1: \documentstyle[prd,aps,preprint,tighten,epsfig]{revtex}
2:
3: \begin{document}
4:
5: \draft
6:
7: \title{Radiative Generation of Leptonic CP Violation}
8: \author{{\bf Shu Luo} ~ and ~ {\bf Jianwei Mei}}
9: \address{Institute of High Energy Physics, Chinese Academy of
10: Sciences, \\
11: P.O. Box 918, Beijing 100049, China}
12: \author{\bf Zhi-zhong Xing}
13: \address{CCAST (World Laboratory), P.O. Box 8730, Beijing 100080,
14: China \\
15: and Institute of High Energy Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences,
16: \\
17: P.O. Box 918, Beijing 100049, China \footnote{Mailing address}
18: \\
19: ({\it Electronic address: xingzz@mail.ihep.ac.cn})}
20: \maketitle
21:
22: \begin{abstract}
23: Three CP-violating phases of the $3\times 3$ lepton flavor mixing
24: matrix $V$ are entangled with one another in the
25: renormalization-group evolution from the seesaw scale
26: ($\Lambda_{\rm SS} \sim 10^{14}$ GeV) to the electroweak scale
27: ($\Lambda_{\rm EW} \sim 10^2$ GeV). Concerning the Dirac phase
28: $\delta$, we show that $\delta =90^\circ$ at $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$
29: can be radiatively generated from $\delta =0^\circ$ at
30: $\Lambda_{\rm SS}$ in the minimal supersymmetric standard model,
31: if three neutrino masses are nearly degenerate. As for the
32: Majorana phases $\rho$ and $\sigma$, it is also possible to
33: radiatively generate $\rho =90^\circ$ or $\sigma = 90^\circ$ at
34: $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$ from $\rho =0^\circ$ or $\sigma = 0^\circ$ at
35: $\Lambda_{\rm SS}$. The one-loop renormalization-group equations
36: for the Jarlskog invariant and two off-diagonal asymmetries of $V$
37: are derived, and their running behaviors from $\Lambda_{\rm SS}$
38: to $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$ are numerically illustrated.
39: \end{abstract}
40:
41: \pacs{PACS number(s): 14.60.Pq, 13.10.+q, 25.30.Pt}
42:
43: \newpage
44:
45: \section{Introduction}
46:
47: Recent solar \cite{SNO}, atmospheric \cite{SK}, reactor (KamLAND
48: \cite{KM} and CHOOZ \cite{CHOOZ}) and accelerator (K2K \cite{K2K})
49: neutrino oscillation experiments have provided us with very robust
50: evidence that neutrinos are massive and lepton flavors are mixed.
51: The phenomenon of lepton flavor mixing can be described by a
52: $3\times 3$ unitary matrix $V$, commonly referred to as the
53: Maki-Nakagawa-Sakata (MNS) matrix \cite{MNS}. A useful
54: parametrization of $V$ reads \cite{FX01}:
55: \begin{equation}
56: V = \left( \matrix{ c^{}_{12}c^{}_{13} & s^{}_{12}c^{}_{13} &
57: s^{}_{13} \cr -c^{}_{12}s^{}_{23}s^{}_{13} - s^{}_{12}c^{}_{23}
58: e^{-i\delta} & -s^{}_{12}s^{}_{23}s^{}_{13} + c^{}_{12}c^{}_{23}
59: e^{-i\delta} & s^{}_{23}c^{}_{13} \cr -c^{}_{12}c^{}_{23}s^{}_{13}
60: + s^{}_{12}s^{}_{23} e^{-i\delta} & -s^{}_{12}c^{}_{23}s^{}_{13} -
61: c^{}_{12}s^{}_{23} e^{-i\delta} & c^{}_{23}c^{}_{13} } \right)
62: \left ( \matrix{e^{i\rho } & 0 & 0 \cr 0 & e^{i\sigma} & 0 \cr 0 &
63: 0 & 1 \cr} \right ) \; ,
64: % (1)
65: \end{equation}
66: where $c^{}_{ij} \equiv \cos\theta_{ij}$ and $s^{}_{ij} \equiv
67: \sin\theta_{ij}$ (for $ij=12,23$ and $13$). Note that the
68: CP-violating phase $\delta$ governs the strength of CP or T
69: violation in normal neutrino oscillations, and it does not appear
70: in the expression of $\langle m\rangle_{ee}$
71: --- the effective mass term of the neutrinoless double-beta decay
72: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
73: \footnote{Namely, $\langle m\rangle_{ee} = \left | m^{}_1 c^2_{12}
74: c^2_{13} e^{2i\rho} + m^{}_2 s^2_{12} c^2_{13} e^{2i\sigma} +
75: m^{}_3 s^2_{13} \right |$ is independent of $\delta$.}.
76: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
77: On the other hand, the CP-violating phases $\rho$ and $\sigma$
78: only affect $\langle m\rangle_{ee}$, and they can be rotated away
79: if the massive neutrinos are Dirac particles. Current experimental
80: data indicate $\theta_{12} \approx 33^\circ$, $\theta_{23} \approx
81: 45^\circ$ and $\theta_{13} < 10^\circ$ \cite{Fit}, but the phase
82: parameters $\delta$, $\rho$ and $\sigma$ are entirely
83: unrestricted. A variety of new neutrino experiments are underway,
84: not only to measure the smallest mixing angle $\theta_{13}$ and
85: the Dirac phase $\delta$, but also to constrain the Majorana
86: phases $\rho$ and $\sigma$.
87:
88: While neutrino masses and lepton flavor mixing parameters can be
89: measured at low-energy scales, their origin is most likely to
90: depend on some unspecified interactions at a superhigh energy
91: scale. For instance, the existence of very heavy right-handed
92: neutrinos and lepton number violation may naturally explain the
93: smallness of left-handed neutrino masses via the famous seesaw
94: mechanism \cite{SS} at the scale $\Lambda_{\rm SS} \sim 10^{14}$
95: GeV. Below this seesaw scale, the effective Lagrangian for lepton
96: Yukawa interactions can be written as
97: \begin{equation}
98: -{\cal L} = \overline{E_L^{}}H_1 Y_l^{} l_R^{} - \frac{1}{2}
99: \overline{E_L^{}} H_2 \cdot\kappa\cdot H_2^{c\dag} E_L^c ~ + ~
100: {\rm h.c.} \;
101: % (2)
102: \end{equation}
103: in the minimal supersymmetric standard model (MSSM)
104: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
105: \footnote{For the sake of simplicity, we assume the supersymmetry
106: breaking scale $\Lambda_{\rm SUSY}$ to be close to the electroweak
107: scale $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$. Even if $\Lambda_{\rm SUSY}/\Lambda_{\rm
108: EW} \sim 10$, the relevant RGE running effects between these two
109: scales are negligibly small for the physics under consideration.},
110: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
111: where $E_L^{}$ denotes the leptonic $SU(2)_L^{}$ doublets,
112: $H_1^{}$ and $H_2^{}$ are the Higgs fields, $l_R^{}$ denotes the
113: right-handed charged leptons, $H_2^c\equiv i \sigma_{}^2 H_2^\ast$
114: and $E_L^c\equiv i \sigma_{}^2 {\cal C} \overline{E_L^{}}_{}^T$
115: with ${\cal C}$ being the Dirac charge-conjugate matrix. After
116: spontaneous gauge symmetry breaking at the electroweak scale
117: $\Lambda_{\rm EW} \sim 10^2$ GeV, we arrive at the charged lepton
118: mass matrix $M_l = vY_l\cos\beta$ and the effective Majorana
119: neutrino mass matrix $M_\nu = v^2\kappa \sin^2\beta$, where $v
120: \approx 174$ GeV and $\tan\beta$ is the ratio of the vacuum
121: expectation values of $H_2$ and $H_1$ in the MSSM. The lepton
122: flavor mixing matrix $V$ arises from the mismatch between the
123: diagonalization of $Y_l$ (or $M_l$) and that of $\kappa$ (or
124: $M_\nu$). In the flavor basis where $Y_l$ is real and diagonal,
125: $V$ directly links the neutrino mass eigenstates $(\nu^{}_1,
126: \nu^{}_2, \nu^{}_3)$ to the neutrino flavor eigenstates
127: $(\nu^{}_e, \nu^{}_\mu, \nu^{}_\tau)$. The physical parameters at
128: $\Lambda_{\rm SS}$ and $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$ are related by the
129: renormalization group equations (RGEs) \cite{RGE}. It has been
130: shown that the RGE evolution between these two scales may have
131: significant effects on the mixing angle $\theta_{12}$ and the
132: CP-violating phases $\delta$, $\rho$ and $\sigma$
133: \cite{RGE1,RGE2,RGE3,RGE4,Mei}, in particular if the masses of
134: three light neutrinos are nearly degenerate. It has also been
135: noticed by Casas {\it et al} \cite{RGE2} and Antusch {\it et al}
136: \cite{RGE3} that a CP-violating phase can be radiatively generated
137: due to the RGE running from $\Lambda_{\rm SS}$ to $\Lambda_{\rm
138: EW}$.
139:
140: The reason for the radiative generation of a CP-violating phase is
141: simply that three phases of $V$ are entangled with one another in
142: the RGEs. In other words, the running behavior of $\delta$ depends
143: on a non-linear function of $\delta$, $\rho$ and $\sigma$. It is
144: therefore possible to generate a non-zero value of $\delta$ at
145: $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$ even if $\delta =0$ holds at $\Lambda_{\rm
146: SS}$, provided the initial values of $\rho$ and $\sigma$ are not
147: vanishing. This observation opens a new and interesting window to
148: understand possible connection between the phenomena of CP
149: violation at low- and high-energy scales; e.g., the phase
150: parameter governing the strength of CP violation in a
151: long-baseline neutrino oscillation experiment could be radiatively
152: generated from those CP-violating phases which control the
153: leptogenesis of right-handed neutrinos \cite{LEP} at the seesaw
154: scale.
155:
156: The main purpose of this paper is to analyze the radiative
157: generation of three CP-violating phases ($\delta, \rho, \sigma$)
158: via the one-loop RGE running effects from $\Lambda_{\rm SS}$ to
159: $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$. Our work is different from the one done in
160: Refs. \cite{RGE2} and \cite{RGE3} at least in the following
161: aspects:
162: \begin{itemize}
163: \item The phase convention of $V$ taken by us in Eq. (1)
164: forbids the phase parameter $\delta$ to appear in the effective
165: mass of the neutrinoless double-beta decay $\langle
166: m\rangle_{ee}$. Hence it makes sense to refer to $\delta$ as the
167: Dirac phase. In contrast, the so-called ``Dirac" phase in the
168: ``standard" parametrization of $V$ used by Casas {\it et al}
169: \cite{RGE2} and Antusch {\it et al} \cite{RGE3} enters the
170: expression of $\langle m\rangle_{ee}$ and is not purely of the
171: Dirac nature. Our RGEs for three CP-violating phases turn out to
172: be remarkably different from theirs.
173:
174: \item We focus on the possibilities to generate $\delta =
175: 90^\circ$, $\rho = 90^\circ$ or $\sigma = 90^\circ$ at
176: $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$ from $\delta = 0^\circ$, $\rho =0^\circ$ or
177: $\sigma =0^\circ$ at $\Lambda_{\rm SS}$. While $\delta =90^\circ$
178: might imply ``Maximal" CP violation in some sense \cite{FX95},
179: $\rho =90^\circ$ or $\sigma = 90^\circ$ will lead to a kind of
180: large cancellation in $\langle m\rangle_{ee}$. The RGE running of
181: $\delta$ is of particular interest, because it means the radiative
182: generation of leptonic unitarity triangles in the complex plane;
183: i.e., three overlapped lines (sides) at $\Lambda_{\rm SS}$ can
184: evolve into a triangle at $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$.
185:
186: \item The one-loop RGEs for the Jarlskog parameter (denoted
187: by $\cal J$) \cite{J} and two off-diagonal asymmetries of $V$
188: (denoted as ${\cal A}^{}_{\rm L}$ and ${\cal A}^{}_{\rm R}$)
189: \cite{Xing02} are derived, and their running behaviors from
190: $\Lambda_{\rm SS}$ to $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$ are illustrated. These
191: rephasing-invariant quantities measure the strength of Dirac-type
192: CP violation and the geometrical structure of $V$, respectively.
193: For example, ${\cal A}^{}_{\rm L}=0$ (or ${\cal A}^{}_{\rm R}=0$)
194: would imply $V$ to be symmetric about its $V_{e1}$-$V_{\mu
195: 2}$-$V_{\tau 3}$ (or $V_{e3}$-$V_{\mu 2}$-$V_{\tau 1}$) axis.
196: \end{itemize}
197: Because the radiative corrections to $V$ are expected to be
198: insignificant in the case that three light neutrinos have a strong
199: mass hierarchy and $\tan\beta$ takes small or mild values, we
200: shall mainly consider the quasi-degenerate neutrino mass spectrum
201: in our numerical calculations.
202:
203: Section II is devoted to the one-loop RGEs for three neutrino
204: masses, three lepton flavor mixing angles, three CP-violating
205: phases and three rephasing-invariant quantities of $V$. A detailed
206: numerical analysis of radiative corrections to the Dirac and
207: Majorana phases is presented in section III, where the RGE
208: evolution of ${\cal J}$, ${\cal A}_{\rm L}$ and ${\cal A}_{\rm R}$
209: is also analyzed. We give a brief summary of our results with some
210: concluding remarks in Section IV.
211:
212: \section{RGEs for physical parameters}
213:
214: Below the seesaw scale, the effective neutrino coupling matrix
215: $\kappa$ obeys the following one-loop RGE in the MSSM:
216: \begin{equation}
217: 16\pi^2 \frac{{\rm d}\kappa}{{\rm d}t} = \alpha \kappa + \left
218: (Y^{}_lY^\dagger_l \right ) \kappa + \kappa \left (Y^{}_l
219: Y^\dagger_l \right )^T \;
220: % (3)
221: \end{equation}
222: with $t\equiv \ln (\mu/\Lambda_{\rm SS})$ and
223: \begin{equation}
224: \alpha \; = \; -\frac{6}{5}g^2_1 - 6g^2_2 + 6 \left (y^2_u + y^2_c
225: + y^2_t \right ) \; ,
226: % (4)
227: \end{equation}
228: where $g^{}_1$ and $g^{}_2$ denote the gauge couplings, and
229: $y^{}_f$ (for $f=u,c,t$) stand for the Yukawa couplings of up-type
230: quarks. In the flavor basis where $Y_l$ is real and diagonal, we
231: have $\kappa = V \overline{\kappa} V^T$ with $\overline{\kappa} =
232: {\rm Diag}\{\kappa^{}_1, \kappa^{}_2, \kappa^{}_3\}$. The neutrino
233: masses at $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$ read as $m^{}_i = v^2 \kappa^{}_i
234: \sin^2\beta$ (for $i=1,2,3$). It is then possible to derive the
235: RGEs for $(\kappa^{}_1, \kappa^{}_2, \kappa^{}_3)$, $(\theta_{12},
236: \theta_{23}, \theta_{13})$ and $(\delta, \rho, \sigma)$ from Eq.
237: (3), similar to the work done in Refs. \cite{RGE2,RGE3,RGE4,Mei}.
238:
239: For simplicity, we neglect the small contributions of $y^{}_e$ and
240: $y^{}_\mu$ to Eq. (3) in our calculations. The RGEs of
241: $\kappa^{}_i$ (for $i=1,2,3$) turn out to be
242: \begin{eqnarray}
243: \frac{{\rm d} \kappa^{}_1}{{\rm d} t} & = &
244: \frac{\kappa^{}_1}{16\pi^2} \left [ \alpha + 2 y_{\tau}^2 \left
245: (s_{12}^2 s_{23}^2 - 2c_{\delta }^{} c_{12}^{} c_{23}^{} s_{12}^{}
246: s_{23}^{} s_{13}^{} + c_{12}^2 c_{23}^2 s_{13}^2 \right ) \right ]
247: \; ,
248: \nonumber \\
249: \frac{{\rm d} \kappa^{}_2}{{\rm d} t} & = &
250: \frac{\kappa^{}_2}{16\pi^2} \left [ \alpha + 2 y_{\tau}^2 \left (
251: c_{12}^2 s_{23}^2 + 2c_{\delta }^{} c_{12}^{} c_{23}^{} s_{12}^{}
252: s_{23}^{} s_{13}^{} + c_{23}^2 s_{12}^2 s_{13}^2 \right ) \right ]
253: \; ,
254: \nonumber \\
255: \frac{{\rm d} \kappa^{}_3}{{\rm d} t} & = &
256: \frac{\kappa^{}_3}{16\pi^2} \left [ \alpha + 2 y_{\tau }^2
257: c_{23}^2 c_{13}^2 \right ] \; ,
258: % (5)
259: \end{eqnarray}
260: where $c^{}_\delta \equiv \cos\delta$. The RGEs of $\theta_{ij}$
261: (for $ij =12, 23, 13$) are found to be
262: \begin{eqnarray}
263: \frac{{\rm d} \theta^{}_{12}}{{\rm d} t} & = &
264: \frac{y^2_\tau}{16\pi^2} \left \{\frac{c_{(\rho -\sigma
265: )}^{}}{\zeta_{12}^{}} \left [c_{(\rho -\sigma )}^{} c_{12}^{}
266: s_{12}^{} \left (s_{23}^2 - c_{23}^2 s_{13}^2 \right ) - \left
267: (c_{(\delta +\rho -\sigma)}^{} c_{12}^2 - c_{(\delta -\rho +\sigma
268: )}^{} s_{12}^2 \right ) c_{23}^{} s_{23}^{} s_{13}^{} \right ]
269: \right .
270: \nonumber \\
271: && + \zeta_{12}^{} s_{(\rho -\sigma)}^{} \left [ s_{(\rho -\sigma
272: )}^{} c_{12}^{} s_{12}^{} \left (s_{23}^2 - c_{23}^2 s_{13}^2
273: \right ) - \left (s_{(\delta +\rho -\sigma )}^{} c_{12}^2 +
274: s_{(\delta -\rho +\sigma) }^{} s_{12}^2 \right ) c_{23}^{}
275: s_{23}^{} s_{13}^{} \right ]
276: \nonumber \\
277: && - \left [\frac{c_{\rho}^{}}{\zeta_{13}^{}} \left (c_{(\delta
278: -\rho)}^{} s_{12}^{} s_{23}^{} - c_{\rho }^{} c_{12}^{} c_{23}^{}
279: s_{13}^{} \right ) - \zeta_{13}^{} s_{\rho}^{} \left (s_{(\delta
280: -\rho)}^{} s_{12}^{} s_{23}^{} + s_{\rho }^{} c_{12}^{} c_{23}^{}
281: s_{13}^{} \right ) \right ] c_{23}^{} s_{12}^{} s_{13}^{}
282: \nonumber \\
283: && \left . - \left [\frac{c_{\sigma}^{}}{\zeta _{23}^{}} \left
284: (c_{(\delta -\sigma) }^{} c_{12}^{} s_{23}^{} + c_{\sigma}^{}
285: c_{23}^{} s_{12}^{} s_{13}^{} \right ) - \zeta _{23}^{}
286: s_{\sigma}^{} \left (s_{(\delta -\sigma) }^{} c_{12}^{} s_{23}^{}
287: - s_{\sigma }^{} c_{23}^{} s_{12}^{} s_{13}^{} \right ) \right ]
288: c_{12}^{} c_{23}^{} s_{13}^{} \right \} \; ,
289: \nonumber \\
290: \nonumber \\
291: \frac{{\rm d} \theta^{}_{23}}{{\rm d} t} & = &
292: \frac{y^2_\tau c^{}_{23}}{16\pi^2} \left \{ \left
293: [\frac{c_{(\delta -\rho )}^{}}{\zeta_{13}^{}} \left (c_{(\delta
294: -\rho )}^{} s_{12}^{} s_{23}^{} - c_{\rho }^{} c_{12}^{} c_{23}^{}
295: s_{13}^{} \right ) + \zeta_{13}^{} s_{(\delta -\rho)}^{} \left
296: (s_{(\delta -\rho) }^{} s_{12}^{} s_{23}^{} + s_{\rho}^{}
297: c_{12}^{} c_{23}^{} s_{13}^{} \right ) \right ] s_{12}^{} \right .
298: \nonumber \\
299: && \left. + \left [\frac{c_{(\delta -\sigma )}^{}}{\zeta_{23}^{}}
300: \left (c_{(\delta -\sigma) }^{} c_{12}^{} s_{23}^{} +
301: c_{\sigma}^{} c_{23}^{} s_{12}^{} s_{13}^{} \right ) + \zeta
302: _{23}^{} s_{(\delta -\sigma)}^{} \left (s_{(\delta -\sigma )}^{}
303: c_{12}^{} s_{23}^{} - s_{\sigma }^{} c_{23}^{} s_{12}^{} s_{13}^{}
304: \right ) \right ] c_{12}^{} \right \} \; ,
305: \nonumber \\
306: \nonumber \\
307: \frac{{\rm d} \theta^{}_{13}}{{\rm d} t} & = &
308: \frac{y^2_\tau c^{}_{23}}{16\pi^2} \left \{- \left [
309: \frac{c_{\rho}^{}}{\zeta_{13}^{}} \left (c_{(\delta -\rho )}^{}
310: s_{12}^{} s_{23}^{} - c_{\rho}^{} c_{12}^{} c_{23}^{} s_{13}^{}
311: \right ) - \zeta_{13}^{} s_{\rho}^{} \left (s_{(\delta -\rho) }^{}
312: s_{12}^{} s_{23}^{} + s_{\rho }^{} c_{12}^{} c_{23}^{} s_{13}^{}
313: \right ) \right ] c_{12}^{} c_{13}^{} \right.
314: \nonumber \\
315: && \left . + \left [\frac{c_{\sigma}^{}}{\zeta _{23}^{}}
316: \left(c_{(\delta -\sigma) }^{} c_{12}^{} s_{23}^{} + c_{\sigma}^{}
317: c_{23}^{} s_{12}^{} s_{13}^{} \right ) - \zeta _{23}^{}
318: s_{\sigma}^{} \left(s_{(\delta -\sigma) }^{} c_{12}^{} s_{23}^{} -
319: s_{\sigma }^{} c_{23}^{} s_{12}^{} s_{13}^{} \right ) \right ]
320: c_{13}^{} s_{12}^{} \right \} \; ,
321: % (6)
322: \end{eqnarray}
323: in which $\zeta^{}_{ij} \equiv (\kappa^{}_i -
324: \kappa^{}_j)/(\kappa^{}_i + \kappa^{}_j)$ (for $ij = 12, 23, 13$),
325: $c^{}_A \equiv \cos A$ and $s^{}_A \equiv \sin A$ (for $A =
326: \delta, ~\rho, ~\sigma, ~\delta - \rho, ~\delta - \sigma, ~\rho -
327: \sigma, ~\delta + \rho - \sigma, ~\delta - \rho + \sigma$). In
328: addition, the RGEs of $\delta$, $\rho$ and $\sigma$ are obtained
329: as follows:
330: \begin{eqnarray}
331: \frac{{\rm d} \delta}{{\rm d} t} & = & \frac{y^2_\tau}{16\pi^2}
332: \left \{\frac{s_{(\rho -\sigma)}^{}}{\zeta_{12}^{}} \left [
333: c_{(\rho -\sigma)}^{} \left (s_{23}^2 - c_{23}^2 s_{13}^2 \right )
334: - \left (c_{(\delta +\rho -\sigma)}^{} c_{12}^2 - c_{(\delta -\rho
335: + \sigma)}^{} s_{12}^2 \right ) \frac{c_{23}^{} s_{23}^{}
336: s_{13}^{}}{c_{12}^{} s_{12}^{}} \right ] \right .
337: \nonumber \\
338: && - \zeta_{12}^{} c_{(\rho -\sigma)}^{} \left [s_{(\rho -\sigma
339: )}^{} \left (s_{23}^2 - c_{23}^2 s_{13}^2 \right ) - \left
340: (s_{(\delta +\rho -\sigma)}^{} c_{12}^2 + s_{(\delta -\rho +\sigma
341: )}^{} s_{12}^2 \right ) \frac{c_{23}^{} s_{23}^{}
342: s_{13}^{}}{c_{12}^{} s_{12}^{}} \right ]
343: \nonumber \\
344: && + \frac{1}{\zeta_{13}} \left (c_{(\delta -\rho )} s_{12}^{}
345: s_{23}^{} - c_{\rho}^{} c_{12}^{} c_{23}^{} s_{13}^{} \right )
346: \left [ \frac{s_{\rho}^{} c_{23}^{}}{c_{12}^{} s_{13}^{}} \left
347: (c_{12}^2 - s_{12}^2 s_{13}^2 \right ) - s_{(\delta -\rho )}^{}
348: \frac{s_{12}^{}}{s_{23}^{}} \left (c_{23}^2 - s_{23}^2 \right )
349: \right ]
350: \nonumber \\
351: && + \zeta_{13}^{} \left (s_{(\delta -\rho )}^{} s_{12}^{}
352: s_{23}^{} + s_{\rho} c_{12}^{} c_{23}^{} s_{13}^{} \right ) \left
353: [ \frac{c_{\rho}^{} c_{23}^{}}{c_{12}^{} s_{13}^{}} \left
354: (c_{12}^2 - s_{12}^2 s_{13}^2 \right ) + c_{(\delta -\rho )}^{}
355: \frac{s_{12}^{}}{s_{23}^{}}
356: \left (c_{23}^2 - s_{23}^2 \right ) \right ]
357: \nonumber \\
358: && - \frac{1}{\zeta_{23}} \left (c_{(\delta -\sigma )} c_{12}^{}
359: s_{23}^{} + c_{\sigma}^{} c_{23}^{} s_{12}^{} s_{13}^{} \right )
360: \left [\frac{s_{\sigma}^{} c_{23}^{}}{s_{12}^{} s_{13}^{}}
361: \left(s_{12}^2 - c_{12}^2 s_{13}^2 \right ) + s_{(\delta -\sigma
362: )}^{} \frac{c_{12}^{}}{s_{23}^{}} \left (c_{23}^2 - s_{23}^2
363: \right ) \right ]
364: \nonumber \\
365: && \left . - \zeta_{23}^{} \left (s_{(\delta -\sigma )}^{}
366: c_{12}^{} s_{23}^{} - s_{\sigma} c_{23}^{} s_{12}^{} s_{13}^{}
367: \right ) \left [\frac{c_{\sigma}^{} c_{23}^{}}{s_{12}^{}
368: s_{13}^{}} \left(s_{12}^2 - c_{12}^2 s_{13}^2 \right ) -
369: c_{(\delta -\sigma)}^{} \frac{c_{12}^{}}{s_{23}^{}}
370: \left (c_{23}^2 - s_{23}^2 \right ) \right ] \right \} \; ,
371: \nonumber \\
372: \nonumber \\
373: \frac{{\rm d} \rho}{{\rm d} t} & = & \frac{y^2_\tau}{16\pi^2}
374: \left \{\frac{s_{(\rho -\sigma)}^{}}{\zeta_{12}^{}} \left [
375: c_{(\rho -\sigma )}^{} c_{12}^{} s_{12}^{} \left(s_{23}^2 -
376: c_{23}^2s_{13}^2 \right ) - \left(c_{(\delta +\rho -\sigma )}^{}
377: c_{12}^2 - c_{(\delta -\rho +\sigma)}^{} s_{12}^2 \right )
378: c_{23}^{} s_{23}^{} s_{13}^{} \right ] \frac{s_{12}^{}}{c_{12}^{}}
379: \right .
380: \nonumber \\
381: && - \zeta_{12}^{} c_{(\rho -\sigma)}^{} \left [s_{(\rho -\sigma
382: )}^{} c_{12}^{} s_{12}^{} \left (s_{23}^2 - c_{23}^2 s_{13}^2
383: \right ) - \left (s_{(\delta +\rho -\sigma )}^{} c_{12}^2 +
384: s_{(\delta -\rho +\sigma)}^{} s_{12}^2 \right ) c_{23}^{}
385: s_{23}^{} s_{13}^{} \right ] \frac{s_{12}^{}}{c_{12}^{}}
386: \nonumber \\
387: && + \left [\frac{s_{\rho}^{}}{\zeta_{13}^{}} \left (c_{(\delta
388: -\rho)}^{} s_{12}^{} s_{23}^{} - c_{\rho }^{} c_{12}^{} c_{23}^{}
389: s_{13}^{} \right ) + \zeta_{13}^{} c_{\rho}^{} \left (s_{(\delta
390: -\rho)}^{} s_{12}^{} s_{23}^{} + s_{\rho } c_{12}^{} c_{23}^{}
391: s_{13}^{} \right ) \right ]
392: \frac{c_{23}^{} \left (c_{12}^2 c_{13}^2 - s_{13}^2 \right )}{c_{12}^{}s_{13}^{}}
393: \nonumber \\
394: && \left . - \left [\frac{s_{\sigma}^{}}{\zeta _{23}^{}} \left
395: (c_{(\delta -\sigma) }^{} c_{12}^{} s_{23}^{} + c_{\sigma}^{}
396: c_{23}^{} s_{12}^{} s_{13}^{} \right ) + \zeta _{23}^{}
397: c_{\sigma}^{} \left (s_{(\delta -\sigma) }^{} c_{12}^{} s_{23}^{}
398: - s_{\sigma} c_{23}^{} s_{12}^{} s_{13}^{} \right ) \right ]
399: \frac{c_{23}^{} c_{13}^2 s_{12}^{}}{s_{13}^{}} \right \} \; ,
400: \nonumber \\
401: \nonumber \\
402: \frac{{\rm d} \sigma}{{\rm d} t} & = & \frac{y^2_\tau}{16\pi^2}
403: \left \{\frac{s_{(\rho -\sigma)}^{}}{\zeta_{12}^{}} \left [
404: c_{(\rho -\sigma )}^{} c_{12}^{} s_{12}^{} \left (s_{23}^2 -
405: c_{23}^2 s_{13}^2 \right ) - \left (c_{(\delta +\rho -\sigma )}^{}
406: c_{12}^2 - c_{(\delta -\rho +\sigma)}^{} s_{12}^2 \right )
407: c_{23}^{} s_{23}^{} s_{13}^{} \right ] \frac{c_{12}^{}}{s_{12}^{}}
408: \right .
409: \nonumber \\
410: && - \zeta_{12}^{} c_{(\rho -\sigma)}^{} \left [s_{(\rho -\sigma
411: )}^{} c_{12}^{} s_{12}^{} \left (s_{23}^2 - c_{23}^2 s_{13}^2
412: \right ) - \left (s_{(\delta +\rho -\sigma )}^{} c_{12}^2 +
413: s_{(\delta -\rho +\sigma)}^{} s_{12}^2 \right ) c_{23}^{}
414: s_{23}^{} s_{13}^{} \right ] \frac{c_{12}^{}}{s_{12}^{}}
415: \nonumber \\
416: && - \left [\frac{s_{\sigma}^{}}{\zeta _{23}^{}} \left (c_{(\delta
417: -\sigma) }^{} c_{12}^{} s_{23}^{} + c_{\sigma}^{} c_{23}^{}
418: s_{12}^{} s_{13}^{} \right ) + \zeta _{23}^{} c_{\sigma}^{} \left
419: (s_{(\delta -\sigma) }^{} c_{12}^{} s_{23}^{} - s_{\sigma}
420: c_{23}^{} s_{12}^{} s_{13}^{} \right ) \right ] \frac{c_{23}^{}
421: \left (c_{13}^2 s_{12}^2 - s_{13}^2 \right ) }{s_{12}^{}
422: s_{13}^{}}
423: \nonumber \\
424: && \left . + \left [\frac{s_{\rho}^{}}{\zeta_{13}^{}} \left
425: (c_{(\delta -\rho)}^{} s_{12}^{} s_{23}^{} - c_{\rho }^{}
426: c_{12}^{} c_{23}^{} s_{13}^{} \right ) + \zeta_{13}^{} c_{\rho}^{}
427: \left (s_{(\delta -\rho)}^{} s_{12}^{} s_{23}^{} + s_{\rho }
428: c_{12}^{} c_{23}^{} s_{13}^{} \right ) \right ] \frac{c_{12}^{}
429: c_{23}^{} c_{13}^2}{s_{13}^{}} \right \} \; .
430: % (7)
431: \end{eqnarray}
432: It is worth mentioning that the analytical results in Eqs. (6) and
433: (7) can also be achieved from Eqs. (14)--(19) of Ref. \cite{Mei}
434: by setting $C^l_\kappa =1$ and $y^{}_\nu =0$ over there. One can
435: see that the running effects of three flavor mixing angles and
436: three CP-violating phases are all proportional to the factor
437: $y^2_\tau/(16\pi^2) = m^2_\tau(1+\tan^2\beta)/(16\pi^2v^2) \approx
438: 6.6\times 10^{-7} (1+\tan^2\beta)$ in the MSSM. Hence an
439: appreciable value of $\tan\beta$ is required, in order to get
440: appreciable radiative corrections to relevant physical parameters.
441:
442: Next let us consider three rephasing-invariant quantities of $V$.
443: The first one is the Jarlskog parameter $\cal J$ \cite{J}, defined
444: through
445: \begin{equation}
446: {\rm Im} \left (V_{\alpha i}V_{\beta j} V^*_{\alpha j}V^*_{\beta
447: i} \right ) = {\cal J} \sum_{\gamma,k} \left (\epsilon^{~}_{\alpha
448: \beta \gamma} \epsilon^{~}_{ijk} \right ) \; ,
449: % (8)
450: \end{equation}
451: where the Greek and Latin subscripts run over $(e,\mu,\tau)$ and
452: $(1,2,3)$, respectively. Taking account of the parametrization of
453: $V$ in Eq. (1), we have ${\cal J} = s^{}_{12} c^{}_{12} s^{}_{23}
454: c^{}_{23} s^{}_{13} c^2_{13} s^{}_\delta$. The off-diagonal
455: asymmetries of $V$ \cite{Xing02},
456: \begin{eqnarray}
457: {\cal A}^{}_{\rm L} & \equiv & |V_{e2}|^2 - |V_{\mu 1}|^2 =
458: |V_{\mu 3}|^2 - |V_{\tau 2}|^2 = |V_{\tau 1}|^2 - |V_{e 3}|^2 \; ,
459: \nonumber \\
460: {\cal A}^{}_{\rm R} & \equiv & |V_{e2}|^2 - |V_{\mu 3}|^2 =
461: |V_{\mu 1}|^2 - |V_{\tau 2}|^2 = |V_{\tau 3}|^2 - |V_{e 1}|^2 \; ,
462: % (9)
463: \end{eqnarray}
464: are also rephasing-invariant. We obtain ${\cal A}^{}_{\rm L} =
465: s^2_{12} \left (c^2_{13} - c^2_{23} \right ) - c^2_{12} s^2_{23}
466: s^2_{13} - 2 s^{}_{12} c^{}_{12} s^{}_{23} c^{}_{23} s^{}_{13}
467: c^{}_\delta$ and ${\cal A}^{}_{\rm R} = c^2_{13} \left (s^2_{12} -
468: s^2_{23} \right )$. The RGEs of $\cal J$, ${\cal A}^{}_{\rm L}$
469: and ${\cal A}^{}_{\rm R}$ can then be derived from Eqs. (6) and
470: (7). The result for $\cal J$ is
471: \begin{eqnarray}
472: \frac{{\rm d} {\cal J}}{{\rm d} t} & = & \frac{y^2_\tau}{16\pi^2}
473: \left \{- \frac{c_{23}^{} c_{13}^2 s_{23}^{}
474: s_{13}^{}}{\zeta_{12}^{}} \left [c_\delta^{} s_{(\rho-\sigma)}^{}
475: + c_{(\rho-\sigma)}^{} s_\delta^{} \left (c_{12}^2 - s_{12}^2
476: \right ) \right ] \left [c_{(\delta+\rho-\sigma)}^{} c_{12}^2
477: c_{23}^{} s_{23}^{} s_{13}^{} \right . \right .
478: \nonumber \\
479: && \left. - c_{(\delta-\rho+\sigma)}^{} c_{23}^{} s_{12}^2
480: s_{23}^{} s_{13}^{} - c_{(\rho-\sigma)}^{} c_{12}^{} s_{12}^{}
481: \left (s_{23}^2 - c_{23}^2s_{13}^2 \right ) \right ]
482: \nonumber \\
483: && + \zeta_{12}^{} c_{23}^{} c_{13}^2 s_{23}^{} s_{13}^{} \left
484: [c_\delta^{} c_{(\rho-\sigma)}^{} - s_\delta^{}
485: s_{(\rho-\sigma)}^{} \left (c_{12}^2 - s_{12}^2 \right ) \right ]
486: \left [ s_{(\delta+\rho-\sigma)}^{} c_{12}^2 c_{23}^{} s_{23}^{}
487: s_{13}^{} \right .
488: \nonumber \\
489: && \left . + s_{(\delta-\rho+\sigma)}^{} c_{23}^{} s_{12}^2
490: s_{23}^{} s_{13}^{} - s_{(\rho-\sigma)}^{} c_{12}^{} s_{12}^{}
491: \left (s_{23}^2 - c_{23}^2 s_{13}^2 \right ) \right ]
492: \nonumber \\
493: && + \frac{c_{23}^{} c_{13}^2 s_{12}^{}}{\zeta_{13}^{}} \left
494: (c_{(\delta-\rho)}^{} s_{12}^{} s_{23}^{} - c_\rho^{} c_{12}^{}
495: c_{23}^{} s_{13}^{} \right ) \left [s_\rho^{} c_{12}^{} s_{12}^{}
496: s_{13}^{} \left (c_{23}^2 - s_{23}^2 \right ) \right .
497: \nonumber\\
498: && \left . + s_{(\delta-\rho)}^{} c_{23}^{} s_{12}^2 s_{23}^{}
499: s_{13}^2 + \left [c_\delta^{} s_\rho^{} - c_\rho^{} s_\delta^{}
500: \left (c_{13}^2 - s_{13}^2 \right ) \right ] c_{12}^2 c_{23}^{}
501: s_{23}^{} \right ]
502: \nonumber \\
503: && + \zeta_{13}^{} c_{23}^{} c_{13}^2 s_{12}^{} \left
504: (s_{(\delta-\rho)}^{} s_{12}^{} s_{23}^{} + s_\rho^{} c_{12}^{}
505: c_{23}^{} s_{13}^{} \right ) \left [c_\rho^{} c_{12}^{} s_{12}^{}
506: s_{13}^{} \left (c_{23}^2 - s_{23}^2 \right ) \right .
507: \nonumber \\
508: && \left . - c_{(\delta-\rho)}^{} c_{23}^{} s_{12}^2 s_{23}^{}
509: s_{13}^2 + \left [c_\delta^{} c_\rho^{} + s_\delta^{} s_\rho^{}
510: \left (c_{13}^2 - s_{13}^2 \right ) \right ] c_{12}^2 c_{23}^{}
511: s_{23}^{} \right ]
512: \nonumber \\
513: && - \frac{c_{12}^{} c_{23}^{} c_{13}^2}{\zeta_{23}^{}} \left
514: (c_{(\delta-\sigma)}^{} c_{12}^{} s_{23}^{} + c_\sigma^{}
515: c_{23}^{} s_{12}^{} s_{13}^{} \right ) \left [ \left (c_\delta^{}
516: s_\sigma^{} - c_\sigma^{} s_\delta^{} c_{13}^2 \right ) c_{23}^{}
517: s_{12}^2 s_{23}^{} \right .
518: \nonumber \\
519: && \left . - s_\sigma^{} c_{12}^{} s_{12}^{} s_{13}^{} \left
520: (c_{23}^2 - s_{23}^2 \right ) + \left (s_{(\delta-\sigma)}^{}
521: c_{12}^2 + c_\sigma^{} s_\delta^{} s_{12}^2 \right ) c_{23}^{}
522: s_{23}^{} s_{13}^2 \right ]
523: \nonumber \\
524: && + \zeta_{23}^{} c_{12}^{} c_{23}^{} c_{13}^2 \left
525: (s_{(\delta-\sigma)}^{} c_{12}^{} s_{23}^{} - s_\sigma^{}
526: c_{23}^{} s_{12}^{} s_{13}^{} \right ) \left [- \left (c_\delta^{}
527: c_\sigma^{} + s_\delta^{} s_\sigma^{} c_{13}^2 \right ) c_{23}^{}
528: s_{12}^2 s_{23}^{} \right .
529: \nonumber \\
530: && + c_\sigma^{} c_{12}^{} s_{12}^{} s_{13}^{} \left (c_{23}^2 -
531: s_{23}^2 \right ) + \left . \left . \left (c_{(\delta-\sigma)}^{}
532: c_{12}^2 + s_\delta^{} s_\sigma^{} s_{12}^2 \right ) c_{23}^{}
533: s_{23}^{} s_{13}^2 \right ] \right \} \; .
534: % (10)
535: \end{eqnarray}
536: Different from ${\rm d}\delta/{\rm d} t$, ${\rm d} {\cal J}/{\rm
537: d} t$ does not suffer from any divergence in the $\theta_{13}
538: \rightarrow 0$ limit. This feature proves that ${\cal J}$ itself
539: is a well-defined rephasing-invariant quantity, while $\delta$ is
540: parametrization-dependent and cannot be well defined when
541: $\theta_{13}$ vanishes. The RGEs of ${\cal A}^{}_{\rm L}$ and
542: ${\cal A}^{}_{\rm R}$ read as follows:
543: \begin{eqnarray}
544: \frac{{\rm d}{\cal A}_{\rm L}^{}}{{\rm d} t} & = &
545: \frac{y_\tau^2}{16\pi^2} \left \{ \frac{2}{\zeta_{12}^{}} \left
546: [c_{(\delta+\rho-\sigma)}^{} c_{12}^2 c_{23}^{} s_{23}^{}
547: s_{13}^{} - c_{(\delta-\rho+\sigma)}^{} c_{23}^{} s_{12}^2
548: s_{23}^{} s_{13}^{} - c_{(\rho-\sigma)}^{} c_{12}^{} s_{12}^{}
549: \left (s_{23}^2 - c_{23}^2 s_{13}^2 \right ) \right ] \right.
550: \nonumber \\
551: && \left [-s_\delta^{} s_{(\rho-\sigma)}^{} c_{23}^{} s_{23}^{}
552: s_{13}^{} + c_\delta^{} c_{(\rho-\sigma)}^{} c_{23}^{} s_{23}^{}
553: s_{13}^{} \left (c_{12}^2 - s_{12}^2 \right ) -
554: c_{(\rho-\sigma)}^{} c_{12}^{} s_{12}^{} \left (s_{23}^2 -
555: c_{23}^2 s_{13}^2 \right ) \right ]
556: \nonumber \\
557: && + 2\zeta_{12}^{} \left [s_{(\delta+\rho-\sigma)}^{} c_{12}^2
558: c_{23}^{} s_{23}^{} s_{13}^{} + s_{(\delta-\rho+\sigma)}^{}
559: c_{23}^{} s_{12}^2 s_{23}^{} s_{13}^{} - s_{(\rho-\sigma)}^{}
560: c_{12}^{} s_{12}^{} \left (s_{23}^2 - c_{23}^2 s_{13}^2 \right )
561: \right ]
562: \nonumber \\
563: && \left [c_{(\rho-\sigma)}^{} s_\delta^{} c_{23}^{} s_{23}^{}
564: s_{13}^{} + c_\delta^{} s_{(\rho-\sigma)}^{} c_{23}^{} \left
565: (c_{12}^2 - s_{12}^2 \right ) s_{23}^{} s_{13}^{} -
566: s_{(\rho-\sigma)}^{} c_{12}^{} s_{12}^{} \left (s_{23}^2 -
567: c_{23}^2 s_{13}^2 \right ) \right ]
568: \nonumber \\
569: && + \frac{2c_{23}^{} c_{13}^2 s_{23}^{}}{\zeta_{13}^{}} \left
570: (c_{(\delta-\rho)}^{} s_{12}^{} s_{23}^{} - c_\rho^{} c_{12}^{}
571: c_{23}^{} s_{13}^{} \right ) \left (c_{(\delta-\rho)}^{} c_{23}^{}
572: s_{12}^{} + c_\rho^{} c_{12}^{} s_{23}^{} s_{13}^{} \right )
573: \nonumber \\
574: && + 2\zeta_{13}^{} c_{23}^{} c_{13}^2 s_{23}^{} \left
575: (s_{(\delta-\rho)}^{} s_{12}^{} s_{23}^{} + s_\rho^{} c_{12}^{}
576: c_{23}^{} s_{13}^{} \right ) \left (s_{(\delta-\rho)}^{} c_{23}^{}
577: s_{12}^{} - s_\rho^{} c_{12}^{} s_{23}^{} s_{13}^{} \right )
578: \nonumber \\
579: && - \frac{2c_\sigma^{} c_{23}^{} c_{13}^2 s_{12}^{}
580: s_{13}^{}}{\zeta_{23}^{}} \left (c_{(\delta-\sigma)}^{} c_{12}^{}
581: s_{23}^{} + c_\sigma^{} c_{23}^{} s_{12}^{} s_{13}^{} \right )
582: \nonumber \\
583: && \left . + 2\zeta_{23}^{} s_\sigma^{} c_{23}^{} c_{13}^2
584: s_{12}^{} s_{13}^{} \left (s_{(\delta-\sigma)}^{} c_{12}^{}
585: s_{23}^{} - s_\sigma^{} c_{23}^{} s_{12}^{} s_{13}^{} \right )
586: \right \} \; ,
587: \nonumber \\
588: \nonumber \\
589: \frac{{\rm d}{\cal A}_{\rm R}^{}}{{\rm d} t} & = & \frac{y_\tau^2
590: c^2_{13}}{16\pi^2} \left \{ \frac{2c_{(\rho-\sigma)}^{} c_{12}^{}
591: s_{12}^{}}{\zeta_{12}^{}} \left [-c_{(\delta+\rho-\sigma)}^{}
592: c_{12}^2 c_{23}^{} s_{23}^{} s_{13}^{} +
593: c_{(\delta-\rho+\sigma)}^{} c_{23}^{} s_{12}^2 s_{23}^{} s_{13}^{}
594: \right . \right .
595: \nonumber \\
596: && \left . + c_{(\rho-\sigma)}^{} c_{12}^{} s_{12}^{} \left
597: (s_{23}^2 - c_{23}^2 s_{13}^2 \right ) \right ] - 2\zeta_{12}^{}
598: s_{(\rho-\sigma)}^{} c_{12}^{} s_{12}^{} \left
599: [s_{(\delta+\rho-\sigma)}^{} c_{12}^2 c_{23}^{} s_{23}^{}
600: s_{13}^{} \right .
601: \nonumber \\
602: && \left . + s_{(\delta-\rho+\sigma)}^{} c_{23}^{} s_{12}^2
603: s_{23}^{} s_{13}^{} - s_{(\rho-\sigma)}^{} c_{12}^{} s_{12}^{}
604: \left (s_{23}^2 - c_{23}^2 s_{13}^2 \right ) \right ]
605: \nonumber \\
606: && + \frac{2c_{23}^{} s_{23}^{}}{\zeta_{13}^{}} \left
607: (-c_{(\delta-\rho)}^{} s_{12}^{} s_{23}^{} + c_\rho^{} c_{12}^{}
608: c_{23}^{} s_{13}^{} \right ) \left (c_{(\delta-\rho)}^{} c_{23}^{}
609: s_{12}^{} + c_\rho^{} c_{12}^{} s_{23}^{} s_{13}^{} \right )
610: \nonumber \\
611: && + 2\zeta_{13}^{} c_{23}^{} s_{23}^{} \left
612: (s_{(\delta-\rho)}^{} s_{12}^{} s_{23}^{} + s_\rho^{} c_{12}^{}
613: c_{23}^{} s_{13}^{} \right ) \left (-s_{(\delta-\rho)}^{}
614: c_{23}^{} s_{12}^{} + s_\rho^{} c_{12}^{} s_{23}^{} s_{13}^{}
615: \right )
616: \nonumber \\
617: && - \frac{2c_{23}^2}{\zeta_{23}^{}} \left (c_{(\delta-\sigma)}^{}
618: c_{12}^{} s_{23}^{} + c_\sigma^{} c_{23}^{} s_{12}^{} s_{13}^{}
619: \right )^2 - \left . 2\zeta_{23}^{} c_{23}^2 \left
620: (s_{(\delta-\sigma)}^{} c_{12}^{} s_{23}^{} - s_\sigma^{}
621: c_{23}^{} s_{12}^{} s_{13}^{} \right )^2 \right \} \; .
622: % (11)
623: \end{eqnarray}
624: Eqs. (10) and (11) clearly show that the RGE evolution of $\cal
625: J$, ${\cal A}^{}_{\rm L}$ and ${\cal A}^{}_{\rm R}$ depends on the
626: Majorana phases $\rho$ and $\sigma$. Hence the radiative
627: corrections to these rephasing-invariant parameters would in
628: general be quite different, if neutrinos were Dirac particles
629: instead of Majorana particles
630: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
631: \footnote{See, e.g., Ref. \cite{Lindner} for a recent analysis of
632: the RGE evolution of Dirac neutrino masses and lepton flavor
633: mixing parameters.}.
634: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
635:
636: \section{Numerical Examples and Discussion}
637:
638: We proceed to illustrate the radiative generation of three
639: CP-violating phases by taking a few typical numerical examples.
640: The eigenvalues of $Y_l$ at $\Lambda_{\rm SS}$ are chosen in such
641: a way that they can correctly run to their low-energy values
642: \cite{PDG}
643: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
644: \footnote{A similar treatment is required for the gauge couplings,
645: the quark Yukawa coupling eigenvalues and the quark flavor mixing
646: parameters in the full set of RGEs
647: \cite{RGE1,RGE2,RGE3,RGE4,Mei,FX00}.}.
648: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
649: We assume the masses of three light neutrinos to be nearly
650: degenerate and $m^{}_1 \sim 0.2$ eV, so as to make the RGE running
651: effects of relevant physical quantities significant enough. The
652: initial values of $\kappa^{}_1$, $\kappa^{}_2$ and $\kappa^{}_3$
653: can be adjusted via
654: \begin{eqnarray}
655: \kappa^{}_1 & = & \frac{m^{}_1}{v^2\sin^2\beta} \; ,
656: \nonumber \\
657: \kappa^{}_2 & = & \frac{\sqrt{m^2_1 + \Delta
658: m^2_{21}}}{v^2\sin^2\beta} \; ,
659: \nonumber \\
660: \kappa^{}_3 & = & \frac{\sqrt{m^2_1 + \Delta
661: m^2_{31}}}{v^2\sin^2\beta} \; ,
662: % (12)
663: \end{eqnarray}
664: together with a typical input $\tan\beta = 10$, such that the
665: resultant neutrino mass-squared differences $\Delta m^2_{21}
666: \equiv m^2_2 - m^2_1$ and $\Delta m^2_{31} \equiv m^2_3 - m^2_1$
667: at $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$ are consistent with the solar and
668: atmospheric neutrino oscillation data \cite{SNO,SK,KM,CHOOZ,K2K}.
669: We follow a similar strategy to choose the initial values of three
670: mixing angles $\theta_{12}$, $\theta_{23}$ and $\theta_{13}$, in
671: order to reproduce their low-energy values determined or
672: constrained from a global analysis of current experimental data
673: \cite{Fit}. In view of the upper bound $\theta_{13} < 10^\circ$,
674: we shall typically take $\theta_{13} = 1^\circ$, $3^\circ$ and
675: $5^\circ$ in our numerical calculations. We allow one of three
676: CP-violating phases ($\delta$, $\rho$, $\sigma$) to vanish at
677: $\Lambda_{\rm SS}$ and examine whether it can run to $90^\circ$ at
678: $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$ by choosing the initial values of the other two
679: phase parameters properly.
680:
681: \subsection{Radiative Generation of $\delta=90^\circ$}
682:
683: First of all, let us look at the one-loop RGE evolution of
684: $\delta$ in the $m^{}_1 < m^{}_2 < m^{}_3$ case (i.e., $\Delta
685: m^2_{31} > 0$). The input and output values of relevant physical
686: parameters are listed in Table I. One can see that $\delta =
687: 90^\circ$ at $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$ can be radiatively generated from
688: $\delta = 0^\circ$ at $\Lambda_{\rm SS}$, if $\theta_{13} =
689: 1^\circ$, $\rho = 4.0^\circ$ and $\sigma = -57.5^\circ$ are input.
690: Changing the initial value of $\theta_{13}$ to $3^\circ$ or
691: $5^\circ$ but fixing the input values of the other quantities, we
692: find that only $\delta = 41.8^\circ$ or $\delta = 35.8^\circ$ can
693: be obtained at $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$. While the results of $m^{}_1$,
694: $\Delta m^2_{31}$, $\theta_{12}$ and $\theta_{23}$ at
695: $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$ are rather stable against the change of
696: $\theta_{13}$ from $1^\circ$ to $5^\circ$ at $\Lambda_{\rm SS}$,
697: the result of $\Delta m^2_{21}$ becomes smaller and less favored.
698:
699: The running behaviors of $\delta$, $\rho$ and $\sigma$ are
700: explicitly shown in FIG. 1, in which those of ${\cal J}$, ${\cal
701: A}^{}_{\rm L}$ and ${\cal A}^{}_{\rm R}$ are also illustrated.
702: Some comments are in order.
703: \begin{itemize}
704: \item The one-loop RGE running behaviors of three
705: CP-violating phases are quite similar in the chosen parameter
706: space. It is easy to understand this feature from Eq. (7): given
707: the conditions that $\kappa^{}_1 \approx \kappa^{}_2 \approx
708: \kappa^{}_3$ holds and $\theta_{13}$ is small, Eq. (7) can be
709: simplified to
710: \begin{eqnarray}
711: \frac{{\rm d} \delta}{{\rm d} t} & \approx &
712: \frac{y^2_\tau}{16\pi^2} \left [\frac{c^{}_{(\rho -\sigma)}
713: s^{}_{(\rho -\sigma)}}{\zeta^{}_{12}} s^2_{23} + \left (
714: \frac{c^{}_{(\delta -\rho)} s^{}_\rho}{\zeta^{}_{13}} -
715: \frac{c^{}_{(\delta -\sigma)} s^{}_\sigma}{\zeta^{}_{23}} \right )
716: \frac{c^{}_{12} s^{}_{12} c^{}_{23} s^{}_{23}}{s^{}_{13}} \right ]
717: \; ,
718: \nonumber \\
719: \frac{{\rm d} \rho}{{\rm d} t} & \approx &
720: \frac{y^2_\tau}{16\pi^2} \left [\frac{c^{}_{(\rho -\sigma)}
721: s^{}_{(\rho -\sigma)}}{\zeta^{}_{12}} s^2_{12} s^2_{23} + \left (
722: \frac{c^{}_{(\delta -\rho)} s^{}_\rho}{\zeta^{}_{13}} -
723: \frac{c^{}_{(\delta -\sigma)} s^{}_\sigma}{\zeta^{}_{23}} \right )
724: \frac{c^{}_{12} s^{}_{12} c^{}_{23} s^{}_{23}}{s^{}_{13}} \right ]
725: \; ,
726: \nonumber \\
727: \frac{{\rm d} \sigma}{{\rm d} t} & \approx &
728: \frac{y^2_\tau}{16\pi^2} \left [\frac{c^{}_{(\rho -\sigma)}
729: s^{}_{(\rho -\sigma)}}{\zeta^{}_{12}} c^2_{12} s^2_{23} + \left (
730: \frac{c^{}_{(\delta -\rho)} s^{}_\rho}{\zeta^{}_{13}} -
731: \frac{c^{}_{(\delta -\sigma)} s^{}_\sigma}{\zeta^{}_{23}} \right )
732: \frac{c^{}_{12} s^{}_{12} c^{}_{23} s^{}_{23}}{s^{}_{13}} \right ]
733: \; .
734: % (13)
735: \end{eqnarray}
736: Thus the trend of $\rho$ or $\sigma$ in the RGE evolution is very
737: similar to that of $\delta$.
738:
739: \item The Jarlskog parameter is sensitive to both $\delta$
740: and $\theta_{13}$. Given the initial condition $\theta_{13} =
741: 1^\circ$, $\delta = 90^\circ$ at $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$ can be
742: achieved from $\delta = 0^\circ$ at $\Lambda_{\rm SS}$. It turns
743: out that ${\cal J} \approx 0.26\%$ can be radiatively generated in
744: this specific case. When $\theta_{13} = 5^\circ$ is input at
745: $\Lambda_{\rm SS}$, one may arrive at ${\cal J} \approx 1\%$ at
746: $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$, a value which might be detectable in the
747: future long-baseline neutrino oscillation experiments.
748:
749: \item The off-diagonal asymmetries ${\cal A}^{}_{\rm L}$ and
750: ${\cal A}^{}_{\rm R}$ are both non-vanishing in our numerical
751: example. While ${\cal A}^{}_{\rm L}$ is sensitive to the input of
752: $\theta_{13}$, ${\cal A}^{}_{\rm R}$ is not. The reason for the
753: latter feature is simply that ${\cal A}^{}_{\rm R} = c^2_{13}
754: (s^2_{12} - s^2_{23})$ holds.
755: \end{itemize}
756: It is worth mentioning that the unitarity of $V$ requires that its
757: six unitarity triangles in the complex plane have the same area,
758: amounting to ${\cal J}/2$ \cite{FX00}. Thus the radiative
759: generation of $\delta$ or ${\cal J}$ geometrically implies the
760: radiative generation of every leptonic unitarity triangle; i.e.,
761: three overlapped lines (sides) at $\Lambda_{\rm SS}$ can evolve
762: into a triangle at $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$.
763:
764: Now let us examine whether the radiative generation of $\delta =
765: 90^\circ$ at $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$ can be achieved from other initial
766: values of $\rho$ and $\sigma$, when $\theta_{13} = 1^\circ$ holds
767: and $m^{}_1$, $\Delta m^2_{21}$, $\Delta m^2_{31}$, $\theta_{12}$
768: and $\theta_{23}$ take the same input values as before at
769: $\Lambda_{\rm SS}$ (see Table I). We find out two new numerical
770: examples with $(\rho, ~\sigma) = (0^\circ, -59.9^\circ)$ and
771: $(10^\circ, -57^\circ)$, respectively, as shown in FIG. 2. Note
772: that both $\delta$ and $\rho$ (or $\sigma$) can be radiatively
773: generated from $\sigma \neq 0^\circ$ (or $\rho \neq 0^\circ$) at
774: the seesaw scale
775: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
776: \footnote{The possibility to simultaneously generate $\rho$ and
777: $\sigma$ from $\delta \neq 0^\circ$ at $\Lambda_{\rm SS}$ via the
778: RGE evolution is in general expected to be strongly suppressed,
779: because the leading terms of ${\rm d}\rho/{\rm d}t$ and ${\rm
780: d}\sigma/{\rm d}t$ in Eq. (7) vanish for $\rho = \sigma = 0^\circ$
781: at $\Lambda_{\rm SS}$. Only in the $\theta_{13} \rightarrow 0$
782: limit, the running effects of three CP-violating phases could
783: become significant \cite{Mei}.}.
784: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
785: Our results hint at the existence of strong parameter degeneracy
786: in obtaining $\delta = 90^\circ$ at $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$ from
787: $\delta = 0^\circ$ at $\Lambda_{\rm SS}$. To resolve this problem
788: is certainly a big challenge in model building, unless two
789: Majorana CP-violating phases could separately be measured at low
790: energies.
791:
792: Finally we demonstrate that it is also possible to radiatively
793: generate $\delta = 90^\circ$ at $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$ from $\delta =
794: 0^\circ$ at $\Lambda_{\rm SS}$ in the $\Delta m^2_{31} < 0$ case.
795: Our numerical results are shown in FIG. 3, where the initial
796: values of relevant parameters are listed in Table II. One can see
797: that the one-loop RGE running behaviors of three CP-violating
798: phases in FIG. 3 are very similar to those in FIG. 1, although the
799: initial conditions in these two cases are quite different. The
800: reason for this similarity has actually been reflected by Eq.
801: (13), where the sign of $\Delta m^2_{31}$ does not play a role in
802: the leading-order approximation.
803:
804: \subsection{Radiative Generation of $\rho=90^\circ$}
805:
806: We continue to take a look at the one-loop RGE evolution of $\rho$
807: in the $m^{}_1 < m^{}_2 < m^{}_3$ case (i.e., $\Delta m^2_{31} >
808: 0$). The input and output values of relevant physical parameters
809: are listed in Table III. One can see that there is no difficulty
810: to radiatively generate $\rho = 90^\circ$ at $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$
811: from $\rho = 0^\circ$ at $\Lambda_{\rm SS}$, provided $\theta_{13}
812: = 1^\circ$, $\delta = 0^\circ$ and $\sigma = -67.7^\circ$ are
813: input. Allowing the initial value of $\theta_{13}$ to change to
814: $3^\circ$ or $5^\circ$ but fixing the input values of the other
815: quantities, we find that only $\rho = 17.6^\circ$ or $\rho =
816: 12.1^\circ$ can be obtained at $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$. Again the
817: results of $m^{}_1$, $\Delta m^2_{31}$, $\theta_{12}$ and
818: $\theta_{23}$ at $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$ are quite stable against the
819: change of $\theta_{13}$ from $1^\circ$ to $5^\circ$ at
820: $\Lambda_{\rm SS}$, but the result of $\Delta m^2_{21}$ becomes
821: smaller.
822:
823: The RGE running behaviors of three CP-violating phases $(\delta,
824: \rho, \sigma)$ and three rephasing-invariant parameters $({\cal
825: J}, {\cal A}^{}_{\rm L}, {\cal A}^{}_{\rm R})$ are explicitly
826: shown in FIG. 4. Comparing this figure with FIG. 1, one may
827: observe much similarity between them. There are two reasons for
828: this similarity: first, the initial conditions in these two cases
829: are not very different; second, the evolution of $\delta$, $\rho$
830: and $\sigma$ is dominated by Eq. (13) in both cases.
831:
832: \subsection{Radiative Generation of $\sigma=90^\circ$}
833:
834: Finally let us look at the RGE evolution of $\sigma$ in the
835: $m^{}_1 < m^{}_2 < m^{}_3$ case (i.e., $\Delta m^2_{31} > 0$). The
836: input and output values of relevant physical parameters are listed
837: in Table IV. One can see that there is no difficulty to
838: radiatively generate $\sigma = 90^\circ$ at $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$
839: from $\sigma = 0^\circ$ at $\Lambda_{\rm SS}$, if $\theta_{13} =
840: 1^\circ$, $\delta = 119.7^\circ$ and $\rho = 60.8^\circ$ are
841: input. Allowing the initial value of $\theta_{13}$ to change to
842: $3^\circ$ or $5^\circ$ but fixing the input values of the other
843: quantities, we find that only $\sigma = 34.4^\circ$ or $\sigma =
844: 29.8^\circ$ can be obtained at $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$. The results of
845: $m^{}_1$, $\Delta m^2_{31}$, $\theta_{12}$ and $\theta_{23}$ at
846: $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$ are very stable against the change of
847: $\theta_{13}$ from $1^\circ$ to $5^\circ$ at $\Lambda_{\rm SS}$,
848: but the result of $\Delta m^2_{21}$ becomes larger and less
849: favored.
850:
851: The RGE running behaviors of $\delta$, $\rho$ and $\sigma$ are
852: shown in FIG. 5, in which those of ${\cal J}$, ${\cal A}^{}_{\rm
853: L}$ and ${\cal A}^{}_{\rm R}$ are also illustrated. Again the
854: evolution of three CP-violating phases is dominated by Eq. (13).
855: Because $\delta$ evolves from the second quadrant to the third one
856: during the RGE running, a flip of the sign of ${\cal J}$ appears
857: around $\delta = 180^\circ$. The signs of ${\cal A}^{}_{\rm L}$
858: and ${\cal A}^{}_{\rm R}$ keep unchanged from $\Lambda_{\rm SS}$
859: to $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$, implying that the geometrical structure of
860: $V$ does not change in a significant way.
861:
862: In all the cases discussed above, $\langle m\rangle_{ee} \sim
863: m^{}_1$ holds as a consequence of the approximate mass degeneracy
864: of three light neutrinos. Indeed, the smallness of $\theta_{13}$
865: allows us to obtain an approximate expression of $\langle
866: m\rangle_{ee}$:
867: \begin{equation}
868: \langle m\rangle_{ee} \approx m^{}_1 \sqrt{1 - \sin^2 2\theta_{12}
869: \sin^2 (\rho - \sigma)} \in \left [m^{}_1 \cos 2\theta_{12}, ~
870: m^{}_1 \right ] \; .
871: % (14)
872: \end{equation}
873: Given $m^{}_1 \approx 0.2$ eV and $\theta_{12} \approx 33^\circ$
874: at low-energy scales, $\langle m\rangle_{ee}$ turns out to lie in
875: the range $0.08 ~ {\rm eV} \leq \langle m\rangle_{ee} \leq 0.2 ~
876: {\rm eV}$, a result consistent with the present experimental upper
877: limit $\langle m\rangle_{ee} < 0.38$ eV \cite{Fit}.
878:
879: \section{Summary}
880:
881: Taking account of a very useful parametrization of the $3\times 3$
882: MNS matrix $V$, we have derived the one-loop RGEs for its three
883: mixing angles $(\theta_{12}, \theta_{23}, \theta_{13})$, three
884: CP-violating phases $(\delta, \rho, \sigma)$ and three
885: rephasing-invariant quantities $({\cal J}, {\cal A}^{}_{\rm L},
886: {\cal A}^{}_{\rm R})$. Particular attention has been paid to the
887: radiative generation of leptonic CP violation, because the Dirac
888: phase $\delta$ and the Majorana phases $\rho$ and $\sigma$ are
889: entangled with one another in the RGE evolution from the seesaw
890: scale $\Lambda_{\rm SS}$ to the electroweak scale $\Lambda_{\rm
891: EW}$. We have shown that $\delta =90^\circ$ at $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$
892: can be radiatively generated from $\delta =0^\circ$ at
893: $\Lambda_{\rm SS}$ in the minimal supersymmetric standard model,
894: provided the light neutrino masses are nearly degenerate and the
895: mixing angle $\theta_{13}$ is of ${\cal O}(1^\circ)$ or smaller.
896: As for $\rho$ and $\sigma$, it is also possible to radiatively
897: generate $\rho =90^\circ$ or $\sigma = 90^\circ$ at $\Lambda_{\rm
898: EW}$ from $\rho =0^\circ$ or $\sigma = 0^\circ$ at $\Lambda_{\rm
899: SS}$. An interesting feature of our numerical analysis is that the
900: one-loop RGE running behaviors of three CP-violating phases are
901: quite similar in the chosen parameter space, no matter whether the
902: sign of the neutrino mass-squared difference $\Delta m^2_{31}$ is
903: positive or negative. As an important by-product, the geometrical
904: structure of $V$ (i.e., its off-diagonal asymmetries and the area
905: of its unitarity triangles in the complex plane) against radiative
906: corrections has also been discussed.
907:
908: At this point, it is worthwhile to summarize some remarkable
909: differences between our analytical and numerical results and those
910: obtained in Refs. \cite{RGE2,RGE3}:
911:
912: (1) The phase convention of $V$ used in Refs. \cite{RGE2,RGE3}
913: leads to the apparent dependence of $\langle m\rangle_{ee}$ (the
914: effective mass of the neutrinoless double-beta decay) on $\delta$,
915: thus it is ill to refer to $\delta$ as the ``Dirac" CP-violating
916: phase. Such an ambiguity has been avoided in our phase convention
917: of $V$, which forbids $\delta$ to enter the expression of $\langle
918: m\rangle_{ee}$. Our Majorana phases ($\rho$ and $\sigma$) are
919: related to the ones defined by Casas {\it et al} \cite{RGE2}
920: ($\phi$ and $\phi'$) or by Antusch {\it et al} \cite{RGE3}
921: ($\varphi^{}_1$ and $\varphi^{}_2$) as follows: $\varphi^{}_1 =
922: \phi = 2 \left (\delta - \rho \right )$ and $\varphi^{}_2 = \phi'
923: = 2 \left (\delta - \sigma \right )$. On the other hand, our Dirac
924: phase $\delta$ is indistinguishable from their phase parameter
925: $\delta$ in the description of leptonic CP violation in neutrino
926: oscillations.
927:
928: (2) Our RGEs for three mixing angles and three CP-violating phases
929: are apparently different from those given in Refs.
930: \cite{RGE2,RGE3}, just because we have taken a different and more
931: instructive phase convention for $V$. In particular, the leading
932: terms of ${\rm d}\rho/{\rm d}t$ and ${\rm d}\sigma/{\rm d}t$
933: (i.e., the terms proportional to $1/\zeta^{}_{12}$ and
934: $1/s^{}_{13}$) are very similar to those of ${\rm d}\delta/{\rm
935: d}t$, as one can see from Eq. (7) or Eq. (13). This result implies
936: that three CP-violating phases have similar RGE running behaviors
937: in our phase convention. In contrast, the RGE running effect on
938: $\varphi^{}_1$ (or $\phi$) and $\varphi^{}_2$ (or $\phi'$) is much
939: weaker than that on $\delta$ in Refs. \cite{RGE2,RGE3}.
940:
941: (3) The one-loop RGEs for ${\cal J}$, ${\cal A}_{\rm L}$ and
942: ${\cal A}_{\rm R}$ given in Eqs. (10) and (11) are new results,
943: although they can be derived from Eqs. (6) and (7) in a
944: straightforward way. These three quantities are actually
945: rephasing-invariant or parametrization-independent. Hence we can
946: get some more generic feeling about radiative corrections to the
947: leptonic CP-violating effect and the geometrical structure of $V$
948: from the RGE evolution of ${\cal J}$, ${\cal A}_{\rm L}$ and
949: ${\cal A}_{\rm R}$. This kind of study was not done in Refs.
950: \cite{RGE2,RGE3} or elsewhere.
951:
952: (4) Different from those previous works, we have concentrated on
953: the novel possibilities to radiatively generate $\delta =
954: 90^\circ$, $\rho = 90^\circ$ or $\sigma = 90^\circ$ at
955: $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$ from $\delta = 0^\circ$, $\rho =0^\circ$ or
956: $\sigma =0^\circ$ at $\Lambda_{\rm SS}$ in our numerical
957: exercises. Because of ${\cal J} \propto \sin\delta$, $\delta \sim
958: 90^\circ$ at low energies is a necessary condition to achieve
959: sufficiently large CP- and $T$-violating effects in neutrino
960: oscillations. On the other hand, $\rho \sim 90^\circ$ or $\sigma
961: \sim 90^\circ$ at low energies may result in a kind of large
962: cancellation in $\langle m\rangle_{ee}$, implying the possible
963: suppression of this unique experimental observable to identify the
964: Majorana nature of massive neutrinos.
965:
966: It is also worth remarking that our analysis is essentially
967: independent of the specific textures of lepton Yukawa coupling
968: matrices, thus it can be applied to the concrete work of model
969: building. Since the elegant thermal leptogenesis mechanism is
970: usually expected to work at the seesaw scale, a study of its
971: consequences at low-energy scales is available by means of the
972: one-loop RGEs that we have obtained. In other words, the RGEs may
973: serve as a useful bridge to establish a kind of connection between
974: the phenomena of CP violation at low- and high-energy scales. It
975: would be extremely interesting, in our opinion, if the phase
976: parameter governing the strength of CP violation in a
977: long-baseline neutrino oscillation experiment could be radiatively
978: generated from those CP-violating phases which control the
979: matter-antimatter asymmetry of our universe at the seesaw scale.
980:
981: \vspace{0.5cm}
982:
983: One of us (Z.Z.X.) is grateful to S. Zhou for very helpful
984: discussions. This work was supported in part by the National
985: Nature Science Foundation of China.
986:
987: %\newpage
988:
989: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
990: \bibitem{SNO} SNO Collaboration, Q.R. Ahmad {\it et al.},
991: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 89}, 011301 (2002).
992:
993: \bibitem{SK} For a review, see: C.K. Jung {\it et al.},
994: Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. {\bf 51}, 451 (2001).
995:
996: \bibitem{KM} KamLAND Collaboration, K. Eguchi {\it et al.},
997: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 90}, 021802 (2003).
998:
999: \bibitem{CHOOZ} CHOOZ Collaboration, M. Apollonio {\it et al.},
1000: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 420}, 397 (1998);
1001: Palo Verde Collaboration, F. Boehm {\it et al.},
1002: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 84}, 3764 (2000).
1003:
1004: \bibitem{K2K} K2K Collaboration, M.H. Ahn {\it et al.},
1005: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 90}, 041801 (2003).
1006:
1007: \bibitem{MNS} Z. Maki, M. Nakagawa, and S. Sakata,
1008: Prog. Theor. Phys. {\bf 28}, 870 (1962).
1009:
1010: \bibitem{FX01} H. Fritzsch and Z.Z. Xing, Phys. Lett. B {\bf 517},
1011: 363 (2001); Z.Z. Xing, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A {\bf 19}, 1 (2004).
1012:
1013: \bibitem{Fit} M. Maltoni, T. Schwetz, M.A. T$\rm\acute{o}$rtola,
1014: and J.W.F. Valle, New J. Phys. {\bf 6}, 122 (2004); A. Strumia and
1015: F. Vissani, hep-ph/0503246.
1016:
1017: \bibitem{SS} P. Minkowski, Phys. Lett. B {\bf 67}, 421
1018: (1977); T. Yanagida, in {\it Proceedings of the Workshop on
1019: Unified Theory and the Baryon Number of the Universe}, edited by
1020: O. Sawada and A. Sugamoto (KEK, Tsukuba, 1979), p. 95; M.
1021: Gell-Mann, P. Ramond, and R. Slansky, in {\it Supergravity},
1022: edited by F. van Nieuwenhuizen and D. Freedman (North Holland,
1023: Amsterdam, 1979), p. 315; S.L. Glashow, in {\it Quarks and
1024: Leptons}, edited by M. L$\rm\acute{e}vy$ {\it et al.} (Plenum, New
1025: York, 1980), p. 707; R.N. Mohapatra and G. Senjanovic, Phys. Rev.
1026: Lett. {\bf 44}, 912 (1980).
1027:
1028: \bibitem{RGE} P.H. Chankowski and Z. Pluciennik, Phys. Lett. B
1029: {\bf 316}, 312 (1993); K.S. Babu, C.N. Leung, and J. Pantaleone,
1030: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 319}, 191 (1993); M. Tanimoto, Phys. Lett. B
1031: {\bf 360}, 41 (1995).
1032:
1033: \bibitem{RGE1} For a recent review with extensive references,
1034: see: P.H. Chankowski and S. Pokorski, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A {\bf
1035: 17}, 575 (2002).
1036:
1037: \bibitem{RGE2} J.A. Casas, J.R. Espinosa, A. Ibarra, and I. Navarro,
1038: Nucl. Phys. B {\bf 573}, 652 (2000).
1039:
1040: \bibitem{RGE3} S. Antusch, J. Kersten, and M. Lindner,
1041: M. Ratz, Nucl. Phys. B {\bf 674}, 401 (2003).
1042:
1043: \bibitem{RGE4} S. Antusch, J. Kersten, M. Lindner, M. Ratz,
1044: M.A. Schmidt, JHEP {\bf 0503}, 024 (2005).
1045:
1046: \bibitem{Mei} J.W. Mei, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 71}, 073012 (2005).
1047: At this point it is worthwhile to correct two typing errors in
1048: Appendix B of this paper: (1) Eq. (B3) should be $\dot{\kappa}' +
1049: T_\kappa \kappa' + \kappa' T^T_\kappa = \alpha^{}_\kappa \kappa' +
1050: \tilde{N}_\kappa \kappa' + \kappa' \tilde{N}^T_\kappa$; and (2)
1051: Eq. (B5) should be $\dot{k}^{}_i = (\alpha^{}_\kappa + 2 {\rm Re}
1052: \tilde{N}_{\kappa, ii} ) k^{}_i$.
1053:
1054: \bibitem{LEP} M. Fukugita and T. Yanagida, Phys. Lett. B {\bf
1055: 174}, 45 (1986).
1056:
1057: \bibitem{FX95} H. Fritzsch and Z.Z. Xing, Phys. Lett. B {\bf 353},
1058: 114 (1995); Nucl. Phys. B {\bf 556}, 49 (1999).
1059:
1060: \bibitem{J} C. Jarlskog, Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 55}, 1039 (1985).
1061:
1062: \bibitem{Xing02} Z.Z. Xing, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 65}, 113010 (2002).
1063:
1064: \bibitem{Lindner} M. Lindner, M. Ratz, and M.A. Schmidt,
1065: hep-ph/0506280; C.W. Chiang, Phys. Rev. D {\bf 63}, 076009 (2001).
1066:
1067: \bibitem{PDG} Particle Data Group, S. Eidelman {\it et al.},
1068: Phys. Lett. B {\bf 592}, 1 (2004).
1069:
1070: \bibitem{FX00} H. Fritzsch and Z.Z. Xing, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. {\bf 45}, 1
1071: (2000); and references therein.
1072:
1073:
1074:
1075:
1076: \end{thebibliography}
1077:
1078: \newpage
1079:
1080: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Table 1 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1081: \begin{table}
1082: \caption{Radiative generation of $\delta = 90^\circ$ at the
1083: electroweak scale $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$ from $\delta =0^\circ$ at
1084: the seesaw scale $\Lambda_{\rm SS}$ in the MSSM with $\tan\beta =
1085: 10$ and $\Delta m^2_{31} >0$.} \vspace{0.2cm}
1086: \begin{center}
1087: \begin{tabular}{c|l|ccc}
1088: Parameter & Input $\left(\Lambda_{\rm SS}^{}\right)$ ~~~~~~ &
1089: \multicolumn{3}{c}{Output $( \Lambda_{\rm EW} )$} \\ & &
1090: $\theta_{13}
1091: = 1^\circ$ & $\theta_{13} = 3^\circ$ & $\theta_{13} = 5^\circ$ \\
1092: \hline
1093: $m^{}_1 ({\rm eV} )$ & 0.241 & 0.20 & 0.20 & 0.20 \\
1094: %-----------------------------
1095: $\Delta m^2_{21} ( 10^{-5} ~{\rm eV}^2 )$ & 20.4 & 7.79 & 7.17 & 6.56 \\
1096: %-----------------------------
1097: $\Delta m^2_{31} ( 10^{-3} ~{\rm eV}^2 )$ & 3.32 & 2.20 & 2.20 & 2.20 \\
1098: \hline
1099: %=============================
1100: $\theta_{12}$ & $24.1^\circ$ & $33.0^\circ$ & $33.0^\circ$ & $33.1^\circ$ \\
1101: %-----------------------------
1102: $\theta_{23}$ & $43.9^\circ$ & $45.1^\circ$ & $45.0^\circ$ & $45.0^\circ$ \\
1103: %-----------------------------
1104: $\theta_{13}$ & $1^\circ/3^\circ/5^\circ$ & $0.65^\circ$ & $2.46^\circ$ & $4.52^\circ$ \\
1105: \hline
1106: %-----------------------------
1107: $\delta$ & $0^\circ$ & $90.0^\circ$ & $41.8^\circ$ & $35.8^\circ$ \\
1108: %-----------------------------
1109: $\rho$ & $4.0^\circ$ & $72.2^\circ$ & $23.8^\circ$ & $17.6^\circ$ \\
1110: %-----------------------------
1111: $\sigma$ & $-57.5^\circ$ & $26.3^\circ$ & $-22.0^\circ$ & $-28.1^\circ$ \\
1112: \end{tabular}
1113: \end{center}
1114: \end{table}
1115: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1116:
1117: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Table 2 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1118: \begin{table}
1119: \caption{Radiative generation of $\delta = 90^\circ$ at the
1120: electroweak scale $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$ from $\delta =0^\circ$ at
1121: the seesaw scale $\Lambda_{\rm SS}$ in the MSSM with $\tan\beta =
1122: 10$ and $\Delta m^2_{31} < 0$.} \vspace{0.2cm}
1123: \begin{center}
1124: \begin{tabular}{c|l|ccc}
1125: Parameter & Input $\left(\Lambda_{\rm SS}^{}\right)$ ~~~~~ &
1126: \multicolumn{3}{c}{Output $( \Lambda_{\rm EW}
1127: )$} \\
1128: & & $\theta_{13}
1129: = 1^\circ$ & $\theta_{13} = 3^\circ$ & $\theta_{13} = 5^\circ$ \\
1130: \hline
1131: $m^{}_1 ({\rm eV} )$ & 0.241 & 0.20 & 0.20 & 0.20 \\
1132: %-----------------------------
1133: $\Delta m^2_{21} ( 10^{-5} ~{\rm eV}^2 )$ & 20.8 & 7.96 & 7.37 & 6.79 \\
1134: %-----------------------------
1135: $\Delta m^2_{31} ( 10^{-3} ~{\rm eV}^2 )$ & -3.08 & -2.20 & -2.21 & -2.21 \\
1136: \hline
1137: %=============================
1138: $\theta_{12}$ & $25.1^\circ$ & $33.3^\circ$ & $33.5^\circ$ & $33.7^\circ$ \\
1139: %-----------------------------
1140: $\theta_{23}$ & $46.7^\circ$ & $45.2^\circ$ & $45.2^\circ$ & $45.2^\circ$ \\
1141: %-----------------------------
1142: $\theta_{13}$ & $1^\circ/3^\circ/5^\circ$ & $0.68^\circ$ & $2.38^\circ$ & $4.34^\circ$ \\
1143: \hline
1144: %-----------------------------
1145: $\delta$ & $0^\circ$ & $90.0^\circ$ & $43.1^\circ$ & $36.8^\circ$ \\
1146: %-----------------------------
1147: $\rho$ & $-81.9^\circ$ & $-13.6^\circ$ & $-60.7^\circ$ & $-67.2^\circ$ \\
1148: %-----------------------------
1149: $\sigma$ & $34.3^\circ$ & $117.7^\circ$ & $70.6^\circ$ & $64.1^\circ$ \\
1150: \end{tabular}
1151: \end{center}
1152: \end{table}
1153: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1154:
1155: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Table 3 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1156: \begin{table}
1157: \caption{Radiative generation of $\rho = 90^\circ$ at the
1158: electroweak scale $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$ from $\rho =0^\circ$ at the
1159: seesaw scale $\Lambda_{\rm SS}$ in the MSSM with $\tan\beta = 10$
1160: and $\Delta m^2_{31} >0$.} \vspace{0.2cm}
1161: \begin{center}
1162: \begin{tabular}{c|l|ccc}
1163: Parameter & Input $\left(\Lambda_{\rm SS}^{}\right)$ ~~~~~ &
1164: \multicolumn{3}{c}{Output $( \Lambda_{\rm EW}
1165: )$} \\
1166: & & $\theta_{13}
1167: = 1^\circ$ & $\theta_{13} = 3^\circ$ & $\theta_{13} = 5^\circ$ \\
1168: \hline
1169: $m^{}_1 ({\rm eV} )$ & 0.241 & 0.20 & 0.20 & 0.20 \\
1170: %-----------------------------
1171: $\Delta m^2_{21} ( 10^{-5} ~{\rm eV}^2 )$ & 20.4 & 8.54 & 7.90 & 7.27 \\
1172: %-----------------------------
1173: $\Delta m^2_{31} ( 10^{-3} ~{\rm eV}^2 )$ & 3.32 & 2.21 & 2.20 & 2.20 \\
1174: \hline
1175: %=============================
1176: $\theta_{12}$ & $27.6^\circ$ & $33.1^\circ$ & $33.2^\circ$ & $33.3^\circ$ \\
1177: %-----------------------------
1178: $\theta_{23}$ & $43.9^\circ$ & $44.8^\circ$ & $44.8^\circ$ & $44.8^\circ$ \\
1179: %-----------------------------
1180: $\theta_{13}$ & $1^\circ/3^\circ/5^\circ$ & $0.43^\circ$ & $2.17^\circ$ & $4.24^\circ$ \\
1181: \hline
1182: %-----------------------------
1183: $\delta$ & $0^\circ$ & $107.6^\circ$ & $35.4^\circ$ & $30.2^\circ$ \\
1184: %-----------------------------
1185: $\rho$ & $0^\circ$ & $90.2^\circ$ & $17.6^\circ$ & $12.1^\circ$ \\
1186: %-----------------------------
1187: $\sigma$ & $-67.7^\circ$ & $34.1^\circ$ & $-38.3^\circ$ & $-44.6^\circ$ \\
1188: \end{tabular}
1189: \end{center}
1190: \end{table}
1191: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1192:
1193: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Table 4 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1194: \begin{table}
1195: \caption{Radiative generation of $\sigma = 90^\circ$ at the
1196: electroweak scale $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$ from $\sigma =0^\circ$ at
1197: the seesaw scale $\Lambda_{\rm SS}$ in the MSSM with $\tan\beta =
1198: 10$ and $\Delta m^2_{31} >0$.} \vspace{0.2cm}
1199: \begin{center}
1200: \begin{tabular}{c|l|ccc}
1201: Parameter & Input $\left(\Lambda_{\rm SS}^{}\right)$ ~~~~~ &
1202: \multicolumn{3}{c}{Output $( \Lambda_{\rm EW}
1203: )$} \\
1204: & & $\theta_{13}
1205: = 1^\circ$ & $\theta_{13} = 3^\circ$ & $\theta_{13} = 5^\circ$ \\
1206: \hline
1207: $m^{}_1 ({\rm eV} )$ & 0.241 & 0.20 & 0.20 & 0.20 \\
1208: %-----------------------------
1209: $\Delta m^2_{21} ( 10^{-5} ~{\rm eV}^2 )$ & 20.3 & 8.24 & 8.85 & 9.50 \\
1210: %-----------------------------
1211: $\Delta m^2_{31} ( 10^{-3} ~{\rm eV}^2 )$ & 3.32 & 2.21 & 2.21 & 2.21 \\
1212: \hline
1213: %=============================
1214: $\theta_{12}$ & $24.1^\circ$ & $33.2^\circ$ & $34.2^\circ$ & $35.2^\circ$ \\
1215: %-----------------------------
1216: $\theta_{23}$ & $43.9^\circ$ & $44.6^\circ$ & $44.6^\circ$ & $44.6^\circ$ \\
1217: %-----------------------------
1218: $\theta_{13}$ & $1^\circ/3^\circ/5^\circ$ & $0.51^\circ$ & $2.27^\circ$ & $4.29^\circ$ \\
1219: \hline
1220: %-----------------------------
1221: $\delta$ & $119.7^\circ$ & $216.0^\circ$ & $161.0^\circ$ & $157.1^\circ$ \\
1222: %-----------------------------
1223: $\rho$ & $60.8^\circ$ & $135.3^\circ$ & $78.8^\circ$ & $73.6^\circ$ \\
1224: %-----------------------------
1225: $\sigma$ & $0^\circ$ & $90.0^\circ$ & $34.4^\circ$ & $29.8^\circ$ \\
1226: \end{tabular}
1227: \end{center}
1228: \end{table}
1229: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1230:
1231: \newpage
1232:
1233: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Fig. 1 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1234: \begin{figure}
1235: \begin{center}
1236: \vspace{-1cm}
1237: \includegraphics[width=15.5cm,height=22.5cm]{fig1.ps}
1238: \vspace{-3.cm}
1239: \caption{The RGE running behaviors of three
1240: CP-violating phases and three rephasing-invariant quantities of
1241: $V$ from $\Lambda_{\rm SS}$ to $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$ in the MSSM,
1242: where the input values of relevant parameters can be found from
1243: Table I.}
1244: \end{center}
1245: \end{figure}
1246: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1247:
1248: \newpage
1249:
1250: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Fig. 2 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1251: \begin{figure}
1252: \begin{center}
1253: \vspace{-1cm}
1254: \includegraphics[width=15.5cm,height=22.5cm]{fig2.ps}
1255: \vspace{-3cm}
1256: \caption{The radiative generation of $\delta =
1257: 90^\circ$ at $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$ from $\theta_{13} = 1^\circ$ and
1258: different values of $\rho$ and $\sigma$ at $\Lambda_{\rm SS}$. The
1259: input values of other parameters can be found from Table I.}
1260: \end{center}
1261: \end{figure}
1262: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1263:
1264: \newpage
1265:
1266: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Fig. 3 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1267: \begin{figure}
1268: \begin{center}
1269: \vspace{-1cm}
1270: \includegraphics[width=15.5cm,height=22.5cm]{fig3.ps}
1271: \vspace{-3cm}
1272: \caption{The RGE running behaviors of three
1273: CP-violating phases and three rephasing-invariant quantities of
1274: $V$ from $\Lambda_{\rm SS}$ to $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$ in the MSSM,
1275: where the input values of relevant parameters can be found from
1276: Table II.}
1277: \end{center}
1278: \end{figure}
1279: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1280:
1281: \newpage
1282:
1283: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Fig. 4 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1284: \begin{figure}
1285: \begin{center}
1286: \vspace{-1cm}
1287: \includegraphics[width=15.5cm,height=22.5cm]{fig4.ps}
1288: \vspace{-3.cm}
1289: \caption{The RGE running behaviors of three
1290: CP-violating phases and three rephasing-invariant quantities of
1291: $V$ from $\Lambda_{\rm SS}$ to $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$ in the MSSM,
1292: where the input values of relevant parameters can be found from
1293: Table III.}
1294: \end{center}
1295: \end{figure}
1296: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1297:
1298: \newpage
1299:
1300: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Fig. 5 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1301: \begin{figure}
1302: \begin{center}
1303: \vspace{-1cm}
1304: \includegraphics[width=15.5cm,height=22.5cm]{fig5.ps}
1305: \vspace{-3.cm}
1306: \caption{The RGE running behaviors of three
1307: CP-violating phases and three rephasing-invariant quantities of
1308: $V$ from $\Lambda_{\rm SS}$ to $\Lambda_{\rm EW}$ in the MSSM,
1309: where the input values of relevant parameters can be found from
1310: Table IV.}
1311: \end{center}
1312: \end{figure}
1313: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
1314:
1315:
1316: \end{document}
1317: