# Strong constraints on non-standard neutrino interactions: LHC vs.   IceCube

**Authors:** Sujata Pandey, Siddhartha Karmakar, Subhendu Rakshit

arXiv: 1907.07700 · 2020-01-08

## TL;DR

This paper compares constraints on non-standard neutrino interactions from LHC monojet searches and IceCube astrophysical neutrino observations, highlighting where each provides stronger bounds and discussing implications for different new physics scenarios.

## Contribution

It provides a comparative analysis of LHC and IceCube sensitivities to various NSI models, including new vector bosons and effective interactions, with specific focus on mass ranges where each is more constraining.

## Key findings

- LHC sets stronger bounds for certain $Z'$ mass ranges.
- IceCube surpasses LHC constraints for GeV-scale $Z'$.
- LHC constraints are superior for contact-type effective interactions.

## Abstract

We find the constraints on various non-standard interactions (NSI) of neutrinos from monojet+MET searches at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC). Also, we show that the measurement of neutrino-nucleon cross-section from the observation of high energy astrophysical neutrino events at IceCube facilitates strong constraints on NSI as well. To this end, we pursue a comparative study of the prospects of LHC and IceCube in detecting NSI, also mentioning the role of low-energy experiments. We discuss the case of NSI with a new vector boson $Z'$ and it is found that for some range of $m_{Z'}$ LHC puts more stringent bound, whereas IceCube supersedes elsewhere. We also pay special attention to the case of $Z'$ of mass of a few GeVs, pointing out that the IceCube constraints can surpass those from LHC and low-energy experiments. Although, for contact-type effective interactions with two neutrinos and two partons, constraints from LHC are superior.

## Full text

_Full body text omitted from this summary view._ Fetch the complete paper as Markdown: https://tomesphere.com/paper/1907.07700/full.md

## Figures

11 figures with captions in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/1907.07700/full.md

## References

94 references — full list in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/1907.07700/full.md

---
Source: https://tomesphere.com/paper/1907.07700