Cosmological and astrophysical neutrino mass measurements

By K. Abazajian, E. Calabrese, A. Cooray, F. Bernardis, Scott Dodelson, A. Friedland, G. Fuller, S. Hannestad, B. Keating, Eric Linder and 8 more. 2011

153 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Cosmological and astrophysical measurements provide powerful constraints on neutrino masses complementary to those from accelerators and reactors. Here we provide a guide to these different probes, for each explaining its physical basis, underlying assumptions, current and future reach.

Subfields: Nuclear and High Energy Physics

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/2a457dd0a2f55a437b1b1d7099220cdc93dda31d

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Nuclear and High Energy Physics

1. M. Drewes
2. Z. Xing
3. Julien Lesgourgues
4. S. Pastor
5. M. Viel
6. C. Giunti
7. T. Schwetz
8. M. Maltoni

Citations in the corpus

• Current Direct Neutrino Mass Experiments (2013, background): “5 eV [11], which are to some extent model and analysis dependent [6].”
• Neutrino Mass from Cosmology (2012, background): “Other recent summaries of existing bounds have been recently presented in [6, 17, 50, 71, 75].”
• The clustering of galaxies in the SDSS-III Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey: measurements of the growth of structure and expansion rate at z = 0.57 from anisotropic clustering (2012, background): “One important extension of the minimal cosmological model is allowing neutrinos to have mass; neutrino oscillation experiments suggest that ∑ mν 0.05 eV (Abazajian et al. 2011).”
• An efficient implementation of massive neutrinos in non-linear structure formation simulations (2012, background): “Upcoming data from the Planck satellite is expected to lower this bound by a factor of two (Planck Collaboration 2005; Abazajian et al. 2011).”
• The Atacama Cosmology Telescope: cosmological parameters from three seasons of data (2013, unknown): “Various authors have explored possible models which lead to excess damping of the Silk damping tail (e.g., Galli et al. 2011; Calabrese et al. 2011a,b; Hasenkamp 2012; Hamann 2012; Menestrina & Scherrer 2012; Foot 2012; Abazajian et al. 2011; Menegoni et al. 2012; Farhang et al. 2013).”
• A White Paper on keV sterile neutrino Dark Matter (2016, background): “Note however that various uncertainties may still affect the constraints (see discussions in [241, 730, 788]): the comparison of subhaloes to Milky Way dwarfs assumes a factor ≈ 4 correction for the number of dwarfs being missed by current surveys, and lower correction factors would appreciably weak”
• Solar Neutrinos: Status and Prospects (2012, unknown): “0.2− 0.6 eV (Abazajian et al. 2011).”