Joint neutrino oscillation analysis from the T2K and NOvA experiments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The landmark discovery that neutrinos have mass and can change type (or flavour) as they propagate-a process called neutrino oscillation1-6 -has opened up a rich array of theoretical and experimental questions being actively pursued today. Neutrino oscillation remains the most powerful experimental tool for addressing many of these questions, including whether neutrinos violate charge-parity (CP) symmetry, which has possible connections to the unexplained preponderance of matter over antimatter in the Universe7-11 . Oscillation measurements also probe the mass-squared differences between the different neutrino mass states (Δm2 ), whether there are two light states and a heavier one (normal ordering) or vice versa (inverted ordering), and the structure of neutrino mass and flavour mixing12 . Here we carry out the first joint analysis of datasets from NOvA13 and T2K14 , the two currently operating long-baseline neutrino oscillation experiments (hundreds of kilometres of neutrino travel distance), taking advantage of our complementary experimental designs and setting new constraints on several neutrino sector parameters. This analysis provides new precision on the Δ m 32 2 mass difference, finding 2.4 3 - 0.03 + 0.04 × 1 0 - 3 eV 2 in the normal ordering and - 2.4 8 - 0.04 + 0.03 × 1 0 - 3 eV 2 in the inverted ordering, as well as a 3σ interval on δCP of [-1.38π, 0.30π] in the normal ordering and [-0.92π, -0.04π] in the inverted ordering. The data show no strong preference for either mass ordering, but notably, if inverted ordering were assumed true within the three-flavour mixing model, then our results would provide evidence of CP symmetry violation in the lepton sector.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".