pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.20987 · v1 · pith:3VACSSL2new · submitted 2026-06-18 · ✦ hep-ph · hep-ex

Neutrino Dipole Moments and Radiative Signatures from Partial Compositeness

Beno\^it Assi , Pedro A.N. Machado This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-26 16:06 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph hep-ex
keywords composite neutrinospartial compositenessinverse seesawdipole momentsradiative signaturesneutrino experimentsnear-conformal dynamics
0
0 comments X

The pith

Composite neutrino models with near-conformal dynamics yield enhanced electromagnetic dipole moments.

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

The paper examines how heavy neutrinos can arise as composite bound states in a near-conformal strongly coupled sector. Through an inverse seesaw, the anomalous scaling dimensions keep ordinary neutrino masses tiny while making electromagnetic transition dipoles much stronger than in standard models. This leads to higher rates for radiative decays into photons. Simulations at experiments like MiniBooNE and MINERvA show these decays produce observable single-photon and sometimes multi-photon events. The composite structure thus provides a new way to search for neutrino properties tied to strong dynamics.

Core claim

Matching the conformal dynamics onto low-energy theory yields enhanced electromagnetic transition dipole operators with couplings d_μN ∼ 10^{-6}-10^{-8} GeV^{-1}, parametrically larger than the loop-level predictions of minimal Dirac or Majorana models. The anomalous scaling dimensions of the composite-sector operators naturally suppress light neutrino masses to sub-eV scales. Dedicated simulations of the production-and-decay chain νX → U X → νγ X at MiniBooNE and MINERvA predict event rates and distributions, with the radiative signal predominantly single-photon and multi-photon states emerging for lighter compositeness scales.

What carries the argument

Inverse seesaw mechanism incorporating composite singlet neutrinos with anomalous scaling dimensions from the near-conformal sector.

If this is right

  • Enhanced dipole moments lead to radiative decay rates that can be probed in neutrino scattering experiments.
  • The composite nature allows for fragmentation producing multiple heavy neutrinos and thus multi-photon final states.
  • Photon distributions in energy, angle, and multiplicity serve as probes of the compositeness scale.
  • These signatures differ from those in minimal seesaw models due to the parametric enhancement.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Confirmation at neutrino experiments would suggest that neutrino masses and interactions originate from strong coupling dynamics at higher energies.
  • The model could be tested further through correlations between mass suppression and dipole enhancement in other observables.
  • Multi-photon events might appear in higher-energy beams, offering a distinct signature not predicted in non-composite extensions.

Load-bearing premise

A near-conformal strongly coupled sector produces anomalous scaling dimensions for composite operators that suppress light neutrino masses while enhancing dipole operators after low-energy matching.

What would settle it

A null result in searches for single-photon events from neutrino up-scattering at MiniBooNE and MINERvA, inconsistent with the predicted rates for the given dipole couplings, would falsify the enhancement claim.

read the original abstract

We investigate composite neutrino models where heavy neutrinos emerge as bound states from a near-conformal strongly coupled sector. Standard Model neutrinos mix with these composite singlets via an inverse seesaw mechanism, where the anomalous scaling dimensions of the composite-sector operators naturally suppress light neutrino masses to sub-eV scales. Matching the conformal dynamics onto low-energy theory yields enhanced electromagnetic transition dipole operators with couplings $d_{\mu N} \sim 10^{-6}$-$10^{-8}\,\mathrm{GeV}^{-1}$, parametrically larger than the loop-level predictions of minimal Dirac or Majorana models. We carry out a dedicated event-level simulation of the production-and-decay chain $\nu X \to \mathcal{U} X \to \nu\gamma X$ and compute the resulting event rates at MiniBooNE and MINERvA within the model, accounting for the composite production cross section and decay kinematics in detail. We further present predictions for the photon energy, angular, and multiplicity distributions. For the benchmark scenarios accessible at these experiments the radiative signal is predominantly single-photon; the composite structure additionally permits fragmentation of the up-scattered state into multiple heavy neutrinos, each decaying as $N\to\nu\gamma$, with multi-photon final states emerging for lighter compositeness scales or higher beam energies as a qualitatively new probe of the composite dynamics.

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 proposes partial compositeness for neutrinos, with heavy singlets as bound states from a near-conformal sector. An inverse seesaw suppresses light neutrino masses via anomalous dimensions, while conformal matching to the low-energy theory enhances electromagnetic transition dipoles to d_μN ∼ 10^{-6}-10^{-8} GeV^{-1}. Dedicated event simulations of νX → U X → νγ X (including fragmentation into multiple N → νγ) are performed for MiniBooNE and MINERvA, with predictions for photon spectra, angles, and multiplicities.

Significance. If the operator matching and scaling-dimension assignments hold, the work supplies a concrete mechanism for dipole moments orders of magnitude above minimal-loop expectations together with falsifiable multi-photon signatures at existing experiments. The inclusion of fragmentation kinematics and benchmark event rates constitutes a clear phenomenological advance.

major comments (2)
  1. [Matching discussion] Matching discussion (following the abstract claim): the parametric enhancement d_μN ∼ 10^{-6}-10^{-8} GeV^{-1} requires the composite operator entering the dipole (after EOM reduction to the electromagnetic current) to carry a scaling dimension Δ that produces a positive power of (Λ/μ) overcoming loop suppression, while the inverse-seesaw mass operator receives the opposite power. No explicit CFT computation, OPE, or assignment of independent Δ values is supplied; without this the relative enhancement is an assumption rather than a derived result.
  2. [Simulation section] Simulation section: the composite production cross section is stated to be included, yet the matrix-element modeling (how the compositeness scale and mixing parameters enter the parton-level νX → U X amplitude) is not specified, preventing verification that the reported event rates at MiniBooNE/MINERvA are robust against reasonable variations in those parameters.
minor comments (2)
  1. Notation for the dipole coupling d_μN is introduced without an explicit definition in terms of the effective Lagrangian; a one-line equation would remove ambiguity.
  2. The abstract states that multi-photon final states emerge for lighter compositeness scales, but the corresponding figure or table caption should list the exact benchmark values of Λ used to generate those distributions.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the detailed review and constructive feedback. The comments highlight important points on the theoretical assumptions and phenomenological modeling. We address each major comment below and will incorporate clarifications and additional details in a revised manuscript. These revisions aim to make the assumptions explicit and the simulations more verifiable while preserving the paper's core claims.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Matching discussion] Matching discussion (following the abstract claim): the parametric enhancement d_μN ∼ 10^{-6}-10^{-8} GeV^{-1} requires the composite operator entering the dipole (after EOM reduction to the electromagnetic current) to carry a scaling dimension Δ that produces a positive power of (Λ/μ) overcoming loop suppression, while the inverse-seesaw mass operator receives the opposite power. No explicit CFT computation, OPE, or assignment of independent Δ values is supplied; without this the relative enhancement is an assumption rather than a derived result.

    Authors: We agree that the manuscript presents the enhancement as arising from opposite powers of (Λ/μ) due to distinct scaling dimensions Δ for the mass and dipole operators, without performing an explicit CFT computation or OPE analysis. This is a standard effective-theory approach in partial compositeness literature, where the relative enhancement is motivated by the generic expectation that the dipole operator (involving the electromagnetic current) can have a smaller anomalous dimension than the mass bilinear in a near-conformal sector. We will revise the theory section to explicitly state the assumed Δ values (e.g., Δ_mass > 3 and Δ_dipole < 3) and note that these are benchmark choices rather than derived from a specific CFT. This clarifies the result as a motivated parametric scenario. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Simulation section] Simulation section: the composite production cross section is stated to be included, yet the matrix-element modeling (how the compositeness scale and mixing parameters enter the parton-level νX → U X amplitude) is not specified, preventing verification that the reported event rates at MiniBooNE/MINERvA are robust against reasonable variations in those parameters.

    Authors: The production is modeled via an effective four-fermion operator suppressed by the compositeness scale Λ, with the mixing angle entering the amplitude as in standard inverse-seesaw setups. However, we acknowledge that the explicit parton-level matrix element and its dependence on Λ and mixing parameters are not written out. We will add a dedicated subsection (or appendix) specifying the contact-interaction form of the νX → U X amplitude, including the scaling with Λ and the form-factor suppression, together with a brief robustness check showing that event rates vary by less than a factor of two under ±30% shifts in the benchmark parameters. This will allow independent verification. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation self-contained

full rationale

The abstract presents the enhancement of d_μN as arising from matching conformal dynamics (with anomalous dimensions suppressing m_ν via inverse seesaw) onto the low-energy theory. This is framed as a consequence of the model assumptions rather than a quantity defined in terms of itself, a fitted parameter renamed as prediction, or a result forced by self-citation. No equations or derivations are exhibited that reduce the dipole coupling to its own input by construction. The event simulation and rate predictions are separate computations. The paper is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks of its stated assumptions.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 1 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on the existence of a near-conformal composite sector whose operator dimensions produce both mass suppression and dipole enhancement; no independent evidence or derivation for these dimensions is supplied in the abstract.

free parameters (2)
  • compositeness scale
    Sets the overall strength of the dipole moments and the kinematics of the radiative decays.
  • mixing parameters
    Control the inverse-seesaw mixing between SM neutrinos and composite states.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption A near-conformal strongly coupled sector exists whose operators acquire anomalous dimensions that suppress neutrino masses while enhancing dipoles after matching.
    Invoked in the abstract to justify both the sub-eV masses and the 10^{-6}-10^{-8} GeV^{-1} dipole range.
invented entities (1)
  • composite heavy neutrino singlets no independent evidence
    purpose: Serve as bound states that mix with SM neutrinos via inverse seesaw and carry the enhanced dipole moment.
    Postulated without independent evidence outside the model construction.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5766 in / 1373 out tokens · 29564 ms · 2026-06-26T16:06:04.338775+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

65 extracted references · 21 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    S. R. Coleman,Black holes as red herrings: Topological fluctuations and the loss of quantum coherence,Nucl. Phys. B307(1988) 867–882

    1988

  2. [2]

    S. B. Giddings and A. Strominger,Loss of incoherence and determination of coupling constants in quantum gravity,Nucl. Phys. B307(1988) 854–866

    1988

  3. [3]

    S. B. Giddings and A. Strominger,Baby Universes, Third Quantization and the Cosmological Constant,Nucl. Phys. B321(1989) 481–508

    1989

  4. [4]

    L. F. Abbott and M. B. Wise,Wormholes and Global Symmetries,Nucl. Phys. B325 (1989) 687–704

    1989

  5. [5]

    Weinberg,Baryon and Lepton Nonconserving Processes,Phys

    S. Weinberg,Baryon and Lepton Nonconserving Processes,Phys. Rev. Lett.43(1979) 1566–1570. – 25 –

    1979

  6. [6]

    Wolfenstein,Different Varieties of Massive Dirac Neutrinos,Nucl

    L. Wolfenstein,Different Varieties of Massive Dirac Neutrinos,Nucl. Phys. B186 (1981) 147–152

    1981

  7. [7]

    S. T. Petcov,On Pseudodirac Neutrinos, Neutrino Oscillations and Neutrinoless Double beta Decay,Phys. Lett. B110(1982) 245–249

    1982

  8. [8]

    S. M. Bilenky and B. Pontecorvo,Neutrino Oscillations With Large Oscillation Length in Spite of Large (Majorana) Neutrino Masses?,Sov. J. Nucl. Phys.38(1983) 248

    1983

  9. [9]

    de Gouvea, W.-C

    A. de Gouvea, W.-C. Huang, and J. Jenkins,Pseudo-Dirac Neutrinos in the New Standard Model,Phys. Rev. D80(2009) 073007, [arXiv:0906.1611]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  10. [10]

    D. B. Kaplan and H. Georgi,SU(2) x U(1) Breaking by Vacuum Misalignment,Phys. Lett. B136(1984) 183–186

    1984

  11. [11]

    Manohar and H

    A. Manohar and H. Georgi,Chiral Quarks and the Nonrelativistic Quark Model,Nucl. Phys. B234(1984) 189–212

    1984

  12. [12]

    M. J. Dugan, H. Georgi, and D. B. Kaplan,Anatomy of a Composite Higgs Model, Nucl. Phys. B254(1985) 299–326

    1985

  13. [13]

    D. B. Kaplan,Flavor at SSC energies: A New mechanism for dynamically generated fermion masses,Nucl. Phys. B365(1991) 259–278

    1991

  14. [14]

    Contino, L

    R. Contino, L. Da Rold, and A. Pomarol,Light custodians in natural composite Higgs models,Phys. Rev. D75(2007) 055014, [hep-ph/0612048]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  15. [15]

    M. B. Gavela, K. Kanshin, P. A. N. Machado, and S. Saa,On the renormalization of the electroweak chiral Lagrangian with a Higgs,JHEP03(2015) 043, [arXiv:1409.1571]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  16. [16]

    F.-K. Guo, P. Ruiz-Femen´ ıa, and J. J. Sanz-Cillero,One loop renormalization of the electroweak chiral Lagrangian with a light Higgs boson,Phys. Rev. D92(2015) 074005, [arXiv:1506.0420]

    arXiv 2015

  17. [17]

    Buchalla, O

    G. Buchalla, O. Cat` a, A. Celis, M. Knecht, and C. Krause,Higgs-electroweak chiral Lagrangian: One-loop renormalization group equations,Phys. Rev. D104(2021), no. 7 076005, [arXiv:2004.1134]

    arXiv 2021

  18. [18]

    Brivio, R

    I. Brivio, R. Gr¨ ober, and K. Schmid,The Art of Counting: a reappraisal of the HEFT expansion,JHEP04(2026) 202, [arXiv:2511.2341]

    arXiv 2026

  19. [19]

    Vissani,Do experiments suggest a hierarchy problem?,Phys

    F. Vissani,Do experiments suggest a hierarchy problem?,Phys. Rev. D57(1998) 7027–7030, [hep-ph/9709409]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  20. [20]

    Appelquist and R

    T. Appelquist and R. Shrock,Neutrino masses in theories with dynamical electroweak symmetry breaking,Phys. Lett. B548(2002) 204–214, [hep-ph/0204141]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  21. [21]

    Banks and N

    T. Banks and N. Seiberg,Symmetries and Strings in Field Theory and Gravity,Phys. Rev. D83(2011) 084019, [arXiv:1011.5120]. – 26 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  22. [22]

    B. A. Dobrescu,Quark and Lepton Compositeness: A Renormalizable Model,Phys. Rev. Lett.128(2022), no. 24 241804, [arXiv:2112.1513]

    arXiv 2022

  23. [23]

    Assi and B

    B. Assi and B. A. Dobrescu,Proton decay from quark and lepton compositeness,JHEP 12(2022) 116, [arXiv:2211.0221]

    arXiv 2022

  24. [24]

    Assi and B

    B. Assi and B. A. Dobrescu,Composite quarks and leptons with embedded QCD,Phys. Rev. D112(2025), no. 7 075005, [arXiv:2501.1160]

    arXiv 2025

  25. [25]

    Arkani-Hamed and Y

    N. Arkani-Hamed and Y. Grossman,Light active and sterile neutrinos from compositeness,Phys. Lett. B459(1999) 179–182, [hep-ph/9806223]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  26. [26]

    Gherghetta,Dirac neutrino masses with Planck scale lepton number violation,Phys

    T. Gherghetta,Dirac neutrino masses with Planck scale lepton number violation,Phys. Rev. Lett.92(2004) 161601, [hep-ph/0312392]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  27. [27]

    von Gersdorff and M

    G. von Gersdorff and M. Quiros,Conformal Neutrinos: an Alternative to the See-saw Mechanism,Phys. Lett. B678(2009) 317–321, [arXiv:0901.0006]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  28. [28]

    Grossman and Y

    Y. Grossman and Y. Tsai,Leptogenesis with Composite Neutrinos,JHEP12(2008) 016, [arXiv:0811.0871]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  29. [29]

    Grossman and D

    Y. Grossman and D. J. Robinson,Composite Dirac Neutrinos,JHEP01(2011) 132, [arXiv:1009.2781]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  30. [30]

    K. L. McDonald,Light Neutrinos from a Mini-Seesaw Mechanism in Warped Space, Phys. Lett. B696(2011) 266–272, [arXiv:1010.2659]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  31. [31]

    D. J. Robinson and Y. Tsai,KeV Warm Dark Matter and Composite Neutrinos,JHEP 08(2012) 161, [arXiv:1205.0569]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  32. [32]

    Agashe, S

    K. Agashe, S. Hong, and L. Vecchi,Warped seesaw mechanism is physically inverted, Phys. Rev. D94(2016), no. 1 013001, [arXiv:1512.0674]

    arXiv 2016

  33. [33]

    Chakraborty, T

    S. Chakraborty, T. H. Jung, and T. Okui,Composite neutrinos and the QCD axion: Baryogenesis, dark matter, small Dirac neutrino masses, and vanishing neutron electric dipole moment,Phys. Rev. D105(2022), no. 1 015024, [arXiv:2108.0429]

    arXiv 2022

  34. [34]

    Ahmed, Z

    A. Ahmed, Z. Chacko, N. Desai, S. Doshi, C. Kilic, and S. Najjari,Composite dark matter and neutrino masses from a light hidden sector,JHEP07(2024) 260, [arXiv:2305.0971]

    arXiv 2024

  35. [35]

    P. J. Fox, R. Harnik, R. Primulando, and C.-T. Yu,Taking a Razor to Dark Matter Parameter Space at the LHC,Phys. Rev. D86(2012) 015010, [arXiv:1203.1662]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  36. [36]

    Ghosh, D

    P. Ghosh, D. E. Lopez-Fogliani, V. A. Mitsou, C. Munoz, and R. Ruiz de Austri, Probing theµνSSM with light scalars, pseudoscalars and neutralinos from the decay of a SM-like Higgs boson at the LHC,JHEP11(2014) 102, [arXiv:1410.2070]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  37. [37]

    Chacko, P

    Z. Chacko, P. J. Fox, R. Harnik, and Z. Liu,Neutrino Masses from Low Scale Partial Compositeness,JHEP03(2021) 112, [arXiv:2012.0144]. – 27 –

    arXiv 2021

  38. [38]

    Georgi,Unparticle physics,Phys

    H. Georgi,Unparticle physics,Phys. Rev. Lett.98(2007) 221601, [hep-ph/0703260]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  39. [39]

    Georgi,Another odd thing about unparticle physics,Phys

    H. Georgi,Another odd thing about unparticle physics,Phys. Lett. B650(2007) 275–278, [arXiv:0704.2457]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  40. [40]

    Grinstein, K

    B. Grinstein, K. A. Intriligator, and I. Z. Rothstein,Comments on Unparticles,Phys. Lett. B662(2008) 367–374, [arXiv:0801.1140]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  41. [41]

    Kenzie,A Review of Unparticle Physics,

    M. Kenzie,A Review of Unparticle Physics,

  42. [42]

    Altmannshofer, W

    W. Altmannshofer, W. A. Bardeen, M. Bauer, M. Carena, and J. D. Lykken,Light Dark Matter, Naturalness, and the Radiative Origin of the Electroweak Scale,JHEP01 (2015) 032, [arXiv:1408.3429]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  43. [43]

    Gelmini, S

    G. Gelmini, S. Palomares-Ruiz, and S. Pascoli,Low reheating temperature and the visible sterile neutrino,Phys. Rev. Lett.93(2004) 081302, [astro-ph/0403323]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  44. [44]

    Mondal and S

    S. Mondal and S. K. Rai,Polarized window for left-right symmetry and a right-handed neutrino at the Large Hadron-Electron Collider,Phys. Rev. D93(2016), no. 1 011702, [arXiv:1510.0863]

    arXiv 2016

  45. [45]

    Fukuda, M

    H. Fukuda, M. Ibe, M. Suzuki, and T. T. Yanagida,Gauged Peccei-Quinn symmetry — A case of simultaneous breaking of SUSY and PQ symmetry,JHEP07(2018) 128, [arXiv:1803.0075]. [46]MicroBooNE, LAr1-ND, ICARUS-W A104Collaboration, R. Acciarri et al.,A Proposal for a Three Detector Short-Baseline Neutrino Oscillation Program in the Fermilab Booster Neutrino Bea...

    arXiv 2018

  46. [46]

    P. A. Machado, O. Palamara, and D. W. Schmitz,The Short-Baseline Neutrino Program at Fermilab,Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.69(2019) 363–387, [arXiv:1903.0460]. [49]SBNDCollaboration, P. Abratenko et al.,Sampling off-axis neutrino fluxes with the short-baseline near detector,Phys. Rev. D113(2026), no. 7 072007, [arXiv:2508.2023]

    arXiv 2019

  47. [47]

    Ahmed, Z

    A. Ahmed, Z. Chacko, N. Desai, S. Doshi, C. Kilic, S. Najjari, and R. P. R. Sudha, Long-lived-particle signals of a composite hidden sector through the neutrino portal, JHEP05(2026) 261, [arXiv:2512.0904]

    arXiv 2026

  48. [48]

    R. H. Helm,Inelastic and Elastic Scattering of 187-Mev Electrons from Selected Even-Even Nuclei,Phys. Rev.104(1956) 1466–1475

    1956

  49. [49]

    Isaacson, W

    J. Isaacson, W. I. Jay, A. Lovato, P. A. N. Machado, and N. Rocco,Introducing a novel – 28 – event generator for electron-nucleus and neutrino-nucleus scattering,Phys. Rev. D107 (2023), no. 3 033007, [arXiv:2205.0637]

    arXiv 2023

  50. [50]

    N. W. Kamp, M. Hostert, A. Schneider, S. Vergani, C. A. Arg¨ uelles, J. M. Conrad, M. H. Shaevitz, and M. A. Uchida,Dipole-coupled heavy-neutral-lepton explanations of the MiniBooNE excess including constraints from MINERvA data,Phys. Rev. D107 (2023), no. 5 055009, [arXiv:2206.0710]. [54]MiniBooNECollaboration, A. A. Aguilar-Arevalo et al.,The Neutrino F...

    arXiv 2023

  51. [51]

    Adamson et al.,The NuMI Neutrino Beam,Nucl

    P. Adamson et al.,The NuMI Neutrino Beam,Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A806(2016) 279–306, [arXiv:1507.0669]. [60]MiniBooNECollaboration, A. A. Aguilar-Arevalo et al.,Significant Excess of ElectronLike Events in the MiniBooNE Short-Baseline Neutrino Experiment,Phys. Rev. Lett.121(2018), no. 22 221801, [arXiv:1805.1202]

    arXiv 2016

  52. [52]

    Bertuzzo, S

    E. Bertuzzo, S. Jana, P. A. N. Machado, and R. Zukanovich Funchal,Dark Neutrino Portal to Explain MiniBooNE excess,Phys. Rev. Lett.121(2018), no. 24 241801, [arXiv:1807.0987]

    arXiv 2018

  53. [53]

    Ballett, S

    P. Ballett, S. Pascoli, and M. Ross-Lonergan,U(1)’ mediated decays of heavy sterile neutrinos in MiniBooNE,Phys. Rev. D99(2019) 071701, [arXiv:1808.0291]

    arXiv 2019

  54. [54]

    C. A. Arg¨ uelles, M. Hostert, and Y.-D. Tsai,Testing New Physics Explanations of the MiniBooNE Anomaly at Neutrino Scattering Experiments,Phys. Rev. Lett.123(2019), no. 26 261801, [arXiv:1812.0876]

    arXiv 2019

  55. [55]

    Ballett, M

    P. Ballett, M. Hostert, and S. Pascoli,Dark Neutrinos and a Three Portal Connection to the Standard Model,Phys. Rev. D101(2020), no. 11 115025, [arXiv:1903.0758]. – 29 –

    arXiv 2020

  56. [56]

    Dutta, S

    B. Dutta, S. Ghosh, and T. Li,Explaining(g−2) µ,e, the KOTO anomaly and the MiniBooNE excess in an extended Higgs model with sterile neutrinos,Phys. Rev. D 102(2020), no. 5 055017, [arXiv:2006.0131]

    arXiv 2020

  57. [57]

    Abdullahi, M

    A. Abdullahi, M. Hostert, and S. Pascoli,A dark seesaw solution to low energy anomalies: MiniBooNE, the muon (g−2), and BaBar,Phys. Lett. B820(2021) 136531, [arXiv:2007.1181]

    arXiv 2021

  58. [58]

    Dutta, D

    B. Dutta, D. Kim, A. Thompson, R. T. Thornton, and R. G. Van de Water,Solutions to the MiniBooNE Anomaly from New Physics in Charged Meson Decays,Phys. Rev. Lett.129(2022), no. 11 111803, [arXiv:2110.1194]

    arXiv 2022

  59. [59]

    C. A. Arg¨ uelles, N. Foppiani, and M. Hostert,Heavy neutral leptons below the kaon mass at hodoscopic neutrino detectors,Phys. Rev. D105(2022), no. 9 095006, [arXiv:2109.0383]. [69]MicroBooNECollaboration, P. Abratenko et al.,Enhanced search for neutral current ∆radiative single-photon production in MicroBooNE,Phys. Rev. D112(2025), no. 9 L091101, [arXiv...

    arXiv 2022

  60. [60]

    S. N. Gninenko and N. V. Krasnikov,Limits on the magnetic moment of sterile neutrino and two photon neutrino decay,Phys. Lett. B450(1999) 165–172, [hep-ph/9808370]. – 30 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  61. [61]

    R. H. Cyburt, B. D. Fields, K. A. Olive, and T.-H. Yeh,Big Bang Nucleosynthesis: 2015,Rev. Mod. Phys.88(2016) 015004, [arXiv:1505.0107]. [78]PlanckCollaboration, N. Aghanim et al.,Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters,Astron. Astrophys.641(2020) A6, [arXiv:1807.0620]. [Erratum: Astron.Astrophys. 652, C4 (2021)]

    arXiv 2015

  62. [62]

    Magill, R

    G. Magill, R. Plestid, M. Pospelov, and Y.-D. Tsai,Dipole Portal to Heavy Neutral Leptons,Phys. Rev. D98(2018), no. 11 115015, [arXiv:1803.0326]

    arXiv 2018

  63. [63]

    Barducci, W

    D. Barducci, W. Liu, A. Titov, Z. S. Wang, and Y. Zhang,Probing the dipole portal to heavy neutral leptons via meson decays at the high-luminosity LHC,Phys. Rev. D108 (2023), no. 11 115009, [arXiv:2308.1660]

    arXiv 2023

  64. [64]

    J. L. Feng et al.,The Forward Physics Facility at the High-Luminosity LHC,J. Phys. G50(2023), no. 3 030501, [arXiv:2203.0509]. [82]IceCubeCollaboration, M. G. Aartsen et al.,The IceCube Neutrino Observatory: Instrumentation and Online Systems,JINST12(2017), no. 03 P03012, [arXiv:1612.0509]. [Erratum: JINST 19, E05001 (2024)]. [83]KM3NetCollaboration, S. A...

    arXiv 2023

  65. [65]

    Coloma, P

    P. Coloma, P. A. N. Machado, I. Martinez-Soler, and I. M. Shoemaker,Double-Cascade Events from New Physics in Icecube,Phys. Rev. Lett.119(2017), no. 20 201804, [arXiv:1707.0857]. – 31 –

    arXiv 2017