# Neutrinoless Double Beta Decay Overview

### Submission summary

 As Contributors: Laura Cardani Arxiv Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/1810.12828v1 (pdf) Date submitted: 2018-10-31 01:00 Submitted by: Cardani, Laura Submitted to: SciPost Physics Proceedings Proceedings issue: The 15th International Workshop on Tau Lepton Physics (Amsterdam, 2018-09) Academic field: Physics Specialties: Gravitation, Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics Nuclear Physics - Experiment Approach: Experimental

### Abstract

Neutrinoless Double Beta Decay is a hypothesised nuclear process in which two neutrons simultaneously decay into protons with no neutrino emission. The prized observation of this decay would point to the existence of a process that violates a fundamental symmetry of the Standard Model of Particle Physics, and would allow to establish the nature of neutrinos. Today, the lower limits on the half-life of this process exceed 10$^{25}$-10$^{26}$ yr. I will review the current status of the searches for Double Beta Decay and the perspectives to enhance the experimental sensitivity in the next years.

###### Current status:
Has been resubmitted

### Submission & Refereeing History

Resubmission 1810.12828v2 on 19 December 2018

Submission 1810.12828v1 on 31 October 2018

## Reports on this Submission

### Anonymous Report 1 on 2018-12-10 (Invited Report)

• Cite as: Anonymous, Report on arXiv:1810.12828v1, delivered 2018-12-10, doi: 10.21468/SciPost.Report.731

### Strengths

This is a very complete review.

### Weaknesses

There a few sentences that are not 100% correct and some sentences could use some corrections for understanding or grammar.

### Attachment

• validity: high
• significance: top
• originality: top
• clarity: high
• formatting: perfect
• grammar: good

### Author:  Laura Cardani  on 2018-12-19  [id 392]

(in reply to Report 1 on 2018-12-10)
Category:
I thank the Referee for reading carefully my proceeding and improving its quality. I attach my answers to his/her questions: 1) about the schedule of NEXT-100: I wrote "The first mile-stone of the NEXT collaboration should have been the operation of NEXT-100, [..] nevertheless..." and the Referee asked if now NEXT-100 is delayed. I did not mean that NEXT-100 is delayed (even if I have not found recent talks/papers about the status of this project, and the website is not updated, so I can not state that it is on schedule...). I just meant that this step should have been the next step of the collaboration. Nevertheless, they decided to run a medium-scale project before NEXT-100, called NEW (or NEXT-WHITE) and they are now publishing the results obtained with NEW and not with NEXT-100. 2) about AMoRE, the Referee observed (correctly) that they are preparing a 200 kg experiment. I did not mentioned it before because I think it is not going to happen in the immediate future (they are still working on the kg scale), but I understand the point of the Referee, so I added a sentence to clarify that this is not a small R$\&$D, but a part of a long-term plan. Best regards Laura