pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.20951 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-22 · ✦ hep-ph · hep-ex

Recognition: unknown

Sharpening New Physics Searches in Neutrino Oscillations with DUNE-PRISM

Josu Hern\'andez-Garc\'ia , Jacobo L\'opez-Pav\'on , Salvador Urrea
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-09 23:36 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph hep-ex
keywords neutrino oscillationsDUNEPRISM techniquenon-unitaritysterile neutrinossystematic uncertaintieslong-baseline experimentsoff-axis measurements
0
0 comments X

The pith

The PRISM technique allows DUNE to recover sensitivity to non-unitarity and sterile neutrinos despite large systematic uncertainties.

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

Upcoming neutrino experiments like DUNE are limited by uncertainties in neutrino flux predictions and neutrino-nucleus cross sections, which can hide small distortions from new physics such as non-unitary mixing or sterile neutrinos. The paper demonstrates that the PRISM method, by taking data at several off-axis detector positions, supplies a data-driven way to constrain and shrink those uncertainties. With this approach the sensitivity to new physics signals in the electron and muon sectors returns to the level that would be achieved if the spectral uncertainties were already small. The gains are smaller for the tau sector because most off-axis flux sits below the tau production threshold. The authors also release higher-statistics flux files for multiple off-axis angles.

Core claim

PRISM mitigates the impact of large systematic uncertainties in DUNE by exploiting measurements at multiple off-axis angles, thereby restoring the experiment's sensitivity to non-unitary neutrino mixing and sterile neutrino scenarios in the electron and muon sectors to the level obtained with small spectral uncertainties.

What carries the argument

The PRISM (Precision Reaction Independent Spectrum Measurement) technique, which uses neutrino flux measurements at multiple off-axis angles to derive data-driven constraints on flux and cross-section systematics.

If this is right

  • Sensitivity to non-unitarity in the electron and muon sectors is restored to near the level achievable with minimal uncertainties.
  • Sterile neutrino searches in the electron and muon sectors regain comparable reach.
  • Improvement remains marginal in the tau sector because off-axis fluxes lie mostly below the tau production threshold.
  • Higher-statistics neutrino and antineutrino flux predictions for multiple off-axis angles are now available.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same multi-position strategy could be adapted to other long-baseline experiments facing similar flux and cross-section uncertainties.
  • Global fits combining DUNE-PRISM data with other oscillation results may yield tighter limits on sterile neutrino mixing angles.
  • If off-axis modeling uncertainties prove controllable, PRISM could be combined with additional near-detector techniques to further extend new-physics reach.

Load-bearing premise

Measurements at different off-axis angles supply a robust data-driven handle on flux and cross-section uncertainties without introducing new uncontrolled errors from off-axis flux modeling or detector response.

What would settle it

An analysis of real or simulated DUNE-PRISM data in which the post-constraint systematic uncertainty remains large or the projected sensitivity to non-unitarity or sterile neutrinos does not improve to the level claimed.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.20951 by Jacobo L\'opez-Pav\'on, Josu Hern\'andez-Garc\'ia, Salvador Urrea.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Neutrino fluxes at the DUNE Near Detector (ND-LAr) for various off-axis angles, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Sensitivity to the off-diagonal non-unitarity parameters [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Expected sensitivity to sterile-neutrino disappearance channels assuming a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Expected sensitivity to sterile neutrinos from the combination of appearance and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Neutrino fluxes at the DUNE Near Detector (ND-LAr) for various off-axis angles, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Sensitivity to the off-diagonal non-unitarity parameters [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Expected sensitivity to sterile-neutrino appearance channels assuming a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_7.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Upcoming long-baseline neutrino oscillation experiments such as DUNE aim to achieve unprecedented precision, but their physics reach is ultimately constrained by systematic uncertainties in neutrino flux predictions and neutrino-nucleus cross sections. These limitations are especially critical for new-physics searches in neutrino oscillations at the near detector, including non-unitarity and sterile neutrinos, where the signal manifests as small distortions in the energy spectrum and is therefore highly sensitive to spectral uncertainties. The PRISM (Precision Reaction Independent Spectrum Measurement) technique offers a robust strategy to mitigate these effects by exploiting measurements at multiple off-axis angles, effectively providing a data-driven handle to reduce systematics. In this work, we demonstrate that PRISM can significantly reduce the impact of large systematic uncertainties, restoring sensitivity to non-unitarity and sterile neutrino scenarios in the electron and muon sectors to a level comparable to that obtained with small spectral uncertainties. We also include the results for the $\tau$ sector with PRISM; however, in this case, since the majority of the flux measured at off-axis angles lies below the $\tau$ production threshold, we find the improvement to be marginal. As part of this work, we have obtained neutrino and antineutrino fluxes for different off-axis angles with higher statistics than those provided by the DUNE collaboration. We make available these fluxes as auxiliary material to this manuscript.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript investigates the use of the PRISM (Precision Reaction Independent Spectrum Measurement) technique at the DUNE near detector to mitigate large systematic uncertainties in neutrino flux and cross-section predictions for new-physics searches in neutrino oscillations. By exploiting data at multiple off-axis angles, the authors claim that PRISM restores sensitivity to non-unitarity and sterile-neutrino scenarios in the electron and muon sectors to levels comparable to those achievable with small spectral uncertainties. Improvement in the tau sector is reported as marginal because most off-axis flux lies below the tau production threshold. The work also computes and releases higher-statistics neutrino and antineutrino fluxes at various off-axis angles as auxiliary material.

Significance. If the central claim holds, the result would meaningfully strengthen DUNE's reach for new-physics searches by providing a practical, data-driven route to control flux and cross-section systematics that currently limit spectral-distortion analyses. The public release of higher-statistics off-axis fluxes is a concrete strength that supports reproducibility and community follow-up studies.

major comments (2)
  1. [PRISM implementation and flux modeling sections] The load-bearing assumption that multi-angle off-axis measurements supply a purely data-driven constraint on flux and cross-section systematics (without injecting new uncontrolled errors) requires explicit validation. The angle-dependent spectra are still generated from beamline simulations (horn focusing, target geometry, decay pipe); any residual shape or normalization uncertainties in these inputs could correlate with the new-physics spectral distortions being searched for, reducing the effective systematic reduction below the claimed level. This must be demonstrated with dedicated uncertainty propagation or decorrelation studies.
  2. [Results and sensitivity analysis sections] The abstract states that PRISM restores sensitivity 'to a level comparable to that obtained with small spectral uncertainties' in the electron and muon sectors. A quantitative comparison (e.g., via tabulated sensitivity metrics or overlaid curves) between the PRISM case, the large-systematics baseline, and the small-spectral-uncertainty ideal case is needed to substantiate the 'comparable' claim and to assess how close the restoration actually comes.
minor comments (2)
  1. The marginal improvement in the tau sector is noted, but a brief discussion of how the combined e/μ/τ sensitivity is affected when the tau channel contributes little would help readers evaluate the overall new-physics reach.
  2. Clarify the exact factor by which the released off-axis fluxes improve statistics relative to the DUNE collaboration's public fluxes.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their positive assessment of our manuscript and for the constructive comments that help strengthen the presentation of the PRISM method and its impact on new-physics sensitivities. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript accordingly.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [PRISM implementation and flux modeling sections] The load-bearing assumption that multi-angle off-axis measurements supply a purely data-driven constraint on flux and cross-section systematics (without injecting new uncontrolled errors) requires explicit validation. The angle-dependent spectra are still generated from beamline simulations (horn focusing, target geometry, decay pipe); any residual shape or normalization uncertainties in these inputs could correlate with the new-physics spectral distortions being searched for, reducing the effective systematic reduction below the claimed level. This must be demonstrated with dedicated uncertainty propagation or decorrelation studies.

    Authors: We agree that explicit validation of the residual impact from beamline simulation uncertainties is necessary to substantiate the data-driven nature of the PRISM constraints. Although the nominal off-axis spectra in our studies are generated from beamline simulations, the PRISM technique uses the multi-angle data to fit and constrain flux and cross-section parameters directly. In the revised manuscript we have added a dedicated subsection in the PRISM implementation section that propagates uncertainties in key beamline parameters (horn focusing, target geometry, decay pipe) and demonstrates through decorrelation studies that the multi-angle measurements reduce their correlation with new-physics spectral distortions to a level that preserves the reported sensitivity restoration in the electron and muon sectors. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Results and sensitivity analysis sections] The abstract states that PRISM restores sensitivity 'to a level comparable to that obtained with small spectral uncertainties' in the electron and muon sectors. A quantitative comparison (e.g., via tabulated sensitivity metrics or overlaid curves) between the PRISM case, the large-systematics baseline, and the small-spectral-uncertainty ideal case is needed to substantiate the 'comparable' claim and to assess how close the restoration actually comes.

    Authors: We concur that a quantitative comparison is required to support the 'comparable' claim. The revised manuscript now includes a new table in the results section reporting explicit sensitivity metrics (90% CL exclusion limits on non-unitarity parameters and sterile-neutrino mixing angles) for the three cases: large systematics without PRISM, PRISM, and the ideal small-spectral-uncertainty scenario. We have also added overlaid sensitivity curves in the relevant figures for the electron and muon sectors to allow direct visual assessment of how closely the PRISM results approach the small-uncertainty case. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; central claim rests on independent flux simulations

full rationale

The paper demonstrates PRISM's ability to mitigate flux and cross-section systematics for new-physics searches by using measurements at multiple off-axis angles. This relies on newly computed higher-statistics neutrino/antineutrino fluxes (provided as auxiliary material) and standard oscillation physics, not on re-deriving or fitting the target sensitivities from the same data. No load-bearing self-citations, self-definitional steps, or fitted inputs renamed as predictions appear in the derivation chain. The result is self-contained against external simulation benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only; limited visibility into internal parameters. The approach assumes standard neutrino oscillation formalism and DUNE beam models as external inputs.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Off-axis angle variations provide independent spectral information sufficient to constrain flux and cross-section systematics without new dominant uncertainties.
    Invoked as the core strategy for mitigating systematics in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5550 in / 1265 out tokens · 20414 ms · 2026-05-09T23:36:51.400685+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

47 extracted references · 35 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Minkowski,µ→eγat a Rate of One Out of10 9 Muon Decays?,Phys

    P. Minkowski,µ→eγat a Rate of One Out of10 9 Muon Decays?,Phys. Lett. B67 (1977) 421–428

    1977

  2. [2]

    R. N. Mohapatra and G. Senjanovic,Neutrino Mass and Spontaneous Parity Nonconservation,Phys. Rev. Lett.44(1980) 912

    1980

  3. [3]

    Yanagida,Horizontal gauge symmetry and masses of neutrinos,Conf

    T. Yanagida,Horizontal gauge symmetry and masses of neutrinos,Conf. Proc. C 7902131(1979) 95–99

    1979

  4. [5]

    G. C. Branco, W. Grimus, and L. Lavoura,The Seesaw Mechanism in the Presence of a Conserved Lepton Number,Nucl. Phys. B312(1989) 492–508

    1989

  5. [6]

    Kersten and A

    J. Kersten and A. Y. Smirnov,Right-Handed Neutrinos at CERN LHC and the 22 Mechanism of Neutrino Mass Generation,Phys. Rev. D76(2007) 073005, [arXiv:0705.3221]

    work page arXiv 2007

  6. [7]

    Abada, C

    A. Abada, C. Biggio, F. Bonnet, M. B. Gavela, and T. Hambye,Low energy effects of neutrino masses,JHEP12(2007) 061, [arXiv:0707.4058]

    work page arXiv 2007

  7. [8]

    Moffat, S

    K. Moffat, S. Pascoli, and C. Weiland,Equivalence between massless neutrinos and lepton number conservation in fermionic singlet extensions of the Standard Model, arXiv:1712.07611

    work page arXiv

  8. [9]

    R. N. Mohapatra and J. W. F. Valle,Neutrino Mass and Baryon Number Nonconservation in Superstring Models,Phys. Rev. D34(1986) 1642

    1986

  9. [10]

    M. C. Gonzalez-Garcia and J. W. F. Valle,Fast Decaying Neutrinos and Observable Flavor Violation in a New Class of Majoron Models,Phys. Lett. B216(1989) 360–366

    1989

  10. [11]

    M. B. Gavela, T. Hambye, D. Hernandez, and P. Hernandez,Minimal Flavour Seesaw Models,JHEP09(2009) 038, [arXiv:0906.1461]

    work page arXiv 2009

  11. [12]

    Bernabéu, A

    J. Bernabéu, A. Santamaria, J. Vidal, A. Mendez, and J. Valle,Lepton flavour non-conservation at high energies in a superstring inspired standard model,Physics Letters B187(1987), no. 3 303–308

    1987

  12. [13]

    R. N. Mohapatra,Mechanism for Understanding Small Neutrino Mass in Superstring Theories,Phys. Rev. Lett.56(1986) 561–563

    1986

  13. [14]

    E. K. Akhmedov, M. Lindner, E. Schnapka, and J. W. F. Valle,Left-right symmetry breaking in NJL approach,Phys. Lett. B368(1996) 270–280, [hep-ph/9507275]

    work page arXiv 1996

  14. [15]

    S. M. Barr,A Different seesaw formula for neutrino masses,Phys. Rev. Lett.92(2004) 101601, [hep-ph/0309152]

    work page arXiv 2004

  15. [16]

    Malinsky, J

    M. Malinsky, J. C. Romao, and J. W. F. Valle,Novel supersymmetricSO(10)seesaw mechanism,Phys. Rev. Lett.95(2005) 161801, [hep-ph/0506296]

    work page arXiv 2005

  16. [17]

    Blennow, E

    M. Blennow, E. Fernández-Martínez, J. Hernández-García, J. López-Pavón, X. Marcano, and D. Naredo-Tuero,Bounds on lepton non-unitarity and heavy neutrino mixing,JHEP08(2023) 030, [arXiv:2306.01040]

    work page arXiv 2023

  17. [18]

    Blennow, P

    M. Blennow, P. Coloma, E. Fernandez-Martinez, J. Hernandez-Garcia, and J. Lopez-Pavon,Non-Unitarity, sterile neutrinos, and Non-Standard neutrino Interactions,JHEP04(2017) 153, [arXiv:1609.08637]. [22]LSNDCollaboration, A. Aguilar-Arevalo et al.,Evidence for neutrino oscillations from the observation of¯νe appearance in a¯νµ beam,Phys. Rev. D64(2001) 1120...

    work page arXiv 2017

  18. [19]

    Antusch, C

    S. Antusch, C. Biggio, E. Fernandez-Martinez, M. B. Gavela, and J. Lopez-Pavon, Unitarity of the Leptonic Mixing Matrix,JHEP10(2006) 084, [hep-ph/0607020]

    work page arXiv 2006

  19. [20]

    O. G. Miranda, P. Pasquini, M. Tórtola, and J. W. F. Valle,Exploring the Potential of Short-Baseline Physics at Fermilab,Phys. Rev. D97(2018), no. 9 095026, [arXiv:1802.02133]

    work page arXiv 2018

  20. [21]

    Coloma, J

    P. Coloma, J. López-Pavón, S. Rosauro-Alcaraz, and S. Urrea,New physics from oscillations at the DUNE near detector, and the role of systematic uncertainties,JHEP 08(2021) 065, [arXiv:2105.11466]. [34]nuPRISMCollaboration, S. Bhadra et al.,Letter of Intent to Construct a nuPRISM Detector in the J-PARC Neutrino Beamline,arXiv:1412.3086

    work page arXiv 2021

  21. [22]

    Hasnip,DUNE-PRISM - a new method to measure neutrino oscillations

    C. Hasnip,DUNE-PRISM - a new method to measure neutrino oscillations. PhD thesis, Oxford University, Oxford U., 2023

    2023

  22. [23]

    Gehrlein, J

    J. Gehrlein, J. Kopp, M. MacMahon, and G. A. Parker,A LENS on DUNE-PRISM: Characterizing a Neutrino Beam with Off-Axis Measurements,arXiv:2510.09546. [37]DUNECollaboration, S. Abbaslu et al.,Towards mono-energetic virtualνbeam cross-section measurements: A feasibility study ofν-Ar interaction analysis with DUNE-PRISM,arXiv:2509.07664

    work page arXiv

  23. [24]

    Yanagida,Horizontal Symmetry and Mass of the Top Quark,Phys

    T. Yanagida,Horizontal Symmetry and Mass of the Top Quark,Phys. Rev. D20(1979) 2986

    1979

  24. [25]

    Complex Spinors and Unified Theories

    M. Gell-Mann, P. Ramond, and R. Slansky,Complex Spinors and Unified Theories, Conf. Proc. C790927(1979) 315–321, [arXiv:1306.4669]

    work page Pith review arXiv 1979

  25. [26]

    Bernabeu, A

    J. Bernabeu, A. Santamaria, J. Vidal, A. Mendez, and J. W. F. Valle,Lepton Flavor Nonconservation at High-Energies in a Superstring Inspired Standard Model,Phys. Lett. B187(1987) 303–308

    1987

  26. [27]

    Y. Cai, J. Herrero-García, M. A. Schmidt, A. Vicente, and R. R. Volkas,From the trees to the forest: a review of radiative neutrino mass models,Front. in Phys.5(2017) 63, [arXiv:1706.08524]

    work page arXiv 2017

  27. [28]

    S. F. King,Neutrino mass models,Rept. Prog. Phys.67(2004) 107–158, [hep-ph/0310204]

    work page arXiv 2004

  28. [29]

    S. M. Boucenna, S. Morisi, and J. W. F. Valle,The low-scale approach to neutrino masses,Adv. High Energy Phys.2014(2014) 831598, [arXiv:1404.3751]

    work page arXiv 2014

  29. [30]

    The Reactor Antineutrino Anomaly

    G. Mention, M. Fechner, T. Lasserre, T. A. Mueller, D. Lhuillier, M. Cribier, and A. Letourneau,The Reactor Antineutrino Anomaly,Phys. Rev. D83(2011) 073006, [arXiv:1101.2755]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2011

  30. [31]

    On the determination of anti-neutrino spectra from nuclear reactors,

    P. Huber,On the determination of anti-neutrino spectra from nuclear reactors,Phys. Rev. C84(2011) 024617, [arXiv:1106.0687]. [Erratum: Phys.Rev.C 85, 029901 (2012)]

    work page arXiv 2011

  31. [32]

    Blennow, P

    M. Blennow, P. Coloma, E. Fernández-Martínez, J. Hernández-García, J. López-Pavón, X. Marcano, D. Naredo-Tuero, and S. Urrea,Misconceptions in neutrino oscillations in 24 presence of non-unitary mixing,Nucl. Phys. B1017(2025) 116944, [arXiv:2502.19480]

    work page arXiv 2025

  32. [33]

    Broncano, M

    A. Broncano, M. B. Gavela, and E. E. Jenkins,The Effective Lagrangian for the seesaw model of neutrino mass and leptogenesis,Phys. Lett. B552(2003) 177–184, [hep-ph/0210271]. [Erratum: Phys.Lett.B 636, 332 (2006)]

    work page arXiv 2003

  33. [34]

    Fernandez-Martinez, M

    E. Fernandez-Martinez, M. B. Gavela, J. Lopez-Pavon, and O. Yasuda,CP-violation from non-unitary leptonic mixing,Phys. Lett. B649(2007) 427–435, [hep-ph/0703098]

    work page arXiv 2007

  34. [35]

    Langacker and D

    P. Langacker and D. London,Mixing Between Ordinary and Exotic Fermions,Phys. Rev. D38(1988) 886

    1988

  35. [36]

    Nardi, E

    E. Nardi, E. Roulet, and D. Tommasini,Limits on neutrino mixing with new heavy particles,Phys. Lett. B327(1994) 319–326, [hep-ph/9402224]

    work page arXiv 1994

  36. [37]

    Tommasini, G

    D. Tommasini, G. Barenboim, J. Bernabeu, and C. Jarlskog,Nondecoupling of heavy neutrinos and lepton flavor violation,Nucl. Phys. B444(1995) 451–467, [hep-ph/9503228]

    work page arXiv 1995

  37. [38]

    Alonso, M

    R. Alonso, M. Dhen, M. B. Gavela, and T. Hambye,Muon conversion to electron in nuclei in type-I seesaw models,JHEP01(2013) 118, [arXiv:1209.2679]

    work page arXiv 2013

  38. [39]

    Akhmedov, A

    E. Akhmedov, A. Kartavtsev, M. Lindner, L. Michaels, and J. Smirnov,Improving Electro-Weak Fits with TeV-scale Sterile Neutrinos,JHEP05(2013) 081, [arXiv:1302.1872]

    work page arXiv 2013

  39. [40]

    Antusch and O

    S. Antusch and O. Fischer,Non-unitarity of the leptonic mixing matrix: Present bounds and future sensitivities,JHEP10(2014) 094, [arXiv:1407.6607]

    work page arXiv 2014

  40. [41]

    Fernandez-Martinez, J

    E. Fernandez-Martinez, J. Hernandez-Garcia, J. Lopez-Pavon, and M. Lucente,Loop level constraints on Seesaw neutrino mixing,JHEP10(2015) 130, [arXiv:1508.03051]

    work page arXiv 2015

  41. [42]

    Fernandez-Martinez, J

    E. Fernandez-Martinez, J. Hernandez-Garcia, and J. Lopez-Pavon,Global constraints on heavy neutrino mixing,JHEP08(2016) 033, [arXiv:1605.08774]. [57]MicroBooNECollaboration, P. Abratenko et al.,Search for light sterile neutrinos with two neutrino beams at MicroBooNE,Nature648(2025), no. 8092 64–69, [arXiv:2512.07159]. [58]DUNECollaboration, B. Abi et al.,...

    work page arXiv 2016

  42. [43]

    Coloma, E

    P. Coloma, E. Fernández-Martínez, M. González-López, J. Hernández-García, and Z. Pavlovic,GeV-scale neutrinos: interactions with mesons and DUNE sensitivity,Eur. Phys. J. C81(2021), no. 1 78, [arXiv:2007.03701]

    work page arXiv 2021

  43. [44]

    Simulation of long-baseline neutrino oscillation experiments with GLoBES

    P. Huber, M. Lindner, and W. Winter,Simulation of long-baseline neutrino oscillation experiments with GLoBES (General Long Baseline Experiment Simulator),Comput. Phys. Commun.167(2005) 195, [hep-ph/0407333]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2005

  44. [45]

    New features in the simulation of neutrino oscillation experiments with GLoBES 3.0

    P. Huber, J. Kopp, M. Lindner, M. Rolinec, and W. Winter,New features in the simulation of neutrino oscillation experiments with GLoBES 3.0: General Long Baseline Experiment Simulator,Comput. Phys. Commun.177(2007) 432–438, [hep-ph/0701187]. [63]IceCubeCollaboration, M. G. Aartsen et al.,Searches for Sterile Neutrinos with the IceCube Detector,Phys. Rev. ...

    work page Pith review arXiv 2007

  45. [46]

    The GENIE Neutrino Monte Carlo Generator: Physics and User Manual

    C. Andreopoulos, C. Barry, S. Dytman, H. Gallagher, T. Golan, R. Hatcher, G. Perdue, and J. Yarba,The GENIE Neutrino Monte Carlo Generator: Physics and User Manual, arXiv:1510.05494. [76]GENIECollaboration, J. Tena-Vidal et al.,Neutrino-Nucleon Cross-Section Model Tuning in GENIE v3,arXiv:2104.09179

    work page Pith review arXiv

  46. [47]

    de Gouvˆ ea and K

    A. De Gouvêa, K. J. Kelly, G. V. Stenico, and P. Pasquini,Physics with Beam Tau-Neutrino Appearance at DUNE,Phys. Rev. D100(2019), no. 1 016004, [arXiv:1904.07265]

    work page arXiv 2019

  47. [48]

    J. Kopp, Z. Tabrizi, and S. Urrea,Effective Field Theory in Long-Baseline Neutrino Oscillation Experiments,arXiv:2509.21537. [79]Particle Data GroupCollaboration, P. Zyla et al.,Review of Particle Physics,PTEP 2020(2020), no. 8 083C01. 26

    work page arXiv 2020