AG-2026.01-1268·hep-ph·cross-listed: astro-ph.SRhep-ex
Testing the three massive neutrino paradigm: Constraints on Neutrino Properties and Interactions from Recent Experimental Data
Authors
- João Paulo Pinheiro
Abstract
Neutrino physics offers unique insights into phenomena beyond the Standard Model (BSM). This thesis presents phenomenological investigations organized around three pillars: consolidation of the three-flavor oscillation paradigm, exploration of new physics viability, and precise determination of solar neutrino fluxes. The theoretical framework introduces massive neutrinos, leptonic mixing, and flavor transitions, followed by experimental results emphasizing Borexino and NOvA data analyses. The first pillar establishes the three-flavor framework through global analysis of solar, atmospheric, reactor, and accelerator data, providing updated determinations of mixing angles ($θ_{12}$, $θ_{13}$, $θ_{23}$) and mass-squared differences ($Δm^2_{21}$, $Δm^2_{31}$), while quantifying ambiguities in mass ordering and $θ_{23}$ octant. The second pillar investigates Non-Standard Interactions (NSI) with electrons and quarks, combining Borexino data with COHERENT's CE$ν$NS measurements to establish bounds on propagation and detection couplings, excluding viable NSI parameter regions including potential LMA-D solutions. The third pillar advances solar neutrino physics through precision flux determinations, integrating pp-chain and CNO-cycle measurements. Results show preference for high-metallicity Standard Solar Models and incompatibility between $3+1$ mixing parameters favored by Gallium experiments and solar observations. This synthesis guides future experiments toward resolving mass ordering, CP violation, and dark sector interactions.
Submitted
21 January 20263 months ago
Version
v1
License
CC-BY-4.0
DOI
10.48550/arXiv.2601.14851
Chat with this PDF
Ask questions, probe assumptions, request a plain-English summary. Answers cite sections from the preprint itself.
Community
Questions and answers about this paper from other readers. No formal peer review — just a place to think out loud.