c$ reaches maximum 

498: at around $ (0.1-0.2)R_{\odot}$,  

499: where the potential doesn't drop down substantially

500: and $h(x_0)$ reaches its almost minimal value due to increase of the 

501: density gradient. 

502: The corrections are negligible in the whole relevant range of neutrino

503: energies and production points. The probability (\ref{pc}) strongly differs

504: from what one would get using double-exponential formula~\cite{PetKra}:

505: $\sim e^{- 4\pi h /l_{osc}} \lsim 10^{-400}$.

506: 

507: Notice that the jump probability (\ref{nonadinsun}) equals (up to factor 4)

508: the adiabaticity parameter 

509: in the production point squared, as is expected in

510: the adiabatic perturbation theory. This contrasts the Landau-Zener

511: probability, $P_c \sim \exp(-\pi/2\gamma)$, which is essentially

512: non-perturbative effect.

513: 

514: 

515: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

516: \section{Averaging over production region: analytic results}

517: \label{sec3}

518: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

519: 

520: 

521: \begin{table}

522: \begin{center}

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

524: \hline

525: $K$ & pp & $^8B$ & $^{13}N$ & $^{15}O$ & $^{17}F$ & $^7Be$ & $pep$ & $hep$ 

526: \\

527: \hline

528: ${\bar V}_K$($10^{-12}$eV) & 4.68 & 6.81 & 6.22 & 6.69 &6.74 & 6.16 & 5.13 & 3.96 

529: \\

530: \hline

531: $\Delta V_K^2/{\bar V}_K^2$ & 0.109 & 0.010 & 0.054 & 0.013 & 0.012 &

532: 0.029& 0.076 & 0.165 \\

533: \hline

534:   \end{tabular}

535:  \end{center}

536: \caption{\it The average value of potential ${\bar V}_K$

537: and the corresponding value of

538: $\Delta V^2_K/{\bar V}_K^2$ for different component of the solar

539: neutrino spectrum.}

540: \label{tab:para}

541: \end{table}

542: 

543: In the adiabatic approximation the survival probability 

544: depends on the potential (density) in neutrino production point $r$: 

545: \be

546: P_{ee} = P_{ee}(V_0), ~~~ 

547: V_0=V(x_0=r).

548: \ee 

549: 

550: Observables at the Earth are determined by the survival probability 

551: averaged over the neutrino production region: 

552: \bea

553: P_K = \frac{\int dr ~G_K(r) P_{ee}(r)}{\int dr ~G_K(r)}, ~~~~

554: K = pp, pep, Be, N, O, F,  B, hep,  

555: \label{aveprob1}

556: \eea

557: where $G_K(r)$ is the distribution of 

558: sources of the $K$ component of neutrino spectrum.

559: The distributions 

560: are different for different components. 

561: 

562: Let us introduce the average value of the potential 

563: in the production region for the type $K$ neutrinos: 

564: \bea

565: \bar{V}_K \equiv \frac{\int dr ~G_K(r) V(r)}{\int dr ~G_K(r)}.

566: \label{avepot}

567: \eea

568: We will use the fact that in the effective production region, 

569: $V(r)$ deviates weakly from ${\bar V}_K$. Therefore the survival 

570: probability can be expanded in series around ${\bar V}_K$:

571: \bea

572: P_{ee} = P_{ee}(\bar{V}_K) + 

573: \left(\frac{d P_{ee}}{dV}\right)_{V = \bar{V}_K}(V - \bar{V}_K) + 

574: \frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{d^2 P_{ee}}{dV^2}\right)_{V = 

575: \bar{V}_K}(V - {\bar V}_K)^2 + \cdots

576: \eea

577: Inserting this expression into (\ref{aveprob1}) and using 

578: the definition (\ref{avepot}) we find 

579: \be

580: P_K  = P_{ee}(\bar{V}_K) 

581: -\frac{3 E^2}{(\Delta m^2)^2} \frac{\sin^2 2\theta \cos 2 \theta

582: (\cos 2 \theta - 2 E \bar{V}_K/\Delta m^2)} 

583: {[(\cos 2\theta- 2 E\bar{V}_K/\Delta m^2)^2+\sin^2 2\theta ]^{5/2}}

584: \Delta V^2_K,   

585: \label{aveprobb}

586: \ee

587: where 

588: \be

589: \Delta V^2_K \equiv

590: \frac{\int dr ~G_K(r) (V(r)- \bar{V}_K)^2}{\int dr ~G_K(r)}. 

591: \label{delpot2} 

592: \ee

593: Notice that the correction to $P_{ee}$ appears in the second order 

594: of the deviation of potential from the average value. 

595: The expression for probability (\ref{aveprobb}) can be rewritten as

596: \be

597: P_K = 

598: \frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{2}( 1-\delta_K) \cos 2\theta_{m}(\bar{V}_K) \cos 

599: 2\theta, 

600: \label{aveprob}

601: \ee

602: where the correction $\delta_K$ equals

603: \be

604: \delta_K = \frac{3}{2}\frac{(2 E \bar{V}_K/\Delta m^2)^2 \sin^2 2\theta}

605: {[(\cos 2\theta- 2 E\bar{V}_K/\Delta m^2)^2+\sin^2 2\theta ]^2}

606: \frac{\Delta V_K^2}{\bar{V}_K^2}.   

607: \label{deltaN}

608: \ee

609: In the Table \ref{tab:para} we present the average values of potentials 

610: and the corresponding second order deviations 

611: from the average values for eight types of solar neutrinos. We use 

612: the distributions of neutrino sources from the BP2000 model~\cite{bp2000}.

613: The expansion parameters $\Delta V_K^2/\bar{V}_K^2$ are all small,

614: especially for the boron neutrinos which have the narrowest

615: distribution of sources.

616: 

617: In Fig. \ref{figdiff} we compare the probability $P_K$ 

618: obtained from the approximate analytic formula  

619: (\ref{aveprob}) with results of numerical calculations, $P'_K$. 

620: $P_K/P'_K - 1$ is shown as a function of $E/\Delta m^2$.

621: The lines have been cut for $K=pp,Be7,pep,N,O,F$ because of their

622: lower energies in comparison with the  energies of $hep$ and boron 

623: neutrinos.

624: The plot shows that the analytic formula is rather precise.

625: In particular, the deviations are extremely small ($\lsim 10^{-3}$) for 

626: small and large 

627: values of $E/ \Delta m^2$. Relatively large deviations can be seen 

628: in the intermediate

629: region of $E/ \Delta m^2$. For example, for $K = hep$ the magnitude of

630: $P_K/P'_K-1$ reaches maximum $1.8\%$ at around

631: $E/\Delta m^2\approx 34 \times 10^{10}$~eV$^{-1}$.

632: The corrections $\delta_K$ are important: {\it e.g.}, for the

633: $hep$ neutrinos the 

634: deviation would be up to $6\%$ without $\delta_K$ .

635: \begin{figure}[t]

636: \centerline{\psfig{figure=diff.eps,height=12cm,width=12cm}}

637: \caption{\small Deviations of the probability $P_K$ given in 

638: formula (\ref{aveprob}) from the

639: numerically calculated probability, $P'_K$ for different components of the 

640: solar neutrino spectrum.}

641: \label{figdiff}

642: \end{figure}

643: 

644: 

645: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

646: \section{The Earth matter effect: analytic study}

647: \label{sec4}

648: 

649: The solar neutrinos arrive at the surface of the Earth as incoherent 

650: fluxes of the mass states. The mass states oscillate in the matter 

651: of the Earth producing partial regeneration of the

652: electron neutrino flux~\cite{MS86,DN,other,other1,other2,LMA,para_old,para}.  

653: Previously the effect has been described in one or two layers

654: approximation. In the later case, interference effects of

655: contributions from 

656: the core and the mantle have been discussed 

657: ~\cite{para_old,para}. In this section we will

658: study effects for the realistic density profile

659: of the Earth.

660: 

661: 

662: \begin{figure}[t]

663: \centerline{\psfig{figure=Earth.eps,height=10cm,width=16cm}}

664: \caption{\small Structure of the Earth density profile. We indicate

665: notations used in the text.}

666: \label{figearth}

667: \end{figure}

668: 

669: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

670: 

671: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

672: \subsection{Regeneration factor and the Earth density profile}

673: \label{sec4.1}

674: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

675: 

676: The probability of $\nu_2 \to \nu_e$ transition can be 

677: written as 

678: \be

679: P(\nu_2 \to \nu_e) \equiv \sin^2\theta + f_{reg}, 

680: \label{freg}

681: \ee

682: where $f_{reg}$ is  the regeneration factor which  describes the 

683: Earth matter effect. 

684: In the absence of matter ({\it i.e.}, during the day) $f_{reg} = 0$. 

685: Using the definition (\ref{freg}) we find the

686: $\nu_e$ survival probability with the regeneration effect included 

687: as

688: \bea

689: P_{ee} = \frac{1}{2}(1+\cos 2\theta_m^0 \cos 2\theta) - 

690: \cos 2\theta_m^0 f_{reg}. 

691: \eea

692: Notice that the mixing angle $\theta_m^0$ in the neutrino production point 

693: in the Sun determines the mass ($\nu_1$, $\nu_2$) composition of the neutrino 

694: flux which arrives at the Earth. 

695: 

696: The essential feature of the LMA solution is that 

697: the Earth matter effect is small. This smallness 

698: is characterized by the ratio

699: \bea

700: \eta \equiv \frac{2 E V}{\Delta m^2} = 

701: 0.024 \left(\frac{E}{10 {\textrm MeV}}\right) 

702: \left(\frac{6.3 \times 10^{-5} {\textrm eV}^2}{\Delta m^2}\right) 

703: \frac{V}{V_A}, 

704: ~~~V_A=\sqrt{2} G_F N_A,

705: \eea

706: where $N_A$ is the Avogadro number. 

707: We will use $\eta$ as the expansion parameter.

708: 

709: The $\nu_2 \to \nu_e$ transition probability can be written as

710: \bea

711: P(\nu_2 \to \nu_e) && = |\langle\nu_e|U(\theta_{mR}) S(x_f,x_0)  

712: U^\dagger(\theta_{mR})U(\theta)|\nu_2\rangle|^2 \nnb \\

713: && =  |\langle\nu_e|U(\theta_{mR}) 

714: S(x_f,x_0) U^\dagger(\theta_{mR} - \theta)|\nu_2\rangle|^2  ,

715: \label{p2e}

716: \eea

717: where $\theta_{mR}$ is the mixing angle in matter at the surface of the 

718: Earth and the matrix $S(x_f,x_0)$ given in

719: (\ref{ev}) describes evolution of the 

720: neutrino eigenstates in matter. 

721: Noting that in matter of the Earth 

722: \be

723: \sin(\theta_{mR} -\theta) \approx

724: \frac{E V_R}{\Delta m^2} \sin2\theta \ll 1,  

725: \ee

726: we find from (\ref{evolnew}), (\ref{freg}) and (\ref{p2e})

727: an expression for the regeneration 

728: factor in the lowest 

729: order in $c(x)$ and $\sin(\theta_{mR} -\theta)$ as

730: \bea

731: f_{reg} = \frac{2 E V_R}{\Delta m^2} \sin^2 2\theta  \sin^2 \Phi(x_f)

732: + \sin 2 \theta  Re\{c(x_f)\},   

733: \label{regcor}

734: \eea

735: where $V_R$ is the potential at the surface of the Earth and

736: $\Phi(x_f)$ is the total phase acquired along the trajectory in the Earth.

737: 

738: For the profile with slowly changing density (lowest adiabatic approximation),

739: $c\approx 0$, we obtain

740: \bea

741: f^{ad}_{reg}=\frac{2 E V_R}{\Delta m^2}

742: \sin^2 2\theta \sin^2\Phi(x_f).

743: \label{regold}

744: \eea

745: The prefactor (the depth of oscillations) is determined

746: by the potential at the surface of the Earth, whereas the phase

747: is given by the integral along  whole trajectory.

748: For one layer with constant potential (density), and therefore 

749: $c = 0$, the regeneration factor (\ref{regcor}) or (\ref{regold}) 

750: is reduced to  

751: the well known expression: 

752: \bea

753: f_{reg}= \frac{2 E V_R}{\Delta m^2} \sin^2 2\theta 

754: \sin^2\frac{ \pi L}{l_m}.

755: \label{regold1}

756: \eea

757: Here $L$ is the distance traveled by neutrino in the Earth and $l_m$

758: is the oscillation length in matter. 

759: 

760: Let us consider a neutrino propagation in realistic density

761: profile of the Earth. The profile can be described by $n$ nearly

762: spherical shells of matter with sharp (step-like) density changes

763: at the borders of shells and slow variation of density

764: in layers between the borders. According to the PREM model 

765: $n=9$~\cite{PREM}.

766: So, in $i$th shell ($i=1,\cdots,n$), the potential $V_i$ is a smooth function

767: of the radial distance $r$. Crossing $j$ shells corresponds to

768: crossing $2j-1$ layers (see Fig. \ref{figearth}).

769: We denote by $R_{i-1}$ the outer radius of

770: $i$th shell, so that $R_0$ corresponds to the radius of the Earth: $R_0=R_E$.

771: 

772: The trajectory of the neutrino is 

773: characterized by the zenith angle $\theta_Z$. 

774: We determine a position of neutrino along trajectory by the 

775: coordinate $x$ 

776: with origin in the center of trajectory, so that

777: \bea

778: x \in [-L/2,L/2], ~~x^2=r^2-R_E^2\sin^2\theta_Z.

779: \label{trajcoor}

780: \eea

781: Here $L$ is the total length of the trajectory in the Earth.

782: The length of the part of trajectory inside border $R_i$

783: is given by

784: \bea

785: L_i = \sqrt{R_i^2-R_E^2\sin^2\theta_Z},

786: \label{length}

787: \eea

788: and $L_0=L$ by definition.

789: 

790: We introduce the adiabatic phase $\Phi_i$ acquired by neutrinos

791: in the interval $- L_i/2 \leq x \leq L_i/2$ along the trajectory,

792: that is, inside the outer border of the $(i+1)$th shell:

793: \bea

794: \Phi_i &&= \int^{L_i/2}_{-L_i/2} dx \frac{\Delta(x)}{4 E} \nnb \\

795: &&\approx \int^{L_i/2}_{-L_i/2} dx \bigg[ \frac{\Delta m^2}{4 E} - \frac{1}{2}

796: \cos2\theta V(x) + \frac{E \sin^2 2\theta}{2 \Delta m^2} V^2(x)\bigg] ,

797: ~~~i=0,\cdots,n-1. 

798: \label{phasei}

799: \eea

800: $\Delta(x)$ is given in Eq. (\ref{massdiff}).

801: Here we keep the order $V^2$ term since due to integration its

802: contribution to the phase is not negligible.

803: 

804: At the borders of shells there are jumps of the potential 

805: and hence the discontinuities of the mixing angle in matter.

806: We denote them as

807: \bea

808: \Delta V_i && \equiv V_{i+1}(R_i)-V_i(R_i), 

809: ~~i=0,\cdots,n-1, \label{jump1} \\

810: \Delta \theta_{mi} && \equiv \theta_m(V_{i+1}(R_i))- 

811: \theta_m(V_i(R_i)), ~~~

812: i=0, \cdots, n-1.

813: \label{jump}

814: \eea

815: At the surface of the Earth, we obtain

816: \bea

817: \Delta V_0= V_R, ~~~\Delta \theta_{m0} =\theta_{mR}-\theta.

818: \label{jump2}

819: \eea

820: Furthermore, we find

821: \bea

822: \sin \Delta \theta_{mi} \approx \frac{ E \Delta V_i}{\Delta m^2} \sin 2\theta, 

823: ~~~\cos \Delta \theta_{mi} \approx 1, ~~~i=0,\cdots,n-1.

824: \label{approxth}

825: \eea

826: Corrections to (\ref{approxth}) are of the order $\eta^2$, and hence negligible.

827: 

828: Smooth variation of the potential in each shell of the Earth can be

829: approximated by the analytic formula~\cite{LisMon}:

830: \bea

831: V_i = V_A\left[ \alpha_i + \beta_i \frac{r^2}{R^2_E} +\gamma_i

832: \frac{r^4}{R^4_E}\right], ~~~i=1,\cdots,n.

833: \label{poteni}

834: \eea

835: 

836: Let us find an analytic expression for  the 

837: regeneration factor using the density profile described above.  

838: The problem can be solved in two steps: (1) computation of the  

839: non-adiabatic corrections to propagation within a given layer, $\Delta f_i$;

840: (2) computation of effect of the borders between layers, 

841: $\Delta f_i^{jump}$. So that

842: \bea

843: f_{reg} =f^{ad}_{reg} + \sum_i \Delta f_i+\sum_i \Delta f_i^{jump}.

844: \eea

845: The virtue of the LMA solution is that it enables us to study both 

846: effects using the same formalism of the adiabatic perturbation

847: theory. 

848: 

849: 

850: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

851: \subsection{Non-adiabatic corrections in a layer of the Earth}

852: \label{sec4.2}

853: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

854: 

855: Let us compute the non-adiabatic corrections for one layer.  

856: Suppose a neutrino trajectory crosses the $i$th layer with the

857: borders at $x=L_i/2$ and $x=L_{i-1}/2$.

858: Using (\ref{trajcoor}) and (\ref{poteni}), the potential in

859: this layer can be expressed in terms of the trajectory coordinate as

860: \bea

861: V_i  = V_A\left[\alpha'_i+\beta'_i 

862: \frac{x^2}{R^2_E}+\gamma'_i\frac{x^4}{R^4_E}\right].  

863: \label{potenib}

864: \eea

865: Here

866: \bea

867: \alpha'_i=\alpha_i+ \beta_i \sin^2\theta_Z+\gamma_i \sin^4\theta_Z,~~

868: \beta'_i=\beta_i+2 \gamma_i \sin^2\theta_Z, ~~ \gamma'_i=\gamma_i.

869: \label{parametb}

870: \eea

871: 

872: According to (\ref{length}) and (\ref{parametb}) the gradients

873: of potential at the  borders equal 

874: \bea

875: \frac{d V_i(x)}{dx}\bigg|_{x={L_i \over 2}} &&

876:  = \frac{2 V_A}{R_E} \sqrt{y_i^2 - \sin^2\theta_Z}

877: (\beta_i+ 2 \gamma_i y_i^2),

878: \label{gradi} \\

879: \frac{d V_i(x)}{dx}\bigg|_{x={L_{i-1} \over 2}} &&=

880: \frac{2 V_A}{R_E} \sqrt{y_{i-1}^2 - \sin^2\theta_Z}

881: (\beta_i+ 2 \gamma_i y_{i-1}^2). 

882: \label{gradi-1}

883: \eea

884: where $y_i \equiv R_i/R_E$.

885: Then for this layer Eq. (\ref{csol2}) gives the 

886: amplitude of non-adiabatic transition

887: \bea

888: c_i&& =-2i e^{2 i \Phi_0} 

889: \frac{E^2 \Delta m^2 \sin 2\theta}{\Delta^3(x)} 

890: \frac{d V(x)}{dx} e^{-2 i \Phi(x)} 

891: \bigg|^{x={L_{i-1} \over 2}}_{x={L_i \over2}} \nnb \\

892: && = -\frac{4 i E^2 \sin 2 \theta}{(\Delta m^2)^2 R_E} V_A e^{i \Phi_0}

893: \bigg[ (\beta_i+2 \gamma_i y_{i-1}^2 ) 

894: \sqrt{y_{i-1}^2 - \sin^2\theta_Z} 

895: e^{-i \Phi_{i-1}} \nnb \\

896: && - (\beta_i+2 \gamma_i y_i^2)

897: \sqrt{y_i^2 - \sin^2\theta_Z} e^{-i \Phi_i} \bigg],

898: \label{ampli}

899: \eea

900: where phases $\Phi_i$ are defined in (\ref{phasei}).

901: Inserting this expression into (\ref{regcor}) we obtain the  non-adiabatic

902: correction from this layer, $\Delta f_{i}$ to the regeneration factor

903: as 

904: \bea

905: \Delta f_{i} &&= \frac{4 E^2 \sin^2 2 \theta}{(\Delta m^2)^2 R_E} V_A 

906: \bigg[ (\beta_i+2 \gamma_i y_{i-1}^2) \sqrt{y_{i-1}^2 - \sin^2\theta_Z}

907: \sin(\Phi_0 -\Phi_{i-1}) \nnb \\

908: && - (\beta_i+2 \gamma_i y_i^2)\sqrt{y_i^2 - \sin^2\theta_Z}

909: \sin(\Phi_0 -\Phi_i) \bigg].

910: \eea

911: 

912: The ratio of the absolute value of correction and the adiabatic

913: term equals

914: \bea 

915: \frac{|\Delta f_i|}{|f^{ad}_{reg}|} \sim 

916: \frac{2 E }{\Delta m^2  \sin 2 \theta R_E} 

917: \frac{V_A (\beta_i + 2 \gamma_i y_i^2)}{V_R} 

918: \sqrt{y_i^2-\sin^2\theta_Z}

919: \sim \frac{2 E }{\Delta m^2}\frac{1}{R_E}, 

920: \label{ratio}

921: \eea

922: where $R_E$ plays the role of typical scale of the density change. 

923: As an example, let us consider

924: the layer between $0.895 R_E$ and $0.546R_E$. In this layer

925: $\alpha=3.156$, $\beta =-1.459$ and $\gamma=0.280$~\cite{LisMon}.

926: From (\ref{ratio}) we obtain that the non-adiabatic correction to the

927: regeneration factor is about $(1-2)\%$

928: at $E = 10$ MeV.

929: 

930: Notice that for some particular values of energies and $\theta_Z$,

931: the contributions $\Delta f_i$ from different layers $i$ may sum up

932: ``constructively" producing larger effect. In this connection let us

933: notice the following.

934: 

935: 1) The enhancement effect may occur for exceptional values of $E$ and

936: $\theta_Z$ and therefore any realistic averaging over $E$ and integration

937: over $\theta_Z$ will wash it out.

938: 

939: 2) The enhancement can not be large (proportional to the number of

940: layers, $n$) since

941: (i) only few layers give significant contribution and for the rest,

942: the effect is below $1 \%$; (ii) there is a systematic cancellation

943: of contributions from the upper limit of integration in $\Delta f_i$

944: and the lower limit of integration in $\Delta f_{i-1}$ (the adiabatic

945: phases are the same for both); (iii) typically, contributions from

946: two layers of the same shell have opposite signs.

947: 

948: So, we conclude that the non-adiabaticity within

949: layers of the Earth can be safely neglected.

950: 

951: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

952: \subsection{Effects of several layers}

953: \label{sec4.3}

954: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

955: 

956: \begin{figure}[t]

957: \centerline{\psfig{figure=reg.eps,height=11cm,width=14cm}}

958: \caption{\small The regeneration factor as function of $\cos\theta_Z$ 

959: for $E=10$ MeV, $\Delta m^2=6.3 \times 10^{-5}$ ~eV$^2$, and 

960: $\tan^2\theta=0.4$. We compare result of numerical computations

961: with analytic result (\ref{regnewb}) for the PREM model. }

962: \label{figreg}

963: \end{figure}

964: 

965: The jumps of potential between the layers strongly violate the 

966: adiabaticity and on the first glance, the adiabatic

967: perturbation theory can not be applied. 

968: We show, however, that the results for non-adiabatic case 

969: obtained in section \ref{sec2.2} can be also used here.  

970: The key point is that for the LMA parameters  

971: the Earth matter effects are small,  whatever

972: the density profile in the Earth is. 

973: As a consequence, variations of the mixing angle in matter are small:

974: $|\Delta \theta_m| \ll \theta$, and essentially the expansion 

975: parameter here is $\eta$.  

976: 

977: Consider a neutrino trajectory which crosses 

978: $2 n-1$ layers ($n$ shells). In the points of the trajectory 

979: $x=\mp L_i/2$  neutrinos 

980: cross the borders of shell with  $r=R_i$, as illustrated 

981: in Fig. \ref{figearth}. The corresponding potential

982: jumps equal $\pm \Delta V_i$ for $x=\mp L_i/2$. 

983: Using the expression  (\ref{tdot}) we obtain in the lowest

984: approximation

985: \bea

986: {\dot \theta}_m(x) = \frac{ E \sin 2 \theta}{ \Delta m^2} 

987: \sum^{n-1}_{i=1} \Delta V_i 

988: \left[\delta \left(x+\frac{L_i}{2}\right) - 

989: \delta \left(x-\frac{L_i}{2}\right)\right].  

990: \label{theder}

991: \eea

992: As it has been shown in section \ref{sec4.2} to a good approximation 

993: one can take ${\dot \theta}_m = 0$ everywhere outside the borders.  

994: 

995: The evolution equation (\ref{evoleigen}) can be averaged in small 

996: intervals $\Delta x \ll 1/\Delta (x)$ 

997: to eliminate $\delta$-functions which originate from 

998: $\dot \theta_m$. 

999: However, this is not necessary since in the 

1000: expression for $c(x)$ in (\ref{evolc}) $\dot \theta_m$ is integrated anyway.   

1001: 

1002: Plugging expression (\ref{theder}) into Eq. (\ref{newsolutb})

1003: we obtain

1004: \bea

1005: c(L/2) 

1006:  = \frac{ E \sin 2 \theta}{ \Delta m^2} e^{i \Phi_0 } 

1007: \sum^{n-1}_{i=1} \Delta V_i \left(e^{-i \Phi_i} - e^{i \Phi_i}\right), 

1008: \eea

1009: where $\Phi_i$ are defined in (\ref{phasei}).

1010: 

1011: Inserting the real part of $c(L/2)$ into 

1012: (\ref{regcor}) we find the regeneration factor for the case of

1013: $n$ shells crossing:

1014: \bea

1015: f_{reg} =  \frac{2 E V_R}{\Delta m^2} \sin^2 2 \theta \sin^2 

1016: \Phi_0

1017: + \sum^{n-1}_{i=1} \frac{2 E \Delta V_i}{\Delta m^2} \sin^2 2\theta

1018: \sin\Phi_i \sin \Phi_0.

1019: \label{regnew}

1020: \eea

1021: In the Appendix A we present the rigorous derivation

1022: of this factor  considering evolution in the sequent layers explicitly. 

1023: The results of two approaches coincide exactly in  the first 

1024: order in $E V/\Delta m^2$. 

1025: 

1026: Noting that $V_R = \Delta V_0$ is the jump of potential at the 

1027: surface of the Earth, we can rewrite the expression (\ref{regnew})

1028: in the following compact form: 

1029: \bea

1030: f_{reg} = 

1031: \frac{2 E \sin^2 2\theta}{\Delta m^2}\sin\Phi_0 

1032: \sum^{n-1}_{i=0} \Delta V_i \sin\Phi_i.

1033: \label{regnewb}

1034: \eea

1035: So, $f_{reg}$ is proportional to the sum of similar terms which

1036: correspond to the borders of the shells. Each term is the product

1037: of the potential jump at a given border and sine of the total adiabatic

1038: phase acquired on the part of trajectory inside a given border (that is,

1039: from $- L_i/2$ to $L_i/2$ for the border $i$). The sum runs over all

1040: borders including the surface of the Earth. The expression (\ref{regnewb})

1041: corresponds to the symmetric density profile.

1042: The zenith angle dependence of the regeneration 

1043: factor appears via the phases: 

1044: $\Phi_i \equiv \Phi_i (\theta_Z)$.   

1045: 

1046: The formula (\ref{regnewb}) (which is the  main result of our study) 

1047: allows us to get complete 

1048: understanding of the Earth matter effects including effects 

1049: of complicated  shell structure. 

1050: Apparently, this is  not possible  using the one layer approximation 

1051: (\ref{regold}), where the interference terms induced by different 

1052: shells are absent.

1053: 

1054: 

1055: In Fig. \ref{figreg} we compare the zenith angle dependence of the 

1056: regeneration  

1057: factor computed using the analytic formula (\ref{regnew}) with the one 

1058: obtained by the exact numerical integration for the PREM profile. 

1059: Two results coincide extremely well. One can see that the analytic

1060: formula reproduces quite precisely the magnitude and the phase 

1061: structure of the regeneration factor. 

1062: 

1063: Let us mark some features.

1064: The change of the oscillatory behaviors for 

1065:  $\cos\theta_Z \gsim 0.83$ is induced by the sharp density

1066: jump at the border between the mantle and the core

1067: of the Earth, at $r=0.54 R_E$. 

1068: Notice that at $\cos\theta_Z \gsim 0.83$ the amplitude of oscillations

1069: for some periods increases, however, the frequency of large peaks

1070: becomes lower. So that the average value of $f_{reg}$ does not increase

1071: in comparison with the  value for $\cos\theta_Z < 0.83$.

1072: 

1073: For small $\cos\theta_Z$ the dependence of $f_{reg}$ on 

1074: $\theta_Z$ is a result

1075: of interference of terms in (\ref{regnewb}) which correspond to 

1076: the outer shells of the Earth. To understand this dependence, it is convenient

1077: to introduce the phase $\varphi_i$:

1078: \bea

1079: \varphi_i \equiv \Phi_0 - \Phi_i,

1080: \label{phased}

1081: \eea

1082: so that $\varphi_i/2$ is the phase acquired by neutrino on the way

1083: from the surface of the Earth to $r=R_i$.

1084: Using $\varphi_i$ we can rewrite the expression for

1085: regeneration factor (\ref{regnewb}) as

1086: \bea

1087: f_{reg} =  \frac{2 E \sin^2 2\theta} {\Delta m^2}

1088: \sum^{n-1}_{i=0} \Delta V_i

1089: \left[\sin^2\Phi_0\cos\varphi_i - \frac{1}{2} \sin 2 \Phi_0 \sin\varphi_i

1090: \right].

1091: \label{newreg1}

1092: \eea

1093: Apparently, if averaging over $\varphi_i$ occurs only the

1094: term with $i=0$ survives ($\varphi_0=0$) in $f_{reg}$ which is reduced to

1095: the adiabatic expression for one layer.

1096: 

1097: The increase of regeneration factor

1098: with $\cos\theta_Z$ in the range  $0.2 - 0.5$

1099: is related to the effect of three density jumps 

1100: near the surface of the Earth:  

1101: according to the PREM profile they   

1102: are situated  at depths 10 km, 22 km and 31 km correspondingly.

1103: The distance, $L-L_i$, on  which $\varphi_i$ is acquired  

1104: depends on the zenith angle as

1105: \bea

1106: L-L_i \approx 2 \frac{R_E-R_i}{\cos\theta_Z}, ~~

1107: \cos\theta_Z > \sqrt{1-R_i^2/R^2_E}

1108: \eea

1109: ($R_E-R_i$ is  the depth from the surface of the Earth to the borders

1110: of the $i$th shell). 

1111: In the case of small $\cos\theta_Z$ 

1112: ($\cos\theta_Z \lsim 0.2$), the distance 

1113: $L-L_i$  can be of several hundreds kilometers which is comparable

1114: to or larger than the oscillation length. Furthermore, $L-L_i$ and

1115: $\varphi_i$ are fast changing functions of $\theta_Z$.

1116: So, $\varphi_i$ are large and different for different $i$.

1117: Therefore, the terms $\sin \Phi_0 \sin\Phi_i$ for different 

1118: $i$ ($i=1,2,3$) are quite different and therefore partially cancel

1119: each other (``interfere destructively'').

1120: 

1121: In constrast, for $\cos\theta_Z \gsim 0.5$,

1122: the distances $L-L_i$ ($i=1,2,3$) for the outer shells become 

1123: much smaller than 

1124: the oscillation length and they slowly 

1125: change with $\cos\theta_Z$. In this case the phases 

1126: $\varphi_i$ ($i=1,2,3$) are all small and  

1127: $\sin\Phi_0 \sin\Phi_i \approx \sin^2\Phi_0$.

1128: So, for $\cos\theta_Z >  0.5$ the effects of outer shells

1129: ``interfere constructively'' producing larger regeneration factor.

1130: It is then possible to account

1131: these close layers effectively as a single layer, as it was

1132: done in Ref.~\cite{LisMon}. 

1133: Increase of the regeneration factor in the transition region

1134: $\cos\theta_Z = (0.2-0.5)$ corresponds to convergence

1135: of the term $\sin\Phi_0 \sin\Phi_i$ ($i=1,2,3$) to

1136: $\sin^2\Phi_0$. 

1137: 

1138: 

1139: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1140: \subsection{Averaging over the neutrino energy}

1141: \label{sec4.4}

1142: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1143: \begin{figure}[t]

1144: \centerline{\psfig{figure=regave.eps,height=9cm,width=18cm}}

1145: \caption{\small The regeneration factor averaged over the energy

1146:  intervals (a) $E= (9.5 - 10.5)$ MeV; (b) 

1147: $E= (8 - 11)$ MeV. For oscillation parameters we take 

1148: $\Delta m^2=6.3 \times 10^{-5}$ ~eV$^2$ and

1149: $\tan^2\theta=0.4$. }

1150: \label{figave}

1151: \end{figure}

1152: 

1153: For the LMA solution the oscillation length in the Earth is small:    

1154: $l_m \approx l_{\nu} \ll R_E$.

1155: Since the time of the neutrino detection is well known, 

1156: averaging over the zenith angle can be avoided, 

1157: and in fact, in the unbinned analysis of the data developed

1158: recently~\cite{sk-dn} one needs to know the zenith angle dependence 

1159: without averaging. 

1160: At the same time since the recoil electron (and not 

1161: neutrino) energy 

1162: is measured and a detector has finite energy resolution,  

1163: averaging over the neutrino energy occurs. 

1164: 

1165: In the leading approximation the phase equals $\varphi_i \approx

1166: \Delta m^2 (L-L_i)/(4E)$. Therefore the energy resolution $\Delta E$

1167: corresponds to averaging over the interval of phases:

1168: \bea

1169: \Delta \varphi_i \approx \varphi_i \frac{\Delta E}{E}.

1170: \eea

1171: If $L - L_i \gg l_m$, so that $\varphi_i \gg 1$,  

1172: the interval $\Delta \varphi_i$ can

1173: be large, thus leading to

1174: strong averaging of terms $\sin\Phi_0 \sin\Phi_i$ in (\ref{regnewb}).

1175: This happens to the contributions from  structures situated 

1176: far from the surface of the Earth.

1177: In Fig. \ref{figave} we show 

1178: the result of averaging of the regeneration factor folded with  

1179: the cross section of the neutrino-electron 

1180: elastic scattering over two different energy intervals.  

1181: Comparing with Fig. \ref{figreg}, one

1182: sees that the complicated oscillatory pattern produced by the density jumps

1183: in the central regions of the Earth 

1184: is strongly averaged when $\cos\theta_Z$ 

1185: is large (for general analysis of this effect see ~\cite{IS}). 

1186: According to Fig. \ref{figave}

1187: for $\cos\theta_Z \gsim 0.4$ the regeneration factor

1188: oscillates with small depth around $f_{reg} \approx 1.5 \%$. This happens

1189: because the main term $\sin^2 \Phi_0$ is strongly averaged too.

1190: 

1191: In contrast, for $\cos\theta_Z \lsim 0.2$ only the outer structures of the

1192: Earth can contribute and the averaging is not as efficient

1193: as for large $\cos\theta_Z$. Indeed, for the borders of outer

1194: shells ($i=1,2,3$) the distance where $\varphi_i$ is acquired,

1195: $L-L_i \le 2 R_E \sqrt{1-R_i^2/R^2_E}$, 

1196: can be about several hundreds kilometers, that is, 

1197: comparable with the oscillation length in matter. 

1198: In this case the phase

1199: interval $\Delta \varphi_i \approx \varphi_i\Delta E/E$

1200: is still not large enough to give sufficient averaging.

1201: For $\cos\theta_Z < 0.4$, $\Delta \Phi_0 \approx \Phi_0 \Delta E/E$ is 

1202: also small and  averaging is weak.

1203: Furthermore, in the interval $\cos\theta_Z

1204: =(0.2-0.5)$ the regeneration factor increases with $\cos\theta_Z$.

1205: The reason is that in this interval the main term, $\sin^2\Phi_0$,

1206: starts to ``interfere constructively'' with the terms produced by the

1207: outer shells, $\sin\Phi_0 \sin\Phi_i$ ($i=1,2,3$),

1208: as it has been discussed in section \ref{sec4.3}.

1209: 

1210: \begin{figure}[t]

1211: \centerline{\psfig{figure=snocc1.eps,height=10cm,width=14cm}}

1212: \caption{\small The regeneration factor for the SNO charged current

1213: events integrated over  different intervals of the observed kinetic energy 

1214: as function of the zenith angle. We take 

1215: $\Delta m^2=6.3 \times 10^{-5}$ eV$^2$, $\tan^2\theta=0.4$.}

1216: \label{snocc1}

1217: \end{figure}

1218: 

1219: In Fig. \ref{snocc1} and \ref{snocc2} we show  dependence of 

1220: the regeneration factor

1221: for the charged current events at SNO. Here we have taken into account

1222: the energy resolution of the SNO detector and also performed

1223: integration over various energy bins of the observed kinetic energy.

1224: On the basis of our analytic formulas and discussion, the interpretation

1225: of results of Fig. \ref{snocc1} and \ref{snocc2} is straightforward.

1226: 

1227: \begin{figure}[t]

1228: \centerline{\psfig{figure=snocc2.eps,height=10cm,width=14cm}}

1229: \caption{\small The same as in Fig. \ref{snocc1} for different intervals

1230: of averaging and the same middle kinetic energy $T= 13$ MeV.}

1231: \label{snocc2}

1232: \end{figure}

1233: 

1234: 

1235: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1236: \subsection{Small scale structures: general density profile}

1237: \label{sec4.5}

1238: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1239: 

1240: There are small scale structures  

1241: in the  outer mantle of the Earth of

1242: depth $(\sim 10)$ km in which matter has  

1243: quite different densities ({\it e.g.}, ocean, rock and soil).  

1244: In contrast to the ideal PREM 

1245: model, these structures are not isotropically distributed and

1246: can be quite complicated.

1247: 

1248: In section \ref{sec4.3} we have shown for the ideal PREM model

1249: that contributions produced by structures close the surface of the Earth

1250: interfere destructively for small $\cos\theta_Z$. 

1251: Furthermore, averaging over the energy doesn't smooth

1252: the dependence of these contributions on $\cos\theta_Z$ completely.

1253: This produces an uncertainty for 

1254: the future high statistics solar neutrino experiments (see also comments 

1255: in ~\cite{LISI})

1256: unless the local density distribution is well known~\cite{IS2}. 

1257: In view of this we will consider 

1258: general (not spherically symmetric) density profile.

1259: 

1260: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1261: %\subsection{General density profile}

1262: %\label{sec5.1}

1263: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1264: 

1265: Suppose neutrinos cross $k$ layers of matter. The density

1266: jumps occur in the points

1267: $x=x_i$ ($i=1,\cdots, k-1$);

1268: $x=x_0$ and $x=x_k$ are the points where neutrinos enter and

1269: leave the matter correspondingly.

1270: Similarly to (\ref{theder}) we parameterize ${\dot \theta}_m$ as

1271: \bea

1272: {\dot \theta}_m= \frac{E \sin 2\theta}{\Delta m^2}

1273: \sum^{k-1}_{i=1} \Delta V_i ~\delta(x-x_i),

1274: \label{thederasy}

1275: \eea

1276: where the jump of potential at the $i$th border between layers equals

1277: \bea

1278: \Delta V_i =V(x_i+\epsilon)-V(x_i-\epsilon),  ~~~i=1,\cdots, k-1.

1279: \label{jumpnewden}

1280: \eea

1281: $\epsilon$ is the infinitesimally small distance.

1282: Noting that the potential is zero for neutrinos before entering 

1283: the Earth and after leaving the Earth, we define also

1284: \bea

1285: \Delta V_0 = V(x_0),~~~\Delta V_k = -V(x_k).

1286: \label{jumpnewden1}

1287: \eea

1288: Plugging the potential jumps into (\ref{newsolutb}) gives

1289: \bea

1290: c(x_k)= - \frac{E \sin 2\theta}{\Delta m^2}

1291: \sum ^{k-1}_{i=1} \Delta V_i ~e^{2 i \phi_i},

1292: \eea

1293: where

1294: \bea

1295: \phi_i = \int^{x_k}_{x_i} dx \frac{\Delta(x)}{4 E}, ~~~i=0,\cdots, k

1296: \label{phasex}

1297: \eea

1298: is the phase acquired from a given border $i$ to the final point

1299: of the trajectory (detector).

1300: 

1301: Now it is straightforward to compute the regeneration factor, 

1302: and in the leading order in $E V/\Delta m^2$ we obtain

1303: \bea

1304: f_{reg} &&= \bigg| \langle \nu_e| U(\theta_m(x_k)) S(x_k,x_0)

1305: U^\dagger(\theta_m(x_0))U(\theta) | \nu_2 \rangle \bigg|^2 -\sin^2\theta \nnb \\

1306: && = -\frac{E \sin^2 2\theta}{\Delta m^2}

1307: \sum^k_{i=0} \Delta V_i \cos 2\phi_i.

1308: \label{regasy}

1309: \eea

1310: In the Appendix B, a direct computation of $f_{reg}$ for this case is given. 

1311: Its result coincides with

1312: (\ref{regasy}) in the leading order in $E V/\Delta m^2$.

1313: Using this formula one can easily reproduce (\ref{regnewb})

1314: assuming a symmetric density profile and taking into account

1315: that $\Phi_i=(\phi_i-\phi_{k-i})$ for $k=2n-1$ and $i < n$.

1316: 

1317: Using (\ref{regasy}) it is easy to study 

1318: averaging  effects following the discussion in  section \ref{sec4.4}. 

1319: Structures situated far from the detector have $\phi_i \gg 1$. 

1320: So that, after averaging, remote structures do not

1321: produce significant effect. However, if the energy resolution

1322: is improved, effects of these remote structures can be

1323: large. This agrees with general consideration in ~\cite{IS}.

1324: 

1325: Thus, we arrive at the following conclusion.

1326: If $\cos\theta_Z$ is large, small scale structures near

1327: the entering point can be taken effectively as a single

1328: layer. 

1329: Furthermore, averaging over the energy makes contributions

1330: of these small structures to be unimportant.

1331: 

1332: If $\cos\theta_Z$ is small, we can not consider small scale structures

1333: near the entering point as a single layer. However uncertainties

1334: produced by these structures can be significantly reduced if 

1335: averaging is performed over broad energy interval, {\it i.e.} $\Delta E/E 

1336: \sim 1$. 

1337: After averaging, the regeneration factor still shows an oscillatory 

1338: behavior in the region of small $\cos\theta_Z$, and this effect is  

1339: produced by  contributions 

1340: of the shells close to the detector~\cite{IS}. 

1341: 

1342: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1343: \section{Conclusion}

1344: \label{sec5}

1345: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1346: 

1347: We have performed detailed analytic study of the

1348: LMA MSW conversion of the solar neutrinos.

1349: Our main result is the precise analytic formula for the survival 

1350: probability which includes non-adiabatic corrections, averaging over

1351: the neutrino production region and the Earth regeneration effect.

1352: For the $K$ component of the solar neutrino spectrum

1353: ($K = pp, pep, Be, N, O, F,  B, hep$)

1354: it can be written as

1355: \bea

1356: P_K = \frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{2}(1-\delta_K) \cos 2\theta_m({\bar V}_K)

1357: \cos 2\theta -(1-\delta_K) \cos 2\theta_m({\bar V}_K) f_{reg}.

1358: \eea

1359: Here the correction due to averaging effect, $\delta_K$, 

1360: is given in Eq. (\ref{deltaN}); the average values

1361: of matter potential in the production regions of $K$ components,

1362: ${\bar V}_K$, are defined in (\ref{avepot}) and their numerical

1363: values are presented in the Table 1.

1364: The regeneration factor $f_{reg}$ is given in (\ref{regnew})

1365: for the symmetric density profile

1366: and in (\ref{regasy}) for general asymmetric density profile.

1367: 

1368: Effect of averaging over the neutrino production region in the Sun

1369: is reduced to specific value of the initial mixing angle in matter

1370: which should be taken for the average value of the potential,

1371: $\theta^0_m=\theta_m({\bar V}_K)$, and

1372: to the appearance of the correction $\delta_K$.

1373: We have compared the analytic results with the results of

1374: numerical computation and found that maximal deviation $\sim 1.8 \%$

1375: happens for the $hep$ neutrinos.

1376: For the boron neutrinos the precision is better than 0.2\%.

1377: 

1378: We have obtained precise analytic formula

1379: for the regeneration effect in the Earth using the

1380: realistic  density profile.

1381: We present simple derivation of this formula

1382: which uses the adiabatic perturbation theory.

1383: Performing also explicit calculations of the evolution

1384: in sequent layers we show that this derivation is correct.

1385: The analytic formula reproduces results of

1386: numerical computations with accuracy determined by $\eta \sim 1-2 \%$.

1387: 

1388: Essentially the regeneration effect is the

1389: sum of contributions from different shells which are determined by

1390: jumps of the potential at the borders  and

1391: by the adiabatic phase acquired inside the outer  borders of the

1392: corresponding shells.

1393: The dependence of regeneration factor on the zenith angle

1394: can be understood in terms of interference of

1395: contributions from different borders.

1396: 

1397: The derived analytical formula allows us to understand

1398: the effect of averaging over the neutrino energy.

1399: Using the analytical formula we have considered effects of

1400: small scale structures ($\sim 10$ km) of the Earth profile.

1401: These effects can be important for

1402: small values of $\cos \theta_Z$.

1403: We stress that local ``perturbations'' of the density profile

1404: can produce sizable uncertainties in $f_{reg}$.\\ 

1405: 

1406: \noindent

1407: {\Large \bf Acknowledgment}

1408: 

1409: One of the authors (P.C.H.) would like to thank FAPESP for financial

1410: support. A.Y.S. thanks Tokyo Metropolitan University where this work 

1411: has been accomplished for hospitality.  

1412: 

1413: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1414: 

1415: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%bbbb%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1416: \section*{\bf Appendix A. Regeneration factor in a symmetric density profile}\nonumber

1417: %\setcounter{num}{2}

1418: %\setcounter{equation}{0}

1419: 

1420: Let us derive the  expression for the regeneration factor by considering

1421: neutrino evolution in sequent layers of the Earth 

1422: explicitly. 

1423: First, we find  the complete evolution matrix, $\hat{S}$, in the

1424: basis of the mass eigenstates $\Psi^T \equiv (\nu_1,\nu_2)$:

1425: \bea

1426: \Psi(x_f)=\hat{S}(x_f,x_0) \Psi(x_0).

1427: \eea

1428: As discussed

1429: in section \ref{sec4.2}, the adiabaticity violation effect within

1430: layers is suppressed by $2 E/(\Delta m^2 R_E) \sim 1-2\%$  

1431: in comparison with the leading order Earth matter effect ($ \sim \eta$).

1432: Therefore, we neglect the adiabaticity violation

1433: within layers. 

1434: %The adiabatic evolution matrix (\ref{evad})

1435: %will be frequently used.

1436: 

1437: 1). In the case of neutrino propagation in one shell (one layer)

1438: we can simply project the adiabatic evolution matrix (\ref{evad}) 

1439: obtained for the matter eigenstates  

1440: on to the basis of the mass states. 

1441: In the leading order in $E V/\Delta m^2$ we find

1442: \bea

1443: {\hat S} && = \hat{S}_1 \bigg(\frac{L}{2},-\frac{L}{2}\bigg) \nnb \\ 

1444: && =U^\dagger (\theta) U(\theta_{mR}) S^{ad}\left(\frac{L}{2},-\frac{L}{2}\right)

1445: U^\dagger (\theta_{mR}) U(\theta) =

1446: U(\Delta \theta_{m0}) S^{ad}(\Phi_0)

1447: U^\dagger(\Delta \theta_{m0}) \nnb \\

1448: &&= S^{ad}\left(\frac{L}{2},-\frac{L}{2}\right) 

1449: + \sin\Delta \theta_{m0} (e^{-i \Phi_0}-e^{i \Phi_0})

1450: \pmatrix{ \sin\Delta \theta_{m0} & \cos\Delta \theta_{m0} \cr

1451: \cos\Delta \theta_{m0} & -\sin\Delta \theta_{m0} } \nnb \\

1452: && = \pmatrix{ e^{i \Phi_0} & 0 \cr 0 & e^{-i \Phi_0} }

1453: +\frac{E \Delta V_0 \sin 2\theta}{\Delta m^2} (e^{-i \Phi_0}-e^{i \Phi_0})

1454: \pmatrix{0 & 1 \cr 1 & 0 }.

1455: \label{matr1}

1456: \eea

1457: Here $\Delta \theta_{m0} \equiv \theta_{mR} - \theta$ is the jump of the mixing 

1458: angle at the surface of the Earth. We have used Eq. (\ref{approxth}), and 

1459: $\Phi_0$ is defined in Eq. (\ref{phasei}).

1460: 

1461: 2).  In the case of two shells crossing, the neutrino encounters 

1462: three layers (the outer shell is crossed twice). The evolution

1463: matrix can be similarly obtained by using the adiabatic evolution

1464: matrix (\ref{evad}) in each layer and  by  rotation from the 

1465: matter eigenstates basis in the layer before the border 

1466: to the basis after the border.   

1467: As a result, we find

1468: \bea

1469: \hat{S} = U(\Delta \theta_{m0}) 

1470: S^{ad}\left(\frac{L}{2},\frac{L_1}{2}\right) 

1471: S_1 \bigg(\frac{L_1}{2},-\frac{L_1}{2} \bigg) 

1472: S^{ad}\left(-\frac{L_1}{2},-\frac{L}{2}\right) 

1473: U^\dagger(\Delta \theta_{m0}), \nnb

1474: \eea

1475: where $S_1$ is the evolution matrix in the inner shell which has

1476: a form similar to Eq. (\ref{matr1}) and it can be written as 

1477: \bea

1478: S_1 && = U(\Delta \theta_{m1}) S^{ad}\left(\frac{L_1}{2},-\frac{L_1}{2}\right)

1479: U^\dagger(\Delta \theta_{m1}) \nnb \\

1480: && = S^{ad}\left(\frac{L_1}{2},-\frac{L_1}{2}\right)

1481: + \frac{E \Delta V_1 }{\Delta m^2} \sin 2\theta

1482: (e^{-i \Phi_1}-e^{i \Phi_1})

1483: \pmatrix{ 0 & 1 \cr

1484: 1 & 0 }. 

1485: \label{matr2b}

1486: \eea

1487: Here $\Delta \theta_{m1}$ is the jump of mixing angle on the border

1488: between the first and the second shells, and  $\Phi_1$ is defined

1489: in Eq. (\ref{phasei}).

1490: 

1491: Combining the last two formulas we find to the order $E V/\Delta m^2$

1492: \bea

1493: {\hat S}  &&=  {\hat S}_2\left(\frac{L}{2},-\frac{L}{2}\right) \nnb \\

1494: && =S^{ad}\left(\frac{L}{2},-\frac{L}{2}\right)

1495: +\sum_{i=0}^1 \frac{E \Delta V_i \sin 2\theta}{\Delta m^2} 

1496: (e^{-i \Phi_i}-e^{i \Phi_i})

1497: \pmatrix{0 & 1 \cr 1 & 0 } .

1498: \label{matr2}

1499: \eea

1500: 

1501: 3). Suppose the evolution matrix for $j$ shells crossing ($2j-1$ 

1502: layers) equals 

1503: \bea

1504: {\hat S}  &&=  {\hat S}_j \left(\frac{L}{2},-\frac{L}{2}\right) \nnb \\

1505: && =S^{ad}\left(\frac{L}{2},-\frac{L}{2}\right)

1506: +\sum_{i=0}^{j-1} \frac{E \Delta V_i \sin 2\theta}{\Delta m^2} 

1507: (e^{-i \Phi_i}-e^{i \Phi_i})

1508: \pmatrix{0 & 1 \cr 1 & 0 }. 

1509: \label{matrj}

1510: \eea

1511: Consider now the trajectory with $j+1$ shells crossings. The evolution

1512: matrix is

1513: \bea

1514: {\hat S}&&= {\hat S}_{j+1} \nnb \\

1515:         &&=\prod^{j-1}_{i=0} \bigg[ U(\Delta \theta_{mi}) 

1516: S^{ad}\left(\frac{L_i}{2},

1517: \frac{L_{i+1}}{2}\right) \bigg] S_j \bigg(\frac{L_j}{2},-\frac{L_j}{2}\bigg)

1518: \prod^{0}_{i=j-1} \bigg[ S^{ad}\left(-\frac{L_{i+1}}{2},-\frac{L_i}{2}\right)

1519: U^\dagger(\Delta \theta_{mi}) \bigg], 

1520: \label{sss}

1521: \eea

1522: where $\Delta \theta_{mi}$ defined in (\ref{jump}), is the jump of the mixing 

1523: angle in matter at the border $R_i$.

1524: $S_j$ is the evolution matrix in the central shell which can be 

1525: written similarly to Eq. (\ref{matr2b}) as 

1526: \bea

1527: S_j

1528:  = S^{ad}\left(\frac{L_j}{2},-\frac{L_j}{2}\right)

1529:  + \frac{E \Delta V_j}{\Delta m^2} \sin 2\theta

1530: (e^{-i \Phi_j}-e^{i \Phi_j}) \pmatrix{ 0 & 1 \cr 1 & 0 }

1531: \label{matrjb}.

1532: \eea

1533: $\Phi_j$ is given in Eq. (\ref{phasei}). 

1534: After insertion into (\ref{sss}), the first 

1535: term of (\ref{matrjb}) leads to ${\hat S}_j$.

1536: The second term in (\ref{matrjb}) is already of the 

1537: order $E V/\Delta m^2$. Note that $\Delta \theta_{mi}$ is small, 

1538: as is shown in (\ref{approxth}). So,  we can 

1539: approximate $U(\Delta \theta_{mi})$ by the  unit matrix when

1540: plugging the second term in (\ref{matrjb}) into (\ref{sss}).

1541: As a result, we find

1542: \bea

1543: {\hat S} = {\hat S}_j +\frac{E \Delta V_j \sin 2\theta}{\Delta m^2}

1544: (e^{-i \Phi_j}-e^{i \Phi_j}) \pmatrix{0 & 1 \cr 1 & 0 }.

1545: \eea

1546: Using then expression (\ref{matrj}) for ${\hat S}_j$, 

1547: the formula (\ref{matrj}) is immediately extended to the

1548: case of crossing $j+1$ shells, thus accomplishing the proof. 

1549: The result for the case of $n$ shells crossing 

1550: is 

1551: \bea

1552: {\hat S}  

1553: =S^{ad}\left(\frac{L}{2},-\frac{L}{2}\right)

1554: +\sum_{i=0}^{n-1} \frac{E \Delta V_i \sin 2\theta}{\Delta m^2}

1555: (e^{-i \Phi_i}-e^{i \Phi_i})

1556: \pmatrix{0 & 1 \cr 1 & 0 } .

1557: \label{matrn}

1558: \eea

1559: 

1560: Using (\ref{matrn}) we obtain the expression for the regeneration

1561: factor in the leading order in $E V/\Delta m^2$ as 

1562: \bea

1563: f_{reg} && =\bigg| \sin\theta e^{-i \Phi_0}+\cos\theta \sum_{i=0}^{n-1}

1564: \frac{E \Delta V_i \sin 2\theta}{\Delta m^2}

1565: (e^{-i \Phi_i}-e^{i \Phi_i}) \bigg|^2 -\sin^2\theta \nnb \\

1566: &&= \frac{2 E \sin^2 2\theta}{\Delta m^2} \sin\Phi_0

1567: \sum_{i=0}^{n-1}\Delta V_i \sin\Phi_i,

1568: \label{regen}

1569: \eea

1570: where $\Phi_i$ is given in (\ref{phasei}) and $\Delta V_i$ is defined

1571: in (\ref{jump1}).

1572: This expression coincides with (\ref{regnew}) or (\ref{regnewb})

1573: which have been obtained in section \ref{sec4.3} using 

1574: the adiabatic perturbation

1575: theory.

1576: 

1577: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1578: \section*{\bf Appendix B. Regeneration in asymmetric density profile}

1579: \nonumber

1580: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1581: 

1582: As in the section \ref{sec4.5}, we define

1583: \bea

1584: \Delta \theta_{i} \equiv \theta_m(x_i+\epsilon)-\theta_m(x_i-\epsilon),

1585: ~~~i=0,\cdots, k,

1586: \eea

1587: where $\Delta \theta_{0}=\theta_m(x_0)-\theta$ and 

1588: $\Delta \theta_{k}= \theta - \theta_m(x_k)$, and $x=x_i$

1589: are the points of density jumps.

1590: $x_0$ and $x_k$ are the initial and final points of neutrino trajectory 

1591: in matter.

1592: We will use the following expression:

1593: \bea

1594: \sin \Delta \theta_{i} \approx \frac{E \Delta V_i}{\Delta m^2} \sin 2\theta,

1595: ~~~\cos\Delta \theta_{i} \approx 1,

1596: \label{approxb}

1597: \eea

1598: which is a good approximation in the leading order in $E \Delta V/\Delta m^2$.

1599: $\Delta V_i$ is given in (\ref{jumpnewden}).

1600: Neglecting the adiabaticity violation within each layer,

1601: we obtain the evolution matrix ${\hat S}$ as 

1602: \bea

1603: {\hat S} = \bigg (\prod^1_{i=k} U^\dagger(\Delta \theta_{i})

1604: S^{ad}(x_i,x_{i-1}) \bigg) U^\dagger(\Delta \theta_{0}).

1605: \label{matrasy}

1606: \eea

1607: $S^{ad}(x,x_0)=S^{ad}(\phi(x))$ is the adiabatic

1608: evolution matrix given in (\ref{evad}).

1609: 

1610: We approximate $U^\dagger(\Delta \theta_{i})$ as

1611: \bea

1612: U^\dagger(\Delta \theta_{i}) = \pmatrix{1 & 0 \cr 0 & 1}+

1613: Q(\Delta \theta_{i}),

1614: \eea

1615: where

1616: \bea

1617: Q(\Delta \theta_{i}) \equiv \pmatrix{0 & -\sin\Delta \theta_{i} 

1618: \cr \sin \Delta \theta_{i} & 0}.

1619: \eea

1620: Straightforward computation gives the following result in the leading order in 

1621: $E V/\Delta m^2$ 

1622: \bea

1623: {\hat S} 

1624: &&= S^{ad}(x_k,x_0)+Q(\Delta \theta_{k}) S^{ad}(x_k,x_0)

1625: +S^{ad}(x_k,x_0) Q(\Delta \theta_{0}) \nnb \\

1626: && +\sum^{k-1}_{i=1} S^{ad}(x_k,x_i) Q(\Delta \theta_{i}) 

1627: S^{ad}(x_i,x_0)\nnb \\

1628: &&  = S^{ad}(x_k,x_0)+ \sum^k_{i=0} 

1629: \pmatrix{0 & -\sin\Delta \theta_{i} e^{i(2 \phi_i-\phi_0)} \cr

1630:  \sin \Delta\theta_{i} e^{-i(2 \phi_i-\phi_0)} & 0}.

1631: \eea

1632: $\phi_i$ is defined in (\ref{phasex}). Then,  

1633: using (\ref{approxb}), the regeneration factor can be  directly 

1634: computed in the first order in $E V/\Delta m^2$ as

1635: \bea

1636: f_{reg} &&= | \sin\theta e^{-i \phi_0}-\cos\theta \sum^k_{i=0}\

1637: \sin\Delta \theta_{i} e^{i(2 \phi_i-\phi_0)} \bigg|^2 -\sin^2\theta \nnb \\

1638: && = - \frac{E \sin^2 2 \theta}{\Delta m^2} 

1639: \sum^k_{i=0} \Delta V_i \cos 2 \phi_i.

1640: \eea

1641: It coincides with (\ref{regasy}).

1642: \\

1643: 

1644: \noindent

1645: {\Large \bf Note added}\\

1646: 

1647: This note has been added on request of the referee.

1648: 

1649: 1). After the present paper had appeared in the hep-ph archive

1650: [hep-ph/0404042], the preprint by Akhmedov {\it et. al.},

1651: [hep-ph/0404083],

1652: has been published in which the analytic integral formula is given for the

1653: the regeneration effect in the Earth in the three

1654: neutrino framework. In the first version of

1655: [hep-ph/0404083] the correct oscillation phase in this integral formula

1656: has been introduced on the ``heuristic'' basis: it does not follow

1657: from their perturbation theory.

1658: Correct integral formula (with the correct phase) has been derived for the

1659: first time  in the paper

1660: by Ioannisian and  Smirnov, [hep-ph/0404060].

1661: Later in the Journal version JHEP 0405 (2004) 057,

1662: Akhmedov {\it et. al.}, have also presented derivation of correct phase.

1663: 

1664: Let us now compare the results of papers [hep-ph/0404060], 

1665: [hep-ph/0404083] with the results of present paper.

1666: (We will use the Akhmedov's {\it et. al.} results in the

1667: limit of zero 1-3 mixing.)

1668: 

1669: In Ioannisian and Smirnov paper hep-ph/0404060 and Akhmedov {\it et. al.}

1670: paper JHEP 0405 (2004) 057 the integral formula has been obtained

1671: using the improved perturbation theory in the small parameter

1672: $\eta \equiv 2E V(x)/\Delta m^2$.

1673: In the present paper we use the adiabatic perturbation theory.

1674: It can be  shown that in the lowest order in  $\eta$

1675: both approaches coincide. Indeed, inserting expression for

1676: ${\dot \theta}_m$ from (\ref{tdot}) into (\ref{newsolutb}) and

1677: performing integration by parts in Eq. (\ref{newsolutb}) of the present paper

1678: one can derive the integral formula.

1679: 

1680: This formula is valid for arbitrary density profile provided 

1681: that the condition $\eta \ll 1$ is satisfied. Inserting the potential

1682: of PREM model (Eqs. (\ref{jump1}, \ref{potenib})) into the integral formula

1683: one can reproduce the result (\ref{regnewb}). 

1684: However technically the use of

1685: formula (\ref{newsolutb}) of the present paper is more convenient 

1686: for the derivation of

1687: (\ref{regnewb}) since the derivative $d\theta_m/dx$ gives $\delta$- functions

1688: at the borders of layers and further integration becomes trivial.

1689: 

1690: 2). The KamLAND collaboration has published recently

1691: results of improved measurements of oscillations on the

1692: basis of 766.3 ton-year exposure [T. Araki {\it et. al.}, hep-ex/0406035].

1693: In assumption of the CPT conservation,

1694: the global analysis of the solar neutrino data and KamLAND

1695: gives slightly ($\sim 10\%$) higher best fit value $\Delta m^2 = 8 \cdot

1696: 10^{-5}$ eV$^2$ than it was before.

1697: The increase of $\Delta m^2$ leads to the corresponding small decrease of

1698: the adiabaticity parameter $\gamma$ and the expansion

1699: parameter $\eta$ for a given energy

1700: of neutrinos. Therefore increase in $\Delta m^2$ (i) further improves

1701: the adiabatic perturbation theory and

1702: implies that the non-adiabatic correction for probability in the Sun

1703: is smaller;  (ii) diminishes the Earth matter regeneration effect;

1704: (iii) makes our analytic formula for $f_{reg}$ 

1705: preciser. Notice that the  analytic study of this paper has a general

1706: character and does not rely on particular values of $\Delta m^2$.

1707: We use specific  value of $\Delta m^2$ for illustration only.

1708: 

1709: 

1710: \begin{thebibliography}{99}

1711: \bibitem{w}

1712: L. Wolfenstein, Phys. Rev. {\bf D 17}, 2369 (1978); L. Wolfenstein, in

1713: "Neutrino-78", Purdue Univ. C3 - C6, (1978).

1714: 

1715: \bibitem{ms}

1716: S. P. Mikheyev and A. Yu. Smirnov, Yad. Fiz. {\bf 42}, 1441 (1985) [

1717: Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. {\bf 42}, 913 (1985)]; Nuovo Cim. {\bf C9}, 17

1718: (1986); S. P. Mikheyev and A. Yu. Smirnov, ZHETF, {\bf 91}, (1986),

1719: [Sov. Phys. JETP, {\bf 64}, 4 (1986)] (reprinted in "Solar neutrinos:

1720: the first thirty years", Eds. J.N.Bahcall {\it et. al.}).

1721: 

1722: \bibitem{sno1} Q. R. Ahmad {\it et al.}, SNO collaboration

1723: Phys. Rev. Lett {\bf 87}(2001)071301; {\it ibidem} {\bf 89}(2002)011301;

1724: {\it ibidem} {\bf 89}(2002)011302.

1725: 

1726: \bibitem{sno2} Q. R. Ahmad {\it et al.}, SNO collaboration,

1727: nucl-ex/0309004.

1728: 

1729: \bibitem{SK} Super-Kamiokande collaboration, S. Fukuda {\it et al.},

1730: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 86}(2001)5651; Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 86}(2001)

1731: 5656; Phys. Lett.  B {\bf 539}(2002)179.

1732: 

1733: \bibitem{sk-dn}

1734: M. B. Smy {\it et al.}, Super-Kamiokande Collaboration,

1735: Phys. Rev. D{\bf 69}(2004)011104.

1736: 

1737: \bibitem{kamlandannouncement}

1738: K. Eguchi {\it et al.}, KamLAND Coll., 

1739: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 90}(2003)021802[hep-ex/0212021].

1740: 

1741: \bibitem{balan} A. B. Balantekin and H. Y\"uksel, 

1742: Phys. Rev. D{\bf 68}(2003)113002[hep-ph/0309079].

1743: 

1744: \bibitem{fogli} G.L. Fogli, E. Lisi, A. Marrone, A. Palazzo,

1745: Phys. Lett. B{\bf 583}(2004)149[hep-ph/0309100].

1746: 

1747: \bibitem{valle2} M. Maltoni, T. Schwetz, M. A. Tortola, J.W.F. Valle,

1748: Phys. Rev. D{\bf 68}(2003)113010[hep-ph/0309130].

1749: 

1750: \bibitem{alia} P. Aliani, V. Antonelli, M. Picariello,

1751: E. Torrente-Lujan, hep-ph/0309156.

1752: 

1753: \bibitem{crem} P. Creminelli, G. Signorelli, A. Strumia, hep-ph/0102234,

1754: v.5, Sept. 15 (2003).

1755: 

1756: \bibitem{choubey}

1757: A. Bandyopadhyay, S. Choubey, S. Goswami, S. T. Petcov, D.P. Roy,

1758: Phys. Lett. B{\bf 583}(2004)134[hep-ph/0309174].

1759: 

1760: \bibitem{ped02b} P. C. de Holanda, A.Yu. Smirnov, JCAP {\bf 0302}(2003)001

1761: [hep-ph/0212270].

1762: 

1763: \bibitem{ped03} P. C. de Holanda, A.Yu. Smirnov, hep-ph/0309299, to be

1764: published in Astropart. Phys..

1765: 

1766: %\bibitem{bgpkland}

1767: %J.N. Bahcall, M.C. Gonzalez-Garcia and C. Pe\~na-Garay, 

1768: %JHEP{\bf 0302}(2003)009[hep-ph/0212147].

1769: 

1770: \bibitem{BahPen} J. N. Bahcall, C. Pena-Garay, JHEP {\bf 0311}(2003)004,

1771: and references therein.

1772: 

1773: \bibitem{UNO}UNO Proto-collaboration, UNO Whitepaper: 

1774: Physics Potential and Feasibility of UNO, SBHEP-01-03(2000),

1775: http://nngroup.physics.sunysb.edu/uno/; 

1776: see also C. K. Jung 2002, hep-ex/0005046

1777: 

1778: \bibitem{hyper-K} Next-Generation Cherenkov Detector Hyper-Kamiokande,

1779: K. Nakamura, talk at Neutrinos and Implications for Physics Beyond the

1780: Standard Model 2002, 

1781: http://insti.physics.sunysb.edu/itp/conf/neutrino/talks/nakamura.pdf.

1782: 

1783: \bibitem{FREJUS} A European Megaton Project at Fr\'ejus, L. Mosca, 

1784: talk at TAUP 2003, 

1785: http://mocha.phys.washington.edu/~int\_talk/WorkShops/TAUP03/.

1786: 

1787: \bibitem{messiah} A. Messiah, in Proceedings of the $6$th Moriond

1788: Workshop On Massive Neutrino in Particle Physics and Astrophysics,

1789: ed. O. Fackler and J. Tran Thanh Van, 1986.

1790: 

1791: \bibitem{parke}

1792: S. J. Parke, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 57}(1986)1275.

1793: 

1794: \bibitem{ms87}

1795: S. P. Mikheev and A. Yu. Smirnov, Sov. Phys. JETP {\bf 65}(1987)230.

1796: 

1797: \bibitem{LanZen} L. Landau, Phys. Z. Sov{\bf 2}(1932)46;

1798: C. Zener, Proc. Roy. Soc. Lon. A{\bf 137}(1932)696.

1799: 

1800: \bibitem{fried} A. Friedland, hep-ph/0106042,

1801: contributed to 2nd Frontiers in Contemporary Physics: 

1802: The Inner Space Outer Space Connection, Nashville, Tennessee, 2001.

1803: 

1804: \bibitem{PetKra} S.T. Petcov, Phys. Lett. B{\bf 200}(1988)373;

1805: P.I. Krastev and S.T. Petcov, Phys. Lett. B{\bf 207}(1998)64.

1806: 

1807: \bibitem{bp2000}John N. Bahcall, M. H. Pinsonneault, Sarbani Basu,

1808: Astrophys. J. {\bf 555}(2001)990[astro-ph/0010346]

1809: 

1810: \bibitem{MS86}

1811: S. P. Mikheyev and A. Yu. Smirnov, {\it '86 Massive Neutrinos in

1812: Astrophysics and in Particle Physics}, proceedings of the Sixth

1813: Moriond Workshop, edited by O. Fackler and J. Tr$\hat{a}$n Thanh

1814: V$\hat{a}$n (Editions Fronti\`eres, Gif-sur-Yvette, 1986), pp. 355.

1815: 

1816: \bibitem{DN}

1817: J. Bouchez {\it et. al.}, Z. Phys. {\bf C32}, 499 (1986); M. Cribier

1818: {\it et. al.}, Phys. Lett. B {\bf 182}, 89 (1986);

1819: E. D. Carlson, Phys. Rev. {\bf D34}, 1454 (1986) .

1820: 

1821: \bibitem{other}

1822: A.J. Baltz and J. Weneser, Phys. Rev. {\bf D35}, 528 (1987);

1823: A. Dar {\it et. al.}, Phys. Rev. {\bf D 35} (1987) 3607;

1824: S. P. Mikheyev and A. Yu. Smirnov, Sov. Phys. Usp. 30 (1987) 759-790;

1825: L. Cherry and K. Lande, Phys. Rev D {\bf 36} 3571 (1987);

1826: S. Hiroi, H. Sakuma, T. Yanagida, M. Yoshimura,  Phys. Lett. B{\bf 198}

1827: 403, (1987) and Prog. Theor. Phys. {\bf 78} 1428, (1987);

1828: A. J. Baltz and J. Weneser, Phys. Rev. {\bf D37}, 3364 (1988).

1829: M. Spiro and D. Vignaud, Phys. Lett. B {\bf 242} 297 (1990).

1830: 

1831: \bibitem{other1}

1832: A. J. Baltz and J. Weneser, Phys. Rev.

1833: {\bf D50}, 5971 (1994); {\sl ibid} {\bf D51}, 3960 (1994);

1834: M. Maris and S.T. Petcov, Phys. Rev. D{\bf 62}(2000)093006;

1835: N. Hata and P. Langacker, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 48}(1993)2937 and

1836: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 50}(1994)632; 

1837: E. Lisi, D. Montanino, Phys. Rev. D{\bf 56}(1997)1792;

1838: J. M. Gelb, Wai-kwok Kwong, S. P. Rosen, 

1839: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 78}(1997)2296.

1840: 

1841: \bibitem{other2}

1842: Q. Y. Liu, M. Maris and S. T. Petcov Phys. Rev. D {\bf 56} 5991 (1997);

1843: M. Maris, S.T. Petcov, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 56} 7444 ,1997.  

1844: M. Narayan, G. Rajasekaran, R. Sinha; 

1845: Mod. Phys. Lett. A13: 1915 (1998); 

1846: A. de Gouvea, A. Friedland, H. Murayama,  

1847: hep-ph/9910286;

1848: G.L. Fogli, E. Lisi, D. Montanino, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 61} 073009 (2000);

1849: G.L. Fogli, E. Lisi, D. Montanino, A. Palazzo, hep-ph/0008012.

1850: 

1851: \bibitem{LMA}

1852: J. N. Bahcall, P. I. Krastev, A. Yu. Smirnov, Phys. Rev. {\bf D60}(1999)

1853: 093001;P. C. de Holanda, C. P\~ena-Garay, M.C. Gonzalez-Garcia, J. W. F. Valle,

1854: Phys. Rev. D{\bf 60}(1999)093010; A. H. Guth, L. Randall, M. Serna,

1855: JHEP {\bf 9908}(1999)018.

1856: 

1857: \bibitem{para_old}

1858: V. K. Ermilova, V. A. Tsarev, and V. A. Chechin, 

1859: Short Notices Lebedev Inst. 5, 26 (1986);

1860: E.Kh. Akhmedov, Yad. Fiz. {\bf 47}, 475 (1988).

1861: 

1862: \bibitem{para}

1863: P. I. Krastev and A. Yu. Smirnov, Phys. Lett. B {\bf 226}(1989)341;

1864: J.M. Losecco, Phys. Rev. D{\bf 47}(1993)2032;

1865: Q. Y. Liu and A. Yu. Smirnov, Nucl. Phys. B {\bf 524}(1998)505; 

1866: Q. Y. Liu, S. P. Mikheyev, and A. Yu. Smirnov, Phys. Lett. B{\bf 440}(1998)319;

1867: S.T. Petcov, Phys. Lett. B {\bf 434}(1998)321;

1868: Kh. Akhmedov, A. Dighe, P. Lipari, and A. Yu. Smirnov, 

1869: Nucl. Phys. B{\bf 542}(1999)3; E. Kh. Akhmedov, hep-ph/9903302;

1870: E.K. Akhmedov, Nucl. Phys. B{\bf 538}(1999)25;

1871: M.V. Chizhov, S.T. Petcov, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 83}(1999)1096;

1872: E.K. Akhmedov, A.Yu. Smirnov, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 85}(2000)3978. 

1873: 

1874: \bibitem{PREM} A.M. Dziewonski and D.L. Anderson,

1875: Phys. Earth. Planet. Inter.{\bf 25}(1981)297.

1876: 

1877: %\bibitem{BahKra} J.N. Bahcall and P.I. Krastev, Phys. Rev. C{\bf 56}(1997)2839.

1878: \bibitem{LisMon} E. Lisi and D. Montanino, Phys. Rev. D{\bf 56}(1997)1792.

1879: \bibitem{IS} A. Ioannissian, A. Smirnov, hep-ph/0404060.

1880: \bibitem{LISI} G. L. Fogli, E. Lisi, A. Marrone, D. Montanino, A. Palazzo,

1881: Phys. Rev. D{\bf 66}(2002)053010.%[hep-ph/0206162].

1882: \bibitem{IS2} A. Ioannissian, A. Smirnov, in preparation.

1883: \end{thebibliography}

1884: 

1885: \end{document}

1886: