1, Cristina Volpe ∗ 1AstroParticule et Cosmologie (APC), UMR 7164-CNRS, Universit´eParis Diderot-Paris 7, 10, rue Alice Domon et L´eonieDuquet, 75205 Paris cedex 13, France Neutrinos of astrophysical origin are messengers produced in stars, in explosive phenomena like core-collapse supernovae, in the accretion disks around black holes, or in the Earth’s atmosphere. Their ﬂuxes and spectra encode information on the environments that produce them. Such ﬂuxes are modiﬁed in characteristic ways when neutrinos traverse a medium. Here our current under- standing of neutrino ﬂavour conversion in media is summarized. The importance of this domain for astrophysical observations is emphasized. Examples are given of the fundamental properties that astrophysical neutrinos have uncovered, or might reveal in the future.
R. Davis’ pioneering measurement of electron neutri- nos emitted by the sun has opened the era of neutrino astronomy . A signiﬁcant deﬁcit, compared to the standard solar model predictions, was rapidly measured, triggering several decades of experiments of solar neu- trino experiments [2–6] to investigate, if unknown neu- trino properties, or solar model uncertainties [7–10], were at its origin. Electron antineutrinos produced by a mas- sive star were ﬁrst detected during the SN1987A explo- sion. A burst was ﬁrst seen in Kamiokande, the electron direction pointing to the Large Magellanic Cloud at 50 FIG. 1. Electron anti-neutrino events measured by the kpc from the Milky Way. The occurrence probability Kamiokande, Baksan, IMB and LSD experiments during the of having 9 events per 10 seconds was determined to be supernova 1987A, in the Large Magellanic Cloud . 8 less than 5.7 10− . Altogether the Kamiokande, IMB, Baksan× and Mont Blanc detectors observed about twenty events [12–15], in the 40 MeV energy range dur- Super-Kamiokande experiment solved the atmospheric ing 13 seconds (Figure 1). Their angular dependence and anomaly and brought a milestone in the solution of the energy distribution are reasonably consistent with expec- ”solar neutrino deﬁcit” problem . In fact, a deﬁcit tations from core-collapse supernova simulations (see e.g. of upgoing atmospheric muon neutrinos traversing the  for a recent analysis). The detection of these events Earth was observed, compared to down-going ones, that constitute the ﬁrst experimental conﬁrmation of the pre- was shown to be consistent with the hypothesis that up- dictions from supernova simulation. In 2002, R. Davis going muon neutrinos convert into tau neutrinos (Figure arXiv:1303.1681v2 [hep-ph] 28 Jun 2013 and M. Koshiba were awarded the Nobel Prize, for ”pi- 2). This discovery has fundamental implications for high- oneering contributions to astrophysics, in particular for energy physics, astrophysics and cosmology. For exam- the detection of cosmic neutrinos”. The prize was shared ple, neutrinos from the sun give us direct conﬁrmation with R. Giacconi for ”for pioneering contributions to as- of the energy production mechanisms in stars (see the trophysics, which have led to the discovery of cosmic X- seminal works [24, 25]). ray sources”. At the same epoch of the solar puzzle, The neutrino oscillation phenomenon occurs if neutri- experiments searching for proton decay were measuring nos have non-zero masses and mixings. The possibil- an anomaly in the atmospheric neutrino background [17– ity to have ν-¯ν oscillations was ﬁrst pointed out by B. 22]. In 1998 the discovery of neutrino oscillations by the Pontecorvo in analogy with K K¯ mesons . Neu- 0 − 0 trino oscillations require that the ﬂavour να and the mass νi basis are related by να = Uαi∗ νi with U being the ∗ [email protected] Pontecorvo-Maki-Nakagawa-Sakata (PMSN) unitary ma- 2
3 2 2 trix . In the three-ﬂavour framework the U matrix 0.12) 10− eV , as well as the mixing angles sin (2θ12) = 2 reads 0.857 0.024, sin (2θ23) > 0.95 . An indication for a nonzero± third neutrino mixing angle has been found by U = VD (1) the T2K  and the Double-Chooz collaborations ; while RENO  and Daya-Bay have measured θ13 to be with a possible parametrization given by  : sin2(2θ ) = 0.092 0.016(stat) 0.005(syst) . 13 ± ± While the experimental progress is impressive, numer- c c s c s e iδ 12 13 12 13 13 −ous features remain unrevealed. First, the mechanism V = s c c s s eiδ c c s s s eiδ s c 12 23 12 23 13 12 23 12 23 13 23 13that gives a mass to the neutrino is unknown. Depend- s− s −c c s eiδ c s − s c s eiδ c c 12 23 12 23 13 12 23 12 23 13 23 13ing on the neutrino nature, introducing a neutrino mass − − − (2) might require a right-handed neutrino singlet (that does where c = cos θ and s = sin θ and ij ij ij ij not couple to the gauge bosons) or, for example, more complex mechanisms of the see-saw type(s) which need e iφ1 0 0 − signiﬁcant extensions of the Standard Model. There is D = 0 1 0 (3) the mass hierarchy problem. In fact, there are two ways 0 0 e iφ2 − to order the mass eigenstates since one of the ∆m2 signs is unknown. The case ∆m2 > 0 corresponds to the The V matrix is analogous to the Cabibbo-Kobayashi- 13 normal hierarchy, while ∆m2 < 0 corresponds to the Maskawa matrix, in the quark sector, although the mix- 13 inverted. Tritium beta-decay experiments give informa- ing angles are there measured to be small. The φ , φ are 1 2 tion on the absolute mass scale. The current upper limit two extra phases that appear in case neutrinos are Majo- is of about 2 eV for the electron neutrino eﬀective mass rana particles. Therefore the PMNS matrix depends on . This will be signiﬁcantly improved by the KATRIN three mixing angles, two Majorana-type and one Dirac- experiment that has a discovery potential for a neutrino type phases. (Here we will not discuss the Majorana mass of 0.35 eV at 5 σ . Moreover, key open issues are phases, since they do not inﬂuence neutrino oscillations the existence of leptonic CP violation, of sterile neutri- in vacuum and in matter.) If the Dirac-type phase is nos and the identiﬁcation of the ν Dirac versus Majorana non-zero, the PMNS matrix is complex, introducing a nature. diﬀerence between the neutrino oscillation probability, and the corresponding ones for antineutrinos, implying Interestingly, the ensemble of experimental data CP violation in the lepton sector (for a neutrino physics’ present a few anomalies that cannot be cast in the three- overview, see the recent comprehensive book ). active neutrino framework. The neutrino ﬂux measure- 37 51 Oscillations in vacuum is an interference phenomenon ment from intense static Ar and Cr sources in the among the matter eigenstates, which is sensitive to their GALLEX and SAGE experiments present an anomalous mass-squared diﬀerences and to the mixing angles. In the deﬁcit of electron neutrinos (the ”Gallium anomaly”). A two-ﬂavour framework, the oscillation appearance prob- recent analysis ﬁnds a statistical signiﬁcance at 3 σ . ability for relativistic neutrinos is given by The LSND collaboration has found evidence for oscilla- tions at δm2 = 1 eV 2 (for small mixing angles) using 2 2 2 P (να νβ) = sin (2θ) sin (∆m12L/4E), (4) decay-at-rest muons  and decay-in-ﬂight pions . → Most of the parameter regions identiﬁed by LSND have E being the neutrino energy, L the source-detector dis- been excluded by the KARMEN experiment based on the 2 2 2 tance and ∆m21 = m2 m1. While the oscillation am- same method . The MiniBooNE experiment has been plitude depends on the− mixing angle, the squared-mass built to clarify the controversial LNSD results. However, diﬀerences determine the oscillation frequency1. In the at present, MiniBooNE anti-neutrino and neutrino oscil- last decade, reactor, accelerator and solar experiments lation data combined show an excess of events at 3.8 σ have precisely measured the two mass-squared diﬀerences [39, 40]. Besides a recent re-evaluation of the electron 2 5 2 2 to be ∆m21 = (7.50 0.20) 10− eV , ∆m32 = (2.32 + anti-neutrino ﬂux from reactors has shown a shift in the ± | | ﬂux renormalization by 3 % compared to previous pre- dictions. The re-analysis of all reactor experiments using this new ﬂux has shown a 3 σ inconsistency with the stan- 1 For three ﬂavours only two independent ∆m2 can be built. Any dard oscillation framework (the ”reactor anomaly”) . extra ∆m2 requires the addition of more mass eigenstates. These unexplained features might point to new physics sub-GeV multi-GeV 250 250 50 75 e-like e-like e-like e-like 200 p < 0.4 GeV/c 200 p > 0.4 GeV/c 40 p < 2.5 GeV/c 60 p > 2.5 GeV/c
150 150 30 45
100 100 20 30 3 50 50 10 15
0 0 0 0 neutrinos, like PINGU  in IceCube or ORCA  in 200 300 100 125 µ-like µ-like µ-like PartiallyANTARES, Contained might reach the required sensitivity to de- 160 p < 0.4 GeV/c 240 p > 0.4 GeV/c 80 100 termine the mass hierarchy. If an (extra)galactic super- nova explosion occurs, the time and energy signals of su- 120 180 60 75 pernova neutrinos will have characteristic imprints from 80 120 40 50 the mass ordering. This would be seen by a network of detectors, such as Super-Kamiokande, KamLAND , 40 60 20 25 Borexino , or by dedicated supernova observatories
0 0 0 0 like HALO [55–58] and LVD ; while some constitute -1 -0.6 -0.2 0.2 0.6 1 -1 -0.6 -0.2 0.2 0.6 1 -1 -0.6 -0.2 0.2 0.6 1 -1 -0.6the -0.2 ”SNEWS: 0.2 0.6 SuperNova 1 Early Warning System” aim- cos cos cos cos ing at alerting observers! if a galactic supernova occurs . About a thousand events can be collected if an ex- FIG. 2. Zenith angle distribution of (a subset of) the plosion happens in our galaxy. Such phenomena are rare sub-GeV and multi-GeV µ-like events observed by Super- (1-3 expected events/century). On the other hand there Kamiokande in 1998. Upward-going particles have cos Θ < 0 is the yet unobserved diﬀuse supernova neutrino back- and downward-going particles have cos Θ > 0. The hatched ground due to supernova explosions at diﬀerent cosmo- region shows the Monte Carlo expectation for no oscillations normalized to the data live-time with statistical errors. The logical redshifts. The sensitivity for its discovery could bold line is the best-ﬁt expectation for ν ν oscillations be reached with improved technologies  or with large- µ τ 2 . → size detectors like MEMPHYS or Hyper-K (440 or 770 kton water Cherenkov) and GLACIER (100 kton liquid Argon)  that would collect about 350 and 60 events and require one or more sterile neutrinos, non-standard over 10 years, respectively . From the detection of interactions or CPT violation. However, at present, none the diﬀuse supernova background, key information could of the proposed explanations is capable of providing a be extracted on the supernova dynamics, on the star for- comprehensive understanding. mation rate and on unknown neutrino properties (for a Future experiments using man-controlled sources will review see [64, 65]). address unknown neutrino properties and try to identify the possible explanations of the anomalies. Exploring the II. NEUTRINO FLAVOUR CONVERSION IN Dirac CP violating phase requires long-term accelerator MEDIA : STATUS AND OPEN QUESTIONS measurements employing either established or novel tech- niques, such as super-beams, beta-beams , neutrino factories (see e.g. [43, 44]), or projects like the decay-at- It is now established that the deﬁcit of high energy so- rest based DAEDALUS . The upgrades of T2K and lar neutrinos is due to the Mikheev-Smirnov-Wolfenstein NOνA experiments can also investigate a small fraction (MSW) eﬀect [66, 67], a resonant conversion phenomenon of the δ values at 3 σ level . Majorana-type phases occurring when neutrinos interact with the matter com- and the neutrino nature can be determined by searches posing a medium. In two-ﬂavours, the MSW resonance 3 for the lepton-number violating neutrino-less double-beta location is identiﬁed by the relation decay. Earth matter eﬀects in long-baseline experiments √ 2 can be exploited to identify the hierarchy, as in e.g. . 2GF ne = (∆m cos 2θ)/2E, (5) Numerous projects are being conceived to test the hy- with G the Fermi coupling constant, n the electron pothesis of the existence of sterile neutrinos based e.g. F e number density (see also the early works [68–70],  or on the use of intense radioactive sources inside spherical the recent review ). At such a location, a conversion detectors such as 144Ce in Ref. or 8Li in Ref. (see  for a review). Astrophysical and cosmological observations oﬀer com- plementary strategies in these fundamental searches. 2 Such detectors are about 20 times larger than Super- Cosmological data will reach an unprecedented sensi- Kamiokande. Their goal is to cover an interdisciplinary program tivity on the sum of the neutrino masses [50, 51] and including the detection of supernova neutrinos, leptonic CP vio- maybe be sensitive to the hierarchy, although this infor- lation and proton decay searches. mation is indirect. Experiments measuring atmospheric 3 For antineutrinos the r.h.s. of the relation has a minus sign. 4 from the electron to the muon (and tau) ﬂavours can take place. Its eﬃciency (or adiabaticity) depends on the one hand on the mixing angles, on the mass-squared diﬀer- ence values and signs, and on the matter number density proﬁle on the other (see Figure 3). In particular, the evolution is little sensitive to the proﬁle details as far as its smooth enough that the adiabatic condition is met. Moreover, depending on the squared-mass diﬀerence sign, the MSW eﬀect can occur in the electron neutrino or anti-neutrino channels. Since R. Davis’ experiment, nu- merous solar experiments mainly sensitive to the electron ﬂavour have precisely measured the solar neutrino ﬂux. These experiments also had some sensitivity to the other FIG. 3. The MSW eﬀect : Schematic behavior of the neutrino ﬂavours. Using elastic scattering, charged- and neutral- matter eigenvalues (solid lines) as a function of the matter current neutrino interactions on heavy water, the SNO number density of a medium. The eigenvalues are pushed experiment has showed that the measurement of the to- far apart because of the presence of mixings, at the MSW tal 8B solar neutrino ﬂux is consistent with the predic- resonance location. (The dashed lines shows the eigenvalues tions of the standard solar model : solar electron neutri- in absence of mixings.) In the case of an adiabatic evolution the matter eigenstate νB does not mix with the νA at the nos convert into the other active ﬂavours. In particular, resonance and stays on the higher branch up to the surface of the muon and tau neutrino components of the solar ﬂux the star. In this case an electron neutrino born as νB emerges has been measured at 5 σ . Moreover the reactor ex- as νB . This produces an electron neutrino deﬁcit in a νe periment KamLAND has deﬁnitely identiﬁed the Large sensitive detector on Earth. Mixing Angle (LMA) solution, by observing reactor elec- tron anti-neutrino disappearance at an average distance of 200 km. The ensemble of these observations shows that averaged vacuum oscillations giving ﬂavour conversion mechanism can occur, named ”para- metric resonance”  or ”neutrino oscillation length res- 1 P (ν ν ) 1 sin2 2θ 0.57 (6) onance” . This eﬀect is an interference eﬀect due e → e ≈ − 2 12 ≈ to the mantle-core-mantle change in the Earth matter density proﬁle, that can enhance the oscillation proba- (with θ12 = 34◦) account for the deﬁcit of low energies bilities. For example, depending on the trajectory (or (< 2 MeV) solar neutrinos; while the deﬁcit of the high 8 azimuthal angle) and energy, atmospheric neutrinos in energy portion of the B spectrum is due to the MSW ef- the few GeV energy range can have an MSW resonant fect. For the latter, the matter-dominated survival prob- conversion in the core, or in the mantle and in the core. ability is Neutrinos having core-crossing trajectories can also ex- perience the parametric resonance. The MSW and para- P (ν ν )high density sin2 θ 0.31 (7) e → e → 12 ≈ metric resonance eﬀects have been investigated e.g. in  in the subdominant atmospheric ν ν in Super- for neutrinos above the critical energy of about 2 MeV e µ Kamiokande. An extended literature concerns→ matter Eq.(5) (see e.g.[10, 29]). More recently, the Borexino eﬀects in atmospheric neutrinos (see e.g.  and refer- experiment has measured the low energy portion of the ences therein). solar neutrino spectrum (pep and 7Be ν) . Figure 4 shows the results from solar experiments . Nowadays A variety of novel ﬂavour conversion mechanisms has the MSW eﬀect constitutes a reference mechanism in the been identiﬁed in stars with more than 6-8 solar masses study of neutrino ﬂavour conversion in media. - the O-Ne-Mg and iron core-collapse supernovae. Their Another interesting case is represented by neutrinos evolution ends with an explosion where 99 % of the grav- traversing the Earth. Its matter density proﬁle undergoes itational energy is released as neutrinos of all ﬂavours, in a rapid change from the mantle to the core at higher den- the 100 MeV energy range, during a burst lasting about sity . It was ﬁrst pointed out in  and in  that ten seconds. The explosion leaves either a neutron star atmospheric neutrinos traversing the Earth would change or a black hole. Since the matter number density of these in ﬂavour. Besides the MSW eﬀect, another neutrino stars is very large, the MSW eﬀect occurs at two diﬀerent H H e e ______, H , L 3m µ 2m , __ , µ 2m __ 1m __ , L , H __ µ 1m 3m __ , , µ e __ e
LHHn Ln n n e -n ne e e e e 19 (a)19 (b) 5 2 iments and the KamLAND experiment2 yielded m = iments and the KamLAND experiment yielded m21 = 21 +0.21 +0.21 5 2 +02 .030 +0.030 0.9 0.9 5 2 2 (7.41(70..4119) 0.1019 ) eV ,10 tan ✓12eV=0, tan.446 0.✓02912, and=0.446 0.029, and 2 ⇥ +1.8 P e e 1 band ⇥ 2 P 1 band! sin ✓13 =(22 H.5 ) 10 +1.. This8 implied2 an upper bound 0.8 e e 1.5 H ! SNO sin2 ✓13 =(2⇥ .5 1.5) 10 . This implied an upper bound 0.8 of sin ✓13 < 0.053 at the 95% C.L. e e 7 2 ⇥ SNO Borexino 7Be, pep __ __ 0.7 __of sin ✓13 < 0.053 at the 95%H C.L. , L Borexinopp7Be - All7 solarBe, pepexperiments , µ 0.7 0.6 3m 2m
e VIII. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ⌫ pp - All solar experiments ! e ⌫ , __ , P 0.5 0.6 µ e This research wasVIII. supported ACKNOWLEDGMENTS by: Canada: Natural 1m ⌫ 2m 0.4 __ !
e Sciences__ and Engineering Research Council, Industry __ ⌫ , L , H P 0.5 Canada, National Research Council, Northern Ontario 0.3 µ 1m 3m HeritageThis Fund, research Atomic Energy was of Canada, supported Ltd., Ontario by: Canada: Natural 0.4 0.2 __Sciences and Engineering Research , Council, Industry , 1 0 1 µ 10 10 10 e __ E⌫(MeV) Canada, National Research Council, Northern Ontario 0.3 Heritage Fund, Atomic Energy of Canada,e Ltd., Ontario FIG. 18. Various solar ⌫e survival probability measurements 0.2 compared to the LMA prediction for 8B neutrino. Using the results from Section VI of this paper, the dashed line is the LHH L 1 0 8 1 n n 10 best ﬁt LMA solution10 for B neutrinos and10 the gray shaded n n e -n ne e band is the 1 uncertainty.E⌫(MeV) The corresponding bands for ⌫es e e e from the pp and 7Be reactions (not shown) are almost iden- tical in the region of those measurements. The blue shaded (c)(d) 8 FIG. 5. MSW eﬀect in supernovae : Level crossing dia- FIG. 18. Variousband solar is the⌫ resulte survival of the measurement probability the B measurements neutrino ⌫e sur- FIG. 4. Solar neutrinosvival probability : Electron reported neutrino here.8 The survival red point probabil- is the result ofgram for the neutrino mass eigenstates in a supernova for the comparedity, as a function to thetheLMA of Borexino the neutrino prediction measurement energy, for  for ofB the the neutrino. survivalpp, pep probability, Using7Be, for thecase of normal mass hierarchy. The ﬁgure shows the matter 7 7 results8B neutrinos from Section from⌫es produced global VI of solar by thisBe+ neutrinose paper, Li+ analyses, the⌫e reactions dashed Borexino, in the line Sun. is The theeigenvalues evolution associated with the matter eigenstates blue point is the8 result of! various measurements  of the bestand ﬁt the LMA SNO solution combined for analysis.B neutrinos The results and are the compared gray2 shaded+ ν1m, ν2m, ν3m, as a function of the electron number density ne. survival probability for ⌫es produced by p + p H+e + ⌫e to the MSW predictions, taking into account present! uncer- The two crossings correspond2 to the high-resonance (H) and band is the 1 uncertainty.reactions in the Sun; The note corresponding that these measurements bands did for not⌫es FIG. 19. Projection over sin ✓13 combining the projections tainties on mixingexclusively7 angles. measure The SNO this resultsreaction, are so the from contribution  and fromtheobtained low-resonance by analyzing (L) associated data from all with neutrino the mixing sources. parameters The from the pp and Be reactions (not shown) are almost iden- 2 2 the ones on pepotherare from reactions . were Figure removed from assuming . the best ﬁt LMA so-(θ13data, ∆m from13) atmospherics,and (θ12, ∆m short-baseline12), respectively experiments . and long- tical in the regionlution, of and those so actually measurements. depends on all solar The neutrino blue results.shaded 8 baseline experiments (ATM+LBL+CHOOZ) was determined band is the resultThe of uncertainty the measurement in absolute ﬂux the of theB subtracted neutrino reactions⌫e sur- from Figure 2-left of Reference  which already includes the vival probabilitywas reported included in here. the calculation The red of point the total is theuncertainty result of of latest T2K  and MINOS  results. locations4, usuallythis point, referred but the to uncertainty as the due High to the (H) neutrino and oscillation the theLow Borexino (L) resonances. measurementprobability The of these evolution reactions of the was at survival not. the The H-resonance uncertainty probability due to for the7 normalization7 of the two points by the expected ﬂux was ⌫es produced by Be+e 2 Li+⌫e reactions in the Sun. The Power Generation, High Performance Computing Virtual depends on theincluded. (θ13, ∆ Form!13 clarity,) oscillation this plot illustratesparameters, the LMA while solutionten years have shown that the situation is more complex bluethe point ﬂavour is evolution therelative result to at only of the various a L-resonance subset of measurements the solar (L) neutrino depends experimental  on of the Laboratory, Canada Foundation for Innovation, Canada 2 + thanResearch what Chairs;shown US: in Figure Department 5 of of Ref.. Energy, National This is be- survival probability2 results. for ⌫es produced by p + p H+e + ⌫e (θ12, ∆m12) (see Figure 5) . For example,! a 40 MeV causeEnergy one Research is facing Scientiﬁc an explosive Computing phenomenon Center, Alfred with P. shock 3 58 2 reactionsneutrino in sees the the Sun; H-resonance note that at these a density measurements of about 10 did notwave(s)SloanFIG.and Foundation; turbulence,19. Projection UK: Science with and over 10 TechnologyMeV sin ✓ released13 Facilitiescombining as neu- the projections exclusivelyg/cm3. The measure identiﬁcationA two-ﬂavor this reaction, of theneutrino solar so oscillation LMA the contribution solution analysis tells yielded fromtrinos.Council;obtained Portugal: by Funda¸c˜aopara analyzing adata Ciˆencia from e a Tecnolo- all neutrino sources. The 2 +1.9 25 2 2 +0.033 other reactions were m21 =(5 removed.6 1.4) assuming10 eV and the tan best✓12 =0 ﬁt.427 LMA0.029 so-. gia. We thank the SNO technical sta↵ for their strong us the value and the sign of⇥ ∆m12. The three neutrino data from atmospherics, short-baseline experiments and long- mixing angles areA three-ﬂavor also now precisely neutrino oscillation determined. analysis For combiningtyp- contributions. We thank Vale (formerly Inco, Ltd.) for lution, and so actuallythis result depends with results on of all all other solar solar neutrino neutrino results. exper- Ref.hostingbaseline this ﬁrst project. pointed experiments out that (ATM+LBL+CHOOZ) the shock wave passage was determined Theical uncertainty supernova matter in absolute density ﬂux proﬁles, of the the subtracted neutrino pas- reactionsin thefrom MSW Figure resonance 2-left region of Reference would leave  which an imprint already includes the wassage included in the L-resonance in the calculation region is adiabatic. of the total On uncertaintythe other on of thelatest time signalT2K  of the and positrons MINOS emitted results. in inverse thishand point, the but neutrino the uncertainty ﬂavour content due after to the the neutrino H-resonance oscillationbeta-decay, i.e.ν ¯ + p n + e+. This is the main de- e → probabilityencodes interesting of thesea Present reactions information address: was Center onnot. thefor The Astrophysics mass uncertainty hierarchy. and Space due As- totectionf Present channel address: in Cherenkov Department of and Physics, scintillator HiroshimaUni- detectors. theTherefore normalization matter of eﬀectstronomy, the two on University the points supernova of Colorado, by the neutrino Boulder, expected CO spec- ﬂux wasRef. versity, has Hiroshima, emphasized Japan the eﬀects from the presence of tra can tell us aboutb Present the address: hierarchy Institut from f¨ur signalsKern- und of Teilchenphysik, future g PowerPresent address: Generation, Sanford LaboratoryHigh Performance at Homestake, Computing Virtual included. For clarity,Technische this plotUniversit¨at illustrates Dresden, Dresden, the LMA Germany solutionnot onlyLead, a front SD but also a reverse shock, which are ap- relativeexplosions. to only However, ac subsetPresent theoretical address: of the Department investigationssolar neutrino of Physics, of experimental the University last ofparenth Laboratory,Present in supernova address: Departmentsimulations. Canada of Foundation Physics, The presence University for of of Innovation, shock Canada California, Davis, CA waves engendersResearchNorth Carolina, two Chairs; Chapel important Hill, US: NC eﬀects.Department First it of makes Energy, National results. d Present address: Instit¨ut f¨ur Experimentelle Kernphysik, i Present address: Center of Cosmology and Particle As- Karlsruher Instit¨ut f¨ur Technologie, Karlsruhe, Germanythe H-resonanceEnergytrophysics, NationalResearch temporarily Taiwan Scientiﬁc University, non-adiabatic Taiwan Computing because Center, of Alfred P. e Present address: CERN, Geneva, Switzerland the steepnessj Present address: of the Institute shock wavefor Space fronts Sciences, (the Freie adiabaticity Uni- 4 Note that there is also a third resonance named V , associated Sloan Foundation; UK: Science and Technology Facilities µτ versit¨at Berlin, Leibniz-Institute of Freshwater Ecology to the ( ∆ 2 ) oscillation parameters. It occurs at higher depends on the derivative of the density proﬁle). Second, A two-ﬂavorθ23, m23 neutrino oscillation analysis yielded Council; Portugal: Funda¸c˜aopara a Ciˆencia e a Tecnolo- density2 than+1 the.9 H-resonance.5 Since,2 in general,2 the Vµτ reso-+0.033multiple H-resonances appear, since a neutrino of a given mnance21 =(5 has.6 a small1.4) eﬀect10 on observations,eV andtan it will✓ not12 be=0 discussed.427 0.029energy. gia. can meet We thankthe resonance the SNO condition technical several sta times.↵ for their strong ⇥ A three-ﬂavorfurther here. neutrino oscillation analysis combiningFor example,contributions. in presence We of two thank resonances, Vale (formerly the electron Inco, Ltd.) for this result with results of all other solar neutrino exper- hosting this project.
a Present address: Center for Astrophysics and Space As- f Present address: Department of Physics, Hiroshima Uni- tronomy, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO versity, Hiroshima, Japan b Present address: Institut f¨ur Kern- und Teilchenphysik, g Present address: Sanford Laboratory at Homestake, Technische Universit¨at Dresden, Dresden, Germany Lead, SD c Present address: Department of Physics, University of h Present address: Department of Physics, University of California, Davis, CA North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC d Present address: Instit¨ut f¨ur Experimentelle Kernphysik, i Present address: Center of Cosmology and Particle As- Karlsruher Instit¨ut f¨ur Technologie, Karlsruhe, Germany trophysics, National Taiwan University, Taiwan e Present address: CERN, Geneva, Switzerland j Present address: Institute for Space Sciences, Freie Uni- versit¨at Berlin, Leibniz-Institute of Freshwater Ecology 6 neutrino survival probability reads  system of coupled stiﬀ non-linear equations needs to be solved. Three new conversion regimes near the neutrino- Z x1 2 2 2 ∆m ˜ sphere are identiﬁed. The ﬁrst is the ”synchronisation” Pνeνe = cos (χ1 χ2) sin 2χ1 sin 2χ2 sin ( )dx where neutrino ﬂavour conversion is frozen. The sec- − − x2 4E (8) ond regime consists in bipolar oscillations that can be with χ1 and χ2 the matter angles mixing the two mat- understood as a ”ﬂavour”  or a ”gyroscopic” pendu- ter eigenstates at the resonance locations x1 and x2, and lum . In the last phase, full or no ﬂavour conversion ∆m ˜ 2 the matter squared-mass diﬀerence. The interfer- occurs depending on the neutrino energy. The underly- ence term oscillates with the neutrino energy and the ing mechanism producing this abrupt change corresponds resonance locations. Since the shock wave is moving, it to an MSW-like behaviour in the co-moving frame , will change the resonance locations modifying the phase which can be interpreted as a ”magnetic resonance” phe- in such a term. This produces rapid oscillations in the nomenon . This mechanism produces sharp changes survival probability for a neutrino of a given energy. The of the neutrino ﬂuxes that appear around 200 km from conditions for such oscillations termed ”phase eﬀects” are the neutrino-sphere. The electron and muon (or tau) that the ﬂavour evolution is semi-adiabatic at the reso- neutrino ﬂuxes swap above a critical energy called the nances and that the matter eigenstates stay coherent at ”split” energy. All these eﬀects are also termed ”col- the resonances . lective” eﬀects because many of their features can be Turbulence is another characteristic of these explosive captured by following the neutrino ensemble (instead of environments. Its eﬀects are studied e.g. in [84–86]. a neutrino at a time). These mechanisms explain the The presence of matter density ﬂuctuations can intro- novel ﬂavour modiﬁcations appearing in simulations with duce numerous locations where the resonance density is neutrino self-interactions. However the picture becomes more complex depending on the neutrino luminosity ra- met. Their eﬀect on ﬂavour conversion is therefore of the 5 same kind as of shock waves. In fact turbulence produces tios at the neutrino-sphere , on the neutrino properties phase eﬀects, averaging the neutrino oscillation probabil- and on the detailed implementation of the geometry of ity between the adiabatic and non-adiabatic solution  the neutrino emission. For example, large matter densi- (see also , and  for a review). Still, extensive calcu- ties can decohere collective eﬀects . Recent calcula- lations remain to be done, where one implements matter tions based on realistic matter density proﬁles from one- density ﬂuctuations extracted from multi-dimensional su- dimensional supernova simulations show that indeed such pernova simulations (instead of more schematic prescrip- eﬀects might be suppressed during the accretion phase of tions). Clearly, to fully capture several ﬂavour conversion the supernova explosion . If so, the situation be- features in media, that are interference eﬀects, one has comes simpler theoretically because the ﬂavour change is to evolve the neutrino amplitudes and not the neutrino only due to the MSW eﬀect. Nevertheless further modiﬁ- probabilities. The latter procedure was often followed in cations can be present due to the shock waves and turbu- the past, e. g. in predictions with the factorisation hy- lence, depending on the considered phase of the explosion pothesis where one factorizes the probabilities for ﬂavour (neutronization burst, accretion, or cooling phase). conversion at the H- and L-resonances. Impressive progress has been achieved in unravelling The implementation of the neutral-current ν-ν inter- mechanisms and conditions for ﬂavour conversion of action constitutes another important progress in simula- core-collapse supernova neutrinos. Still, serious work is tions of ﬂavour conversions in supernovae. Such contri- needed to come to a deﬁnite and comprehensive under- butions are small in the sun, whereas the large neutrino standing and to establish the impact on observations. number density renders them important in these environ- Current supernova simulations are based on a detailed ments. Ref.  ﬁrst pointed out that the neutrino self- treatment of the neutrino transport in the dense super- interaction would introduce a non-linear refractive index. nova region inside the neutrino-sphere. They typically The ﬁrst numerical simulations showed the appearance account for a good angular, or energy neutrino distri- of new phenomena . Ref. pointed out a signif- bution (but not both), and do not include mixings . icant impact on the r-process nucleosynthesis. Ref. Such simulations provide the neutrino energy spectra and showed the important eﬀects on the neutrino ﬂuxes with phenomenological implications. This triggered intensive investigations (see  for a review). The inclusion of 5 The neutrino-sphere is the region in the supernova where neutri- ν self-interaction makes predictions demanding since a nos start free streaming (Figure 6). 7
osynthesis (see e.g. [105, 106]). Refs.[92, 107] have stud- ied e.g. the eﬀect of the neutrino-neutrino interaction in these sites. Rν νj θia Finally, neutrino ﬂavour conversion phenomena are θ r νi ij also important in the Early Universe, in particular at θik the epoch of Big-bang nucleosynthesis. Their description is based on the resolution of a Boltzmann equation for νk νk particles with mixings since collisions need to be imple- mented, as well as neutrino mixings, the coupling to the relativistic plasma and neutrino self-interaction. Note that the importance of the neutrino self-interaction was FIG. 6. Cartoon picture of neutrinos emitted at the neutrino- ﬁrst pointed out in this context. A key parameter for sphere of a supernova and interacting with each other. The primordial nucleosynthesis (as for the r-process) is the neutrino-sphere is taken to be a sharp sphere . proton-to-neutron ratio. This is determined by the elec- tron neutrinos and anti-neutrinos interactions with pro- tons and neutrons and by neutron decay. The build up ﬂuxes at the neutrino-sphere that are the initial condi- of the light elements starts at about 1 s after the Big- tions for the ﬂavour evolution studies. These then evolve bang when the plasma temperature is around 1 MeV. the ν up to the star surface in order to predict the as- The ﬁnal primordial abundances are very sensitive to sociated signals in observatories on Earth (in the case of neutrino properties (see [108, 109] for a review). Just an explosion). The evolution equations used are based to give an example, cosmological observations from pri- on the mean-ﬁeld approximation. This means that one mordial nucleosynthesis and the matter power spectrum neutrino (or anti-neutrino) is evolved at a time in a back- are compatible with about one sterile neutrino (see e.g. ground of matter, of ν and ofν ¯ that acts on the ”test” ). The PLANCK experiment has recently measured particle through a mean-ﬁeld. It is still an open ques- Neff = 3.36 0.66 at 95%C.L. (CMB alone) for the eﬀec- ± tion if and under which conditions the present treatments tive number of neutrino species . The direct observa- describe in an appropriate way the transition between tion of the cosmological neutrino background remains a the region that is Boltzmann treated to the one that is challenge. Its detection demands novel approaches since mean-ﬁeld described. In fact more realistic geometrical such νs are very cold. Attempts are still oﬀ from the descriptions or extended equations implementing many- required sensitivity by several order of magnitudes. The body corrections might be needed. Works along this line approach which appears as the ”closest” is the detection of research are just appearing. For example, Ref. has of cosmological neutrinos through their capture by ra- pointed out the need for a more realistic geometrical de- dioactive nuclei, a process without threshold. First pro- scription of the neutrino emission at the neutrino-sphere posed by Weinberg , this idea has been applied in re- (Figure 6). Ref. has derived corrections beyond the alistic extensive calculations in  (see also Ref.). mean-ﬁeld approximation using a coherent-state path in- tegral approach. Ref. has used the general many- body framework oﬀered by the Bogoliubov-Born-Green- Kirkwood-Yvon hierarchy to derive both the mean-ﬁeld III. OPEN ISSUES AND ASTROPHYSICAL ν and extended mean-ﬁeld equations. The latter introduce for the ﬁrst time the abnormal mean-ﬁeld correspond- One of the crucial open issues is the possible break- ing to neutrino-antineutrino pairing correlations (Figure ing of CP invariance. The recent precise measurement of 7). So far neglected, these two-body correlations might the third neutrino mixing angle by the RENO  and impact ﬂavour conversion and supernova observations. the Daya-Bay collaborations  brings a much awaited The theoretical developments described above also ap- result for CP searches. In fact CP violation from a non- ply to the study of the low energy neutrinos from the zero Dirac phase aﬀects oscillations only in the case of accretion disks surrounding black holes (AD-BH). In fact three families. The discovery of leptonic CP violation the conditions in the disks are very similar to the core- and of neutrino-less double-beta decay would give im- collapse supernova ones, so that such sites also oﬀer con- portant clues for the understanding of matter-antimatter ditions for example for r-process and νp element nucle- asymmetry in the universe (see e.g.). An interest- 8
FIG. 7. The (low energy) neutrino-antineutrino interac- tion (left ﬁgure) and the associated pairing mean-ﬁeld (right ﬁgure) obtained by summing over the background particles states. These contributions appear in an extended mean-ﬁeld description that goes beyond the usual mean-ﬁeld assumption made in the simulations of ﬂavour conversion in core-collapse supernovae . ing related question to explore is the possibility to have indirect manifestations of a non-zero Dirac-type phase FIG. 8. Positron time signal associated with inverse beta- in astrophysical environments. The authors of Ref. decay for a galactic explosion at 10 kpc per unit tonne in a have ﬁrst investigated this question in the solar neutrino detector. The diﬀerent curves are for 10 (solid), 15 (dashed), context showing that there are no CP violating eﬀects in 19 (dash-dotted) and 29 (dot-dot-dashed line) MeV positron the νe survival probability in matter to the leading order energies. The dips or bumps correspond to the passage of the in electroweak interaction. Eﬀects from next-to-leading shock wave in the MSW resonance region. They are present order are estimated to be extremely small. Ref. has in the case of inverted mass hierarchy . ﬁrst pointed out possible eﬀects in core-collapse super- novae coming to the conclusion that there are no CP vi- olation eﬀects in such environments. Ref. has come Earth or of the neutron-to-proton ratio relevant for r- to a result at variance with Ref. demonstrating that process nucleosynthesis . An improved numerical there can be CP violating eﬀects in supernovae. By using simulation with the neutrino self-interaction has shown general arguments, the factorisation condition that the non-linearity of the equations ampliﬁes the CP violating eﬀects from radiative corrections by several or- H(δ) = S†H(δ = 0)S (9) der of magnitudes . While ﬂux modiﬁcations are is obtained6 with S = diag(1, 1, eiδ). This relation gives still at the level of about 5-10 %, future improvements of a procedure to identify under which conditions such ef- the simulations might introduce further ampliﬁcation of fects can arise : contributions to the neutrino Hamil- such eﬀects. Ref. has studied the size of CP violat- tonian that break the factorization condition engender ing eﬀects in presence of non-zero neutrino magnetic mo- CP violating eﬀects. For example, these arise because ments, reaching the same conclusions as previous works of radiative corrections in the Standard Model, or of [118, 120] concerning the size of CP eﬀects. In the Early non-standard interactions like ﬂavour-changing interac- universe context Ref. has performed the ﬁrst inves- tions that diﬀerentiate muon from tau neutrino interac- tigation of the eﬀects of a non-zero Dirac-type phase on tions with matter. This ﬁnding has been subsequently the primordial light elements abundances. Within three- independently conﬁrmed by Ref.. A quantitative active neutrinos it is shown that the phase modiﬁes the evaluation of the modiﬁcations introduced by a non-zero primordial Helium-4 abundance at most by 1%, which is Dirac phase shows variations at the level of a few per- within current systematic uncertainties. cent both of the supernova signal in an observatory on The detection of neutrinos from a future (ex- tra)galactic explosion constitutes one of the strategies to identify the mass hierarchy. Available studies are roughly of three types. The ﬁrst kind exploits Earth matter ef- 6 H being in the so-called T23 basis fects of supernova neutrinos that traverse the Earth be- 9 fore being detected . This produces a modulation of the neutrino events distribution that gives peaks in the distribution Fourier transform . However such ef- fects are very small making this option hardly feasible . A second option consists in exploiting the early time signal of the supernova explosion either from the neutronization burst  or from the accretion phase. In Ref. the signal of the ﬁrst 200 ms (accretion phase) of the explosion is investigated. This time window has the advantage of being simpler than the late explosion stages since the signal is not aﬀected by the neutrino-self- interaction, the shock-waves (and turbulence). The au- thors show that in IceCube one could distinguish the nor- mal from the inverted hierarchy. The third type of studies look for eﬀects in the time signal due to the shock waves since their presence depends on the hierarchy [82, 127]. Early works show features without the ν ν interaction. FIG. 9. One- and two-neutron emission event rates for a This improvement is performed in Ref..− The cal- supernova at 10 kpc in the HALO phase-II detector (1 kton 208 culation treats neutrino self-interactions and shock-wave of Pb). The diﬀerent curves take into account the uncer- eﬀects in a consistent way, using realistic supernova den- tainties in the supernova muon (tau) neutrino ﬂuxes at the neutrino-sphere as well as the possible hierarchy (θ is now sity proﬁles and propagating neutrino amplitudes (phase 13 measured) . eﬀects are properly taken into account). Figure 8 shows the results for the positron time signal associated with inverse beta-decay in water Cherenkov and scintillator detectors. At early times, when the shock wave has not trino spectra. Figure 9 shows the example of the interest yet reached the MSW resonance region, the neutrino con- of having one- and two-neutron detection channels in a version is expected to be adiabatic. As the shock wave lead-based detector like HALO . Note that a software reaches this region, the ﬂux becomes the non-adiabatic - SNOwGLoBES - is now available to compute interac- one, producing either a dip or a bump, depending on tion rates for supernova neutrinos in common detector the neutrino energy. For electron anti-neutrinos, the materials [129, 130]. resonance condition is met for inverted hierarchy. If Observations using the νe detection channel would the hierarchy is normal, no resonant conversion occurs beneﬁt from precise measurements of neutrino-nucleus and the positron time signal presents an exponential be- scattering. Only for deuteron the cross section is known haviour. Such a signature could already be seen in Super- at the level of few percent, while for heavier nuclei uncer- Kamiokande if a galactic supernova happens tomorrow, tainties are typically at the level of few tens of percent. and be distinguished by the exponential at 3.5 σ (1 σ) In the future, facilities producing neutrinos in the 100 for the bump (dip). Note that this signature holds in the MeV energy range such as low energy beta-beams  electron neutrino channel as well, if the mass hierarchy or spallation sources , could oﬀer a unique opportu- is normal. This could be seen in a liquid argon detec- nity to precisely measure such cross sections and also re- tor mainly sensitive to νe or in water Cherenkov and in alise fundamental interaction studies, like measurements scintillator detectors through scattering on oxygen and of the Weinberg angle at low momentum transfer, a test carbon respectively. of the Conserved-Vector-Current hypothesis (see  for Complementary information would be obtained by the a review), or of the hypothesis of the existence of ster- observation of (extra)galactic supernova explosion(s) and ile neutrinos . Note that improving the knowledge the detection of the diﬀuse supernova neutrino back- of the isospin and spin-isospin nuclear response involved ground. While some of the uncertainties are still large, in neutrino-nucleus interactions is of importance also for one can pin down interesting information by combining searches on the neutrino nature, since this constitutes a data from diﬀerent detectors. Having diﬀerent technolo- key ingredient of neutrino-less double-beta decay predic- gies sensitive to ν andν ¯ with various energy thresholds is tions . a key aspect to be sensitive to diﬀerent parts of the neu- Observing a supernova luminosity curve is of great as- 10 trophysical value besides being of interest for the funda- . A follow-up analysis of contained vertex event mental particle or interaction properties it encodes. In search has just found 26 more events at lower energy fact, the ν time signal closely follows the diﬀerent phases (3.6 σ). There is now evidence for a high-energy neu- of the explosion, from the collapse to the accretion phase trino component inconsistent at 4.3 σ with standard at- and to the cooling of the remaining proto-neutron star. mospheric backgrounds . A future larger data set This measurement would provide key information for the with increased statistical signiﬁcance might conﬁrm the longstanding open problem of the explosion mechanism discovery of high energy astrophysical neutrinos. of iron-core supernovae. Currently, 2- and 3-dimensional High-energy neutrino telescopes are currently also pro- simulations are being developed that realistically include viding data on neutrino oscillations measuring atmo- the neutrino transport, convection and hydrodynami- spheric neutrinos, commonly a background for astrophys- cal instabilities (the Standing-Accretion-Shock o SASI ical neutrino searches. Using low energy samples, both mode). Several groups are obtaining successful explo- ANTARES  and IceCube/DeepCore  have mea- sions for diﬀerent progenitor masses, while reaching a 2 sured the parameters θ23 and ∆m23 in good agreement consensus on the mechanism requires further studies (see with existing data. Crucial information can be extracted e.g. [101, 134, 135]). Using 3D models based on a sim- from such telescopes in the future from low energy (below pliﬁed neutrino transport scheme, Ref. has showed 40 GeV) atmospheric neutrinos. Predictions show that for example that the SASI mode could be tracked in Ice- from the measurement of ﬂavour conversion eﬀects in the Cube for a supernova within 2 kpc. These massive stars Earth in IceCube/DeepCore can provide a precise mea- are also candidate sites for the r-process, whose iden- surement of oscillation parameters (see e.g. [144, 145]). tiﬁcation is still an open issue; while several sites might PINGU, IceCube extension in the 10 GeV energy range, contribute, such as the accretion disks around black holes could measure the mass hierarchy and be sensitive to the . The impact of neutrino properties on the r-process Dirac phase . Feasibility studies are currently on- is the object of numerous studies. For example Ref. going both for PINGU and for ORCA to establish if the points out the possible role of sterile neutrinos in getting energy and angular resolution required for the mass hier- a successful nucleosynthesis in supernovae. An intriguing archy search can be achieved. Information on the phase question is also the possible impact of ﬂavour conversion could also be extracted by a precise measurement of high- on the explosion itself. MSW eﬀects occur in the outer energy neutrino ﬂux ratios [147–149]. Ref. gets a 2 σ star layers and have no impact on the shock. The collec- coverage of about 10 % of the CP values, if uncertainties tive eﬀects from the neutrino-neutrino interaction take on the ﬂux ratios are kept below 7 %. As for a fourth place deep in the star and might have an impact. The sterile neutrino, its existence might lead to a distortion of ﬁrst investigations seem to indicate that they are still far the zenith angle distribution of high-energy atmospheric out to aﬀect the shock waves , although it might still neutrinos through the MSW active-sterile resonance in- be too early to draw conclusions. side the Earth. An analysis of data from Amanda and A new window on the universe is opened by high- (incomplete) IceCube as well as the prospects for the energy neutrino telescopes like ANTARES, the ﬁrst un- completed IceCube give limits that for some of the ster- dersea in the Mediterranean , and IceCube, buried ile oscillation parameters are stronger than all combined in deep ice at the South Pole . The main mis- experiments . Ref.  shows that low energy sion is to search for galactic and extra-galactic sources events in DeepCore can substantially constrain the mix- of high-energy neutrinos to elucidate the source of cos- ing of sterile neutrinos in the eV mass scale. The eﬀect mic rays and the astrophysical mechanisms that produce found is diﬀerent for normal or inverted hierarchy of ac- them. These telescopes also investigate neutrino oscil- tive neutrinos, so that if such νss exist the hierarchy can lations, dark matter and supernova neutrinos (for Ice- also be identiﬁed. Finally both terrestrial experiments Cube). At present, the IceCube collected data on ultra- and neutrino telescopes  set tight limits on Lorentz high-energy neutrinos (above 1019 eV) from active galac- and CPT violation. A constraint also comes from the tic nuclei (AGN) and gamma-ray-bursts (GRB) show no SN1987A from the nearly simultaneous arrival of the pho- signiﬁcant deviation from background in the number of tons and the neutrinos . Interestingly, models based observed events, although uncertainties in the models on Lorentz and CPT violation are developed to interpret are still quite large. Interestingly two 1 PeV events at oscillation data from all experiments (see  and the threshold of GZK searches have been recently identiﬁed nice summary in Ref.). with a signiﬁcance of 2.8 σ of not being a background In conclusion, neutrinos are messengers having a wide 11 energy range, capable of covering cosmological distances Sometimes slow on a man-scale, the progress continues and telling us about quiet and violent phenomena. Neu- steadily, while the last decade has been rich of excit- trino physics is a domain rich of interdisciplinary as- ing observations. Neutrinos have brought milestones in pects and approaches. The measurement of these elu- our understanding of fundamental issues in high-energy sive particles requires inventive detectors of huge sizes. physics and astrophysics, and will likely bring more in the future.
 R. Davis, Phys. Rev. Lett. 12, 303 (1964). p. 710.  K. S. Hirata et al., J Phys. Rev. Lett. 63, 16 (1989).  K. Abe et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 041801 (2011).  J. N. Abdurashitov et al., J Phys. Rev. C 60,  Y. Abe et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 131801 (2012). 055801 (1999).  J. K. Ahn et al., arXiv:1204.0626.  P. Anselmannet al. Phys. Lett. B 327, 377 (1994).  F. P. An et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 171803 (2012).  C. Arpesella et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 091302  A. Osipowicz et al., hep-ex/0109033. (2008).  C. Giunti and M. Laveder, Phys. Rev. C 83, 065504  Q. R. Ahmad et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 011301 (2011). (2002).  C. Athanassopoulos et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 77,  J. N. Bahcall, and R. K. Ulrich, Rev. Mod. Phys. 3082 (1996). 60, 297 (1988).  C. Athanassopoulos et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 81,  S. Turck-Chieze , and I. Lopes, Astrophys. J. 408, 1774 (1998). 347 (1993).  B. Zeitnitz et al., Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 40, 169  E. G. Adelberger et al., Rev. Mod. Phys. 70, 1265 (1998). (1998).  A. A. Aguilar-Arevalo et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 102,  W. C. Haxton, R. G. Hamish Robertson, and (2009) 101802. A. M. Serenelli, arXiv:1208.5723.  A. A. Aguilar-Arevalo et al., arXiv:1207.4809  A. Suzuki, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 120, 072001 (2008). [hep-ex].  K. Hirata et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 58, 1490 (1987).  G. Mention et al., Phys. Rev. D 83, 073006 (2011).  R. M. Bionta et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 58, 1494  P. Zucchelli, Phys. Lett. B 532, 166 (2002). (1987).  C. Volpe, J. Phys. G 34, R1 (2007).  Alexeyev, E.N. et al. , Proc. of the Leptonic Session  A. Bandyopadhyay et al., Rept. Prog. Phys. 72, of the 22nd Rencontre de Moriond (1987) 739. 106201 (2009).  M. Aglietta et al. , Europhys. Lett. 3, 1315 (1987).  J. Alonso et al., arXiv:1006.0260.  G. Pagliaroli, F. Vissani, M. L. Costantini, and  P. Huber et al., JHEP 0911, 044 (2009). A. Ianni, Astropart. Phys. 31, 163 (2009).  M. Cribier et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 201801 (2011).  K. S. Hirata et al., Phys. Lett. B 205, 416 (1988).  C. Espinoza, R. Lazauskas, and C. Volpe, Phys.  Y. Fukuda et al., Phys. Lett. B 335, 237 (1994). Rev. D 1986, , 113016 (2012).  D. Casper et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 2561 (1991).  K. N. Abazajian et al., arXiv:1204.5379.  C. Berger et al., Phys. Lett. B 245, 305 (1990).  J. Lesgourgues and S. Pastor, Adv. High Energy  M. Aglietta et al., Europhys. Lett. 8, 611 (1989). Phys. 2012, 608515 (2012).  G. L. Fogli, E. Lisi, D. Montanino, and G. Scios-  K. N. Abazajian et al., Astropart. Phys. 35, 177 cia, Phys. Rev. D 55, 4385 (1997). (2011).  Y. Fukuda et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 1562 (1998).  D. J. Koskinen, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 26, 2899 (2011).  H.A. Bethe, Phys. Rev. 55, 1562 (1939).  see http://agenda.infn.it/conferenceDisplay.py?  G. Gamow, and M. Schoenberg, Phys. Rev. 58, 1117 confId=5510 (1940).  K. Eguchi et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 021802 (2003).  B. Pontecorvo,, Sov. Phys. JETP 6, 429 (1957) [Zh.  see http://www.snolab.ca/halo/ Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 33, 549 (1957)].  G. M. Fuller, W. C. Haxton, and G. C. McLaugh-  Z. Maki, M. Nakagawa, and S. Sakata, Prog. Theor. lin, Phys. Rev. D 59, 085005 (1999). Phys. 28, 870 (1962).  J. Engel, G. C. McLaughlin, and C. Volpe, Phys.  J. Beringer et al., Phys. Rev. D 86, 010001 (2012). Rev. D 67, 013005 (2003).  C. Giunti, and C. W. Kim, “Fundamentals of Neutrino  D. Va¨an¨ anen¨ , and C. Volpe, JCAP 1110, 019 Physics and Astrophysics,” (Univ. Pr., Oxford, 2007), (2011). 12
 N. Y. .Agafonova t et al., J Astropart. Phys. 28, Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 60, 569 (2010). 516 (2008).  H. Duan, G. M. Fuller, J. Carlson, and Y. -  see http://snews.bnl.gov/ Z. Qian, Phys. Rev. D 75, .125005 (2007).  J. F. Beacom, and M. R. Vagins, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93,  S. Hannestad, G. G. Raffelt, G. Sigl , and 171101 (2004). Y. Y. Y. Wong, Phys. Rev. D 74, 105010 (2006)  D. Autiero et al., JCAP 0711, 011 (2007). [Erratum-ibid. Phys. Rev. D 76, 029901 (2007)].  S. Galais, J. Kneller, C. Volpe, and J. Gava, Phys.  G. G. Raffelt, and A. Y. Smirnov, Phys. Rev. D 76, Rev. D 81, 053002 (2010). 081301 (2007) [Erratum-ibid. Phys. Rev. D 77, 029903  J. F. Beacom, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 60, 439 (2008)]. (2010).  S. Galais, and C. Volpe, Phys. Rev. D 84, 085005  C. Lunardini, arXiv:1007.3252. (2011).  L. Wolfenstein, Phys. Rev. D 17, 2369 (1978).  A. Esteban-Pretel et al., Phys. Rev. D 78, 085012  S. P. Mikheev, and A. Y. Smirnov, Sov. J. Nucl. (2008). Phys. 42, 913 (1985).  S. Chakraborty et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 151101  H. A. Bethe, Phys. Rev. Lett. 56, 1305 (1986). (2011).  W. C. Haxton, Phys. Rev. Lett. 57, 1271 (1986).  H. -T. Janka, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 62, 407  J. Bouchez et al., Z. Phys. C 32, 499 (1986). (2012).  B. Aharmim et al., arXiv:1109.0763 .  J. F. Cherry et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 261104  G. Bellini et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 051302 (2012). (2012).  A. B. Balantekin, and Y. Pehlivan, J. Phys. G 34,  A. M. Dziewonski, and D. L. Anderson, Phys. Earth 47 (2007). Planet. Interiors 25, 297 (1981).  C. Volpe, D. Va¨an¨ anen¨ , and C. Espinoza, Phys.  V. K. Ermilova, V. A. Tsarev, and V. A. Chechin, Rev. D 87, 113010 (2013), arXiv:1302.2374. JETP Lett. 43, 453 (1986) [Pisma Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz.  R. Surman, G. C. McLaughlin, and W. R. Hix, As- 43, 353 (1986)]. trophys. J. 643, 1057 (2006).  E. Kh. Akhmedov, Yad. Fiz. 47, (1988) 475 [Sov. J.  L. -T. Kizivat et al., Phys. Rev. C 81, 25802 (2010). Nucl. Phys. 47 (1988) 301].  A. Malkus et al., Phys. Rev. D 86, 085015 (2012).  E. Kh. Akhmedov, Nucl. Phys. B 538, 25 (1999).  A. D. Dolgov, Phys. Rept. 370, 333 (2002).  S. T. Petcov, Phys. Lett. B 434, 321 (1998).  F. Iocco et al., Phys. Rept. 472, 1 (2009).  E. K. Akhmedov et al., Nucl. Phys. B 542, 3 (1999).  J. Hamann et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 181301  E. K. Akhmedov, M. Maltoni, and A. Y. Smirnov, (2010). JHEP 0806, 072 (2008).  P. A. R. Ade et al. , arXiv:1303.5062.  A. S. Dighe, and A. Y. Smirnov, Phys. Rev. D 62,  S. Weinberg Phys. Rev. 128, 1457 (1962). 033007 (2000).  A. G. Cocco, G. Mangano, and M. Messina, JCAP  R. C. Schirato, and G. M. Fuller, astro-ph/0205390 0706, 015 (2007). .  R. Lazauskas, P. Vogel, and C. Volpe, J. Phys. G  R. Tomas et al., JCAP 0409, 015 (2004). 35, 025001 (2008).  B. Dasgupta, and A. Dighe, Phys. Rev. D 75, 093002  S. Davidson et al., Phys. Rept. 466, 105 (2008). (2007).  H. Minakata, and S. Watanabe, Phys. Lett. B 468,  F. N. Loreti et al., Phys. Rev. D 52, 6664 (1995). 256 (1999).  G. L. Fogli, E. Lisi, A. Mirizzi, and D. Mon-  E. K. Akhmedov, C. Lunardini, and A. Y. Smirnov, tanino, JCAP 0606, 012 (2006). Nucl. Phys. B 643, 339 (2002).  A. Friedland, and A. Gruzinov, astro-ph/0607244.  A. B. Balantekin, J. Gava, and C. Volpe, Phys.  J. P. Kneller, and C. Volpe, Phys. Rev. D 82, Lett. B 662, 396 (2008). 123004 (2010).  J. P. Kneller, and G. C. McLaughlin, Phys. Rev.  T. Lund and J. P. Kneller, arXiv:1304.6372. D 80, 053002 (2009).  H. Duan, and J. P. Kneller, J. Phys. G 36, , 113201  J. Gava, and C. Volpe, Phys. Rev. D 78, 083007 (2009). (2008).  J. T. Pantaleone, Phys. Lett. B 287, 128 (1992).  A. de Gouvea, and S. Shalgar, JCAP 1304, 018  S. Samuel, Phys. Rev. D 48, 1462 (1993). (2013)].  A. B. Balantekin, and H. Yuksel, New J. Phys. 7,  J. Gava, and C. Volpe, Nucl. Phys. B 837, 50 (2010). 51 (2005).  A. S. Dighe, M. T. Keil, and G. G. Raffelt, JCAP  H. Duan, G. M. Fuller, J. Carlson, Y.-Z. Qian, 0306, 005 (2003). Phys. Rev. D 74, 105014 (2006).  E. Borriello et al. Phys. Rev. D 86, 083004 (2012).  H. Duan, and G. M. Fuller, and Y. -Z. Qian, Ann.  JM. Kachelriess et al., Phys. Rev. D 71, 063003 13
(2005). (2011).  P. D. Serpico et al., Phys. Rev. D 85, 085031 (2012)  A. Kappes, Phys. Conf. Ser. 09, 012014 (2013).  V. Barger, P. Huber, and D. Marfatia, Phys. Lett.  see the talk by N. WHITEHORN (Icecube collabora- B 617, 167 (2005). tion) at ”The IceCube Particle Astrophysics Sympo-  J. Gava, J. Kneller, C. Volpe, and sium”, May 13th-15th, Wisconsin-Madison. G. C. McLaughlin Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 071101  S. Adrian-Martinez et al., Phys. Lett. B 714, 224 (2009). (2012).  http://www.phy.duke.edu/ schol/snowglobes/  A. Gross, arXiv:1301.4339 [hep-ex].  K. Scholberg, Ann. Rev.∼ Nucl. Part. Sci. 62, 81  E. Fernandez-Martinez, G. Giordano, O. Mena, (2012). and I. Mocioiu, Phys. Rev. D 82, 093011 (2010).  C. Volpe, J. Phys. G 30, L1 (2004).  O. Mena, I. Mocioiu, and S. Razzaque, Phys. Rev.  F. T. Avignone, and Y. .V. Efremenko, J. Phys. G D 78, 093003 (2008). 29, 2615 (2003).  E. K. Akhmedov, S. Razzaque, and A. Y. Smirnov,  C. Volpe, J. Phys. G 31, 903 (2005). JHEP 02, 082 (2013) [JHEP 1302, 082 (2013)]  A. Mezzacappa, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 55, 467  P. D. Serpico, and M. Kachelriess, Phys. Rev. (2005). Lett. 94, 211102 (2005).  K. Kotake, K. Sato and K. Takahashi, Rept. Prog. Phys.  W. Winter, Phys. Rev. D 74, 033015 (2006). 69, 971 (2006).  D. Meloni, and T. Ohlsson , Phys. Rev. D 86,  T. Lund et al., Phys. Rev. D 86, 105031 (2012). 067701 (2012).  G. C. McLaughlin, J. M. Fetter, A. B. Bal-  A. Esmaili et al., JCAP 1211, 041 (2012). antekin, and G. M. Fuller, Phys. Rev. C 59, 2873  S. Razzaque, and A. Y. Smirnov, Phys. Rev. D 85, (1999). 093010 (2012).  B. Dasgupta, E. P. O’Connor and C. D. Ott, Phys. Rev.  R. Abbasi et al., Phys. Rev. D 82, 112003 (2010). D 85, 065008 (2012) [arXiv:1106.1167 [astro-ph.SR]].  M. J. Longo, Phys. Rev. D 36, 3276 (1987).  M. Ageron et al., Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 656, 11  T. Katori, arXiv:1211.7129.  J. S. Diaz, arXiv:1109.4620.