Shell model study on the possibility of using an effective field theory for disentangling several contributions to the neutrinoless double-beta decay
Andrei Neacsu, Mihai Horoi

TL;DR
This paper employs an effective field theory within a shell model framework to analyze neutrinoless double-beta decay, aiming to distinguish among various contributing mechanisms and guide future experimental efforts.
Contribution
It introduces a novel shell model approach using effective field theory to calculate half-life ratios for multiple isotopes, aiding in identifying the dominant decay mechanism.
Findings
Calculated half-life ratios for five isotopes under different lepton number violating couplings.
Provided a method to interpret experimental half-life data to determine decay mechanisms.
Suggested that ratios could help predict experimental sensitivities and limits.
Abstract
Neutrinoless double-beta decay represents the most promising approach for revealing some of the most important, yet-unknown, properties of neutrinos related to their absolute masses and their nature. This transition involves beyond standard model theories that predict the violation of the lepton number conservation by two units. There is no experimental confirmation yet for this decay, but new experiments have set lower-limits for the associated half-lives in the case of several isotopes. Using an effective field theory that describes this transition, we calculate half-life ratios for five experimentally interesting isotopes in the case of 12 lepton number violating couplings. These half-life ratios can be used to probe the sensitivity of the five isotopes in relation to their respective mechanisms, to predict the half-life limits needed to match the different experimental results, and…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
