1: \documentstyle[prd,aps,preprint,tighten,epsfig]{revtex}
2:
3: \begin{document}
4:
5: \draft
6:
7: \title{Radiative Generation of $\theta_{13}$ with the Seesaw Threshold Effect}
8: \author{{\bf Jian-wei Mei} ~ and ~ {\bf Zhi-zhong Xing}}
9: \address{CCAST (World Laboratory), P.O. Box 8730, Beijing 100080, China \\
10: and Institute of High Energy Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, \\
11: P.O. Box 918 (4), Beijing 100039, China
12: \footnote{Mailing address} \\
13: ({\it Electronic address: jwmei@mail.ihep.ac.cn; xingzz@mail.ihep.ac.cn}) }
14: \maketitle
15:
16: \begin{abstract}
17: We examine whether an appreciable value of the lepton flavor mixing
18: angle $\theta_{13}$ at the electroweak scale $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$ can be
19: radiatively generated from $\theta_{13} = 0^\circ$ at the GUT scale
20: $\Lambda_{\rm GUT}$. It is found that the renormalization-group running
21: and seesaw threshold effects may lead to $\theta_{13} \sim 5^\circ$ at
22: low energies for two simple large-maximal mixing patterns of the MNS
23: matrix in the minimal supersymmetric standard model. If $\theta_{12}$
24: is sufficiently large at $\Lambda_{\rm GUT}$, it will be possible to
25: radiatively produce $\theta_{13} \sim 5^\circ$ at $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$
26: both in the standard model and in its supersymmetric extensions. The
27: mass spectrum of three heavy right-handed Majorana neutrinos and the
28: cosmological baryon number asymmetry via leptogenesis are also calculated.
29: \end{abstract}
30:
31: \pacs{PACS number(s): 14.60.Pq, 13.10.+q, 25.30.Pt}
32:
33: \newpage
34:
35: \section{Introduction}
36:
37: The recent solar \cite{SNO}, atmospheric \cite{SK}, reactor
38: (KamLAND \cite{KM} and CHOOZ \cite{CHOOZ}) and accelerator (K2K \cite{K2K})
39: neutrino oscillation experiments have provided us with very robust evidence
40: that neutrinos are massive particles and their mixing involves two
41: large angles ($\theta_{12} \sim 33^\circ$ and $\theta_{23} \sim 45^\circ$)
42: and one small angle ($\theta_{13} < 13^\circ$). How small $\theta_{13}$
43: is remains an open question, but a global analysis of the presently
44: available neutrino oscillation data \cite{FIT} indicates that
45: $\theta_{13}$ is most
46: likely to lie in the range $4^\circ \leq \theta_{13} \leq 6^\circ$. One
47: important target of the future neutrino experiments is just to measure
48: $\theta_{13}$ \cite{T13}.
49:
50: The smallness of $\theta_{13}$ requires a good theoretical reason,
51: which might simultaneously account for the largeness of $\theta_{12}$ and
52: $\theta_{23}$. If $\theta_{13} =0^\circ$ held, there should exist a kind
53: of new flavor symmetry which forbids flavor mixing between the first
54: and third lepton families. While such a new symmetry is unlikely to
55: exist at or below the electroweak scale ($\Lambda_{\rm EW} \sim 10^2$ GeV),
56: it might show up at a superhigh scale -- e.g.,
57: the scale of grand unified theories ($\Lambda_{\rm GUT} \sim 10^{16}$ GeV).
58: Then a natural way to break this flavor symmetry and obtain
59: $\theta_{13} \neq 0^\circ$ in a specific model is to run relevant
60: parameters of the model from $\Lambda_{\rm GUT}$ to $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$
61: by making use of the renormalization group equations (RGEs) \cite{RGE}
62: and taking account of the seesaw threshold effects \cite{Ratz}, either
63: in the standard model (SM) or in the minimal supersymmetric standard
64: model (MSSM). Antusch {\it et al} have
65: recently presented two simple examples (one with
66: $\theta_{12} = \theta_{23} = 45^\circ$ and $\theta_{13} = 0^\circ$ at
67: $\Lambda_{\rm GUT}$ \cite{T1}, and the other with
68: $\theta_{12} = \theta_{13} = 0^\circ$ and
69: $\theta_{23} = 45^\circ$ at $\Lambda_{\rm GUT}$ \cite{T2}) to radiatively
70: generate $\theta_{12} \sim 33^\circ$ and $\theta_{13} \neq 0^\circ$, but
71: their primary interest is in $\theta_{12}$ and their results for
72: $\theta_{13}$ are far below the best-fit values of
73: $\theta_{13}$ obtained from the global analysis \cite{FIT}. Although the
74: low-scale output of $\theta_{13}$ is somehow adjustable by scanning the
75: parameter space of a given model at the GUT scale, we find that it is
76: highly nontrivial to obtain $\theta_{13}(\Lambda_{\rm EW}) \sim 5^\circ$
77: from $\theta_{13}(\Lambda_{\rm GUT}) =0^\circ$ and fit all experimental
78: data of neutrino oscillations in the meantime.
79:
80: The main purpose of this paper is to examine whether an appreciable
81: magnitude of $\theta_{13}$ can be radiatively generated,
82: from $\Lambda_{\rm GUT}$ to $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$, through the seesaw
83: thresholds. We shall consider four instructive patterns of the
84: Maki-Nakagawa-Sakata (MNS) lepton mixing
85: matrix $V_{\rm MNS}$ at $\Lambda_{\rm GUT}$ as typical examples:
86: \begin{eqnarray}
87: {\rm Pattern ~ (A)}: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ && V_{\rm MNS}
88: \; =\; \left ( \matrix{
89: ~ 1 & ~ 0 & ~ 0 \cr
90: ~ 0 & ~ \frac{\sqrt{2}}{2} & ~ \frac{\sqrt{2}}{2} \cr
91: ~ 0 & ~ - \frac{\sqrt{2}}{2} & ~ \frac{\sqrt{2}}{2} \cr}
92: \right ) P_\delta \; ,
93: \nonumber \\
94: {\rm Pattern ~ (B)}: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ && V_{\rm MNS}
95: \; =\; \left ( \matrix{
96: \frac{\sqrt{2}}{2} & ~ \frac{\sqrt{2}}{2} & ~ 0 \cr
97: - \frac{1}{2} & ~ \frac{1}{2} & ~ \frac{\sqrt{2}}{2} \cr
98: \frac{1}{2} & ~ - \frac{1}{2} & ~ \frac{\sqrt{2}}{2} \cr}
99: \right ) P_\delta \; ,
100: \nonumber \\
101: {\rm Pattern ~ (C)}: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ && V_{\rm MNS}
102: \; =\; \left ( \matrix{
103: \frac{\sqrt 6}{3} & \frac{\sqrt{3}}{3} & 0 \cr
104: - \frac{\sqrt{6}}{6} & \frac{\sqrt{3}}{3} & \frac{\sqrt{2}}{2} \cr
105: \frac{\sqrt{6}}{6} & - \frac{\sqrt{3}}{3} & \frac{\sqrt{2}}{2} \cr}
106: \right ) P_\delta \; ,
107: \nonumber \\
108: {\rm Pattern ~ (D)}: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ && V_{\rm MNS}
109: \; =\; \left ( \matrix{
110: \frac{\sqrt 3}{2} & \frac{1}{2} & 0 \cr
111: - \frac{\sqrt{2}}{4} & \frac{\sqrt 6}{4} & \frac{\sqrt{2}}{2} \cr
112: \frac{\sqrt{2}}{4} & - \frac{\sqrt 6}{4} & \frac{\sqrt{2}}{2} \cr}
113: \right ) P_\delta \; ,
114: % (1)
115: \end{eqnarray}
116: where $P_\delta \equiv {\rm Diag} \{ 1, 1, e^{i\delta}\}$ with $\delta$
117: being a CP-violating phase in the standard parametrization of
118: $V_{\rm MNS}$ \cite{FX01}
119: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
120: \footnote{For simplicity and illustration, we only take account of
121: a single CP-violating phase in this work.}.
122: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
123: While patterns (A) and (B) with CP conservation
124: (i.e., $\delta =0^\circ$)
125: have been discussed in Refs. \cite{T1} and \cite{T2}, we shall show
126: that $\delta$ can actually play an important role in the radiative
127: generation of $\theta_{13}$. Patterns (C) \cite{WOL} and
128: (D) \cite{GPX} are phenomenologically favored to account for
129: current experimental data of solar and atmospheric neutrino oscillations.
130: We find that the RGE running and seesaw threshold effects may allow us
131: to obtain $\theta_{13} \sim 5^\circ$ at low energies from both
132: patterns (C) and (D) in the MSSM.
133: If $\theta_{12} \sim 60^\circ$ is taken at $\Lambda_{\rm GUT}$, it will
134: be possible to radiatively produce $\theta_{13} \sim 5^\circ$ at
135: $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$ both in the SM and in the MSSM. As a by-product,
136: the mass spectrum of three heavy Majorana neutrinos and the
137: cosmological baryon number asymmetry via leptogenesis are also calculated.
138:
139: \section{RGE running and threshold effects}
140:
141: Let us make a simple modification of the SM by
142: introducing three heavy right-handed neutrinos $N_i$ (for $i=1,2,3$)
143: and keeping the Lagrangian of electroweak interactions invariant
144: under $\rm SU(2)_L \times U(1)_Y$ gauge transformation. In this
145: case, the Lagrangian relevant for lepton masses can be written as
146: \begin{equation}
147: -{\cal L}_{\rm lepton} \; =\; \bar{l}_{\rm L} Y_l e^{~}_{\rm R} H
148: + \bar{l}_{\rm L} Y_\nu \nu^{~}_{\rm R} H^{\rm c} +
149: \frac{1}{2} \overline{\nu^{\rm c}_{\rm R}} M_{\rm R} \nu^{~}_{\rm R}
150: + {\rm h.c.} \; ,
151: % (2)
152: \end{equation}
153: where $l_{\rm L}$ denotes the left-handed lepton doublet; $e^{~}_{\rm R}$
154: and $\nu^{~}_{\rm R}$ stand respectively for the right-handed charged
155: lepton and Majorana neutrino singlets; and $H$ is the Higgs-boson
156: weak isodoublet (with $H^{\rm c} \equiv i\sigma^{~}_2 H^*$). If the
157: MSSM is taken into account,
158: one may similarly write out the Lagrangian relevant for lepton masses:
159: \begin{equation}
160: -{\cal L}'_{\rm lepton} \; =\; \bar{l}_{\rm L} Y_l e^{~}_{\rm R} H_1
161: + \bar{l}_{\rm L} Y_\nu \nu^{~}_{\rm R} H_2 +
162: \frac{1}{2} \overline{\nu^{\rm c}_{\rm R}} M_{\rm R} \nu^{~}_{\rm R}
163: + {\rm h.c.} \; ,
164: % (3)
165: \end{equation}
166: where $H_1$ and $H_2$ (with hypercharges $\pm 1/2$) are the MSSM Higgs
167: doublets. To obtain the effective (left-handed)
168: neutrino mass matrix, a common approach is to integrate $M_{\rm R}$
169: out of the full theory. This corresponds to a replacement of the
170: last two terms in ${\cal L}_{\rm lepton}$ or ${\cal L}'_{\rm lepton}$
171: by a dimension-5 operator, whose coupling matrix takes the well-known
172: seesaw form
173: $\kappa = -Y_\nu M^{-1}_{\rm R} Y^T_\nu$ \cite{SS}. However, the
174: threshold effects in such a naive treatment have to be taken into
175: account, because the mass eigenvalues of $N_i$ may have a strong
176: hierarchy (for example, $M_3 \gg M_2 \gg M_1$).
177:
178: We take ${\cal L}_{\rm lepton}$ or ${\cal L}'_{\rm lepton}$
179: for granted at the GUT scale, where the Yukawa
180: interactions of quarks and Higgs bosons with the coupling matrices
181: $Y_{\rm u}$ (up) and $Y_{\rm d}$ (down) can similarly be written out.
182: To evolve the lepton mixing parameters from $\Lambda_{\rm GUT}$ to
183: $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$ in a generic seesaw model
184: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%
185: \footnote{We assume the supersymmetry breaking scale $\Lambda_{\rm SUSY}$
186: to be close to the electroweak scale $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$,
187: just for the sake of simplicity. Even if
188: $\Lambda_{\rm SUSY}/\Lambda_{\rm EW} \sim 10$ holds, the relevant RGE
189: running effects between these two scales are negligibly small for the
190: physics under consideration.},
191: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%
192: one has to make use of a series of effective theories which are obtained
193: by integrating out the heavy right-handed singlets $N_i$ step by step
194: at their mass thresholds. The derivation of the one-loop RGEs and the
195: method for dealing with the effective theories have been presented
196: in Ref. \cite{Ratz} in an elegant way. Here we summarize a few essential
197: steps to be taken in treating the seesaw threshold effects.
198:
199: (a) We use the one-loop RGEs to run $Y_\nu$ and $M_{\rm R}$ from
200: $\Lambda_{\rm GUT}$ to the heaviest right-handed neutrino mass scale
201: $M_3$. A proper unitary transformation of the right-handed neutrino
202: fields allows us to diagonalize $M_{\rm R}$ at $M_3$
203: -- namely, $U^\dagger_{\rm R} M_{\rm R} U^*_{\rm R} =
204: {\rm Diag}\{ M_1, M_2, M_3\}$. Then $Y_\nu$ is transformed into
205: $Y_\nu U^*_{\rm R}$. The effective neutrino coupling matrix
206: $\kappa^{~}_{(3)}$ can be obtained by integrating out $M_3$.
207: In this case, we denote
208: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
209: \footnote{It should be noted that our notations (in particular,
210: $\kappa = - Y_\nu M^{-1}_{\rm R} Y^T_\nu$) are somehow different from
211: those of Ref. \cite{Ratz}, where the seesaw formula
212: $\kappa = 2 Y^T_\nu M^{-1}_{\rm R} Y_\nu$ has been adopted.}
213: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
214: \begin{equation}
215: Y_{\nu (3)} \; = \; Y_\nu U^*_{\rm R}
216: \left ( \matrix{
217: 1 & 0 \cr
218: 0 & 1 \cr
219: 0 & 0 \cr} \right ) \; , ~~~~~~
220: \hat{Y}_{\nu (3)} \; = \; Y_\nu U^*_{\rm R}
221: \left ( \matrix{
222: 0 \cr
223: 0 \cr
224: 1 \cr} \right ) \; , ~~~~~~
225: M_{\rm R (3)} \; = \; \left ( \matrix{
226: M_1 & 0 \cr
227: 0 & M_2 \cr} \right ) \;
228: % (4)
229: \end{equation}
230: and get the tree-level matching relation
231: $\kappa^{~}_{(3)} = - \hat{Y}_{\nu (3)} M^{-1}_3 \hat{Y}^T_{\nu (3)}$,
232: where all variables have been set to the scale $\mu = M_3$.
233:
234: (b) We further run $Y_{\nu (3)}$, $M_{\rm R (3)}$
235: and $\kappa^{~}_{(3)}$ from $M_3$ down to the intermediate right-handed
236: neutrino mass scale $M_2$. Because the RGE running effect may spoil the
237: diagonal feature of $M_{\rm R(3)}$, a re-diagonalization of
238: $M_{\rm R (3)}$ at $M_2$ should be done by means of a $2\times 2$ unitary
239: transformation matrix $\tilde{U}_{\rm R}$. Integrating out $M_2$, we
240: arrive at
241: \begin{equation}
242: Y_{\nu (2)} \; = \; Y_{\nu (3)} \tilde{U}^*_{\rm R}
243: \left ( \matrix{
244: 1 \cr
245: 0 \cr} \right ) \; , ~~~~~~~~~~
246: \hat{Y}_{\nu (2)} \; = \; Y_{\nu (3)} \tilde{U}^*_{\rm R}
247: \left ( \matrix{
248: 0 \cr
249: 1 \cr} \right ) \; , ~~~~~~~~~~
250: M_{\rm R (2)} \; = \; \left ( \matrix{
251: M_1 \cr} \right ) \; ~
252: % (5)
253: \end{equation}
254: and the tree-level matching condition
255: $\kappa^{~}_{(2)} = \kappa^{~}_{(3)}
256: - \hat{Y}_{\nu (2)} M^{-1}_2 \hat{Y}^T_{\nu (2)}$,
257: where all variables have been set to the scale $\mu = M_2$.
258:
259: (c) We follow a similar way to run $Y_{\nu (2)}$,
260: $M_{\rm R (2)}$ and $\kappa^{~}_{(2)}$ from $M_2$ down to the lightest
261: right-handed neutrino mass scale $M_1$. As $M_{\rm R (2)}$ is
262: actually a $1\times 1$ mass matrix, it does not need to be
263: re-diagonalized at $M_1$. Integrating out $M_1$, we obtain
264: \begin{equation}
265: \kappa \; \equiv \; \kappa^{~}_{(1)} \; = \; \kappa^{~}_{(2)}
266: - \hat{Y}_{\nu (1)} M^{-1}_1 \hat{Y}^T_{\nu (1)} \; ,
267: % (6)
268: \end{equation}
269: where $\hat{Y}_{\nu (1)} = Y_{\nu (2)}$ holds, and all variables have
270: been set to the scale $\mu = M_1$.
271:
272: (d) Finally, we run $\kappa$
273: from $M_1$ down to the electroweak scale $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$. The
274: one-loop RGE governing the evolution of $\kappa$ is given by \cite{RGE}
275: \begin{equation}
276: 16\pi^2 \frac{{\rm d} \kappa}{{\rm d} t} \; = \;
277: \alpha \kappa + C \left [ \left (Y_l Y^\dagger_l \right ) \kappa
278: + \kappa \left (Y_l Y^\dagger_l \right )^T \right ] \; ,
279: % (7)
280: \end{equation}
281: where $t = \ln (\mu/M_1)$ with $\mu$ being the renormalization
282: scale. We have $C = -1.5$, $\alpha \approx
283: -3g^2_2 + 6 f^2_t + \lambda$ in the SM and $C = 1$,
284: $\alpha \approx -1.2 g^2_1 - 6g^2_2 + 6 f^2_t$ in the MSSM \cite{MX},
285: where $g^{~}_{1,2}$ denote the gauge couplings, $f_t$ denotes
286: the top-quark Yukawa coupling, and $\lambda$ denotes the
287: Higgs self-coupling in the SM. After spontaneous gauge
288: symmetry breaking, we arrive at the fermion mass matrices
289: $M_\nu = v^2 \kappa$, $M_l = v Y_l$,
290: $M_{\rm u} = v Y_{\rm u}$ and $M_{\rm d} = v Y_{\rm d}$ in the
291: SM; and $M_\nu = v^2 \kappa \sin^2\beta$, $M_l = v Y_l \cos\beta$,
292: $M_{\rm u} = v Y_{\rm u} \sin\beta$ and
293: $M_{\rm d} = v Y_{\rm d} \cos\beta$ in the MSSM, where
294: $v \approx 174$ GeV stands for the vacuum expectation value of the
295: neutral Higgs field in the SM, and $\tan\beta$ represents the
296: ratio of two vacuum expectation values in the MSSM.
297:
298: \section{Initial conditions and assumptions}
299:
300: The lepton (or quark) flavor mixing matrix
301: $V_{\rm MNS}$ (or $V_{\rm CKM}$) arises from the
302: mismatch between the diagonalizations of $Y_l$ (or $Y_{\rm u}$) and
303: $\kappa$ (or $Y_{\rm d}$). Without loss of generality, we arrange
304: $Y_l$ and $Y_{\rm u}$ to be diagonal, real and positive at
305: $\Lambda_{\rm GUT}$; i.e.,
306: \begin{equation}
307: Y_{\rm u} \; =\; \frac{1}{\Omega_1} \left ( \matrix{
308: m_u & 0 & 0 \cr
309: 0 & m_c & 0 \cr
310: 0 & 0 & m_t \cr} \right ) \; , ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
311: Y_l \; =\; \frac{1}{\Omega_2} \left ( \matrix{
312: m_e & 0 & 0 \cr
313: 0 & m_\mu & 0 \cr
314: 0 & 0 & m_\tau \cr} \right ) \; ,
315: % (8)
316: \end{equation}
317: where $\Omega_1 = \Omega_2 = v$ in the SM, and
318: $\Omega_1 = v\sin\beta$ and $\Omega_2 = v\cos\beta$ in the MSSM.
319: In this flavor basis, $Y_{\rm d}$ and $Y_\nu$ can generally be
320: expressed as
321: \begin{equation}
322: Y_{\rm d} \; =\; \frac{1}{\Omega_2} V_{\rm CKM} \left ( \matrix{
323: m_d & 0 & 0 \cr
324: 0 & m_s & 0 \cr
325: 0 & 0 & m^{~}_b \cr} \right ) U_{\rm d} \; , ~~~~~
326: Y_\nu \; =\; y_\nu V_\nu \left ( \matrix{
327: r_1 & 0 & 0 \cr
328: 0 & r_2 & 0 \cr
329: 0 & 0 & 1 \cr} \right ) U_\nu \; ,
330: % (9)
331: \end{equation}
332: where $r_1$, $r_2$ and $y_\nu$ are three real and positive
333: dimensionless parameters characterizing the eigenvalues of $Y_\nu$;
334: and $V_\nu$, $U_\nu$ and $U_{\rm d}$ are three $3\times 3$ unitary
335: matrices. It is obvious that the complex phases of $V_\nu$ and $U_\nu$
336: can be re-arranged, such that the former contains a single irremovable
337: CP-violating phase as $V_{\rm CKM}$ does. Furthermore, one may
338: redefine the relevant right-handed fields of quarks and neutrinos to
339: rotate away $U_{\rm d}$ from $Y_{\rm d}$ and $U_\nu$ from $Y_\nu$.
340: Such a transformation of $Y_\nu$ is equivalent to absorbing $U_\nu$
341: into the Majorana mass matrix $M_{\rm R}$, which is not required to be
342: diagonal at $\Lambda_{\rm GUT}$.
343: Once $U_{\rm d}$ and $U_\nu$ are rejected, we are only left with seven
344: unknown parameters in the above Yukawa coupling matrices (namely, three
345: eigenvalues of $Y_\nu$ and four mixing parameters of $V_\nu$).
346:
347: To fix the pattern of $M_{\rm R}$ at $\Lambda_{\rm GUT}$, we
348: extrapolate the effective neutrino coupling matrix $\kappa$ and
349: the lepton flavor mixing matrix $V_{\rm MNS}$ up to the GUT scale:
350: \begin{equation}
351: \kappa \; =\; \frac{1}{\Omega^2_1} V_{\rm MNS}
352: \left ( \matrix{
353: m_1 & 0 & 0 \cr
354: 0 & m_2 & 0 \cr
355: 0 & 0 & m_3 \cr} \right ) V^T_{\rm MNS} \; ,
356: % (10)
357: \end{equation}
358: where $m_i$ (for $i=1,2,3$) denote the physical masses of three
359: light neutrinos. Then $M_{\rm R}$ can be determined from the inverted
360: seesaw formula $M_{\rm R} = -Y^T_\nu \kappa^{-1} Y_\nu$ \cite{XZ}.
361: Note that $V_{\rm MNS}$ consists of three mixing angles and three
362: CP-violating phases. For the sake of simplicity, here we only take
363: account of the ``Dirac-like'' phase of $V_{\rm MNS}$. Then
364: the unitary matrices $V_{\rm CKM}$, $V_{\rm MNS}$ and $V_\nu$ may
365: universally be parametrized as
366: \begin{equation}
367: V \; =\; \left ( \matrix{
368: 1 & 0 & 0 \cr
369: 0 & c_{23} & s_{23} \cr
370: 0 & -s_{23} & c_{23} \cr} \right )
371: \left ( \matrix{
372: c_{13} & 0 & s_{13} \cr
373: 0 & e^{-i\delta} & 0 \cr
374: -s_{13} & 0 & c_{13} \cr} \right )
375: \left ( \matrix{
376: c_{12} & s_{12} & 0 \cr
377: -s_{12} & c_{12} & 0 \cr
378: 0 & 0 & 1 \cr} \right ) \; ,
379: % (11)
380: \end{equation}
381: where $c_{ij} \equiv \cos\theta_{ij}$ and $s_{ij} \equiv \theta_{ij}$.
382: In the limit of $\theta_{13} = 0^\circ$, the complex phase of
383: $V_{\rm MNS}$ actually serves as a ``Majorana-like'' phase and may
384: significantly affect the RGE running behaviors of neutrino masses and
385: lepton flavor mixing angles \cite{Haba}. Four typical patterns of
386: $V_{\rm MNS}$, as already listed in Eq. (1), will be taken in our
387: following investigation.
388:
389: To be specific, we only pay attention to the normal mass hierarchy of
390: three light neutrinos (i.e., $m_3 > m_2 > m_1$). Then we arrive at
391: $m_2 = \sqrt{m^2_1 + \Delta m^2_{\rm sun}}~$ and
392: $m_3 = \sqrt{m^2_2 + \Delta m^2_{\rm atm}}~$, where $\Delta m^2_{\rm sun}$
393: and $\Delta m^2_{\rm atm}$ denote the mass-squared differences
394: of solar and atmospheric neutrino oscillations. Since the low-scale
395: values of $(m_u, m_c, m_t)$, $(m_d, m_s, m_b)$, $(m_e, m_\mu, m_\tau)$
396: and $(\Delta m^2_{\rm sun}, \Delta m^2_{\rm atm})$ are all known,
397: we just have a single unknown mass parameter ($m_1$). On the other hand,
398: four parameters of $V_{\rm CKM}$ are also known at low
399: energies \cite{PDG}. Given
400: a special pattern of $V_{\rm MNS}$ in Eq. (1), only its CP-violating
401: phase is not fixed. In short, we are totally left with nine free
402: parameters at $\Lambda_{\rm GUT}$: the lightest neutrino mass $m_1$,
403: three eigenvalues of $Y_\nu$, four mixing parameters of $V_\nu$ and
404: the CP-violating phase of $V_{\rm MNS}$. We should also specify
405: the value of the Higgs mass $m^{~}_H$ in the SM and that of
406: $\tan\beta$ in the MSSM when numerically solving the relevant RGEs.
407:
408: Although $y_\nu$, $r_1$ and $r_2$ are arbitrary parameters, they are
409: expected to be of or below ${\cal O}(1)$. The unknown rotation and
410: phase angles of $V_\nu$ and $V_{\rm MNS}$ are allowed to take possible
411: values in the range between $0$ and $2\pi$. As for those parameters
412: whose sizes are known at low energies, one may properly adjust their
413: initial values at $\Lambda_{\rm GUT}$ and run the RGEs to reproduce
414: their low-scale values within reasonable error bars. We are then able
415: to fix the parameter space by fitting all relevant low-scale data.
416: Such a phenomenological approach will allow us to examine whether
417: $\theta_{13}(\Lambda_{\rm EW}) \sim 5^\circ$ can be generated
418: from $\theta_{13}(\Lambda_{\rm GUT}) = 0^\circ$ for $V_{\rm MNS}$.
419: Naively, we speculate that an appreciable RGE enhancement of $\theta_{13}$
420: may take place either between the scales $\Lambda_{\rm GUT}$ and $M_1$
421: or between the scales $M_1$ and $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$. In either case,
422: the masses of three light neutrinos are required to be nearly degenerate.
423: As the seesaw threshold effect can significantly affect the RGE running
424: behaviors in most cases \cite{Ratz,T1,T2,King}, it is more likely
425: that the dominant RGE enhancement of $\theta_{13}$ occurs between
426: $\Lambda_{\rm GUT}$ and $M_1$. We shall demonstrate this observation in
427: our subsequent numerical calculations.
428:
429: \section{Numerical examples and discussions}
430:
431: We carry out a numerical analysis of the RGE running and seesaw
432: threshold effects by following the strategies outlined above and
433: taking four typical patterns of $V_{\rm MNS}$ at the GUT scale. Our
434: results are summarized in Table 1 and Figs. 1 and 2. Some comments
435: and discussions are in order.
436:
437: (1) We have carefully examined the sensitivity of
438: $V_{\rm MNS} (\Lambda_{\rm EW})$ to the value of every free parameter
439: at $\Lambda_{\rm GUT}$. We find that the inputs of $m_1$,
440: $y_\nu$, $\theta^{\rm MNS}_{12}$, $\delta_{\rm MNS}$,
441: $\theta_{13}$ of $V_\nu$ and $\Delta m^2_{\rm sun}$ appear to be very
442: important in adjusting the output of $\theta^{\rm MNS}_{13}$
443: at $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$, while the other
444: parameters mainly play a role in fine-tuning the results. In particular,
445: the effects of $r_1$, $r_2$, $\theta_{12}$ of $V_\nu$, $\theta_{23}$ of
446: $V_\nu$ and $\delta$ of $V_\nu$ are insignificant, because the
447: dominant RGE enhancement of $\theta^{\rm MNS}_{13}$
448: takes place above the heaviest right-handed neutrino mass scale $M_3$.
449: Hence we have simply fixed $\theta_{12} =\theta_{23} =\delta =0^\circ$
450: for $V_\nu$ at $\Lambda_{\rm GUT}$. Note that the initial values of
451: $\delta_{\rm MNS}$ and $\theta_{13}$ of $V_\nu$ are important in
452: specifying the running tendency of two neutrino mass-squared differences
453: and three mixing angles of $V_{\rm MNS}$, and they have to be
454: sufficiently large (as shown in Table 1) in order to generate an
455: appreciable magnitude of $\theta^{\rm MNS}_{13}$ at low energies.
456: To be more explicit, the evolution of $\theta^{\rm MNS}_{12}$ strongly
457: relies on $\delta_{\rm MNS}$ in the fitting, while the
458: enhancement of $\theta^{\rm MNS}_{13}$ (from zero at $\Lambda_{\rm GUT}$
459: to a few degrees at $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$) requires a big input value for
460: $\theta_{13}$ of $V_\nu$ ($\sim 45^\circ$, for example).
461: It is also worth remarking that the parameter space obtained here
462: should by no means be unique; or rather, it mainly serves for
463: illustration. To exhaustively explore the allowed ranges of
464: all relevant parameters is a quite lengthy work and will be
465: presented elsewhere \cite{Mei}.
466:
467: (2) Restricting ourselves to the typical parameter space illustrated
468: in Table 1, we find that it is difficult to produce
469: $\theta^{\rm MNS}_{13} \sim 5^\circ$ at $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$ in
470: the SM. Our results yield $\theta^{\rm MNS}_{13} \sim 3^\circ$ for
471: pattern (A) and $\theta^{\rm MNS}_{13} \sim 1.5^\circ$ for
472: patterns (B), (C) and (D) at low energies.
473: In the MSSM, however, a more strong RGE enhancement of
474: $\theta^{\rm MNS}_{13}$ becomes possible. For example, we obtain
475: $\theta^{\rm MNS}_{13} \sim 3^\circ$ for pattern (B)
476: with $\tan\beta \sim 10$ and $\theta^{\rm MNS}_{13} \sim 5^\circ$
477: for patterns (C) and (D) with $\tan\beta \sim 20$ at the electroweak
478: scale. We think that the numerical results in the
479: supersymmetric case are encouraging for model building, because
480: a new kind of flavor symmetry at $\Lambda_{\rm GUT}$ might naturally
481: lead to the bi-maximal mixing pattern (B) or the large-maximal mixing
482: patterns (C) and (D).
483:
484: (3) The running behavior of $\theta^{\rm MNS}_{12}$ deserves some
485: more remarks. As already noticed in Refs. \cite{RGE,Ratz,T1,T2},
486: the evolution of $\theta^{\rm MNS}_{12}$ from $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$
487: to $\Lambda_{\rm GUT}$ (or vice versa) depends sensitively on how big
488: its initial value is and whether three light neutrinos have a near
489: mass degeneracy. Figs. 1 and 2 illustrate that
490: $\theta^{\rm MNS}_{12}(\Lambda_{\rm EW}) \sim 33^\circ$ can
491: radiatively be obtained, either from
492: $\theta^{\rm MNS}_{12}(\Lambda_{\rm GUT}) = 0^\circ$ in pattern (A)
493: or from $\theta^{\rm MNS}_{12}(\Lambda_{\rm GUT})
494: \sim (30^\circ - 45^\circ)$ in patterns (B), (C) and (D).
495: For pattern (A) or (B), the RGE running of $\theta^{\rm MNS}_{12}$
496: in the MSSM is quite similar to that in the SM. The reason for this
497: similarity is simply that the magnitudes of $m_1$ (SM) and $m_1$ (MSSM)
498: at $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$ are comparable ($\sim 0.05$ eV) and the value
499: of $\tan\beta$ in the MSSM case is mild ($\sim 10$). When patterns
500: (C) and (D) are concerned, however, the running behavior of
501: $\theta^{\rm MNS}_{12}$ in the MSSM is more violent than that in the
502: SM. The reason for such a remarkable difference is two-fold: first,
503: $m_1(\Lambda_{\rm EW}) \sim 0.14$ eV and
504: $m_1(\Lambda_{\rm GUT}) \sim 0.20$ eV in the MSSM case imply that
505: the masses of three light neutrinos are nearly degenerate in the
506: entire running course -- this near mass degeneracy can significantly
507: affect the behavior of $\theta^{\rm MNS}_{12}$ \cite{RGE};
508: second, the large value of $\tan\beta$ ($\sim 20$) plays an important
509: role in enhancing the RGE evolution of light neutrino masses and flavor
510: mixing angles (e.g.,
511: $\dot{\theta}^{\rm MNS}_{12} \propto (1 + \tan^2\beta)$ \cite{RGE}).
512:
513: (4) We stress that $\theta^{\rm MNS}_{13} \sim 5^\circ$ at
514: $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$ can be radiatively generated from
515: $\theta^{\rm MNS}_{13} = 0^\circ$ at $\Lambda_{\rm GUT}$ even
516: in the SM, only if we go beyond the four simple patterns considered
517: above. A key point is to assume $\theta^{\rm MNS}_{12}$ to be
518: large enough at the GUT scale. Such an example is presented in Fig. 3,
519: where $\theta^{\rm MNS}_{12} = 67^\circ$ (SM) versus
520: $\theta^{\rm MNS}_{12} = 63^\circ$ (MSSM) has been taken. One may
521: see that the dominant RGE suppression of $\theta^{\rm MNS}_{12}$
522: occurs from $\Lambda_{\rm GUT}$ to $M_3$, and the dominant RGE
523: enhancement of $\theta^{\rm MNS}_{13}$ takes place in the same region.
524: Why $\theta^{\rm MNS}_{12} > 45^\circ$ holds at $\Lambda_{\rm GUT}$
525: is certainly a big question. Putting aside this question, we remark
526: that $\theta^{\rm MNS}_{12} \sim 33^\circ$ at low energies can in
527: principle be produced from an arbitrary value of $\theta^{\rm MNS}_{12}$
528: at the GUT scale via the seesaw threshold effects. Furthermore, the
529: radiative generation of $\theta^{\rm MNS}_{13}$ is highly sensitive to
530: the initial condition of $\theta^{\rm MNS}_{12}$. We observe that
531: the running of $\theta^{\rm MNS}_{23}$ is rather stable, unlike
532: $\theta^{\rm MNS}_{12}$ and $\theta^{\rm MNS}_{13}$. Note that
533: the CP-violating phase $\delta_{\rm MNS}$ is also stable against
534: radiative corrections from $\Lambda_{\rm GUT}$ to $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$.
535: This conclusion is true for both the example under consideration and
536: the four patterns discussed above.
537:
538: (5) A by-product of our analysis is the determination of three heavy
539: right-handed neutrino masses, as shown in Table 1. We see that
540: they have a clear normal hierarchy. It is then possible to calculate
541: the cosmological baryon number asymmetry via leptogenesis \cite{FY}.
542: Instead of describing the technical details of leptogenesis \cite{L},
543: we only give a brief summary of its essential points in the following.
544: Lepton number violation induced by the third term of
545: ${\cal L}_{\rm lepton}$ in Eq. (1) or of ${\cal L}'_{\rm lepton}$
546: in Eq. (2) allows decays of three heavy Majorana neutrinos $N_i$
547: to happen: $N_i \rightarrow l + h$ and
548: $N_i \rightarrow \bar{l} + h^{\rm c}$, where $h = H$ in the SM or
549: $h = H^{\rm c}_2$ in the MSSM. Because each decay mode occurs at
550: both tree and one-loop levels (via the self-energy and vertex
551: corrections), the interference between these two decay amplitudes may
552: result in a CP-violating asymmetry $\varepsilon_i$ between
553: $N_i \rightarrow l + h$ and its CP-conjugated process.
554: If the interactions of $N_1$ are in thermal equilibrium when
555: $N_3$ and $N_2$ decay, the asymmetries $\varepsilon_3$ and
556: $\varepsilon_2$ can be erased before $N_1$ decays. Then only the
557: asymmetry $\varepsilon_1$ produced by the out-of-equilibrium decay
558: of $N_1$ survives. This CP-violating asymmetry may lead to
559: a net lepton number asymmetry $Y_{\rm L} \propto \varepsilon_1$,
560: and the latter is eventually converted into a net baryon number
561: asymmetry $Y_{\rm B}$ via the nonperturbative sphaleron
562: processes \cite{Kuzmin}: $Y_{\rm B} \approx -0.55 Y_{\rm L}$ in the
563: SM or $Y_{\rm B} \approx -0.53 Y_{\rm L}$ in the MSSM. We follow
564: these steps to evaluate $Y_{\rm B}$ for four patterns listed in Table 1.
565: It turns out that only pattern (B) can yield an appreciable result,
566: which lies in the generous range
567: $0.7 \times 10^{-10} \lesssim Y_{\rm B} \lesssim 1.0 \times 10^{-10}$
568: drawn from the recent WMAP observational data \cite{WMAP}. Compared
569: with pattern (B), patterns (A), (C) and (D) have relatively small
570: values of $M_1$ ($\sim 10^9$ GeV) and $M_1/M_2$ ($\sim 3\times 10^{-2}$).
571: The outputs of $Y_{\rm B}$ in these three patterns are therefore
572: suppressed and below the observational result.
573: If the example shown in Fig. 3 is taken into account, we may obtain
574: $Y_{\rm B} \approx 7.7 \times 10^{-11}$ (SM) or
575: $Y_{\rm B} \approx 8.0 \times 10^{-11}$ (MSSM), which is compatible
576: with the WMAP data.
577:
578: Finally, it is worthwhile to point out that we have also taken a
579: look at the ``democratic'' neutrino mixing pattern \cite{FX}
580: \begin{equation}
581: V_{\rm MNS} \; =\; \left ( \matrix{
582: \frac{\sqrt{2}}{2} & \frac{\sqrt{2}}{2} & 0 \cr
583: -\frac{\sqrt{6}}{6} & \frac{\sqrt{6}}{6} & \frac{\sqrt{6}}{3} \cr
584: \frac{\sqrt{3}}{3} & -\frac{\sqrt{3}}{3} & \frac{\sqrt{3}}{3} \cr}
585: \right ) \;
586: % (12)
587: \end{equation}
588: at the GUT scale and examined the possibility to radiatively produce
589: $\theta_{13} \sim 5^\circ$ at the electroweak scale and to
590: simultaneously fit all experimental data of neutrino oscillations.
591: We find that it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to obtain
592: $\theta_{23} \sim 45^\circ$ at low energies. The reason is simply
593: that the initial value of $\theta_{23}$ ($\approx 54.7^\circ$)
594: is not close to $45^\circ$ and the RGE evolution cannot significantly
595: change the magnitude of this mixing angle. Therefore, we argue that
596: radiative corrections might not be a very natural way to break the
597: lepton flavor democracy. The latter could be explicitly broken in some
598: other possible ways at or below the GUT scale.
599:
600: \section{Summary}
601:
602: We have conjectured that the lepton flavor mixing angle $\theta_{13}$
603: might be vanishing at the GUT scale due to the existence of a kind of
604: new flavor symmetry. Starting from this point of view, we have
605: examined whether an appreciable value of $\theta_{13}$ at low energies
606: can be radiatively generated via the RGE running and seesaw threshold
607: effects. Four simple but typical patterns of the lepton flavor mixing
608: matrices have been considered as the initial conditions at
609: $\Lambda_{\rm GUT}$. It is found that the dominant
610: RGE enhancement of $\theta_{13}$ takes place from $\Lambda_{\rm GUT}$
611: to the heaviest right-handed neutrino mass scale. For two large-maximal
612: mixing patterns, $\theta_{13}(\Lambda_{\rm EW}) \sim 5^\circ$ can be
613: radiatively produced in the MSSM. We have also demonstrated that it is
614: possible to obtain $\theta_{13} \sim 5^\circ$ at $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$ from
615: $\theta_{13} = 0^\circ$ at $\Lambda_{\rm GUT}$ in the SM, if the
616: initial value of $\theta_{12}$ is large enough. As a useful by-product,
617: the mass spectrum of three heavy Majorana neutrinos is determined and
618: the cosmological baryon number asymmetry via leptogenesis is calculated.
619:
620: Although the numerical examples presented in this paper are mainly for
621: the purpose of illustration, they are quite suggestive for model
622: building. Of course, only the future neutrino experiments can tell us
623: how small $\theta_{13}$ is. But we believe that the radiative
624: generation of $\theta_{13}$ from high to low energies is an interesting
625: theoretical approach towards understanding the smallness of
626: $\theta_{13}$, and it might indicate some useful hints about the
627: underlying flavor symmetry which is associated with the dynamics of
628: lepton flavor mixing and CP violation.
629:
630: \vspace{0.5cm}
631:
632: This work was supported in
633: part by the National Nature Science Foundation of China.
634:
635: \newpage
636:
637: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
638: \bibitem{SNO} SNO Collaboration, Q.R. Ahmad {\it et al.},
639: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 89}, 011301 (2002).
640:
641: \bibitem{SK} For a review, see: C.K. Jung {\it et al.},
642: Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. {\bf 51}, 451 (2001).
643:
644: \bibitem{KM} KamLAND Collaboration, K. Eguchi {\it et al.},
645: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 90}, 021802 (2003).
646:
647: \bibitem{CHOOZ} CHOOZ Collaboration, M. Apollonio {\it et al.},
648: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 420}, 397 (1998);
649: Palo Verde Collaboration, F. Boehm {\it et al.},
650: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 84}, 3764 (2000).
651:
652: \bibitem{K2K} K2K Collaboration, M.H. Ahn {\it et al.},
653: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 90}, 041801 (2003).
654:
655: \bibitem{FIT} J.N. Bahcall and C. Pe$\rm\tilde{n}$a-Garay,
656: JHEP {\bf 0311} (2003) 004;
657: M. Maltoni, T. Schwetz, M.A. T$\rm\acute{o}$rtola,
658: and J.W.F. Valle, hep-ph/0309130.
659:
660: \bibitem{T13} K. Anderson {\it et al.}, hep-ex/0402041.
661:
662: \bibitem{RGE} P. Chankowski and Z. Pluciennik,
663: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 316}, 312 (1993);
664: K.S. Babu, C.N. Leung, and J. Pantaleone,
665: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 319}, 191 (1993);
666: S. Antusch, M. Drees, J. Kersten, M. Lindner, and M. Ratz,
667: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 519}, 238 (2001);
668: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 525}, 130 (2002);
669: P. Chankowski and S. Pokorski,
670: Int. J. Mod. Phys. A {\bf 17}, 575 (2002);
671: S. Antusch, J. Kersten, M. Lindner, and M. Ratz,
672: Nucl. Phys. B {\bf 674}, 401 (2003).
673:
674: \bibitem{Ratz} S. Antusch, J. Kersten, M. Lindner, and M. Ratz,
675: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 538}, 87 (2002);
676: M. Ratz, PhD Thesis, Technische Universit$\rm\ddot{a}$t
677: M$\rm\ddot{u}$nchen, June 2002.
678:
679: \bibitem{T1} S. Antusch, J. Kersten, M. Lindner, and M. Ratz,
680: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 544}, 1 (2002).
681:
682: \bibitem{T2} S. Antusch and M. Ratz, JHEP {\bf 0211}, 010 (2002).
683:
684: \bibitem{FX01} H. Fritzsch and Z.Z. Xing,
685: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 517}, 363 (2001).
686:
687: \bibitem{WOL} P.F. Harrison, D.H. Perkins, and W.G. Scott,
688: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 530}, 167 (2002);
689: Z.Z. Xing, Phys. Lett. B {\bf 533}, 85 (2002);
690: X.G. He and A. Zee, Phys. Lett. B {\bf 560}, 87 (2003).
691:
692: \bibitem{GPX} R. Peccei, Lectures given at {\it Topical Seminars on
693: Neutrinos and Cosmology}, August 2002, Beijing;
694: C. Giunti, hep-ph/0209103;
695: Z.Z. Xing, J. Phys. G {\bf 29}, 2227 (2003).
696:
697: \bibitem{SS} T. Yanagida, in {\it Proceedings of the Workshop on
698: Unified Theory and the Baryon Number of the Universe}, edited by
699: O. Sawada and A. Sugamoto (KEK, Tsukuba, 1979), p. 95;
700: M. Gell-Mann, P. Ramond, and R. Slansky, in {\it Supergravity},
701: edited by F. van Nieuwenhuizen and D. Freedman (North Holland,
702: Amsterdam, 1979), p. 315;
703: S.L. Glashow, in {\it Quarks and Leptons}, edited by
704: M. L$\rm\acute{e}vy$ {\it et al.} (Plenum, New York, 1980), p. 707;
705: R.N. Mohapatra and G. Senjanovic, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 44}, 912 (1980).
706:
707: \bibitem{MX} See, e.g., J.W. Mei and Z.Z. Xing,
708: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 69}, 073003 (2004); hep-ph/0312167.
709:
710: \bibitem{Haba} See, e.g., N. Haba, Y. Matsui, and N. Okamura,
711: Eur. Phys. J. C {\bf 17}, 513 (2000).
712:
713: \bibitem{PDG} Particle Data Group, K. Hagiwara {\it et al.},
714: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 66}, 010001 (2002).
715:
716: \bibitem{XZ} Z.Z. Xing and S. Zhou, hep-ph/0403261;
717: accepted for publication in Phys. Lett. B.
718:
719: \bibitem{King} S.F. King and N.N. Singh, Nucl. Phys. B {\bf 591}, 3 (2000).
720:
721: \bibitem{Mei} J.W. Mei, {\it Thesis for Master's degree}, IHEP, Beijing
722: (in preparation).
723:
724: \bibitem{FY} M. Fukugita and T. Yanagida,
725: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 174}, 45 (1986).
726:
727: \bibitem{L} For recent reviews with extensive references, see:
728: W. Buchm$\rm\ddot{u}$ller and M. Pl$\rm\ddot{u}$macher,
729: Int. J. Mod. Phys. A {\bf 15}, 5047 (2000);
730: G.F. Giudice, A. Notari, M. Raidal, A. Riotto, and A. Strumia,
731: hep-ph/0310123;
732: Z.Z. Xing, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A {\bf 19}, 1 (2004).
733:
734: \bibitem{Kuzmin} V.A. Kuzmin, V.A. Rubakov, and M.E. Shaposhnikov,
735: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 155}, 36 (1985).
736:
737: \bibitem{WMAP} D.N. Spergel {\it et al.},
738: Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. {\bf 148}, 175 (2003).
739:
740: \bibitem{FX} H. Fritzsch and Z.Z. Xing, Phys. Lett. B {\bf 372}, 265 (1996);
741: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 440}, 313 (1998);
742: Phys. Rev. D {\bf 61}, 073016 (2000);
743: Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. {\bf 45}, 1 (2000).
744:
745: \end{thebibliography}
746:
747: \newpage
748:
749: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Table 1 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
750: \begin{table}
751: \caption{Numerical examples for radiative generation of
752: $\theta_{13}$ via the RGE evolution and seesaw threshold effects.
753: The cosmological baryon number asymmetry $Y_{\rm B}$ is also
754: computed. Note that we have taken
755: $\theta_{12} =\theta_{23} =\delta =0^\circ$ for $V_\nu$ at
756: $\Lambda_{\rm GUT}$.}
757: \vspace{0.3cm}
758: \begin{center}
759: \begin{tabular}{c|ccccc}
760: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
761: Inputs ($\Lambda_{\rm GUT}$)
762: & Pattern (A) & Pattern (B) & Pattern (C) & Pattern (D) & Model \\ \hline
763: %-----------------------------------------------------
764: $m_1$ (eV) & 0.12 & 0.08 & 0.06 & 0.06 & SM \\
765: & 0.08 & 0.10 & 0.20 & 0.20 & MSSM \\ \hline
766: %-----------------------------------------------------
767: $\Delta m^2_{\rm sun}$ (${\rm eV}^2$)
768: & 1.0$\times 10^{-4}$ & 1.8$\times 10^{-4}$ & 1.6$\times 10^{-4}$
769: & 1.2$\times 10^{-4}$ & SM \\
770: & 2.1$\times 10^{-4}$ & 2.6$\times 10^{-4}$ & 5.8$\times 10^{-4}$
771: & 6.1$\times 10^{-4}$ & MSSM \\ \hline
772: %-------------------------------------------------
773: $\Delta m^2_{\rm atm}$ (${\rm eV}^2$)
774: & 7.9$\times 10^{-3}$ & 7.6$\times 10^{-3}$ & 8.0$\times 10^{-3}$
775: & 7.8$\times 10^{-3}$ & SM \\
776: & 5.9$\times 10^{-3}$ & 5.7$\times 10^{-3}$ & 5.1$\times 10^{-3}$
777: & 5.1$\times 10^{-3}$ & MSSM \\ \hline
778: %--------------------------------------------------
779: $\delta$ of $V_{\rm MNS}$
780: & $70^\circ$ & $ 90^\circ$ & $ 75^\circ$ & $ 45^\circ$ & SM \\
781: & $70^\circ$ & $100^\circ$ & $115^\circ$ & $115^\circ$ & MSSM \\
782: \hline
783: %-------------------------------------------------
784: $\theta_{13}$ of $V_\nu$
785: & $35^\circ$ & $50^\circ$ & $45^\circ$ & $45^\circ$ & SM \\
786: & $27^\circ$ & $39^\circ$ & $45^\circ$ & $45^\circ$ & MSSM \\
787: \hline
788: %-------------------------------------------------
789: $y_\nu$ & 0.9 & 0.8 & 0.9 & 0.9 & SM \\
790: & 0.9 & 0.8 & 0.4 & 0.4 & MSSM \\ \hline
791: %-----------------------------------------------------
792: $r_1$ & 1/300 & 1/43 & 1/433 & 1/433 & SM \\
793: & 1/300 & 1/43 & 1/433 & 1/433 & MSSM \\ \hline
794: %-------------------------------------------------
795: $r_2$ & 1/19 & 1/15 & 1/19 & 1/19 & SM \\
796: & 1/19 & 1/15 & 1/19 & 1/19 & MSSM \\ \hline
797: %--------------------------------------------------
798: $m^{~}_H$ (GeV) & 120 & 120 & 120 & 120 & SM \\
799: $\tan\beta$ & 10 & 10 & 19 & 21 & MSSM \\ \hline
800: \hline
801: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
802: Outputs ($\Lambda_{\rm EW}$) & Pattern (A) & Pattern (B) & Pattern
803: (C) & Pattern (D) & Model \\ \hline
804: %--------------------------------------------------
805: $m_1$ (eV) & 0.069 & 0.046 & 0.034 & 0.034 & SM \\
806: & 0.053 & 0.067 & 0.14 & 0.14 & MSSM \\ \hline
807: %-----------------------------------------------------
808: $\Delta m^2_{\rm sun}$ (${\rm eV}^2$)
809: & 6.9$\times 10^{-5}$ & 6.9$\times 10^{-5}$ & 6.9$\times 10^{-5}$
810: & 7.0$\times 10^{-5}$ & SM \\
811: & 6.8$\times 10^{-5}$ & 7.3$\times 10^{-5}$ & 7.2$\times 10^{-5}$
812: & 6.9$\times 10^{-5}$ & MSSM \\ \hline
813: %-------------------------------------------------
814: $\Delta m^2_{\rm atm}$ (${\rm eV}^2$)
815: & 2.6$\times 10^{-3}$ & 2.6$\times 10^{-3}$ & 2.7$\times 10^{-3}$
816: & 2.6$\times 10^{-3}$ & SM \\
817: & 2.6$\times 10^{-3}$ & 2.6$\times 10^{-3}$ & 2.6$\times 10^{-3}$
818: & 2.6$\times 10^{-3}$ & MSSM \\ \hline
819: %-------------------------------------------------
820: $\theta_{13}$ of $V_{\rm MNS}$
821: & $3.1^\circ$ & $1.6^\circ$ & $1.5^\circ$ & $1.4^\circ$ & SM \\
822: & $2.2^\circ$ & $3.3^\circ$ & $4.7^\circ$ & $4.6^\circ$ & MSSM \\
823: \hline\hline
824: %----------------------------------------------------------------------
825: Outputs ($M_1$)
826: & Pattern (A) & Pattern (B) & Pattern (C) & Pattern (D) & Model \\ \hline
827: %-----------------------------------------------------
828: $M_1$ (GeV) & 3.0$\times 10^9$ & 1.8$\times 10^{11}$ & 2.9$\times 10^9$
829: & 2.2$\times 10^9$ & SM \\
830: & 3.9$\times 10^9$ & 1.4$\times 10^{11}$ & 2.1$\times 10^8$
831: & 2.0$\times 10^8$ & MSSM \\ \hline
832: %--------------------------------------------------
833: $M_2$ (GeV) & 8.4$\times 10^{11}$ & 9.9$\times 10^{11}$
834: & 1.0$\times 10^{12}$ & 8.9$\times 10^{11}$ & SM \\
835: & 1.6$\times 10^{12}$ & 1.4$\times 10^{12}$
836: & 6.9$\times 10^{10}$ & 6.5$\times 10^{10}$ & MSSM \\ \hline
837: %--------------------------------------------------
838: $M_3$ (GeV) & 7.9$\times 10^{13}$ & 1.2$\times 10^{14}$
839: & 1.7$\times 10^{14}$ & 2.7$\times 10^{14}$ & SM \\
840: & 8.8$\times 10^{13}$ & 6.5$\times 10^{13}$
841: & 1.5$\times 10^{13}$ & 1.4$\times 10^{13}$ & MSSM \\ \hline
842: %--------------------------------------------------
843: $Y_{\rm B}$ & 1.9$\times 10^{-12}$ & 8.9$\times 10^{-11}$ &
844: 1.7$\times 10^{-12}$ & 6.1$\times 10^{-13}$ & SM \\
845: & 1.7$\times 10^{-12}$ & 7.5$\times 10^{-11}$ &
846: 1.6$\times 10^{-13}$ & 1.5$\times 10^{-13}$ & MSSM
847: %-----------------------------------------------------------------------
848: \end{tabular}
849: \end{center}
850: \end{table}
851: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
852:
853: \newpage
854:
855: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Fig. 1 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
856: \begin{figure}
857: \begin{center}
858: \includegraphics[width=16cm,height=18cm]{t13fig1.ps}
859: \vspace{-0.4cm}
860: \caption{The RGE evolution of three lepton mixing
861: angles between $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$ and $\Lambda_{\rm GUT}$
862: in the SM, where the initial values of relevant parameters
863: are listed in Table 1.}
864: \end{center}
865: \end{figure}
866: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
867:
868: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Fig. 2 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
869: \begin{figure}
870: \begin{center}
871: \includegraphics[width=16cm,height=18cm]{t13fig2.ps}
872: \vspace{-0.4cm}
873: \caption{The RGE evolution of three lepton mixing
874: angles between $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$ and $\Lambda_{\rm GUT}$
875: in the MSSM, where the initial values of relevant parameters
876: are listed in Table 1.}
877: \end{center}
878: \end{figure}
879: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
880:
881: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Fig. 3 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
882: \begin{figure}
883: \begin{center}
884: \includegraphics[width=12cm,height=18cm]{t13fig3.ps}
885: \vspace{-0.4cm}
886: \caption{Running of three lepton mixing angles,
887: where $m_1 = 0.15$ eV,
888: $\Delta m^2_{\rm sun} = 3.5 \times 10^{-4} ~{\rm eV}^2$,
889: $\Delta m^2_{\rm atm} = 7.6 \times 10^{-3} ~{\rm eV}^2$,
890: $y_\nu = 0.9$, $r_1 = 1/41$, $r_2 = 1/17$,
891: $\{\theta_{12}, \theta_{23}, \theta_{13}, \delta\}^{~}_{V_{\rm MNS}}
892: = \{67^\circ, 45^\circ, 0^\circ, 94^\circ\}$,
893: $\{\theta_{12}, \theta_{23}, \theta_{13}, \delta\}^{~}_{V_\nu}
894: = \{0^\circ, 0^\circ, 45^\circ, 0^\circ\}$ and
895: $m^{~}_H = 120$ GeV have typically been input at
896: $\Lambda_{\rm GUT}$ in the SM; and
897: $m_1 = 0.12$ eV,
898: $\Delta m^2_{\rm sun} = 3.9 \times 10^{-4} ~{\rm eV}^2$,
899: $\Delta m^2_{\rm atm} = 5.4 \times 10^{-3} ~{\rm eV}^2$,
900: $y_\nu = 0.8$, $r_1 = 1/41$, $r_2 = 1/15$,
901: $\{\theta_{12}, \theta_{23}, \theta_{13}, \delta\}^{~}_{V_{\rm MNS}}
902: = \{63^\circ, 45^\circ, 0^\circ, 100^\circ\}$,
903: $\{\theta_{12}, \theta_{23}, \theta_{13}, \delta\}^{~}_{V_\nu}
904: = \{0^\circ, 0^\circ, 45^\circ, 0^\circ\}$ and
905: $\tan\beta = 10$ have typically been input at
906: $\Lambda_{\rm GUT}$ in the MSSM.}
907: \end{center}
908: \end{figure}
909:
910: \end{document}
911:
912:
913: