Tezpur University

A Final Semester project presented

for the degree of Master of Science

Connecting Neutrino Mass and Sterile Neutrino

Dark Matter in Inverse and Type II Seesaw

Submitted by
Mallika P. Shivam
PHY14002

Supervised by
Dr. Mrinal Kumar Das
Department of Physics

May 20, 2016

Department of Physics
Tezpur University

Certificate
This is to certify that the project work "Connecting Neutrino Mass and
Sterile Neutrino Dark Matter in Inverse and Type II Seesaw" is a bonafide
record of work done by Mallika P Shivam, Roll: PHY14002 under my
guidance, submitted to the Department of Physics, Tezpur University, in
partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the degree in Master
of Science programme in Physics.

(Dr. Mrinal Kumar Das)

Associate Professor
Dept. of Physics
Tezpur University
Date :Place :-

Acknowledgement

At the very onset, I would like to express my gratitude and thanks to Dr. Mrinal Kumar
Das, Associate Professor, Department of Physics, Tezpur University for his supervision,
encouragement and guidance throughout the semester and also for his support in completing
the project. I would also like to thank my institution, my co-guide Ananya Mukherjee and
Happy Borgohain for their help in every step and last but not the least; I thank my project
partners, Pragyan Phukan and Papori Seal for their support and enthusiasm.

(Mallika Priyadarshini Shivam)

Date :Place :-

Abstract

We present a TeV scale Seesaw Model for exploring the sterile neutrino dark matter and
neutrino phenomenology in the light of latest neutrino data. Using a special kind of Dirac
neutrino mass matrix and Majorana neutrino mass matrix, we fixed the sterile neutrino mass
matrix in Tribimaximal form (TBM). We then use the Type II seesaw as a perturbation
to generate non- vanishing reactor mixing angle 13 without much disturbing the other
neutrino oscillation parameters. Then we have studied the variation of neutrino parameters
with Type II perturbation strength for different values of sterile neutrino Yukawa coupling.

Contents
1

Introduction To Neutrino And Sterile Neutrino

1.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.2 A Brief History of Neutrino . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.3 Current Status of Neutrino . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.4 Neutrino Oscillation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.5 Neutrino Mass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.5.1 Seesaw Mechanism(Type I, Type II And Inverse)
1.6 Sterile Neutrino and Dark Matter . . . . . . . . . . .

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

8
8
8
10
11
13
13
16

Methodology

17

Results, Analysis and Conclusion

3.1 Results and Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.2 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

21
21
31

Reference

32

List of Figures
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
3.9
3.10

Type II perturbation versus sin2 13

Type II perturbation versus sin2 13
Variation of sin2 23 with sin2 13 .
Variation of sin2 23 with sin2 13 .
Variation of sin2 12 with sin2 13 .
Variation of sin2 12 with sin2 13 .
Variation of m223 with sin2 13 . .
Variation of m231 with sin2 13 . .
Variation of m221 with sin2 13 . .
Variation of m221 with sin2 13 . .

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

26
26
27
27
28
28
29
29
30
30

List of Tables
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6

Neutrino Oscillation Data for Normal Hierarchy .

Neutrino Oscillation Data for Inverted Hierarchy
Value of x,y,z for t=0.3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Value of x,y,z for normal hierarchy . . . . . . . .
value of x,y,z for inverted hierarchy . . . . . . .
Summary of Results obtained from graphs . . . .

.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.

22
22
23
24
24
31

Chapter 1

Introduction To Neutrino And Sterile

Neutrino
1.1.

Introduction

neutrino is a lepton (an elementary particle with half-integer spin) that interacts
only via the weak subatomic force and by gravity thereby making it very difficult
to detect. The mass of the neutrino is tiny compared to other subatomic particles.
Neutrinos are the only identified candidate for dark matter , specifically warm dark matter.
Neutrinos come in three flavors: electron neutrinos (e ), muon neutrinos ( ), and tau
neutrinos ( ). Each flavor is also associated with an antiparticle, called anti neutrino ,
which also has no electric charge and half-integer spin. They are the least understood and
the most elusive elementary particle known to exist. Not only it passes easily through
matter undetected and unimpeded but also changes its flavor on the way. Contrary to the
most successful theory of Particle Physics .ie. Standard Model, later convincing evidence
that neutrinos have oscillation among its flavor and mass eigen states was repeatedly
reported.Their number far exceeds the count of all the atoms of the entire universe. Although
they hardly interact at all, they helped forge the elements of the early universe, they tell us
how the sun shines and they may even cause the titanic explosion of a dying star or may be
the reason behind the mysterious dark matter or why we live in a universe filled with matter.

1.2.

A Brief History of Neutrino

1931 - A hypothetical particle is predicted by the theorist Wolfgang Pauli. Pauli based
his prediction on the fact that energy and momentum did not appear to be conserved in
certain radioactive decays. Pauli suggested that this missing energy might be carried
off, unseen, by a neutral particle which was escaping detection.
1934 - Enrico Fermi develops a comprehensive theory of radioactive decays, including
Paulis hypothetical particle, which Fermi coins the neutrino (Italian: "little neutral
one"). With inclusion of the neutrino, Fermis theory accurately explains many
8

experimentally observed results.

1959 - Discovery of a particle fitting the expected characteristics of the neutrino is
announced by Clyde Cowan and Fred Reines. This neutrino is later determined to be
the partner of the electron.
1962 - Experiments at Brookhaven National Laboratory and CERN, the European
Laboratory for Nuclear Physics make a surprising discovery: neutrinos produced
in association with muons do not behave the same as those produced in association
with electrons. They have, in fact, discovered a second type of neutrino (the muon
neutrino).
1968 - The first experiment to detect (electron) neutrinos produced by the Suns
burning (using a liquid Chlorine target deep underground) reports that less than half
the expected neutrinos are observed. This is the origin of the long-standing "solar
neutrino problem." The possibility that the missing electron neutrinos may have
transformed into another type (undetectable to this experiment) is soon suggested,
but unreliability of the solar model on which the expected neutrino rates are based is
initially considered a more likely explanation
1978 - The tau particle is discovered at SLAC, the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center.
It is soon recognized to be a heavier version of the electron and muon, and its decay
exhibits the same apparent imbalance of energy and momentum that led Pauli to
predict the existence of the neutrino in 1931. The existence of a third neutrino
associated with the tau is hence inferred, although this neutrino has yet to be directly
observed.
1985 - The IMB experiment, a large water detector searching for proton decay but
which also detects neutrinos, notices that fewer muon-neutrino interactions than
expected are observed. The anomaly is at first believed to be an artifact of detector
inefficiencies.
1985 - A Russian team reports measurement, for the first time, of a non-zero neutrino
mass. The mass is extremely small (10,000 times less than the mass of the electron),
but subsequent attempts to independently reproduce the measurement do not succeed.
1988 - Kamiokande, another water detector looking for proton decay , able to distinguish muon neutrino interactions from those of electron neutrino, reports that they
observe only about 60% of the expected number of muon-neutrino interactions.
1989 - Experiments at CERNs Large Electron-Positron (LEP) accelerator determine
that no additional neutrinos beyond the three already known can exist.
1989 - Kamiokande becomes the second experiment to detect neutrinos from the Sun,
and confirms the long-standing anomaly by finding only about 1/3 the expected rate.
1994 - Kamiokande finds a deficit of high-energy muon-neutrino interactions. Muonneutrinos travelling the greatest distances from the point of production to the detector
exhibit the greatest depletion.
1994 - The Kamiokande and IMB groups collaborate to test the ability of water detectors to distinguish muon- and electron-neutrino interactions, using a test beam at the
9

1.3.

KEK accelerator laboratory. The results confirm the validity of earlier measurements.
The two groups will go on to form the nucleus of the Super-Kamiokande project.
1996 - The Super-Kamiokande detector begins operation.
1997 - The Soudan-II experiment becomes the first iron detector to observe the
disappearance of muon neutrinos. The rate of disappearance agrees with that observed
by Kamiokande and IMB.
1997 - Super-Kamiokande reports a deficit of cosmic-ray muon neutrinos and solar
electron neutrinos, at rates agreeing with measurements by earlier experiments.
1998 - The Super-Kamiokande collaboration announces evidence of non-zero neutrino
mass at the Neutrino 98 conference.
2000- The DONUT Collaboration working at Fermilab announces observation of
tau particles produced by tau neutrinos, making the first direct observation of the tau
neutrino.
2000 -SuperK announces that the oscillating partner to the muon neutrino is not a
sterile neutrino, but the tau neutrino.
2001 and 2002 SNO announces observation of neutral currents from solar neutrinos,
along with charged currents and elastic scatters, providing convincing evidence that
neutrino oscillations are the cause of the solar neutrino problem.
2002 Masatoshi Koshiba and Raymond Davis win Nobel Prize for measuring solar
neutrinos(as well as supernova neutrinos).
2002 KamLAND begins operations in January and in November announces detection
of a deficit of electron anti-neutrinos from reactors at a mean distance of 175 km in
Japan. The results combined with all the earlier solar neutrino results establish the
correct parameters for the solar neutrino deficit.
2004 SuperKamiokande and KamLAND present evidence for neutrino disappearance and reappearance, eliminating non-oscillations models.
2005 KamLAND announces first detection of neutrino flux from the earth and makes
first measurements of radiogenic heat from earth.
Current Status of Neutrino

In the last two decades experiments have established the existence of neutrino oscillations
and most of the related parameters have by now been measured with reasonable accuracy.
At present neutrino physics is a most vital domain of particle physics and cosmology. The
Nobel Prize in Physics 2015 was awarded jointly to Takaaki Kajita and Arthur B. McDonald
"for the discovery of neutrino oscillations, which shows that neutrinos have mass". This
discovery has changed our understanding of the innermost workings of matter and showed
that the Standard Model cannot be the complete theory of the fundamental constituents of
the universe. Now the experiments continue and intense activity is underway worldwide in
order to capture neutrinos and examine their properties. Current experimental constraints
on the neutrino mass spectrum and the mixing parameters, including the recent observation
10

of non- zero mixing angle 13 by reactor neutrino disappearance experiments has initiated
the precision era of lepton flavor physics. Therefore it is timely to identify strategies to
determine the remaining parameters of the three active neutrinos, such as the neutrino mass
hierarchy and hints for one or more sterile neutrinos and their phenomenology need to
be assessed. In the astrophysics domain, the IceCube discovery of neutrino events at the
highest neutrino energies yet measured (PeV) may have initiated neutrino astronomy as a
new discipline for research.
1.4.

Neutrino Oscillation

Neutrinos are created or detected with a well- defined flavor( electron or muon or tau).However
in a phenomenon called as neutrino Flavour Oscillation,neutrinos are able to oscillate between the three available flavours while they propagate through space. Specifically, this
occurs because the neutrino flavor eigen states are not the same as the neutrino mass eigen
states. This allows for the neutrino that was produced as an electron neutrino at a given
location to have a calculable probability to be detected as either a muon or tau neutrino after
it has travelled to different location. This quantum mechanical effect was first hinted by the
discrepancy between the number of electron neutrinos detected from the sun core failing to
match the expected numbers called as the Solar Neutrino Problem. In the Standard Model
the existence of flavor oscillations implies the nonzero differences between the neutrino
masses because the amount of mixing between neutrino flavours at a given time depends on
the differences in their squared masses.
Neutrino Oscillation is a quantum mechanical phenomenon predicted by Bruno Pontecorvo
whereby a neutrino created with a specific flavor can later be measured with a differerent
flavor. The probability of measuring a particular flavor for a neutrino varies periodically
as it propagates .Neutrino Oscillation is of theoretical importance since observation of the
phenomenon implies that the neutrino has a non zero mass, which is not part of the original
e

Standard Model of Particle Physics. The flavor eigen states of neutrino is and the

mass eigen states is 2 . The two states are related by a 33 mixing matrix :

e
1

= (U PMNS ) 2

(1.1)

And,
U PMNS

Ue1 Ue2 Ue3

= U1 U2 U3

U1 U2 U3

(1.2)

11

Taking two generations,

e

cos sin
sin cos

1
2

!
(1.3)

At t=0, we have an electron neutrino and muon neutrino which are both mixtures of 1 and
2 .
e (t = 0) = cos1 + sin 2

(1.4)

(t = 0) = cos2 sin 1

(1.5)

e (t ) = cos 1 eiE1 t + sin2 eiE2 t

(1.6)

(t ) = cos 2 eiE2 t sin1 eiE1 t

(1.7)

At t=t

Taking approximations
q
m21 + p21  p + m21 /2p,
q
E2 = m22 + p22  p + m22 /2p

E1 =

(1.8)
(1.9)

Where we consider the momentum of the neutrino to be large enough so that p1 = p2 =p

Now, from the above equations it can be shown that:
e (t ) = e (0) [cos2 1 eiE1 t + sin2 2 eiE2 t ] + (0) [eiE1 t + eiE2 t ]cossin (1.10)
Therefore,the probability of having e oscillation in time t is
P(e ) = [ sin2 sin (

And,

E1 E2 2
t )]
2h

(1.11)

P( ) = 1 - P( e )

Where,
m22 m21

m22 m21

c
c4
(1.12)
2p
2E
Thus neutrino oscillation implies that there must be neutrino masses because the probability
of oscillation depends on the difference of their squared masses.
E2 E1

12

1.5.

Neutrino Mass

In the standard model , neutrinos have exactly zero mass. This is a consequence of the
standard model containing only left handed neutrinos .With no suitable right handed partner,
it is impossible to add a renormalizable mass term to the standard model. Measurments
indicated that neutrinos spontaneously change flavours implying neutrinos do have a mass.
1.5.1.

Seesaw Mechanism(Type I, Type II And Inverse)

Type I Seesaw
One approach to add masses to the neutrinos, the so called Seesaw Mechanism is to add
right-handed neutrinos and have these couple to left handed neutrinos with a Dirac mass
term. Since neutrinos have non zero electric charge, Majorana terms are also possible and
the Majorana mass of the RH neutrino is much larger than SM symmetry breaking scale.
Once we consider Right Handed neutrinos by hand, we have a number of neutrino mass
terms
1. Dirac Mass Term
D
Lmass
= mD R L + h.c =

1
(mD R L + mD CR CL ) + h.c...
2

(1.13)

2.Majorana Mass term

1
L
Lmass
= mL CL L + h.c...
2

(1.14)

1
R
Lmass
= mR CR R + h.c
2

(1.15)

Now we write the total mass lagrangian in the form of a mass matrix

L=

D
Lmass

L
Lmass

R
Lmass

CL

0 mD
mTD mR

L
CR

!
(1.16)

After diagonalizing the matrix the following mass eigen states are obtained
m2 mR 1014 GeV.
m2D
m1
mR
T
mD m1
R mD

102 102
=
0.1 eV
1014
13

Thus we see that light neutrinos of sub ev scale are naturally generated due to the large
scale suppression of the other heavy scale RH Majorana neutrino, hence this is named as
Seesaw Mechanism.
Type II Seesaw

Several BSM framewoks have been proposed to explain the tiny neutrino mass and the
pattern of neutrino mixing. Tiny neutrino mass can be explained by seesaw mechanisms
which broadly fall into three classes: Type I , Type II and Inverse ,whereas the pattern of
neutrino mixing can be understood by incorporating flavor symmetries. The SM is extended
by three right handed singlet neutrinos and one higgs triplet such that both Type I and
Type II Seesaw can contribute to neutrino mass. Type I seesaw is assumed to give rise to a
symmetric neutrino mass matrix with 13 = 0 whereas Type II Seesaw acts as a perturbation
which breaks the symmetry resulting in non zero 13 .Type I seesaw is the simplest possible
realization, and is implemented by the inclusion of three additional right handed neutrinos
(Ri , i=1,2,3 ) as SU(2)L singlets with zero U(1)Y charges. On the other hand ,in Type
II Seesaw , the Standard Model is extended by the inclusion of an additional SU(2) L
triplet scalar field having U(1)Y charge twice that of lepton doublets with its 22 matrix
representation as
+

++
2

= 0

+

2

Thus the gauge invariant lagrangian for Type I and Type II seesaw mechanism is given
below
L = ( D )+ ( D ) + T r ( D )+ ( D ) LY V (, )
(1.17)
D E
With Vacuum expectation value of the SM Higgs 0 = 2 , the trilinear mass term generD E
ates an induced VEV for the Higgs triplet as 0 = 2 , thus resulting in 66 neutrino
mass matrix after electroweak symmetry breaking
!
mLL mLR
M =
mTLR MRR
lept

where, mLR = the Dirac Neutrino mass , mLL = Majorana mass for the light active neutrinos and MRR is the bare mass term for the heavy sterile majorana neutrinos.
With the mass hierarchy MRR  mLR  mLL , the seesaw formula for light neutrino mass is
given by
m = mLL = mILL + mII
LL
where, the formula for Type I Seesaw is given by
1 T
mILL = mLR MRR
mLR

14

Whereas the Type II Seesaw mechanism contribution to light neutrino mass is given by
mII
LL = f
D E 2
0 =
M2

where,

In the low scale Type II mechanism operative at TeV scale, one can consider a very small
value of trilinear mass parameter to be  108 GeV.
The tiny trilinear mass parameter controls the neutrino overall mass scale.
Inverse Seesaw Model

In spite of explaining the smallness of neutrino mass, such Type 1 Seesaw mechanisms
are not phenomenologically testable because the new Physics engendered by them will
manifest at 1014 GeV scale which is completely out of the range of the current accelerator
experiment.
So recently a new kind of seesaw was proposed ie. Inverse Seesaw Mechanism (ISS)
where small neutrino masses arise as a result of new Physics at TeV scale which may be
probed at LHC experiment. The implementation of ISS mechanism requires the addition of
three right handed neutrinos NR and the three extra SM gauge singlet neutral fermions S to
the three active neutrinos L .
After SSB the overall neutrino mass terms turn out to be

Lmass

mD
 0
1
L NRC S C mTD
0
=

2
T
0 MRS

0
MRS

C
L
NR

S

(1.18)

Where is the mass of the neutrino singlet, also neutrino singlet has no Yukawa coupling
to left handed neutrino but couple to NR .
A diagonalisation of the above 99 matrix leads to the effective light neutrino mass
matrix i.e.
1
m = mTD ( M TRS ) ( M RS )1 mTD
(1.19)
Or
2    M
2
 m
m
D
RS
=
0.1 eV
100 GeV
1 keV 10 T eV

(1.20)

Thus we see that Standard neutrinos with mass at sub eV scale are obtained for mD at
electroweak scale and MRS at TeV scale. The core of the ISS is that the smallness of the
neutrino masses are guaranteed by assuming that scale is small and in order to bring the
RH neutrinos at TeV scale, it has to be at KeV scale. ISS is also called double seesaw
because as seen from the above equation mD is doubly suppressed by MRS .
15

1.6.

Sterile Neutrino and Dark Matter

Mass eigen states that are dominantly linear combinations of LH neutrinos are called
Active Neutrinos and those are dominated by right handed neutrino components are called
STERILE neutrinos. Sterile neutrinos are hypothetical particles that interact only via gravity
and do not interact via any of the of the Standard Model. The term sterile neutrino is used to
distinguish them from the known active neutrinos in the Standard Model, which are charged
under the weak interaction.This term usually refers to neutrinos with right-handed chirality
which may be added to the Standard Model. The existence of right-handed neutrinos is
theoretically well-motivated, as all other known fermions have been observed with left and
right chirality, and they can explain the observed active neutrino masses in a natural way.
The mass of the right-handed neutrinos themselves is unknown and could have any value
between 1015 GeV and less than one eV. The number of sterile neutrino types is unknown.
The search for sterile neutrinos is an active area of particle physics. If they exist and their
mass is smaller than the energies of particles in the experiment, they can be produced in the
laboratory, either by mixing between active and sterile neutrinos or in high energy particle
collisions. If they are heavier, the only directly observable consequence of their existence
would be the observed active neutrino masses. They may, however, be responsible for
a number of unexplained phenomena in physical cosmology and astrophysics, including
dark matter, baryogenesis or dark radiation. Dark matter can be divided into cold, warm
and hot categories. If the dark matter is composed of abundant light particles which
remain relativistic until shortly before recombination, then it may be termed "hot". The
best candidate for hot dark matter is a neutrino.But HDM cannot explain how individual
galaxies formed from the big bang, so active neutrinos are generally not well motivated
Dark Matter candidates. Whereas Sterile Neutrinos with masses around the KeV can be
viable warm dark matter candidates(WDM).They can potentially solve, even if providing
only a fraction of the total dark matter relic density.In addition a sterile neutrino at this scale
could in general decay into an ordinary neutrino and a photon which could be detected in
cosmic rays. This last possibility has recently triggered an interest in view of the indication
( yet to be confirmed) of an unidentified photon line in galaxy cluster at an energy 3.5 KeV.
Sterile Neutrino can mix with active neutrinos and in that case, oscillations of the active
neutrinos into the sterile neutrinos in the early universe can populate the number density
of sterile neutrino and by this mechanism, it is possible to explain observed relic density
of DM. But the same mechanism would make sterile neutrinos decay into photon and a
neutrino. Such a monochromatic photon line can potentially be observed. Favoured mass
range of sterile neutrino is 1- 50 KeV, thus the photon line is predicted to fall into x-ray
domain. Thus a sterile neutrino with a mass of 7 KeV could be a viable DM candidate for
explaining the recent detection of a 3.5 KeV x-ray emission line of the galaxy cluster.

16

Chapter 2

Methodology
The (2,3) ISS Framework
The (2,3) ISS Realisation corresponds to an extension of the SM by two Right Handed
neutrinos and three sterile states and this realization can provide a WDM candidate ( for a
mass of the sterile state in the KeV range). The lagrangian representing the neutrino mass is
Lm = dL R + mCR R + nCR S + S S
Here the neutrino mass matrix M has the form:

0 d 0

M = dT m n ...

0 nT

(2.1)

The dirac mass matrix d arises from the Yukawa couplings to the SM Higgs boson
 
iR + h.c
Yi lL H
where,

(lL ) =

L eL

Which gives after electroweak symmetry breaking

di =

(2.2)
(2.3)

Yi
2

The mass m and represent Majorana mass terms for , respectively , right handed and
sterile fermions.
Finally the matrix n represents lepton number conserving interactions between right
handed and new sterile fermions. The physical neutrino states are obtained upon diagonalization of the mass matrix M and feature the following mass pattern:
3 light active states with masses of the form
17

m O ( )

O(d )
k2
,k
2
O(n)
1+k

(2.4)

Pairs of heavy Dirac heavy neutrinos with masses O(n) + O (d).

Light sterile states with masses O()
In order to be phenomenologically viable the matrix M associated to this (2,3) ISS
realization must exhibit upon diagonalization three light O (eV ),active eigen states with
mass differences in agreement with oscillation data and a mixing pattern compatible with
the experimental determination of the PMNS matrix.
As we will see, a good fit is provided by the (2,3) ISS realization ( 2 right handed and
3 additional sterile fermions); also an additional intermediate state with mass m4 = m s =
O() appears in the mass spectrum. However in order to comply with all constraints from
neutrino oscillations and laboratory experiments ,the coupling of this new state must be
highly suppressed, thus leading to a dominantly sterile state named as the Sterile Neutrino
with a mass ranging from eV to tens of KeV. As a consequence of its weak interactions the
lifetime of the sterile neutrino largely exceeds the lifetime of the Universe and it thus play a
relevant role in Dark Matter.
Since it is a (2,3) Realisation, we proceed to find the texture of the individual matrices
in the mass matrix M as follows:

R1Le R2Le

d ( 32 matrix) = R1L R2L

R1L R2L

S 11 S 12 S 13

( 33 matrix ) = S 21 S 22 S 23

S 31 S 32 S 33

R1S 1 R2S 1

n ( 32 matrix) = R1S 2 R2S 2

R1S 3 R2S 3

Due to discrete flavour symmetry like Z2 , the coupling term of the Right Handed fermions
does not come in the final expresssion and so
The mass matrix M is now

0 d 0
T

0 n
d

0 nT
This is a 88 leptonic mass matrix and considering the hierarchy  d n, the block
diagonalisation of this matrix provides the following effective neutrino mass matrix for the
standard neutrinos.
18

 1
m = dn1 nT dT

(2.5)

We carry out the Block Diagonalisation as follows

!
0 d 0
0 R
T

0 n =
M = d
(2.6)
RT P

T
0 n


where
R= d 0
!
0 n
P= T
n
If is the effective neutrino mass matrix ( lightest neutrino mass eigen value) representing
the the three active states, then
2 - P RRT = 0
Or = - RP1 RT
m = - RP1 RT

 1 " nT # dT !
= d 0
0
nnT n 0
where
1

1
=
nnT

"

nT
n 0

So the value of the effective neutrino matrix comes out to be

m = RP1 RT
"
# T !


nT
d
1
= d 0 nnT
n 0
0
!
T


d
1
= d 0 nn
T
ndT
 1
(ddT )
= nnT = dn1 nT dT
 1
mTd
We can write it also as,
m = md M 1 M T
Therefore the resultant mass matrix m is a 3 3 mixing matrix,like the PMNS matrix
which is considered as leading order contribution to the neutrino mass.
 1
The texture of the constituent matrices are taken such that md M 1 and M T
mTd are both
identity matrix I..This can be framed in the following
way

1 0 0  
1

1
md M = 0 1 0 = M T mTd

0 0 1
We take the matrix as a TBM ( Tribimaximal mixing) since it is compatible with all
verified neutrino oscillation experiments until recently and may be used as a zeroth order
19

approximation to more general forms of PMNS matrix. So the final matrix m being the
product of two identity matrices and a TBM matrix; is also a TBM matrix.
Therefore we get light neutrino mass matrix of TBM Type, namely

y
y
x

m = t y x + z y z ; where t is the Yukawa coupling.

y yz x+z
Next we proceed with the calculations for studying the neutrino phenomenology
relating to known mixing angles and squared mass differences of the active neutrinos. If
we can somehow restrict the eigenmass of the sterile neutrino to 0.1 KeV or less, then
it can be considered a potential dark matter candidate; as discussed by authors Asmaa
Abada [5]. This is the prime objective of the proposed studies.The well known neutrino
mixing matrix TBM predict the mixing angle angle 13 = 0.The non zero and relatively
large mixing angle have already been reported by MINOS, Double Chooz Daya Bay, and
RENO collaborations. In order to accommodate non zero mixing angle 13 , we modify the
Tribimaximal mixing matrix (TBM) by introducing a simple perturbation matrix to perturb
TBM matrix. Then we determine the neutrino mass spectrum in both normal and inverted
hierarchy from the modified TBM matrix, keeping the sterile neutrino mass of the order
of 0.1 KeV or less; which can be achieved by varying the Yukawa coupling in order of
0.1. By considering the different Yukawa coupling of sterile neutrino, we have studied the
neutrino phenomenology.

20

Chapter 3

Results, Analysis and Conclusion

3.1.

Results and Analysis

We are actually trying to establish a connection between neutrino phenomenology and

dark matter. The matrix in the above light neutrino mass matrix m representing sterile
fermion will be a viable Dark Matter candidate if we can show that even after taking the
sterile fermion into account we can reproduce the known neutrino parameters.
We start with the TBM form
of the mass matrix..
y
y
x

m = t y x + z y z ; where t is the Yukawa coupling

y yz x+z
The following rigorous calculations are done using the Mathematica Software.
Finding the eigensystem of the above matrix
t ( x y) t ( x + 2y) t ( x y + 2z)
{2, 1, 1} {1, 1, 1}
{0, 1, 1}
The mass eigen values are
m1 =t(x-y)
m2 =t(x+2y)
m3 =t(x-y+2z)

We take the Yukawa coupling value from 0.1 to 0.5 and run the following calculations
separately for each case
The Yukawa coupling actually represents the mass of the sterile fermion and so we
are analyzing neutrino spectrum by varying the mass of .
21

 Then we will observe if the parameters thus obtained falls in the 3 range of the
neutrino oscillation parameters shown below:

Table 3.1: Neutrino Oscillation Data for Normal Hierarchy

Oscillation parameters
m221

Best fit point(bfp)

7.5

7.02-8.07

2.457

2.3172.607

sin2 12

0.304

0.270
-0.344

sin2 13

0.0218

0.01860.0250

sin2 23

0.3810.643

[105 eV 2 ]
m231
[103 eV 2 ]

Table 3.2: Neutrino Oscillation Data for Inverted Hierarchy

Oscillation parameters

Best fit point(bfp)

7.5

7.02-8.07

-2.449

-2.590,2.307

sin2 12

0.304

0.270
-0.34

sin2 13

0.0219

0.01880.0251

sin2 23

0.3880.644

m221
[105 eV 2 ]
m231
[103 eV 2 ]

22

For each set of t, the eigen values x, y,z are found to be only slightly different and so we
discuss the analysis taking
Taking t =0.3 (say for normal hierarchy)

m221 = (m2 )2 (m1 )2

= 0.09( x y)2 + 0.09( x + 2y)2

And m231 = (m3 )2 (m2 )2

= 0.09( x y)2 + 0.09( x y + 2z)2

Taking the known values of oscillation parameters ie
m221 = 0.0000765,
m231 = 0.0024
m1 = 0.00001
we get the numerical solution of the parameters x,y,z as

Table 3.3: Value of x,y,z for t=0.3

x
0.0097404
0.0097404
0.00969603
0.00969603

y
0.0097071
0.0097071
0.0097293
0.0097293

z
0.0816663
0.0816329
0.0816663
0.0816329

We choose the values as

x=0.00974048
y=0.00970715
z=-0.0816663
Similarly now for different values of the Yukawa coupling say 0.5, 0.4., 0.3 ..(say).the
parameters x,y,z are found to be slightly different . These are tabulated below for Normal
Hierarchy
23

Table 3.4: Value of x,y,z for normal hierarchy

Parameters
x
y
z

t = 0.5
0.00584429
0.00582429
-0.0489998

t = 0.4
0.00730536
0.00728036
-0.0612497

t = 0.3
0.00974048
0.00970715
-0.0816663

Similarly for the case of Inverted Hierarchy, we follow the same proceedings and
for different values of the Yukawa coupling t=0.3,0.4,0.5, we tabulate the corresponding
parameters x,y,z

Table 3.5: value of x,y,z for inverted hierarchy

Parameters
x
y
z

t = 0.5
-0.0059943
-0.002338
0.021555

t = 0.4
-0.0344962
-0.0022374
-0.0459949

t = 0.3
-0.0459949
-0.0029833
0.0215225

Now as we were considering the t=0.3 case in NH, the eigen system of the TBM mass
y
y
x

matrix 0.3 y x + z y z comes out

y yz x+z

as

0.0489897
0.00874643
9.9 106
{1.13 1016 , 0.70710, 0.7071} {0.57735, 0.57736, 0.57735} {0.8164, 0.4082, 0.4082}

The mass matrix is still the TBM form with the third mixing angle
13 = 1.13 1016 0 ie

0.8164 0.57735 1.13 1016

0.4082 0.57735 0.70710

0.4082 0.57735
0.70710
However with the discovery of the non zero third mixing angle , it is necessary to
include the type II perturbation and we vary the type ii seesaw strength from 106 to .01 to
produce non zero 13 .
The perturbation matrix takes the structure

24


0 w w

0
mII = w w

w
0 w
After adding it, the new matrix becomes

m =mII + mI

ty w
ty + w
tx

t (y z)
m = ty w t ( x + z) + w

ty + w
t (y z)
t ( x + z) w

(3.1)

After getting the complete mass matrices for each of the case t=0.3,0.4, 0.5. . . ,we
diagonalize them. Now the elements of the diagonalised matrix are associated with the
parameters of the model. By varying the Type II perturbation strength w from 106 to
0.01 in stepsize of 106 , we compute all the oscillation parameters.The variation of Type
II strength w with the non vanishing 13 has been shown in the first two figures . The
production of other oscillation parameters ie the three mixing angles and the two mass
squared splitting as a function of non zero 13 has been shown in the subsequent figures for
both NH and IH case.

25

Figure 3.1: Type II perturbation versus sin2 13

...
Figure 3.2: Type II perturbation versus sin2 13

26

...
Figure 3.3: Variation of sin2 23 with sin2 13

...
Figure 3.4: Variation of sin2 23 with sin2 13

27

Figure 3.5: Variation of sin2 12 with sin2 13

...
Figure 3.6: Variation of sin2 12 with sin2 13

28

Figure 3.7: Variation of m223 with sin2 13

Figure 3.8: Variation of m231 with sin2 13

29

Figure 3.9: Variation of m221 with sin2 13

Figure 3.10: Variation of m221 with sin2 13

30

Table 3.6: Summary of Results obtained from graphs

m231
Model

or

m221

12

13

23

m223
TBM(NH)

TBM( IH)

We have calculated the oscillation parameters and from the graphs the following
observations are being found
The non zero value of 13 has been found to be consistent with the variation of Type
II seesaw strength.
All the oscillation parameters are being generated in the correct 3 by the working
matrix for any value of Yukawa coupling ranging from 0.1 to 0.5 in the NH case.
However the matrix is unable to generate m221 for the IH case; other parameters are
generated in the 3 range for the IH case.
The Yukawa coupling has got a key role in generating the oscillation parameters as
well.
3.2.

Conclusion

Thus we have studied the prospect of producing non zero 13 by introducing a perturbation
to the light neutrino mass matrix using Type II seesaw. We have also determined the
strength of the Type II seesaw term which is responsible for generating non zero 13 in
the correct 3 range. This model may have high relevance for future study so far as dark
matter phenomenology and sterile neutrino is concerned.

31

Chapter 4

Reference
[1] R. N. Mohapatra and J. W. Valle, Phys. Rev. D34, 1642-1645, 5 (1986).
[2] M. Borah, D. Borah, M.K.Das and S. Patra, Phys. Rev. D90, 095020 (2014).
[3] M. K. Das, M. Patgiri and N. N. Singh, Pramana 65, 995 (2006).
[4] S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 43,1566 (1979).
[5] A. Abada, S. Davidson, M. Losada and A. Riotto, JHEP 0601, 164 (2006).
[6] R. N. Mohapatra and G. Senjanovic, Phys. Rev.D23, 165 (1981).
[7] S. Antusch and S. F. King, Phys. Lett. B597, 199 (2004).
[8] D. Borah and M. K. Das, Nucl. Phys. B870, 461, (2013).
[9] S. F. King and N. N. Singh, Nucl. Phys. B596 (2), 26 (2001).
[10] G. Altarelli and F. Feruglio, Nucl. Phys. B741, 341, (2006).
[11] J. Schecter and J. W. Valle, Phys. Rev. D22, 2227 (1980).
[12] A. Damanik, arXiv:1201.2747v4[hep-ph].
[13] E. M. Dolle and S. Su, Phys. Rev. D80, 055012 (2009).
[14] B. Adhikari, M. Chakrabarty and A. Ghosal, Phys. Rev. D86, 013015 (2012).

32

[15] M. Hirsch, S. Morisi , E. Peinado and J. W. F. Valle, Phys. Rev. D82, (2010).
[16] C. Arina, R. N. Mohapatra and N. Sahu, Phys. Lett. B720, 130-136, (2013).
[17] A. Berlin, S.Gori, T. Lin and L. Wang, Phys. Rev. D92, 015005, (2015).
[18] E. Ma and U. Sarkar, Phys. Rev. Lett 80, 26, 5716 (1998).
[19] K. Kang, S. K. Kang and U. Sarkar, Phys. Lett. B486, 391 (2000)
[20] S. Gupta, A. S. Joshipura and K. M. Patel, Phys. Rev. D85, 031903 (2012)

33