Probing right-handed neutrinos via trilepton signals at the HL-LHC
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neutrino oscillation experiments have provided direct evidence for the existence of neutrino masses. The seesaw mechanism explains the smallness of these masses through the introduction of heavy right-handed neutrino (RHN) states. The RHN states can also generate Dirac neutrino masses at tree or loop level. These heavy states can exist at the electroweak scale, approximately in the O ( GeV ) range, and can be investigated through current and future collider experiments. This scenario, where other new physics interactions occur at scales much higher than the RHN scale, can be described using an effective field theory (EFT) framework known as N R -EFT. This study focuses on constraining the Wilson coefficients of N R -EFT operators, which primarily contribute to trilepton production and missing energy signals at the LHC. We examine both the scenarios where the RHN mass M N is less than and greater than the W boson mass M W , and provide predictions for the High-Luminosity run of the LHC.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".