- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review D

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Probing new physics scenarios using high energy events at the NOvA far detector

Chinmay Bera* and K. N. Deepthi†

  • *Contact author: chinmay20pphy014@mahindrauniversity.edu.in
  • †Contact author: nagadeepthi.kuchibhatla@mahindrauniversity.edu.in
PDF

Phys. Rev. D 112, 115001 – Published 1 December, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/qg2k-md3c

Abstract

NuMI Off-axis νe Appearance (NOvA) experiment is an ongoing long-baseline neutrino oscillation experiment. The primary channels of interest are the νe, ν¯e appearance, νμ, ν¯μ disappearance channels analyzed in the energy window 1<Eν<4  GeV. However, NOvA far detector sees nontrivial high-energy νe, ν¯e events in the energy range 4<Eν<20  GeV. These high-energy events provide us with an opportunity to investigate the subleading new physics scenarios. In this context, we study the sensitivity of the NOvA experiment to constrain the nonstandard interaction (NSI) parameters and environmental decoherence parameters. We observe that by including high energy events (signal+background) the degeneracy around εeτ∼1.6 can be removed throughout the δCP and δeτ range. Further, we examine the role of signal versus beam background events in removing this degeneracy. In addition, we constrain the decoherence parameter Γ considering events from 1<Eν<20  GeV. Later, assuming the presence of decoherence in nature we obtain the allowed regions in θ23 and δCP plane.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (53)

  1. L. Wolfenstein, Neutrino oscillations in matter, Phys. Rev. D 17, 2369 (1978).
  2. E. Roulet, MSW effect with flavor changing neutrino interactions, Phys. Rev. D 44, R935 (1991).
  3. T. Hattori, T. Hasuike, and S. Wakaizumi, Flavor changing neutrino interactions and CP violation in neutrino oscillations, Prog. Theor. Phys. 114, 439 (2005).
  4. C.-H. Chang, W.-S. Dai, X.-Q. Li, Y. Liu, F.-C. Ma, and Z.-j. Tao, Possible effects of quantum mechanics violation induced by certain quantum gravity on neutrino oscillations, Phys. Rev. D 60, 033006 (1999).
  5. F. Benatti and R. Floreanini, Open system approach to neutrino oscillations, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2000) 032.
  6. Y. Farzan, T. Schwetz, and A. Y. Smirnov, Reconciling results of LSND, MiniBooNE and other experiments with soft decoherence, J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2008) 067.
  7. C. Giunti and C. W. Kim, Coherence of neutrino oscillations in the wave packet approach, Phys. Rev. D 58, 017301 (1998).
  8. M. Blennow, T. Ohlsson, and W. Winter, Damping signatures in future neutrino oscillation experiments, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2005) 049.
  9. E. Akhmedov, D. Hernandez, and A. Smirnov, Neutrino production coherence and oscillation experiments, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2012) 052.
  10. Y.-L. Chan, M. C. Chu, K. M. Tsui, C. F. Wong, and J. Xu, Wave-packet treatment of reactor neutrino oscillation experiments and its implications on determining the neutrino mass hierarchy, Eur. Phys. J. C 76, 310 (2016).
  11. A. de Gouvêa, V. De Romeri, and C. A. Ternes, Combined analysis of neutrino decoherence at reactor experiments, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2021) 042.
  12. P. B. Denton, J. Gehrlein, and R. Pestes, CP -violating neutrino nonstandard interactions in long-baseline-accelerator data, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 051801 (2021).
  13. S. S. Chatterjee and A. Palazzo, Nonstandard neutrino interactions as a solution to the NOνA and T2K discrepancy, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 051802 (2021).
  14. S. S. Chatterjee and A. Palazzo, Status of tension between NOvA and T2K after neutrino 2024 and possible role of nonstandard neutrino interactions, Phys. Rev. D 110, 113002 (2024).
  15. M. A. Acero et al., Improved measurement of neutrino oscillation parameters by the NOvA experiment, Phys. Rev. D 106, 032004 (2022).
  16. K. Abe et al., Improved constraints on neutrino mixing from the T2K experiment with 3.13×1021 protons on target, Phys. Rev. D 103, 112008 (2021).
  17. P. B. Denton, A. Giarnetti, and D. Meloni, How to identify different new neutrino oscillation physics scenarios at DUNE, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2023) 210.
  18. M. A. Acero et al., Search for CP-violating neutrino nonstandard interactions with the NOvA experiment, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 201802 (2024).
  19. J. Kleykamp, Non-standard interactions at nova (2022), 10.5281/zenodo.6782387.
  20. J. A. B. Coelho, W. A. Mann, and S. S. Bashar, Nonmaximal θ23 mixing at NOvA from neutrino decoherence, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 221801 (2017).
  21. V. De Romeri, C. Giunti, T. Stuttard, and C. A. Ternes, Neutrino oscillation bounds on quantum decoherence, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2023) 097.
  22. I. Singh, P. Singh, and B. Choudhary, Impact of high energy νe (ν−e) events on NOvA oscillation sensitivities, Springer Proc. Phys. 304, 174 (2024).
  23. P. N. Shanahan and P. L. Vahle, Physics with NOvA: A half-time review, Eur. Phys. J. Special Topics 230, 4259 (2021).
  24. P. Huber, M. Lindner, and W. Winter, Simulation of long-baseline neutrino oscillation experiments with GLoBES (General Long Baseline Experiment Simulator), Comput. Phys. Commun. 167, 195 (2005).
  25. P. Huber, J. Kopp, M. Lindner, M. Rolinec, and W. Winter, New features in the simulation of neutrino oscillation experiments with GLoBES 3.0: General Long Baseline Experiment Simulator, Comput. Phys. Commun. 177, 432 (2007).
  26. M. A. Acero et al., New constraints on oscillation parameters from νe appearance and νμ disappearance in the NOvA experiment, Phys. Rev. D 98, 032012 (2018).
  27. M. A. Acero et al., First measurement of neutrino oscillation parameters using neutrinos and antineutrinos by NOvA, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 151803 (2019).
  28. M. Tanabashi et al., Review of particle physics, Phys. Rev. D 98, 030001 (2018).
  29. J. Kopp, Efficient numerical diagonalization of Hermitian 3×3 matrices, Int. J. Mod. Phys. C 19, 523 (2008).
  30. J. Kopp, M. Lindner, T. Ota, and J. Sato, Non-standard neutrino interactions in reactor and superbeam experiments, Phys. Rev. D 77, 013007 (2008).
  31. G. L. Fogli, E. Lisi, A. Marrone, D. Montanino, and A. Palazzo, Getting the most from the statistical analysis of solar neutrino oscillations, Phys. Rev. D 66, 053010 (2002).
  32. P. Huber, M. Lindner, and W. Winter, Superbeams versus neutrino factories, Nucl. Phys. B645, 3 (2002).
  33. Y. Farzan and M. Tortola, Neutrino oscillations and non-standard interactions, Front. Phys. 6, 10 (2018).
  34. C. Biggio, M. Blennow, and E. Fernandez-Martinez, General bounds on non-standard neutrino interactions, J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2009) 090.
  35. T. Ohlsson, Status of non-standard neutrino interactions, Rep. Prog. Phys. 76, 044201 (2013).
  36. O. G. Miranda and H. Nunokawa, Non standard neutrino interactions: current status and future prospects, New J. Phys. 17, 095002 (2015).
  37. P. S. Bhupal Dev et al., Neutrino non-standard interactions: A status report, SciPost Phys. Proc. 2, 001 (2019).
  38. C. Bera, K. N. Deepthi, and R. Mohanta, The effect of non-standard interactions and environmental decoherence at DUNE, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2025) 179.
  39. T. Stuttard and M. Jensen, Neutrino decoherence from quantum gravitational stochastic perturbations, Phys. Rev. D 102, 115003 (2020).
  40. G. Lindblad, On the generators of quantum dynamical semigroups, Commun. Math. Phys. 48, 119 (1976).
  41. V. Gorini, A. Kossakowski, and E. C. G. Sudarshan, Completely positive dynamical semigroups of N level systems, J. Math. Phys. (N.Y.) 17, 821 (1976).
  42. V. Gorini, A. Frigerio, M. Verri, A. Kossakowski, and E. C. G. Sudarshan, Properties of quantum Markovian master equations, Rep. Math. Phys. 13, 149 (1978).
  43. T. Banks, L. Susskind, and M. E. Peskin, Difficulties for the evolution of pure states into mixed states, Nucl. Phys. B244, 125 (1984).
  44. F. Benatti and H. Narnhofer, Entropy behaviour under completely positive maps, Lett. Math. Phys. 15, 325 (1988).
  45. J. Carpio, E. Massoni, and A. M. Gago, Revisiting quantum decoherence for neutrino oscillations in matter with constant density, Phys. Rev. D 97, 115017 (2018).
  46. G. Balieiro Gomes, M. M. Guzzo, P. C. de Holanda, and R. L. N. Oliveira, Parameter limits for neutrino oscillation with decoherence in KamLAND, Phys. Rev. D 95, 113005 (2017).
  47. P. Coloma, J. Lopez-Pavon, I. Martinez-Soler, and H. Nunokawa, Decoherence in neutrino propagation through matter, and bounds from IceCube/DeepCore, Eur. Phys. J. C 78, 614 (2018).
  48. P. B. Denton and S. J. Parke, Addendum to “Compact perturbative expressions for neutrino oscillations in matter”, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2018) 109(A).
  49. G. Balieiro Gomes, D. V. Forero, M. M. Guzzo, P. C. De Holanda, and R. L. N. Oliveira, Quantum decoherence effects in neutrino oscillations at DUNE, Phys. Rev. D 100, 055023 (2019).
  50. C. Bera and K. N. Deepthi, Study of quantum decoherence at the Protvino to ORCA experiment, Phys. Rev. D 110, 035035 (2024).
  51. J. R. Ellis, N. E. Mavromatos, and D. V. Nanopoulos, Quantum gravitational diffusion and stochastic fluctuations in the velocity of light, Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 32, 127 (2000).
  52. J. R. Ellis, N. E. Mavromatos, and D. V. Nanopoulos, Quantum decoherence in a D foam background, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 12, 1759 (1997).
  53. J. A. B. Coelho and W. A. Mann, Decoherence, matter effect, and neutrino hierarchy signature in long baseline experiments, Phys. Rev. D 96, 093009 (2017).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 112, 115001– Published 1 December, 2025
  • Received 3 October 2025
  • Accepted 7 November 2025
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI. Funded by SCOAP3.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation