1: %%

2: %% This is file `template-6s.tex',

3: %% generated with the docstrip utility.

4: %%

5: %% The original source files were:

6: %%

7: %% template.raw  (with options: `6s')

8: %% 

9: %% Template for the LaTeX class aipproc.

10: %% 

11: %% (C) 1998,2000,2001 American Institute of Physics and Frank Mittelbach

12: %% All rights reserved

13: %% 

14: %%

15: %% $Id: template.raw,v 1.12 2005/07/06 19:22:14 frank Exp $

16: %%

17: 

18: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

19: %% Please remove the next line of code if you

20: %% are satisfied that your installation is

21: %% complete and working.

22: %%

23: %% It is only there to help you in detecting

24: %% potential problems.

25: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

26: 

27: %\input{aipcheck}

28: 

29: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

30: %% SELECT THE LAYOUT

31: %%

32: %% The class supports further options.

33: %% See aipguide.pdf for details.

34: %%

35: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

36: 

37: \documentclass[

38:     ,final            % use final for the camera ready runs

39: %%  ,draft            % use draft while you are working on the paper

40: %%  ,numberedheadings % uncomment this option for numbered sections

41: %%  ,                 % add further options here if necessary

42:   ]

43:   {aipproc}

44: 

45: \layoutstyle{6x9}

46: 

47: \usepackage{epsfig}

48:  \usepackage{rotating}

49:  \usepackage{amsmath,amssymb}

50: %

51:  \usepackage{graphicx}

52: \usepackage{ifthen,array}

53:  \usepackage{setspace}

54:  \usepackage{fancyhdr}

55:  \usepackage{moreverb}

56:  \usepackage{rotating}

57: \usepackage{amsfonts}

58: \usepackage{bbm}

59: 

60: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% defs start %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

61: \def\e6{$E(6)$}

62: \def\10{$SO(10)$}

63: \def\21{$SU(2) \otimes U(1) $}

64: \def\lr{$SU(2)_L \otimes SU(2)_R \otimes U(1)$}

65: \def\422{$SU(4) \otimes SU(2) \otimes SU(2)$}

66: \def\321{$SU(3) \otimes SU(2) \otimes U(1)$}

67: \def\lsim{\raise0.3ex\hbox{$\;<$\kern-0.75em\raise-1.1ex\hbox{$\sim\;$}}}

68: \def\gsim{\raise0.3ex\hbox{$\;>$\kern-0.75em\raise-1.1ex\hbox{$\sim\;$}}}

69: \def\lfv{lepton flavour violation }

70: \def\lnv{lepton number violation }

71: \def\meff{\langle m_{\nu} \rangle}

72: \newcommand{\ed}{\end{document}}

73: \DeclareMathAlphabet{\mathsc}{OT1}{cmr}{m}{sc}

74: \newcommand{\bne}{\hbox{$\bar \nu_e$ }}

75: \newcommand{\nue}{\hbox{$\nu_e$ }}

76: \newcommand{\nm}{\hbox{$\nu_\mu$ }}

77: \newcommand{\bnm}{\hbox{$\bar \nu_\mu$ }}

78: \newcommand{\nt}{\hbox{$\nu_\tau$ }}

79: %\newcommand{\bnt}\hbox{$\bar \nu_\tau$ }}

80: 

81: \newcommand{\CL}   {C.L.}

82: \newcommand{\dof}  {d.o.f.}

83: \newcommand{\gof}{g.o.f.}

84: \newcommand{\EtAl} {{\it et al.\/}}

85: \newcommand{\eVq}  {\rm{eV}^2}

86: \newcommand{\Sol}  {\mathsc{sol}}

87: \newcommand{\Atm}  {\mathsc{atm}}

88: \newcommand{\JSQ}  {{Just-So$^2$}}

89: 

90: \newcommand{\Sbl}  {\mathsc{sbl}}

91: \newcommand{\Kl}  {\mathsc{KamLAND}}

92: \newcommand{\Nev}  {\mathsc{nev}}

93: \newcommand{\Lsnd} {\mathsc{lsnd}}

94: \newcommand{\Chooz}{\mathsc{chooz}}

95: 

96: \newcommand{\thl}{\theta_\Lsnd}

97: \newcommand{\sql}{\sin^2 2\thl}

98: 

99: \newcommand{\Dcq}  {\Delta\chi^2}

100: \newcommand{\Dms}  {\Delta m^2_\Sol}

101: \newcommand{\Dma}  {\Delta m^2_\Atm}

102: \newcommand{\Dml}{\Delta m^2_\Lsnd}

103: \newcommand{\Eps}  {\varepsilon}

104: \newcommand{\Epp}  {\varepsilon'}

105: 

106: \newcommand{\snocc}{SNO$_\mathrm{CC}^\mathrm{rate}$ }

107: \newcommand{\snotot}{SNO$_\mathrm{CC,NC}^\mathrm{SP,DN}$ }

108: 

109: \newcommand{\pnu}[1] {\overset{\smash{\scriptscriptstyle (-)}}{\nu}_{\hskip-3pt #1}}

110: \newcommand{\eps}{\epsilon_{13}}

111: \newcommand{\si}{S_{13}}

112: 

113: \def \znbb {$0\nu\beta\beta$ }

114: \def \nbb {$\beta\beta_{0\nu}$ }

115: 

116: \def \tnbb {2\nu\beta\beta}

117: \def\meff{\langle m_{\nu} \rangle}

118: \def\rp{$R_p \hspace{-1em}/\;\:$}

119: 

120: \def\VEV#1{\left\langle #1\right\rangle}

121: \let\vev\VEV

122: \def\ZP{$Z^\prime$ }

123: \def\e6{$E(6)$}

124: \def\10{$SO(10)$}

125: \def\21{$SU(2) \otimes U(1) $}

126: \def\lr{$SU(3) \otimes SU(2)_L \otimes SU(2)_R \otimes U(1)_{B-L}$ }

127: \def\422{$SU(4) \otimes SU(2) \otimes SU(2)$ }

128: \def\321{$SU(3) \otimes SU(2) \otimes U(1)$ }

129: 

130: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% defs end %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

131: 

132: \renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{1.05}

133: 

134: \newcommand{\AddrAHEP}{%

135:  Instituto de F\'{\i}sica Corpuscular,

136:   C.S.I.C. -- Universitat de Val{\`e}ncia \\

137:   Edificio de Institutos de Paterna, Apartado 22085,

138:   E--46071 Val{\`e}ncia, Spain\\}

139: 

140: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

141: %% FRONTMATTER

142: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

143: 

144: \begin{document}

145: \newcommand{\Od}{{\cal O}}

146: 

147: \title{Neutrinos in astroparticle physics}

148: \classification{}

149: \keywords      {neutrino mass, astroparticle physics}

150: 

151: \author{J. W. F. Valle}{

152: address={\AddrAHEP}}

153: 

154: 

155: \begin{abstract}

156:   I briefly discuss the role of neutrinos as probes in astroparticle

157:   physics and review the status of neutrino oscillation parameters as

158:   of June 2006, including recent fluxes, and latest SNO, K2K and MINOS

159:   results.

160: %

161:   I comment on the origin of neutrino masses in seesaw-type and

162:   low-scale models and mention some of their experimental signals.

163: \end{abstract}

164: \maketitle

165: 

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

167: %% MAINMATTER

168: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

169: 

170: \bibliographystyle{aipproc}   % if natbib is available

171: 

172:  \section{Introduction}

173: \label{sec:introduction}

174: 

175: Neutrinos play a central role as probes in astroparticle physics and

176: are basic indicators of what may lie ahead of the Standard Model (SM).

177: The discovery of neutrino oscillations comes mainly from the study of

178: ``heavenly''

179: neutrinos~\cite{fukuda:2002pe,ahmad:2002jz,Kajita:2004ga}, and has

180: been brilliantly confirmed by laboratory data from

181: reactors~\cite{araki:2004mb} and

182: accelerators~\cite{Ahn:2006zz,Tagg:2006sx}.

183: 

184: Here I summarize the status of the interpretation of the current

185: neutrino data within the simplest CP-conserving three-neutrino

186: oscillation scenario.

187: %

188: In addition to a determination of the solar and atmospheric

189: oscillation parameters $\theta_{12}$ \& $\Dms$ and $\theta_{23}$ \&

190: $\Dma$, one gets a constraint on the angle $\theta_{13}$.  Together

191: with the small ratio $\Dms/\Dma$ the angle $\theta_{13}$ holds the key

192: for future searches for CP violation in neutrino oscillation.  The

193: growing precision of oscillation experiments also opens good prospects

194: for improved robustness tests, probing unitarity

195: violation~\cite{schechter:1980gr} and other forms of non-standard

196: neutrino interactions.

197: 

198: The search for lepton number violating processes such as neutrinoless

199: double beta decay~\cite{elliott:2002xe,doi:1985dx} (\znbb) constitutes

200: a very important goal for the future, as this will probe whether

201: neutrinos are Dirac or Majorana particles, irrespective of the

202: mechanism that induces their mass. This is known as the ``black-box''

203: theorem~\cite{Schechter:1982bd}.  In addition, \znbb will be sensitive

204: to the absolute scale of neutrino mass and to CP violation induced by

205: the so-called Majorana phases~\cite{schechter:1980gr}, inaccessible in

206: conventional

207: oscillations~\cite{bilenky:1980cx,Schechter:1981gk,doi:1981yb}.

208: 

209: \section{Status of neutrino oscillations}

210: \label{sec:stat-neutr-oscill}

211: 

212: The discovery of oscillations marks a turning point in particle and

213: nuclear physics and implies that neutrinos have masses.  This

214: possibility has been first suggested by theory in the early eighties,

215: both on general grounds and on the basis of different versions of the

216: seesaw

217: mechanism~\cite{Minkowski:1977sc,Orloff:2005nu,Weinberg:1980bf,schechter:1980gr,schechter:1982cv,Lazarides:1980nt}.

218: %

219: The basic ingredient is the lepton mixing matrix, whose simplest

220: unitary 3-dimensional form is given as~\cite{schechter:1980gr}

221: %

222: \begin{equation}

223:   \label{eq:2227}

224: K =  \omega_{23} \omega_{13} \omega_{12}

225: \end{equation}

226: where each $\omega$ is effectively $2\times 2$, characterized by an

227: angle and a CP phase.  Majorana phases do not affect oscillations and,

228: moreover, current neutrino oscillation data have no sensitivity to the

229: remaining Dirac CP violation phase.  Thus we set the three phases to

230: zero.

231: %

232: In this approximation oscillations depend on the three mixing

233: parameters $\sin^2\theta_{12}, \sin^2\theta_{23}, \sin^2\theta_{13}$

234: and on the two mass-squared splittings $\Dms \equiv \Delta m^2_{21}

235: \equiv m^2_2 - m^2_1$ and $\Dma \equiv \Delta m^2_{31} \equiv m^2_3 -

236: m^2_1$ characterizing solar and atmospheric neutrinos.  The hierarchy

237: $\Dms \ll \Dma$ implies that, to a good approximation, one can set

238: $\Dms = 0$ in the analysis of atmospheric and accelerator data, and

239: $\Dma$ to infinity in the analysis of solar and reactor data.

240: 

241: Interpreting the data requires good calculations of the corresponding

242: fluxes~\cite{Bahcall:2004fg,Honda:2004yz}, neutrino cross sections and

243: response functions, as well as an accurate description of neutrino

244: propagation in the Sun and the Earth, taking into account matter

245: effects~\cite{mikheev:1985gs,wolfenstein:1978ue}.

246: 

247: The resulting three--neutrino oscillation parameters obtained in the

248: global analysis are summarized in Fig.~\ref{fig:global}. The analysis

249: includes all new neutrino oscillation data, as of June 2006, as

250: described in Appendix C of hep-ph/0405172 (v5)~\cite{Maltoni:2004ei}.

251: These include new Standard Solar Model~\cite{Bahcall:2005va}, new SNO

252: salt~\cite{Aharmim:2005gt}, latest K2K~\cite{Ahn:2006zz} and

253: MINOS~\cite{Tagg:2006sx} data.

254: %%

255: In the upper panels of the figure the $\Delta \chi^2$ is shown as a

256: function of the three mixing parameters $\sin^2\theta_{12},

257: \sin^2\theta_{23}, \, \sin^2\theta_{13}$ and two mass squared

258: splittings $\Delta m^2_{21}, \Delta m^2_{31}$, minimized with respect

259: to the undisplayed parameters. The lower panels show two-dimensional

260: projections of the allowed regions in the five-dimensional parameter

261: space.  In addition to a confirmation of oscillations with $\Dma$,

262: accelerator neutrinos provide a better determination of $\Dma$ as one

263: can see by comparing dashed and solid lines in Fig.~\ref{fig:global}.

264: Clearly MINOS~\cite{Tagg:2006sx} leads to an improved determination

265: and a slight increase in $\Dma$.

266: %

267: On the other hand reactors~\cite{araki:2004mb} have played a crucial

268: role in selecting large-mixing-angle (LMA)

269: oscillations~\cite{pakvasa:2003zv} out of the previous ``zoo'' of

270: solutions~\cite{gonzalez-garcia:2000sq}.

271: %

272: \begin{figure}[t] \centering

273:     \includegraphics[width=.95\linewidth,height=9cm]{F-fig.summary06-comp.eps}

274:     \caption{\label{fig:global} %

275:       Current neutrino oscillation regions at 90\%, 95\%, 99\%, and

276:       3$\sigma$ \CL\ for 2 \dof\, from Ref.~\cite{Maltoni:2004ei}. In

277:       top panels $\Delta \chi^2$ is minimized with respect to

278:       undisplayed parameters.}

279: \end{figure}

280: Table~\ref{tab:summary} summarizes the current best fit values and the

281: allowed 3$\sigma$ ranges that follow from the global fit.

282: \begin{table}[t] \centering    \catcode`?=\active \def?{\hphantom{0}}

283:       \begin{tabular}{|l|c|c|}        \hline        parameter & best

284:       fit & 3$\sigma$ range         \\  \hline\hline        $\Delta

285:       m^2_{21}\: [10^{-5}~\eVq]$        & 7.9?? & 7.1--8.9 \\

286:       $\Delta m^2_{31}\: [10^{-3}~\eVq]$ & 2.6?? &  2.0--3.2 \\

287:       $\sin^2\theta_{12}$        & 0.30? & 0.24--0.40 \\

288:       $\sin^2\theta_{23}$        & 0.50? & 0.34--0.68 \\

289:       $\sin^2\theta_{13}$        & 0.00 & $\leq$ 0.040 \\

290:       \hline

291: \end{tabular}    \vspace{2mm}

292: \caption{\label{tab:summary} Neutrino oscillation parameters as of June 2006, 

293: from Ref.~\cite{Maltoni:2004ei}.}

294: \end{table}

295: 

296: Note that in a three--neutrino scheme CP violation disappears when two

297: neutrinos become degenerate or when one of the angles

298: vanishes~\cite{schechter:1980bn}.  As a result CP violation is doubly

299: suppressed, first by $\alpha \equiv \Dms/\Dma$ and also by the small

300: value of $\theta_{13}$.

301: %

302: \begin{figure}[t] \centering

303: %    \includegraphics[height=3.5cm,width=.95\linewidth]{alpha-theta13.eps}

304:   \includegraphics[height=5cm,width=.45\linewidth]{F-fcn.alpha06.eps}

305: \includegraphics[height=5cm,width=.45\linewidth]{th13-06.eps}

306: \caption{\label{fig:alpha}%

307:   $\alpha \equiv \Dms / \Dma$ and $\sin^2\theta_{13}$ bound from the

308:   updated analysis given in Ref.~\cite{Maltoni:2004ei}.}

309: \end{figure}

310: %                                                    

311: The left panel in Fig.~\ref{fig:alpha} gives the parameter $\alpha$,

312: as determined from the global $\chi^2$ analysis.

313: %

314: The right panel shows the impact of different data samples on

315: constraining $\theta_{13}$.  One sees that for larger $\Dma$ values

316: the bound on $\sin^2\theta_{13}$ is dominated by CHOOZ, while for low

317: $\Dma$ the solar and KamLAND data become quite relevant.

318: 

319: There is now an ambitious long-term effort towards probing CP

320: violation in neutrino

321: oscillations~\cite{Alsharoa:2002wu,apollonio:2002en,albright:2000xi}.

322: %

323: As a first step, upcoming reactor and accelerator long baseline

324: experiments aim at improving the sensitivity on

325: $\sin^2\theta_{13}$~\cite{Huber:2004ug}.  An alternative possibility

326: involving the day/night effect studies in large water Cerenkov solar

327: neutrino experiments such as UNO, Hyper-K or LENA has also been

328: suggested~\cite{Akhmedov:2004rq}.

329: 

330: %%% rob b %%%

331: 

332: Reactor neutrino data have played a crucial role in testing the

333: robustness of solar oscillations vis a vis astrophysical

334: uncertainties, such as magnetic fields in the

335: radiative~\cite{Burgess:2003su,Burgess:2003fj,burgess:2002we} and

336: convective zone~\cite{miranda:2000bi,guzzo:2001mi,barranco:2002te},

337: leading to stringent limits on neutrino magnetic transition

338: moments~\cite{Miranda:2004nz}.

339: %

340: KamLAND has also played a key role in identifying oscillations as

341: ``the'' solution to the solar neutrino problem~\cite{pakvasa:2003zv}

342: and also in pinning down the LMA parameter region among previous wide

343: range of oscillation solutions~\cite{gonzalez-garcia:2000sq}.

344: 

345: %%% rob e %%%

346: 

347: However, there still some fragility in the interpretation of the data

348: if sub-weak strength ($\sim \varepsilon G_F$) non-standard neutrino

349: interaction (NSI) operators (Fig.~\ref{fig:nuNSI}) are included.

350: Indeed, most neutrino mass generation mechanisms imply the existence

351: of such dimension-6 operators. They can be of two types:

352: flavour-changing (FC) and non-universal (NU). Their presence leads to

353: the possibility of resonant neutrino conversions even in the absence

354: of neutrino masses~\cite{valle:1987gv}.

355: %

356: \begin{figure}[t] \centering

357:     \includegraphics[height=3cm,width=.45\linewidth]{diagram-fc.eps}

358:     \caption{\label{fig:nuNSI} %

359:       Non-standard neutrino interactions arise, e.~g., from the

360:       non-unitary structure of charged current weak interactions

361:       characterizing seesaw-type schemes~\cite{schechter:1980gr}.}

362: \end{figure}

363: %

364: While model-dependent, the expected NSI magnitudes may well

365: fall within the range that will be tested in future precision

366: studies~\cite{Huber:2004ug}.

367: %

368: For example, in the inverse seesaw model~\cite{Deppisch:2004fa} the

369: non-unitary piece of the lepton mixing matrix can be sizeable, hence

370: the induced non-standard interactions.  Relatively sizable NSI

371: strengths may also be induced in supersymmetric unified

372: models~\cite{hall:1986dx} and models with radiatively induced neutrino

373: masses~\cite{zee:1980ai,babu:1988ki}.

374: 

375: The determination of atmospheric neutrino parameters $\Dma$ and

376: $\sin^2\theta_\Atm$ is hardly affected by the presence of NSI on

377: down-type quarks, at least within the 2--neutrino

378: approximation~\cite{fornengo:2001pm}. Future neutrino factories will

379: substantially improve this bound~\cite{huber:2001zw}.

380: 

381: In contrast, the determination of solar neutrino parameters is not

382: quite robust against the existence of NSI~\cite{Miranda:2004nb}, even

383: if reactor data are included. One can show that even a small residual

384: non-standard interaction in this channel has dramatic consequences for

385: the sensitivity to $\theta_{13}$ at a neutrino

386: factory~\cite{huber:2001de}.  Improving the sensitivities on NSI

387: constitutes at a near detector or via coherent neutrino scattering off

388: nuclei~\cite{Barranco:2005yy} a window of opportunity for neutrino

389: physics in the precision age.

390: 

391: 

392: \section{The origin of neutrino mass}

393: \label{sec:origin-neutrino-mass}

394: 

395: Here I briefly discuss the theory of neutrino mass and mention some

396: recent attempts at predicting neutrino masses and mixing.

397: 

398: 

399: \subsection{Light Dirac neutrinos}

400: \label{sec:light-dirac-neutr}

401: 

402: Gauge theories prefer Majorana neutrinos~\cite{schechter:1980gr}.

403: This statement holds irrespective the detailed model of neutrino mass

404: generation. The emergence of Dirac neutrinos would constitute a

405: surprise, indicating the existence of a fundamental lepton number

406: symmetry whose origin should be understood. Without a specific reason,

407: the appearance of such symmetry would be ``accidental''.

408: 

409: Nevertheless there are interesting ideas for generating light Dirac

410: neutrinos. For example, theories involving large extra dimensions

411: offer a novel scenario to account for small neutrino

412: masses~\cite{Dienes:1998sb,Arkani-Hamed:1998vp,Faraggi:1999bm,Dvali:1999cn,Mohapatra:1999zd,Barbieri:2000mg,Ioannisian:1999sw}.

413: According to this picture, right-handed neutrinos propagate in the

414: bulk while left-handed neutrinos, being a part of the lepton doublet,

415: live only on the SM branes. As a result, neutrinos can naturally get

416: very small Dirac masses via mixing with a ``bulk'' fermion.

417: 

418: \subsection{Light Majorana neutrinos}

419: \label{sec:light-major-neutr}

420: 

421: Charged fermions in the SM come in two chiral species to provide their

422: mass after the electroweak symmetry breaks through the nonzero vacuum

423: expectation value (vev) of the Higgs scalar doublet $\vev{\Phi}$.

424: Neutrinos do not.  There is, however, an effective lepton number

425: violating dimension-five operator $\lambda L \Phi L \Phi$ in

426: Fig.~\ref{fig:d-5}, which can be added to the SM (here $L$ denotes any

427: of the lepton doublets)~\cite{Weinberg:1980bf}.

428: \begin{figure}[h] \centering

429:     \includegraphics[height=3.5cm,width=.4\linewidth]{d-5.eps}

430:     \caption{\label{fig:d-5} Dimension five operator responsible for

431:       neutrino mass~\cite{Weinberg:1980bf}.}

432: \end{figure}

433: After the Higgs mechanism this induces Majorana neutrino masses

434: $\propto \vev{\Phi}^2$, thus providing a natural way to account for

435: the smallness of neutrino masses, irrespective of their specific

436: origin. 

437: % 

438: Little more can be said from first principles about the \emph{

439:   mechanism} giving rise to this operator, its associated mass \emph{

440:   scale} or its \emph{flavour structure}.  Its strength $\lambda$ may

441: be suppressed by a large scale $M_X$ in the denominator (top-down)

442: scenario, leading to $ m_{\nu} = \lambda_0 \frac{\vev{\Phi}^2}{M_X}, $

443: %

444: where $\lambda_0$ is some unknown dimensionless constant.

445: %

446: Gravity has been argued to break global symmetries and thus could

447: induce the dimension-five operator, with $M_X = M_P$, the Planck

448: scale~\cite{deGouvea:2000jp}. In this case the magnitude of the

449: resulting Majorana neutrino masses are too small.

450: 

451: Alternatively, the strength $\lambda$ may be suppressed by small

452: parameters (e.g. scales, Yukawa couplings) and/or loop-factors

453: (bottom-up scenario) with no need for a large scale.

454: %

455: Both classes of scenarios have been reviewed in \cite{Valle:2006vb}.

456: Here is a brief summary.

457: 

458: \subsection{Seesaw-type models}

459: \label{sec:top-down-scenario}

460: 

461: The most popular top-down scenario is the

462: seesaw~\cite{Minkowski:1977sc}. The idea is to generate the dim-5

463: operator by the exchange of heavy states, either fermions (type-I) or

464: scalars (type-II), typically both, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:seesaw}.

465: \begin{figure}[ht] \centering

466:    \includegraphics[height=3cm,width=.38\linewidth]{type1.eps} \hskip 1cm

467:     \includegraphics[height=3.7cm,width=.3\linewidth]{type2.ps}

468:     \caption{\label{fig:seesaw} %

469:       Two types of seesaw mechanism}

470: \end{figure}

471: The main point is that, as the masses of the intermediate states go to

472: infinity, neutrinos become light~\cite{Orloff:2005nu}. The seesaw

473: provides a simple realization of Weinberg's dim-5

474: operator~\cite{Weinberg:1980bf}. It can be implemented in many ways,

475: with explicitly or spontaneously broken B-L, gauged or not; with

476: different gauge groups and multiplet contents, minimal or not; with

477: its basic scale large or small. Seesaw with gauged B-L broken at large

478: scale is but one possibility.  I have no space here for a detailed

479: discussion, those interested in a short seesaw ``Kamasutra'' may

480: consult Ref.~\cite{Valle:2006vb}.

481: 

482: \textbf{Seesaw basics~\cite{schechter:1980gr}}

483: 

484: The most general seesaw is described in terms of the SM gauge

485: structure. Most of the low energy phenomenology, such as that of

486: neutrino oscillations, is blind to the details of the underlying

487: seesaw theory at high energies, e.~g. its gauge group, multiplet

488: content or the nature of B-L. The full seesaw mass matrix including

489: the SU(2) triplet (type-II) terms was first given

490: in~\cite{schechter:1980gr} and reads

491: %

492: \begin{equation}

493: \label{ss-matrix-0} {\mathcal M_\nu} = \left(\begin{array}{cc}

494:     M_1 & D \\

495:     {D}^{T}   & M_2 \\ 

496: \end{array}\right) .

497: \end{equation}

498: %

499: in the basis of ``left'' and ``right'' neutrinos $\nu_{L}$ and

500: $\nu^{c}_{L}$. Here we use the original notation of

501: reference~\cite{schechter:1980gr}, where the ``Dirac'' entry is

502: proportional to $\vev{\Phi}$, the $M_1$ comes from a triplet vev, and

503: $M_2$ is a gauge singlet.  The particular case $M_1=0$ was first

504: mentioned in Ref.~\cite{Minkowski:1977sc} and, subsequently, in

505: \cite{schechter:1980gr} and \cite{Orloff:2005nu,Lazarides:1980nt}.

506: 

507: Note that the matrix ${\mathcal M_\nu}$ is complex, so are its Yukawa

508: coupling sub-matrices \(D\), \(M_1\) and \(M_2\), the last two

509: symmetric, by the Pauli principle. It is diagonalized by a unitary

510: transformation \(U_\nu\),

511: %

512: \begin{equation}

513: \label{eq:light-nu}

514:    \nu_i = \sum_{a=1}^{6}(U_\nu)_{ia} n_a ,

515: \end{equation}

516: %

517: so that

518: \begin{equation}

519:    U_\nu^T {\mathcal M_\nu} U_\nu = \mathrm{diag}(m_i,M_i) .

520: \end{equation}

521: This yields 6 mass eigenstates, including the 3 light neutrinos with

522: masses \(m_i\), and 3 two-component heavy leptons of masses \(M_i\).

523: %

524: The light neutrino mass states \(\nu_i\) are given in terms of the

525: flavour eigenstates via eq.~(\ref{eq:light-nu}).

526: %

527: The effective light neutrino mass reads,

528: %

529: \begin{equation}

530:   \label{eq:ss-formula0}

531:   m_{\nu} \simeq M_1 - D {M_2}^{-1} {D}^T . 

532: \end{equation}

533: %

534: The smallness of light neutrino masses comes from the hierarchy $M_2

535: \gg D \gg M_1$.  A dynamical understanding of this hierarchy is

536: obtained in schemes where lepton number symmetry is broken

537: spontaneously, either with gauged or ungauged B-L.

538: 

539: \textbf{Simplest seesaw dynamics~\cite{schechter:1982cv}}

540: 

541: The simplest seesaw is based on the \321 gauge group with ungauged

542: lepton number.  The mass terms in eq.~(\ref{ss-matrix-0}) are given by

543: triplet, doublet and singlet vevs, respectively,

544: as~\cite{schechter:1982cv}

545: %

546: \begin{equation}  

547: \label{ss-matrix-123} {\mathcal M_\nu} = \left(\begin{array}{cc}

548:     Y_3 v_3 & Y_\nu \vev{\Phi} \\

549:     {Y_\nu}^{T} \vev{\Phi}  & Y_1 v_1 \\

550: \end{array}\right) 

551: \end{equation}

552: %

553: As already mentioned, \(Y_\nu\), \(Y_3\) and \(Y_1\) are complex.

554: Neutrino masses arise either by heavy \321 singlet ``right-handed''

555: neutrino exchange (type I) or by the small effective triplet vev (type

556: II), as illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:seesaw}.  The effective light

557: neutrino mass is easily obtained from Eq.~(\ref{eq:ss-formula0}) and

558: its diagonalization matrices containing the CP phases relevant in

559: leptogenesis (see below) are given explicitly as a matrix perturbation

560: series expansion in $D M_2^{-1}$~\cite{schechter:1982cv}.

561: 

562: Since lepton number is ungauged, there is a physical Goldstone boson

563: associated with its spontaneous breakdown, the majoron. Its profile

564: can be determined just by analysing the symmetry properties of the

565: scalar potential (not its detailed form) which dynamically determines

566: the vevs appearing in

567: Eq.~(\ref{ss-matrix-123})~\cite{schechter:1982cv}. These obey a simple

568: hierarchy $$v_1 \gg v_2 \gg v_3$$ with a vev seesaw relation of the

569: type $v_3 v_1 \sim {v_2}^2$ where $v_2 \equiv \vev{\Phi}$ denotes the

570: SM Higgs doublet vev, fixed by the W-boson mass.  This hierarchy

571: implies that the triplet vev $v_3 \to 0$ as the singlet vev $v_1$

572: grows and hence the type-II term is also suppressed.  This model

573: provides the first realization of seesaw that gives a dynamical

574: understanding of the smallness of both type-I and type-II terms.

575: 

576: \textbf{Left-right symmetric seesaw~\cite{Minkowski:1977sc,Orloff:2005nu}}

577:  

578: This is a more symmetric (less general) version of the seesaw, where

579: lepton number (B-L) is gauged. For example, it can be realized either

580: in terms of \10 or its \lr

581: subgroup~\cite{Minkowski:1977sc,Orloff:2005nu}.

582: %

583: In \10 each matter generation is assigned to a {\bf 16} (spinorial) so

584: that the {\bf 16} . {\bf 16} .  {\bf 10} and {\bf 16} . {\bf 126} .

585: {\bf 16} couplings generate all entries of the seesaw matrix in

586: Eq.~(\ref{eq:ss-formula0}) where \(Y_L\) and \(Y_R\) denote the

587: Yukawas of the {\bf 126} of \10, whose vevs $\vev{\Delta_{L,R}}$ give

588: rise to the Majorana terms. They correspond to \(Y_1\) and \(Y_3\) of

589: the simplest seesaw model.  On the other hand ${Y_\nu}$ denotes the

590: {\bf 16} . {\bf 16} .  {\bf 10} Dirac Yukawa coupling.

591: %

592: The diagonalization can be worked out as in the simplest case. With

593: obvious changes, e.~g. $v_1 \to \vev{\Delta_R}$ and $v_3 \to

594: \vev{\Delta_L}$, the explicit formulas for the \(6\times6\) unitary

595: diagonalizing matrix \(U\) given in Ref.~\cite{schechter:1982cv} also

596: hold.

597: 

598: The only important difference with respect to the previous case is the

599: absence of the majoron, now absorbed as the longitudinal mode of the

600: gauge boson coupled to B-L, which picks up a huge mass.  The smallness

601: of neutrino masses gets correlated to the observed maximality of

602: parity violation in low-energy weak interactions, a connection which

603: is as elegant as phenomenologically irrelevant, given the large value

604: of the B-L scale required both to fit the neutrino masses, as well as

605: to unify the gauge couplings.

606:  %

607: 

608:  \textbf{Extended seesaw}

609: 

610:  In any gauge theory one can add any number of (anomaly-free) gauge

611:  singlet leptons~\cite{schechter:1980gr}. For example, in \10 and \e6

612:  one may add leptons outside the {\bf 16} or the {\bf 27},

613:  respectively.  Some of these extended seesaw

614:  schemes~\cite{mohapatra:1986bd} are motivated by string

615:  theories~\cite{Witten:1985xc}. New features emerge when the seesaw is

616:  realized non-minimally.  Recent examples are

617:  type-III~\cite{Akhmedov:1995vm,Barr:2005ss,Fukuyama:2005gg} and the

618:  \10 seesaw mechanism with low B-L scale in

619:  Ref.~\cite{Malinsky:2005bi}. For a brief review see

620:  Ref.~\cite{Valle:2006vb}.

621: 

622: \subsection{Low-scale models}

623: \label{sec:bottom-up-scenario}

624: 

625: There are many models of neutrino mass where the dim-5 operator is

626: induced from physics at low scales, TeV or less.  The smallness of its

627: strength comes then from loop and Yukawa couplings suppression and by

628: small lepton number violating parameters that appear in its numerator,

629: instead of its denominator. Here is an example.

630: 

631: {\bf Inverse seesaw  \cite{mohapatra:1986bd}}

632: 

633: It has the same mass matrix as the double seesaw

634: model~\cite{Valle:2006vb}, except that the basic L-violating scale

635: \(\mu\) is taken very small, e.~g.  \(\mu \ll Y_\nu \vev{\phi} \ll

636: M\)~\cite{mohapatra:1986bd}.  As a result neutrino masses vanish as

637: \(\mu\ \to 0\),

638: $$m_\nu =  {\vev{\Phi}^2} Y_\nu^T { M^{T}}^{-1} \mu M^{-1}  Y_\nu ,$$

639: opposite  to what happens in minimal seesaw.

640: %

641: The entry \(\mu\) may be proportional to the vev of an SU(2) singlet

642: scalar, in which case spontaneous B-L violation leads to the existence

643: of a majoron~\cite{gonzalez-garcia:1989rw}, implying a new phase

644: transition after the electroweak transition.

645: %

646: Since all particles are at the TeV scale, there are possibly testable

647: phenomenological implications, including \lfv in muon and tau

648: decays~\cite{Deppisch:2004fa}.

649: 

650: The model is ``natural'' in t'Hooft's sense~\cite{'tHooft:1979bh}:

651: {\it ``an otherwise arbitrary parameter may be taken as small when the

652:    Lagrangean symmetry increases by having it vanish''}.

653: 

654: {\bf Radiative models}

655: 

656: Neutrino masses may be induced by calculable loop

657: corrections~\cite{zee:1980ai,babu:1988ki} as illustrated in

658: Fig.~\ref{fig:neumass}. For example in the the two-loop model one has,

659: up to a logarithmic factor,

660: %

661: \begin{equation}

662:    \label{eq:babu}

663: {\mathcal M_\nu} \sim \lambda_0 \left(\frac{1}{16\pi^2}\right)^2 

664: f Y_l h Y_l f^T \frac{\vev{\Phi}^2}{(m_k)^2} \vev{\sigma}

665:  \end{equation}

666:  in the limit where the doubly-charged scalar $k$ is much heavier than

667:  the singly charged one. Here $l$ denotes a charged lepton, $f$ and

668:  $h$ are their Yukawa coupling matrices and $Y_l$ denotes the SM Higgs

669:  Yukawa couplings to charged leptons. Here $\vev{\sigma}$ denotes an

670:  \321 singlet vev used in Ref.~\cite{Peltoniemi:1993pd}.  Clearly,

671:  even if the proportionality factor $\lambda_0$ is large, the neutrino

672:  mass is suppressed by the presence of a product of five small Yukawas

673:  and the appearance of the two-loop factor.

674: 

675: \begin{figure}[h] \centering

676:     \includegraphics[height=3cm,width=.45\linewidth]{neumass.ps}

677:     \caption{\label{fig:neumass} 

678:     Two-loop origin for neutrino mass~\cite{babu:1988ki,Peltoniemi:1993pd}.}

679: \end{figure}

680: 

681: {\bf Supersymmetry and neutrino mass}

682: 

683: The intrinsically supersymmetric way to break lepton number is to

684: break the so-called R parity. This may happen spontaneously, driven by

685: a nonzero vev of an \321 singlet

686: sneutrino~\cite{Masiero:1990uj,romao:1992vu,romao:1997xf}, leading to

687: an effective model with bilinear violation of R

688: parity~\cite{Diaz:1998xc}. This provides the minimal way to add

689: neutrino masses to the MSSM, we call it RMSSM~\cite{Hirsch:2004he}, to

690: stress that it serves as a reference model. Neutrino mass generation

691: is hybrid, with one scale generated at tree level and the other

692: induced by ``calculable'' radiative corrections~\cite{Hirsch:2000ef}.

693: The neutrino mass spectrum is typically ``normal hierarchy''-type,

694: with the atmospheric scale generated at the tree level and the solar

695: mass scale arising from calculable loops, as in Fig.~\ref{fig:rpsusy}.

696: %

697: \begin{figure}[h] \centering

698:     \includegraphics[height=3cm,width=.5\linewidth]{topo-1.eps}

699:     \caption{\label{fig:rpsusy} Loop-induced solar scale in

700:       RMSSM~\cite{Hirsch:2000ef}; open blobs denote $\Delta L=1$

701:       insertions.}

702: \end{figure}

703: %

704: The general form of the expression is quite involved but the

705: approximation

706: %

707: \begin{equation}

708:    \label{eq:bilinear}

709: {\mathcal M_\nu} \sim \left(\frac{1}{16\pi^2}\right) {\vev{\Phi}^2} \frac{A}{m_0} Y_d Y_d 

710:  \end{equation}

711:  (where $A$ denotes the trilinear soft supersymmetry breaking

712:  coupling) holds in some regions of parameters.

713: 

714: \subsection{Predicting  neutrino masses and mixing}

715: \label{sec:pred-neutr-mixing}

716: 

717: Currently five of the basic parameters of the lepton sector are probed

718: in neutrino oscillation studies.  Data points towards a well defined

719: pattern of neutrino mixing angles, quite distinct from that of quarks,

720: and difficult to account for in unified schemes where quarks and

721: leptons are related. There seems to be an intriguing complementarity

722: between quark and lepton mixing

723: angles~\cite{Raidal:2004iw,minakata-2004-70,Ferrandis:2004vp,Dighe:2006zk}.

724: 

725: %%%

726: 

727: There have been many papers trying to understand the values of the

728: leptonic mixing angles from underlying symmetries.  Of course, this is

729: part of the the problem of predicting quark and lepton mixings, a

730: defying challenge for model-builders.

731: 

732: Harrison, Perkins \& Scott have suggested~\cite{Harrison:2002kp} that

733: at high scales the neutrino mixing angles are given by,

734: %

735: \begin{align}

736: \label{eq:hps}

737: \tan^2\theta_{\Atm}&=\tan^2\theta_{23}^0=1\\ \nonumber

738: \sin^2\theta_{\textrm{Chooz}}&=\sin^2\theta_{13}^0=0\\

739: \tan^2\theta_{\Sol}&=\tan^2\theta_{12}^0=0.5 .\nonumber

740: \end{align}

741: Such pattern~\cite{Harrison:2002er} could result from some flavour

742: symmetry.  Its predictions should be corrected by renormalization

743: group

744: evolution~\cite{Altarelli:2005yp,Hirsch:2006je,Altarelli:2004za}.

745: 

746: Here I consider a specific idea to predict neutrino masses and mixing

747: angles: that neutrino masses arise from a common seed at some

748: ``neutrino mass unification'' scale $M_X$~\cite{chankowski:2000fp},

749: very similar to the merging of the SM gauge coupling constants at high

750: energies due to supersymmetry~\cite{amaldi:1991cn}.

751: %

752: Although in its simplest form this idea is now inconsistent (at least

753: if CP is conserved) with the observed value of the solar mixing angle

754: $\theta_{12}$, there is an alternative realization in terms of an

755: $A_4$ flavour symmetry which is both viable and

756: predictive~\cite{babu:2002dz}. Starting from three-fold degeneracy of

757: the neutrino masses at the seesaw scale, the model predicts maximal

758: atmospheric angle and vanishing $\theta_{13}$,

759: $$\theta_{23}=\pi/4~~~\rm{and}~~~\theta_{13}=0\:.$$ 

760: Although the solar angle $\theta_{12}$ is unpredicted, one

761: expects~\footnote{There have been realizations of the $A_4$ symmetry

762:   that also predict the solar angle, e.~g.

763:   Ref.~\cite{Hirsch:2005mc}.}

764: $$\theta_{12}={\cal O}(1).$$ 

765: If CP is violated $\theta_{13}$ becomes arbitrary and the Dirac phase

766: is maximal~\cite{Grimus:2003yn}.  One can show that lepton and slepton

767: mixings are closely related and that there must exist at least one

768: slepton below 200 GeV, which can be produced at the LHC. The absolute

769: Majorana neutrino mass scale $m_0 \geq 0.3$ eV ensures that the model

770: will be probed by future cosmological tests and $\beta\beta_{0\nu}$

771: searches.  Rates for lepton flavour violating processes $l_j \to \l_i

772: + \gamma$ typically lie in the range of sensitivity of coming

773: experiments, with BR$(\mu \to e \gamma) \gsim 10^{-15}$ and BR$(\tau

774: \to \mu \gamma) > 10^{-9}$.

775: 

776: \subsection{Absolute scale of neutrino mass and \znbb}

777: \label{sec:neutr-double-beta}

778: 

779: Neutrino oscillations are blind to whether neutrinos are Dirac or

780: Majorana. Lepton number violating processes, such as \znbb and

781: neutrino transition electromagnetic

782: moments~\cite{schechter:1981hw,Wolfenstein:1981rk}

783: \cite{pal:1982rm,kayser:1982br} probe the basic nature of neutrinos.

784: Neutrinoless double beta decay offers the best hope.  Its significance

785: stems from the fact that, in a gauge theory, irrespective of the

786: mechanism that induces \znbb, it necessarily implies a Majorana

787: neutrino mass~\cite{Schechter:1982bd}, as illustrated in Fig.

788: \ref{fig:bbox}.

789: %

790: \begin{figure}[h]

791:   \centering

792: \includegraphics[width=6cm,height=4cm]{blackbox.eps}

793: \caption{Neutrinoless double beta decay and Majorana mass are

794:   equivalent~\cite{Schechter:1982bd}.}

795:  \label{fig:bbox}

796: \end{figure}

797: Thus it is a basic issue. Quantitative implications of the

798: ``black-box'' argument are model-dependent, but the theorem itself

799: holds in any ``natural'' gauge theory (for a recent discussion see

800: \cite{Hirsch:2006yk}).

801: 

802: %%%% 

803: 

804: \znbb will test absolute neutrino masses, inaccessible in neutrino

805: oscillations, and also complement direct information that will become

806: available from high sensitivity beta decay

807: studies~\cite{Drexlin:2005zt}, as well as cosmic microwave background

808: and large scale structure

809: observations~\cite{Lesgourgues:2006nd,Hannestad:2006zg,Fogli:2004as}.

810: 

811: The oscillation signal implies that \znbb must be induced by the

812: exchange of light Majorana neutrinos, through the so-called

813: "mass-mechanism". The corresponding amplitude is sensitive both to the

814: absolute scale of neutrino mass, and to Majorana

815: phases~\cite{schechter:1980gr}, neither of which can be probed in

816: oscillations~\cite{bilenky:1980cx,Schechter:1981gk}.

817: %

818: Taking into account current neutrino oscillation

819: parameters~\cite{Maltoni:2004ei} and state-of-the-art nuclear matrix

820: elements~\cite{Bilenky:2004wn} one can determine the average mass

821: parameter $\meff$ characterizing the neutrino exchange contribution to

822: \znbb, as shown in Fig. 10 of Ref.~\cite{Valle:2006vb}.

823: %

824: Models with quasi-degenerate

825: neutrinos~\cite{babu:2002dz}~\cite{caldwell:1993kn}~\cite{ioannisian:1994nx}

826: give the largest \znbb signal. For models with normal hierarchy there

827: is in general no lower bound on $\meff$ since there can be a

828: destructive interference amongst the neutrino amplitudes (for an

829: exception, see Ref.~\cite{Hirsch:2005mc}; in that specific model a

830: lower bound on $\meff$ exists, which depends, as expected, on the

831: value of the Majorana CP violating phase $\phi_1$).  In contrast, the

832: inverted neutrino mass hierarchy implies a ``lower'' bound for the

833: \znbb amplitude.

834: 

835: The best current limit on $\meff$ comes from the Heidelberg-Moscow

836: experiment. There is also a claim made in

837: Ref.~\cite{Klapdor-Kleingrothaus:2004wj} (see

838: also~\cite{Aalseth:2002dt}) which will be important to confirm or

839: refute in future experiments. GERDA will provide an independent check

840: of this claim~\cite{Aalseth:2002rf}. SuperNEMO, CUORE, EXO, MAJORANA

841: and possibly other experiments will further extend the sensitivity of

842: current \znbb searches~\cite{dbd06}.

843: 

844: \subsection{Other phenomena}

845: \label{sec:other-phenomena}

846: 

847: Besides oscillations and \znbb neutrino masses may have other

848: phenomenological manifestations. Here I summarize a few.

849: 

850: \begin{itemize}

851: \item {\bf \lfv} Now that \lfv has been shown to occur in neutrino

852:   propagation it is natural to expect that it may show up elsewhere.

853:   Indeed, it is expected to occur in seesaw-type schemes of neutrino

854:   mass, either from neutral heavy lepton

855:   exchange~\cite{Bernabeu:1987gr,gonzalez-garcia:1992be,Ilakovac:1994kj}

856:   of through supersymmetric

857:   contributions~\cite{Hall:1985dx,borzumati:1986qx,casas:2001sr,Antusch:2006vw}.

858:   Note that since flavor and CP violation can occur in the massless

859:   neutrino limit, the allowed rates are unsuppressed by the smallness

860:   of neutrino

861:   masses~\cite{Bernabeu:1987gr,gonzalez-garcia:1992be,branco:1989bn,rius:1990gk}.

862:   In the extended seesaw scheme~\cite{mohapatra:1986bd} one can

863:   understand the interplay of both types of contributions. It is

864:   shown~\cite{Deppisch:2004fa} that \(Br(\mu\to e\gamma)\) and the

865:   nuclear $\mu^--e^-$ conversion rates lie within planned

866:   sensitivities of future experiments such as

867:   PRISM~\cite{Kuno:2000kd}.

868: \item {\bf TeV neutral heavy leptons} Extended seesaw models like the

869:   inverse seesaw may contain quasi-Dirac neutral heavy leptons around

870:   TeV or so, that may be directly produced at

871:   accelerators~\cite{Dittmar:1990yg}.

872: \item {\bf majoron-emitting neutrino decays} If neutrino masses arise

873:   from a spontaneous breaking of global lepton number the associated

874:   Goldstone boson (majoron) may lead to neutrino decays

875:   \cite{schechter:1982cv}. Although these are rather slow, they may be

876:   astrophysically relevant and lead to interesting signals

877:   \cite{kachelriess:2000qc} at underground detectors.

878: \item {\bf TeV new gauge boson coupled to lepton number} If neutrino

879:   masses arise from spontaneous breaking of gauged lepton number

880:   ~\cite{valle:1987sq,Malinsky:2005bi}, there will exist a light new

881:   neutral gauge boson, \ZP that could be detected in searches for

882:   Drell-Yan processes at the LHC.

883: \item {\bf invisible Higgs boson decays} In low-scale models of

884:   neutrino mass with spontaneous breaking of global lepton number the

885:   majoron can lead to an invisible Higgs boson

886:   decays~\cite{Joshipura:1993hp,romao:1992zx,Hirsch:2004rw,Bazzocchi:2006vn}.

887: \begin{equation}

888:   \label{eq:JJ}

889:   H \to JJ

890: \end{equation}

891: where $J$ is the majoron.  The latter is experimentally detectable as

892: missing energy or transverse momentum associated to the

893: Higgs~\cite{deCampos:1997bg,Abdallah:2003ry}, a signal that must be

894: taken into account when designing Higgs boson search strategies at

895: future collider experiments.  This shows that, although neutrino

896: masses are small, the neutrino mass generation may have very important

897: implications for the mechanism of electroweak symmetry breaking.

898: \item {\bf Reconstructing neutrino mixing at accelerators} Low-scale

899:   models of neutrino mass offer the tantalizing possibility of

900:   reconstructing neutrino mixing at high energy accelerators, like the

901:   LHC and the ILC.  A remarkable example is provided by models where

902:   supersymmetry is the origin of neutrino mass~\cite{Hirsch:2004he}.

903: %

904:   A general feature of these models is that, unprotected by any

905:   symmetry, the lightest supersymmetric particle (LSP) is unstable. In

906:   order to reproduce the masses indicated by current neutrino

907:   oscillation data, the LSP is expected to decay inside the

908:   detector~\cite{Hirsch:2000ef}~\cite{deCampos:2005ri}.  More

909:   strikingly, LSP decay properties correlate with the neutrino mixing

910:   angles. For example, if the LSP is the lightest neutralino, it

911:   should have the same decay rate into muons and taus, since the

912:   observed atmospheric angle is close to

913:   $\pi/4$~\cite{Porod:2000hv,romao:1999up,mukhopadhyaya:1998xj}.

914: %

915:   Such correlations hold irrespective of which supersymmetric particle

916:   is the LSP~\cite{Hirsch:2003fe} and constitute a smoking gun

917:   signature of this proposal that will be tested at upcoming

918:   accelerators.

919: \end{itemize}

920: 

921: \subsection{Thermal leptogenesis}

922: \label{sec:thermal-leptogenesis}

923: 

924: It has long been noted~\cite{Fukugita:1986hr} that seesaw models open

925: an attractive possibility of accounting for the observed cosmological

926: matter-antimatter asymmetry in the Universe through

927: leptogenesis~\cite{Buchmuller:2005eh}.

928: %

929: In this picture the decays of the heavy ``right-handed'' neutrinos

930: present in the seesaw play a crucial role.

931: %

932: These take place through diagrams in Fig.~\ref{fig:lep-g}. In order to

933: induce successful leptogenesis the decay must happen before the

934: electroweak phase transition~\cite{kuzmin:1985mm} and must also happen

935: out-of-equilibrium, i.~e. the decay rate must be less than the Hubble

936: expansion rate at that epoch. Another crucial ingredient is CP

937: violation in the lepton sector.

938: %

939: \begin{figure}[h]

940: \centering

941: \includegraphics[clip,height=3.2cm,width=0.8\linewidth]{lep-g.ps}

942: \caption{Diagrams contributing to  leptogenesis.}

943:      \label{fig:lep-g}

944: \end{figure}

945: %

946: The lepton (or B-L) asymmetry thus produced then gets converted,

947: through sphaleron processes, into the observed baryon asymmetry.

948: 

949: In seesaw-type schemes the high temperature needed for leptogenesis

950: leads to an overproduction of gravitinos, which destroys the standard

951: predictions of Big Bang Nucleosynthesis (BBN).

952: %

953: In minimal supergravity models, with $m_{3/2} \sim$ 100 GeV to 10 TeV

954: gravitinos are not stable, decaying during or after BBN. Their rate of

955: production can be so large that subsequent gravitino decays completely

956: change the standard BBN scenario.

957: %

958: To prevent such ``gravitino crisis'' one requires an upper bound on

959: the reheating temperature $T_R$ after inflation, since the abundance

960: of gravitinos is proportional to $T_R$. This leads to a stringent

961: upper bound~\cite{Kawasaki:2004qu}, which is in conflict with the

962: temperature required for leptogenesis, $T_R > 2 \times 10^9$

963: GeV~\cite{Buchmuller:2004nz}. One way to cure this

964: conflict~\cite{Farzan:2005ez} is to add a small R-parity violating

965: $\lambda_i \hat{\nu^c}_i \hat{H}_u \hat{H}_d$ term in the

966: superpotential, where $\hat{\nu^c}_i$ are right-handed neutrino

967: supermultiplets. One can show that in the presence of this term, the

968: produced lepton-antilepton asymmetry can be enhanced.

969: %

970: An alternative suggestion~\cite{Hirsch:2006ft} was made in the context

971: of extended supersymmetric seesaw schemes. It was shown in this case

972: that leptogenesis can occur at the TeV scale through the decay of a

973: new singlet, thereby avoiding the gravitino crisis. Washout of the

974: asymmetry is effectively suppressed by the absence of direct couplings

975: of the singlet to leptons.

976: 

977: \vspace{.3cm}

978: 

979: {\em Acknowledgments:} 

980: 

981: I thank the organizers for hospitality. This work was supported by

982: Spanish grants FPA2005-01269, European commission RTN Contract

983: MRTN-CT-2004-503369 and ILIAS/N6 Contract RII3-CT-2004-506222.

984: 

985: \def\baselinestretch{1}

986: 

987: %\bibliography{sample}

988: %\bibliographystyle{h-physrev4}

989: %\bibliography{lgenesis-ref,valle-ref,nu-rev06}

990: %\bibliography{nu-rev06}

991: 

992: \begin{thebibliography}{136}

993: \expandafter\ifx\csname natexlab\endcsname\relax\def\natexlab#1{#1}\fi

994: \providecommand{\enquote}[1]{``#1''}

995: \expandafter\ifx\csname url\endcsname\relax

996:   \def\url#1{\texttt{#1}}\fi

997: \expandafter\ifx\csname urlprefix\endcsname\relax\def\urlprefix{URL }\fi

998: 

999: \bibitem[Fukuda et~al.(2002)]{fukuda:2002pe}

1000: Fukuda, S., et~al., \emph{Phys. Lett.}, \textbf{B539}, 179--187 (2002).

1001: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0205075;%%

1002: 

1003: \bibitem[Ahmad et~al.(2002)]{ahmad:2002jz}

1004: Ahmad, Q.~R., et~al., \emph{Phys. Rev. Lett.}, \textbf{89}, 011301 (2002).

1005: %%CITATION = NUCL-EX 0204008;%%

1006: 

1007: \bibitem[Kajita(2004)]{Kajita:2004ga}

1008: Kajita, T., \emph{New J. Phys.}, \textbf{6}, 194 (2004).

1009: 

1010: \bibitem[Araki et~al.(2004)]{araki:2004mb}

1011: Araki, T., et~al., \emph{Phys. Rev. Lett.}, \textbf{94}, 081801 (2004).

1012: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0406035;%%

1013: 

1014: \bibitem[Ahn(2006)]{Ahn:2006zz}

1015: Ahn, M.~H.,  et~al., hep-ex/0606032.

1016: %%CITATION = HEP-EX 0212007;%%

1017: 

1018: \bibitem[Tagg(2006)]{Tagg:2006sx}

1019: Tagg, N. [MINOS Collaboration],

1020:   %``First MINOS results from the NuMI beam,''

1021:   eConf {\bf C060409}, 019 (2006).

1022: 

1023: \bibitem[Schechter and Valle(1980{\natexlab{a}})]{schechter:1980gr}

1024: Schechter, J., and Valle, J. W.~F., \emph{Phys. Rev.}, \textbf{D22}, 2227

1025:   (1980{\natexlab{a}}).

1026: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D22,2227;%%

1027: 

1028: \bibitem[Elliott and Vogel(2002)]{elliott:2002xe}

1029: Elliott, S.~R., and Vogel, P., \emph{Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.}, \textbf{52},

1030:   115--151 (2002).

1031: 

1032: \bibitem[Doi et~al.(1985)]{doi:1985dx}

1033: Doi, M., Kotani, T., and Takasugi, E., \emph{Prog. Theor. Phys. Suppl.},

1034:   \textbf{83}, 1 (1985).

1035: 

1036: \bibitem[Schechter and Valle(1982{\natexlab{a}})]{Schechter:1982bd}

1037: Schechter, J., and Valle, J. W.~F., \emph{Phys. Rev.}, \textbf{D25}, 2951

1038:   (1982{\natexlab{a}}).

1039: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D25,2951;%%

1040: 

1041: \bibitem[Bilenky et~al.(1980)]{bilenky:1980cx}

1042: Bilenky, S.~M., Hosek, J., and Petcov, S.~T., \emph{Phys. Lett.}, \textbf{B94},

1043:   49 (1980).

1044: 

1045: \bibitem[Schechter and Valle(1981{\natexlab{a}})]{Schechter:1981gk}

1046: Schechter, J., and Valle, J. W.~F., \emph{Phys. Rev.}, \textbf{D23}, 1666

1047:   (1981{\natexlab{a}}).

1048: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D23,1666;%%

1049: 

1050: \bibitem[Doi et~al.(1981)]{doi:1981yb}

1051: Doi, M., Kotani, T., Nishiura, H., Okuda, K., and Takasugi, E., \emph{Phys.

1052:   Lett.}, \textbf{B102}, 323 (1981).

1053: %%CITATION = PTPSA,83,1;%%

1054: 

1055: \bibitem[Minkowski(1977)]{Minkowski:1977sc}

1056: Minkowski, P., \emph{Phys. Lett.}, \textbf{B67}, 421 (1977).

1057: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B67,421;%%

1058: 

1059: \bibitem[Orloff et~al.(2004)]{Orloff:2005nu}

1060: Orloff, J., Lavignac, S., and Cribier, M. (2004), (Editors), written and Round

1061:   table contributions in SEESAW25: Int. Conf. on the Seesaw Mechanism and the

1062:   Neutrino Mass, Paris, France.

1063: 

1064: \bibitem[Weinberg(1980)]{Weinberg:1980bf}

1065: Weinberg, S., \emph{Phys. Rev.}, \textbf{D22}, 1694 (1980).

1066: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D22,1694;%%

1067: 

1068: \bibitem[Schechter and Valle(1982{\natexlab{b}})]{schechter:1982cv}

1069: Schechter, J., and Valle, J. W.~F., \emph{Phys. Rev.}, \textbf{D25}, 774

1070:   (1982{\natexlab{b}}).

1071: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D25,774;%%

1072: 

1073: \bibitem[Lazarides et~al.(1981)]{Lazarides:1980nt}

1074: Lazarides, G., Shafi, Q., and Wetterich, C., \emph{Nucl. Phys.}, \textbf{B181},

1075:   287 (1981).

1076: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B181,287;%%

1077: 

1078: \bibitem[Bahcall and Pinsonneault(2004)]{Bahcall:2004fg}

1079: Bahcall, J.~N., and Pinsonneault, M.~H., \emph{Phys. Rev. Lett.}, \textbf{93},

1080:   121301 (2004).

1081: 

1082: \bibitem[Honda et~al.(2004)]{Honda:2004yz}

1083: Honda, M., Kajita, T., Kasahara, K., and Midorikawa, S. (2004).

1084: 

1085: \bibitem[Mikheev and Smirnov(1985)]{mikheev:1985gs}

1086: Mikheev, S.~P., and Smirnov, A.~Y., \emph{Sov. J. Nucl. Phys.}, \textbf{42},

1087:   913--917 (1985).

1088: 

1089: \bibitem[Wolfenstein(1978)]{wolfenstein:1978ue}

1090: Wolfenstein, L., \emph{Phys. Rev.}, \textbf{D17}, 2369 (1978).

1091: 

1092: \bibitem[Maltoni et~al.(2004)]{Maltoni:2004ei} Maltoni, M., Schwetz,

1093:   T., Tortola, M.~A., and Valle, J. W.~F., \emph{New J.  Phys.},

1094:   \textbf{6}, 122 (2004), app. C in hep-ph/0405172 (v5) provides

1095:   updated results as of June 2006; previous references given therein.

1096: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0405172;%%

1097: 

1098: \bibitem[Bahcall et~al.(2005)]{Bahcall:2005va}

1099: Bahcall, J.~N., Serenelli, A.~M., and Basu, S. astro-ph/0511337.

1100: 

1101: \bibitem[Aharmim et~al.(2005)]{Aharmim:2005gt}

1102: Aharmim, B., et~al., \emph{Phys. Rev.}, \textbf{C72}, 055502 (2005).

1103: 

1104: \bibitem[Pakvasa and Valle(2003)]{pakvasa:2003zv}

1105: Pakvasa, S., and Valle, J. W.~F. (2003), proc. of the Indian National Academy

1106:   of Sciences on Neutrinos, Vol. 70A, No.1, p.189 - 222 (2004), Eds. D.

1107:   Indumathi, M.V.N. Murthy and G. Rajasekaran.

1108: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0301061;%%

1109: 

1110: \bibitem[Gonzalez-Garcia et~al.(2001)]{gonzalez-garcia:2000sq}

1111: Gonzalez-Garcia, M. et~al., \emph{Phys. Rev.}, \textbf{D63}, 033005 (2001).

1112: 

1113: \bibitem[Schechter and Valle(1980{\natexlab{b}})]{schechter:1980bn}

1114: Schechter, J., and Valle, J. W.~F., \emph{Phys. Rev.}, \textbf{D21}, 309

1115:   (1980{\natexlab{b}}).

1116: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D21,309;%%

1117: 

1118: \bibitem[Alsharoa et~al.(2003)]{Alsharoa:2002wu}

1119: Alsharoa, M.~M., et~al., \emph{Phys. Rev. ST Accel. Beams}, \textbf{6}, 081001

1120:   (2003).

1121: 

1122: \bibitem[Apollonio et~al.(2002)]{apollonio:2002en}

1123: Apollonio, M., et~al.  hep-ph/0210192, 

1124: CERN Yellow Report on the Neutrino Factory.

1125: 

1126: \bibitem[Albright et~al.(2000)]{albright:2000xi}

1127: Albright, C., et~al. hep-ex/0008064, report to the Fermilab Directorate.

1128: 

1129: \bibitem[Huber et~al.(2004)]{Huber:2004ug}

1130: Huber, P., Lindner, M., Rolinec, M., Schwetz, T., and Winter, W., \emph{Phys.

1131:   Rev.}, \textbf{D70}, 073014 (2004).

1132: 

1133: \bibitem[Akhmedov et~al.(2004)]{Akhmedov:2004rq}

1134: Akhmedov, E.~K., Tortola, M.~A., and Valle, J. W.~F., \emph{JHEP}, \textbf{05},

1135:   057 (2004).

1136: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0404083;%%

1137: 

1138: \bibitem[Burgess et~al.(2004{\natexlab{a}})]{Burgess:2003su}

1139: Burgess, C.~P., et~al., \emph{JCAP}, \textbf{0401}, 007 (2004{\natexlab{a}}).

1140: 

1141: \bibitem[Burgess et~al.(2004{\natexlab{b}})]{Burgess:2003fj}

1142: Burgess, C.~P., Dzhalilov, N.~S., Rashba, T.~I., Semikoz, V.~B., and Valle, J.

1143:   W.~F., \emph{Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.}, \textbf{348}, 609

1144:   (2004{\natexlab{b}}).

1145: %%CITATION = ASTRO-PH 0304462;%%

1146: 

1147: \bibitem[Burgess et~al.(2003)]{burgess:2002we}

1148: Burgess, C., et~al., \emph{Astrophys. J.}, \textbf{588}, L65 (2003).

1149: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0209094;%%

1150: 

1151: \bibitem[Miranda et~al.(2001)]{miranda:2000bi}

1152: Miranda, O.~G., et~al., \emph{Nucl. Phys.}, \textbf{B595}, 360--380 (2001).

1153: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0005259;%%

1154: 

1155: \bibitem[Guzzo et~al.(2002)]{guzzo:2001mi}

1156: Guzzo, M., et~al., \emph{Nucl. Phys.}, \textbf{B629}, 479--490 (2002).

1157: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0112310;%%

1158: 

1159: \bibitem[Barranco et~al.(2002)]{barranco:2002te}

1160: Barranco, J., et~al., \emph{Phys. Rev.}, \textbf{D66}, 093009 (2002).

1161:  %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0207326;%%

1162: 

1163: \bibitem[Miranda et~al.(2004)]{Miranda:2004nz}

1164: Miranda, O.~G., Rashba, T.~I., Rez, A.~I., and Valle, J. W.~F., \emph{Phys.

1165:   Rev.}, \textbf{D70}, 113002 (2004).

1166: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0406066;%%

1167: 

1168: \bibitem[Valle(1987{\natexlab{a}})]{valle:1987gv}

1169: Valle, J. W.~F., \emph{Phys. Lett.}, \textbf{B199}, 432 (1987{\natexlab{a}}).

1170: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B199,432;%%

1171: 

1172: \bibitem[Deppisch and Valle(2005)]{Deppisch:2004fa}

1173: Deppisch, F., and Valle, J. W.~F., \emph{Phys. Rev.}, \textbf{D72}, 036001

1174:   (2005);\\

1175: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0406040;%%

1176: Deppisch, F., Kosmas, T.~S., and Valle, J. W.~F. \emph{Nucl. Phys.} 

1177: {\bf B752}, 80 (2006).

1178: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0512360;%%

1179: 

1180: \bibitem[Hall et~al.(1986{\natexlab{a}})]{hall:1986dx}

1181: Hall, L.~J., Kostelecky, V.~A., and Raby, S., \emph{Nucl. Phys.},

1182:   \textbf{B267}, 415 (1986{\natexlab{a}}).

1183: 

1184: \bibitem[Zee(1980)]{zee:1980ai}

1185: Zee, A., \emph{Phys. Lett.}, \textbf{B93}, 389 (1980).

1186: 

1187: \bibitem[Babu(1988)]{babu:1988ki}

1188: Babu, K.~S., \emph{Phys. Lett.}, \textbf{B203}, 132 (1988).

1189: 

1190: \bibitem[Fornengo et~al.(2002)]{fornengo:2001pm}

1191: Fornengo, N., et~al., \emph{Phys. Rev.}, \textbf{D65}, 013010 (2002).

1192: 

1193: \bibitem[Huber and Valle(2001)]{huber:2001zw}

1194: Huber, P., and Valle, J. W.~F., \emph{Phys. Lett.}, \textbf{B523}, 151--160

1195:   (2001).

1196: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0108193;%%

1197: 

1198: \bibitem[Miranda et~al.(2006)]{Miranda:2004nb}

1199: Miranda, O.~G., Tortola, M.~A., and Valle, J. W.~F., \emph{JHEP}, \textbf{10},

1200:   008 (2006).

1201: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0406280;%%

1202: 

1203: \bibitem[Huber et~al.(2002)]{huber:2001de}

1204: Huber, P., Schwetz, T., and Valle, J. W.~F., \emph{Phys. Rev. Lett.},

1205:   \textbf{88}, 101804 (2002);\\

1206: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0111224;%%

1207:  \emph{ Phys. Rev.} {\bf D66}, 013006 (2002)

1208: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0202048;%%

1209: 

1210: \bibitem[Barranco et~al.(2005)]{Barranco:2005yy}

1211: Barranco, J. et.~al., \emph{JHEP.},

1212:   \textbf{512}, 021 (2005).

1213: 

1214: \bibitem[Dienes et~al.(1999)]{Dienes:1998sb}

1215: Dienes, K.~R., Dudas, E., and Gherghetta, T., \emph{Nucl. Phys.},

1216:   \textbf{B557}, 25 (1999).

1217: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9811428;%%

1218: 

1219: \bibitem[Arkani-Hamed et~al.(2002)]{Arkani-Hamed:1998vp}

1220: Arkani-Hamed, N., et~al.

1221:   \emph{Phys. Rev.}, \textbf{D65}, 024032 (2002).

1222: 

1223: \bibitem[Faraggi and Pospelov(1999)]{Faraggi:1999bm}

1224: Faraggi, A.~E., and Pospelov, M., \emph{Phys. Lett.}, \textbf{B458}, 237--244

1225:   (1999).

1226: 

1227: \bibitem[Dvali and Smirnov(1999)]{Dvali:1999cn}

1228: Dvali, G.~R., and Smirnov, A.~Y., \emph{Nucl. Phys.}, \textbf{B563}, 63--81

1229:   (1999).

1230: 

1231: \bibitem[Mohapatra et~al.(1999)]{Mohapatra:1999zd}

1232: Mohapatra, R.~N., Nandi, S., and Perez-Lorenzana, A., \emph{Phys. Lett.},

1233:   \textbf{B466}, 115--121 (1999).

1234: 

1235: \bibitem[Barbieri et~al.(2000)]{Barbieri:2000mg}

1236: Barbieri, R., Creminelli, P., and Strumia, A., \emph{Nucl. Phys.},

1237:   \textbf{B585}, 28--44 (2000).

1238: 

1239: \bibitem[Ioannisian and Valle(2001)]{Ioannisian:1999sw}

1240: Ioannisian, A., and Valle, J. W.~F., \emph{Phys. Rev.}, \textbf{D63}, 073002

1241:   (2001).

1242: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9911349;%%

1243: 

1244: \bibitem[de~Gouvea and Valle(2001)]{deGouvea:2000jp}

1245: de~Gouvea, A., and Valle, J. W.~F., \emph{Phys. Lett.}, \textbf{B501}, 115--127

1246:   (2001).

1247: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0010299;%%

1248: 

1249: \bibitem[Valle(2006)]{Valle:2006vb} Valle, J. W.~F. hep-ph/0608101,

1250:   review lectures at the Corfu Summer Institute on Elementary Particle

1251:   Physics, September 2005 and references therein.

1252: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0608101;%%

1253: 

1254: \bibitem[Mohapatra and Valle(1986)]{mohapatra:1986bd}

1255: Mohapatra, R.~N., and Valle, J. W.~F., \emph{Phys. Rev.}, \textbf{D34}, 1642

1256:   (1986).

1257: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D34,1642;%%

1258: 

1259: \bibitem[Witten(1985)]{Witten:1985xc}

1260: Witten, E., \emph{Nucl. Phys.}, \textbf{B258}, 75 (1985).

1261: 

1262: \bibitem[Akhmedov et~al.(1996)]{Akhmedov:1995vm}

1263: Akhmedov, E., Lindner, M., Schnapka, E., and Valle, J. W.~F., \emph{Phys.

1264:   Rev.}, \textbf{D53}, 2752--2780 (1996);

1265: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9509255;%%

1266: \emph{ Phys. Lett.} {\bf B368}, 270 (1996)

1267: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9507275;%%

1268: 

1269: \bibitem[Barr and Dorsner(2006)]{Barr:2005ss}

1270: Barr, S.~M., and Dorsner, I., \emph{Phys. Lett.}, \textbf{B632}, 527--531

1271:   (2006).

1272: 

1273: \bibitem[Fukuyama et~al.(2005)]{Fukuyama:2005gg}

1274: Fukuyama, T., Ilakovac, A., Kikuchi, T., and Matsuda, K., \emph{JHEP},

1275:   \textbf{06}, 016 (2005).

1276: 

1277: \bibitem[Malinsky et~al.(2005)]{Malinsky:2005bi}

1278: Malinsky, M., Romao, J.~C., and Valle, J. W.~F., \emph{Phys. Rev. Lett.},

1279:   \textbf{95}, 161801 (2005).

1280: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0506296;%%

1281: 

1282: \bibitem[Gonzalez-Garcia and Valle(1989)]{gonzalez-garcia:1989rw}

1283: Gonzalez-Garcia, M.~C., and Valle, J. W.~F., \emph{Phys. Lett.}, \textbf{B216},

1284:   360 (1989).

1285: 

1286: \bibitem['t~Hooft(1979)]{'tHooft:1979bh}

1287: 't~Hooft, G. (1979), lecture given at Cargese Summer Inst., Cargese, France,

1288:   Aug 26 - Sep 8, 1979.

1289: 

1290: \bibitem[Peltoniemi and Valle(1993)]{Peltoniemi:1993pd}

1291: Peltoniemi, J.~T., and Valle, J. W.~F., \emph{Phys. Lett.}, \textbf{B304},

1292:   147--151 (1993).

1293: 

1294: \bibitem[Masiero and Valle(1990)]{Masiero:1990uj}

1295: Masiero, A., and Valle, J. W.~F., \emph{Phys. Lett.}, \textbf{B251}, 273--278

1296:   (1990).

1297: 

1298: \bibitem[Romao et~al.(1992{\natexlab{a}})]{romao:1992vu}

1299: Romao, J.~C., Santos, C.~A., and Valle, J. W.~F., \emph{Phys. Lett.},

1300:   \textbf{B288}, 311--320 (1992{\natexlab{a}}).

1301: 

1302: \bibitem[Romao et~al.(1997)]{romao:1997xf}

1303: Romao, J.~C., Ioannisian, A., and Valle, J. W.~F., \emph{Phys. Rev.},

1304:   \textbf{D55}, 427--430 (1997).

1305: 

1306: \bibitem[Diaz et~al.(1998)]{Diaz:1998xc}

1307: Diaz, M.~A., Romao, J.~C., and Valle, J. W.~F., \emph{Nucl. Phys.},

1308:   \textbf{B524}, 23--40 (1998).

1309: 

1310: \bibitem[Hirsch and Valle(2004)]{Hirsch:2004he}

1311: Hirsch, M., and Valle, J. W.~F., \emph{New J. Phys.}, \textbf{6}, 76 (2004).

1312: 

1313: \bibitem[Hirsch et~al.(2000)]{Hirsch:2000ef}

1314: Hirsch, M., et~al., \emph{Phys. Rev.}, \textbf{D62}, 113008 (2000), err-ibid.

1315:   {\bf D65}:119901,2002.

1316: 

1317: \bibitem[Raidal(2004)]{Raidal:2004iw}

1318: Raidal, M., \emph{Phys. Rev. Lett.}, \textbf{93}, 161801 (2004).

1319: 

1320: \bibitem[Minakata and Smirnov(2004)]{minakata-2004-70}

1321: Minakata, H., and Smirnov, A.~Y., \emph{Phy. Rev.}, \textbf{D70}, 073009

1322:   (2004).

1323: 

1324: \bibitem[Ferrandis and Pakvasa(2005)]{Ferrandis:2004vp}

1325: Ferrandis, J., and Pakvasa, S., \emph{Phys. Rev.}, \textbf{D71}, 033004 (2005).

1326: 

1327: \bibitem[Dighe et~al.(2006)]{Dighe:2006zk}

1328: Dighe, A., Goswami, S., and Roy, P., \emph{Phys. Rev.}, \textbf{D73}, 071301

1329:   (2006).

1330: 

1331: \bibitem[Harrison and Scott(2002)]{Harrison:2002kp}

1332: Harrison, P.~F., and Scott, W.~G., \emph{Phys. Lett.}, \textbf{B535}, 163--169

1333:   (2002).

1334: 

1335: \bibitem[Harrison et~al.(2002)]{Harrison:2002er}

1336: Harrison, P.~F., Perkins, D.~H., and Scott, W.~G., \emph{Phys. Lett.},

1337:   \textbf{B530}, 167 (2002).

1338: 

1339: \bibitem[Altarelli and Feruglio(2005)]{Altarelli:2005yp}

1340: Altarelli, G., and Feruglio, F., \emph{Nucl. Phys.}, \textbf{B720}, 64--88

1341:   (2005).

1342: 

1343: \bibitem[Hirsch et~al.(2006{\natexlab{a}})]{Hirsch:2006je}

1344: Hirsch, M., Ma, E., Romao, J.~C., Valle, J. W.~F., and Villanova~del Moral, A.

1345:   (2006{\natexlab{a}}).

1346: 

1347: \bibitem[Altarelli and Feruglio(2004)]{Altarelli:2004za}

1348: Altarelli, G., and Feruglio, F., \emph{New J. Phys.}, \textbf{6}, 106 (2004).

1349: 

1350: \bibitem[Chankowski et~al.(2001)]{chankowski:2000fp}

1351: Chankowski, P., Ioannisian, A., Pokorski, S., and Valle, J. W.~F., \emph{Phys.

1352:   Rev. Lett.}, \textbf{86}, 3488 (2001).

1353: 

1354: \bibitem[Amaldi et~al.(1991)]{amaldi:1991cn}

1355: Amaldi, U., de~Boer, W., and Furstenau, H., \emph{Phys. Lett.}, \textbf{B260},

1356:   447--455 (1991).

1357: 

1358: \bibitem[Babu et~al.(2003)]{babu:2002dz}

1359: Babu, K.~S., Ma, E., and Valle, J. W.~F., \emph{Phys. Lett.}, \textbf{B552},

1360:   207--213 (2003).

1361: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0206292;%%

1362: 

1363: \bibitem[Hirsch et~al.(2005)]{Hirsch:2005mc}

1364: Hirsch, M., Villanova~del Moral, A., Valle, J. W.~F., and Ma, E., \emph{Phys.

1365:   Rev.}, \textbf{D72}, 091301 (2005).

1366: 

1367: \bibitem[Grimus and Lavoura(2004)]{Grimus:2003yn}

1368: Grimus, W., and Lavoura, L., \emph{Phys. Lett.}, \textbf{B579}, 113--122

1369:   (2004).

1370: 

1371: \bibitem[Schechter and Valle(1981{\natexlab{b}})]{schechter:1981hw}

1372: Schechter, J., and Valle, J. W.~F., \emph{Phys. Rev.}, \textbf{D24}, 1883

1373:   (1981{\natexlab{b}}), err. D25, 283 (1982).

1374: %%CITATION = PHRVA,D24,1883;%%

1375: 

1376: \bibitem[Wolfenstein(1981)]{Wolfenstein:1981rk}

1377: Wolfenstein, L., \emph{Phys. Lett.}, \textbf{B107}, 77 (1981).

1378: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B107,77;%%

1379: 

1380: \bibitem[Pal and Wolfenstein(1982)]{pal:1982rm}

1381: Pal, P.~B., and Wolfenstein, L., \emph{Phys. Rev.}, \textbf{D25}, 766 (1982).

1382: 

1383: \bibitem[Kayser(1982)]{kayser:1982br}

1384: Kayser, B., \emph{Phys. Rev.}, \textbf{D26}, 1662 (1982).

1385: 

1386: \bibitem[Hirsch et~al.(2006{\natexlab{b}})]{Hirsch:2006yk}

1387: Hirsch, M., Kovalenko, S., and Schmidt, I., \emph{Phys. Lett.}, \textbf{B642},

1388:   106 (2006{\natexlab{b}}).

1389: 

1390: \bibitem[Drexlin(2005)]{Drexlin:2005zt}

1391: Drexlin, G., \emph{Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl.}, \textbf{145}, 263--267 (2005).

1392: 

1393: \bibitem[Lesgourgues and Pastor(2006)]{Lesgourgues:2006nd}

1394: Lesgourgues, J., and Pastor, S., \emph{Phys. Rep.}, \textbf{429}, 307--379

1395:   (2006).

1396: 

1397: \bibitem[Hannestad(2006)]{Hannestad:2006zg}

1398: Hannestad, S. hep-ph/0602058.

1399: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0602058;%%

1400: 

1401: \bibitem[Fogli et~al.(2004)]{Fogli:2004as}

1402: Fogli, G.~L., et~al., \emph{Phys. Rev.}, \textbf{D70}, 113003 (2004).

1403: 

1404: \bibitem[Bilenky et~al.(2004)]{Bilenky:2004wn}

1405: Bilenky, S.~M., Faessler, A., and Simkovic, F., \emph{Phys. Rev.},

1406:   \textbf{D70}, 033003 (2004).

1407: 

1408: \bibitem[Caldwell and Mohapatra(1993)]{caldwell:1993kn}

1409: Caldwell, D.~O., and Mohapatra, R.~N., \emph{Phys. Rev.}, \textbf{D48},

1410:   3259--3263 (1993).

1411: 

1412: \bibitem[Ioannisian and Valle(1994)]{ioannisian:1994nx}

1413: Ioannisian, A., and Valle, J. W.~F., \emph{Phys. Lett.}, \textbf{B332}, 93--99

1414:   (1994).

1415: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9402333;%%

1416: 

1417: \bibitem[Klapdor-Kleingrothaus et~al.(2004)]{Klapdor-Kleingrothaus:2004wj}

1418: Klapdor-Kleingrothaus, H.~V.,  et~al.,

1419:   \emph{Phys. Lett.}, \textbf{B586}, 198--212 (2004).

1420: 

1421: \bibitem[Aalseth et~al.(2002{\natexlab{a}})]{Aalseth:2002dt}

1422: Aalseth, C.~E., et~al., \emph{Mod. Phys. Lett.}, \textbf{A17}, 1475--1478

1423:   (2002{\natexlab{a}}).

1424: 

1425: \bibitem[Aalseth et~al.(2002{\natexlab{b}})]{Aalseth:2002rf}

1426: Aalseth, C.~E., et~al., \emph{Phys. Rev.}, \textbf{D65}, 092007

1427:   (2002{\natexlab{b}}).

1428: 

1429: \bibitem[Saakyan et~al.(2006)]{dbd06}

1430: Saakyan, R., Nones, C., Tomei, C., and Zuber, K. (2006).

1431: 

1432: \bibitem[Bernabeu et~al.(1987)]{Bernabeu:1987gr}

1433: Bernabeu, J., et~al., \emph{Phys. Lett.}, \textbf{B187}, 303 (1987).

1434: 

1435: \bibitem[Gonzalez-Garcia and Valle(1992)]{gonzalez-garcia:1992be}

1436: Gonzalez-Garcia, M.~C., and Valle, J. W.~F., \emph{Mod. Phys. Lett.},

1437:   \textbf{A7}, 477--488 (1992).

1438: 

1439: \bibitem[Ilakovac and Pilaftsis(1995)]{Ilakovac:1994kj}

1440: Ilakovac, A., and Pilaftsis, A., \emph{Nucl. Phys.}, \textbf{B437}, 491 (1995).

1441: 

1442: \bibitem[Hall et~al.(1986{\natexlab{b}})]{Hall:1985dx}

1443: Hall, L.~J., Kostelecky, V.~A., and Raby, S., \emph{Nucl. Phys.},

1444:   \textbf{B267}, 415 (1986{\natexlab{b}}).

1445: 

1446: \bibitem[Borzumati and Masiero(1986)]{borzumati:1986qx}

1447: Borzumati, F., and Masiero, A., \emph{Phys. Rev. Lett.}, \textbf{57}, 961

1448:   (1986).

1449: 

1450: \bibitem[Casas and Ibarra(2001)]{casas:2001sr}

1451: Casas, J.~A., and Ibarra, A., \emph{Nucl. Phys.}, \textbf{B618}, 171--204

1452:   (2001).

1453: 

1454: \bibitem[Antusch et~al.(2006)]{Antusch:2006vw}

1455: Antusch, S., Arganda, E., Herrero, M.~J., and Teixeira, A. hep-ph/0607263.

1456: 

1457: \bibitem[Branco et~al.(1989)]{branco:1989bn}

1458: Branco, G.~C., Rebelo, M.~N., and Valle, J. W.~F., \emph{Phys. Lett.},

1459:   \textbf{B225}, 385 (1989).

1460: 

1461: \bibitem[Rius and Valle(1990)]{rius:1990gk}

1462: Rius, N., and Valle, J. W.~F., \emph{Phys. Lett.}, \textbf{B246}, 249--255

1463:   (1990).

1464: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B246,249;%%

1465: 

1466: \bibitem[Kuno(2000)]{Kuno:2000kd}

1467: Kuno, Y., \emph{AIP Conf. Proc.}, \textbf{542}, 220--225 (2000).

1468: 

1469: \bibitem[Dittmar et~al.(1990)]{Dittmar:1990yg}

1470: Dittmar, M., et~al., \emph{Nucl. Phys.}, \textbf{B332}, 1 (1990);

1471: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B332,1;%%

1472: DELPHI, P.~Abreu {\em et~al.},

1473: \emph{ Z. Phys.} {\bf C74}, 57 (1997).

1474: %%CITATION = ZEPYA,C74,57;%%

1475: 

1476: \bibitem[Kachelriess et~al.(2000)]{kachelriess:2000qc}

1477: Kachelriess, M., Tomas, R., and Valle, J. W.~F., \emph{Phys. Rev.},

1478:   \textbf{D62}, 023004 (2000).

1479: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0001039;%%

1480: 

1481: \bibitem[Joshipura and Valle(1993)]{Joshipura:1993hp} Joshipura,

1482:   A.~S., and Valle, J. W.~F., \emph{Nucl. Phys.}, \textbf{B397},

1483:   105--122 (1993); 

1484: %%CITATION = NUPHA,B397,105;%%

1485: for an early paper see Shrock, R.~E. and Suzuki, M.

1486:   \emph{Phys. Lett.}  {\bf B110}, 250 (1982).

1487: 

1488: \bibitem[Romao et~al.(1992{\natexlab{b}})]{romao:1992zx}

1489: Romao, J.~C., de~Campos, F., and Valle, J. W.~F., \emph{Phys. Lett.},

1490:   \textbf{B292}, 329--336 (1992{\natexlab{b}}).

1491: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9207269;%%

1492: 

1493: \bibitem[Hirsch et~al.(2004)]{Hirsch:2004rw}

1494: Hirsch, M.,  et~al., \emph{Phys. Rev.}, \textbf{D70}, 073012 (2004);

1495: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0407269;%%

1496: \emph{Phys. Rev.}, \textbf{D73}, 055007 (2006{\natexlab{c}}).

1497: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0512257;%%

1498: 

1499: \bibitem[Bazzocchi and Valle(2006)]{Bazzocchi:2006vn}

1500: Bazzocchi, F., and Valle, J. W.~F. hep-ph/0609093.

1501: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0609093;%%

1502: 

1503: \bibitem[de~Campos et~al.(1997)]{deCampos:1997bg}

1504: de~Campos, F., Eboli, O. J.~P., Rosiek, J., and Valle, J. W.~F., \emph{Phys.

1505:   Rev.}, \textbf{D55}, 1316--1325 (1997).

1506: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9601269;%%

1507: 

1508: \bibitem[Abdallah et~al.(2004)]{Abdallah:2003ry}

1509: Abdallah, J., et~al., \emph{Eur. Phys. J.}, \textbf{C32}, 475--492 (2004).

1510: 

1511: \bibitem[Valle(1987{\natexlab{b}})]{valle:1987sq}

1512: Valle, J. W.~F., \emph{Phys. Lett.}, \textbf{B196}, 157 (1987{\natexlab{b}}).

1513: %%CITATION = PHLTA,B196,157;%%

1514: 

1515: \bibitem[de~Campos et~al.(2005)]{deCampos:2005ri}

1516: de~Campos, F., et~al., \emph{Phys. Rev.}, \textbf{D71}, 075001 (2005).

1517: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0501153;%%

1518: 

1519: \bibitem[Porod et~al.(2001)]{Porod:2000hv}

1520: Porod, W., Hirsch, M., Romao, J., and Valle, J. W.~F., \emph{Phys. Rev.},

1521:   \textbf{D63}, 115004 (2001).

1522: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0011248;%%

1523: 

1524: \bibitem[Romao et~al.(2000)]{romao:1999up}

1525: Romao, J.~C., et~al., \emph{Phys. Rev.}, \textbf{D61}, 071703 (2000).

1526: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 9907499;%%

1527: 

1528: \bibitem[Mukhopadhyaya et~al.(1998)]{mukhopadhyaya:1998xj}

1529: Mukhopadhyaya, B., Roy, S., and Vissani, F., \emph{Phys. Lett.}, \textbf{B443},

1530:   191--195 (1998).

1531: 

1532: \bibitem[Hirsch and Porod(2003)]{Hirsch:2003fe}

1533: Hirsch, M., and Porod, W., \emph{Phys. Rev.}, \textbf{D68}, 115007 (2003).

1534: 

1535: \bibitem[Fukugita and Yanagida(1986)]{Fukugita:1986hr}

1536: Fukugita, M., and Yanagida, T., \emph{Phys. Lett.}, \textbf{B174}, 45 (1986).

1537: 

1538: \bibitem[Buchmuller et~al.(2005)]{Buchmuller:2005eh}

1539: Buchmuller, W., Peccei, R.~D., and Yanagida, T., \emph{Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part.

1540:   Sci.}, \textbf{55}, 311--355 (2005).

1541: 

1542: \bibitem[Kuzmin et~al.(1985)]{kuzmin:1985mm}

1543: Kuzmin, V.~A., Rubakov, V.~A., and Shaposhnikov, M.~E., \emph{Phys. Lett.},

1544:   \textbf{B155}, 36 (1985).

1545: 

1546: \bibitem[Kawasaki et~al.(2005)]{Kawasaki:2004qu}

1547: Kawasaki, M., Kohri, K., and Moroi, T., \emph{Phys. Rev.}, \textbf{D71}, 083502

1548:   (2005).

1549: 

1550: \bibitem[Buchmuller et~al.(2004)]{Buchmuller:2004nz}

1551: Buchmuller, W., Di~Bari, P., and Plumacher, M. 

1552: \emph{Annals Phys.}  {\bf 315}, 305 (2005)

1553: 

1554: \bibitem[Farzan and Valle(2006)]{Farzan:2005ez}

1555: Farzan, Y., and Valle, J. W.~F., \emph{Phys. Rev. Lett.}, \textbf{96}, 011601

1556:   (2006).

1557: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0509280;%%

1558: 

1559: \bibitem[Hirsch et~al.(2006{\natexlab{d}})]{Hirsch:2006ft}

1560: Hirsch, M., Malinsky, M., Romao, J.~C., Sarkar, U., and Valle, J. W.~F.

1561:  hep-ph/0608006 

1562: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0608006;%%

1563: 

1564: \end{thebibliography}

1565: 

1566: 

1567: \end{document}

1568: