KATRIN: Status and Prospects for the Neutrino Mass and Beyond

Aker, M.; Balzer, M.; Batzler, D.; Beglarian, A.; Behrens, J.; Berlev, A.; Besserer, U.; Biassoni, M.; Bieringer, B.; Block, F.; Bobien, S.; Bombelli, L.; Bormann, D.; Bornschein, B.; Bornschein, L.; Böttcher, M.; Brofferio, C.; Bruch, C.; Brunst, T.; Caldwell, T. S.; Carminati, M.; Carney, R. M. D.; Chilingaryan, S.; Choi, W.; Cremonesi, O.; Debowski, K.; Descher, M.; Barrero, D. Díaz; Doe, P. J.; Dragoun, O.; Drexlin, G.; Edzards, F.; Eitel, K.; Ellinger, E.; Engel, R.; Enomoto, S.; Felden, A.; Fink, D.; Fiorini, C.; Formaggio, J. A.; Forstner, C.; Fränkle, F. M.; Franklin, G. B.; Friedel, F.; Fulst, A.; Gauda, K.; Gavin, A. S.; Gil, W.; Gisotti, L.; Glück, F.; Grande, A.; Grössle, R.; Gugiatti, M.; Gumbsheimer, R.; Hannen, V.; Hartmann, J.; Haußmann, N.; Helbing, K.; Hickford, S.; Hiller, R.; Hillesheimer, D.; Hinz, D.; Höhn, T.; Houdy, T.; Huber, A.; Jansen, A.; Karl, C.; Kellerer, J.; King, P.; Kleifges, M.; Klein, M.; Köhler, C.; Köllenberger, L.; Kopmann, A.; Korzeczek, M.; Kovalík, A.; Krasch, B.; Krause, H.; Lasserre, T.; La Cascio, L.; Lebeda, O.; Lechner, P.; Lehnert, B.; Le, T. L.; Lokhov, A.; Machatschek, M.; Malcherek, E.; Manfrin, D.; Mark, M.; Marsteller, A.; Martin, E. L.; Mazzola, E.; Melzer, C.; Mertens, S.; Mostafa, J.; Müller, K.; Nava, A.; Neumann, H.; Niemes, S.; Oelpmann, P.; Onillon, A.; Parno, D. S.; Pavan, M.; Pigliafreddo, A.; Poon, A. W. P.; Poyato, J. M. L.; Pozzi, S.; Priester, F.; Puritscher, M.; Radford, D. C.; Ráliš, J.; Ramachandran, S.; Robertson, R. G. H.; Rodejohann, W.; Rodenbeck, C.; Röllig, M.; Röttele, C.; Ryšavý, M.; Sack, R.; Saenz, A.; Salomon, R. W. J.; Schäfer, P.; Schimpf, L.; Schlösser, K.; Schlösser, M.; Schlüter, L.; Schneidewind, S.; Schrank, M.; Schütz, A. K.; Schwemmer, A.; Sedlak, A.; Šefčík, M.; Sibille, V.; Siegmann, D.; Slezák, M.; Spanier, F.; Spreng, D.; Steidl, M.; Sturm, M.; Telle, H. H.; Thorne, L. A.; Thümmler, T.; Titov, N.; Tkachev, I.; Toscano, L.; Trigilio, P.; Urban, K.; Valerius, K.; Vénos, D.; Hernández, A. P. Vizcaya; Voigt, P.; Weinheimer, C.; Welte, S.; Wendel, J.; Wiesinger, C.; Wilkerson, J. F.; Wolf, J.; Wunderl, L.; Wüstling, S.; Wydra, J.; Xu, W.; Zadoroghny, S.; Zeller, G.

doi:10.48550/arxiv.2203.08059

Cited by 4 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 124 publications

(248 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The improving sensitivity of all neutrino-mass-measurement techniques raises the possibility of a fruitful disagreement between methods. A measured neutrino mass m β within the projected KATRIN sensitivity [75] would constrain the available model space for neutrinoless double-beta decay, and require the introduction of new physics to be reconciled with current cosmological data [76]. Any positive measurement should be followed up using a different experimental technique and/or a different decaying isotope.…”

Section: Neutrino-mass Scalementioning

confidence: 99%

Snowmass Neutrino Frontier Report

Huber¹,

Scholberg²,

Worcester³

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Neutrino-mass Scalementioning

confidence: 99%

Snowmass Neutrino Frontier Report

Huber¹,

Scholberg²,

Worcester³

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The strongest bound on the neutrino mass using 0νββ is set by KamLAND-Zen, |m ββ | ď 0.17 eV [50]. By 2024, the KATRIN collaboration expects to be sensitive to effective neutrino masses m ν ď 0.2 eV [51], which will become the strongest constraint on the mass of unstable Dirac neutrinos. Future experiments such as Project 8 [52], HOLMES [53] and ECHo [54] aim to improve this bound further, with the potential to probe effective neutrino mass scales as low as m ν ď 40 meV.…”

Section: Other Constraintsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Limits on the cosmic neutrino background

Bauer¹,

Shergold²

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present the first comprehensive discussion of constraints on the cosmic neutrino background (CνB) overdensity, including theoretical, experimental and cosmological limits for a wide range of neutrino masses and temperatures. Additionally, we calculate the sensitivities of future direct and indirect relic neutrino detection experiments and compare the results with the existing constraints, extending several previous analyses by taking into account that the CνB reference frame may not be aligned with that of the Earth. The Pauli exclusion principle strongly disfavours overdensities η ν " 1 at small neutrino masses, but allows for overdensities η ν À 125 at the KATRIN mass bound m ν » 0.8 eV. On the other hand, cosmology strongly favours η ν À 3.5 in all scenarios. We find that direct detection proposals are capable of observing the CνB without a significant overdensity for neutrino masses m ν ą 0.2 eV, but require an overdensity η ν Á 10 7 outside of this range. We also demonstrate that relic neutrino detection proposals are sensitive to the helicity composition of the CνB, whilst some may be able to distinguish between Dirac and Majorana neutrinos.

show abstract

“…The observation of neutrino oscillations has established that at least two of the neutrino mass eigenstates have a non-zero mass, with an associated lower bound on the sum of the masses of ν m ν > ∼ 0.06 and 0.1eV for the normal and inverted hierarchies respectively [1][2][3]. Complementary information comes from beta decay experiments, which set an upper bound to a weighted sum of the masses m ν,β < 0.8eV [4]. Additionally, massive neutrinos suppress cosmological structure formation at small scales [5], leading to the most stringent upper bound on the sum of neutrino masses to date, i.e., ν m ν < 0.12eV [6].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Equation ( 18) is a simple interpolation between the two regimes given by Eqs. ( 9) and ( 11) 4 . It improves on previous approximation schemes in the literature that generally assume an adiabatic sound speed, since we account for deviations from adiabaticity on the small scales (which can be phrased as the presence of an entropy perturbation).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Generalized Boltzmann hierarchy for massive neutrinos in cosmology

Nascimento

2021

Phys. Rev. D

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A measurement of the neutrino mass scale will be achieved with cosmological probes in the upcoming decade. On one hand, the inclusion of massive neutrinos in the linear perturbation theory of cosmological structure formation is well understood and can be done accurately with state of the art Boltzmann solvers. On the other hand, the numerical implementation of the Boltzmann equation is computationally expensive and is a bottleneck in those codes. This has motivated the development of more efficient fluid approximations, despite their limited accuracy over all scales of interest, k ∼ (10 −3 − 10)Mpc −1 . In this work we account for the dispersive nature of the neutrino fluid, i.e., the scale dependence in the sound speed, leading to an improved fluid approximation. We show that overall < ∼ 5% errors can be achieved for the neutrino density and velocity transfer functions at redshift z < ∼ 5, which corresponds to an order of magnitude improvement over previous approximation schemes that can be discrepant by as much as a factor of two.1 This upper bound can be relaxed with nonstandard scenarios such as an unstable neutrino species and dynamical dark energy [7][8][9].

show abstract

KATRIN: Status and Prospects for the Neutrino Mass and Beyond

Cited by 4 publications

References 124 publications

Snowmass Neutrino Frontier Report

Snowmass Neutrino Frontier Report

Limits on the cosmic neutrino background

Generalized Boltzmann hierarchy for massive neutrinos in cosmology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About