neutrinoless double beta decay · 2016. 5. 11. · neutrinoless double beta decay is mediated by...
TRANSCRIPT
Neutrinoless Double Beta Decay
Werner Rodejohann
XVIII LNF Spring School
May 2016MANITOP
Massive Neutrinos: Investigating their
Theoretical Origin and Phenomenology
mv = mL - mD M -1
mD
v
T
R
1
Contents
III) Neutrinoless double beta decay: non-standard interpretations
III1) Basics
III2) Left-right symmetry
III3) SUSY
III4) The inverse problem
2
Interpretation of Experiments
Master formula:
Γ0ν = Gx(Q,Z) |Mx(A,Z) ηx|2
• Gx(Q,Z): phase space factor
• Mx(A,Z): nuclear physics
• ηx: particle physics
3
Interpretation of Experiments
Master formula:
Γ0ν = Gx(Q,Z) |Mx(A,Z) ηx|2
• Gx(Q,Z): phase space factor, typically Q5
• Mx(A,Z): nuclear physics; factor 2-3 uncertainty
• ηx: particle physics; many possibilities
4
Contents
III) Neutrinoless double beta decay: non-standard interpretations
III1) Basics
III2) Left-right symmetry
III3) SUSY
III4) The inverse problem
5
III1) Basics
• Standard Interpretation:
Neutrinoless Double Beta Decay is mediated by light and massive Majorana
neutrinos (the ones which oscillate) and all other mechanisms potentially
leading to 0νββ give negligible or no contribution
• Non-Standard Interpretations:
There is at least one other mechanism leading to Neutrinoless Double Beta
Decay and its contribution is at least of the same order as the light neutrino
exchange mechanism
6
• Standard Interpretation:
W
νi
νi
W
dL
dL
uL
e−L
e−L
uL
Uei
q
Uei
• Non-Standard Interpretations:
WL
WR
NR
NR
νL
WL
dL
dL
uL
e−R
e−L
uL
dR
χ/g
dR
χ/g
dc
dc
uL
e−L
e−L
uL
W
W
∆−−
dL
dL
uL
e−L
e−L
uL
√
2g2vL hee
uL
uL
χ/g
χ/g
dc
dc
e−L
uL
uL
e−L
W
W
dL
dL
uL
e−L
χ0
χ0
e−L
uL
7
Non-Standard Interpretations
clear experimental signature:
KATRIN (or cosmology) sees nothing but “|mee| > 0.5 eV”
0νββ decoupled from cosmology limits on neutrino mass!
8
Energy Scale:
• standard amplitude for light Majorana neutrino exchange:
Al ≃ G2F
|mee|q2
≃ 7× 10−18
( |mee|0.5 eV
)
GeV−5 ≃ (2.7 TeV)−5
•
9
Energy Scale:
• standard amplitude for light Majorana neutrino exchange:
Al ≃ G2F
|mee|q2
≃ 7× 10−18
( |mee|0.5 eV
)
GeV−5 ≃ (2.7 TeV)−5
• if new heavy particles are exchanged:
Ah ≃ c
M5
10
Energy Scale:
• standard amplitude for light Majorana neutrino exchange:
Al ≃ G2F
|mee|q2
≃ 7× 10−18
( |mee|0.5 eV
)
GeV−5 ≃ (2.7 TeV)−5
• if new heavy particles are exchanged:
Ah ≃ c
M5
⇒ for 0νββ holds:
1 eV = 1 TeV
⇒ Phenomenology in colliders, LFV
11
Schechter-Valle theorem: observation of 0νββ implies Majorana neutrinos
νe
W
e−
d u u
e−
d
νe
W
is 4 loop diagram: mBBν ∼ G2
F
(16π2)4MeV5 ∼ 10−25 eV
explicit calculation: Duerr, Lindner, Merle, 1105.0901
12
mechanism physics parameter current limit test
light neutrino exchange∣
∣
∣U2ei
mi
∣
∣
∣ 0.5 eV
oscillations,
cosmology,
neutrino mass
heavy neutrino exchange
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
S2ei
Mi
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
2 × 10−8 GeV−1 LFV,
collider
heavy neutrino and RHC
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
V2ei
Mi M4WR
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
4 × 10−16 GeV−5 flavor,
collider
Higgs triplet and RHC
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
(MR)ee
m2∆R
M4WR
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
10−15 GeV−1
flavor,
collider
e− distribution
λ-mechanism with RHC
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
Uei SeiM2
WR
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
1.4 × 10−10 GeV−2
flavor,
collider,
e− distribution
η-mechanism with RHC tan ζ∣
∣
∣Uei Sei
∣
∣
∣ 6 × 10−9
flavor,
collider,
e− distribution
short-range /R
∣
∣
∣λ′2111
∣
∣
∣
Λ5SUSY
ΛSUSY = f(mg, muL, m
dR, mχi
)
7 × 10−18 GeV−5 collider,
flavor
long-range /R
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
sin 2θb λ′131 λ′
113
1
m2b1
− 1
m2b2
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∣
∼GFq
mb
∣
∣
∣λ′131 λ′
113
∣
∣
∣
Λ3SUSY
2 × 10−13 GeV−2
1 × 10−14 GeV−3
flavor,
collider
Majorons |〈gχ〉| or |〈gχ〉|2 10−4 . . . 1spectrum,
cosmology
13
Some features
• Majoranas and no RHC:
A ∝ m
q2 −m2→
m for q2 ≫ m2
1
mfor q2 ≪ m2 µ 1�m²
µ m²
m»q
mass
rate
Note: maximum A corresponds to m ≃ 〈q〉: limits on O(mK) Majorana neutrinos from
K+ → π−µ+e+
• heavy scalar/vector boson:
A ∝ 1
q2 −m2→ 1
m2
14
Dib et al., hep-ph/0006277
15
Chiralities
W
νi
νi
W
dL
dL
uL
e−L
e−L
uL
Uei
q
Uei
A ∝ PL/q +mi
q2 −m2i
PL ∝ mi
q2 −m2i
≃
mi/q2 (m2
i ≪ q2)
1/mi (m2i ≫ q2)
WR
NR
NR
νL
W
dR
dL
uR
e−R
e−L
uL
A ∝ PR/q +mi
q2 −m2i
PL ∝ /q
q2 −m2i
≃
1/q (m2i ≪ q2)
q/m2i (m2
i ≫ q2)
16
Heavy neutrinos
W
νi
νi
W
dL
dL
uL
e−L
e−L
uL
S ei
q
S ei
if heavier than 100 MeV:
Ah = G2F
S2ei
Mi≡ G2
F 〈 1m〉 ⇒ 〈 1m 〉 <∼ 10−8 GeV−1
dimensionless LNV parameter:
ηh = mp 〈1
m〉 ≤ 1.7× 10−8
17
Faessler, Gonzalez, Kovalenko, Simkovic, 1408.6077
18
An exact See-Saw Relation
Full mass matrix:
M =
0 mD
mTD MR
= U
mdiagν 0
0 MdiagR
UT with U =
N S
T V
• N is the PMNS matrix: non-unitary
• S = m†D (M∗
R)−1 describes mixing of heavy neutrinos with SM leptons
upper left 0 in M gives exact see-saw relation Uαi (mν)i Uiβ = 0, or:
|N2ei mi| = |S2
eiMi| <∼ 0.3 eV
compare withS2ei
Mi
<∼ 10−8 GeV−1 and |Sei|2 ≤ 0.0052
19
exact see-saw relation gives stronger constraints!
1 1000 1e+06 1e+09 1e+12 1e+15 1e+18
Mi [GeV]
1e-28
1e-26
1e-24
1e-22
1e-20
1e-18
1e-16
1e-14
1e-12
1e-10
1e-08
1e-06
0,0001
0,01
|Se
i|2
|Sei|2 M_i
|Sei|2 /M_i
⇒ cancellations required to make heavy neutrinos contribute significantly to
0νββ
20
TeV scale seesaw with sizable mixing
mν = m2D/MR ≃ v2/MR
with mν ≃√
∆m2A it follows that MR ≃ 1015 GeV and
S = mD/MR =√
mν/MR ≃ 10−13
then, heavy neutrino contribution to 0νββ negligible:
S2/MR = m2D/M3
R ≃ 10−41 GeV−1
can make MR TeV, but then mixing√
mν/MR ≃ 10−7 and still
m2D/M3
R ≃ 10−17 GeV−1
21
TeV scale seesaw with sizable mixing
not necessarily correct, mD and MR are matrices and cancellations can occur. . .
e.g. mD = v
h1 h2 h3
ω h1 ω h2 ω h3
ω2 h1 ω2 h2 ω2 h3
MR = M01 (here ω = e2iπ/3)
gives mν = 0, add (very) small corrections. . .
mD = v, MR = TeV, mixing mD/MR large, 0νββ contribution large
22
TeV scale seesaw with sizable mixing
can also make everything smaller:
MD = m
fǫ2 0 0
0 gǫ 0
0 0 1
, M−1R = M−1
a b k
b c dǫ
k dǫ eǫ2
M/GeV m/MeV ǫ a k b c d e f g
5.00 0.935 0.02 1.00 1.35 0.90 1.4576 0.7942 0.2898 0.0948 0.485
∣
∣
∣
∣
Al
Ah
∣
∣
∣
∣
=
G2F
q2 |mee|G2
F 〈 1m〉≃ 10−4 GeV2
q2≃ 10−2
23
Higgs triplets (type II seesaw)
W
W
∆−−
dL
dL
uL
e−L
e−L
uL
√
2g2vL hee
A∆ ≃ G2F
hee vLm2
∆
<∼ G2F
(mν)eem2
∆
= G2F
|mee|m2
∆
plays no role in 0νββ
24
Inverse Neutrinoless Double Beta Decay
this is not
76Se++ + e− + e− → 76Ge
but rather
e− + e− → W− +W−
Rizzo; Heusch, Minkowski; Gluza, Zralek; Cuypers, Raidal;. . .
N
e−L
e−L
W−
W−
N
e−L
e−L
W−
W−
∆−−
e−L
e−L
W−
W−
(a) (b) (c)
25
Inverse Neutrinoless Double Beta Decay
1 10 100 1000 10000 1e+05 1e+06 1e+07 1e+08
Mi [GeV]
1e-14
1e-12
1e-10
1e-08
1e-06
0,0001
0,01
1
100
10000
1e+06
1e+08
σ [
fb]
e- e
- ---> W
- W
- , s = 16 TeV
2
|Vei|2 = 1.0
|Vei|2 = 0.0052
|Vei|2 = 5.0 10
-8 (M
i /GeV)
dσ
d cos θ=
G2F
32π
{
∑
(mν)i U2ei
(
t
t− (mν)i+
u
u− (mν)i
)}2
26
Inverse Neutrinoless Double Beta Decay
Extreme limits:
• light neutrinos:
σ(e−e− → W−W−) =G2
F
4π|mee|2 ≤ 4.2 · 10−18
( |mee|1 eV
)2
fb
⇒ way too small
• heavy neutrinos:
σ(e−e− → W−W−) = 2.6 · 10−3
( √s
TeV
)4(S2ei/Mi
5 · 10−8GeV−1
)2
fb
⇒ too small
• √s → ∞:
σ(e−e− → W−W−) =G2
F
4π
(
∑
U2ei (mν)i
)2
⇒ amplitude grows with√s? Unitarity??
27
Unitarity
high energy limit√s → ∞:
σ(e−e− → W−W−) =G2
F
4π
(
∑
U2ei (mν)i
)2
↔ amplitude grows with√s?
Answer: exact see-saw relation U2ei (mν)i = 0
M =
0 mD
mTD MR
= U
mdiagν 0
0 MdiagR
UT
if Higgs triplet is present: unitarity also conserved
σ(e−e− → W−W−) =G2
F
4π
(
(U2ei (mν)i − (mL)ee
)2= 0
W.R., PRD 81
28
Contents
III) Neutrinoless double beta decay: non-standard interpretations
III1) Basics
III2) Left-right symmetry
III3) SUSY
III4) The inverse problem
29
III2) Left-right symmetric theories
very simple extension of SM gauge group to SU(2)L × SU(2)R × U(1)B−L
usual particle content:
LLi =
ν′L
ℓL
i
∼ (2,1,−1) , LRi =
νR
ℓR
i
∼ (1,2,−1)
QLi =
uL
dL
i
∼ (2,1, 1
3) , QRi =
uR
dR
i
∼ (1,2, 13)
for symmetry breaking:
∆L ≡
δ+L/√2 δ++
L
δ0L −δ+L/√2
∼ (3,1,2) , ∆R ≡
δ+R/√2 δ++
R
δ0R −δ+R/√2
∼ (1,3,2)
φ ≡
φ01 φ+
2
φ−1 φ0
2
∼ (2,2,0)
30
Left-right Symmetry
• very rich Higgs sector (13 extra scalars)
• rich gauge boson sector (Z ′,MW±R
) with
MZ′ =√
21−tan2 θW
MWR ≃ 1.7MWR
• ’sterile’ neutrinos νR
• type I + type II seesaw for neutrino mass
• right-handed currents with strength GF
(
gRgL
)2 (mW
MWR
)2
• mν ∝ 1/vR ∝ 1/MWR : maximal parity violation ↔ smallness of neutrino
mass
(Note: in case of modified symmetry breaking gL 6= gR and MZ′ < MWR
possible. . .)
31
Left-right Symmetry
6 neutrinos, flavor states n′L = (ν′L, νR
c)T , mass states nL = (νL, NcR)
T
n′L =
ν′L
νRc
=
KL
KR
nL =
U S
T V
νL
N cR
right-handed currents:
LlepCC =
g√2
[
ℓLγµKLnL(W
−1µ + ξeiαW−
2µ) + ℓRγµKRn
cL(−ξe−iαW−
1µ +W−2µ)]
(KL and KR are 3× 6 mixing matrices)
plus: gauge boson mixing
W±L
W±R
=
cos ξ sin ξ eiα
− sin ξ e−iα cos ξ
W±1
W±2
32
Connection to neutrinos
Majorana mass matrices ML = fL vL from 〈∆L〉 and MR = fR vR from 〈∆R〉(with fL = fR = f)
Lνmass = − 1
2
(
ν′L ν′Rc)
ML MD
MTD MR
ν′Lc
ν′R
⇒ mν = ML −MD M−1R MT
D
useful special cases
(i) type I dominance: mν = MD M−1R MT
D = MD f−1R /vR MT
D
(ii) type II dominance: mν = fL vL
for case (i): mixing of light neutrinos with heavy neutrinos of order
|Sαi| ≃ |T Tαi| ≃
√
mν
Mi
<∼ 10−7
(
TeV
Mi
)1/2
small (or enhanced up to 10−2 by cancellations)
33
Right-handed Currents in Double Beta Decay(A,Z) → (A,Z + 2) + 2e−
LlepCC =
g√2
3∑
i=1
[
eLγµ(UeiνLi + SeiN
cRi)(W
−1µ + ξeiαW−
2µ)
+ eRγµ(T ∗
eiνcLi + V ∗
eiNRi)(−ξe−iαW−1µ +W−
2µ)]
LℓY =− L
′c
Liσ2∆LfLL′L − L
′c
Riσ2∆RfRL′R
classify diagrams:
• mass dependent diagrams (same helicity of electrons)
• triplet exchange diagrams (same helicity of electrons)
• momentum dependent diagrams (different helicity of electrons)
34
Mass Dependent Diagrams
electrons either both left- or both right-handed: leading diagrams:
W
νi
νi
W
dL
dL
uL
e−L
e−L
uL
Uei
q
Uei
WR
WR
dR
dR
uR
e−R
e−R
uR
NRi
Aν ≃ G2F
mee
q2AR
NR≃ G2
F
(
mWL
MWR
)4∑
i
V ∗ei
2
Mi
<∼ 0.3 eV <∼ 4 · 10−16 GeV−5
∝ L2
R∝ L4
R5
35
Triplet exchange diagrams
leading diagrams:
WL
WL
δ−−
L
dL
dL
uL
e−L
e−L
uL
√
2g2vL hee
WR
WR
δ−−
R
dR
dR
uR
e−R
e−R
uR
√
2g2vR hee
AδL ≃ G2F
heevLm2
δL
AδR ≃ G2F
(
mWL
MWR
)4∑
i
V 2eiMi
m2δR
−− <∼ 4 · 10−16 GeV−5
(negligible) ∝ L4
R5
36
Momentum Dependent Diagrams
electrons with opposite helicity leading diagrams
(light neutrino exchange, long range):
WR
NR
NR
νL
WL
dR
dL
uR
e−R
e−L
uL
WL
WR
NR
NR
νL
WL
dL
dL
uL
e−R
e−L
uL
Aλ ≃ G2F
(
mWL
MWR
)2∑
i
UeiT∗ei
1
qAη ≃ G2
F tan ξ∑
i
UeiT∗ei
1
q
<∼ 1 · 10−10GeV−2 <∼ 6 · 10−9
∝ L3
R3q∝ L3
R3q
37
Tests of left-right symmetric diagrams
suppose ML dominates in mν and h = f : ⇒ MR ∝ mν
⇒ ANR≃ G2
F
(
mW
MWR
)4∑ V 2
ei
Mi∝∑ U2
ei
mi
Tello et al., 1011.3522
38
Tests of left-right symmetric diagrams
WR
WR
dR
dR
uR
e−R
e−R
uR
NRi
WR
WR
δ−−
R
dR
dR
uR
e−R
e−R
uR
√
2g2vR hee
Keung, Senjanovic, 1983
39
Example: Left-right symmetric theories
WR
WR
dR
dR
uR
e−R
e−R
uR
NRi
WR
WR
δ−−
R
dR
dR
uR
e−R
e−R
uR
√
2g2vR hee
WR WR
uR
dR
e−R e−
R
dR
uR
NRi
δ−−L
µ−L
e+L
e−L
e−L
heµ
hee
40
Lindner, Queiroz, W.R., 1604.07419
LHC assumes that MWR> MN , BR = 1, cuts don’t see low MN regime
indirect limits from WR → jj (Helo, Hirsch, 1509.00423) and Z ′ → ℓℓ
MZ′
MWR
=
√2δ
√
δ2 − tan2 θWand
gR√
1− δ2 tan2 θWZ ′µ f(
TR3 + (TL
3 −Q)δ2 tan2 θW)
f
where δ = gL/gR
41
Da (far and uncertain) future:
Lindner, Queiroz, W.R., Yaguna, 1604.08596
42
LHC vs. 0νββ
WR WR
uR
dR
e−R e−
R
dR
uR
NRi
• LHC assumptions: MN < MWR , BR(MN → ee) = 1, gR = gL
• cuts result in weak sensitivities for low MN
• background processes?
• QCD corrections?
• (LNV at LHC and baryogenesis)
43
Background
1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
Meff HGeVL
gef
f
Helo et al., PRD 88
one should include e.g.
• “jet fake” (high-pT jet registered as electron)
• “charge flip” (e− from opposite sign pair transfer pT to e+ via conversion)
Peng, Ramsey-Musolf, Winslow, 1508.04444
44
Background
one should include e.g.
• “jet fake” (high-pT jet registered as electron)
• “charge flip” (e− from opposite sign pair transfer pT to e+ via conversion)
1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
Meff HGeVL
geff
Peng, Ramsey-Musolf, Winslow, 1508.04444
45
QCD corrections
• matrix element multiplied with αs/(4π) lnM2W /µ2, match with eff. diagram
• run that down to 0νββ scale p2 = (100 MeV)2 ⇒ αs/(4π) lnM2W /p2 = 10%
• creates color non-singlet operators, (’operator mixing’), Fierz them for NMEs
• creates new operator with different matrix element, e.g.
(V −A)× (V +A) → (S − P )× (S + P )
• can give for alternative mechanisms large effect in either direction. . .
• (makes limit on right-handed diagrams slightly weaker)
Mahajan, PRL 112; Gonzalez, Kovalenko, Hirsch, PRD 93
46
Observation of LNV at LHC implies washout effects in early Universe!
Example TeV-scale WR: leading to washout e±R e±R → W±RW±
R and
e±R W∓R → e∓R W±
R . Further, e±RW∓R → e∓R W±
R stays long in equilibrium
(Frere, Hambye, Vertongen; Bhupal Dev, Lee, Mohapatra; U. Sarkar et al.)
More model-independent (Deppisch, Harz, Hirsch):
washout: log10ΓW (qq → ℓ+ℓ+ qq)
H>∼ 6.9 + 0.6
(
MX
TeV− 1
)
+ log10σLHC
fb
(TeV-0νββ, LFV and YB: Deppisch, Harz, Huang, Hirsch, Päs)
↔ post-Sphaleron mechanisms, τ flavor effects,. . .
47
Constraints from Lepton Flavor Violation
WR
WR
δ−−
R
dR
dR
uR
e−R
e−R
uR
√
2g2vR hee δ−−R
µ−R
e+R
e−R
e−R
heµ
hee
0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1
mlight (eV)
1026
1028
1030
1032
[T1
/2] ν
(yrs
)
GERDA 40kg
GERDA 1T
Normal
0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1
Excluded by KamLAND-Zen
InvertedmδR
= 3.5 TeV
mδR = 2 TeV
mδR = 1 TeV
Barry, W.R., JHEP 1309
48
Adding diagrams
WR
WR
dR
dR
uR
e−R
e−R
uR
NRi
W
νi
νi
W
dL
dL
uL
e−L
e−L
uL
Uei
q
Uei
⇒ lower bound on m(lightest) >∼ meV
49
Xe vs. Ge
1024
1025
1026
T1/2[136
Xe] (yrs)
1024
1025
1026
T1/
2[76G
e] (
yrs) GERDA
HM
Ge Combined
EX
OK
amLA
ND
-Zen
Xe
Com
bine
d
IBM (M-S)QRPA (CCM)
1024
1025
1026
T1/2[136
Xe] (yrs)
1024
1025
1026
T1/
2[76G
e] (
yrs) GERDA
HM
Ge Combined
EX
OK
amLA
ND
-Zen
Xe
Com
bine
d
QRPA (Tü)QRPA (HD)
WR
WR
dR
dR
uR
e−R
e−R
uR
NRi
W
WR
NR
NR
νL
W
dL
dL
uL
e−R
e−L
uL
Barry, W.R., JHEP 1309
50
λ-diagram and inverse 0νββ
WR
NR
NR
νL
W
dR
dL
uR
e−R
e−L
uL
NRi
νLi
NRi
e−
e−
WR
WL
T ∗
ei
Uei
0νββ W -WR production
2500. 2600. 2700. 2800. 2900. 3000.
10-6
10-5
10-4
0.001
0.01
0.1
e−e− → W−
L W−
R , s = 9 TeV2
σ[fb]
mWR[GeV]
Barry, Dorame, W.R., 1204.3365
51
Contents
III) Neutrinoless double beta decay: non-standard interpretations
III1) Basics
III2) Left-right symmetry
III3) SUSY
III4) The inverse problem
52
III3) Supersymmetry
L/R = λijk Li Lj eck + λ′
ijk Li Qj dck + λ′′
ijkuci d
cj d
ck + ǫi LiHu
λ′′ violates B, the rest violates L by one unit
gives rise to two mechanisms for 0νββ:
• short range, or neutralino/gluino exchange, or λ′111 mechanism
• long-range, or squark exchange, or λ′131 λ
′113 mechanism
Hirsch, Kovalenko, Paes, Klapdor, Babu, Mohapatra, Vergados,. . .
53
Supersymmetry: short range
eL
χ
eL
χ
dc
dc
uL
e−L
e−L
uL
eL
χ
uL
χ
dc
dc
uL
e−L
uL
e−L
uL
uL
χ/g
χ/g
dc
dc
e−L
uL
uL
e−L
dR
χ
χ
eL
dc
dc
uL
e−L
e−L
uL
dR
χ/g
χ/g
uL
dc
dc
uL
e−L
uL
e−L
dR
χ/g
dR
χ/g
dc
dc
uL
e−L
e−L
uL
A/R1≃ λ′2
111
Λ5SUSY
54
Supersymmetry: short range
Actually. . .
ηg =πα3
6
λ′2111
G2F
mp
mg
(
1
m4uL
+1
m4dR
− 1
2m2uL
m2dR
)
ηχ =πα2
2
λ′2111
G2F
4∑
i=1
mp
mχi
(
V 2Li(u)
m4uL
+V 2Ri(d)
m4dR
− VLi(u)VRi(d)
m2uL
m2dR
)
η′g =2πα3
3
λ′2111
G2F
mp
mg
1
m2uL
m2dR
ηχe = 2πα2λ′2111
G2F
4∑
i=1
mp
mχi
V 2Li(e)
m4eL
ηχf = πα2λ′2111
G2F
4∑
i=1
mp
mχi
(
VLi(u)VRi(d)
m2uL
m2dR
− VLi(u)VLi(e)
m2uL
m2eL
− VLi(e)VRi(d)
m2eLm2
dR
)
55
Supersymmetry: short range
gluino dominance:
ηg/R1≃ πα3
6
λ′2111
G2F
mp
mg m4dR
(
1 +
(
mdR
muL
)2)2
≤ 7.5× 10−9
translates into
λ′2111
mg m4dR
(1 +m2dR
/m2uL
)2<∼ 1.8× 10−17 GeV−5
56
Supersymmetry: short range
interplay with LHC:
eL
χ
uL
χ
dc
dc
uL
e−L
uL
e−L
eL uL
u
dc
e−L u
dc
e−L
χ
“resonant selectron production”
σ ∝ λ′2111
s
Allanach, Kom, Paes, 0903.0347
57
tanβ = 10, A0 = 0, 10 fb−1
M0/GeV
M1/2/G
eV
T 0νββ1/2 (Ge) < 1.9× 1025 yrs
100 > T 0νββ1/2 (Ge)/1025 yrs > 1.9
T 0νββ1/2 (Ge) > 1× 1027 yrs
→ observation in white region in conflict with 0νββ
→ if 0νββ observed: dark yellow region tests R/ SUSY mechanism
→ light yellow region: no significant R/ contribution to 0νββ
58
RPV SUSY and inverse 0νββ
χ0
uLdc
eL
eL
λ′∗111
uLdc
eL
eL
λ′∗111
χ0
uL
dc
eL
eLλ′111
uL
dceL
eLλ′111
0νββ resonant eL production → 4j
100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275
m∼χ0 [GeV]
100
125
150
175
200
225
250
275
m∼ e L [G
eV]
-6
-4
-2
0
2
BR
E(beam)
√s=500GeV
log10(σ/fb)
250 500 750 1000 1250 1500 1750
m∼χ0 [GeV]
250
500
750
1000
1250
1500
1750
m∼ e L [G
eV]
-3
-2
-1
0
BR
E(beam)
√s=3000GeV
log10(σ/fb)
Kom, W.R., 1110.3220
59
Cool effect somewhere else
d-squarks resonantly produced νedL → dR → νedL, euL
Dev, W.R.
60
Supersymmetry: long range
b
νe
bc
W
dc
dL
uL
e−L
e−L
uL
Ab/R2
≃ GF1
qUei
mb
Λ3SUSY
λ′131 λ
′113
61
Supersymmetry: long range
Test with B0-B0 mixing
νe
d
bc
b
dc
constrains λ′131 λ
′113/Λ
4SUSY
gives currently stronger constraint than 0νββ
62
Contents
III) Neutrinoless double beta decay: non-standard interpretations
III1) Basics
III2) Left-right symmetry
III3) SUSY
III4) The inverse problem
63
III4) The inverse problem
identify mechanism via
1.) other observables (LHC, LFV, KATRIN, cosmology,. . .)
2.) decay products (individual e− energies, angular correlations, spectrum,. . .)
3.) nuclear physics (multi-isotope, 0νECEC, 0νβ+β+,. . .)
64
Distinguishing via decay products
SuperNEMO
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
E2e (MeV)
Nu
mb
er
of
ev
en
ts/0
.05
Me
V
(a)
100Mo7.369 kg.y
219,000bbevents
S/B = 40
NEMO 3 (Phase I)
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1
cos(Θ)
Nu
mb
er
of
ev
en
ts
(b)
100Mo7.369 kg.y
219,000bbevents
S/B = 40
NEMO 3 (Phase I)
• source foils in between plastic scintillators
• individual electron energy, and their relative angle!
65
Distinguishing via decay products
Consider standard plus λ-mechanism
W
νi
νi
W
dL
dL
uL
e−L
e−L
uL
Uei
q
Uei
WR
NR
NR
νL
W
dR
dL
uR
e−R
e−L
uL
dΓdE1 dE2 d cos θ ∝ (1− β1 β2 cos θ) dΓ
dE1 dE2 d cos θ ∝ (E1 − E2)2 (1 + β1 β2 cos θ)
Arnold et al., 1005.1241
66
Distinguishing via decay products
Defining asymmetries
Aθ = (N+ −N−)/(N+ +N−) and AE = (N> −N<)/(N> +N<)
-4 -2 0 2 40
50
100
150
200
250
300
Λ @10-7D
XmΝ\@m
eVD
-4 -2 0 2 40
50
100
150
200
250
300
Λ @10-7D
XmΝ\@m
eVD
67
Distinguishing via nuclear physics
challenging, but possible if nuclear physics is under control (sic!)
recall:
1
T 0ν1/2(A,Z)
= G(Q,Z) |M(A,Z) η|2
if you measured two isotopes:
T 0ν1/2(A1, Z1)
T 0ν1/2(A2, Z2)
=Gx(Q2, Z2) |Mx(A2, Z2)|2Gx(Q1, Z1) |Mx(A1, Z1)|2
particle physics drops out, ratio of NMEs sensitive to mechanism
⇒ third reason for multi-isotope determination
68
Distinguishing via nuclear physics
Gehman, Elliott, hep-ph/0701099
3 to 4 isotopes necessary to disentangle mechanism
69
Distinguishing via nuclear physics
• standard interpretation: suppressed by 2 to 3 orders of magnitude
• ratio sensitive to mechanism
• 0+1 easier to identify; 2+1 very sensitive to RHC
70
Distinguishing via nuclear physics
Observation of
(A,Z) → (A,Z − 2) + 2 e+ (0νβ+β+)
e−b + (A,Z) → (A,Z − 2) + e+ (0νβ+EC)
2 e−b + (A,Z) → (A,Z − 2)∗ (0νECEC)
rate to 0νββ is sensitive to mechanism
71
Dircet vs. indirect contribution
Example: introduce Ψi = (8, 1, 0) and Φ = (8, 2, 12 )
να νβΨi Ψi
Φ Φ
H0 H0
Φ
Φ
Ψi
Ψi
d
d
u
e−
e−
u
mν ∝ λΦH yαiyβi
indirect contribution to 0νββ: direct contribution to 0νββ:
Al ≃ G2F
|mee|q2
A ≃ c2udy2eα
MΨi M4Φ
72
Dircet vs. indirect contribution
new contribution can dominate over standard one:
Choubey, Dürr, Mitra, W.R., JHEP 1205
73
Summary
74