SciPost Submission Page
Recent Results from the Long Baseline Neutrino Oscillation Experiments
by Pablo Fernandez
This is not the latest submitted version.
This Submission thread is now published as
Submission summary
| Authors (as registered SciPost users): | Pablo Fernández |
| Submission information | |
|---|---|
| Preprint Link: | scipost_201810_00007v1 (pdf) |
| Date submitted: | 2018-10-31 01:00 |
| Submitted by: | Fernández, Pablo |
| Submitted to: | SciPost Physics Proceedings |
| Proceedings issue: | The 15th International Workshop on Tau Lepton Physics (TAU2018) |
| Ontological classification | |
|---|---|
| Academic field: | Physics |
| Specialties: |
|
| Approach: | Experimental |
Abstract
The results from the current long-baseline neutrino oscillation experiments are reviewed. These experiments are designed to measure the remaining unknown neutrino oscillation parameters via the oscillation of accelerator neutrinos over long distances. The performance of these experiments and their results are reviewed and discussed, giving a precise picture of the current status of the measurements for the neutrino mass ordering, the value of ∆m 232 , the θ 23 and the lepton CP-violating phase, δ CP .
Current status:
Reports on this Submission
Report #1 by Anonymous (Referee 1) on 2018-11-27 (Invited Report)
- Cite as: Anonymous, Report on arXiv:scipost_201810_00007v1, delivered 2018-11-27, doi: 10.21468/SciPost.Report.677
Strengths
The paper gives an excellent overview on recent results from the long-baseline neutrino oscillation experiments, and their combined interpretation.
Weaknesses
The paper contains a significant number of typos that should be fixed.
Report
page 2 line 3: its -> their
page 2 paragraph 2 first sentence: -> In this conference paper the current status of the long-baseline neutrino oscillation experiments is reviewed. First, in section 2, we discuss the physics of neutrino oscillations... (etc.)
page 2 line 11: reviwed -> reviewed
page 2: inconsistent use of "flavor" versus "flavour"
page 2: vaccum -> vacuum
page 3: as shown in 1 -> as shown in equation 1
page 3: two oscillation channels that matters -> two oscillation channels that matter
page 3: apearance -> appearance
page 3: define $N_e^{man}$
page 4: from 3 -> from equation 3
page 4: consist on -> consists of
page 4: expeiments -> experiments
page 4: inbalance -> imbalance
page 5: T2K near detector as well -> T2K has a near detector as well
page 5: which carries -> which carries out (or which performs)
page 5: figure 5 has an incorrect caption
page 5: please rephrase the last sentence on the page "Due to the ... at the far detector", I am not sure what is intended.
page 6: figure 6 has an incorrect caption
page 6 first line below table: -> The results for $\theta_{23}$ and $\Delta m^2_{32}$ from T2K with reactor data constraints are shown in figure 7.
page 7 caption figure 7: tom top to bottom -> from top to bottom
page 9 caption figure 11: with its -> with their
page 11: are summarize -> are summarized
page 11: complte -> complete
page 11: unkwowns -> unknowns
page 12: I am puzzled by the number $\delta_{CP} = -0.83 \pi$. Figure 17 clearly shows that the best fit gives approximately $+ 0.2 \pi$?
page 12: forseen -> foreseen
page 13: in his case -> in this case
page 14: techonology -> technology
page 14: measurement neutrino oscillation parameters -> measurement of neutrino oscillation parameters
page 15 caption figure 22: onstraints -> constraints
page 15: "prefer large and negative values" ? Figure 17 seems to say something different for the NH in NOvA. Idem in the conclusion.
page 16 reference 5: page numbers of the article are missing
Requested changes
See report.