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

Is the Large Uncertainty of δCP Fundamentally Encoded in the Neutrino Quantum State?

Michela Ignoti1,2,*, Claudia Frugiuele2,†, Matteo G. A. Paris1,2,‡, and Marco G. Genoni1,2,§

  • *Contact author: michela.ignoti@studenti.unimi.it
  • †Contact author: claudia.frugiuele@mi.infn.it
  • ‡Contact author: matteo.paris@fisica.unimi.it
  • §Contact author: marco.genoni@unimi.it

Phys. Rev. Lett. 137, 201802 – Published 12 November, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/dgdr-mx1d

Abstract

The precise measurement of the leptonic CP-violating phase δCP remains one of the major open challenges in neutrino physics, as current experiments achieve only very limited accuracy. We address this issue through the lens of quantum estimation theory. A distinctive feature of neutrino oscillation experiments is that they cannot freely optimize the probe or measurement, since both are constrained by the production and detection of flavor eigenstates. We therefore examine whether the large uncertainty in δCP originates from intrinsic properties—either of the neutrino quantum state or of flavor measurements—or if it instead stems from experimental limitations. By comparing quantum and classical Fisher information, we demonstrate that the limited sensitivity to δCP originates primarily from the information content of flavor measurements. Furthermore, we show that, while targeting the second oscillation maximum, as in the ESSνSB proposal, typically enhances δCP information, this feature in fact strongly depends on the actual values of δCP.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (43)

  1. I. Esteban, M. C. Gonzalez-Garcia, M. Maltoni, I. Martinez-Soler, J. P. Pinheiro, and T. Schwetz, J. High Energy Phys. 12 (2024) 216.
  2. K. Abe et al., Eur. Phys. J. C 83, 782 (2023).
  3. M. A. Acero, P. Adamson, L. Aliaga, N. Anfimov, A. Black et al. (The NOvA Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 106, 032004 (2022).
  4. DUNE Collaboration, arXiv:1512.06148.
  5. F. Terranova, Universe 10, 221 (2024).
  6. M. Yokoyama, J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2023) 101.
  7. M. Singh, M. Bustamante, and S. K. Agarwalla, arXiv:2305.05184.
  8. A. Alekou et al., Universe 9, 347 (2023).
  9. A. Alekou et al., Eur. Phys. J. C 81, 1130 (2021).
  10. S. Davidson, E. Nardi, and Y. Nir, Phys. Rep. 466, 105 (2008).
  11. M. G. A. Paris, Int. J. Quantum. Inf. 07, 125 (2009).
  12. C. W. Helstrom, J. Stat. Phys. 1, 231 (1969).
  13. V. Giovannetti, S. Lloyd, and L. Maccone, Nat. Photonics 5, 222 (2011).
  14. C. L. Degen, F. Reinhard, and P. Cappellaro, Rev. Mod. Phys. 89, 035002 (2017).
  15. L. Pezzè, A. Smerzi, M. K. Oberthaler, R. Schmied, and P. Treutlein, Rev. Mod. Phys. 90, 035005 (2018).
  16. F. Albarelli, M. Barbieri, M. Genoni, and I. Gianani, Phys. Lett. A 384, 126311 (2020).
  17. V. Montenegro, C. Mukhopadhyay, R. Yousefjani, S. Sarkar, U. Mishra, M. G. Paris, and A. Bayat, Phys. Rep. 1134, 1 (2025),
  18. D. Bak, Phys. Lett. B 756, 200 (2016).
  19. N. Lashkari and M. Van Raamsdonk, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2016) 153.
  20. A. Trivella, Classical Quantum Gravity 34, 105003 (2017).
  21. S. Banerjee, J. Erdmenger, and D. Sarkar, J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2018) 001.
  22. C. Gómez and R. Jimenez, Phys. Rev. D 102, 063511 (2020).
  23. J. Erdmenger, K. T. Grosvenor, and R. Jefferson, SciPost Phys. 8, 073 (2020).
  24. C. Gómez and R. Jimenez, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 09 (2021) 016.
  25. J. Feng and J.-J. Zhang, Phys. Lett. B 827, 136992 (2022).
  26. A. Candeloro, C. Degli Esposti Boschi, and M. G. A. Paris, Phys. Rev. D 102, 056012 (2020).
  27. L. Seveso and M. G. A. Paris, Ann. Phys. (Amsterdam) 380, 213 (2017).
  28. C. Cepollaro, F. Giacomini, and M. G. A. Paris, Quantum 7, 946 (2023).
  29. P. Asenov, W. Zhang, and A. Serafini, Phys. Rev. D 113, 016015 (2026).
  30. M. Piotrak, T. Colas, A. Alonso-Serrano, and A. Serafini, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2026) 199.
  31. C. Frugiuele, M. G. Genoni, M. Ignoti, and M. G. A. Paris, J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2026) 218.
  32. E. K. Akhmedov and A. Y. Smirnov, Phys. At. Nucl. 72, 1363 (2009).
  33. S. Eliezer and A. R. Swift, Nucl. Phys. B105, 45 (1976).
  34. S. M. Bilenky and B. Pontecorvo, Lett. Nuovo Cimento 17, 569 (1976).
  35. H. Fritzsch and P. Minkowski, Phys. Lett. 62B, 72 (1976).
  36. K. Abe et al. (T2K Collaboration), Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res., Sect. A 659, 106 (2011).
  37. K. Abe, N. Abgrall, H. Aihara, T. Akiri, J. B. Albert, C. Andreopoulos et al. (T2K Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 87, 012001 (2013).
  38. A. Alekou, E. Baussan, A. K. Bhattacharyya, N. Blaskovic Kraljevic et al., Eur. Phys. J. Special Topics 231, 3779 (2022).
  39. P. Coloma and E. Fernandez-Martinez, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2012) 089.
  40. A. Fujiwara and H. Nagaoka, Phys. Lett. A 201, 119 (1995).
  41. A. Chou et al., arXiv:2311.01930.
  42. C. Beadle, H. Bekker, D. Blas, D. Budker, S. Calatroni, R. T. D’Agnolo, A. D𝚤az-Morcillo, S. A. R. Ellis, C. Gatti, I. Garc𝚤a-Irastorza, B. Gimeno, D. F. J. Kimball, N. Koss, A. Macpherson, W. L. Millar, K. Peters, A. O. Sushkov, A. Wickenbrock, J. Walter, and Y. Zhang, Quantum sensing for dark matter and gravitational waves, Technical Report, 2026, https://cds.cern.ch/record/2933206.
  43. Y. Afik et al., Eur. Phys. J. Plus 140, 855 (2025).

Outline

Information

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation