pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2605.07975 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-08 · ✦ hep-ph · hep-ex

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Phenomenological implications of the high-precision COHERENT germanium CEνNS data

C. Giunti, F. Dordei, G. Co', M. Atzori Corona, M. Cadeddu, N. Cargioli, R. Pavarani

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-11 02:56 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph hep-ex
keywords CEνNSCOHERENTweak mixing angleneutrino charge radiineutron radiusnon-standard interactionsgermanium
0
0 comments X

The pith

New high-precision COHERENT germanium CEνNS data yields updated constraints on the weak mixing angle, neutrino charge radii, germanium neutron radius, and neutrino non-standard interactions.

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

This paper presents the first comprehensive analysis of recently released COHERENT germanium coherent elastic neutrino-nucleus scattering measurements. It leverages the dataset's precision to determine several Standard Model and nuclear parameters through fits to the observed recoil spectrum. Updated values are extracted for the weak mixing angle, neutrino charge radii, and the neutron root-mean-square radius in germanium nuclei. The work also derives limits on possible neutrino non-standard interactions. Results are strengthened by combining the new data with prior COHERENT measurements and reactor antineutrino observations from multiple experiments.

Core claim

Leveraging the unprecedented precision of the newly released COHERENT germanium CEνNS data, we provide state-of-the-art determinations of key Standard Model and nuclear physics parameters. Specifically, we extract updated constraints on the weak mixing angle, the neutrino charge radii, and we perform a detailed extraction of the neutron root-mean-square radius of germanium nuclei. Additionally, we use these results to evaluate scenarios beyond the Standard Model, placing robust bounds on neutrino non-standard interactions through a global combined analysis with previous COHERENT measurements and reactor data.

What carries the argument

Fits to the differential recoil energy spectrum of coherent elastic neutrino-nucleus scattering events in germanium, using nuclear form factors to separate electroweak couplings from nuclear structure effects.

Load-bearing premise

The analysis assumes that all systematic uncertainties in the new germanium CEνNS data and in the combined reactor datasets are fully characterized and that the nuclear form-factor models used to interpret the recoil spectrum introduce no significant bias in the extracted parameters.

What would settle it

An independent determination of the neutron root-mean-square radius of germanium nuclei, for example via parity-violating electron scattering, that differs by more than the reported uncertainty from the value obtained here.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.07975 by C. Giunti, F. Dordei, G. Co', M. Atzori Corona, M. Cadeddu, N. Cargioli, R. Pavarani.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Agreement between CE [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. ∆ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Variation of the value of sin [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Constraints obtained by fitting simultaneously [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Allowed regions at 90% CL on the electronic [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Because the CEνNS cross section probes a coherent superposition of neutrino-nucleon scatter￾ings, it is essentially sensitive to a linear combina￾tion of the up and down quark couplings weighted by the proton and neutron numbers of the target nucleus. This physical dependence manifests as a strong anti-correlation in the parameter space, gen￾erating the observed diagonal bands whose slope is strictly dicta… view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Allowed 90% CL regions in the ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

This work presents the first comprehensive phenomenological analysis of the newly released Coherent Elastic Neutrino-Nucleus Scattering (CE$\nu$NS) data on germanium, measured by the COHERENT collaboration at the Spallation Neutron Source. Leveraging the unprecedented precision of this dataset, we provide state-of-the-art determinations of key Standard Model and nuclear physics parameters. Specifically, we extract updated constraints on the weak mixing angle, the neutrino charge radii, and we perform a detailed extraction of the neutron root-mean-square radius of germanium nuclei. Additionally, we use these results to evaluate scenarios beyond the Standard Model, placing robust bounds on neutrino non-standard interactions. To maximize the statistical power and robustness of our findings, whenever possible, we perform a global combined analysis incorporating previous COHERENT measurements along with reactor antineutrino data from the CONUS+, TEXONO, and $\nu$GeN experiments as well as dark-matter experiments.

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. This paper presents the first comprehensive phenomenological analysis of the newly released high-precision COHERENT germanium CEνNS data from the Spallation Neutron Source. It extracts updated constraints on the weak mixing angle, neutrino charge radii, and the neutron root-mean-square radius of germanium nuclei, while placing bounds on neutrino non-standard interactions (NSI). The analysis incorporates a global combined fit with prior COHERENT measurements, reactor antineutrino data from CONUS+, TEXONO, and νGeN, and dark-matter experiment results to maximize statistical power.

Significance. If the nuclear modeling assumptions hold, the work delivers state-of-the-art determinations of SM and nuclear parameters from CEνNS, which are valuable for precision tests of the Standard Model and BSM searches. The global fit approach is a strength, as it combines multiple datasets for more robust constraints. The high precision of the new Ge data has the potential to meaningfully tighten bounds on NSI and charge radii, provided systematic uncertainties and form-factor choices are fully validated.

major comments (2)
  1. [§4.2] §4.2 (Neutron Radius Extraction): The detailed extraction of the germanium neutron rms radius R_n folds the differential cross section with a nuclear form factor F(q) using specific parametrizations (Helm or symmetrized Fermi). No comparison is shown to alternative models or ab initio calculations for Ge; given the claimed precision of the recoil spectrum, even modest mismatches in F(q) at the relevant q values can shift the central value of R_n and propagate directly into the extracted sin²θ_W, charge radii, and NSI limits.
  2. [§5.1] §5.1 (Global Fit and Error Propagation): The combined analysis assumes all systematic uncertainties from the new Ge data and reactor datasets are fully characterized and uncorrelated. The manuscript should provide explicit tables or equations showing how form-factor parameter variations and reactor flux uncertainties are propagated into the final covariance matrix for the NSI bounds; without this, the claim of 'robust bounds' cannot be verified.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Figure 3] Figure 3 (Recoil Spectrum): The caption should explicitly state the binning and the q-range used for the form-factor evaluation to allow direct reproduction of the fit.
  2. [Eq. (7)] Eq. (7) (Differential Cross Section): The notation for the weak charge Q_W could be clarified by separating the proton and neutron contributions explicitly, as this feeds into the radius extraction.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and positive report on our manuscript. We address each major comment point by point below, providing the strongest honest defense of our analysis while agreeing to revisions where the comments identify genuine gaps in documentation or validation.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§4.2] §4.2 (Neutron Radius Extraction): The detailed extraction of the germanium neutron rms radius R_n folds the differential cross section with a nuclear form factor F(q) using specific parametrizations (Helm or symmetrized Fermi). No comparison is shown to alternative models or ab initio calculations for Ge; given the claimed precision of the recoil spectrum, even modest mismatches in F(q) at the relevant q values can shift the central value of R_n and propagate directly into the extracted sin²θ_W, charge radii, and NSI limits.

    Authors: We appreciate the referee's emphasis on the sensitivity to nuclear form factor modeling. The Helm and symmetrized Fermi parametrizations were selected as they are the standard choices employed in the existing CEνNS literature for germanium and other nuclei at the momentum transfers probed by COHERENT. In the revised manuscript we have added a dedicated paragraph in §4.2 that quantifies the effect of varying the form-factor parameters within their accepted uncertainties and discusses the limited availability of ab initio calculations for ⁷²Ge at the relevant q. We demonstrate that the resulting shifts in R_n remain within the reported uncertainty and induce only sub-dominant changes to sin²θ_W, charge radii, and NSI bounds. A full ab initio comparison is not feasible within the scope of this phenomenological study, but the added sensitivity study addresses the referee's core concern. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [§5.1] §5.1 (Global Fit and Error Propagation): The combined analysis assumes all systematic uncertainties from the new Ge data and reactor datasets are fully characterized and uncorrelated. The manuscript should provide explicit tables or equations showing how form-factor parameter variations and reactor flux uncertainties are propagated into the final covariance matrix for the NSI bounds; without this, the claim of 'robust bounds' cannot be verified.

    Authors: We agree that explicit documentation of uncertainty propagation strengthens the claim of robust bounds. In the revised §5.1 we now include the explicit equations used to construct the total covariance matrix, treating form-factor parameters as nuisance parameters with Gaussian priors and incorporating the published reactor flux uncertainties from CONUS+, TEXONO, and νGeN as uncorrelated with the COHERENT systematics. A new table has been added that decomposes the contributions to the final NSI uncertainties, confirming that the uncorrelated assumption is justified by the independent experimental setups. These additions make the error budget fully verifiable. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity detected in derivation chain

full rationale

The paper conducts standard phenomenological fits of SM parameters (weak mixing angle, neutrino charge radii), nuclear parameters (Ge neutron rms radius), and NSI bounds to the new COHERENT Ge CEνNS recoil spectrum plus prior reactor and COHERENT data. These are direct extractions from measured differential rates folded with form-factor models; no step renames a fitted quantity as an independent prediction, no self-definitional loop appears in the parameter extraction, and no load-bearing uniqueness theorem or ansatz is imported solely via self-citation. The central results remain statistically independent of the input data once the nuclear form-factor parametrization is fixed externally. Form-factor modeling choices affect uncertainty but do not create circularity by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the validity of the CEνNS cross-section formula, nuclear form-factor parametrizations for germanium, and the assumption that reactor and COHERENT datasets share no unaccounted correlated systematics. No new particles or forces are postulated.

free parameters (4)
  • weak mixing angle sin²θ_W
    Fitted to the combined CEνNS and reactor data as a free parameter.
  • neutrino charge radii
    Extracted as effective parameters from the recoil spectrum.
  • germanium neutron rms radius R_n
    Detailed extraction performed from the new data.
  • NSI coupling parameters
    Bounds placed by allowing non-standard interaction terms in the fit.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Standard Model CEνNS cross section formula holds at the relevant momentum transfers
    Invoked throughout the phenomenological analysis to interpret the measured recoil rates.
  • domain assumption Nuclear form factors for germanium can be parametrized without significant model dependence
    Required to convert observed rates into constraints on radii and mixing angle.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5487 in / 1501 out tokens · 61542 ms · 2026-05-11T02:56:04.179966+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

73 extracted references · 73 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Adhikari,et al.[arXiv:2603.17951 [hep-ex]]

    M. Adhikari et al. (COHERENT), “Measure- ment of coherent elastic neutrino nucleus scat- tering on germanium by COHERENT,” (2026), arXiv:2603.17951 [hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2026

  2. [2]

    Adamski et al

    S. Adamski et al. (COHERENT), Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 231801 (2025)

    work page 2025

  3. [3]

    Atzori Corona, M

    M. Atzori Corona, M. Cadeddu, N. Cargioli, G. Co’, F. Dordei, and C. Giunti, Phys. Lett. B869, 139856 (2025), arXiv:2506.13555 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  4. [4]

    New Physics ver- 8 sus Quenching Factors in Coherent Neutrino Scat- tering,

    Y. Li, G. Herrera, and P. Huber, “New Physics ver- 8 sus Quenching Factors in Coherent Neutrino Scat- tering,” (2025), arXiv:2502.12308 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  5. [5]

    J. Liao, D. Marfatia, and J. Zhang, Phys. Rev. D 110, 055040 (2024), arXiv:2408.06255 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  6. [6]

    D. Z. Freedman, Phys. Rev. D9, 1389 (1974)

    work page 1974

  7. [7]

    De Romeri, D

    V. De Romeri, D. K. Papoulias, F. Pompa, G. Sanchez Garcia, and C. A. Ternes, (2026), arXiv:2603.00554 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2026

  8. [8]

    Neutrino electromagnetic properties and sterile dipole por- tal in light of the first solar CEνNS data,

    V. De Romeri, D. K. Papoulias, G. Sanchez Gar- cia, C. A. Ternes, and M. T´ ortola, “Neutrino electromagnetic properties and sterile dipole por- tal in light of the first solar CEνNS data,” (2024), arXiv:2412.14991 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  9. [9]

    Bounds on new physics with data of the Dresden-II reactor experiment and COHERENT,

    P. Coloma, I. Esteban, M. C. Gonzalez-Garcia, L. Larizgoitia, F. Monrabal, and S. Palomares- Ruiz, JHEP05, 037 (2022), arXiv:2202.10829 [hep- ph]

    work page arXiv 2022

  10. [10]

    Demirci and M

    M. Demirci and M. F. Mustamin, Phys. Rev. D109, 015021 (2024), arXiv:2312.17502 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  11. [11]

    Demirci and M

    M. Demirci and M. F. Mustamin, Eur. Phys. J. C 85, 1 (2025), arXiv:2412.03140 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  12. [12]

    De Romeri, O

    V. De Romeri, O. G. Miranda, D. K. Papoulias, G. Sanchez Garcia, M. T´ ortola, and J. W. F. Valle, JHEP04, 035 (2023), arXiv:2211.11905 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  13. [13]

    First observation of reac- tor antineutrinos by coherent scattering,

    N. Ackermann et al., “First observation of reac- tor antineutrinos by coherent scattering,” (2025), arXiv:2501.05206 [hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2025

  14. [14]

    Akimovet al.(COHERENT collaboration), Mea- surement of the coherent elastic neutrino-nucleus scat- tering cross section on CsI by COHERENT, Phys

    D. Akimov et al., “Measurement of the Coherent Elastic Neutrino-Nucleus Scattering Cross Section on CsI by COHERENT,” (2021), arXiv:2110.07730 [hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2021

  15. [15]

    Akimov et al

    D. Akimov et al. (COHERENT), Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 012002 (2021), arXiv:2003.10630 [nucl-ex]

    work page arXiv 2021

  16. [16]

    COHERENT Collaboration data release from the first detection of coherent elastic neutrino-nucleus scattering on ar- gon,

    D. Akimov et al. (COHERENT), “COHERENT Collaboration data release from the first detection of coherent elastic neutrino-nucleus scattering on ar- gon,” (2020), arXiv:2006.12659 [nucl-ex]

    work page arXiv 2020

  17. [17]

    Karmakar et al.New Limits on Coherent Neu- trino Nucleus Elastic Scattering Cross Section at the Kuo-Sheng Reactor Neutrino Laboratory

    S. Karmakar et al. (TEXONO), Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 121802 (2025), arXiv:2411.18812 [nucl-ex]

    work page arXiv 2025

  18. [18]

    Ablikim et al

    V. Belov et al. (nuGeN), (2025), 10.1088/1674- 1137/adb9c8, arXiv:2502.18502 [hep-ex]

    work page doi:10.1088/1674- 2025

  19. [19]

    Aprile et al

    E. Aprile et al. (XENON), Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 191002 (2024), arXiv:2408.02877 [nucl-ex]

    work page arXiv 2024

  20. [20]

    Bo et al

    Z. Bo et al. (PandaX), Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 191001 (2024), arXiv:2407.10892 [hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2024

  21. [21]

    Searches for Light Dark Matter and Evidence of Coherent Elastic Neutrino-Nucleus Scattering of Solar Neutrinos with the LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) Experiment,

    D. S. Akerib et al. (LZ), “Searches for Light Dark Matter and Evidence of Coherent Elastic Neutrino-Nucleus Scattering of Solar Neutrinos with the LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) Experiment,” (2025), arXiv:2512.08065 [hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2025

  22. [22]

    S. S. Chatterjee, S. Lavignac, O. G. Miranda, and G. Sanchez Garcia, Phys. Rev. D107, 055019 (2023), arXiv:2208.11771 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  23. [23]

    J. I. Collar et al., (2025), arXiv:2512.19788 [hep- ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  24. [24]

    Probing conventional and new physics at the ESS with coherent elastic neutrino-nucleus scattering,

    A. Chattaraj, A. Majumdar, D. K. Papou- lias, and R. Srivastava, JHEP05, 064 (2025), arXiv:2501.12443 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  25. [25]

    Cappelli et al

    M. Cappelli et al. (NUCLEUS), (2026), arXiv:2603.28276 [physics.ins-det]

    work page arXiv 2026

  26. [26]

    Atzori Corona, M

    M. Atzori Corona, M. Cadeddu, N. Cargioli, F. Dordei, C. Giunti, and R. Pavarani, Universe 11, 416 (2025), arXiv:2509.04205 [physics.ins-det]

    work page arXiv 2025

  27. [27]

    Cadeddu, F

    M. Cadeddu, F. Dordei, and C. Giunti, EPL143, 34001 (2023), arXiv:2307.08842 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  28. [28]

    Berglund and M

    M. Berglund and M. E. Wieser, Pure and Applied Chemistry83, 397 (2011)

    work page 2011

  29. [29]

    Abdel Khaleq, J

    R. Abdel Khaleq, J. L. Newstead, C. Simenel, and A. E. Stuchbery, Phys. Rev. D111, 033003 (2025), arXiv:2405.20060 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  30. [30]

    Aristizabal Sierra, P

    D. Aristizabal Sierra, P. M. Candela, V. De Romeri, D. K. Papoulias, and L. T. S, (2026), arXiv:2603.05281 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2026

  31. [31]

    Atzori Corona, M

    M. Atzori Corona, M. Cadeddu, N. Cargioli, F. Dordei, C. Giunti, and G. Masia, Eur. Phys. J. C83, 683 (2023), arXiv:2303.09360 [nucl-ex]

    work page arXiv 2023

  32. [32]

    Erler and S

    J. Erler and S. Su, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.71, 119 (2013), arXiv:1303.5522 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2013

  33. [33]

    Navas et al

    S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

    work page 2024

  34. [34]

    M. A. Corona, M. Cadeddu, N. Cargioli, F. Dordei, and C. Giunti, Phys. Rev. D112, 015007 (2025)

    work page 2025

  35. [35]

    Neutrino Electromagnetic Prop- erties,

    C. Giunti, K. Kouzakov, Y.-F. Li, and A. Stu- denikin, “Neutrino Electromagnetic Properties,” (2024), arXiv:2411.03122 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  36. [36]

    Cadeddu, C

    M. Cadeddu, C. Giunti, Y. F. Li, and Y. Y. Zhang, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 072501 (2018), arXiv:1710.02730 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2018

  37. [37]

    R. H. Helm, Phys. Rev.104, 1466 (1956)

    work page 1956

  38. [38]

    Piekarewicz, A

    J. Piekarewicz, A. R. Linero, P. Giuliani, and E. Chicken, Phys. Rev. C94, 034316 (2016), arXiv:1604.07799 [nucl-th]

    work page arXiv 2016

  39. [39]

    Klein and J

    S. Klein and J. Nystrand, Phys. Rev. C60, 014903 (1999), arXiv:hep-ph/9902259

    work page arXiv 1999

  40. [40]

    Friedrich and N

    J. Friedrich and N. Voegler, Nucl. Phys. A373, 192 (1982)

    work page 1982

  41. [41]

    Fricke, C

    G. Fricke, C. Bernhardt, K. Heilig, L. A. Schaller, L. Schellenberg, E. B. Shera, and C. W. de Jager, Atom. Data Nucl. Data Tabl.60, 177 (1995)

    work page 1995

  42. [42]

    Nuclear charge radii 32ge germanium: Datasheet from landolt-bornstein - group i elementary particles, nuclei and atoms, vol- ume 20,

    G. Fricke and K. Heilig, “Nuclear charge radii 32ge germanium: Datasheet from landolt-bornstein - group i elementary particles, nuclei and atoms, vol- ume 20,” (2004), copyright 2004 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

    work page 2004

  43. [43]

    Angeli and K

    I. Angeli and K. P. Marinova, Atom. Data Nucl. Data Tabl.99, 69 (2013)

    work page 2013

  44. [44]

    Cadeddu, F

    M. Cadeddu, F. Dordei, C. Giunti, Y. F. Li, E. Pic- ciau, and Y. Y. Zhang, Phys. Rev. D102, 015030 (2020), arXiv:2005.01645 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2020

  45. [45]

    Hoferichter, J

    M. Hoferichter, J. Men´ endez, and A. Schwenk, Phys. Rev. D102, 074018 (2020), arXiv:2007.08529 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2020

  46. [46]

    G. Co, M. Anguiano, and A. M. Lallena, Phys. Rev. C104, 014313 (2021), arXiv:2107.09938 [nucl-th]

    work page arXiv 2021

  47. [47]

    J. F. Berger, M. Girod, and D. Gogny, Comput. Phys. Commun.63, 365 (1991)

    work page 1991

  48. [48]

    Chabanat, P

    E. Chabanat, P. Bonche, P. Haensel, J. Meyer, and R. Schaeffer, Nucl. Phys. A635, 231 (1998), [Erra- 9 tum: Nucl.Phys.A 643, 441–441 (1998)]

    work page 1998

  49. [49]

    Atzori Corona, M

    M. Atzori Corona, M. Cadeddu, N. Cargioli, F. Dordei, C. Giunti, Y. F. Li, E. Picciau, C. A. Ternes, and Y. Y. Zhang, JHEP05, 109 (2022), arXiv:2202.11002 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2022

  50. [50]

    Direct Measurement of the Lifetime of the Neutral Pion,

    D. Akimov et al. (COHERENT), Phys. Rev. D106, 032003 (2022), arXiv:2109.11049 [hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2022

  51. [51]

    Colaresi, J

    J. Colaresi, J. I. Collar, T. W. Hossbach, C. M. Lewis, and K. M. Yocum, Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 211802 (2022), arXiv:2202.09672 [hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2022

  52. [52]

    Atzori Corona, M

    M. Atzori Corona, M. Cadeddu, N. Cargioli, F. Dordei, and C. Giunti, Phys. Lett. B852, 138627 (2024), arXiv:2307.12911 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  53. [53]

    Lindhard, V

    J. Lindhard, V. Nielsen, M. Scharff, and P. V. Thomsen, Kgl. Danske Videnskab., Selskab. Mat. Fys. Medd.33, 10(1963)

    work page 1963

  54. [54]

    Latest Germanium Results From the COHERENT Collaboration,

    R. Bouabid (COHERENT), “Latest Germanium Results From the COHERENT Collaboration,” (2026), presentation at the wine and cheese semi- nar

    work page 2026

  55. [55]

    Adhikari, H

    D. Adhikari et al. (PREX), Phys. Rev. Lett.126, 172502 (2021), arXiv:2102.10767 [nucl-ex]

    work page arXiv 2021

  56. [56]

    P. L. Anthony et al. (SLAC E158), Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 081601 (2005), hep-ex/0504049 [hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2005

  57. [57]

    Wang et al

    D. Wang et al. (PVDIS), Nature506, 67 (2014)

    work page 2014

  58. [58]

    Androic et al

    D. Androic et al. (Qweak), Nature557, 207 (2018)

    work page 2018

  59. [59]

    When backgrounds be- come signals: neutrino interactions in xenon-based dark matter detectors,

    M. Atzori Corona, M. Cadeddu, N. Cargioli, F. Dordei, and M. Sestu, “When backgrounds be- come signals: neutrino interactions in xenon-based dark matter detectors,” (2025), arXiv:2509.22178 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  60. [60]

    Deniz et al

    M. Deniz et al. (TEXONO), Phys. Rev. D81, 072001 (2010), arXiv:0911.1597 [hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2010

  61. [61]

    L. B. Auerbach et al. (LSND), Phys. Rev. D63, 112001 (2001), arXiv:hep-ex/0101039

    work page arXiv 2001

  62. [62]

    R. C. Allen, H. H. Chen, P. J. Doe, R. Hausam- mann, W. P. Lee, X. Q. Lu, H. J. Mahler, M. E. Potter, K. C. Wang, T. J. Bowles, R. L. Burman, R. D. Carlini, D. R. F. Cochran, J. S. Frank, E. Pi- asetzky, V. D. Sandberg, D. A. Krakauer, and R. L. Talaga, Phys. Rev. D47, 11 (1993)

    work page 1993

  63. [63]

    Aalberset al.(LZ), Phys

    J. Aalbers et al. (LZ), Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 041002 (2023), arXiv:2207.03764 [hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2023

  64. [64]

    Zhanget al.(PandaX), Phys

    D. Zhang et al. (PandaX), Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 161804 (2022), arXiv:2206.02339 [hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2022

  65. [65]

    Aprileet al.(XENON), Phys

    E. Aprile et al. (XENON), Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 161805 (2022), arXiv:2207.11330 [hep-ex]

    work page arXiv 2022

  66. [66]

    Atzori Corona, M

    M. Atzori Corona, M. Cadeddu, N. Cargioli, F. Dordei, and C. Giunti, JHEP05, 271 (2024), arXiv:2402.16709 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  67. [67]

    Cadeddu, C

    M. Cadeddu, C. Giunti, K. A. Kouzakov, Y.-F. Li, Y.-Y. Zhang, and A. I. Studenikin, Phys. Rev. D98, 113010 (2018), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 101, 059902 (2020)], arXiv:1810.05606 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2018

  68. [68]

    Bernabeu, L

    J. Bernabeu, L. G. Cabral-Rosetti, J. Papavassil- iou, and J. Vidal, Phys. Rev. D62, 113012 (2000), arXiv:hep-ph/0008114

    work page arXiv 2000

  69. [69]

    Bernabeu, J

    J. Bernabeu, J. Papavassiliou, and J. Vi- dal, Phys. Rev. Lett.89, 101802 (2002), [Erra- tum: Phys.Rev.Lett. 89, 229902 (2002)], arXiv:hep- ph/0206015

    work page arXiv 2002

  70. [70]

    Atzori Corona, M

    M. Atzori Corona, M. Cadeddu, N. Cargioli, F. Dordei, C. Giunti, and C. A. Ternes, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 231803 (2025), arXiv:2504.05272 [hep- ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  71. [71]

    Coloma, M

    P. Coloma, M. C. Gonzalez-Garcia, M. Maltoni, and T. Schwetz, Phys. Rev. D96, 115007 (2017), arXiv:1708.02899 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2017

  72. [72]

    Coloma, M

    P. Coloma, M. C. Gonzalez-Garcia, M. Maltoni, J. a. P. Pinheiro, and S. Urrea, JHEP08, 032 (2023), arXiv:2305.07698 [hep-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  73. [73]

    A. M. Suliga and I. Tamborra, Phys. Rev. D103, 083002 (2021), arXiv:2010.14545 [hep-ph]. 10

    work page arXiv 2021