Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 124 references

Neutrino Physics and Astrophysics at Colliders

T0 review · 2 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read Forward LHC neutrinos are becoming a million-event precision tool.

desk verdict A competent review of collider neutrino physics, with a trident-discovery claim that deserves a caveat about charm-flux uncertainty. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.20855 v2 pith:QJ44OUVP submitted 2025-06-25 hep-ph astro-ph.HEhep-ex

Bei Zhou , Pedro Machado This is my paper
classification hep-phastro-ph.HEhep-ex
keywords colliderneutrinosForwardPhysicsFacilityneutrinocrosssectionstridentproductionpartondistributionfunctionsbeyondStandardModelatmosphericfluxmuonpuzzle
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This review makes the case that neutrinos produced in the far-forward direction of the LHC, detected for the first time by FASERν and SND@LHC, are becoming a precise laboratory for particle physics and astrophysics. Its central contention is that the planned Forward Physics Facility at the High-Luminosity LHC will collect roughly $10^6$ neutrino interaction events, spanning the 400 GeV to 6 TeV gap in measured neutrino cross sections and probing the proton's parton distributions at very small momentum fraction $x$. With those statistics, the paper projects an order-of-magnitude improvement in cross-section precision and a very likely first discovery of neutrino trident production at about $10\sigma$. The same forward measurements would reduce the largest systematic uncertainties in atmospheric neutrino flux calculations that currently limit IceCube, KM3NeT, and Baikal-GVD, and would test models invoked to explain the cosmic-ray muon puzzle.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object of this program is the far-forward neutrino flux at the LHC, produced by decays of pions, kaons, $D$ and $D_s$ mesons, and hyperons within a forward cone of $\theta \lesssim 1$ mrad. Its flavor composition, with $\nu_e:\nu_\mu:\nu_\tau \simeq 0.1:1:10^{-3}$, and its energy spectrum are estimated by Monte Carlo generators such as SIBYLL 2.3d, DPMJET, QGSJET-II.04, EPOS-LHC, and Pythia8, and the detection is done with emulsion-tungsten targets (FASERν and FASERν2) and a liquid-argon TPC (FLArE). The decisive feature is that pion- and kaon-derived fluxes agree among generators to within a factor of two, while charmed-hadron production differs by about an order of magnitude, which sets the uncertainty on $\nu_\tau$ rates and on the trident discovery potential.

What would settle it

A direct measurement of forward $D_s$ meson production at the LHC—for instance from LHCb data in the same rapidity window or from charm-tagged events in FASERν—that lands at the low end of the generator spread would reduce the predicted $\nu_\tau$ rate and the trident significance, contradicting the optimistic FPF projection.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that collider neutrino physics has passed from first detection to a planned precision program. The demonstration began with FASERν's first measurements of high-energy $\nu_e$ and $\nu_\mu$ charged-current interactions at the LHC in 2024, which produced the first collider neutrino cross-section points around $560$–$1760$ GeV, and continued with the muon-neutrino cross-section and flux measurement using the FASER electronic detector. The review then argues that the Forward Physics Facility, with a roughly twenty-fold increase in flux and target mass, will observe about $10^6$ neutrino interactions of all flavors, including thousands of $\nu_\tau$; that it will measure CC and NC deep-inelastic scattering cross sections from $\sim$100 GeV to several TeV; that it will very likely make the first discovery of neutrino trident production; and that it will open sensitive searches for dark photons, heavy neutral leptons, axion-like particles, sterile neutrinos, and non-standard neutrino interactions, while simultaneously providing data that anchors atmospheric neutrino flux predictions.

Load-bearing premise

The projected event rates and discoveries at the FPF all scale with the forward charm-hadron production rate, and the paper concedes that current Monte Carlo generators disagree on that rate by roughly an order of magnitude.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The FPF would fill the 400 GeV to 6 TeV gap in neutrino-nucleon cross-section data, linking fixed-target accelerator measurements to IceCube's Earth-absorption results.
  • A first discovery of neutrino trident production, projected at about $10\sigma$ in the $\mu^+\mu^-$ channel at FASERν2, would open a new probe of Standard Model weak interactions and of new light mediators.
  • Neutrino dimuon events at the FPF would extend the strange-quark parton distribution function fits to higher $Q^2$ and lower $x$ than accelerator neutrino data currently reach.
  • Direct measurements of forward pion, kaon, and charm production would reduce the dominant systematic uncertainties in the conventional and prompt atmospheric neutrino fluxes, improving astrophysical neutrino analyses.
  • The measured $\nu_e$-to-$\nu_\mu$ flux ratio traces the kaon-to-pion ratio in forward production, providing a direct test of the strangeness-suppression models proposed for the cosmic-ray muon puzzle.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Editorial inference: If the true forward charm production sits at the low end of the generator spread, the $\nu_\tau$ sample at the FPF could drop by up to an order of magnitude, delaying tau-neutrino physics and weakening trident channels involving tau leptons.
  • Editorial inference: The same detector data that serve neutrino physics can be read as a forward-hadron production measurement, effectively turning the HL-LHC into a calibrator for air-shower Monte Carlo codes beyond what cosmic-ray experiments alone can provide.
  • Editorial inference: A measurement of the prompt atmospheric neutrino flux anchored by collider data would change the interpretation of IceCube's high-energy astrophysical flux, since the prompt component is currently one of the largest backgrounds at the highest energies.
  • Editorial inference: The trident and W-boson production measurements proposed here could be the first direct test of neutrino-nucleus coherent scattering in the high-energy regime, complementing low-energy measurements at reactors and spallation sources.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 6 minor

Summary. This review article surveys the emerging program of collider neutrino physics. It describes the FASER/FASERν and SND@LHC detectors and their first measurements, then focuses on the proposed Forward Physics Facility (FPF) at the HL-LHC. The paper reviews forward neutrino flux predictions at the LHC, neutrino interaction processes (DIS, QES, RES, trident production, W-boson production, final-state radiation), beyond-Standard-Model search strategies (dark photons, heavy neutral leptons, scalars, ALPs, sterile neutrinos, NSIs), and applications to atmospheric neutrino fluxes and the cosmic-ray muon puzzle. The central forward-looking claims are that FPF will record about 10^6 neutrino interactions, will very likely make the first discovery of neutrino trident production, will fill the 400 GeV to 6 TeV gap in neutrino cross-section measurements, will improve low-x PDF determinations, and will reduce systematic uncertainties in atmospheric and cosmic-ray physics.

Significance. If the FPF projections hold, this is a timely and useful review of a rapidly growing field. The paper accurately describes the published FASERν and SND@LHC measurements and is appropriately candid about the dominant flux uncertainty: Section 3 explicitly reports an order-of-magnitude spread in charmed-hadron production among generators, notes that DPMJET is ruled out by data, and identifies SIBYLL 2.3d as the only generator calibrated to forward charm data. The review also gives a broad and well-referenced account of BSM and astrophysics applications. The main weakness is that the strongest FPF sensitivity statements, especially the 10σ trident discovery claim in Section 4.3, are taken from the authors' own calculations without propagating the charm-flux uncertainty that Section 3 itself identifies as the dominant systematic. This missing propagation does not invalidate the review, but it makes the headline projections stronger than the paper's own evidence supports.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. 4.3 (with Sec. 3)] The statement that FPF 'will also very likely make the first discovery of neutrino trident production' rests on the roughly 10σ projection for the μ+μ− channel from Ref. [73], but the review does not carry into that projection the dominant flux uncertainty quantified in Sec. 3. There, charmed-hadron production is reported to vary by approximately one order of magnitude among generators, with only SIBYLL 2.3d calibrated to forward charm data. Charm decays dominate the ντ flux and contribute substantially to the high-energy ν_e and ν_μ tails, where trident rates are largest because the trident cross section grows with energy. If the true charm flux is at the low end of the stated range, the quoted FASERν2 yields (about 40 μ+μ−, 44 e+e−, 150 eμ, and the corresponding 10σ significance) would drop, potentially by a large factor. The review should state which flux benchmark underlies the Ref. [73] numbers, quote a range of expected trident rates and significances across the Sec. 3 generator spread, or soften the 'very likely' wording to make the projection explicitly conditional on the charm-flux benchmark.
  2. [Sec. 3] The text states that the ν_e:ν_μ:ντ flux ratio is roughly 0.1:1:10^-3 and then reports expected FPF event numbers of about 10^5 ν_e, 10^6 ν_μ, and somewhere between 2–20×10^3 ντ interactions. The implied ντ/ν_μ event ratio is 2×10^-3 to 2×10^-2, which is a factor of 2–20 larger than the stated 10^-3 flux ratio. This discrepancy directly affects the 'thousands of ντ events' claim and the associated tau-neutrino physics reach. The authors should reconcile the flux ratio with the event-count range, or clearly separate flux ratios at production from the detector event rates that include acceptance and cross-section effects.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Sec. 4.1] The sentence saying that trident production and W-boson production 'have never been discovered at the 5σ level' should be clarified: historical measurements by CHARM II and CCFR exist in the literature, so the authors should either cite them and explain that no 5σ-standard observation has been established, or rephrase to avoid the implication that the processes have never been seen at any significance.
  2. [Sec. 3] There is a typo in 'DPMJET(dashed lines in the figure)' where a space is missing before the parenthesis; also, the Fig. 3 caption would be clearer if it explicitly identified which vertical panel corresponds to which neutrino flavor rather than saying the panels are 'distributed vertically.'
  3. [Sec. 2.3] The phrase 'leverage a ~20× increase in neutrino flux over Run 3 and a ~20× increase in the target mass' mixes luminosity, acceptance, and detector size; please specify what the 20× flux factor refers to (for example, integrated luminosity times angular acceptance) so that the comparison with Run 3 is unambiguous.
  4. [Sec. 4.3] The statement that O(10^6) events correspond to 'an order-of-magnitude improvement in the precision' conflates the event-sample size with the statistical precision; for a factor of 100 more events the statistical precision improves by a factor of 10, so the sentence should say this explicitly or refer to the event-sample size.
  5. [Sec. 6.2] In Eq. (4), the angle-bracket notation \(\langle N^\mu_{\rm obs}\rangle\) and \(\langle N^\mu_{\rm pred}\rangle\) suggests event counts or muon numbers, while the surrounding text defines the same quantities as average muon densities; please align the notation with the definitions.
  6. [Sec. 5] The sentence 'They would be produced at or near the interaction point... and decay within the volume of FPF detectors' has an unclear antecedent because the preceding sentence refers to BSM particles while the subject 'they' could also be read as referring to 'scenarios'; please rephrase.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

Review article; trident and event-rate projections are quoted from independent peer-reviewed calculations, not derived in-paper; no circular reduction found.

full rationale

This manuscript is a review, so the usual derivation-chain circularity patterns largely do not apply: no quantity is defined in terms of another, no parameter is fitted and then renamed a prediction, and no uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors' prior work. The central forward-looking numbers are explicitly attributed to external references: Sec. 4.3 states that 'FPF will also very likely make the first discovery of neutrino trident production [73]' and quotes the FASERnu2 event counts and 'about 10sigma' from Ref. [73], which is a peer-reviewed calculation with its own 'reverse tracking' background study. Although Ref. [73] is coauthored by one of the present reviewers (Bei Zhou) and Ref. [87] by the other (Pedro Machado), these citations are literature summaries rather than load-bearing derivations; the cited results have stated assumptions that do not include the review's conclusions. Section 3 does flag a genuine systematic limitation: 'charmed hadron production shows discrepancies spanning approximately one order of magnitude,' so projected event rates and the trident significance inherit this flux uncertainty. That is a robustness caveat, not circularity: the generator fluxes are not fitted to the projected event counts, and the paper does not hide the spread. No equation in the paper reduces to its own input, and no observed quantity is manufactured from an ansatz. The only mild concern is the concentration of self-citations for specific physics projections, which is expected in a specialist review and does not make the synthesis circular.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

As a review, the paper introduces no free parameters, no new entities, and no derivation. Its central projections rest on assumptions about FPF design, Monte Carlo generators, and SM cross-section benchmarks, all drawn from the cited literature.

assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Monte Carlo generators SIBYLL 2.3d, QGSJET II-04, EPOS-LHC, and Pythia8 provide valid forward hadron production predictions, with DPMJET excluded as ruled out by data.
    Sec. 3 uses these generators for FPF neutrino flux predictions; the paper itself notes charmed hadron production varies by an order of magnitude, so this assumption is partially weakened by the paper's own discussion.
  • domain assumption The Forward Physics Facility will be constructed with the assumed design: about 620 m downstream, HL-LHC at 3 ab^-1, FASERv2 with a 20-ton emulsion target, and FLArE with a 10-ton LArTPC.
    All FPF physics projections in Secs. 4-6 scale with these parameters; the facility is a proposal, not yet approved or built.
  • domain assumption Standard Model neutrino cross-section calculations, such as the Bodek-Yang model in GENIE, are the correct benchmarks for collider neutrino measurements.
    Sec. 4.2 compares FASERv data and FPF projections to these SM predictions; any new physics would alter the interpretation, but the review uses SM as the baseline.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Neutrino Physics and Astrophysics at Colliders." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/QJ44OUVP

@misc{pith2026250620855,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Neutrino Physics and Astrophysics at Colliders},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/QJ44OUVP}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.20855}
}
abstract

Nonzero neutrino masses guarantee new physics and neutrinos are excellent probes of extreme environments in the Universe. The recent collider neutrino experimental program, including FASER$\nu$ and SND@LHC, along with the planned Forward Physics Facility at the High-Luminosity Large Hadron Collider, is opening a new window into neutrino physics and astrophysics. In this article, we review recent achievements and prospects of collider neutrino experiments, including key achievements such as the first measurements of collider neutrino interactions at unprecedented energies and the exploration of new physics scenarios, like dark matter candidates, sterile neutrinos, and non-standard neutrino interactions. For concreteness, we will focus on the significant scientific opportunities presented by the Forward Physics Facility, which will enable precision measurements of neutrino cross sections and proton structure at low parton momentum fraction. Furthermore, collider neutrino studies will substantially reduce systematic uncertainties in calculating atmospheric neutrino fluxes, thereby improving astrophysical neutrino observations as well as advancing our understanding of cosmic-ray interactions.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

124 extracted references · 20 canonical work pages

  1. [73]

    Wolfgang Altmannshofer, Toni M ¨akel¨a, Subir Sarkar, Sebastian Trojanowski, Keping Xie, Bei Zhou, Discovering neutrino tridents at the Large Hadron Collider, Phys. Rev. D 110 (7) (2024) 072018, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.110.072018,2406.16803

    arXiv 2024

  2. [1]

    (FASER), Detecting and Studying High-Energy Collider Neutrinos with FASER at the LHC, Eur

    Henso Abreu, et al. (FASER), Detecting and Studying High-Energy Collider Neutrinos with FASER at the LHC, Eur. Phys. J. C 80 (1) (2020) 61, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-020-7631-5,1908.02310

    arXiv 2020

  3. [2]

    (FASER), Technical Proposal: FASERnu (2020),2001.03073

    Henso Abreu, et al. (FASER), Technical Proposal: FASERnu (2020),2001.03073

    arXiv 2020

  4. [3]

    (FASER), First Direct Observation of Collider Neutrinos with FASER at the LHC (2023),2303.14185

    Henso Abreu, et al. (FASER), First Direct Observation of Collider Neutrinos with FASER at the LHC (2023),2303.14185

    arXiv 2023

  5. [4]

    Feng, et al., The Forward Physics Facility at the High-Luminosity LHC, J

    Jonathan L. Feng, et al., The Forward Physics Facility at the High-Luminosity LHC, J. Phys. G 50 (3) (2023) 030501, doi:10.1088/1361-6471/ ac865e,2203.05090. [5]https://fpf.web.cern.ch/

    arXiv 2023

  6. [6]

    W. G. Seligman, et al. (CCFR), Improved determination ofα s from neutrino nucleon scattering, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79 (1997) 1213–1216, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.79.1213,hep-ex/9701017

    arXiv 1997

  7. [7]

    Naples, et al

    D. Naples, et al. (NuTeV), High energy neutrino scattering results from NuTeV, Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl. 118 (2003) 164–173, doi: 10.1016/S0920-5632(03)01314-8

    work page doi:10.1016/s0920-5632(03)01314-8 2003

  8. [8]

    (NOMAD), A Study of quasi-elastic muon neutrino and antineutrino scattering in the NOMAD experiment, Eur

    V Lyubushkin, et al. (NOMAD), A Study of quasi-elastic muon neutrino and antineutrino scattering in the NOMAD experiment, Eur. Phys. J. C 63 (2009) 355–381, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-009-1113-0,0812.4543

    arXiv 2009

Show all 124 references
  1. [9]

    Jain, Douglas W

    P . Jain, Douglas W. McKay, S. Panda, John P . Ralston, Extra dimensions and strong neutrino nucleon interactions above 10**19-eV: Breaking the GZK barrier, Phys. Lett. B 484 (2000) 267–274, doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(00)00647-X,hep-ph/0001031

    2000 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Arg ¨uelles, Francis Halzen, Logan Wille, Mike Kroll, Mary Hall Reno, High-energy behavior of photon, neutrino, and proton cross sections, Phys

    Carlos A. Arg ¨uelles, Francis Halzen, Logan Wille, Mike Kroll, Mary Hall Reno, High-energy behavior of photon, neutrino, and proton cross sections, Phys. Rev. D 92 (7) (2015) 074040, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.92.074040,1504.06639

    2015 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Damir Be ˇcirevi´c, Boris Panes, Olcyr Sumensari, Renata Zukanovich Funchal, Seeking leptoquarks in IceCube, JHEP 06 (2018) 032, doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2018)032,1803.10112

    2018 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Y ang Bai, Keping Xie, Bei Zhou, Large Neutrino ”Collider” (2025),2510.13948

    2025

  5. [13]

    Akitaka Ariga, Jamie Boyd, Felix Kling, Albert De Roeck, Neutrino Experiments at the Large Hadron Collider (2025), doi:10.1146/ annurev-nucl-121423-101000,2501.10078

    2025 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Amoroso, et al., Snowmass 2021 Whitepaper: Proton Structure at the Precision Frontier, Acta Phys

    S. Amoroso, et al., Snowmass 2021 Whitepaper: Proton Structure at the Precision Frontier, Acta Phys. Polon. B 53 (12) (2022) 12–A1, doi:10.5506/APhysPolB.53.12-A1,2203.13923

    2022 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Cruz-Martinez, Max Fieg, Tommaso Giani, Peter Krack, Toni M ¨akel¨a, Tanjona R

    Juan M. Cruz-Martinez, Max Fieg, Tommaso Giani, Peter Krack, Toni M ¨akel¨a, Tanjona R. Rabemananjara, Juan Rojo, The LHC as a Neutrino-Ion Collider, Eur. Phys. J. C 84 (4) (2024) 369, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-12665-1,2309.09581

    2024 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Space Sci

    Johannes Albrecht, et al., The Muon Puzzle in cosmic-ray induced air showers and its connection to the Large Hadron Collider, Astrophys. Space Sci. 367 (3) (2022) 27, doi:10.1007/s10509-022-04054-5,2105.06148

    2022 arXiv

  9. [17]

    (FASER), Reconstruction and Performance Evaluation of FASER’s Emulsion Detector at the LHC (2025),2504.13008

    Roshan Mammen Abraham, et al. (FASER), Reconstruction and Performance Evaluation of FASER’s Emulsion Detector at the LHC (2025),2504.13008

    2025 arXiv

  10. [18]

    (FASER), The FASER detector, JINST 19 (05) (2024) P05066, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/19/05/P05066,2207.11427

    Henso Abreu, et al. (FASER), The FASER detector, JINST 19 (05) (2024) P05066, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/19/05/P05066,2207.11427

    2024

  11. [19]

    Feng, Ahmed Ismail, Felix Kling, Michael Waterbury, Neutrino detection without neutrino detectors: Dis- covering collider neutrinos at FASER with electronic signals only, Phys

    Jason Arakawa, Jonathan L. Feng, Ahmed Ismail, Felix Kling, Michael Waterbury, Neutrino detection without neutrino detectors: Dis- covering collider neutrinos at FASER with electronic signals only, Phys. Rev. D 106 (5) (2022) 052011, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.106.052011, 2206.09932

    2022 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Feng, Iftah Galon, Felix Kling, Sebastian Trojanowski, ForwArd Search ExpeRiment at the LHC, Phys

    Jonathan L. Feng, Iftah Galon, Felix Kling, Sebastian Trojanowski, ForwArd Search ExpeRiment at the LHC, Phys. Rev. D 97 (3) (2018) 035001, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.97.035001,1708.09389

    2018 arXiv

  13. [21]

    (FASER), Technical Proposal for FASER: ForwArd Search ExpeRiment at the LHC (2018),1812.09139

    Akitaka Ariga, et al. (FASER), Technical Proposal for FASER: ForwArd Search ExpeRiment at the LHC (2018),1812.09139

    2018 arXiv

  14. [22]

    (FASER), Letter of Intent for FASER: ForwArd Search ExpeRiment at the LHC (2018),1811.10243

    Akitaka Ariga, et al. (FASER), Letter of Intent for FASER: ForwArd Search ExpeRiment at the LHC (2018),1811.10243

    2018 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Acampora, et al

    G. Acampora, et al. (SND@LHC), SND@LHC: the scattering and neutrino detector at the LHC, JINST 19 (05) (2024) P05067, doi: 10.1088/1748-0221/19/05/P05067,2210.02784. Neutrino Physics and Astrophysics at Colliders13 [24]https://snd-lhc.web.cern.ch/

    2024 arXiv

  16. [25]

    rep., CERN, Geneva 2025, URLhttps://cds.cern.ch/record/2926288

    D Abbaneo, C Ahdida, S Ahmad, R Albanese, A Alexandrov, F Alicante, F Aloschi, N Amapane, M Andreini, K Androsov, A Anokhina, T Asada, C Asawatangtrakuldee, M A Ayala Torres, N Bangaru, C Battilana, A Bay, A Bertocco, C Bertone, C Betancourt, D Bick, R Biswas, A Blanco Castro,...

    2025

  17. [26]

    Anchordoqui, et al., The Forward Physics Facility: Sites, experiments, and physics potential, Phys

    Luis A. Anchordoqui, et al., The Forward Physics Facility: Sites, experiments, and physics potential, Phys. Rept. 968 (2022) 1–50, doi: 10.1016/j.physrep.2022.04.004,2109.10905

    2022 arXiv

  18. [27]

    Jyotismita Adhikary, et al., Scientific program for the Forward Physics Facility, Eur. Phys. J. C 85 (4) (2025) 430, doi:10.1140/epjc/ s10052-025-14048-6,2411.04175

    2025 arXiv

  19. [28]

    Anchordoqui, et al

    Luis A. Anchordoqui, et al. (FPF Working Groups), The Forward Physics Facility at the Large Hadron Collider 2025,2503.19010

    2025 arXiv

  20. [29]

    Kamp, Carlos A

    Nicholas W. Kamp, Carlos A. Arg ¨uelles, Albrecht Karle, Jennifer Thomas, Tianlu Yuan, Lake- and Surface-Based Detectors for Forward Neutrino Physics (2025),2501.08278

    2025

  21. [30]

    1033–1038, doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-18211-2 166,hep-ph/0012252

    Stefan Roesler, Ralph Engel, Johannes Ranft, The Monte Carlo event generator DPMJET -III, in: International Conference on Ad- vanced Monte Carlo for Radiation Physics, Particle Transport Simulation and Applications (MC 2000) 2000, pp. 1033–1038, doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-18211-2 ...

    arXiv

  22. [31]

    Gaisser, Paolo Lipari, Todor Stanev, Cosmic ray interaction event generator SIBYLL 2.1, Phys

    Eun-Joo Ahn, Ralph Engel, Thomas K. Gaisser, Paolo Lipari, Todor Stanev, Cosmic ray interaction event generator SIBYLL 2.1, Phys. Rev. D 80 (2009) 094003, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.80.094003,0906.4113

    2009 arXiv

  23. [32]

    QGSJET -II model, Phys

    Sergey Ostapchenko, Monte Carlo treatment of hadronic interactions in enhanced Pomeron scheme: I. QGSJET -II model, Phys. Rev. D 83 (2011) 014018, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.83.014018,1010.1869

    2011 arXiv

  24. [33]

    Pierog, Iu

    T. Pierog, Iu. Karpenko, J. M. Katzy, E. Y atsenko, K. Werner, EPOS LHC: Test of collective hadronization with data measured at the CERN Large Hadron Collider, Phys. Rev. C 92 (3) (2015) 034906, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.92.034906,1306.0121

    2015 arXiv

  25. [34]

    Peter Skands, Stefano Carrazza, Juan Rojo, Tuning PYTHIA 8.1: the Monash 2013 Tune, Eur. Phys. J. C 74 (8) (2014) 3024, doi: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-014-3024-y,1404.5630

    2014 arXiv

  26. [35]

    Christiansen, Richard Corke, Nishita Desai, Philip Ilten, Stephen Mrenna, Stefan Prestel, Christine O

    Torbj ¨orn Sj ¨ostrand, Stefan Ask, Jesper R. Christiansen, Richard Corke, Nishita Desai, Philip Ilten, Stephen Mrenna, Stefan Prestel, Christine O. Rasmussen, Peter Z. Skands, An introduction to PYTHIA 8.2, Comput. Phys. Commun. 191 (2015) 159–177, doi:10.1016/j. cpc.2015.01....

    2015 arXiv

  27. [36]

    thesis, KIT, Karlsruhe, Dept

    Anatoli Fedynitch, Cascade equations and hadronic interactions at very high energies, Ph.D. thesis, KIT, Karlsruhe, Dept. Phys. 2015, doi:10.5445/IR/1000055433

    2015

  28. [37]

    Gaisser, Todor Stanev, A new version of the event generator Sibyll, PoS ICRC2015 (2016) 558, doi:10.22323/1.236.0558,1510.00568

    Felix Riehn, Ralph Engel, Anatoli Fedynitch, Thomas K. Gaisser, Todor Stanev, A new version of the event generator Sibyll, PoS ICRC2015 (2016) 558, doi:10.22323/1.236.0558,1510.00568

    2016 arXiv

  29. [38]

    Dembinski, Ralph Engel, Anatoli Fedynitch, Thomas K

    Felix Riehn, Hans P . Dembinski, Ralph Engel, Anatoli Fedynitch, Thomas K. Gaisser, Todor Stanev, The hadronic interaction model SIBYLL 2.3c and Feynman scaling, PoS ICRC2017 (2018) 301, doi:10.22323/1.301.0301,1709.07227

    2018 arXiv

  30. [39]

    Gaisser, Todor Stanev, Hadronic interaction model sibyll 2.3c and inclusive lepton fluxes, Phys

    Anatoli Fedynitch, Felix Riehn, Ralph Engel, Thomas K. Gaisser, Todor Stanev, Hadronic interaction model sibyll 2.3c and inclusive lepton fluxes, Phys. Rev. D 100 (10) (2019) 103018, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.100.103018,1806.04140

    2019 arXiv

  31. [40]

    Energy 82 (2015) 10–18, doi:10.1016/j.anucene.2014.11.007

    Giuseppe Battistoni, et al., Overview of the FLUKA code, Annals Nucl. Energy 82 (2015) 10–18, doi:10.1016/j.anucene.2014.11.007

    2015 doi

  32. [41]

    Nevay, et al., BDSIM: An accelerator tracking code with particle–matter interactions, Comput

    Laurence J. Nevay, et al., BDSIM: An accelerator tracking code with particle–matter interactions, Comput. Phys. Commun. 252 (2020) 107200, doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2020.107200,1808.10745

    2020

  33. [42]

    Nevay, Forward neutrino fluxes at the LHC, Phys

    Felix Kling, Laurence J. Nevay, Forward neutrino fluxes at the LHC, Phys. Rev. D 104 (11) (2021) 113008, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.104. 113008,2105.08270

    2021 arXiv

  34. [43]

    (FASER), First Measurement of the Muon Neutrino Interaction Cross Section and Flux as a Function of Energy at the LHC with FASER, Phys

    Roshan Mammen Abraham, et al. (FASER), First Measurement of the Muon Neutrino Interaction Cross Section and Flux as a Function of Energy at the LHC with FASER, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134 (21) (2025) 211801, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.134.211801,2412.03186

    2025 arXiv

  35. [44]

    (FASER), Neutrino Rate Predictions for FASER (2024),2402.13318

    Roshan Mammen Abraham, et al. (FASER), Neutrino Rate Predictions for FASER (2024),2402.13318

    2024 arXiv

  36. [45]

    Luca Buonocore, Felix Kling, Luca Rottoli, Jonas Sominka, Predictions for Neutrinos and New Physics from Forward Heavy Hadron Production at the LHC (2023),2309.12793

    2023 arXiv

  37. [46]

    Weidong Bai, Milind Diwan, Maria Vittoria Garzelli, Yu Seon Jeong, Mary Hall Reno, Far-forward neutrinos at the Large Hadron Collider, JHEP 06 (2020) 032, doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2020)032,2002.03012

    2020 arXiv

  38. [47]

    Rafal Maciula, Antoni Szczurek, Far-forward production of charm mesons and neutrinos at forward physics facilities at the LHC and the intrinsic charm in the proton, Phys. Rev. D 107 (3) (2023) 034002, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.107.034002,2210.08890

    2023 arXiv

  39. [48]

    Stasto, Forward Neutrinos from Charm at Large Hadron Collider (2023),2306.01578

    Atri Bhattacharya, Felix Kling, Ina Sarcevic, Anna M. Stasto, Forward Neutrinos from Charm at Large Hadron Collider (2023),2306.01578

    2023 arXiv

  40. [49]

    (FASER), First Measurement ofνe andνµInteraction Cross Sections at the LHC with FASER’s Emulsion Detector, Phys

    Roshan Mammen Abraham, et al. (FASER), First Measurement ofνe andνµInteraction Cross Sections at the LHC with FASER’s Emulsion Detector, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133 (2) (2024) 021802, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.133.021802,2403.12520

    2024 arXiv

  41. [50]

    M. G. Aartsen, et al. (IceCube), Measurement of the multi-TeV neutrino cross section with IceCube using Earth absorption, Nature 551 (2017) 596–600, doi:10.1038/nature24459,1711.08119

    2017 arXiv

  42. [51]

    Mauricio Bustamante, Amy Connolly, Extracting the Energy-Dependent Neutrino-Nucleon Cross Section above 10 TeV Using IceCube Showers, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122 (4) (2019) 041101, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.122.041101,1711.11043

    2019 arXiv

  43. [52]

    Abbasi, et al

    R. Abbasi, et al. (IceCube), Measurement of the high-energy all-flavor neutrino-nucleon cross section with IceCube (2020), doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.104.022001,2011.03560. 14Neutrino Physics and Astrophysics at Colliders

    2020

  44. [53]

    Tzanov, et al

    M. Tzanov, et al. (NuTeV), Precise measurement of neutrino and anti-neutrino differential cross sections, Phys. Rev. D 74 (2006) 012008, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.74.012008,hep-ex/0509010

    2006 arXiv

  45. [54]

    thesis, Nevis Labs, Columbia U

    William Glenn Seligman, A Next-to-Leading Order QCD Analysis of Neutrino - Iron Structure Functions at the Tevatron, Ph.D. thesis, Nevis Labs, Columbia U. 1997, doi:10.2172/1421736, URLhttp://lss.fnal.gov/cgi-bin/find_paper.pl?thesis-1997-21

    1997 doi

  46. [55]

    Wu, et al

    Q. Wu, et al. (NOMAD), A Precise measurement of the muon neutrino-nucleon inclusive charged current cross-section off an isoscalar target in the energy range 2.5<E(nu)<40-GeV by NOMAD, Phys. Lett. B 660 (2008) 19–25, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2007.12.027,0711.1183

    2008 arXiv

  47. [56]

    Kozhushner, E.P

    M.A. Kozhushner, E.P . Shabalin, PRODUCTION OF LEPTON PARTICLE PAIRS ON A COULOMB CENTER, Soviet Journal of Experi- mental and Theoretical Physics 41 (1961) 949

    1961

  48. [57]

    E. P . Shabalin, Theµ +µ− and e+e− Pair Production Cross Sections for Neutrinos Scattered by Nuclei, Soviet Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Physics 16 (1963) 125

    1963

  49. [58]

    W. Czyz, G. C. Sheppey, J. D. Walecka, Neutrino production of lepton pairs through the point four-fermion interaction, Nuovo Cim. 34 (1964) 404–435, doi:10.1007/BF02734586

    1964 doi

  50. [59]

    Lovseth, M

    J. Lovseth, M. Radomiski, Kinematical distributions of neutrino-produced lepton triplets, Phys. Rev. D 3 (1971) 2686–2706, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.3.2686

    1971

  51. [60]

    Fujikawa, The self-coupling of weak lepton currents in high-energy neutrino and muon reactions, Annals Phys

    K. Fujikawa, The self-coupling of weak lepton currents in high-energy neutrino and muon reactions, Annals Phys. 68 (1971) 102–162, doi:10.1016/0003-4916(71)90244-2

    1971 doi

  52. [61]

    Koike, M

    K. Koike, M. Konuma, K. Kurata, K. Sugano, Neutrino production of lepton pairs. 1. -, Prog. Theor. Phys. 46 (1971) 1150–1169, doi: 10.1143/PTP.46.1150

    1971 doi

  53. [62]

    Koike, M

    K. Koike, M. Konuma, K. Kurata, K. Sugano, Neutrino production of lepton pairs. 2., Prog. Theor. Phys. 46 (1971) 1799–1804, doi: 10.1143/PTP.46.1799

    1971 doi

  54. [63]

    R. W. Brown, R. H. Hobbs, J. Smith, N. Stanko, Intermediate boson. iii. virtual-boson effects in neutrino trident production, Phys. Rev. D 6 (1972) 3273–3292, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.6.3273

    1972 doi

  55. [64]

    Belusevic, J

    R. Belusevic, J. Smith, W - Z Interference in Neutrino - Nucleus Scattering, Phys. Rev. D 37 (1988) 2419, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.37.2419

    1988 doi

  56. [65]

    Wolfgang Altmannshofer, Stefania Gori, Maxim Pospelov, Itay Y avin, Neutrino Trident Production: A Powerful Probe of New Physics with Neutrino Beams, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113 (2014) 091801, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.091801,1406.2332

    2014 arXiv

  57. [66]

    Gabriel Magill, Ryan Plestid, Neutrino Trident Production at the Intensity Frontier, Phys. Rev. D 95 (7) (2017) 073004, doi:10.1103/ PhysRevD.95.073004,1612.05642

    2017 arXiv

  58. [67]

    Shao-Feng Ge, Manfred Lindner, Werner Rodejohann, Atmospheric Trident Production for Probing New Physics, Phys. Lett. B 772 (2017) 164–168, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2017.06.020,1702.02617

    2017 arXiv

  59. [68]

    Perez-Gonzalez, Zahra Tabrizi, Renata Zukanovich Funchal, Neutrino Trident Scattering at Near Detectors, JHEP 01 (2019) 119, doi:10.1007/JHEP01(2019)119,1807.10973

    Peter Ballett, Matheus Hostert, Silvia Pascoli, Yuber F . Perez-Gonzalez, Zahra Tabrizi, Renata Zukanovich Funchal, Neutrino Trident Scattering at Near Detectors, JHEP 01 (2019) 119, doi:10.1007/JHEP01(2019)119,1807.10973

    2019 arXiv

  60. [69]

    Wolfgang Altmannshofer, Stefania Gori, Justo Mart ´ın-Albo, Alexandre Sousa, Michael Wallbank, Neutrino Tridents at DUNE, Phys. Rev. D 100 (11) (2019) 115029, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.100.115029,1902.06765

    2019 arXiv

  61. [70]

    Rhorry Gauld, Precise predictions for multi-TeV and PeV energy neutrino scattering rates, Phys. Rev. D 100 (9) (2019) 091301, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.100.091301,1905.03792

    2019 arXiv

  62. [71]

    Beacom, Neutrino-nucleus cross sections for W-boson and trident production, Phys

    Bei Zhou, John F . Beacom, Neutrino-nucleus cross sections for W-boson and trident production, Phys. Rev. D 101 (3) (2020) 036011, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.101.036011,1910.08090

    2020 arXiv

  63. [72]

    Beacom, W-boson and trident production in TeV–PeV neutrino observatories, Phys

    Bei Zhou, John F . Beacom, W-boson and trident production in TeV–PeV neutrino observatories, Phys. Rev. D 101 (3) (2020) 036010, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.101.036010,1910.10720

    2020 arXiv

  64. [74]

    Innes Bigaran, P . S. Bhupal Dev, Diego Lopez Gutierrez, Pedro A. N. Machado, Tau Tridents at Accelerator Neutrino Facilities (2024), 2406.20067

    2024 arXiv

  65. [75]

    Goncalves, Diego R

    Reinaldo Francener, Victor P . Goncalves, Diego R. Gratieri, Neutrino trident scattering at the LHC energy regime, Eur. Phys. J. C 84 (9) (2024) 923, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-13323-2,2406.13593

    2024 arXiv

  66. [76]

    Seckel, Neutrino photon reactions in astrophysics and cosmology, Phys

    D. Seckel, Neutrino photon reactions in astrophysics and cosmology, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80 (1998) 900–903, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.80.900, hep-ph/9709290

    1998 arXiv

  67. [77]

    Alikhanov, Hidden Glashow resonance in neutrino–nucleus collisions, Phys

    I. Alikhanov, Hidden Glashow resonance in neutrino–nucleus collisions, Phys. Lett. B 756 (2016) 247–253, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2016.03. 009,1503.08817

    2016 arXiv

  68. [78]

    Keping Xie, Bei Zhou, T. J. Hobbs (CTEQ-TEA), The photon content of the neutron, JHEP 04 (2024) 022, doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2024)022, 2305.10497

    2024 arXiv

  69. [79]

    Ansari, M

    V. Ansari, M. Sajjad Athar, H. Haider, I. Ruiz Simo, S. K. Singh, F . Zaidi, Deep inelastic (anti)neutrino–nucleus scattering, Eur. Phys. J. ST 230 (24) (2021) 4433–4448, doi:10.1140/epjs/s11734-021-00277-9,2106.14670

    2021 arXiv

  70. [80]

    Alessandro Candido, Alfonso Garcia, Giacomo Magni, Tanjona Rabemananjara, Juan Rojo, Roy Stegeman, Neutrino Structure Functions from GeV to EeV Energies, JHEP 05 (2023) 149, doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2023)149,2302.08527

    2023 arXiv

  71. [81]

    Keping Xie, Jun Gao, T. J. Hobbs, Daniel R. Stump, C. P . Yuan (CTEQ-TEA), High-energy neutrino deep inelastic scattering cross sections, Phys. Rev. D 109 (11) (2024) 113001, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.109.113001,2303.13607

    2024 arXiv

  72. [82]

    Yu Seon Jeong, Mary Hall Reno, Neutrino Cross Sections: Interface of shallow- and deep-inelastic scattering for collider neutrinos (2023), 2307.09241

    2023 arXiv

  73. [83]

    Philip L. R. Weigel, Janet M. Conrad, Alfonso Garcia-Soto, Cross sections and inelasticity distributions of high-energy neutrino deep inelastic scattering, Phys. Rev. D 111 (4) (2025) 043044, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.111.043044,2408.05866

    2025 arXiv

  74. [84]

    Silvia Ferrario Ravasio, Rhorry Gauld, Barbara J ¨ager, Alexander Karlberg, Giulia Zanderighi, An event generator for neutrino-induced Deep Inelastic Scattering and applications to neutrino astronomy (2024),2407.03894

    2024 arXiv

  75. [85]

    Melissa van Beekveld, Silvia Ferrario Ravasio, Eva Groenendijk, Peter Krack, Juan Rojo, Valentina Sch¨utze S´anchez, A phenomenological analysis of LHC neutrino scattering at NLO accuracy matched to parton showers, Eur. Phys. J. C 84 (11) (2024) 1175, doi:10.1140/epjc/ s10052-...

    2024 arXiv

  76. [86]

    Akimov, et al

    D. Akimov, et al. (COHERENT), Observation of Coherent Elastic Neutrino-Nucleus Scattering, Science 357 (6356) (2017) 1123–1126, doi:10.1126/science.aao0990,1708.01294

    2017 arXiv

  77. [87]

    Vedran Brdar, Andr ´e de Gouv ˆea, Pedro A. N. Machado, Ryan Plestid, Resonances inν¯e-e- scattering below a TeV, Phys. Rev. D 105 (9) (2022) 093004, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.105.093004,2112.03283

    2022 arXiv

  78. [88]

    Ryan Plestid, Bei Zhou, Final state radiation from high and ultrahigh energy neutrino interactions (2024),2403.07984

    2024 arXiv

  79. [89]

    Neutrino Physics and Astrophysics at Colliders15

    Markus Ackermann, et al., High-energy and ultra-high-energy neutrinos: A Snowmass white paper, JHEAp 36 (2022) 55–110, doi: 10.1016/j.jheap.2022.08.001,2203.08096. Neutrino Physics and Astrophysics at Colliders15

    2022 arXiv

  80. [90]

    Giovanni De Lellis, Pasquale Migliozzi, Pietro Santorelli, Charm physics with neutrinos, Phys. Rept. 399 (2004) 227–320, doi:10.1016/j. physrep.2005.02.001, [Erratum: Phys.Rept. 411, 323–324 (2005)]

    2004 doi

  81. [91]

    Tie-Jiun Hou, et al., New CTEQ global analysis of quantum chromodynamics with high-precision data from the LHC, Phys. Rev. D 103 (1) (2021) 014013, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.103.014013,1912.10053

    2021 arXiv

  82. [92]

    Nocera, Juan Rojo, Maria Ubiali, The Strangest Proton?, Eur

    Ferran Faura, Shayan Iranipour, Emanuele R. Nocera, Juan Rojo, Maria Ubiali, The Strangest Proton?, Eur. Phys. J. C 80 (12) (2020) 1168, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-020-08749-3,2009.00014

    2020 arXiv

  83. [93]

    Beacom, Dimuons in neutrino telescopes: New predictions and first search in IceCube, Phys

    Bei Zhou, John F . Beacom, Dimuons in neutrino telescopes: New predictions and first search in IceCube, Phys. Rev. D 105 (9) (2022) 093005, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.105.093005,2110.02974

    2022 arXiv

  84. [94]

    (FASER), FASER’s physics reach for long-lived particles, Phys

    Akitaka Ariga, et al. (FASER), FASER’s physics reach for long-lived particles, Phys. Rev. D 99 (9) (2019) 095011, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD. 99.095011,1811.12522

    2019 arXiv

  85. [95]

    Kingman Cheung, Thong T. Q. Nguyen, C. J. Ouseph, Leptoquark search at the Forward Physics Facility, Phys. Rev. D 108 (3) (2023) 036014, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.108.036014,2302.05461

    2023 arXiv

  86. [96]

    (FASER), Search for dark photons with the FASER detector at the LHC, Phys

    Henso Abreu, et al. (FASER), Search for dark photons with the FASER detector at the LHC, Phys. Lett. B 848 (2024) 138378, doi: 10.1016/j.physletb.2023.138378,2308.05587

    2024

  87. [97]

    Roshan Mammen Abraham, et al. (FASER), Shining light on the dark sector: search for axion-like particles and other new physics in photonic final states with FASER, JHEP 01 (2025) 199, doi:10.1007/JHEP01(2025)199,2410.10363

    2025 arXiv

  88. [98]

    Feng, Max Fieg, Felix Kling, Jinmian Li, Junle Pei, Tanjona R

    Roshan Mammen Abraham, Jyotismita Adhikary, Jonathan L. Feng, Max Fieg, Felix Kling, Jinmian Li, Junle Pei, Tanjona R. Rabemanan- jara, Juan Rojo, Sebastian Trojanowski, FPF@FCC: Neutrino, QCD, and BSM Physics Opportunities with Far-Forward Experiments at a 100 TeV Proton Coll...

    2024 arXiv

  89. [99]

    Ahmed Ismail, Roshan Mammen Abraham, Felix Kling, Neutral current neutrino interactions at FASERν, Phys. Rev. D 103 (5) (2021) 056014, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.103.056014,2012.10500

    2021 arXiv

  90. [100]

    Adam Falkowski, Mart ´ın Gonz ´alez-Alonso, Joachim Kopp, Y otam Soreq, Zahra Tabrizi, EFT at FASERν, JHEP 10 (2021) 086, doi: 10.1007/JHEP10(2021)086,2105.12136

    2021 arXiv

  91. [101]

    Felix Kling, Toni M ¨akel¨a, Sebastian Trojanowski, Investigating the fluxes and physics potential of LHC neutrino experiments, Phys. Rev. D 108 (9) (2023) 095020, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.108.095020,2309.10417

    2023 arXiv

  92. [102]

    M. G. Aartsen, et al. (IceCube), Evidence for High-Energy Extraterrestrial Neutrinos at the IceCube Detector, Science 342 (2013) 1242856, doi:10.1126/science.1242856,1311.5238

    2013 arXiv

  93. [103]

    Nicholas Senno, Kohta Murase, Peter Meszaros, Choked Jets and Low-Luminosity Gamma-Ray Bursts as Hidden Neutrino Sources, Phys. Rev. D 93 (8) (2016) 083003, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.083003,1512.08513

    2016 arXiv

  94. [104]

    Nicholas Senno, Kohta Murase, Peter M ´esz´aros, Constraining high-energy neutrino emission from choked jets in stripped-envelope supernovae, JCAP 1801 (2018) 025, doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2018/01/025,1706.02175

    2018 arXiv

  95. [105]

    Arman Esmaili, Kohta Murase, Constraining high-energy neutrinos from choked-jet supernovae with IceCube high-energy starting events, JCAP 1812 (2018) 008, doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2018/12/008,1809.09610

    2018 arXiv

  96. [106]

    Po-Wen Chang, Bei Zhou, Kohta Murase, Marc Kamionkowski, High-energy neutrinos from choked-jet supernovae: Searches and impli- cations, Phys. Rev. D 109 (10) (2024) 103041, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.109.103041,2210.03088

    2024 arXiv

  97. [107]

    Abbasi, et al

    R. Abbasi, et al. (IceCube), Constraining High-energy Neutrino Emission from Supernovae with IceCube, Astrophys. J. Lett. 949 (1) (2023) L12, doi:10.3847/2041-8213/acd2c9,2303.03316

    2023

  98. [108]

    T. K. Gaisser, M. Honda, Flux of atmospheric neutrinos, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 52 (2002) 153–199, doi:10.1146/annurev.nucl.52.050102. 090645,hep-ph/0203272. [109]https://icecube.wisc.edu/

    2002 arXiv

  99. [110]

    Adrian-Martinez, et al

    S. Adrian-Martinez, et al. (KM3Net), Letter of intent for KM3NeT 2.0, J. Phys. G 43 (8) (2016) 084001, doi:10.1088/0954-3899/43/8/084001, 1601.07459

    2016 arXiv

  100. [111]

    V. A. Allakhverdyan, et al., Deep-Water Neutrino Telescope in Lake Baikal, Phys. At. Nucl. 84 (9) (2021) 1600–1609, doi:10.1134/ S1063778821090064

    2021

  101. [112]

    M. G. Aartsen, et al. (IceCube-Gen2), IceCube-Gen2: the window to the extreme Universe, J. Phys. G 48 (6) (2021) 060501, doi: 10.1088/1361-6471/abbd48,2008.04323. [113]https://icecube-gen2.wisc.edu/science/publications/TDR/

    2021

  102. [114]

    (P-ONE), The Pacific Ocean Neutrino Experiment, Nature Astron

    Matteo Agostini, et al. (P-ONE), The Pacific Ocean Neutrino Experiment, Nature Astron. 4 (10) (2020) 913–915, doi:10.1038/ s41550-020-1182-4,2005.09493

    2020 arXiv

  103. [115]

    Z. P . Y e, et al., A multi-cubic-kilometre neutrino telescope in the western Pacific Ocean, Nature Astron. 7 (12) (2023) 1497–1505, doi: 10.1038/s41550-023-02087-6

    2023 doi

  104. [116]

    Tian-Qi Huang, Zhen Cao, Mingjun Chen, Jiali Liu, Zike Wang, Xiaohao Y ou, Ying Qi, Proposal for the High Energy Neutrino Telescope, PoS ICRC2023 (2023) 1080, doi:10.22323/1.444.1080

    2023 doi

  105. [117]

    Huiming Zhang, Yudong Cui, Yunlei Huang, Sujie Lin, Yihan Liu, Zijian Qiu, Chengyu Shao, Yihan Shi, Caijin Xie, Lili Y ang, A proposed deep sea Neutrino Observatory in the Nanhai, Astropart. Phys. 171 (2025) 103123, doi:10.1016/j.astropartphys.2025.103123,2408.05122

    2025

  106. [118]

    Max Fieg, Felix Kling, Holger Schulz, Torbj ¨orn Sj¨ostrand, Tuning Pythia for Forward Physics Experiments (2023),2309.08604

    2023 arXiv

  107. [119]

    Dennis Soldin (EAS-MSU, IceCube, KASCADE-Grande, NEVOD-DECOR, Pierre Auger, SUGAR, Telescope Array, Y akutsk EAS Array), Update on the Combined Analysis of Muon Measurements from Nine Air Shower Experiments, PoS ICRC2021 (2021) 349, doi:10.22323/ 1.395.0349,2108.08341

    2021 arXiv

  108. [120]

    Farrar, Jeffrey D

    Glennys R. Farrar, Jeffrey D. Allen, A new physical phenomenon in ultra-high energy collisions, EPJ Web Conf. 53 (2013) 07007, doi: 10.1051/epjconf/20135307007,1307.2322

    2013

  109. [121]

    Anchordoqui, Haim Goldberg, Thomas J

    Luis A. Anchordoqui, Haim Goldberg, Thomas J. Weiler, Strange fireball as an explanation of the muon excess in Auger data, Phys. Rev. D 95 (6) (2017) 063005, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.95.063005,1612.07328

    2017 arXiv

  110. [122]

    Sebastian Baur, Hans Dembinski, Matias Perlin, Tanguy Pierog, Ralf Ulrich, Klaus Werner, Core-corona effect in hadron collisions and muon production in air showers, Phys. Rev. D 107 (9) (2023) 094031, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.107.094031,1902.09265

    2023 arXiv

  111. [123]

    Anchordoqui, Carlos Garc ´ıa Canal, Sergio J

    Luis A. Anchordoqui, Carlos Garc ´ıa Canal, Sergio J. Sciutto, Jorge F . Soriano, Through the looking-glass with ALICE into the quark-gluon plasma: A new test for hadronic interaction models used in air shower simulations, Phys. Lett. B 810 (2020) 135837, doi:10.1016/j.physlet...

    2020

  112. [124]

    Dembinski, Ralf Ulrich, Klaus Werner, Collective Hadronization and Air Showers: Can LHC Data Solve the Muon Puzzle ?, PoS ICRC2019 (2020) 387, doi:10.22323/1.358.0387

    Tanguy Pierog, Sebastian Baur, Hans P . Dembinski, Ralf Ulrich, Klaus Werner, Collective Hadronization and Air Showers: Can LHC Data Solve the Muon Puzzle ?, PoS ICRC2019 (2020) 387, doi:10.22323/1.358.0387

    2020 doi

  113. [125]

    Ostapchenko, QGSJET -II: physics, recent improvements, and results for air showers, EPJ Web Conf

    S. Ostapchenko, QGSJET -II: physics, recent improvements, and results for air showers, EPJ Web Conf. 52 (2013) 02001, doi:10.1051/ epjconf/20125202001. 16Neutrino Physics and Astrophysics at Colliders

    2013

  114. [126]

    Gaisser, Todor Stanev, Hadronic interaction model Sibyll 2.3d and extensive air showers, Phys

    Felix Riehn, Ralph Engel, Anatoli Fedynitch, Thomas K. Gaisser, Todor Stanev, Hadronic interaction model Sibyll 2.3d and extensive air showers, Phys. Rev. D 102 (6) (2020) 063002, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.102.063002,1912.03300

    2020 arXiv

  115. [127]

    A Fedynitch, R Engel, Revision of the high energy hadronic interaction models PHOJET/DPMJET -III (2015), URLhttps://cds.cern.ch/ record/2115393

    2015

  116. [128]

    Anchordoqui, Carlos Garcia Canal, Felix Kling, Sergio J

    Luis A. Anchordoqui, Carlos Garcia Canal, Felix Kling, Sergio J. Sciutto, Jorge F . Soriano, An explanation of the muon puzzle of ultrahigh- energy cosmic rays and the role of the Forward Physics Facility for model improvement, JHEAp 34 (2022) 19–32, doi:10.1016/j.jheap.2022. ...

    2022 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.