4.4 Review

Models of neutrino mass, mixing and CP violation

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/0954-3899/42/12/123001

关键词

Stephen F King; editorial board; neutrino; supersymmetry; beyond the Standard Model

资金

  1. STFC [ST/J000396/1]
  2. European Union FP7 ITN-INVISIBLES (Marie Curie Actions) [PITN- GA-2011-289442]
  3. STFC [ST/L000296/1, ST/J000396/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  4. Science and Technology Facilities Council [ST/J000396/1, ST/L000296/1] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this topical review we argue that neutrino mass and mixing data motivates extending the Standard Model (SM) to include a non-Abelian discrete flavour symmetry in order to accurately predict the large leptonic mixing angles and CP violation. We begin with an overview of the SM puzzles, followed by a description of some classic lepton mixing patterns. Lepton mixing may be regarded as a deviation from tri-bimaximal mixing, with charged lepton corrections leading to solar mixing sum rules, or tri-maximal lepton mixing leading to atmospheric mixing rules. We survey neutrino mass models, using a roadmap based on the open questions in neutrino physics. We then focus on the seesaw mechanism with right-handed neutrinos, where sequential dominance (SD) can account for large lepton mixing angles and CP violation, with precise predictions emerging from constrained SD (CSD). We define the flavour problem and discuss progress towards a theory of favour using GUTs and discrete family symmetry. We classify models as direct, semidirect or indirect, according to the relation between the Klein symmetry of the mass matrices and the discrete family symmetry, in all cases focussing on spontaneous CP violation. Finally we give two examples of realistic and highly predictive indirect models with CSD, namely an A to Z of flavour with Pati-Salam and a fairly complete A(4) x SU(5) SUSY GUT of flavour, where both models have interesting implications for leptogenesis.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据