# Lepton flavour violation and neutrino masses

### Submission summary

 As Contributors: Ana M. Teixeira Preprint link: scipost_201811_00022v1 Date accepted: 2019-01-08 Date submitted: 2018-11-15 Submitted by: Teixeira, Ana M. Submitted to: SciPost Physics Proceedings Domain(s): Theoretical Subject area: High-Energy Physics - Phenomenology

### Abstract

Neutrino oscillations provided the first evidence for the violation of flavour in the lepton sector, and established a clear need to consider extensions of the Standard Model. Many new phenomena can emerge from these New Physics (NP) constructions, among which processes violating lepton number and charged lepton flavour, all clear signals of New Physics. Following a short overview of the status of experimental searches, we comment on the prospects of several models of massive neutrinos, from minimal constructions to complete NP models, to the above mentioned observables.

###### Current status:
Publication decision taken: accept

### Submission & Refereeing History

Submission scipost_201811_00022v1 (15 November 2018)

## Invited Reports on this Submission

Toggle invited reports view

### Report

The contribution provides a review about the possible new phenomena that one can expect from the established phenomenon of neutrino oscillations, per se necessitating an extension of the SM. These new phenomena notably include, among the others, charged-lepton flavour violation, lepton number violation and contributions to lepton dipole moments.

The contribution starts from a review of the experimental status of such searches, and proceeds with a reasoned discussion of their potential within chosen SM extensions. Given the fact that flavour observables are indirect probes of a given SM extension, crucial is the interplay among as many observables as possible. The discussion focuses precisely on this aspect.

The contribution is carefully written, and an enjoyable read. I have one minor comment, concerning fig. 5 (left). The caption mentions "light (dark) surfaces denote currently allowed (excluded) regimes due to the violation of the associated experimental bound", but I can't see such surfaces in the plot. In the original reference, such surfaces seem to be visible only in a different plot, not shown in this contribution. I also suppose that the two vertical lines on fig. 5 (left) denote the LQ-mass region explaining RK(*). If so, I would specify this in the caption.

• validity: -
• significance: -
• originality: -
• clarity: -
• formatting: -
• grammar: -

### Author Ana M. Teixeira on 2018-12-13

(in reply to Report 1 on 2018-12-12)
Category: