Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

Neutrino Mixing
With the possible exceptions of ”short-baseline anomalies,”
such as LSND, all neutrino data can be described within theframework of a 3×3 mixing matrix between the mass eigenstates
ν1 , ν2 , and ν3 , leading to the flavor eigenstates νe , νµ , andντ , as described in the review ”Neutrino masses, mixing andoscillations.”
The Listings are divided in the following sections:(A) Neutrino fluxes and event ratios: shows measurements
which correspond to various oscillation tests for Accelerator, Reactor, Atmospheric, and Solar neutrino experiments. Typically,
ratios involve a measurement in a realm sensitive to oscillations
compared to one for which no oscillation effect is expected.
(B) Neutrino mixing parameters: shows measurements ofsin2 (θ12 ), sin2 (θ23 ), sin2 (θ13 ), ∆m221 , ∆m232 , and δCP as extracted from the measured data in the quoted publications in
the frame of the three-neutrino mixing scheme. The quoted
averages are not the result of a global fit, as in the review ”Neutrino masses, mixing, and oscillations,” and, as a consequence,might slightly differ from them. In some cases, measurements
depend on the mass order (normal when ∆m232 > 0 or inverted
when ∆m232 < 0) or octant of θ23 (lower when θ23 < 45◦ or
upper when θ23 > 45◦ ).
(C) Other neutrino mixing results:
The LSND anomaly [AGUILAR 01], reported a signal whichis consistent with ν µ → ν e oscillations. In a three neutrino
framework, this would be a measurement of θ12 and ∆m221 .
This does not appear to be consistent with the interpretationof other neutrino data. It has been interpreted as evidence fora 4th “sterile” neutrino. The following listings include results
https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 1Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

which might be relevant towards understanding this observation.
They include searches for νµ → νe , ν µ → ν e , sterile neutrino
oscillations, and others.
(A) Neutrino fluxes and event ratios
Events (observed/expected) from accelerator νµ experiments.

Some neutrino oscillation experiments compare the flux in two or more detectors. Thisis usually quoted as the ratio of the event rate in the far detector to the expected rate
based on an extrapolation from the near detector in the absence of oscillations.

VALUE

DOCUMENT ID

TECNCOMMENT• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •1 ABE
1.01± 0.10
14B T2K
νe rate in T2K near detect.
20.71± 0.08
AHN
06A K2KK2K to Super-K
3 MICHAEL
0.64± 0.05
06 MINS All charged current events+ 0.080.71 −
0.09

4 ALIU05

K2K

KEK to Super-K+ 0.100.70 −
0.11

5 AHN

03

K2K

KEK to Super-K

1 The rate of ν from µ decay was measured to be 0.68 ± 0.30 compared to the predictedeflux. From K decay 1.10 ± 0.14 compared to the predicted flux.
2 Based on the observation of 112 events when 158.1 + 9.2 were expected without os− 8.6
cillations. Including not only the number of events but also the shape of the energy
distribution, the evidence for oscillation is at the level of about 4.3 σ. Supersedes
ALIU 05.
3 This ratio is based on the observation of 215 events compared to an expectation of
336 ± 14 without oscillations. See also ADAMSON 08.
4 This ratio is based on the observation of 107 events at the far detector 250 km away
12
from KEK, and an expectation of 151 +− 10 .
5 This ratio is based on the observation of 56 events with an expectation of 80.1 + 6.2 .
− 5.4

Events (observed/expected) from reactor ν e experiments.

The quoted values are the ratios of the measured reactor ν e event rate at the quoted
distances, and the rate expected without oscillations. The expected rate is based on
the experimental data for the most significant reactor fuels (235 U, 239 Pu, 241 Pu)
and on calculations for 238 U.

A recent re-evaluation of the spectral conversion of electron to ν e in MUELLER 11
results in an upward shift of the reactor ν e spectrum by 3% and, thus, might require
revisions to the ratios listed in this table.
VALUE

DOCUMENT ID

TECNCOMMENT• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •1 ALMAZAN
0.948± 0.008 ± 0.033
20 RHFRHF reactor at ILL
2
0.952± 0.027
ADEY
19 DAYA DayaBay, Ling Ao/Ao II reactors
3 AN
16 DAYA DayaBay, Ling Ao/Ao II reactors
4
1.08 ± 0.21 ± 0.16
DENIZ
10 TEXO Kuo-Sheng reactor, 28 m
5 ARAKI
0.658± 0.044 ± 0.047
05 KLND Japanese react. ∼ 180 km
60.611± 0.085 ± 0.041
EGUCHI
03 KLND Japanese react. ∼ 180 km
7 BOEHM
1.01 ± 0.024 ± 0.053
01
Palo Verde react. 0.75–0.89 km

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 2Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

8 APOLLONIO 99 CHOZ Chooz reactors 1 km
1.01 ± 0.028 ± 0.027
90.987± 0.006 ± 0.037
GREENWOOD 96
Savannah River, 18.2 m
0.988± 0.004 ± 0.05
ACHKAR
95 CNTR Bugey reactor, 15 m
0.994± 0.010 ± 0.05
ACHKAR
95 CNTR Bugey reactor, 40 m
0.915± 0.132 ± 0.05
ACHKAR
95 CNTR Bugey reactor, 95 m
100.987± 0.014 ± 0.027
DECLAIS
94 CNTR Bugey reactor, 15 m
0.985± 0.018 ± 0.034
KUVSHINN... 91 CNTR Rovno reactor
1.05 ± 0.02 ± 0.05
VUILLEUMIER 82
Gösgen reactor
11 KWONνe p → e + n
0.955± 0.035 ± 0.110
81
110.89 ± 0.15
BOEHM
80
νe p → e + n
1 ALMAZAN 20 use the RHF research reactor at ILL to compare their measured antineutrino event rate to the calculation by HUBER 11. Reported 0.948 ± 0.008 ± 0.023 ±0.023 measurement with uncertainties from statistics, systematic, and model. Note that
this result is obtained for highly enriched 235 U reactor fuel while most other reactor
experiments utilize a low-enrichment mix of fissile nuclides.
2 ADEY 19 present a re-analysis of 1230 days of Daya Bay near detector data with reduced
systematic uncertainties on the neutron detection efficiency. Note that ADEY 19 report
the measured to predicted antineutrino ratio using the reactor model of MUELLER 11(Huber-Mueller model). The ratio using the older ILL-Vogel model is 1.001 ± 0.015 ±0.027.
3 AN 16 use 217 days of data (338k events) to determine the neutrino flux ratio relative
to the prediction of Mueller-Huber and ILL-Vogel models (see AN 16 for details). The
reported flux ratios were corrected for θ13 oscillation effect. The flux measurement is
consistent with results from previous short-baseline reactor experiments. The measured
inverse beta decay yield is (1.55 ± 0.04) × 10−18 cm2 /(GW day) or σf = (5.92 ±0.14) × 10−43 cm2 /fission. About 4σ excess of events was observed in the 4–6 MeV
prompt energy region.
4 DENIZ 10 observe reactor ν e scattering with recoil kinetic energies 3–8 MeV usingeCsI(Tl) detectors. The observed rate is consistent with the Standard Model prediction,
leading to a constraint on sin2 θW = 0.251 ± 0.031(stat) ± 0.024(sys).
5 Updated result of KamLAND, including the data used in EGUCHI 03. Note that thesurvival probabilities for different periods are not directly comparable because the effective
baseline varies with power output of the reactor sources involved, and there were large
variations in the reactor power production in Japan in 2003.
6 EGUCHI 03 observe reactor neutrino disappearance at ∼ 180 km baseline to various
Japanese nuclear power reactors.
7 BOEHM 01 search for neutrino oscillations at 0.75 and 0.89 km distance from the Palo
Verde reactors.
8 APOLLONIO 99, APOLLONIO 98 search for neutrino oscillations at 1.1 km fixed distance from Chooz reactors. They use ν e p → e + n in Gd-loaded scintillator target.
APOLLONIO 99 supersedes APOLLONIO 98. See also APOLLONIO 03 for detailed
description.
9 GREENWOOD 96 search for neutrino oscillations at 18 m and 24 m from the reactor at
Savannah River.
10 DECLAIS 94 result based on integral measurement of neutrons only. Result is ratio of measured cross section to that expected in standard V-A theory. Replaced by
ACHKAR 95.
11 KWON 81 represents an analysis of a larger set of data from the same experiment as
BOEHM 80.

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 3Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

Atmospheric neutrinos
Neutrinos and antineutrinos produced in the atmosphere induce µ-like ande-like events in underground detectors. The ratio of the numbers of thetwo kinds of events is defined as µ/e. It has the advantage that systematiceffects, such as flux uncertainty, tend to cancel, for both experimental andtheoretical values of the ratio. The “ratio of the ratios” of experimental
to theoretical µ/e, R(µ/e), or that of experimental to theoretical µ/total,
R(µ/total) with total = µ+e, is reported below. If the actual value is
not unity, the value obtained in a given experiment may depend on theexperimental conditions. In addition, the measured “up-down asymmetry” for µ (Nup (µ)/Ndown (µ)) or e (Nup (e)/Ndown (e)) is reported.
The expected “up-down asymmetry” is nearly unity if there is no neutrino
oscillation.

R(µ/e) = (Measured Ratio µ/e) / (Expected Ratio µ/e)
VALUE

DOCUMENT ID

TECNCOMMENT• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •1 ASHIE
0.658± 0.016 ± 0.035
05 SKAM sub-GeV+ 0.032 ± 0.101
0.702 −
0.030
0.69 ± 0.10 ± 0.06
1.00 ± 0.15 ± 0.08
+ 0.06 ± 0.05
0.60 −
0.05+
0.08 ± 0.07
0.57 − 0.07

2 ASHIE

05

3 SANCHEZ
4 FUKUDA
5 DAUM

03 SOU2 Calorimeter raw data
96B KAMI Water Cherenkov
95 FREJ Calorimeter

6 FUKUDA

94

SKAM multi-GeV

KAMI sub-GeV

7 FUKUDA

94 KAMI multi-Gev
8 BECKER-SZ... 92B IMBWater Cherenkov

1 ASHIE 05 results are based on an exposure of 92 kton yr during the complete SuperKamiokande I running period. The analyzed data sample consists of fully-contained
single-ring e-like events with 0.1 GeV/c < pe and µ-like events 0.2 GeV/c < pµ ,
both having a visible energy < 1.33 GeV. These criteria match the definition used by
FUKUDA 94.
2 ASHIE 05 results are based on an exposure of 92 kton yr during the complete SuperKamiokande I running period. The analyzed data sample consists of fully-contained
single-ring events with visible energy > 1.33 GeV and partially-contained events. All
partially-contained events are classified as µ-like.
3 SANCHEZ 03 result is based on an exposure of 5.9 kton yr, and updates ALLISON 99
result. The analyzed data sample consists of fully-contained e-flavor and µ-flavor events
having lepton momentum > 0.3 GeV/c.
4 FUKUDA 96B studied neutron background in the atmospheric neutrino sample observedin the Kamiokande detector. No evidence for the background contamination was found.
5 DAUM 95 results are based on an exposure of 2.0 kton yr which includes the data usedby BERGER 90B. This ratio is for the contained and semicontained events. DAUM 95
also report R(µ/e) = 0.99 ± 0.13 ± 0.08 for the total neutrino induced data sample
which includes upward going stopping muons and horizontal muons in addition to thecontained and semicontained events.
6 FUKUDA 94 result is based on an exposure of 7.7 kton yr and updates the HIRATA 92
result. The analyzed data sample consists of fully-contained e-like events with 0.1 <pe < 1.33 GeV/c and fully-contained µ-like events with 0.2 < pµ < 1.5 GeV/c.
7 FUKUDA 94 analyzed the data sample consisting of fully contained events with visibleenergy > 1.33 GeV and partially contained µ-like events.
8 BECKER-SZENDY 92B reports the fraction of nonshowering events (mostly muons fromatmospheric neutrinos) as 0.36 ± 0.02 ± 0.02, as compared with expected fraction 0.51 ±https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 4Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

0.01 ± 0.05. After cutting the energy range to the Kamiokande limits, BEIER 92 finds
R(µ/e) very close to the Kamiokande value.

R(νµ ) = (Measured Flux of νµ ) / (Expected Flux of νµ )VALUE

DOCUMENT ID

TECNCOMMENT• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •1 ADAMSON
0.84± 0.12
06 MINS MINOS atmospheric
2 AMBROSIO
0.72± 0.026 ± 0.13
01 MCRO upward through-going
3 AMBROSIO
0.57± 0.05 ± 0.15
00 MCRO upgoing partially contained
4 AMBROSIO
0.71± 0.05 ± 0.19
00 MCRO downgoing partially contained+ upgoing stopping
5 AMBROSIO
0.74± 0.036 ± 0.046
98 MCRO Streamer tubes
6 CASPER
91 IMB
Water Cherenkov
7 AGLIETTA
89 NUSX
8 BOLIEV
0.95± 0.22
81
Baksan0.62± 0.17
CROUCH78
Case Western/UCI
1 ADAMSON 06 uses a measurement of 107 total neutrinos compared to an expected rateof 127 ± 13 without oscillations.
2 AMBROSIO 01 result is based on the upward through-going muon tracks with E > 1µ
GeV. The data came from three different detector configurations, but the statistics islargely dominated by the full detector run, from May 1994 to December 2000. The total
live time, normalized to the full detector configuration, is 6.17 years. The first error isthe statistical error, the second is the systematic error, dominated by the theoretical error
in the predicted flux.
3 AMBROSIO 00 result is based on the upgoing partially contained event sample. It camefrom 4.1 live years of data taking with the full detector, from April 1994 to February
1999. The average energy of atmospheric muon neutrinos corresponding to this sample
is 4 GeV. The first error is statistical, the second is the systematic error, dominated by
the 25% theoretical error in the rate (20% in the flux and 15% in the cross section, addedin quadrature). Within statistics, the observed deficit is uniform over the zenith angle.
4 AMBROSIO 00 result is based on the combined samples of downgoing partially contained
events and upgoing stopping events. These two subsamples could not be distinguished
due to the lack of timing information. The result came from 4.1 live years of datataking with the full detector, from April 1994 to February 1999. The average energy
of atmospheric muon neutrinos corresponding to this sample is 4 GeV. The first error is
statistical, the second is the systematic error, dominated by the 25% theoretical error in
the rate (20% in the flux and 15% in the cross section, added in quadrature). Within
statistics, the observed deficit is uniform over the zenith angle.
5 AMBROSIO 98 result is for all nadir angles and updates AHLEN 95 result. The lower
cutoff on the muon energy is 1 GeV. In addition to the statistical and systematic errors,
there is a Monte Carlo flux error (theoretical error) of ± 0.13. With a neutrino oscillation hypothesis, the fit either to the flux or zenith distribution independently yields
sin2 2θ=1.0 and ∆(m2 ) ∼ a few times 10−3 eV2 . However, the fit to the observed
zenith distribution gives a maximum probability for χ2 of only 5% for the best oscillation
hypothesis.
6 CASPER 91 correlates showering/nonshowering signature of single-ring events with parent atmospheric-neutrino flavor. They find nonshowering (≈ νµ induced) fraction is0.41 ± 0.03 ± 0.02, as compared with expected 0.51 ± 0.05 (syst).
7 AGLIETTA 89 finds no evidence for any anomaly in the neutrino flux. They define ρ = (measured number of νe ’s)/(measured number of νµ ’s). They report+ 0.32 .
ρ(measured)=ρ(expected) = 0.96 −0.28
8 From this data BOLIEV 81 obtain the limit ∆(m2 ) ≤ 6 × 10−3 eV2 for maximal
mixing, νµ 6→ νµ type oscillation.

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 5Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

R(µ/total) = (Measured Ratio µ/total) / (Expected Ratio µ/total)
VALUE

DOCUMENT ID

TECNCOMMENT• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •+ 0.07 ± 0.11
1.1 −
0.12

1 CLARK97

IMB

multi-GeV

1 CLARK 97 obtained this result by an analysis of fully contained and partially contained
events in the IMB water-Cherenkov detector with visible energy > 0.95 GeV.

Nup (µ)/Ndown (µ)
VALUE

DOCUMENT ID

TECNCOMMENT• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •1 ADAMSON
0.71 ± 0.06
12B MINS contained-vertex muons+ 0.035 ± 0.004
0.551 −
0.033

2 ASHIE

05

SKAM multi-GeV

1 ADAMSON 12B reports the atmospheric neutrino results obtained with MINOS far detector in 2,553 live days (an exposure of 37.9 kton·yr). This result is obtained with asample of high resolution contained-vertex muons. The quoted error is statistical only.
2 ASHIE 05 results are based on an exposure of 92 kton yr during the complete SuperKamiokande I running period. The analyzed data sample consists of fully-contained
single-ring µ-like events with visible energy > 1.33 GeV and partially-contained events.
All partially-contained events are classified as µ-like. Upward-going events are thosewith − 1 < cos(zenith angle) < − 0.2 and downward-going events are those with 0.2<
cos(zenith angle) <1. The µ-like up-down ratio for the multi-GeV data deviates from 1(the expectation for no atmospheric νµ oscillations) by more than 12 standard deviations.

Nup (e)/Ndown (e)VALUE

DOCUMENT ID

TECNCOMMENT• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •+ 0.086 ± 0.016
0.961 −
0.079

1 ASHIE

05

SKAM multi-GeV

1 ASHIE 05 results are based on an exposure of 92 kton yr during the complete SuperKamiokande I running period. The analyzed data sample consists of fully-contained
single-ring e-like events with visible energy > 1.33 GeV. Upward-going events are thosewith − 1 < cos(zenith angle) < − 0.2 and downward-going events are those with 0.2< cos(zenith angle) < 1. The e-like up-down ratio for the multi-GeV data is consistent
with 1 (the expectation for no atmospheric νe oscillations).

R(up/down; µ) = (Measured up/down; µ) / (Expected up/down; µ)
VALUE

DOCUMENT ID

TECNCOMMENT• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •1 ADAMSON
0.62± 0.05 ± 0.02
12B MINS contained-vertex muons+ 0.19 ± 0.02
0.62 −
0.14

2 ADAMSON

06

MINS

atmospheric ν with far detector

1 ADAMSON 12B reports the atmospheric neutrino results obtained with MINOS far detector in 2,553 live days (an exposure of 37.9 kton·yr). This result is obtained with asample of high resolution contained-vertex muons. The expected ratio is calculated withno neutrino oscillation.
2 ADAMSON 06 result is obtained with the MINOS far detector with an exposure of 4.54
kton yr. The expected ratio is calculated with no neutrino oscillation.

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 6Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

N(µ+ )/N(µ− )VALUE

DOCUMENT ID

TECNCOMMENT• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •+ 0.050.46 −
0.04

1,2 ADAMSON

12B MINS

contained-vertex muons+ 0.090.63 −
0.08

1,3 ADAMSON

12B MINSν-induced rock-muons

1 ADAMSON 12B reports the atmospheric neutrino results obtained with MINOS far
detector in 2,553 live days (an exposure of 37.9 kton·yr). The muon charge ratio
N(µ+ )/N(µ− ) represents the ν µ /νµ ratio.
2 This result is obtained with a charge-separated sample of high resolution contained-vertex
muons. The quoted error is statistical only.
3 This result is obtained with a charge-separated sample of high resolution neutrino-induced
rock-muons. The quoted error is statistical only.

R(µ+ /µ− ) = (Measured N(µ+ )/N(µ− )) / (Expected N(µ+ )/N(µ− ))VALUE

DOCUMENT ID

TECNCOMMENT• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •1,2 ADAMSON
0.93± 0.09 ± 0.09
12B MINS contained-vertex muons+ 0.19 ± 0.16
1.29 −
0.17

1,3 ADAMSON

12B MINSν-induced rock-muons

1.03± 0.08 ± 0.08
+ 0.35 + 0.08
1.39 −
0.46 − 0.14

1,4 ADAMSON

12B MINS

contained

5 ADAMSON

07

MINS

+ 0.38 ± 0.15
0.96 −
0.27

6 ADAMSON

06

MINS

Upward and horizontal µ with
far detector
atmospheric ν with far detector

1 ADAMSON 12B reports the atmospheric neutrino results obtained with MINOS far
detector in 2,553 live days (an exposure of 37.9 kton·yr). The muon charge ratio
N(µ+ )/N(µ− ) represents the ν µ /νµ ratio. As far as the same oscillation parameters
are used for νs and νs, the expected ν µ /νµ ratio is almost entirely independent of any
input oscillations.
2 This result is obtained with a charge-separated sample of high resolution contained-vertex
muons.
3 This result is obtained with a charge-separated sample of high resolution neutrino-induced
rock-muons.
4 The charge-separated samples of high resolution contained-vertex muons and neutrinoinduced rock-muons are combined to obtain this result which is consistent with unity.
5 ADAMSON 07 result is obtained with the MINOS far detector in 854.24 live days, basedon neutrino-induced upward-going and horizontal muons. This result is consistent with
CPT conservation.
6 ADAMSON 06 result is obtained with the MINOS far detector with an exposure of 4.54
kton yr, based on contained events. The expected ratio is calculated by assuming thesame oscillation parameters for neutrinos and antineutrinos.

Solar neutrinos
Solar neutrinos are produced by thermonuclear fusion reactions in theSun. Radiochemical experiments measure particular combinations of fluxes
from various neutrino-producing reactions, whereas water-Cherenkov experiments mainly measure a flux of neutrinos from decay of 8 B. Solar
neutrino fluxes are composed of all active neutrino species, νe , νµ , andντ . In addition, some other mechanisms may cause antineutrino components in solar neutrino fluxes. Each measurement method is sensitive toa particular component or a combination of components of solar neutrino
fluxes.

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 7Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

νe Capture Rates from Radiochemical Experiments

1 SNU (Solar Neutrino Unit) = 10−36 captures per atom per second.

VALUE (SNU)

DOCUMENT ID

TECNCOMMENT• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •+ 6.1 + 3.7
73.4 −
6.0 − 4.1

1 KAETHER

10GALX reanalysis

2 KAETHER
67.6 ± 4.0 ± 3.2
10
GNO+GALX reanalysis combined
+
3.1
+
2.6
3 ABDURASHI... 09 SAGE 71 Ga → 71 Ge
65.4 − 3.0 − 2.8+ 5.5 ± 2.5
4 ALTMANN
62.9 −
05 GNO 71 Ga → 71 Ge
5.3
5 ALTMANN
69.3 ± 4.1 ± 3.6
05 GNO GNO + GALX combined+
4.3
6
77.5 ± 6.2 − 4.7
HAMPEL99 GALX 71 Ga → 71 Ge
7 CLEVELAND 98 HOME 37 Cl → 37 Ar
2.56± 0.16 ± 0.16
1 KAETHER 10 reports the reanalysis results of a complete GALLEX data (GALLEXI+II+III+IV, reported in HAMPEL 99) based on the event selection with a new pulse
shape analysis, which provides a better background reduction than the rise time analysis
adopted in HAMPEL 99.
2 Combined result of GALLEX I+II+III+IV reanalysis and GNO I+II+III (ALTMANN 05).
3 ABDURASHITOV 09 reports a combined analysis of 168 extractions of the SAGE solar
neutrino experiment during the period January 1990 through December 2007, and updates the ABDURASHITOV 02 result. The data are consistent with the assumption thatthe solar neutrino production rate is constant in time. Note that a ∼ 15% systematic
uncertainty in the overall normalization may be added to the ABDURASHITOV 09 result,because calibration experiments for gallium solar neutrino measurements using intense
51 Cr (twice by GALLEX and once by SAGE) and 37 Ar (by SAGE) result in an average
ratio of 0.87 ± 0.05 of the observed to calculated rates.
4 ALTMANN 05 reports the complete result from the GNO solar neutrino experiment(GNO I+II+III), which is the successor project of GALLEX. Experimental technique of
GNO is essentially the same as that of GALLEX. The run data cover the period 20 May
1998 through 9 April 2003.
5 Combined result of GALLEX I+II+III+IV (HAMPEL 99) and GNO I+II+III.
6 HAMPEL 99 report the combined result for GALLEX I+II+III+IV (65 runs in total),
which update the HAMPEL 96 result. The GALLEX IV result (12 runs) is 118.4 ±17.8 ± 6.6 SNU. (HAMPEL 99 discuss the consistency of partial results with the mean.)
The GALLEX experimental program has been completed with these runs. The total run
data cover the period 14 May 1991 through 23 January 1997. A total of 300 71 Ge eventswere observed. Note that a ∼ 15% systematic uncertainty in the overall normalization
may be added to the HAMPEL 99 result, because calibration experiments for gallium
solar neutrino measurements using intense 51 Cr (twice by GALLEX and once by SAGE)
and 37 Ar (by SAGE) result in an average ratio of 0.87 ± 0.05 of the observed to calculated
rates.
7 CLEVELAND 98 is a detailed report of the 37 Cl experiment at the Homestake Mine.
The average solar neutrino-induced 37 Ar production rate from 108 runs between 1970
and 1994 updates the DAVIS 89 result.

φES (8 B)

8 B solar-neutrino flux measured via ν e elastic scattering. This process is sensitive toall active neutrino flavors, but with reduced sensitivity to νµ , ντ due to the crosssection difference, σ(ν µ,τ e) ∼ 0.16σ(νe e). If the 8 B solar-neutrino flux involves
nonelectron flavor active neutrinos, their contribution to the flux is ∼ 0.16 times ofνe .

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 8Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

VALUE (106 cm− 2 s− 1 )DOCUMENT ID

TECNCOMMENT• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •+ 0.17 + 0.07
2.57 −
0.18 − 0.07

1 AGOSTINI

20A BORX average flux

+ 0.31 + 0.13
2.53 −
0.28 − 0.10

2 ANDERSON

19+ 0.17 + 0.07
2.57 −
0.18 − 0.07

3 AGOSTINI

18B BORX average flux

4 ABE

16C SKAM SK-I+II+III+IV average flux

5 ABE

16C SKAM SK-IV average flux

5 ABE

16C SKAM SK-IV day flux

5 ABE
6 ABE

16C SKAM SK-IV night flux
16C SKAM SK-III average flux

7 ABE

11

8 ABE
9 ABE
10 BELLINI

11 SKAM SK-I average flux
11B KLND average flux
10A BORX average flux

11 AHARMIM

08

SNO

12 CRAVENS

08

SKAM average flux

13 HOSAKA
14 AHARMIM

2.345± 0.014 ± 0.036+ 0.0392.308± 0.020 −
0.040
+
0.030
2.250 − 0.029 ± 0.038
2.364± 0.029 ± 0.040
2.404± 0.039 ± 0.053+ 0.16
2.41 ± 0.05 −0.15
2.38 ± 0.02 ± 0.08
2.77 ± 0.26 ± 0.32
2.4 ± 0.4 ± 0.1+ 0.24 + 0.09
1.77 −
0.21 − 0.10
+ 0.162.38 ± 0.05 −0.15
2.35 ± 0.02 ± 0.08
2.35 ± 0.22 ± 0.15

SNO+ Water phase; average flux

SKAM SK-II average flux

Phase III+ 0.152.34 ± 0.23 −0.14

14 AHARMIM+ 0.24 ± 0.12
2.39 −
0.23

15 AHMAD

06 SKAM average flux
05A SNO
Salty D2 O; 8 B shape not constrained
05A SNO
Salty D2 O; 8 B shape constrained
02 SNO
average flux

+ 0.16
2.39 ± 0.34 −0.14

16 AHMAD

01

SNO

average flux

17 FUKUDA
2.80 ± 0.19 ± 0.33
96 KAMI average flux
17 FUKUDA
2.70 ± 0.27
96 KAMI day flux
+ 0.2717 FUKUDA
2.87 −
96 KAMI night flux
0.26
1 AGOSTINI 20A obtained this result from the ν e elastic scattering rate over the periodebetween January 2008 and December 2016. Uses the same data as AGOSTINI 18B, but
the analysis technique is significantly improved.
2 ANDERSON 19 reports this result from the ν e elastic scattering rate using a 69.2
ekton·day (or 114.7 days) of exposure from May through December, 2017 during the
SNO+ detector’s water commissioning phase. The events over the reconstructed electron
kinetic energy range of 5–15 MeV were analyzed.
3 AGOSTINI 18B obtained this result from the ν e elastic scattering rate over the periodebetween January 2008 and December 2016.
4 ABE 16C reports the combined results of the four phases of the Super-Kamiokande
average flux measurements. Here the revised Super-Kamiokande-III result is used.
5 ABE 16C reports the Super-Kamiokande-IV results for 1664 live days from September
2008 to February 2014. The analysis threshold is total electron energy of 4.0 MeV.
6 ABE 16C revised the Super-Kamiokande-III average flux value reported in ABE 11. SuperKamiokande-III results are for 548 live days from August 4, 2006 to August 18, 2008. The
analysis threshold is 5.0 MeV, but the event sample in the 5.0–6.5 MeV total electronenergy range has a total live time of 298 days.

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 9Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

7 ABE 11 recalculated the Super-Kamiokande-II results using 8 B spectrum of WINTER 06A.
8 ABE 11 recalculated the Super-Kamiokande-I results using 8 B spectrum of WINTER 06A.
9 ABE 11B use a 123 kton·day exposure of the KamLAND liquid scintillation detector
to measure the 8 B solar neutrino flux. They utilize ν − e elastic scattering above areconstructed-energy threshold of 5.5 MeV, corresponding to 5 MeV electron recoil energy. 299 electron recoil candidate events are reported, of which 157 ± 23.6 are assigned
to background.
10 BELLINI 10A reports the Borexino result with 3 MeV energy threshold for scatteredelectrons. The data correspond to 345.3 live days with a target mass of 100 t, between
July 15, 2007 and August 23, 2009.
11 AHARMIM 08 reports the results from SNO Phase III measurement using an array of
3 He proportional counters to measure the rate of NC interactions in heavy water, overthe period between November 27, 2004 and November 28, 2006, corresponding to 385.17
live days. A simultaneous fit was made for the number of NC events detected by the
proportional counters and the numbers of NC, CC, and ES events detected by the PMTs,
where the spectral distributions of the ES and CC events were not constrained to the 8 B
shape.
12 CRAVENS 08 reports the Super-Kamiokande-II results for 791 live days from December
2002 to October 2005. The photocathode coverage of the detector is 19% (reduced from
40% of that of Super-Kamiokande-I due to an accident in 2001). The analysis thresholdfor the average flux is 7 MeV.
13 HOSAKA 06 reports the final results for 1496 live days with Super-Kamiokande-I between
May 31, 1996 and July 15, 2001, and replace FUKUDA 02 results. The analysis thresholdis 5 MeV except for the first 280 live days (6.5 MeV).
14 AHARMIM 05A measurements were made with dissolved NaCl (0.195% by weight) inheavy water over the period between July 26, 2001 and August 28, 2003, corresponding
to 391.4 live days, and update AHMED 04A. The CC, ES, and NC events were statisticallyseparated. In one method, the 8 B energy spectrum was not constrained. In the othermethod, the constraint of an undistorted 8 B energy spectrum was added for comparison
with AHMAD 02 results.
15 AHMAD 02 reports the 8 B solar-neutrino flux measured via ν e elastic scattering above
the kinetic energy threshold of 5 MeV. The data correspond to 306.4 live days with SNO
between November 2, 1999 and May 28, 2001, and updates AHMAD 01 results.
16 AHMAD 01 reports the 8 B solar-neutrino flux measured via ν e elastic scattering above
the kinetic energy threshold of 6.75 MeV. The data correspond to 241 live days with
SNO between November 2, 1999 and January 15, 2001.
17 FUKUDA 96 results are for a total of 2079 live days with Kamiokande II and III fromJanuary 1987 through February 1995, covering the entire solar cycle 22, with threshold
Ee > 9.3 MeV (first 449 days), > 7.5 MeV (middle 794 days), and > 7.0 MeV (last 836
days). These results update the HIRATA 90 result for the average 8 B solar-neutrino fluxand HIRATA 91 result for the day-night variation in the 8 B solar-neutrino flux. The total
data sample was also analyzed for short-term variations: within experimental errors, nostrong correlation of the solar-neutrino flux with the sunspot numbers was found.

φCC (8 B)

8 B solar-neutrino flux measured with charged-current reaction which is sensitive ex-clusively to νe .
VALUE (106 cm− 2 s− 1 )DOCUMENT ID

TECNCOMMENT• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •+ 0.05 + 0.07
1.67 −
0.04 − 0.08

1 AHARMIM

08+ 0.081.68± 0.06 −0.09

2 AHARMIM

05A SNOhttps://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 10SNO

Phase III
Salty D2 O; 8 B shape
not const.

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

2 AHARMIM

1.72± 0.05 ± 0.11

05A SNO

Salty D2 O; 8 B shape
constrained
average flux

+ 0.06 ± 0.09
3 AHMAD1.76 −
02 SNO
0.05+
0.12
4 AHMAD1.75 ± 0.07 − 0.11 ± 0.05
01 SNO
average flux
1 AHARMIM 08 reports the results from SNO Phase III measurement using an array of
3 He proportional counters to measure the rate of NC interactions in heavy water, overthe period between November 27, 2004 and November 28, 2006, corresponding to 385.17
live days. A simultaneous fit was made for the number of NC events detected by the
proportional counters and the numbers of NC, CC, and ES events detected by the PMTs,
where the spectral distributions of the ES and CC events were not constrained to the 8 B
shape.
2 AHARMIM 05A measurements were made with dissolved NaCl (0.195% by weight) inheavy water over the period between July 26, 2001 and August 28, 2003, corresponding
to 391.4 live days, and update AHMED 04A. The CC, ES, and NC events were statisticallyseparated. In one method, the 8 B energy spectrum was not constrained. In the othermethod, the constraint of an undistorted 8 B energy spectrum was added for comparison
with AHMAD 02 results.
3 AHMAD 02 reports the SNO result of the 8 B solar-neutrino flux measured with chargedcurrent reaction on deuterium, νe d → p p e − , above the kinetic energy threshold of
5 MeV. The data correspond to 306.4 live days with SNO between November 2, 1999
and May 28, 2001, and updates AHMAD 01 results. The complete description of the
SNO Phase I data set is given in AHARMIM 07.
4 AHMAD 01 reports the first SNO result of the 8 B solar-neutrino flux measured with the
charged-current reaction on deuterium, νe d → p p e − , above the kinetic energy threshold of 6.75 MeV. The data correspond to 241 live days with SNO between November 2,
1999 and January 15, 2001.

φNC (8 B)

8 B solar neutrino flux measured with neutral-current reaction, which is equally sensitiveto νe , νµ , and ντ .
VALUE (106 cm− 2 s− 1 )CL%

DOCUMENT ID

TECNCOMMENT• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •
1 MA
<9.0
90
23A PNDX CEνNS, liquid Xe detector+ 0.11
5.25 ± 0.16 −0.13

2 AHARMIM

13

SNO

All three phases combined+ 0.160 + 0.132
5.140 −
0.158 − 0.117

3 AHARMIM

10

SNO

Phase I+II, low threshold+ 0.33 + 0.36
5.54 −
0.31 − 0.34

4 AHARMIM

08

SNO

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 11

Phase III, prop. counter +
PMT
+
0.38
5
4.94 ± 0.21 − 0.34
AHARMIM
05A SNO
Salty D2 O; 8 B shape notconst.
+
0.28
5
4.81 ± 0.19 − 0.27
AHARMIM
05A SNO
Salty D2 O; 8 B shape constrained
+
0.46
+
0.44
6
5.09 − 0.43 − 0.43
AHMAD
02 SNO
average flux; 8 B shape
const.
+
0.55
6
6.42 ± 1.57 − 0.58
AHMAD
02 SNO
average flux; 8 B shape notconst.
1 MA 23A searched for 8 B solar neutrinos elastically scattered off xenon nuclei in thecommissioning phase of the PANDAX-4T experiment with an effective exposure of 0.48
ton·yr. This experiment is dedicated to dark matter direct search using a dual-phasexenon TPC with a sensitive volume of 3.7 tons of liquid Xe.

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

2 AHARMIM 13 obtained this result from a combined analysis of the data from all threephases, SNO-I, II, and III. The measurement of the 8 B flux mostly comes from the NC
signal, however, CC contribution is included in the fit.
3 AHARMIM 10 reports this result from a joint analysis of SNO Phase I+II data with the”effective electron kinetic energy” threshold of 3.5 MeV. This result is obtained with a”binned-histogram unconstrained fit” where binned probability distribution functions of
the neutrino signal observables were used without any model constraints on the shapeof the neutrino spectrum.
4 AHARMIM 08 reports the results from SNO Phase III measurement using an array of
3 He proportional counters to measure the rate of NC interactions in heavy water, overthe period between November 27, 2004 and November 28, 2006, corresponding to 385.17
live days. A simultaneous fit was made for the number of NC events detected by the
proportional counters and the numbers of NC, CC, and ES events detected by the PMTs,
where the spectral distributions of the ES and CC events were not constrained to the 8 B
shape.
5 AHARMIM 05A measurements were made with dissolved NaCl (0.195% by weight) inheavy water over the period between July 26, 2001 and August 28, 2003, corresponding
to 391.4 live days, and update AHMED 04A. The CC, ES, and NC events were statisticallyseparated. In one method, the 8 B energy spectrum was not constrained. In the othermethod, the constraint of an undistorted 8 B energy spectrum was added for comparison
with AHMAD 02 results.
6 AHMAD 02 reports the first SNO result of the 8 B solar-neutrino flux measured with
the neutral-current reaction on deuterium, νℓ d → n p νℓ , above the neutral-current
reaction threshold of 2.2 MeV. The data correspond to 306.4 live days with SNO between
November 2, 1999 and May 28, 2001. The complete description of the SNO Phase I
data set is given in AHARMIM 07.

φνµ +ντ (8 B)

Nonelectron-flavor active neutrino component (νµ and ντ ) in the 8 B solar-neutrino
flux.

VALUE (106 cm− 2 s− 1 )DOCUMENT ID

TECNCOMMENT• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •+ 0.403.26± 0.25 −0.35

1 AHARMIM

05A SNO

From φNC , φCC , and φES ;8 B shape not const.

+ 0.303.09± 0.22 −0.27

1 AHARMIM

05A SNO

From φNC , φCC , and φES ;8 B shape constrained+ 0.483.41± 0.45 −0.45

2 AHMAD

02

From φNC , φCC , and φES

3 AHMAD01

3.69± 1.13

SNO

Derived from SNO+SuperKam,
water Cherenkov
1 AHARMIM 05A measurements were made with dissolved NaCl (0.195% by weight) inheavy water over the period between July 26, 2001 and August 28, 2003, corresponding
to 391.4 live days, and update AHMED 04A. The CC, ES, and NC events were statisticallyseparated. In one method, the 8 B energy spectrum was not constrained. In the othermethod, the constraint of an undistorted 8 B energy spectrum was added for comparison
with AHMAD 02 results.
2 AHMAD 02 deduced the nonelectron-flavor active neutrino component (ν and ν )µτ
in the 8 B solar-neutrino flux, by combining the charged-current result, the ν e elasticscattering result and the neutral-current result. The complete description of the SNO
Phase I data set is given in AHARMIM 07.
3 AHMAD 01 deduced the nonelectron-flavor active neutrino component (ν and ν ) inµ
τ8the B solar-neutrino flux, by combining the SNO charged-current result (AHMAD 01)
and the Super-Kamiokande ν e elastic-scattering result (FUKUDA 01).

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 12Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

Total Flux of Active p p Solar Neutrinos
Total flux of active neutrinos (νe ,νµ ,ντ ).
VALUE (1010 cm− 2 s− 1 )DOCUMENT ID

TECNCOMMENT• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •+ 0.3
6.1± 0.5 −0.5

1 AGOSTINI

18B BORX νe e scattering rate

1 AGOSTINI 18B obtained this result from the measured ν e elastic scattering rate overethe period between December 2011 and May 2016, assuming the MSW-LMA oscillation
parameters derived by ESTEBAN 17. Assuming a high-metalicity standard solar model,
the electron neutrino survival probability for the p p solar neutrino is calculated to be
0.57 ± 0.09.

Total Flux of Active 7 Be Solar Neutrinos
Total flux of active neutrinos (νe ,νµ ,ντ ).
VALUE (109 cm− 2 s− 1 )DOCUMENT ID

TECNCOMMENT• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •+ 0.064.99± 0.11 −0.08

1 AGOSTINI

18B BORX νe e scattering rate

1 AGOSTINI 18B obtained this result from the measured ν e elastic scattering rate overethe period between December 2011 and May 2016, assuming the MSW-LMA oscillation
parameters derived by ESTEBAN 17. Assuming a high-metalicity standard solar model,
the electron neutrino survival probability for the 7 Be solar neutrino is calculated to be
0.53 ± 0.05.

Total Flux of Active p e p Solar Neutrinos
Total flux of active neutrinos (νe ,νµ ,ντ ).
VALUE (108 cm− 2 s− 1 )DOCUMENT ID

TECNCOMMENT• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •+ 0.081.27± 0.19 −0.12

1 AGOSTINI

18B BORX νe e scattering rate

1 AGOSTINI 18B obtained this result from the measured ν e elastic scattering rate overethe period between December 2011 and May 2016, assuming the MSW-LMA oscillation
parameters derived by ESTEBAN 17 and a high-metalicity standard solar model. The
electron neutrino survival probability for the pep solar neutrino is calculated to be 0.43 ±0.11.

Total Flux of Active 8 B Solar Neutrinos
Total flux of active neutrinos (νe , νµ , and ντ ).
VALUE (106 cm− 2 s− 1 )DOCUMENT ID

TECNCOMMENT• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •+ 0.75 + 0.28
5.95 −
0.71 − 0.30

1 ANDERSON

19+ 0.39 + 0.03
5.68 −
0.41 − 0.03

2 AGOSTINI

18B BORX From νe e scattering rate

+ 0.11
5.25 ± 0.16 −0.13

3 AHARMIM

13

SNO

All three phases combined+ 0.159 + 0.107
5.046 −
0.152 − 0.123

4 AHARMIM

10

SNO+ 0.33 + 0.36
5.54 −
0.31 − 0.34

5 AHARMIM

08

SNO

From φNC in Phase I+II, lowthresholdφNC in Phase III

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 13

SNO+ Water phase; νe e scattering rate

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)+ 0.384.94 ± 0.21 −0.34

6 AHARMIM

05A SNO

From φNC ; 8 B shape not const.

+ 0.284.81 ± 0.19 −0.27

6 AHARMIM

05A SNO

From φNC ; 8 B shape constrained+ 0.44 + 0.46
5.09 −
0.43 − 0.43

7 AHMAD02

Direct measurement from φNC

8 AHMAD01

5.44 ± 0.99

SNO

Derived from SNO+SuperKam,
water Cherenkov
1 ANDERSON 19 reports this result from the measured ν e elastic scattering rate using ae69.2 kton·day (or 114.7 days) of exposure from May through December, 2017 during the
SNO+ detector’s water commissioning phase, assuming the neutrino mixing parameters
given in PDG 16 and a standard solar model given in BAHCALL 05.
2 AGOSTINI 18B obtained this result from the measured ν e elastic scattering rate over theeperiod between January 2008 and December 2016, assuming the MSW-LMA oscillation
parameters derived by ESTEBAN 17. Assuming a high-metalicity standard solar model,
the electron neutrino survival probability for the 8 B solar neutrino is calculated to be
0.37 ± 0.08.
3 AHARMIM 13 obtained this result from a combined analysis of the data from all threephases, SNO-I, II, and III. The measurement of the 8 B flux mostly comes from the NC
signal, however, CC contribution is included in the fit.
4 AHARMIM 10 reports this result from a joint analysis of SNO Phase I+II data withthe ”effective electron kinetic energy” threshold of 3.5 MeV. This result is obtainedwith the assumption of unitarity, which relates the NC, CC, and ES rates. The data
were fit with the free parameters directly describing the total 8 B neutrino flux and theenergy-dependent νe survival probability.
5 AHARMIM 08 reports the results from SNO Phase III measurement using an array of
3 He proportional counters to measure the rate of NC interactions in heavy water, overthe period between November 27, 2004 and November 28, 2006, corresponding to 385.17
live days. A simultaneous fit was made for the number of NC events detected by the
proportional counters and the numbers of NC, CC, and ES events detected by the PMTs,
where the spectral distributions of the ES and CC events were not constrained to the 8 B
shape.
6 AHARMIM 05A measurements were made with dissolved NaCl (0.195% by weight) inheavy water over the period between July 26, 2001 and August 28, 2003, corresponding
to 391.4 live days, and update AHMED 04A. The CC, ES, and NC events were statisticallyseparated. In one method, the 8 B energy spectrum was not constrained. In the othermethod, the constraint of an undistorted 8 B energy spectrum was added for comparison
with AHMAD 02 results.
7 AHMAD 02 determined the total flux of active 8 B solar neutrinos by directly measuring
the neutral-current reaction, νℓ d → n p νℓ , which is equally sensitive to νe , νµ , and ντ .
The complete description of the SNO Phase I data set is given in AHARMIM 07.
8 AHMAD 01 deduced the total flux of active 8 B solar neutrinos by combining the SNO
charged-current result (AHMAD 01) and the Super-Kamiokande ν e elastic-scatteringresult (FUKUDA 01).

Total Flux of Active CNO Solar Neutrinos
Total flux of active neutrinos (νe ,νµ ,ντ ).
VALUE (108 cm− 2 s− 1 )CL%

DOCUMENT ID

TECNCOMMENT• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •
+ 1.2
6.7 −
0.8

1 BASILICO

23

+ 2.0
6.6 −
0.9

2 APPEL

22

+ 3.0
7.0 −
2.0

3 AGOSTINI

20D BORX νe e scattering rate
18B BORX νe e scattering rate

<7.9

https://pdg.lbl.gov

95

4 AGOSTINIPage 14

BORX νe e directional + spectral information
BORX νe e scattering rate

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

1 BASILICO 23 obtained this result by combining the newly developed Correlated Integrated Directionality (CID)-based CNO result obtained by using the complete Borexino
data-taking period from 2007 to 2021, with a spectral fit of the Phase-III dataset (fromJuly 2016 to October 2021, characterized by a thermally stable detector). Note thatthe directional information is independent from the spectral information on which theprevious CNO solar neutrino measurements by Borexino were based. Neutrino flavor
conversion was taken into account.
2 APPEL 22 obtained this result from the measured ν e elastic scattering rate over theeperiod between January 2017 and October 2021, assuming the MSW-LMA oscillation
parameters derived by ESTEBAN 20A. The exposure corresponding to this data is 1431.6
days × 71.3 tons.
3 AGOSTINI 20D obtained this result from the measured ν e elastic scattering rate overethe period between July 2016 to February 2020, assuming the MSW-LMA oscillation
parameters derived by CAPOZZI 18.
4 AGOSTINI 18B obtained this result from an upper limit of the ν e elastic scattering ratee
for the CNO neutrinos over the period between December 2011 and May 2016, assuming
the MSW-LMA oscillation parameters derived by ESTEBAN 17.

Total Flux of Active hep Solar Neutrinos
Total flux of active neutrinos (νe ,νµ ,ντ ).
VALUE (105 cm− 2 s− 1 )CL%

DOCUMENT ID

TECNCOMMENT• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •1 AGOSTINI<1.8
90
20A BORX νe e scattering and
12 C(ν,ν’)12 C∗
2
<0.3
90
AHARMIM
20 SNO
CC, NC, νe e scattering
3 AGOSTINI<2.2
90
18B BORX νe e scattering rate
1 AGOSTINI 20A obtained this result from an upper limit of the ν e elastic scatteringerate and NC-mediated inelastic scattering on carbon nuclei with 15.1 MeV deexcitation
γ-ray for the hep neutrino. The dataset corresponds to an effective exposure of 0.745
kt·yr from November 2009 to October 2017. A FADC DAQ system, optimized for theacquisition of high-energy events was used for data collection. The MSW-LMA oscillation
parameters derived by ESTEBAN 17 were assumed.
2 AHARMIM 20 uses the entire SNO dataset, corresponding to 2.47 kton·yrs of exposure
after fiducialization. With the D2 O target, SNO was sensitive to charged current, neutral
current, and elastic scattering channels.
3 AGOSTINI 18B obtained this result from an upper limit of the ν e elastic scatteringerate for the hep neutrino using the dataset corresponding to an exposure of 0.8 kt·yr andassuming the MSW-LMA oscillation parameters derived by ESTEBAN 17.

Day-Night Asymmetry (8 B)
A = (φnight − φday ) / φaverage
VALUE

DOCUMENT ID

TECNCOMMENT

1 ABE

0.033± 0.010 ± 0.005
16C SKAM SK combined; Based on φES• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •2 ABE
0.036± 0.016 ± 0.006
16C SKAM SK-IV; Based on φES
30.032± 0.011 ± 0.005
RENSHAW
14 SKAM Based on φES
4 CRAVENS
0.063± 0.042 ± 0.037
08 SKAM Based on φES+
0.012
5 HOSAKA
0.021± 0.020 − 0.013
06 SKAM Based on φES+ 0.0120.017± 0.016 −0.013− 0.056± 0.074 ± 0.053− 0.037± 0.063 ± 0.032

https://pdg.lbl.gov

6 HOSAKA

06

7 AHARMIM
7 AHARMIM

05A SNO
05A SNO

Page 15

SKAM Fitted in the LMA region
From salty SNO φCC
From salty SNO φCC ; const.
of no φNC asymmetry

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)+ 0.015
0.14 ± 0.063 −0.014

8 AHMAD

02B SNO

Derived from SNO φCC+ 0.0130.07 ± 0.049 −0.012

9 AHMAD

02B SNO

Const. of no φNC asymmetry

1 ABE 16C reports the combined day-night flux asymmetry results of the four phases of
the Super-Kamiokande measurements. Amplitude fit method is used. See footnote to
RENSHAW 14.
2 ABE 16C reports the Super-Kamiokande-IV results for 1664 live days from September
2008 to February 2014. The analysis threshold for day-night flux asymmetry is recoil
electron energy of 4.49 MeV (total electron energy of 5.0 MeV). Amplitude fit method
is used. See footnote to RENSHAW 14.
3 RENSHAW 14 obtains this result by using the ”amplitude fit” introduced in SMY 04.
The data from the Super-Kamiokande(SK)-I, -II, -III, and 1306 live days of the SK-IV
measurements are used. The analysis threshold is recoil-electron kinetic energy of 4.5
MeV for SK-III, and SK-IV except for 250 live days in SK-III (6.0 MeV). The analysis
threshold for SK-I and SK-II is the same as in the previous reports. (Note that in theprevious SK solar-neutrino results, the analysis threshold is quoted as recoil-electron
total energy.) This day-night asymmetry result is consistent with neutrino oscillationsfor 4 × 10−5 eV2 < ∆m2 < 7 × 10−5 eV2 and large mixing values of θ12 at the21
68% CL.
4 CRAVENS 08 reports the Super-Kamiokande-II results for 791 live days from December
2002 to October 2005. The photocathode coverage of the detector is 19% (reduced from
40% of that of Super-Kamiokande-I due to an accident in 2001). The analysis thresholdfor the day and night fluxes is 7.5 MeV except for the first 159 live days (8.0 MeV).
5 HOSAKA 06 reports the final results for 1496 live days with Super-Kamiokande-I between
May 31, 1996 and July 15, 2001, and replace FUKUDA 02 results. The analysis thresholdis 5 MeV except for the first 280 live days (6.5 MeV).
6 This result with reduced statistical uncertainty is obtained by assuming two-neutrino
oscillations within the LMA (large mixing angle) region and by fitting the time variation of
the solar neutrino flux measured via νe elastic scattering to the variations expected fromneutrino oscillations. For details, see SMY 04. There is an additional small systematic
error of ± 0.0004 coming from uncertainty of oscillation parameters.
7 AHARMIM 05A measurements were made with dissolved NaCl (0.195% by weight) inheavy water over the period between July 26, 2001 and August 28, 2003, with 176.5
days of the live time recorded during the day and 214.9 days during the night. This
result is obtained with the spectral distribution of the CC events not constrained to the
8 B shape.
8 AHMAD 02B results are based on the charged-current interactions recorded between
November 2, 1999 and May 28, 2001, with the day and night live times of 128.5 and
177.9 days, respectively. The complete description of the SNO Phase I data set is given
in AHARMIM 07.
9 AHMAD 02B results are derived from the charged-current interactions, neutral-current
interactions, and ν e elastic scattering, with the total flux of active neutrinos constrained
to have no asymmetry. The data were recorded between November 2, 1999 and May
28, 2001, with the day and night live times of 128.5 and 177.9 days, respectively. The
complete description of the SNO Phase I data set is given in AHARMIM 07.

φES (7 Be)

7 Be solar-neutrino flux measured via νe elastic scattering. This process is sensitive
to all active neutrino flavors, but with reduced sensitivity to νµ , ντ due to the crosssection difference, σ(ν µ,τ e) ∼ 0.2 σ(νe e). If the 7 Be solar-neutrino flux involves
nonelectron flavor active neutrinos, their contribution to the flux is ∼ 0.2 times thatof νe .

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 16Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)
VALUE (109 cm− 2 s− 1 )DOCUMENT ID

TECNCOMMENT• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •1 GANDO
3.26± 0.52
15 KLND average flux2
3.10± 0.15
BELLINI
11A BORX average flux
1 GANDO 15 uses 165.4 kton·day exposure of the KamLAND liquid scintillator detector
to measure the 862 keV 7 Be solar neutrino flux via ν − e elastic scattering
2 BELLINI 11A reports the 7 Be solar neutrino flux measured via ν − e elastic scattering.
The data correspond to 740.7 live days between May 16, 2007 and May 8, 2010, andalso correspond to 153.6 ton·year fiducial exposure. BELLINI 11A measured the 862 keV
7 Be solar neutrino flux, which is an 89.6% branch of the 7 Be solar neutrino flux, to be(2.78 ± 0.13) × 109 cm−2 s−1 . Supercedes ARPESELLA 08A.

φES (p e p)p e p solar-neutrino flux measured via νe elastic scattering. This process is sensitive
to all active neutrino flavors, but with reduced sensitivity to νµ , ντ due to the crosssection difference, σ(νµ,τ e) ∼ 0.2 σ(νe e). If the p e p solar-neutrino flux involves
non-electron flavor active neutrinos, their contribution to the flux is ∼ 0.2 times thatof νe .
VALUE (108 cm−2 s−1 )DOCUMENT ID

TECNCOMMENT• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •1 BELLINI
1.0± 0.2
12A BORX average flux
1 BELLINI 12A reports 1.44 MeV p e p solar-neutrino flux measured via ν elastic scattering.
e
The data were collected between January 13, 2008 and May 9, 2010, corresponding to
20,4009 ton·day fiducial exposure. The listed flux value is calculated from the observed
rate of p e p solar neutrino interactions in Borexino (3.1 ± 0.6 ± 0.3 counts/(day·100ton)) and the corresponding rate expected for no neutrino flavor oscillations (4.47 ± 0.05
counts/(day·100 ton)), using the SSM prediction for the p e p solar neutrino flux of(1.441 ± 0.012) × 108 cm−2 s−1 .

φES (CNO)
CNO solar-neutrino flux measured via νe elastic scattering. This process is sensitive
to all active neutrino flavors, but with reduced sensitivity to νµ , ντ due to the crosssection difference, σ(νµ,τ e) ∼ 0.2 σ(νe e). If the CNO solar-neutrino flux involves
non-electron flavor active neutrinos, their contribution to the flux is ∼ 0.2 times thatof νe .
VALUE (108 cm−2 s−1 ) CL%

DOCUMENT ID

TECNCOMMENT• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •1 BELLINI<7.7
90
12A BORX MSW-LMA solution assumed
1 BELLINI 12A reports an upper limit of the CNO solar neutrino flux measured via νeelastic scattering. The data were collected between January 13, 2008 and May 9, 2010,
corresponding to 20,409 ton·day fiducial exposure.

φES (pp)p p solar-neutrino flux measured via ν e elastic scattering. This process is sensitive
to all active neutrino flavors, but with reduced sensitivity to νµ , ντ due to the crosssection difference, σ(νµ,τ e) ∼ 0.3 σ(νe e). If the p p solar-neutrino flux involves
nonelectron flavor active neutrinos, their contribution to the flux is ∼ 0.3 times of νe .

VALUE (1010 cm− 2 s− 1 )DOCUMENT ID

TECNCOMMENT• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •1 BELLINI
4.4± 0.5
14A BORX average flux

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 17Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

1 BELLINI 14A reports p p solar-neutrino flux measured via ν e elastic scattering. The
data were collected between January 2012 and May 2013, corresponding to 408 days ofdata. The p p neutrino interaction rate in Borexino is measured to be 144 ± 13 ± 10
counts/(day·100 ton) by fitting the measured energy spectrum of events in the 165–590
keV recoil electron kinetic energy window with the expected signal + background spectrum. The listed flux value φES (p p) is calculated from the observed rate and the numberof (3.307 ± 0.003) × 1031 electrons for 100 tons of the Borexino scintillator, and the νe e
integrated cross section over the p p neutrino spectrum, σ(νe e) = 11.38 × 10−46 cm2 .

φCC (pp)

pp solar-neutrino flux measured with charged-current reaction which is sensitive exclusively to νe .

VALUE (1010 cm− 2 s− 1 )DOCUMENT ID

TECNCOMMENT• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •1 ABDURASHI... 09 FIT
3.38± 0.47
Fit existing solar-ν data
1 ABDURASHITOV 09 reports the p p solar-neutrino flux derived from the Ga solar neutrino capture rate by subtracting contributions from 8 B, 7 Be, p e p and CNO solar neutrino fluxes determined by other solar neutrino experiments as well as neutrino oscillation
parameters determined from available world neutrino oscillation data.

φES (hep)

hep solar-neutrino flux measured via ν e elastic scattering. This process is sensitive
to all active neutrino flavors, but with reduced sensitivity to νµ , ντ due to the crosssection difference, σ(ν µ,τ e) ∼ 0.16σ(νe e). If the hep solar-neutrino flux involves
nonelectron flavor active neutrinos, their contribution to the flux is ∼ 0.16 times ofνe .

VALUE (103 cm− 2 s− 1 )CL%

DOCUMENT ID

TECN• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •1 HOSAKA<73
90
06 SKAM
1 HOSAKA 06 result is obtained from the recoil electron energy window of 18–21 MeV,
and updates FUKUDA 01 result.

φν e (8 B)

Searches are made for electron antineutrino flux from the Sun. Flux limits listed here
are derived relative to the BS05(OP) Standard Solar Model 8 B solar neutrino flux
(5.69 × 106 cm−2 s−1 ), with an assumption that solar ν e s follow an unoscillated 8 B
neutrino spectrum.

VALUE (%)

CL%

DOCUMENT ID

TECNCOMMENT• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •1 AGOSTINI<0.007290
21 BORX Eν > 1.8 MeVe2<0.01390
BELLINI
11 BORX Eν > 1.8 MeV
e
3 BALATA<1.9
90
06 CNTR 1.8< Eν < 20.0 MeV
e
<0.72
90
AHARMIM
04 SNO
4.0< Eν < 14.8 MeV
e<0.02290

EGUCHI

04

KLND 8.3< Eν < 14.8 MeV

<0.7

90

GANDO

03

SKAM 8.0< Eν < 20.0 MeV

<1.7

90

AGLIETTA

96

LSD

e
e

7< Eν < 17 MeV
e

1 AGOSTINI 21 derived this result relative to the Standard Solar Model 8 B solar neutrino
flux, under an assumption of high solar metallicity, of 5.46 (1 ± 0.12) × 106 cm−2 s−1(see VINYOLES 17).

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 18

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

2 Superseded by AGOSTINI 21.
3 BALATA 06 obtained this result from the search for ν interactions with Counting Teste
Facility (the prototype of the Borexino detector).

(B) Three-neutrino mixing parameterssin2 (θ12 )If an experiment reports sin2 (2 θ12 ) we convert the value to sin2 ( θ12 ).

VALUE+ 0.0130.307 −
0.012

DOCUMENT ID

1 ABE

TECN

16C FITCOMMENT

KamLAND+global solar; 3ν• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •2 SALAS
0.318± 0.016
21 FIT
global fit
30.304± 0.012
ESTEBAN
20A FIT
Global fit+ 0.0200.320 −
0.016
0.310± 0.014+ 0.027
0.334 −
0.023
+
0.026
0.327 − 0.031
0.323± 0.016+ 0.0130.304 −
0.012
+
0.014
0.299 − 0.014+ 0.0160.307 −
0.013
+
0.022
0.304 − 0.018+ 0.0140.304 −
0.013

DE-SALAS

18

FIT

Global fit

4 ABE

16C FIT

SKAM+SNO; 3ν

5 ABE

16C FIT

SK-I+II+III+IV; 3ν

6 ABE

16C FIT

SK-IV; 3ν

7 FORERO

14

FIT

3ν

8 GONZALEZ... 14

FIT

Either mass ordering; global fit

9,10 AHARMIM

13

FIT

global solar: 2ν

10,11 AHARMIM

13

FIT

global solar: 3ν

10,12 AHARMIM

13

FIT

KamLAND + global solar: 3ν

13 GANDO

13

FIT

KamLAND + global solar +SBL + accelerator: 3ν

+ 0.0140.304 −
0.013

14 GANDO

13

FIT

KamLAND + global solar: 3ν

+ 0.0390.325 −
0.039

15 GANDO

13

FIT

KamLAND: 3ν

+ 0.020.30 −
0.01

16 ABE

11

FIT

KamLAND + global solar: 2ν

+ 0.020.30 −
0.01

17 ABE

11

FIT

global solar: 2ν

+ 0.030.31 −
0.02

18 ABE

11

FIT

KamLAND + global solar: 3ν

+ 0.030.31 −
0.03

19 ABE

11

FIT

global solar: 3ν

+ 0.0150.314 −
0.012

20 BELLINI

11A FIT

KamLAND + global solar: 2ν

+ 0.0170.319 −
0.015

21 BELLINI

11A FITglobal solar: 2ν

+ 0.0160.311 −
0.016

22 GANDO

11

FIT

KamLAND + solar: 3ν

+ 0.046
0.304 −
0.042

23 GANDO

11

FIT

KamLAND: 3ν

+ 0.0180.314 −
0.014

24,25 AHARMIM

10

FIT

KamLAND + global solar: 2ν

+ 0.0170.314 −
0.020

24,26 AHARMIM

10

FIT

global solar: 2ν

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 19

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)+ 0.0190.319 −
0.016

24,27 AHARMIM

10

FIT

KamLAND + global solar: 3ν

+ 0.023
0.319 −
0.024

24,28 AHARMIM

10

FIT

global solar: 3ν

+ 0.050.36 −
0.04

29 ABE

08A FIT

KamLAND

30 ABE
31 AHARMIM

0.32 ± 0.03
08A FIT
KamLAND + global fit
0.32 ± 0.02
08 FIT
KamLAND + global solar+ 0.0432 HOSAKA
0.31 −
06 FIT
KamLAND + global solar
0.04+ 0.0433 HOSAKA
0.31 −
06 FIT
SKAM+SNO+KamLAND
0.03+ 0.0334 HOSAKA
0.31 −
06 FIT
SKAM+SNO
0.04+ 0.0235 AHARMIM
0.31 −
05A FIT
KamLAND + global solar
0.03
36 AHARMIM
0.25–0.39
05A FITglobal solar
37
0.29 ± 0.03
ARAKI
05 FIT
KamLAND + global solar+ 0.0338 AHMED
0.29 −
04A FIT
KamLAND + global solar
0.02
39
0.23–0.37
AHMED
04A FITglobal solar
+
0.04
40
0.31 − 0.04
SMY
04 FIT
KamLAND + global solar+ 0.0441 SMY
0.29 −
04 FIT
global solar
0.04+ 0.0642 SMY
0.32 −
04 FIT
SKAM + SNO
0.05
43
0.19–0.33
AHMAD
02B FITglobal solar
44 FUKUDA
0.19–0.39
02 FIT
global solar
1 ABE 16C obtained this result by a three-neutrino oscillation analysis, with a constraint ofsin2 (θ13 ) = 0.0219 ± 0.0014 coming from reactor neutrino experiments, using all solar
data and KamLAND data. CPT invariance is assumed.
2 SALAS 21 reports results of a global fit to neutrino oscillation data available at the timeof the Neutrino 2020 conference.
3 ESTEBAN 20A reports results of a global fit to neutrino oscillation data available at thetime of the Neutrino2020 conference.
4 ABE 16C obtained this result by a three-neutrino oscillation analysis, with a constraintof sin2 (θ13 ) = 0.0219 ± 0.0014 coming from reactor neutrino experiments, using SuperKamiokande (I+II+III+IV) and SNO data.
5 ABE 16C obtained this result by a three-neutrino oscillation analysis, with a constraint ofsin2 (θ13 ) = 0.0219 ± 0.0014 coming from reactor neutrino experiments, by combining
the four phases of the Super-Kamiokande solar data.
6 ABE 16C obtained this result by a three-neutrino oscillation analysis, with a constraintof sin2 (θ13 ) = 0.0219 ± 0.0014 coming from reactor neutrino experiments, using theSuper-Kamiokande-IV data.
7 FORERO 14 performs a global fit to neutrino oscillations using solar, reactor, longbaseline accelerator, and atmospheric neutrino data.
8 GONZALEZ-GARCIA 14 result comes from a frequentist global fit. The corresponding Bayesian global fit to the same data results are reported in BERGSTROM 15 as+ 0.013 for normal and 0.305 + 0.012 for inverted mass ordering.
0.304 −
0.012
− 0.013
9 AHARMIM 13 obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using global
solar neutrino data.
10 AHARMIM 13 global solar neutrino data include SNO’s all-phases-combined analysis
results on the total active 8 B neutrino flux and energy-dependent νe survival probability
parameters, measurements of Cl (CLEVELAND 98), Ga (ABDURASHITOV 09 whichcontains combined analysis with GNO (ALTMANN 05 and Ph.D. thesis of F. Kaether)),

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 20

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

and 7 Be (BELLINI 11A) rates, and 8 B solar-neutrino recoil electron measurements of SKI (HOSAKA 06) zenith, SK-II (CRAVENS 08) and SK-III (ABE 11) day/night spectra,
and Borexino (BELLINI 10A) spectra.
11 AHARMIM 13 obtained this result by a three-neutrino oscillation analysis with the valueof ∆m 2 fixed to 2.45 × 10−3 eV2 , using global solar neutrino data.
32
12 AHARMIM 13 obtained this result by a three-neutrino oscillation analysis with thevalue of ∆m 2 fixed to 2.45 × 10−3 eV2 , using global solar neutrino and KamLAND
32(GANDO 11) data. CPT invariance is assumed.
13 GANDO 13 obtained this result by a three-neutrino oscillation analysis using KamLAND,
global solar neutrino, short-baseline (SBL) reactor, and accelerator data, assuming CPT
invariance. Supersedes GANDO 11.
14 GANDO 13 obtained this result by a three-neutrino oscillation analysis using KamLAND
and global solar neutrino data, assuming CPT invariance. Supersedes GANDO 11.
15 GANDO 13 obtained this result by a three-neutrino oscillation analysis using KamLAND
data. Supersedes GANDO 11.
16 ABE 11 obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using solar neutrino data including Super-Kamiokande, SNO, Borexino (ARPESELLA 08A), Homestake,
GALLEX/GNO, SAGE, and KamLAND data. CPT invariance is assumed.
17 ABE 11 obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using solar neutrino data including Super-Kamiokande, SNO, Borexino (ARPESELLA 08A), Homestake,
GALLEX/GNO, and SAGE data.
18 ABE 11 obtained this result by a three-neutrino oscillation analysis with the value of∆m 2 fixed to 2.4 × 10−3 eV2 , using solar neutrino data including Super-Kamiokande,
32
SNO, Borexino (ARPESELLA 08A), Homestake, GALLEX/GNO, SAGE, and KamLAND
data. The normal neutrino mass ordering and CPT invariance are assumed.
19 ABE 11 obtained this result by a three-neutrino oscillation analysis with the value of∆m 2 fixed to 2.4 × 10−3 eV2 , using solar neutrino data including Super-Kamiokande,
32
SNO, Borexino (ARPESELLA 08A), Homestake, and GALLEX/GNO data. The normal
neutrino mass ordering is assumed.
20 BELLINI 11A obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using KamLAND,
Homestake, SAGE, Gallex, GNO, Kamiokande, Super-Kamiokande, SNO, and Borexino(BELLINI 11A) data and the SSM flux prediction in SERENELLI 11 (Astrophysical Journal 743 24 (2011)) with the exception that the 8 B flux was left free. CPT invariance isassumed.
21 BELLINI 11A obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using Homestake, SAGE, Gallex, GNO, Kamiokande, Super-Kamiokande, SNO, and Borexino(BELLINI 11A) data and the SSM flux prediction in SERENELLI 11 (Astrophysical Journal 743 24 (2011)) with the exception that the 8 B flux was left free.
22 GANDO 11 obtain this result with three-neutrino fit using the KamLAND + solar data.
Superseded by GANDO 13.
23 GANDO 11 obtain this result with three-neutrino fit using the KamLAND data only.
Superseded by GANDO 13.
24 AHARMIM 10 global solar neutrino data include SNO’s low-energy-threshold analysis
survival probability day/night curves, SNO Phase III integral rates (AHARMIM 08), Cl(CLEVELAND 98), SAGE (ABDURASHITOV 09), Gallex/GNO (HAMPEL 99, ALTMANN 05), Borexino (ARPESELLA 08A), SK-I zenith (HOSAKA 06), and SK-II
day/night spectra (CRAVENS 08).
25 AHARMIM 10 obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using global
solar neutrino data and KamLAND data (ABE 08A). CPT invariance is assumed.
26 AHARMIM 10 obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using global
solar neutrino data.
27 AHARMIM 10 obtained this result by a three-neutrino oscillation analysis with the valueof ∆m 2 fixed to 2.3 × 10−3 eV2 , using global solar neutrino data and KamLAND data
31
(ABE 08A). CPT invariance is assumed.

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 21

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

28 AHARMIM 10 obtained this result by a three-neutrino oscillation analysis with the valueof ∆m 2 fixed to 2.3 × 10−3 eV2 , using global solar neutrino data.
3129 ABE 08A obtained this result by a rate + shape + time combined geoneutrino andreactor two-neutrino fit for ∆m 2 and tan2 θ12 , using KamLAND data only. Superseded
21
by GANDO 11.
30 ABE 08A obtained this result by means of a two-neutrino fit using KamLAND, Homestake,
SAGE, GALLEX, GNO, SK (zenith angle and E-spectrum), the SNO χ2 -map, and solar
flux data. CPT invariance is assumed. Superseded by GANDO 11.
31 The result given by AHARMIM 08 is θ = (34.4 + 1.3 )◦ . This result is obtained by− 1.2
a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using solar neutrino data including those of Borexino (ARPESELLA 08A) and Super-Kamiokande-I (HOSAKA 06), and KamLAND data
(ABE 08A). CPT invariance is assumed.
32 HOSAKA 06 obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using SK ν data,e
CC data from other solar neutrino experiments, and KamLAND data (ARAKI 05). CPT
invariance is assumed.
33 HOSAKA 06 obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using the data fromSuper-Kamiokande, SNO (AHMAD 02 and AHMAD 02B), and KamLAND (ARAKI 05)
experiments. CPT invariance is assumed.
34 HOSAKA 06 obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using the SuperKamiokande and SNO (AHMAD 02 and AHMAD 02B) solar neutrino data.
35 The result given by AHARMIM 05A is θ = (33.9 ± 1.6)◦ . This result is obtained bya two-neutrino oscillation analysis using SNO pure deuteron and salt phase data, SKνe data, Cl and Ga CC data, and KamLAND data (ARAKI 05). CPT invariance is+ 2.4 )◦ as the error enveloping the 68%
assumed. AHARMIM 05A also quotes θ = (33.9 −2.2+ 0.05 .
CL two-dimensional region. This translates into sin2 2 θ = 0.86 −0.06
36 AHARMIM 05A obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using the datafrom all solar neutrino experiments. The listed range of the parameter envelops the 95%
CL two-dimensional region shown in figure 35a of AHARMIM 05A. AHARMIM 05A also
+ 0.09 as the error enveloping the 68% CL two-dimensional region.
quotes tan2 θ = 0.45 −0.08+ 0.05 .
2This translates into sin 2 θ = 0.86 −0.07
37 ARAKI 05 obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using KamLAND andsolar neutrino data. CPT invariance is assumed. The 1σ error shown here is translated+ 0.07 . The
from the number provided by the KamLAND collaboration, tan2 θ = 0.40 −0.05+ 0.10 (sin2 2 θ = 0.82 ±corresponding number quoted in ARAKI 05 is tan2 θ = 0.40 −0.070.07), which envelops the 68% CL two-dimensional region.
38 The result given by AHMED 04A is θ = (32.5 + 1.7 )◦ . This result is obtained by a two− 1.6
neutrino oscillation analysis using solar neutrino and KamLAND data (EGUCHI 03). CPT+ 2.4 )◦ as the error enveloping
invariance is assumed. AHMED 04A also quotes θ = (32.5 −2.3
the 68% CL two-dimensional region. This translates into sin2 2 θ = 0.82 ± 0.06.
39 AHMED 04A obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using the datafrom all solar neutrino experiments. The listed range of the parameter envelops the 95%
CL two-dimensional region shown in Fig. 5(a) of AHMED 04A. The best-fit point is∆(m2 ) = 6.5 × 10−5 eV2 , tan2 θ = 0.40 (sin2 2 θ = 0.82).
40 The result given by SMY 04 is tan2 θ = 0.44 ± 0.08. This result is obtained by a twoneutrino oscillation analysis using solar neutrino and KamLAND data (IANNI 03). CPT
invariance is assumed.
41 SMY 04 obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using the data fromall solar neutrino experiments. The 1σ errors are read from Fig. 6(a) of SMY 04.
42 SMY 04 obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using the SuperKamiokande and SNO (AHMAD 02 and AHMAD 02B) solar neutrino data. The 1σ
errors are read from Fig. 6(a) of SMY 04.

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 22

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

43 AHMAD 02B obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using the datafrom all solar neutrino experiments. The listed range of the parameter envelops the 95%
CL two-dimensional region shown in Fig. 4(b) of AHMAD 02B. The best fit point is∆(m2 ) = 5.0 × 10−5 eV2 and tanθ = 0.34 (sin2 2 θ = 0.76).
44 FUKUDA 02 obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using the datafrom all solar neutrino experiments. The listed range of the parameter envelops the 95%
CL two-dimensional region shown in Fig. 4 of FUKUDA 02. The best fit point is ∆(m2 )= 6.9 × 10−5 eV2 and tan2 θ = 0.38 (sin2 2 θ = 0.80).

∆m221
VALUE (10−5 eV2 )DOCUMENT ID

TECNCOMMENT7.53± 0.18

1 GANDO13

FIT+ 0.227.50 −
0.20

2 SALAS

21

FIT

global fit+ 0.21
7.42 −
0.20

3 ESTEBAN

20A FIT

Global fit+ 0.207.55 −
0.16

DE-SALAS

18

Global fit

KamLAND + global solar + SBL+ accelerator: 3ν• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •FIT+ 0.197.49 −
0.18

4 ABE

16C FIT

KamLAND+global solar; 3ν

+ 1.3
4.8 −
0.6

5 ABE

16C FIT

SKAM+SNO; 3ν

+ 1.5
4.8 −
0.8

6 ABE

16C FIT

SK-I+II+III+IV; 3ν

+ 2.8
3.2 −
0.2

7 ABE

16C FIT

SK-IV; 3ν+ 0.197.6 −0.18

8 FORERO

14

FIT

3ν

+ 0.197.50 −
0.17

9 GONZALEZ... 14

FIT

Either mass ordering; global fit+ 1.295.13 −
0.96

10,11 AHARMIM

13

FIT

global solar: 2ν

+ 1.495.13 −
0.98

11,12 AHARMIM

13

FIT

global solar: 3ν

+ 0.207.46 −
0.19

11,13 AHARMIM

13

FIT

KamLAND + global solar: 3ν

+ 0.197.53 −
0.18

14 GANDO

13

FIT

KamLAND + global solar: 3ν

+ 0.197.54 −
0.18

15 GANDO

13

FIT

KamLAND: 3ν

16 ABE

11

FIT

KamLAND + global solar: 2ν

17 ABE

11

FIT

global solar: 2ν

18 ABE

11

FIT

KamLAND + global solar: 3ν

19 ABE

11

FIT

global solar: 3ν

20 BELLINI

11A FIT

KamLAND + global solar: 2ν

21 BELLINI

11A FITglobal solar: 2ν

22 GANDO

11

FIT

KamLAND + solar: 3ν

23 GANDO

11

FIT

KamLAND: 3ν

24,25 AHARMIM

10

FIT

KamLAND + global solar: 2ν

7.6 ± 0.2
+ 1.1
6.2 −
1.9
7.7 ± 0.3
+ 2.2
6.0 −
2.5
+
0.16
7.50 − 0.24
+ 1.5
5.2 −
0.9
+
0.19
7.50 − 0.20
7.49± 0.20
+ 0.207.59 −
0.21

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 23

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)+ 2.135.89 −
2.16
7.59± 0.21
+ 2.496.31 −
2.58+
0.14 ± 0.15
7.58 − 0.13
7.59± 0.21
+ 0.197.59 −
0.21
8.0 ± 0.3
8.0 ± 0.3
+ 3.7
6.3 −
1.5
5–12

24,26 AHARMIM

10

FIT

global solar: 2ν

24,27 AHARMIM

10

FIT

KamLAND + global solar: 3ν

24,28 AHARMIM

10

FIT

global solar: 3ν

+ 0.4
8.0 −
0.3

29 ABE

08A FIT

KamLAND

30 ABE

08A FIT

KamLAND + global solar

31 AHARMIM

08

FIT

KamLAND + global solar

32 HOSAKA
33 HOSAKA

06
06

FIT
FIT

KamLAND + global solar
SKAM+SNO+KamLAND

34 HOSAKA

06

FIT

SKAM+SNO

35 HOSAKA

06

FIT

SKAM day/night in the LMA
region36 AHARMIM

05A FIT

KamLAND + global solar LMA

37 AHARMIM

3.3–14.4
05A FITglobal solar+
0.438
7.9 − 0.3
ARAKI
05 FIT
KamLAND + global solar+ 1.0
39 AHMED
7.1 −04A FIT
KamLAND + global solar
0.3
40 AHMED
3.2–13.7
04A FITglobal solar+
0.6
41
7.1 − 0.5
SMY
04 FIT
KamLAND + global solar+ 1.7
42 SMY
6.0 −04 FIT
global solar
1.6
+ 2.5
43 SMY
6.0 −04 FIT
SKAM + SNO
1.6
44 AHMAD
2.8–12.0
02B FITglobal solar
45
3.2–19.1
FUKUDA
02 FIT
global solar
1 GANDO 13 obtained this result by a three-neutrino oscillation analysis using KamLAND,
global solar neutrino, short-baseline (SBL) reactor, and accelerator data, assuming CPT
invariance. Supersedes GANDO 11.
2 SALAS 21 reports results of a global fit to neutrino oscillation data available at the timeof the Neutrino 2020 conference.
3 ESTEBAN 20A reports results of a global fit to neutrino oscillation data available at thetime of the Neutrino2020 conference.
4 ABE 16C obtained this result by a three-neutrino oscillation analysis, with a constraint ofsin2 (θ13 ) = 0.0219 ± 0.0014 coming from reactor neutrino experiments, using all solar
data and KamLAND data. CPT invariance is assumed.
5 ABE 16C obtained this result by a three-neutrino oscillation analysis, with a constraintof sin2 (θ13 ) = 0.0219 ± 0.0014 coming from reactor neutrino experiments, using SuperKamiokande (I+II+III+IV) and SNO data.
6 ABE 16C obtained this result by a three-neutrino oscillation analysis, with a constraint ofsin2 (θ13 ) = 0.0219 ± 0.0014 coming from reactor neutrino experiments, by combining
the four phases of the Super-Kamiokande solar data.
7 ABE 16C obtained this result by a three-neutrino oscillation analysis, with a constraintof sin2 (θ13 ) = 0.0219 ± 0.0014 coming from reactor neutrino experiments, using theSuper-Kamiokande-IV data.
8 FORERO 14 performs a global fit to ∆m2 using solar, reactor, long-baseline accelerator,
21
and atmospheric neutrino data.
9 GONZALEZ-GARCIA 14 result comes from a frequentist global fit. The corresponding Bayesian global fit to the same data results are reported in BERGSTROM 15 as

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 24

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)+ 0.19 ) × 10−5 eV2 for normal and (7.50 + 0.18 ) × 10−5 eV2 for inverted mass
(7.50 −
0.17
− 0.17ordering.
10 AHARMIM 13 obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using global
solar neutrino data.
11 AHARMIM 13 global solar neutrino data include SNO’s all-phases-combined analysis
results on the total active 8 B neutrino flux and energy-dependent νe survival probability
parameters, measurements of Cl (CLEVELAND 98), Ga (ABDURASHITOV 09 whichcontains combined analysis with GNO (ALTMANN 05 and Ph.D. thesis of F. Kaether)),and 7 Be (BELLINI 11A) rates, and 8 B solar-neutrino recoil electron measurements of SKI (HOSAKA 06) zenith, SK-II (CRAVENS 08), and SK-III (ABE 11) day/night spectra,
and Borexino (BELLINI 10A) spectra.
12 AHARMIM 13 obtained this result by a three-neutrino oscillation analysis with the valueof ∆m 2 fixed to 2.45 × 10−3 eV2 , using global solar neutrino data.
31
13 AHARMIM 13 obtained this result by a three-neutrino oscillation analysis with the valueof ∆m 2 fixed to 2.45 × 10−3 eV2 , using global solar neutrino and KamLAND data
31
(GANDO 11). CPT invariance is assumed.
14 GANDO 13 obtained this result by a three-neutrino oscillation analysis using KamLAND
and global solar neutrino data, assuming CPT invariance. Supersedes GANDO 11.
15 GANDO 13 obtained this result by a three-neutrino oscillation analysis using KamLAND
data. Supersedes GANDO 11.
16 ABE 11 obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using solar neutrino data including Super-Kamiokande, SNO, Borexino (ARPESELLA 08A), Homestake,
GALLEX/GNO, SAGE, and KamLAND data. CPT invariance is assumed.
17 ABE 11 obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using solar neutrino data including Super-Kamiokande, SNO, Borexino (ARPESELLA 08A), Homestake,
GALLEX/GNO, and SAGE data.
18 ABE 11 obtained this result by a three-neutrino oscillation analysis with the value of∆m 2 fixed to 2.4 × 10−3 eV2 , using solar neutrino data including Super-Kamiokande,
32
SNO, Borexino (ARPESELLA 08A), Homestake, GALLEX/GNO, SAGE, and KamLAND
data. The normal neutrino mass ordering and CPT invariance are assumed.
19 ABE 11 obtained this result by a three-neutrino oscillation analysis with the value of∆m 2 fixed to 2.4 × 10−3 eV2 , using solar neutrino data including Super-Kamiokande,
32
SNO, Borexino (ARPESELLA 08A), Homestake, and GALLEX/GNO data. The normal
neutrino mass ordering is assumed.
20 BELLINI 11A obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using KamLAND,
Homestake, SAGE, Gallex, GNO, Kamiokande, Super-Kamiokande, SNO, and Borexino(BELLINI 11A) data and the SSM flux prediction in SERENELLI 11 (Astrophysical Journal 743 24 (2011)) with the exception that the 8 B flux was left free. CPT invariance isassumed.
21 BELLINI 11A obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using Homestake, SAGE, Gallex, GNO, Kamiokande, Super-Kamiokande, SNO, and Borexino(BELLINI 11A) data and the SSM flux prediction in SERENELLI 11 (Astrophysical Journal 743 24 (2011)) with the exception that the 8 B flux was left free.
22 GANDO 11 obtain this result with three-neutrino fit using the KamLAND + solar data.
Superseded by GANDO 13.
23 GANDO 11 obtain this result with three-neutrino fit using the KamLAND data only.
Supersedes ABE 08A.
24 AHARMIM 10 global solar neutrino data include SNO’s low-energy-threshold analysis
survival probability day/night curves, SNO Phase III integral rates (AHARMIM 08), Cl(CLEVELAND 98), SAGE (ABDURASHITOV 09), Gallex/GNO (HAMPEL 99, ALTMANN 05), Borexino (ARPESELLA 08A), SK-I zenith (HOSAKA 06), and SK-II
day/night spectra (CRAVENS 08).
25 AHARMIM 10 obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using global
solar neutrino data and KamLAND data (ABE 08A). CPT invariance is assumed.

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 25

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

26 AHARMIM 10 obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using global
solar neutrino data.
27 AHARMIM 10 obtained this result by a three-neutrino oscillation analysis with the valueof ∆m 2 fixed to 2.3 × 10−3 eV2 , using global solar neutrino data and KamLAND data
31
(ABE 08A). CPT invariance is assumed.
28 AHARMIM 10 obtained this result by a three-neutrino oscillation analysis with the valueof ∆m 2 fixed to 2.3 × 10−3 eV2 , using global solar neutrino data.
3129 ABE 08A obtained this result by a rate + shape + time combined geoneutrino andreactor two-neutrino fit for ∆m 2 and tan2 θ12 , using KamLAND data only. Superseded
21
by GANDO 11.
30 ABE 08A obtained this result by means of a two-neutrino fit using KamLAND, Homestake,
SAGE, GALLEX, GNO, SK (zenith angle and E-spectrum), the SNO χ2 -map, and solar
flux data. CPT invariance is assumed. Superseded by GANDO 11.
31 AHARMIM 08 obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using all solar
neutrino data including those of Borexino (ARPESELLA 08A) and Super-Kamiokande-I(HOSAKA 06), and KamLAND data (ABE 08A). CPT invariance is assumed.
32 HOSAKA 06 obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using solar neutrino
and KamLAND data (ARAKI 05). CPT invariance is assumed.
33 HOSAKA 06 obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using the data fromSuper-Kamiokande, SNO (AHMAD 02 and AHMAD 02B), and KamLAND (ARAKI 05)
experiments. CPT invariance is assumed.
34 HOSAKA 06 obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using the SuperKamiokande and SNO (AHMAD 02 and AHMAD 02B) solar neutrino data.
35 HOSAKA 06 obtained this result from the consistency between the observed and expected
day-night flux asymmetry amplitude. The listed 68% CL range is derived from the 1σboundary of the amplitude fit to the data. Oscillation parameters are constrained to bein the LMA region. The mixing angle is fixed at tan2 θ = 0.44 because the fit depends
only very weekly on it.
36 AHARMIM 05A obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using solar
neutrino and KamLAND data (ARAKI 05). CPT invariance is assumed. AHARMIM 05A+ 0.6 ) × 10−5 eV2 as the error enveloping the 68% CL twoalso quotes ∆(m2 ) = (8.0 −
0.4
dimensional region.
37 AHARMIM 05A obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using the datafrom all solar neutrino experiments. The listed range of the parameter envelops the
95% CL two-dimensional region shown in figure 35a of AHARMIM 05A. AHARMIM 05A+ 4.4 ) × 10−5 eV2 as the error enveloping the 68% CL twoalso quotes ∆(m2 ) = (6.5 −2.3
dimensional region.
38 ARAKI 05 obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using KamLAND
and solar neutrino data. CPT invariance is assumed. The 1σ error shown here is provided+ 0.6 ) ×by the KamLAND collaboration. The error quoted in ARAKI 05, ∆(m2 ) = (7.9 −0.5
10−5 , envelops the 68% CL two-dimensional region.
39 AHMED 04A obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using solar neutrino and KamLAND data (EGUCHI 03). CPT invariance is assumed. AHMED 04A+ 1.2 ) × 10−5 eV2 as the error enveloping the 68% CL twoalso quotes ∆(m2 ) = (7.1 −
0.6
dimensional region.
40 AHMED 04A obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using the datafrom all solar neutrino experiments. The listed range of the parameter envelops the 95%
CL two-dimensional region shown in Fig. 5(a) of AHMED 04A. The best-fit point is∆(m2 ) = 6.5 × 10−5 eV2 , tan2 θ = 0.40 (sin2 2 θ = 0.82).
41 SMY 04 obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using solar neutrino
and KamLAND data (IANNI 03). CPT invariance is assumed.
42 SMY 04 obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using the data fromall solar neutrino experiments. The 1σ errors are read from Fig. 6(a) of SMY 04.

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 26

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

43 SMY 04 obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using the SuperKamiokande and SNO (AHMAD 02 and AHMAD 02B) solar neutrino data. The 1σ
errors are read from Fig. 6(a) of SMY 04.
44 AHMAD 02B obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using the datafrom all solar neutrino experiments. The listed range of the parameter envelops the 95%
CL two-dimensional region shown in Fig. 4(b) of AHMAD 02B. The best fit point is∆(m2 ) = 5.0 × 10−5 eV2 and tanθ = 0.34 (sin2 2 θ = 0.76).
45 FUKUDA 02 obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using the datafrom all solar neutrino experiments. The listed range of the parameter envelops the 95%
CL two-dimensional region shown in Fig. 4 of FUKUDA 02. The best fit point is ∆(m2 )= 6.9 × 10−5 eV2 and tan2 θ = 0.38 (sin2 2 θ = 0.80).

sin2 (θ23 )The reported limits below correspond to the projection onto the sin2 (θ23 ) axis of the
90% CL contours in the sin2 (θ23 ) − ∆m 2 plane presented by the authors. Unless
32
otherwise specified, the limits are 90% CL and the reported uncertainties are 68% CL.
If an experiment reports sin2 (2 θ23 ) we convert the value to sin2 ( θ23 ).

VALUE

DOCUMENT ID+ 0.016 OUR FIT
0.553 −
0.024

TECN

COMMENT

Error includes scale factor of 1.1. Assuming inverted mass order-ing+ 0.015 OUR FIT
0.558 −
0.021

Assuming normal mass ordering

1 ABBASI

0.51 ± 0.05
23 ICCB Normal mass ordering
+
0.021
2 ABE
0.561 − 0.032
23F T2K
Normal mass ordering+ 0.0172 ABE
0.563 −
23F T2K
Inverted mass ordering
0.032+ 0.03
3 ACERO
0.57 −
22 NOVA Normal mass ordering; octant II for θ230.04
30.56 ± 0.04
ACERO
22 NOVA Inverted mass ordering; octant II for θ23+
0.20
4 ADAMSON
0.43 − 0.04
20A MINS Normal mass ordering+ 0.07
4 ADAMSON
0.42 −
20A MINS Inverted mass ordering
0.03+ 0.0315 ABE
0.588 −
18B SKAM Normal mass ordering, θ13 constrained
0.064+ 0.036
5 ABE
0.575 −
18B SKAM Inverted mass ordering, θ13 constrained
0.073• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •+ 0.110.47 −
0.02

6 ABE

23D T2K

νµ disappearance+ 0.160.45 −
0.04

6 ABE

23D T2K

ν µ disappearance+ 0.060.51 −
0.07

7 ABE

21A T2K

νµ disappearance+ 0.210.43 −
0.05

7 ABE

21A T2K

ν µ disappearance

8 SALAS

21

FIT

Normal mass ordering, global fit

8 SALAS

21

FIT

Inverted mass ordering, global fit

9 AARTSEN

20

ICCB

For both mass orderings

10 ABE

20F T2K

0.574± 0.014+ 0.0100.578 −
0.017
0.455
+ 0.030.53 −
0.04

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 27

Both mass orderings

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)+ 0.0160.573 −
0.020

11 ESTEBAN

20A FIT

Normal mass ordering, global fit+ 0.0160.575 −
0.019

11 ESTEBAN

20A FIT

Inverted mass ordering, global fit+ 0.040.58 −
0.13

12 AARTSEN

19C ICCB+ 0.040.56 −
0.03

13 ACERO

19

NOVA Normal mass order; octant II for θ23+ 0.040.48 −
0.03

13,14 ACERO

19

NOVA Normal mass order; octant I for θ23+ 0.040.56 −
0.03

13,14 ACERO

19

NOVA Inverted mass order; octant II for θ23+ 0.040.47 −
0.03

13,14 ACERO

19

NOVA Inverted mass order; octant I for θ23+ 0.300.49 −
0.28

AGAFONOVA 19

OPER+ 0.200.50 −
0.19

15 ALBERT

19+ 0.070.51 −
0.09

16 AARTSEN

18A ICCB+ 0.0360.587 −
0.069

17 ABE

18B SKAM 3ν osc: normal mass ordering, θ13 free

+ 0.0440.551 −
0.075

17 ABE

18B SKAM 3ν osc: inverted mass ordering, θ13 free

+ 0.032
0.526 −
0.036

18 ABE

18G T2K

Normal mass ordering, θ13 constrained+ 0.0300.530 −
0.034

18 ABE

18G T2K

Inverted mass ordering, θ13 constrained

0.56 ± 0.04
0.47 ± 0.04
+ 0.0200.547 −
0.030
+
0.018
0.551 − 0.030+ 0.061
0.532 −
0.087
+
0.061
0.534 − 0.087+ 0.080.51 −
0.07+
0.25
0.42 − 0.07
+ 0.075
0.52 −
0.09

19 ACERO
19 ACERO

18
18

NOVA Normal mass order; octant II for θ23
NOVA Normal mass order; octant I for θ23

DE-SALAS

18

FIT

Normal mass ordering, global fit

DE-SALAS

18

FIT

Inverted mass order, global fit

ANTR Atmospheric ν, deep sea telescope
Normal mass ordering

20 ABE

17A T2K

Normal mass ordering

20 ABE

17A T2K

Inverted mass ordering

ABE

17C T2K

Normal mass ordering with neutrinos

ABE

17C T2K

Normal mass ordering with antineutrinos

ABE

17C T2K+ 0.050.55 −
0.09

20 ABE

17F T2K

normal mass ordering with neutrinos
and antineutrinos
Normal mass ordering+ 0.050.55 −
0.08

20 ABE

17F T2K

Inverted mass ordering+ 0.0220.404 −
0.030

21 ADAMSON

17A NOVA Normal mass ordering; octant I for θ23+ 0.0220.624 −
0.030

21 ADAMSON

17A NOVA Normal mass ordering; octant II for θ23+ 0.030
0.398 −
0.022

21 ADAMSON

17A NOVA Inverted mass ordering; octant I for θ23+ 0.0220.618 −
0.030

21 ADAMSON

17A NOVA Inverted mass ordering; octant II for θ23+ 0.190.45 −
0.07

22 ABE

16D T2K

23 ADAMSON

16A NOVA normal mass ordering

0.38 to 0.65

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 283ν osc; normal mass ordering; ν beamCreated: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

23 ADAMSON
0.37 to 0.64
16A
+
0.09
24
0.53 − 0.12
AARTSEN
15A+ 0.0924 AARTSEN
0.51 −
15A
0.11+ 0.055
25 ABE
0.514 −
140.056
25
0.511± 0.055
ABE
14
+
0.23
26
0.41 − 0.06
ADAMSON14+ 0.2626 ADAMSON
0.41 −
140.07+ 0.032
27 FORERO
0.567 −
140.128
+ 0.025
27 FORERO
0.573 −
140.043
+ 0.052
28 GONZALEZ... 14
0.452 −
0.028
+ 0.025
28 GONZALEZ... 14
0.579 −
0.037
29 AARTSEN
0.24 to 0.76
13B
30
0.514± 0.082
ABE
13G+ 0.051
31 ADAMSON
0.388 −
13B
0.053
32
0.3 to 0.7
ABE
12A
33 ADAMSON
0.28 to 0.72
12
0.25 to 0.75 34,35 ADAMSON
12B
0.27 to 0.73 34,36 ADAMSON
12B
0.21 to 0.79 34,36 ADAMSON
12B
37 ADRIAN-MAR...12
0.15 to 0.85
38 ABE
0.39 to 0.61
11C
0.34 to 0.66
ADAMSON11+ 0.1039 ADAMSON
0.31 −
11B
0.07
40
0.41 to 0.59
WENDELL
1041 WENDELL
0.39 to 0.61
1042
0.37 to 0.63
WENDELL
10
0.31 to 0.69
ADAMSON
08A
43 ADAMSON
0.05 to 0.95
06
44 AHN
0.18 to 0.82
06A
45 MICHAEL
0.23 to 0.77
06
46 ALIU
0.18 to 0.82
05
47 ALLISON
0.18 to 0.82
05
48 ASHIE
0.36 to 0.64
05
49 AMBROSIO
0.28 to 0.72
04
50 ASHIE
0.34 to 0.66
04
51 AHN
0.08 to 0.92
0352
0.13 to 0.87
AMBROSIO
03
53 AMBROSIO
0.26 to 0.74
03
54 SANCHEZ
0.15 to 0.85
0355 AMBROSIO
0.28 to 0.72
01
56 AMBROSIO
0.29 to 0.71
01
57 FUKUDA
0.13 to 0.87
99C
58 FUKUDA
0.23 to 0.77
99D
59 FUKUDA
0.08 to 0.92
99D

https://pdg.lbl.gov

NOVA Inverted mass ordering
ICCB

Normal mass ordering

ICCB

Inverted mass ordering

T2K

3ν osc.; normal mass ordering

T2K

3ν osc.; inverted mass ordering

MINS

Normal mass ordering

MINS

Inverted mass ordering

FIT

Normal mass ordering

FIT

Inverted mass ordering

FIT

Normal mass ordering; global fit

FIT

Inverted mass ordering; global fit

ICCB
T2K

DeepCore, 2ν oscillation3ν osc.; normal mass ordering

MINS

Beam + Atmospheric; identical ν & ν

T2K
Off-axis beam
MINS ν beam
MINS MINOS atmospheric
MINS MINOS pure atmospheric ν
MINS MINOS pure atmospheric ν
ANTR Atmospheric ν with deep see telescope
SKAM Super-Kamiokande
MINS 2ν osc.; maximal mixing
MINSν beamSKAM 3ν osc. with solar terms; θ13 =0
SKAM 3ν osc.; normal mass ordering
SKAM 3ν osc.; inverted mass ordering
MINS MINOSMINS Atmospheric ν with far detector
K2K
KEK to Super-K
MINS MINOS
K2K
KEK to Super-K
SOU2
SKAM Super-Kamiokande
MCRO MACROSKAM L/E distribution
K2K
KEK to Super-K
MCRO MACRO
MCRO MACROSOU2 Soudan-2 Atmospheric
MCRO Upward µ
MCRO Upward µ
SKAM Upward µ
SKAM Upward µ
SKAM Stop µ / throughPage 29

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

60 FUKUDA
0.29 to 0.71
98C SKAM Super-Kamiokande
61
0.08 to 0.92
HATAKEYAMA98 KAMI Kamiokande
62 HATAKEYAMA98 KAMI Kamiokande
0.24 to 0.76
63 FUKUDA
0.20 to 0.80
94 KAMI Kamiokande
1 ABBASI 23 uses atmospheric neutrino data measured between 2011 and 2019 withthe low-energy subdetector DeepCore of the IceCube neutrino telescope. Supersedes
AARTSEN 18A.
2 ABE 23F results are based on data collected between 2010 and 2020 in (anti)neutrino
mode and include a neutrino beam exposure of 1.97 × 1021 (1.63 × 1021 ) protons on
target. Supersedes ABE 20F.
3 ACERO 22 uses data from Jun 29, 2016 to Feb 26, 2019 (12.5 × 1020 POT) and Feb
6, 2014 to Mar 20, 2020 (13.6 × 1020 POT). Best fit for octant I (lower octant) is 0.46
for both normal and inverted mass orderings. Supersedes ACERO 19.
4 ADAMSON 20A uses the complete dataset from MINOS and MINOS+ experiments. The
data were collected using a total exposure of 23.76 × 1020 protons on target and 60.75
kton·yr exposure to atmospheric neutrinos. Supersedes ADAMSON 14.
5 ABE 18B uses 328 kton·years of Super-Kamiokande I-IV atmospheric neutrino data toobtain this result. The fit is performed over the three parameters, ∆m2 , sin2 (θ23 ), and32
δ, while the solar parameters and sin2 (θ13 ) are fixed to ∆m2 = (7.53 ± 0.18) × 10−521eV2 , sin2 (θ12 ) = 0.304 ± 0.014, and sin2 (θ13 ) = 0.0219 ± 0.0012.
6 ABE 23D uses the same dataset as ABE 23F. The measurement of sin2 (θ ) is performed
23
independently for νµ and ν µ .
7 ABE 21A results are based on 1.49 × 1021 POT in neutrino mode and 1.64 × 1021 POT
in antineutrino mode.
8 SALAS 21 reports results of a global fit to neutrino oscillation data available at the timeof the Neutrino 2020 conference.
9 AARTSEN 20 uses the data taken between May 2012 and April 2014 with the low-energy
subdetector DeepCore of the IceCube neutrino telescope. The reconstructed energy range
is between 4 (5) and 90 (80) GeV for the main (confirmatory) analysis. Though theobserved best-fit is in the lower octant for both mass orderings, a substantial range ofsin2 (θ23 ) > 0.5 is still compatible with the observed data for both mass orderings.
10 ABE 20F results are based on data collected between 2009 and 2018 in (anti)neutrino
mode and include a neutrino beam exposure of 1.49 × 1021 (1.64 × 1021 ) protons on
target. Supersedes ABE 18G.
11 ESTEBAN 20A reports results of a global fit to neutrino oscillation data available at thetime of the Neutrino2020 conference.
12 AARTSEN 19C uses three years (April 2012 – May 2015) of neutrino data from full sky
with reconstructed energies between 5.6 and 56 GeV, measured with the low-energy subdetector DeepCore of the IceCube neutrino telescope. AARTSEN 19C adopts looser event
selection criteria to prioritize the efficiency of selecting neutrino events, different fromtighter event selection criteria which closely follow the criteria used by AARTSEN 18A
to measure the νµ disappearance.
13 ACERO 19 is based on a sample size of 12.33× 1020 protons on target. The fit combines
both antineutrino and neutrino data to extract the oscillation parameters. The results
favor the normal mass ordering by 1.9 σ and θ23 values in octant II by 1.6 σ. Supersedes
ACERO 18.
14 Errors are from normal mass ordering and θ octant II fits.
13
15 ALBERT 19 measured the oscillation parameters of atmospheric neutrinos with the
ANTARES deep sea neutrino telescope using the data taken from 2007 to 2016 (2830
days of total live time). Supersedes ADRIAN-MARTINEZ 12.
16 AARTSEN 18A uses three years (April 2012 – May 2015) of neutrino data from fullsky with reconstructed energies between 5.6 and 56 GeV, measured with the low-energy
subdetector DeepCore of the IceCube neutrino telescope. AARTSEN 18A also reports

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 30

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

the best fit result for the inverted mass ordering as ∆m2 = − 2.32 × 10−3 eV2 and32
sin2 (θ23 ) = 0.51. Uncertainties for the inverted mass ordering fits were not provided.
Supersedes AARTSEN 15A.
17 ABE 18B uses 328 kton·years of Super-Kamiokande I-IV atmospheric neutrino data toobtain this result. The fit is performed over the four parameters, ∆m2 , sin2 θ23 ,32
sin2 θ13 , and δ, while the solar parameters are fixed to ∆m2 = (7.53 ± 0.18) × 10−521eV2 and sin2 θ12 = 0.304 ± 0.014.
18 ABE 18G data prefers normal mass ordering is with a posterior probability of 87%. Supersedes ABE 17F.
19 ACERO 18 performs a joint fit to the data for ν disappearance and ν appearance.
µe
The overall best fit favors normal mass ordering and θ23 in octant II. No 1σ confidence intervals are presented for the inverted mass ordering scenarios. Superseded by
ACERO 19.
20 Errors are from the projections of the 68% contour on 2D plot of ∆m2 versus sin2 (θ ).
23
ABE 17F supersedes ABE 17A. Superseded by ABE 18G.
21 Superseded by ACERO 18.
22 ABE 16D reports oscillation results using ν disappearance in an off-axis beam.
µ
23 ADAMSON 16A obtains sin2 (θ ) in the 68% C.L. range [0.38, 0.65] ([0.37, 0.64]), with23
two statistically degenerate best-fit values of 0.44 and 0.59 (0.44 and 0.59) for normal(inverted) mass ordering. Superseded by ADAMSON 17A.
24 AARTSEN 15A obtains this result by a three-neutrino oscillation analysis using 10–100
GeV muon neutrino sample from a total of 953 days of measurement with the low-energy
subdetector DeepCore of the IceCube neutrino telescope. Superseded by AARTSEN 18A.
25 ABE 14 results are based on ν disappearance using three-neutrino oscillation fit. Theµ
confidence intervals are derived from one dimensional profiled likelihoods. Superseded by
ABE 17A.
26 ADAMSON 14 uses a complete set of accelerator and atmospheric data. The analysis
combines the νµ disappearance and νe appearance data using three-neutrino oscillation
fit. The fit results are obtained for normal and inverted mass ordering assumptions. The
best fit is for first θ23 octant and inverted mass ordering.
27 FORERO 14 performs a global fit to neutrino oscillations using solar, reactor, longbaseline accelerator, and atmospheric neutrino data.
28 GONZALEZ-GARCIA 14 result comes from a frequentist global fit. The corresponding
Bayesian global fit to the same data results are reported in BERGSTROM 15 as 68% CLintervals of 0.433–0.496 or 0.530–0.594 for normal and 0.514–0.612 for inverted massordering.
29 AARTSEN 13B obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using 20–100
GeV muon neutrino sample from a total of 318.9 days of live-time measurement withthe low-energy subdetector DeepCore of the IceCube neutrino telescope.
30 The best fit value is sin2 (θ ) = 0.514 ± 0.082. Superseded by ABE 14.
23
31 ADAMSON 13B obtained this result from ν and ν disappearance using ν (10.71 ×µµµ1020 POT) and ν µ (3.36 × 1020 POT) beams, and atmospheric (37.88kton-years) datafrom MINOS The fit assumed two-flavor neutrino hypothesis and identical νµ and ν µoscillation parameters. Superseded by ADAMSON 14.
32 ABE 12A obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis. The best-fit point issin2 (2θ23 ) = 0.98.
33 ADAMSON 12 is a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using antineutrinos. The best fit+ 0.10 ± 0.01.
value is sin2 (2θ23 ) = 0.95 −0.11
34 ADAMSON 12B obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis of the L/E
distribution using 37.9 kton·yr atmospheric neutrino data with the MINOS far detector.
35 The best fit point is ∆m2 = 0.0019 eV2 and sin2 2θ = 0.99. The 90% single-parameter
confidence interval at the best fit point is sin2 2θ > 0.86.

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 31

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

36 The data are separated into pure samples of νs and νs, and separate oscillation parametersfor νs and νs are fit to the data. The best fit point is (∆m2 , sin2 2θ) = (0.0022 eV2 ,0.99) and (∆m2 , sin2 2θ) = (0.0016 eV2 , 1.00). The quoted result is taken from the
90% C.L. contour in the (∆m2 , sin2 2θ) plane obtained by minimizing the four parameter
log-likelihood function with respect to the other oscillation parameters.
37 ADRIAN-MARTINEZ 12 measured the oscillation parameters of atmospheric neutrinos
with the ANTARES deep sea neutrino telescope using the data taken from 2007 to 2010
(863 days of total live time). Superseded by ALBERT 19.
38 ABE 11C obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using the SuperKamiokande-I+II+III atmospheric neutrino data. ABE 11C also reported results undera two-neutrino disappearance model with separate mixing parameters between ν and ν,and obtained sin2 2θ > 0.93 for ν and sin2 2θ > 0.83 for ν at 90% C.L.
39 ADAMSON 11B obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis of antineutrinos
in an antineutrino enhanced beam with 1.71 × 1020 protons on target. This results is
consistent with the neutrino measurements of ADAMSON 11 at 2% C.L.
40 WENDELL 10 obtained this result (sin2 θ = 0.407–0.583) by a three-neutrino oscilla23
tion analysis using the Super-Kamiokande-I+II+III atmospheric neutrino data, assuming
θ13 = 0 but including the solar oscillation parameters ∆m2 and sin2 θ12 in the fit.
21
41 WENDELL 10 obtained this result (sin2 θ = 0.43–0.61) by a three-neutrino oscillation
23
analysis with one mass scale dominance (∆m2 = 0) using the Super-Kamiokande21
I+II+III atmospheric neutrino data, and updates the HOSAKA 06A result.
42 WENDELL 10 obtained this result (sin2 θ = 0.44–0.63) by a three-neutrino oscillation
23
analysis with one mass scale dominance (∆m2 = 0) using the Super-Kamiokande21
I+II+III atmospheric neutrino data, and updates the HOSAKA 06A result.
43 ADAMSON 06 obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis of the L/E
distribution using 4.54 kton yr atmospheric neutrino data with the MINOS far detector.
44 Supercedes ALIU 05.
45 MICHAEL 06 best fit is for maximal mixing. See also ADAMSON 08.
46 The best fit is for maximal mixing.
47 ALLISON 05 result is based upon atmospheric neutrino interactions including upwardstopping muons, with an exposure of 5.9 kton yr. From a two-flavor oscillation analysis
the best-fit point is ∆m2 = 0.0017 eV2 and sin2 (2θ) = 0.97.
48 ASHIE 05 obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using 92 kton yr
atmospheric neutrino data from the complete Super-Kamiokande I running period.
49 AMBROSIO 04 obtained this result, without using the absolute normalization of theneutrino flux, by combining the angular distribution of upward through-going muon tracks
with Eµ > 1 GeV, Nlow and Nhigh , and the numbers of InDown + UpStop and InUp
events. Here, Nlow and Nhigh are the number of events with reconstructed neutrinoenergies < 30 GeV and > 130 GeV, respectively. InDown and InUp represent eventswith downward and upward-going tracks starting inside the detector due to neutrino
interactions, while UpStop represents entering upward-going tracks which stop in thedetector. The best fit is for maximal mixing.
50 ASHIE 04 obtained this result from the L(flight length)/E(estimated neutrino energy)
distribution of νµ disappearance probability, using the Super-Kamiokande-I 1489 live-day
atmospheric neutrino data.
51 There are several islands of allowed region from this K2K analysis, extending to highvalues of ∆m2 . We only include the one that overlaps atmospheric neutrino analyses.
The best fit is for maximal mixing.
52 AMBROSIO 03 obtained this result on the basis of the ratio R = N
low /Nhigh , where
Nlow and Nhigh are the number of upward through-going muon events with reconstructed neutrino energy < 30 GeV and > 130 GeV, respectively. The data came fromthe full detector run started in 1994. The method of FELDMAN 98 is used to obtainthe limits.

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 32

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

53 AMBROSIO 03 obtained this result by using the ratio R and the angular distributionof the upward through-going muons. R is given in the previous note and the angular
distribution is reported in AMBROSIO 01. The method of FELDMAN 98 is used toobtain the limits. The best fit is to maximal mixing.
54 SANCHEZ 03 is based on an exposure of 5.9 kton yr. The result is obtained using alikelihood analysis of the neutrino L/E distribution for a selection µ flavor sample while
the e-flavor sample provides flux normalization. The method of FELDMAN 98 is used
to obtain the allowed region. The best fit is sin2 (2θ) = 0.97.
55 AMBROSIO 01 result is based on the angular distribution of upward through-going muontracks with Eµ > 1 GeV. The data came from three different detector configurations, but
the statistics is largely dominated by the full detector run, from May 1994 to December
2000. The total live time, normalized to the full detector configuration is 6.17 years.
The best fit is obtained outside the physical region. The method of FELDMAN 98 isused to obtain the limits. The best fit is for maximal mixing.
56 AMBROSIO 01 result is based on the angular distribution and normalization of upward
through-going muon tracks with Eµ > 1 GeV. See the previous footnote.
57 FUKUDA 99C obtained this result from a total of 537 live days of upward through-going
muon data in Super-Kamiokande between April 1996 to January 1998. With a thresholdof Eµ > 1.6 GeV, the observed flux is (1.74 ± 0.07 ± 0.02) × 10−13 cm−2 s−1 sr−1 .
The best fit is sin2 (2θ) = 0.95.
58 FUKUDA 99D obtained this result from a simultaneous fitting to zenith angle distributionsof upward-stopping and through-going muons. The flux of upward-stopping muons ofminimum energy of 1.6 GeV measured between April 1996 and January 1998 is (0.39 ±0.04 ± 0.02) × 10−13 cm−2 s−1 sr−1 . This is compared to the expected flux of (0.73 ±0.16 (theoretical error)) × 10−13 cm−2 s−1 sr−1 . The best fit is to maximal mixing.
59 FUKUDA 99D obtained this result from the zenith dependence of the upwardstopping/through-going flux ratio. The best fit is to maximal mixing.
60 FUKUDA 98C obtained this result by an analysis of 33.0 kton yr atmospheric neutrino
data. The best fit is for maximal mixing.
61 HATAKEYAMA 98 obtained this result from a total of 2456 live days of upward-going
muon data in Kamiokande between December 1985 and May 1995. With a threshold of+ 0.07 )×
Eµ > 1.6 GeV, the observed flux of upward through-going muons is (1.94± 0.10 −0.06
10−13 cm−2 s−1 sr−1 . This is compared to the expected flux of (2.46 ± 0.54 (theoreticalerror)) × 10−13 cm−2 s−1 sr−1 . The best fit is for maximal mixing.
62 HATAKEYAMA 98 obtained this result from a combined analysis of Kamiokande contained events (FUKUDA 94) and upward going muon events. The best fit is sin2 (2θ) =0.95.
63 FUKUDA 94 obtained the result by a combined analysis of sub- and multi-GeV atmospheric neutrino events in Kamiokande. The best fit is for maximal mixing.

∆m232

The sign of ∆m2 is not known at this time. If given, values are shown separately
32
for the normal and inverted mass ordering. Unless otherwise specified, the ranges
below correspond to the projection onto the ∆m2 axis of the 90% CL contours in32
the sin2 (2θ23 ) − ∆m2 plane presented by the authors. If uncertainties are reported
32with the value, they correspond to one standard deviation uncertainty.

VALUE (10−3 eV2 )− 2.529± 0.029 OUR FIT
2.455± 0.028 OUR FIT
2.41 ± 0.07
+ 0.0412.494 −
0.058

https://pdg.lbl.gov

DOCUMENT ID

TECN

Assuming inverted ordering
Assuming normal ordering
1 ABBASI
23 ICCB
2 ABE
23F T2K

Page 33

COMMENT

Normal mass ordering
Normal mass ordering, θ13
constrained

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)+ 0.042− 2.54 −0.056

2,3 ABE

23F T2K

2.47 ± 0.06
− 2.57 ± 0.06
2.41 ± 0.07

4 AN
4 AN
5 ACERO

23
23
22

DAYA
DAYA
NOVA

− 2.45 ± 0.07

5 ACERO

22

NOVA+ 0.082.40 −
0.09

6 ADAMSON

20A MINS+ 0.08− 2.45 −0.07

6 ADAMSON

20A MINS

Inverted mass ordering, θ13
constrained
Normal mass ordering
Inverted mass ordering
Normal mass ordering, octant
II for θ23 , θ13 constrained
Inverted mass ordering, octant
II for θ23 , θ13 constrained
Accel., atmospheric, normal
mass ordering
Accel., atmospheric, inverted
mass ordering+ 0.132.50 −
0.20

7 ABE+ 0.052.48 −
0.06

9 ABE

23D T2K

νµ disappearance+ 0.102.53 −
0.11

9 ABE

23D T2K

ν µ disappearance+ 0.082.47 −
0.09

10 ABE

21A T2K

νµ disappearance+ 0.182.50 −
0.13

10 ABE

21A T2K

ν µ disappearance

2.45 ± 0.07

11 ABE

20F T2K− 2.51 ± 0.07

11,12 ABE

20F T2K

Normal mass ordering, θ13
constrained
Inverted mass ordering, θ13
constrained
Normal mass ordering, global
fit
Inverted mass ordering, global
fit

18B SKAM Normal mass ordering, θ13
constrained+ 0.087 ABE− 2.58 −18
B SKAM Inverted mass ordering, θ13
0.37
constrained
8 BAK
2.63 ± 0.14
18 RENO Normal mass ordering
8 BAK− 2.73 ± 0.14
18 RENO Inverted mass ordering• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •+ 0.026
2.517 −
0.028

13 ESTEBAN

20A FIT+ 0.028− 2.498 −0.028

13 ESTEBAN

20A FIT+ 0.122.55 −
0.11

14 AARTSEN

19C ICCB+ 0.11
2.48 −
0.06

15 ACERO

19+ 0.06− 2.54 −0.11

NOVA Normal mass ordering, octant
II for θ23

15 ACERO

19< 4.1 at 90% CL
+ 0.4
2.0 −
0.3

AGAFONOVA 19
16 ALBERT19

NOVA Inverted mass ordering, octant
II for θ23
OPER
ANTR Atmospheric ν, deep sea telescope+ 0.112.31 −
0.13

17 AARTSEN

18A ICCB+ 0.132.50 −
0.31

18 ABE+ 0.33− 2.28 −0.13

18 ABE+ 0.071
2.463 −
0.070

19 ABE− 2.507± 0.070

19,20 ABE

18B SKAM 3ν osc: normal mass ordering,θ13 free
18B SKAM 3ν osc: inverted mass ordering, θ13 free
18G T2K
Normal mass ordering, θ13
constrained
18G T2K
Inverted mass ordering, θ13
constrained

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 34

Normal mass ordering

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)+ 0.082.44 −
0.07

21 ACERO

18+ 0.072.45 −
0.08

NOVA Normal mass order, octant IIfor θ23

21,22 ACERO

18+ 0.068
2.471 −
0.070

NOVA Normal mass order; octant I
for θ23

23 ADEY

18A DAYA Normal mass ordering+ 0.068− 2.575 −0.070

23 ADEY

18A DAYA Inverted mass ordering

+ 0.7
− 0.6
2.42 ± 0.03
2.7

+ 0.03− 2.50 −0.04

24 AGAFONOVA 18

OPER OPERA ντ appearance

DE-SALAS

18

FIT

DE-SALAS

18

FIT

Normal mass ordering, global
fit
Inverted mass order, global fit+ 0.21 + 0.12
2.57 −
0.23 − 0.13

25 SEO

18

RENO Normal mass ordering+ 0.23 + 0.13
− 2.67 −0.21 − 0.12

25 SEO

18

RENO Inverted mass ordering+ 0.152.53 −
0.13

ABE

17C T2K+ 0.33
2.55 −
0.27

ABE

17C T2K+ 0.082.55 −
0.08

ABE

17C T2K+ 0.08− 2.63 −0.08

ABE

17C T2K

2.54 ± 0.08
− 2.51 ± 0.08
2.67 ± 0.11
− 2.72 ± 0.11
2.45 ± 0.06 ± 0.06
− 2.56 ± 0.06 ± 0.06
+ 0.292.51 −
0.25

26 ABE
26 ABE
27 ADAMSON
27 ADAMSON
28 AN
28 AN

17F
17F
17A
17A
17A
17A

29 ABE

16D T2K

T2K
T2K
NOVA
NOVA
DAYA
DAYA

Normal mass ordering withneutrinos
Normal mass ordering withantineutrinos
Normal mass ordering withneutrinos and antineutrinos
Inverted mass ordering withneutrinos and antineutrinos
Normal mass ordering; ν+νInverted mass ordering; ν+ν3ν osc; normal mass ordering
3ν osc; inverted mass ordering
Normal mass ordering
Inverted mass ordering

30 ADAMSON

3ν osc.; normal mass ordering;ν beam
16A NOVA 3ν osc; normal mass ordering− 2.56 ± 0.19
+ 0.21 + 0.12
2.56 −
0.23 − 0.13+
0.23
+ 0.13− 2.69 − 0.21 −
0.12
+
0.19
2.72 − 0.20
+ 0.21− 2.73 −0.18
2.0–5.0
2.37 ± 0.11
− 2.47 ± 0.11
2.51 ± 0.10
− 2.56 ± 0.10
2.37 ± 0.09

30 ADAMSON

16A NOVA 3ν osc; inverted mass ordering

31 CHOI

16

RENO 3ν osc; normal mass ordering

31 CHOI

16

RENO 3ν osc; inverted mass ordering

32 AARTSEN

15A ICCB

Normal mass ordering

32 AARTSEN

15A ICCB

Inverted mass ordering

33 AGAFONOVA
34 AN
34 AN
35 ABE
35 ABE
36 ADAMSON

15A
15
15
14
14
14

OPER
DAYA
DAYA
T2K
T2K
MINS

90% CL, 5 events
3ν osc.; normal mass ordering
3ν osc.; inverted mass ordering
3ν osc.; normal mass ordering
3ν osc.; inverted mass ordering
Accel., atmospheric, normal
mass ordering+ 0.09− 2.41 −0.12

36 ADAMSON

14

MINS

Accel., atmsopheric, inverted
mass ordering

37 AN

14

DAYA 3ν osc.; normal mass ordering+ 0.202.52 −
0.18+ 0.192.54 −
0.20

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 35

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)+ 0.20− 2.64 −
0.19

37 AN

14

DAYA 3ν osc.; inverted mass ordering+ 0.052.48 −
0.07

38 FORERO

14

FIT

3ν; normal mass ordering+ 0.06− 2.38 −0.05

38 FORERO

FIT

3ν; inverted mass ordering

2.457± 0.047

1439,40 GONZALEZ... 14

FIT+ 0.047− 2.449 −0.048

39 GONZALEZ... 14

FIT

+ 0.6
− 0.5
+ 0.172.44 −
0.15+
0.09
2.41 − 0.10
2.3

2.2–3.1+ 0.31 ± 0.09
2.62 −
0.28
1.35–2.55
1.4–5.6
0.9–2.5
1.8–5.0
1.3–4.0+ 0.122.32 −
0.08+
0.46
3.36 − 0.40
< 3.37
1.9–2.6− 1.7– − 2.7
2.43 ± 0.13
0.07–50
1.9–4.0
2.2–3.8
1.9–3.6
0.3–12
1.5–3.4
0.6–8.0
1.9 to 3.0
1.5–3.9
0.25–9.0
0.6–7.0
0.15–15
0.6–15
1.0–6.0
1.0–50
1.5–15.0
0.7–18
0.5–6.0
0.55–50
4–23
5–25

https://pdg.lbl.gov

41 AARTSEN

13B ICCB

Normal mass ordering; global
fit
Inverted mass ordering; global
fit
DeepCore, 2ν oscillation

42 ABE

13G T2K

3ν osc.; normal mass ordering

43 ADAMSON

13B MINS44 ABE

12A T2K

2ν osc.; beam + atmospheric;identical ν & ν
off-axis beam

45 ADAMSON

1246,47 ADAMSON
12B
46,48 ADAMSON
12B
46,48 ADAMSON
12B
49 ADRIAN-MAR...12MINSν beamMINOS atmospheric
MINOS pure atmospheric ν
MINOS pure atmospheric νAtmospheric ν with deep sea
telescope
11C SKAM atmospheric ν

50 ABEADAMSON

11

MINS
MINS
MINS
ANTR

MINS

51 ADAMSON

11B MINS

52 ADAMSON
53 WENDELL
53 WENDELL

11C
10
10
08A
06

ADAMSON
54 ADAMSON

55,56 AHN
06A
57 MICHAEL
06
55 ALIU
05
58 ALLISON
05
59 ASHIE
05
60 AMBROSIO
04
61 ASHIE
04
62 AHN03
63 AMBROSIO
03
64 AMBROSIO
03
65 SANCHEZ
03
66 AMBROSIO
01
67 AMBROSIO
01
68 FUKUDA
99C
69 FUKUDA
99D
70 FUKUDA
99D
71 FUKUDA
98C
72 HATAKEYAMA98
73 HATAKEYAMA98
74 FUKUDA
94

Page 362ν oscillation; maximal mixing
ν beamMINS MINOSSKAM 3ν osc.; normal mass ordering
SKAM 3ν osc.; inverted mass ordering
MINS MINOSMINS atmospheric ν with far detector
K2K
KEK to Super-K
MINS MINOS
K2K
KEK to Super-K
SOU2
SKAM atmospheric neutrino
MCRO MACROSKAM L/E distribution
K2K
KEK to Super-K
MCRO MACRO
MCRO MACROSOU2 Soudan-2 Atmospheric
MCRO upward µ
MCRO upward µ
SKAM upward µ
SKAM upward µ
SKAM stop µ / through
SKAM Super-Kamiokande
KAMI Kamiokande
KAMI Kamiokande
KAMI Kamiokande

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

1 ABBASI 23 uses atmospheric neutrino data measured between 2011 and 2019 withthe low-energy subdetector DeepCore of the IceCube neutrino telescope. Supersedes
AARTSEN 18A.
2 ABE 23F results are based on data collected between 2010 and 2020 in (anti)neutrino
mode and include a neutrino beam exposure of 1.97 × 1021 (1.63 × 1021 ) protons on
target. Supersedes ABE 20F.
3 ABE 23F reports ∆m2 =(2.463 + 0.042 ) × 10−3 eV2 for inverted mass ordering. We− 0.056
13
convert to ∆m2 using PDG 23 value of ∆m2 = (7.53 ± 0.18) × 10−5 eV2 .
32
21
4 AN 23 reports results derived from the complete data set collected by the Daya-Bay
experiment, corresponding to 3158 days of operation, resulting in 5.55×106 ν e candidate
events. Solar oscillation parameters are fixed in the analysis to sin2 (θ12 ) = 0.307 ± 0.013,∆m2 = (7.53 ± 0.18) × 10−5 eV2 from PDG 20. Supersedes ADEY 18A.
21
5 ACERO 22 uses data from Jun 29, 2016 to Feb 26, 2019 (12.5 × 1020 POT) and Feb
6, 2014 to Mar 20, 2020 (13.6 × 1020 POT). For normal mass ordering and θ23 octant
I (lower octant), best fit is 0.00239 eV2 ; for inverted mass ordering and octant I, best
fit is − 0.00244 eV2 . Supersedes ACERO 19.
6 ADAMSON 20A uses the complete dataset from MINOS and MINOS+ experiments. The
data were collected using a total exposure of 23.76 × 1020 protons on target and 60.75
kton·yr exposure to atmospheric neutrinos. Supersedes ADAMSON 14.
7 ABE 18B uses 328 kton·years of Super-Kamiokande I-IV atmospheric neutrino data toobtain this result. The fit is performed over the three parameters, ∆m2 , sin2 (θ23 ), and32
δ, while the solar parameters and sin2 (θ13 ) are fixed to ∆m2 = (7.53 ± 0.18) × 10−521eV2 , sin2 (θ12 ) = 0.304 ± 0.014, and sin2 (θ13 ) = 0.0219 ± 0.0012.
8 BAK 18 reports results of the RENO experiment using about 2200 live-days of datataken with detectors placed at 410.6 and 1445.7 m from reactors of the Hanbit Nuclear
Power Plant. We convert the results to ∆m2 using the PDG 18 values of sin2 θ12 =32+ 0.013 and ∆m2 = (7.53 ± 0.18) × 10−5 eV2 . Supersedes SEO 18.
0.307 −
0.012
21
9 ABE 23D uses the same dataset as ABE 23F. The measurement of ∆m2 is performed
32
independently for νµ and ν µ .
10 ABE 21A results are based on 1.49 × 1021 POT in neutrino mode and 1.64 × 1021 POT
in antineutrino mode.
11 ABE 20F results are based on data collected between 2009 and 2018 in (anti)neutrino
mode and include a neutrino beam exposure of 1.49 × 1021 (1.64 × 1021 ) protons on
target. Supersedes ABE 18G.
12 ABE 20F reports ∆m2 =(2.43 ± 0.07) × 10−3 eV2 for inverted mass ordering. We
13convert to ∆m2 using PDG 20 value of ∆m2 = (7.53 ± 0.18) × 10−5 eV2 .
2132
13 ESTEBAN 20A reports results of a global fit to neutrino oscillation data available at thetime of the Neutrino2020 conference.
14 AARTSEN 19C uses three years (April 2012 – May 2015) of neutrino data from full sky
with reconstructed energies between 5.6 and 56 GeV, measured with the low-energy subdetector DeepCore of the IceCube neutrino telescope. AARTSEN 19C adopts looser event
selection criteria to prioritize the efficiency of selecting neutrino events, different fromtighter event selection criteria which closely follow the criteria used by AARTSEN 18A
to measure the νµ disappearance.
15 ACERO 19 is based on a sample size of 12.33× 1020 protons on target. The fit combines
both antineutrino and neutrino data to extract the oscillation parameters. The results
favor the normal mass ordering by 1.9 σ and θ23 values in octant II by 1.6 σ. Supersededby ACERO 22.

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 37

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

16 ALBERT 19 measured the oscillation parameters of atmospheric neutrinos with the
ANTARES deep sea neutrino telescope using the data taken from 2007 to 2016 (2830
days of total live time). Supersedes ADRIAN-MARTINEZ 12.
17 AARTSEN 18A uses three years (April 2012 – May 2015) of neutrino data from fullsky with reconstructed energies between 5.6 and 56 GeV, measured with the low-energy
subdetector DeepCore of the IceCube neutrino telescope. AARTSEN 18A also reports
the best fit values for the inverted mass ordering as ∆m2 = − 2.32 × 10−3 eV2 and32
sin2 (θ23 ) = 0.51. Uncertainties for the inverted mass ordering fits were not provided.
Supersedes AARTSEN 15A.
18 ABE 18B uses 328 kton·years of Super-Kamiokande I-IV atmospheric neutrino data toobtain this result. The fit is performed over the four parameters, ∆m2 , sin2 θ23 ,32
sin2 θ13 , and δ, while the solar parameters are fixed to ∆m2 = (7.53 ± 0.18) × 10−521eV2 and sin2 θ12 = 0.304 ± 0.014.
19 ABE 18G data prefers normal ordering with a posterior probability of 87%. Supersedes
ABE 17F.
20 ABE 18G reports ∆m2 =(2.432 ± 0.070) × 10−3 eV2 for inverted mass ordering. We
13convert to ∆m2 using PDG 18 value of ∆m2 =(7.53 ± 0.18) × 10−5 eV2 .
2132
21 ACERO 18 performs a joint fit to the data for ν disappearance and ν appearance.
µe
The overall best fit favors normal mass ordering and θ23 in octant II. No 1σ confidence intervals are presented for the inverted mass ordering scenarios. Superseded by
ACERO 19.
22 The error for octant I is taken from the result for octant II.
23 ADEY 18A reports results from analysis of 1958 days of data taking with the DayaBay experiment, with 3.9 × 106 ν e candidates. The fit to the data gives ∆m2 =ee+ 0.068 ) × 10−3 eV2 . Solar oscillation parameters are fixed in the analysis using(2.522 −0.070+ 0.013 , ∆m2 = (7.53 ± 0.18) × 10−5 eV2 ,the global averages, sin2 (θ12 ) = 0.307 −0.012
21
from PDG 18. Supersedes AN 17A.
24 AGAFONOVA 18 assumes maximal θ mixing.
23
25 SEO 18 reports result of the RENO experiment from a rate and shape analysis of 500 days
+ 0.21 + 0.12 )×10−3
of data. A simultaneous fit to θ13 and ∆m2 yields ∆m2 = (2.62 −0.23 − 0.13
eeeeeV2 . We convert the results to ∆m2 using the PDG 18 values of sin2 θ12 and ∆m2 .
32
21
SEO 18 is a detailed description of the results published in CHOI 16, which it supersedes.
Superseded by BAK 18
26 ABE 17F confidence intervals are obtained using a frequentist analysis including θ
13
constraint from reactor experiments. Bayesian intervals based on Markov Chain Monte
Carlo method are also provided by the authors. Superseded by ABE 18G.
27 Superseded by ACERO 18.
28 AN 17A report results from combined rate and spectral shape analysis of 1230 days ofdata taken with the Daya Bay reactor experiment. The data set contains more than
2.5 × 106 inverse beta-decay events with neutron capture on Gd. The fit to the data
gives ∆2 =(2.50 ± 0.06 ± 0.06) × 10−3 eV. Superseded by ADEY 18A.
ee
29 ABE 16D reports oscillation results using ν disappearance in an off-axis beam.
µ
30 Superseded by ADAMSON 17A.
31 CHOI 16 reports result of the RENO experiment from a rate and shape analysis of 500+ 0.21 + 0.12 ) ×days of data. A simultaneous fit to θ13 and ∆m2 yields ∆m2 = (2.62 −0.23 − 0.13eeee
10−3 eV. We convert the results to ∆m2 using PDG 18 values of sin2 (θ12 ) and ∆m2 .
21
32
32 AARTSEN 15A obtains this result by a three-neutrino oscillation analysis using 10–100
GeV muon neutrino sample from a total of 953 days of measurements with the low-energy
subdetector DeepCore of the IceCube neutrino telescope. Superseded by AARTSEN 18A.

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 38

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

33 AGAFONOVA 15A result is based on 5 ν → ν appearance candidates with an expectedµτ
background of 0.25 ± 0.05 events. The best fit is for ∆m2 =3.3 × 10−3 eV2 .
32
34 AN 15 uses all eight identical detectors, with four placed near the reactor cores and theremaining four at the far hall to determine prompt energy spectra. The results correspondto the exposure of 6.9×105 GWth -ton-days. They derive ∆m2 = (2.42 ± 0.11)×10−3ee
eV2 . Assuming the normal (inverted) ordering, the fitted ∆m2 = (2.37 ± 0.11) × 10−3
32((2.47 ± 0.11) × 10−3 ) eV2 . Superseded by AN 17A.
35 ABE 14 results are based on ν disappearance using three-neutrino oscillation fit. Theµ
confidence intervals are derived from one dimensional profiled likelihoods. In ABE 14 theinverted mass ordering result is reported as ∆m2 = (2.48 ± 0.10) × 10−3 eV2 which13
we converted to ∆m2 by adding PDG 14 value of ∆m2 = (7.53 ± 0.18) × 10−5 eV2 .
32
21Superseded by ABE 17C.
36 ADAMSON 14 uses a complete set of accelerator and atmospheric data. The analysis
combines The analysis combines the νµ disappearance and νe appearance data using
three-neutrino oscillation fit. The fit results are obtained for normal and inverted massordering assumptions.
37 AN 14 uses six identical detectors, with three placed near the reactor cores (flux-weighted
baselines of 512 and 561 m) and the remaining three at the far hall (at the flux averaged
distance of 1579 m from all six reactor cores) to determine prompt energy spectra and+ 0.19 ) × 10−3 eV2 . Assuming the normal (inverted) ordering,
derive ∆m2 = (2.59 −0.20
ee+ 0.19 ) × 10−3 ((2.64 + 0.19 ) × 10−3 ) eV2 . Superseded by
the fitted ∆m2 = (2.54 −− 0.200.20
32
AN 15.
38 FORERO 14 performs a global fit to ∆m2 using solar, reactor, long-baseline accelerator,
31
and atmospheric neutrino data.
39 GONZALEZ-GARCIA 14 result comes from a frequentist global fit. The corresponding
Bayesian global fit to the same data results are reported in BERGSTROM 15 as (2.460 ±+ 0.047 )×10−3 eV2 for inverted mass ordering.
0.046)×10−3 eV2 for normal and (2.445 −0.045
40 The value for normal mass ordering is actually a measurement of ∆m 2 which differs
31
2 .
from ∆m 2
byamuch
smaller
value
of
∆m
32
12
41 AARTSEN 13B obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using 20–100
GeV muon neutrino sample from a total of 318.9 days of live-time measurement withthe low-energy subdetector DeepCore of the IceCube neutrino telescope.
42 Based on the observation of 58 ν events with 205 ± 17(syst) expected in the absenceµof neutrino oscillations. Superseded by ABE 14.
43 ADAMSON 13B obtained this result from ν and ν disappearance using ν (10.71 ×µµµ1020 POT) and ν µ (3.36 × 1020 POT) beams, and atmospheric (37.88 kton-years) datafrom MINOS. The fit assumed two-flavor neutrino hypothesis and identical νµ and ν µoscillation parameters.
44 ABE 12A obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis. The best-fit point is∆m2 = 2.65 × 10−3 eV2 .
32
45 ADAMSON 12 is a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using antineutrinos.
46 ADAMSON 12B obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis of the L/E
distribution using 37.9 kton·yr atmospheric neutrino data with the MINOS far detector.
47 The 90% single-parameter confidence interval at the best fit point is ∆m2 = 0.0019 ±0.0004 eV2 .
48 The data are separated into pure samples of νs and νs, and separate oscillation parametersfor νs and νs are fit to the data. The best fit point is (∆m2 , sin2 2θ) = (0.0022 eV2 ,0.99) and (∆m2 , sin2 2θ) = (0.0016 eV2 , 1.00). The quoted result is taken from thehttps://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 39

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

90% C.L. contour in the (∆m2 , sin2 2θ) plane obtained by minimizing the four parameter
log-likelihood function with respect to the other oscillation parameters.
49 ADRIAN-MARTINEZ 12 measured the oscillation parameters of atmospheric neutrinos
with the ANTARES deep sea neutrino telescope using the data taken from 2007 to 2010
(863 days of total live time). Superseded by ALBERT 19
50 ABE 11C obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis with separate mixing
parameters between neutrinos and antineutrinos, using the Super-Kamiokande-I+II+III
atmospheric neutrino data. The corresponding 90% CL neutrino oscillation parameter
range obtained from this analysis is ∆m 2 = 1.7–3.0 × 10−3 eV2 .
51 ADAMSON 11B obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis of antineutrinos
in an antineutrino enhanced beam with 1.71 × 1020 protons on target. This results is
consistent with the neutrino measurements of ADAMSON 11 at 2% C.L.
52 ADAMSON 11C obtains this result based on a study of antineutrinos in a neutrino beam
and assumes maximal mixing in the two-flavor approximation.
53 WENDELL 10 obtained this result by a three-neutrino oscillation analysis with one massscale dominance (∆m2 = 0) using the Super-Kamiokande-I+II+III atmospheric neu21
trino data, and updates the HOSAKA 06A result.
54 ADAMSON 06 obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis of the L/E
distribution using 4.54 kton yr atmospheric neutrino data with the MINOS far detector.
55 The best fit in the physical region is for ∆m2 = 2.8 × 10−3 eV2 .
56 Supercedes ALIU 05.
57 MICHAEL 06 best fit is 2.74 × 10−3 eV2 . See also ADAMSON 08.
58 ALLISON 05 result is based on an atmospheric neutrino observation with an exposure of
5.9 kton yr. From a two-flavor oscillation analysis the best-fit point is ∆m2 = 0.0017
eV2 and sin2 2 θ = 0.97.
59 ASHIE 05 obtained this result by a two-neutrino oscillation analysis using 92 kton yr
atmospheric neutrino data from the complete Super-Kamiokande I running period. The
best fit is for ∆m 2 = 2.1 × 10−3 eV2 .
60 AMBROSIO 04 obtained this result, without using the absolute normalization of theneutrino flux, by combining the angular distribution of upward through-going muon tracks
with Eµ > 1 GeV, Nlow and Nhigh , and the numbers of InDown + UpStop and InUp
events. Here, Nlow and Nhigh are the number of events with reconstructed neutrinoenergies < 30 GeV and > 130 GeV, respectively. InDown and InUp represent eventswith downward and upward-going tracks starting inside the detector due to neutrino
interactions, while UpStop represents entering upward-going tracks which stop in thedetector. The best fit is for ∆m2 = 2.3 × 10−3 eV2 .
61 ASHIE 04 obtained this result from the L(flight length)/E(estimated neutrino energy)
distribution of νµ disappearance probability, using the Super-Kamiokande-I 1489 live-day
atmospheric neutrino data. The best fit is for ∆m2 = 2.4 × 10−3 eV2 .
62 There are several islands of allowed region from this K2K analysis, extending to highvalues of ∆m2 . We only include the one that overlaps atmospheric neutrino analyses.
The best fit is for ∆m2 = 2.8 × 10−3 eV2 .
63 AMBROSIO 03 obtained this result on the basis of the ratio R = N
low /Nhigh , where
Nlow and Nhigh are the number of upward through-going muon events with reconstructed neutrino energy < 30 GeV and > 130 GeV, respectively. The data came fromthe full detector run started in 1994. The method of FELDMAN 98 is used to obtainthe limits. The best fit is for ∆m2 = 2.5 × 10−3 eV2 .
64 AMBROSIO 03 obtained this result by using the ratio R and the angular distributionof the upward through-going muons. R is given in the previous note and the angular
distribution is reported in AMBROSIO 01. The method of FELDMAN 98 is used toobtain the limits. The best fit is for ∆m2 = 2.5 × 10−3 eV2 .
65 SANCHEZ 03 is based on an exposure of 5.9 kton yr. The result is obtained using alikelihood analysis of the neutrino L/E distribution for a selection µ flavor sample while

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 40

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

the e-flavor sample provides flux normalization. The method of FELDMAN 98 is used
to obtain the allowed region. The best fit is for ∆m2 = 5.2 × 10−3 eV2 .
66 AMBROSIO 01 result is based on the angular distribution of upward through-going muontracks with Eµ > 1 GeV. The data came from three different detector configurations, but
the statistics is largely dominated by the full detector run, from May 1994 to December
2000. The total live time, normalized to the full detector configuration is 6.17 years.
The best fit is obtained outside the physical region. The method of FELDMAN 98 isused to obtain the limits.
67 AMBROSIO 01 result is based on the angular distribution and normalization of upward
through-going muon tracks with Eµ > 1 GeV. See the previous footnote.
68 FUKUDA 99C obtained this result from a total of 537 live days of upward through-going
muon data in Super-Kamiokande between April 1996 to January 1998. With a thresholdof Eµ > 1.6 GeV, the observed flux is (1.74 ± 0.07 ± 0.02) × 10−13 cm−2 s−1 sr−1 .
The best fit is for ∆m2 = 5.9 × 10−3 eV2 .
69 FUKUDA 99D obtained this result from a simultaneous fitting to zenith angle distributionsof upward-stopping and through-going muons. The flux of upward-stopping muons ofminimum energy of 1.6 GeV measured between April 1996 and January 1998 is (0.39 ±0.04 ± 0.02) × 10−13 cm−2 s−1 sr−1 . This is compared to the expected flux of (0.73 ±0.16 (theoretical error)) × 10−13 cm−2 s−1 sr−1 . The best fit is for ∆m2 = 3.9 × 10−3eV2 .
70 FUKUDA 99D obtained this result from the zenith dependence of the upwardstopping/through-going flux ratio. The best fit is for ∆m2 = 3.1 × 10−3 eV2 .
71 FUKUDA 98C obtained this result by an analysis of 33.0 kton yr atmospheric neutrino
data. The best fit is for ∆m2 = 2.2 × 10−3 eV2 .
72 HATAKEYAMA 98 obtained this result from a total of 2456 live days of upward-going
muon data in Kamiokande between December 1985 and May 1995. With a threshold of+ 0.07 )×
Eµ > 1.6 GeV, the observed flux of upward through-going muons is (1.94± 0.10 −0.06
10−13 cm−2 s−1 sr−1 . This is compared to the expected flux of (2.46 ± 0.54 (theoreticalerror)) × 10−13 cm−2 s−1 sr−1 . The best fit is for ∆m2 = 2.2 × 10−3 eV2 .
73 HATAKEYAMA 98 obtained this result from a combined analysis of Kamiokande contained events (FUKUDA 94) and upward going muon events. The best fit is for ∆m2 =13 × 10−3 eV2 .
74 FUKUDA 94 obtained the result by a combined analysis of sub- and multi-GeV atmospheric neutrino events in Kamiokande. The best fit is for ∆m2 = 16 × 10−3 eV2 .

sin2 (θ13 )At present time direct measurements of sin2 ( θ13 ) are derived from the reactor ν edisappearance at distances corresponding to the ∆m2 value, i.e. L ∼ 1km. Alter32
natively, limits can also be obtained from the analysis of the solar neutrino data andaccelerator-based νµ → νe experiments.
If an experiment reports sin2 (2 θ13 ) we convert the value to sin2 ( θ13 ).

VALUE (units 10−2 )CL%

DOCUMENT ID

TECNCOMMENT

2.19 ± 0.07 OUR AVERAGE Error includes scale factor of 1.2.
0.28
1 ABE
2.80 +
23F T2K
Normal mass ordering− 0.6522.170± 0.063
AN
23 DAYA DayaBay, Ling Ao/Ao
II reactors
3 DE-KERRET 20 DCHZ Chooz reactors
2.70 ± 0.37
4 SHIN
2.22 ± 0.21 ± 0.37
20 RENO Yonggwang reactors
5 BAK
2.29 ± 0.18
18 RENO Yonggwang reactors
6 AN
1.81 ± 0.29
16A DAYA DayaBay, Ling Ao/Ao
II reactors

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 41

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •0.30
3.10 +− 0.691 ABE

23F T2K

2.41 ± 0.45
+ 0.069
2.200 −
0.062

7 ABRAHAO

21

DCHZ Chooz reactors

8 SALAS

21

FIT

Normal mass ordering,
global fit+ 0.0642.225 −
0.070

8 SALAS

21

FIT

Inverted mass ordering,
global fit+ 0.062
2.219 −
0.063

9 ESTEBAN

20A FIT

Normal mass ordering,
global fit+ 0.063
2.238 −
0.062

9 ESTEBAN

20A FIT

Inverted mass ordering,
global fit

< 3.9

68

1.8

+ 2.9
− 1.3

0.8

+ 1.7
− 0.7

2.188± 0.076
90<12+ 0.083
2.160 −
0.069
+ 0.074
2.220 −
0.076

Inverted mass ordering

AGAFONOVA 19 OPER
10 ABE
18B SKAM 3ν osc: normal massordering, θ13 free
10 ABE
18B SKAM 3ν osc: inverted massordering, θ13 free
11 ADEY
18A DAYA DayaBay, LingAo/Ao IIreactors
12 AGAFONOVA 18A OPER OPERA: ν appeareance
DE-SALAS
18 FIT
Normal mass ordering,
global fit
DE-SALAS

2.09 ± 0.23 ± 0.16
2.7 ± 0.7

13 SEO
14 ABE

2.149± 0.071 ± 0.050

15 AN

0.87
2.25 +− 0.86

16 ABE

Inverted mass ordering,
global fit
18 RENO Yonggwang reactors
17F T2K
Normal mass ordering,T2K only
17A DAYA DayaBay, LingAo/Ao IIreactors
16B DCHZ Chooz reactors

17 CHOI
18 AN

16
15

2.09 ± 0.23 ± 0.16
2.15 ± 0.13
2.6
3.0
3.6
2.3
2.3

+ 1.2
− 1.1
+ 1.3
− 1.0
+ 1.0
− 0.9
+ 0.9
− 0.8
± 0.2

2.12 ± 0.47
2.34 ± 0.20
2.40 ± 0.19
2.18 ± 0.10
0.11
2.19 +− 0.10
2.5

± 0.9

± 0.9

https://pdg.lbl.gov

18

FIT

19 ABERENO Yonggwang reactors
DAYA DayaBay, Ling Ao/Ao
II reactors
14A DCHZ Chooz reactors

20 ABE

14C T2K

Inverted mass ordering

20 ABE

14C T2K

Normal mass ordering

21 ABE

14H DCHZ Chooz reactors

22 AN

14

DAYA DayaBay, Ling Ao/Ao
II reactors
23 AN
14B DAYA DayaBay, Ling Ao/Ao
II reactors
24 FORERO
14 FIT
Normal mass ordering
24 FORERO
14 FIT
Inverted mass ordering
25 GONZALEZ... 14 FIT
Normal mass ordering;
global fit
25 GONZALEZ... 14 FIT
Inverted mass ordering;
global fit
26 ABE
13C DCHZ Chooz reactors

Page 42

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

2.3
2.8
1.6
3.0

+ 1.3
− 1.0
+ 1.6
− 1.2
+ 1.3
− 0.9
+ 1.8
− 1.6

13E T2K

Normal mass ordering

27 ABE

13E T2K

Inverted mass ordering

28 ADAMSON

13A MINS

Normal mass ordering

28 ADAMSON

13A MINS

Inverted mass ordering

<13
< 3.6
2.3

± 0.3

± 0.1

AGAFONOVA 13
29 AHARMIM
13
30 AN
13

2.2
2.8
2.9
2.4

± 1.1
± 0.8
± 0.3
± 0.4

± 0.8
± 0.7
± 0.5
± 0.1

31 ABE
32 ABE
33 AHN
34 AN

12
12B
12
12

2.5

+ 1.8
− 1.6

35 ABE

1136 ABE37 ABE38 ABE
39 ADAMSON
40 ADAMSON
41 FOGLI
42 GANDO

11
11A
11A
11D
11D
11
11

43 GANDO

1190

44 ADAMSON

10A MINS

Normal mass ordering

90

45 ADAMSON

10A MINS

Inverted mass ordering

< 6.1
1.3
1.5
0.3
0.8
8
7.8
12.4
3
6
8

90
95

27 ABE

to 5.6
to 5.6to 2.3to 3.9± 3± 6.2± 13.3
+ 9
− 7
+ 14
− 6
+ 8
− 7

95
68
68
68
68

46,47 AHARMIM

10OPER OPERA: 3ν
FIT
global solar: 3ν
DAYA DayaBay, LIng Ao/Ao
II reactors
DCHZ Chooz reactors
DCHZ Chooz reactors
RENO Yonggwang reactors
DAYA DayaBay, Ling Ao/Ao
II reactors
FIT
KamLAND + global
solar
FIT
Global solar
T2K
Normal mass ordering
T2K
Inverted mass ordering
MINS Normal mass ordering
MINS Inverted mass ordering
FIT
Global neutrino data
FIT
KamLAND + solar:
3ν
FIT
KamLAND: 3ν

FIT

KamLAND + global
solar: 3ν
FIT
global solar: 3ν
SKAM 3ν osc.; normal m ordering
SKAM 3ν osc.; inverted mordering

< 30
< 15

95
90

46,48 AHARMIM
49 WENDELL

10
10

< 33

90

49 WENDELL

1050 ADAMSON

09

MINS

Normal mass ordering

51 ADAMSON

09

MINS

Inverted mass ordering

6
8

+ 11
− 8
+ 15
− 11
± 4
± 7

52 FOGLI
53 FOGLI

08
08

FIT
FIT

5

± 5

54 FOGLI

08

11
18

Global neutrino data
Solar + KamLAND
data
FIT
Atmospheric + LBL +
CHOOZ
K2K
Accelerator experiment
K2K
Accelerator experiment
Palo Verde react.
Palo Verde react.
CHOZ Reactor Experiment

55 YAMAMOTO 06< 36
90
56 AHN< 48
90
04
57 BOEHM< 36
90
01
58 BOEHM< 45
9000
59 APOLLONIO 99< 1590
1 ABE 23F results are based on data collected between 2010 and 2020 in (anti)neutrino
mode and include a neutrino beam exposure of 1.97 × 1021 (1.63 × 1021 ) protons on
target.

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 43

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

2 AN 23 reports results derived from the complete data set collected by the Daya-Bay
experiment, corresponding to 3158 days of operation, resulting in 5.55×106 ν e candidate
events. Solar oscillation parameters are fixed in the analysis to sin2 (θ12 ) = 0.307 ± 0.013,∆m2 = (7.53 ± 0.18) × 10−5 eV2 from PDG 20. Supersedes ADEY 18A.
21
3 DE-KERRET 20 uses 481 days of data from single detector operation and also 384 days ofdata with both near and far detectors operating. A rate and shape analysis is performedon combined neutron captures on H and Gd. Supersedes ABE 16B.
4 SHIN 20 uses the RENO detector and 1500 live days of data. The near (far) detector observed 567,690 (90,747) ν e candidate events with a delayed neutron capture onhydrogen. The extracted value of sin2 θ13 is consistent with the previous analysis withneutron capture on Gd in BAK 18.
5 BAK 18 reports results of the RENO experiment using about 2200 live-days of data takenwith detectors placed at 410.6 and 1445.7 m from reactors of the Hanbit Nuclear Power
Plant. Supersedes SEO 18.
6 AN 16A uses data from the eight antineutrino detectors (404 days) and six antineutrino detectors (217 days) runs to determine the mixing parameter sin2 (2θ13 ) using theneutron capture on H only. Supersedes AN 14B.
7 ABRAHAO 21 uses 865 days of data collected in both near and far detectors with atleast one reactor in operation. The analysis is based on a background model independent
approach, so called Reactor Rate Modulation, to determine the mixing angle θ13 . Adding
the background model reduces the uncertainty to 0.0041. Supersedes ABE 16B.
8 SALAS 21 reports results of a global fit to neutrino oscillation data available at the timeof the Neutrino 2020 conference.
9 ESTEBAN 20A reports results of a global fit to neutrino oscillation data available at thetime of the Neutrino2020 conference.
10 ABE 18B uses 328 kton·years of Super-Kamiokande I-IV atmospheric neutrino data toobtain this result. The fit is performed over the four parameters, ∆m2 , sin2 θ23 ,32
sin2 θ13 , and δ, while the solar parameters are fixed to ∆m2
=
(7.53
±
0.18)
× 10−521eV2 and sin2 θ12 = 0.304 ± 0.014.
11 ADEY 18A reports results from analysis of 1958 days of data taking with the DayaBay experiment, with 3.9 × 106 ν e candidates. The fit to the data gives ∆m2 =ee+ 0.068 ) × 10−3 eV2 . Solar oscillation parameters are fixed in the analysis using(2.522 −0.070+ 0.013 , ∆m2 = (7.53 ± 0.18) × 10−5 eV2 ,the global averages, sin2 (θ12 ) = 0.307 −0.012
21
from PDG 18. Supersedes AN 17A.
12 AGAFONOVA 18A reports sin2 (2θ ) < 0.43 at 90% C.L. The result on the sterile
13
neutrino search in the context of 3+1 model is also reported. A 90% C.L. upper limit
on sin2 (2θµ e) = 0.021 for ∆m2 ≥ 0.1 eV2 is set.
41
13 SEO 18 reports results of the RENO experiment using about 500 days of data, performing
a rate and shape analysis. Compared to AHN 12, a significant reduction of the systematic
uncertainties is reported. A 3% excess of events near 5 MeV of the prompt energy isobserved. SEO 18 is a detailed description of the results published in CHOI 16, which itsupersedes. Superseded by BAK 18.
14 Using T2K data only. For inverted mass ordering, all values of θ are ruled out at 68%
13CL.
15 AN 17A reports results from combined rate and spectral shape analysis of 1230 days ofdata taken with the Daya Bay reactor experiment. The data set contains more than
2.5 × 106 inverse beta-decay events with neutron capture on Gd. A simultaneous fit toθ13 and ∆m2 is performed. Superseded by ADEY 18A.
ee
16 ABE 16B uses 455.57 live days of data from a detector 1050 m away from two reactor
cores of the Chooz nuclear power station, to determine the mixing parameter sin2 (2θ13 ).
This analysis uses 7.15 reactor-off days for constraining backgrounds. A rate and shapehttps://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 44

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

analysis is performed on combined neutron captures on H and Gd. Supersedes ABE 14H
and ABE 13C.
17 CHOI 16 reports results of the RENO experiment using about 500 days of data, performing a rate and shape analysis. Compared to AHN 12, a significant reduction of thesystematic uncertainties is reported. A 3% excess of events near 5 MeV of the prompt
energy is observed. Supersedes AHN 12.
18 AN 15 uses all eight identical detectors, with four placed near the reactor cores and theremaining four at the far hall to determine the mixing angle θ13 using the ν e observed
interaction rates with neutron capture on Gd and energy spectra. The result corresponds
to the exposure of 6.9 × 105 GWth -ton-days. Superseded by AN 17A.
19 ABE 14A uses 467.9 live days of one detector, 1050 m away from two reactor cores of
the Chooz nuclear power station, to determine the mixing parameter sin2 (2 θ13 ). The
Bugey4 data (DECLAIS 94) is used to constrain the neutrino flux. The data set includes
7.24 reactor-off days. A ”rate-modulation” analysis is performed. Supercedes ABE 12B.
20 ABE 14C result is for ν appearance and assumes ∆m 2 = 2.4 × 10−3 eV2 , sin2 ( θ )e2332= 0.5, and δ = 0.
21 ABE 14H uses 467.9 live days of one detector, 1050 m away from two reactor cores of
the Chooz nuclear power station, to determine the mixing parameter sin2 (2 θ13 ). The
Bugey4 data (DECLAIS 94) is used to constrain the neutrino flux. The data set includes
7.24 reactor-off days. A rate and shape analysis is performed. Superceded by ABE 16B.
22 AN 14 uses six identical detectors, with three placed near the reactor cores (flux-weighted
baselines of 512 and 561 m) and the remaining three at the far hall (at the flux averaged
distance of 1579 m from all six reactor cores) to determine the mixing angle θ13 using theν e observed interaction rates with neutron capture on Gd and energy spectra. Supersedes
AN 13 and superseded by AN 15.
23 AN 14B uses six identical anti-neutrino detectors with flux-weighted baselines of ∼ 500
m and ∼ 1.6 km to six power reactors. This rate analysis uses a 217-day data set
and neutron capture on protons (not Gd) only. ∆m 2 = 2.32 × 10−3 eV2 is assumed.
31
Superseded by AN 16A.
24 FORERO 14 performs a global fit to neutrino oscillations using solar, reactor, longbaseline accelerator, and atmospheric neutrino data.
25 GONZALEZ-GARCIA 14 result comes from a frequentist global fit. The corresponding Bayesian global fit to the same data results are reported in BERGSTROM 15 as+ 0.10 ) × 10−2 eV2 for normal and (2.19 + 0.12 ) × 10−2 eV2 for inverted mass
(2.18 −
0.11
− 0.10ordering.
26 ABE 13C uses delayed neutron capture on hydrogen instead of on Gd used previously.
The physical volume is thus three times larger. The fit is based on the rate and shapeanalysis as in ABE 12B. The Bugey4 data (DECLAIS 94) is used to constrain the neutrino
flux. Superseded by ABE 16B.
27 ABE 13E assumes maximal θ mixing and CP phase δ = 0.
23
28 ADAMSON 13A results obtained from ν appearance, assuming δ = 0, and sin2 (2 θ )e
23= 0.957.
29 AHARMIM 13 obtained this result by a three-neutrino oscillation analysis with the valueof ∆m 2 fixed to 2.45 × 10−3 eV2 , using global solar neutrino data. AHARMIM 13
32
global solar neutrino data include SNO’s all-phases-combined analysis results on the
total active 8 B neutrino flux and energy-dependent νe survival probability parameters, measurements of Cl (CLEVELAND 98), Ga (ABDURASHITOV 09 which contains
combined analysis with GNO (ALTMANN 05 and Ph.D. thesis of F. Kaether)), and
7 Be (BELLINI 11A) rates, and 8 B solar-neutrino recoil electron measurements of SK-I
(HOSAKA 06) zenith, SK-II (CRAVENS 08) and SK-III (ABE 11) day/night spectra,
and Borexino (BELLINI 10A) spectra. AHARMIM 13 also reported a result combining+ 2.9 ) × 10−2 .
global solar and KamLAND data, which is sin2 (2 θ13 ) = (9.1 −3.1
30 AN 13 uses six identical detectors, with three placed near the reactor cores (flux-weighted
baselines of 498 and 555 m) and the remaining three at the far hall (at the flux averaged

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 45

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

distance of 1628 m from all six reactor cores) to determine the ν e interaction rate ratios.
Superseded by AN 14.
31 ABE 12 determines the ν interaction rate in a single detector, located 1050 m from theecores of two reactors. A rate and shape analysis is performed. The rate normalization isfixed by the results of the Bugey4 reactor experiment, thus avoiding any dependence on
possible very short baseline oscillations. The value of ∆m 2 = 2.4 × 10−3 eV2 is used
31
in the analysis. Superseded by ABE 12B.
32 ABE 12B determines the neutrino mixing angle θ
13 using a single detector, located1050 m from the cores of two reactors. This result is based on a spectral shape andrate analysis. The Bugey4 data (DECLAIS 94) is used to constrain the neutrino flux.
Superseded by ABE 14A.
33 AHN 12 uses two identical detectors, placed at flux weighted distances of 408.56 m and1433.99 m from six reactor cores, to determine the mixing angle θ13 . This rate-only
analysis excludes the no-oscillation hypothesis at 4.9 standard deviations. The value+ 0.12 ) × 10−3 eV2 was assumed in the analysis. Superseded byof ∆m 2 = (2.32 −0.08
31
CHOI 16.
34 AN 12 uses six identical detectors with three placed near the reactor cores (flux-weighted
baselines of 470 m and 576 m) and the remaining three at the far hall (at the flux averaged
distance of 1648 m from all six reactor cores) to determine the mixing angle θ13 using
the ν e observed interaction rate ratios. This rate-only analysis excludes the no-oscillation+ 0.12 ) × 10−3 eV2hypothesis at 5.2 standard deviations. The value of ∆m 2 = (2.32 −0.08
31
was assumed in the analysis. Superseded by AN 13.
35 ABE 11 obtained this result by a three-neutrino oscillation analysis with the value of∆m 2 fixed to 2.4 × 10−3 eV2 , using solar neutrino data including Super-Kamiokande,
32
SNO, Borexino (ARPESELLA 08A), Homestake, GALLEX/GNO, SAGE, and KamLAND
data. This result implies an upper bound of sin2 θ13 < 0.059 (95% CL) or sin2 2θ13 <0.22 (95% CL). The normal neutrino mass ordering and CPT invariance are assumed.
36 ABE 11 obtained this result by a three-neutrino oscillation analysis with the value of∆m 2 fixed to 2.4 × 10−3 eV2 , using solar neutrino data including Super-Kamiokande,
32
SNO, Borexino (ARPESELLA 08A), Homestake, and GALLEX/GNO data. The normal
neutrino mass ordering is assumed.
37 The quoted limit is for ∆m 2 = 2.4 × 10−3 eV2 , θ
23 = π/2, δ = 0, and the normal
32
mass ordering. For other values of δ, the 68% region spans from 0.03 to 0.25, and the
90% region from 0.02 to 0.32.
38 The quoted limit is for ∆m 2 = 2.4 × 10−3 eV2 , θ = π/2, δ = 0, and the inverted
23
32
mass ordering. For other values of δ, the 68% region spans from 0.04 to 0.30, and the
90% region from 0.02 to 0.39.
39 The quoted limit is for ∆m 2 = 2.32 × 10−3 eV2 , θ = π/2, δ = 0, and the normal
23
32
mass ordering. For other values of δ, the 68% region spans from 0.02 to 0.12, and the
90% region from 0 to 0.16.
40 The quoted limit is for ∆m 2 = 2.32 × 10−3 eV2 , θ = π/2, δ = 0, and the inverted
23
32
mass ordering. For other values of δ, the 68% region spans from 0.02 to 0.16, and the
90% region from 0 to 0.21.
41 FOGLI 11 obtained this result from an analysis using the atmospheric, accelerator long
baseline, CHOOZ, solar, and KamLAND data. Recently, MUELLER 11 suggested anaverage increase of about 3.5% in normalization of the reactor ν e fluxess, and using
these fluxes, the fitted result becomes 0.10 ± 0.03.
42 GANDO 11 report sin2 θ = 0.020 ± 0.016. This result was obtained with three-neutrino
13
fit using the KamLAND + solar data.
43 GANDO 11 report sin2 θ = 0.032 ± 0.037. This result was obtained with three-neutrino
13
fit using the KamLAND data only.
44 This result corresponds to the limit of <0.12 at 90% CL for ∆m2 = 2.43 × 10−3 eV2 ,32
θ23 = π/2, and δ = 0. For other values of δ, the 90% CL region spans from 0 to 0.16.

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 46

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

45 This result corresponds to the limit of <0.20 at 90% CL for ∆m2 = 2.43 × 10−3 eV2 ,32
θ23 = π/2, and δ = 0. For other values of δ, the 90% CL region spans from 0 to 0.21.
46 AHARMIM 10 global solar neutrino data include SNO’s low-energy-threshold analysis
survival probability day/night curves, SNO Phase III integral rates (AHARMIM 08), Cl(CLEVELAND 98), SAGE (ABDURASHITOV 09), Gallex/GNO (HAMPEL 99, ALTMANN 05), Borexino (ARPESELLA 08A), SK-I zenith (HOSAKA 06), and SK-II
day/night spectra (CRAVENS 08).
47 AHARMIM 10 obtained this result by a three-neutrino oscillation analysis with the valueof ∆m 2 fixed to 2.3 × 10−3 eV2 , using global solar neutrino data and KamLAND data
31
(ABE 08A). CPT invariance is assumed. This result implies an upper bound of sin2 θ13 <0.057 (95% CL) or sin2 2θ13 < 0.22 (95% CL).
48 AHARMIM 10 obtained this result by a three-neutrino oscillation analysis with the valueof ∆m 2 fixed to 2.3 × 10−3 eV2 , using global solar neutrino data.
31
49 WENDELL 10 obtained this result by a three-neutrino oscillation analysis with one massscale dominance (∆m2 = 0) using the Super-Kamiokande-I+II+III atmospheric neu21
trino data, and updates the HOSAKA 06A result.
50 The quoted limit is for ∆m2 = 2.43 × 10−3 eV2 , θ
23 = π/2, and δ = 0. For other32
values of δ, the 68% CL region spans from 0.02 to 0.26.
51 The quoted limit is for ∆m2 = 2.43 × 10−3 eV2 , θ
23 = π/2, and δ = 0. For other32
values of δ, the 68% CL region spans from 0.04 to 0.34.
52 FOGLI 08 obtained this result from a global analysis of all neutrino oscillation data, thatis, solar + KamLAND + atmospheric + accelerator long baseline + CHOOZ.
53 FOGLI 08 obtained this result from an analysis using the solar and KamLAND neutrino
oscillation data.
54 FOGLI 08 obtained this result from an analysis using the atmospheric, accelerator long
baseline, and CHOOZ neutrino oscillation data.
55 YAMAMOTO 06 searched for ν → ν appearance. Assumes 2 sin2 (2θ ) =µeµe
sin2 (2θ13 ). The quoted limit is for ∆m2 = 1.9 × 10−3 eV2 . That value of ∆m2 is32
32
the one-σ low value for AHN 06A. For the AHN 06A best fit value of 2.8 × 10−3 eV2 ,the sin2 (2θ13 ) limit is < 0.26. Supersedes AHN 04.
56 AHN 04 searched for ν → ν appearance. Assuming 2 sin2 (2 θ ) = sin2 (2 θ ), a
µ
e
µe
13
limit on sin2 (2 θµ ) is converted to a limit on sin2 (2 θ13 ).The quoted limit is for ∆m2
32e= 1.9 × 10−3 eV2 . That value of ∆m2 is the one-σ low value for ALIU 05. For the
32
ALIU 05 best fit value of 2.8 × 10−3 eV2 , the sin2 (2 θ13 ) limit is < 0.30.
57 The quoted limit is for ∆m2 = 1.9 × 10−3 eV2 . That value of ∆m2 is the 1-σ low
32
32
value for ALIU 05. For the ALIU 05 best fit value of 2.8 × 10−3 eV2 , the sin2 2 θ13 limitis < 0.19. In this range, the θ13 limit is larger for lower values of ∆m2 , and smaller32
for higher values of ∆m2.
32
58 The quoted limit is for ∆m2 = 1.9 × 10−3 eV2 . That value of ∆m2 is the 1-σ low
32
32
value for ALIU 05. For the ALIU 05 best fit value of 2.8 × 10−3 eV2 , the sin2 2 θ13
limit is < 0.23.
59 The quoted limit is for ∆m2 = 2.43 × 10−3 eV2 . That value of ∆m2 is the central
32
32
value for ADAMSON 08. For the ADAMSON 08 1-σ low value of 2.30 × 10−3 eV2 ,the sin2 2 θ13 limit is < 0.16. See also APOLLONIO 03 for a detailed description of theexperiment.

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 47

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

CP violating phaseδ, CP violating phase
Measurements of δ come from atmospheric and accelarator experiments looking at νe
appearance. We encode values between 0 and 2π, though it is equivalent to use − πto π.
VALUE (π rad)CL%

DOCUMENT ID

TECNCOMMENT1.19± 0.22 OUR AVERAGE Error includes scale factor of 1.2.
+ 0.31
1 ABE
1.37 −
23F T2K
Normal mass ordering, θ13 con0.20
strained+
0.27
2,30.82 − 0.87
ACERO
22 NOVA Normal mass ordering, octant IIfor θ23 , θ13 constrained+
0.45
41.33 − 0.51
ABE
18B SKAM Normal mass ordering, θ13 constrained• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •+ 0.301.52 −
0.41

2,5 ACERO

22+ 0.131.08 −
0.12

6 SALAS

21

NOVA Inverted mass ordering, octant IIfor θ23 , θ13 constrained
FIT
Normal mass ordering, global fit+ 0.15
1.58 −
0.16

6 SALAS

21

FIT+ 0.221.40 −
0.18

7 ABE

20F T2K

Normal mass ordering+ 0.151.09 −
0.13

8 ESTEBAN

20A FIT

Normal mass ordering, global fit+ 0.14
1.57 −
0.17

8 ESTEBAN

20A FIT

Inverted mass ordering, global fit

+ 1.3
0.0 −
0.4

9 ACERO19+ 0.46
1.33 −
0.53

10 ABE

18B+ 0.76
1.22 −
0.67

10 ABE

18B+ 0.481.33 −
0.53

4 ABE

18B

1.40± 0.20

11 ABE

18G

11 ABE

18G+ 0.91
1.21 −
0.30

12 ACERO

18+ 0.56
1.46 −
0.42

12 ACERO

18

Inverted mass ordering, global fit+ 0.211.32 −
0.15

DE-SALAS

18

NOVA Normall mass ordering, octant IIfor θ23
SKAM 3ν osc: normal mass ordering,θ13 free
SKAM 3ν osc: inverted mass ordering,θ13 free
SKAM 3ν osc: inverted mass ordering,θ13 constrained
T2K
Normal mass ordering, θ13 constrained
T2K
Inverted mass ordering, θ13 constrained
NOVA Normal mass ordering, octant IIfor θ23
NOVA Normal mass order; octant I for
θ23
FIT
Normal mass ordering, global fit+ 0.13
1.56 −
0.15

DE-SALAS

18

FIT+ 0.14
1.54 −
0.12

95

Inverted mass ordering, global fit+ 0.271.45 −
0.26

13 ABE

17F T2K

Normal mass ordering+ 0.22
1.54 −
0.23

13 ABE

17F T2K

Inverted mass ordering+ 0.531.50 −
0.57

14 ADAMSON

17B NOVA Inverted mass ordering; θ23 inoctant II

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 48

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)+ 0.570.74 −
0.93

14 ADAMSON+ 0.691.48 −
0.58

14 ADAMSON

17B NOVA Normal mass ordering; θ23 inoctant II
17B NOVA Normal mass ordering; θ23 inoctant I
16 NOVA Inverted mass ordering

0.0 to 0.1, 0.5 90 14,15 ADAMSON
to 2.015 ADAMSON
0.0 to 2.0
90
16 NOVA Normal mass ordering
0 to 0.15, 0.83 90
ABE
15D T2K
Normal mass ordering
to 2
1.09 to 1.92
90
ABE
15D T2K
Inverted mass ordering
16 ADAMSON
0.05 to 1.2
90
14 MINS Normal mass ordering+ 0.64
1.34 −FORERO
14 FIT
Normal mass ordering
0.38+ 0.34
1.48 −FORERO
14 FIT
Inverted mass ordering
0.32+ 0.2217 GONZALEZ... 14 FIT
1.70 −
Normal mass ordering; global fit
0.39+ 0.3517 GONZALEZ... 14 FIT
1.41 −
Inverted mass ordering; global fit
0.34
18 ADAMSON
0 to 1.5 or 1.9 90
13A MINS Normal mass ordering
to 2
1 ABE 23F results are based on data collected between 2010 and 2020 in (anti)neutrino
mode and include a neutrino beam exposure of 1.97 × 1021 (1.63 × 1021 ) protons on+ 0.18 π rad. Supersedes
target. For inverted mass ordering, the quoted result is 1.54 −0.19
ABE 20F.
2 ACERO 22 uses data from Jun 29, 2016 to Feb 26, 2019 (12.5 × 1020 POT) and Feb 6,2014 to Mar 20, 2020 (13.6×1020 POT). Results for normal and inverted mass ordering,and θ23 octant I and II are presented. Supersedes ACERO 19.
3 For the octant I (lower octant), the 68% CL allowed region is discontinuous, and all delta
values are allowed at 90% CL.
4 ABE 18B uses 328 kton·years of Super-Kamiokande I-IV atmospheric neutrino data toobtain this result. The fit is performed over the three parameters, ∆m2 , sin2 θ23 , and32
δ, while the solar parameters and sin2 θ23 are fixed to ∆m2 = (7.53 ± 0.18) × 10−521eV2 , sin2 θ12 = 0.304 ± 0.014, and sin2 θ13 = 0.0219 ± 0.0012.
5 The inverted mass ordering is rejected at 1.0 σ. The quoted error bars are based on thelocal best-fit point.
6 SALAS 21 reports results of a global fit to neutrino oscillation data available at the timeof the Neutrino 2020 conference.
7 ABE 20F results are based on data collected between 2009 and 2018 in (anti)neutrino
mode and include a neutrino beam exposure of 1.49 × 1021 (1.64 × 1021 ) protons on+ 0.15 π rad. Supersedes
target. For inverted mass ordering, the quoted result is 1.56 −0.17
ABE 18G.
8 ESTEBAN 20A reports results of a global fit to neutrino oscillation data available at thetime of the Neutrino 2020 conference.
9 ACERO 19 is based on a sample size of 1.33 × 1020 protons on target with combined
antineutrino and neutrino data. Superseded by ACERO 22.
10 ABE 18B uses 328 kton·years of Super-Kamiokande I-IV atmospheric neutrino data toobtain this result. The fit is performed over the four parameters, ∆m2 , sin2 θ23 ,32
sin2 θ13 , and δ, while the solar parameters are fixed to ∆m2 = (7.53 ± 0.18) × 10−521eV2 and sin2 θ12 = 0.304 ± 0.014.
11 ABE 18G confidence intervals are marginalized over both mass orderings. Normal order
preferred with a posterior probability of 87%. The 1-sigma result for normal mass ordering used in the average was provided by the experiment via private communications.
Supersedes ABE 17F.

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 49

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

12 ACERO 18 performs a joint fit to the data for νµ disappearance and νe appearance.
The overall best fit favors normal mass ordering and θ23 in octant II. No 1σ confidence intervals are presented for the inverted mass ordering scenarios. Superseded by
ACERO 19.
13 ABE 17F confidence intervals are obtained using a frequentist analysis including θ
13
constraint from reactor experiments. Bayesian intervals based on Markov Chain Monte
Carlo method are also provided by the authors. Superseded by ABE 18G.
14 Errors are projections of 68% C.L. curve of δ2
CP vs. sin θ23 .
15 ADAMSON 16 result is based on a data sample with 2.74 × 1020 protons on target.
The likelihood-based analysis observed 6 νe events with an expected background of
0.99 ± 0.11 events.
16 ADAMSON 14 result is based on three-flavor formalism and θ > π/4. Likelihood as a23function of δ is also shown for the other three combinations of hierarchy and θ23 octants;
all values of δ are allowed at 90% C.L.
17 GONZALEZ-GARCIA 14 result comes from a frequentist global fit. The corresponding
Bayesian global fit to the same data results are reported in BERGSTROM 15 as 68% CLintervals of 1.24–1.94 for normal and 1.15–1.77 for inverted mass ordering.
18 ADAMSON 13A result is based on ν appearance in MINOS and the calculatede
sin2 (2θ23 ) = 0.957,θ23 > π/4, and normal mass hierarchy. Likelihood as a function ofδ
is also shown for the other three combinations of hierarchy and θ23 octants; all valuesof δ are allowed at 90% C.L.

(C) Other neutrino mixing results
The LSND collaboration reported in AGUILAR 01 a signal which is consistent with ν µ → ν e oscillations. In a three neutrino framework, thiswould be a measurement of θ12 and ∆m2 . This does not appear to be21
consistent with most of the other neutrino data. The following listings
include results from νµ → νe , ν µ → ν e appearance and νµ , ν µ , νe ,and ν e disappearance experiments, and searches for CPT violation.

∆(m2 ) for sin2 (2θ) = 1
VALUE (eV2 )CL%(νµ → νe )DOCUMENT ID

TECNCOMMENT• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •1 AGUILAR-AR...21 MBNE MiniBooNE ν,ν combined
0.03 to 0.55
90
20.03 to 0.05
90
AGUILAR-AR...18C MBNE MiniBooNE ν,ν combined
3 AGUILAR-AR...13A MBNE MiniBooNE
0.015 to 0.050
90
4 MAHN<0.34
90
12 MBNE MiniBooNE/SciBooNE
90
90
90
90

<0.034<0.0008
<0.4
<2.4
0.03

to 0.395

AGUILAR-AR...07
AHN
04
ASTIER
03
AVVAKUMOV 02
5 AGUILAR
01
6 ATHANASSO...98
7 LOVERRE
96

MBNE MiniBooNE
K2K
Water Cherenkov
NOMD CERN SPSNTEV NUTEV FNALLSND ν µ → νe osc.prob.
LSND νµ → νe

<2.3
90
CHARM/CDHS<0.9
90
VILAIN
94C CHM2 CERN SPS<0.09
90
ANGELINI
86 HLBC BEBC CERN PS
1 AGUILAR-AREVALO 21 result is based on a total of 18.75 × 1020 POT in neutrinomode, and 11.27 × 1020 POT in anti-neutrino mode. Best fit at 0.043 eV2 . The allowed
region does not extend to large ∆m2 . The quoted value is the entire allowed region of∆m2 at 90% C.L. for all values of sin2 (2θ). Supersedes AGUILAR-AREVALO 18C.

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 50

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

2 AGUILAR-AREVALO 18C result is based on ν → ν appearance of 460.5 ± 99.0 events;µ
e
The best fit value is ∆m2 = 0.041 eV2 . Superseded by AGUILAR-AREVALO 21.
3 AGUILAR-AREVALO 13A result is based on ν → ν appearance of 162.0 ± 47.8 events;µ
emarginally compatible with twoneutrino oscillations. The best fit value is ∆m2 = 3.14
eV2 .
4 MAHN 12 is a combined spectral fit of MiniBooNE and SciBooNE neutrino data withthe range of ∆m2 up to 25 eV2 . The best limit is 0.04 at 7 eV2 .
5 AGUILAR 01 is the final analysis of the LSND full data set. Search is made for theνµ → νe oscillations using νµ from π + decay in flight by observing beam-on electron
events from νe C → e − X . Present analysis results in 8.1 ± 12.2 ± 1.7 excess eventsin the 60<Ee < 200 MeV energy range, corresponding to oscillation probability of
0.10 ± 0.16 ± 0.04%. This is consistent, though less significant, with the previous resultof ATHANASSOPOULOS 98, which it supersedes. The present analysis uses selection
criteria developed for the decay at rest region, and is less effective in removing thebackground above 60 MeV than ATHANASSOPOULOS 98.
6 ATHANASSOPOULOS 98 is a search for the ν → ν oscillations using ν from π +µeµdecay in flight. The 40 observed beam-on electron events are consistent with νe C →e − X; the expected background is 21.9 ± 2.1. Authors interpret this excess as evidence foran oscillation signal corresponding to oscillations with probability (0.26 ± 0.10 ± 0.05)%.
Although the significance is only 2.3 σ, this measurement is an important and consistentcross check of ATHANASSOPOULOS 96 who reported evidence for ν µ → ν e oscillations
from µ+ decay at rest. See also ATHANASSOPOULOS 98B.
7 LOVERRE 96 uses the charged-current to neutral-current ratio from the combined
CHARM (ALLABY 86) and CDHS (ABRAMOWICZ 86) data from 1986.

sin2 (2θ) for “Large” ∆(m2 )(νµ → νe )VALUE (units 10−3 )DOCUMENT ID

CL%

TECN

COMMENT• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •1 AGUILAR-AR...21 MBNE MiniBooNE; ν + ν
6 to 1000
90
2
< 5
90
AGUILAR-AR...18C MBNE MiniBooNE; ν+ν< 7.2
90
AGAFONOVA 13 OPER ∆(m2 ) > 0.1 eV2
3 AGUILAR-AR...13A MBNE MiniBooNE
0.8 to 390
4 ANTONELLO 13 ICAR ν → ν
< 11
90
µ
e
5 ANTONELLO 13A ICAR ν → ν
< 6.8
90
µ
e
6 MAHN<100
90
12 MBNE MiniBooNE/SciBooNE
7 AGUILAR-AR...07 MBNE MiniBooNE
< 1.8
90
8 AHN
<110
90
04 K2K
Water Cherenkov
<
<

1.4
1.6

90
90

ASTIER
03
AVVAKUMOV 02
9 AGUILAR
01
10 ATHANASSO...98

NOMD CERN SPSNTEV NUTEV FNALLSND νµ → νe osc.prob.

0.5 to 30
95
LSND νµ → νe
11 LOVERRE
< 3.0
90
96
CHARM/CDHS< 9.4
90
VILAIN
94C CHM2 CERN SPS
12 VILAIN< 5.6
90
94C CHM2 CERN SPS
1 AGUILAR-AREVALO 21 result is based on a total of 18.75×1020 POT in neutrino mode,and 11.27 × 1020 POT in anti-neutrino mode. The best fit value is sin2 (2θ)=0.807.
The allowed region does not extend to large ∆m 2 . The quoted value is the entire
allowed region of sin2 (2θ) at 90% C.L. for all values of ∆m 2 . Supersedes AGUILARAREVALO 18C.

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 51

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

2 AGUILAR-AREVALO 18C result is based on ν → ν appearance of 460.5 ± 99.0 events;µ
e
The best fit value is sin2 (2θ) = 0.92. The quoted limit for the two-neutrino mixing angle
θ is valid above ∆m2 = 0.59 eV2 . Superseded by AGUILAR-AREVALO 21.
3 AGUILAR-AREVALO 13A result is based on ν → ν appearance of 162.0 ± 47.8 events;µ
emarginally compatible with two neutrino oscillations. The best fit value is sin2 (2θ) =0.002.
4 ANTONELLO 13 use the ICARUS T600 detector at LNGS and ∼ 20 GeV beam of νµfrom CERN 730 km away to search for an excess of νe events. Two events are foundwith 3.7 ± 0.6 expected from conventional sources. This result excludes some parts ofthe parameter space expected by LSND. Superseded by ANTONELLO 13A.
5 Based on four events with a background of 6.4 ± 0.9 from conventional sources with anaverage energy of 20 GeV and 730 km from the source of νµ .
6 MAHN 12 is a combined fit of MiniBooNE and SciBooNE neutrino data.
7 The limit is sin2 2θ < 0.9 × 10−3 at ∆m 2 = 2 eV2 . That value of ∆m 2 corresponds tothe smallest mixing angle consistent with the reported signal from LSND in AGUILAR 01.
8 The limit becomes sin2 2θ < 0.15 at ∆m 2 = 2.8 × 10−3 eV2 , the bets-fit value of theνµ disappearance analysis in K2K.
9 AGUILAR 01 is the final analysis of the LSND full data set of the search for the ν →µνe oscillations. See footnote in preceding table for further details.
10 ATHANASSOPOULOS 98 report (0.26 ± 0.10 ± 0.05)% for the oscillation probability;
the value of sin2 2θ for large ∆m2 is deduced from this probability. See footnote inpreceding table for further details, and see the paper for a plot showing allowed regions.
If effect is due to oscillation, it is most likely to be intermediate sin2 2θ and ∆m2 . See
also ATHANASSOPOULOS 98B.
11 LOVERRE 96 uses the charged-current to neutral-current ratio from the combined
CHARM (ALLABY 86) and CDHS (ABRAMOWICZ 86) data from 1986.
12 VILAIN 94C limit derived by combining the ν and ν data assuming CP conservation.
µµ∆(m2 ) for sin2 (2θ) = 1
VALUE (eV2 )CL%(ν µ → ν e )DOCUMENT ID

TECNCOMMENT• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •1 AGUILAR-AR...13A MBNE MiniBooNE
0.023 to 0.060
90
2 CHENG<0.16
90
12 MBNE MiniBooNE/SciBooNE
3
0.03–0.09
90
AGUILAR-AR...10 MBNE Eν > 475 MeV
4 AGUILAR-AR...10 MBNE E > 200 MeV
0.03–0.07
90
ν
<0.06
90
AGUILAR-AR...09B MBNE MiniBooNE
5 ARMBRUSTER02 KAR2 Liquid Sci. calor.
<0.05590<2.6
90
AVVAKUMOV 02 NTEV NUTEV FNAL
6 AGUILAR
0.03–0.05
01 LSND LAMPF
7 ATHANASSO...96 LSND LAMPF
0.05–0.08
90
8 ATHANASSO...95
0.048–0.090
80
9 HILL
<0.07
90
95
<0.9
90
VILAIN
94C CHM2 CERN SPS
10 FREEDMAN 93 CNTR LAMPF<0.14
90
1 Based on ν → ν appearance of 78.4 ± 28.5 events. The best fit values are ∆m2 =µe
0.043 eV2 and sin2 2θ = 0.88.
2 CHENG 12 is a combined fit of MiniBooNE and SciBooNE antineutrino data.
3 This value is for a two neutrino oscillation analysis for excess antineutrino events withEν > 475 MeV. The best fit is at 0.07. The allowed region is consistent with LSND
reported by AGUILAR 01. Supercedes AGUILAR-AREVALO 09B.

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 52

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

4 This value is for a two neutrino oscillation analysis for excess antineutrino events withEν > 200 MeV with subtraction of the expected 12 events low energy excess seen in theneutrino component of the beam. The best fit value is 0.007 for ∆(m2 ) = 4.4 eV2 .
5 ARMBRUSTER 02 is the final analysis of the KARMEN 2 data for 17.7 m distance fromthe ISIS stopped pion and muon neutrino source. It is a search for ν e , detected by the
inverse β-decay reaction on protons and 12 C. 15 candidate events are observed, and15.8 ± 0.5 background events are expected, hence no oscillation signal is detected. The
results exclude large regions of the parameter area favored by the LSND experiment.
6 AGUILAR 01 is the final analysis of the LSND full data set. It is a search for ν 30 m frome
LAMPF beam stop. Neutrinos originate mainly for π + decay at rest. ν e are detected
through ν e p → e + n (20<E + < 60 MeV) in delayed coincidence with n p → d γ.
eAuthors observe 87.9 ± 22.4 ± 6.0 total excess events. The observation is attributedto ν µ → ν e oscillations with the oscillation probability of 0.264 ± 0.067 ± 0.045%,
consistent with the previously published result. Taking into account all constraints,
the most favored allowed region of oscillation parameters is a band of ∆(m2 ) from
0.2–2.0 eV2 . Supersedes ATHANASSOPOULOS 95, ATHANASSOPOULOS 96, and
ATHANASSOPOULOS 98.
7 ATHANASSOPOULOS 96 is a search for ν 30 m from LAMPF beam stop. Neutrinoseoriginate mainly from π + decay at rest. ν e could come from either ν µ → ν e orνe → ν e ; our entry assumes the first interpretation. They are detected through ν e p →e + n (20 MeV <E + <60 MeV) in delayed coincidence with n p → d γ. Authorseobserve 51 ± 20 ± 8 total excess events over an estimated background 12.5 ± 2.9.
ATHANASSOPOULOS 96B is a shorter version of this paper.
8 ATHANASSOPOULOS 95 error corresponds to the 1.6σ band in the plot. The expected background is 2.7 ± 0.4 events. Corresponds to an oscillation probability of+ 0.20 ± 0.07)%. For a different interpretation, see HILL 95. Replaced by(0.34 −
0.18
ATHANASSOPOULOS 96.
9 HILL 95 is a report by one member of the LSND Collaboration, reporting a different conclusion from the analysis of the data of this experiment (see ATHANASSOPOULOS 95).
Contrary to the rest of the LSND Collaboration, Hill finds no evidence for the neutrino
oscillation ν µ → ν e and obtains only upper limits.
10 FREEDMAN 93 is a search at LAMPF for ν generated from any of the three neutrinoetypes νµ , ν µ , and νe which come from the beam stop. The ν e ’s would be detected by
the reaction ν e p → e + n. FREEDMAN 93 replaces DURKIN 88.

sin2 (2θ) for “Large” ∆(m2 )VALUE (units 10−3 )CL%(ν µ → ν e )DOCUMENT ID

TECNCOMMENT• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •1 ANTONELLO 13A ICAR ν appearance
<640
90
e
2
<150
90
CHENG
12 MBNE MiniBooNE/SciBooNE
3 AGUILAR-AR...10 MBNE E > 475 MeV
0.4–9.099
ν
4 AGUILAR-AR...10 MBNE E > 200 MeV
0.4–9.099ν
5 AGUILAR-AR...09B MBNE MiniBooNE< 3.3
90
6 ARMBRUSTER02 KAR2 Liquid Sci. calor.
< 1.7
90
1.1
90
AVVAKUMOV 02
7 AGUILAR
5.3± 1.3 ± 9.001
8 ATHANASSO...966.2± 2.4 ± 1.0
9 ATHANASSO...95
3–12
80
10
< 6
90
HILL
95
1 ANTONELLO 13A obtained the limit by assuming ν<

NTEV NUTEV FNALLSND LAMPF
LSND LAMPFµ → ν e oscillation from the ∼ 2%of ν µ evnets contamination in the CNGS beam.

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 53

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

2 CHENG 12 is a combined fit of MiniBooNE and SciBooNE antineutrino data.
3 This value is for a two neutrino oscillation analysis for excess antineutrino events withEν > 475 MeV. At 90% CL there is no solution at high ∆(m2 ). The best fit is at
maximal mixing. The allowed region is consistent with LSND reported by AGUILAR 01.
Supercedes AGUILAR-AREVALO 09B.
4 This value is for a two neutrino oscillation analysis for excess antineutrino events withEν > 200 MeV with subtraction of the expected 12 events low energy excess seen in theneutrino component of the beam. At 90% CL there is no solution at high ∆(m2 ). The
best fit value is 0.007 for ∆(m2 ) = 4.4 eV2 .
5 This result is inconclusive with respect to small amplitude mixing suggested by LSND.
6 ARMBRUSTER 02 is the final analysis of the KARMEN 2 data. See footnote in thepreceding table for further details, and the paper for the exclusion plot.
7 AGUILAR 01 is the final analysis of the LSND full data set. The deduced oscillation probability is 0.264 ± 0.067 ± 0.045%; the value of sin2 2θ for large ∆(m2 ) is twice this probability (although these values are excluded by other constraints). See footnote in precedingtable for further details, and the paper for a plot showing allowed regions. Supersedes
ATHANASSOPOULOS 95, ATHANASSOPOULOS 96, and ATHANASSOPOULOS 98.
8 ATHANASSOPOULOS 96 reports (0.31 ± 0.12 ± 0.05)% for the oscillation probability;
the value of sin2 2θ for large ∆(m2 ) should be twice this probability. See footnote inpreceding table for further details, and see the paper for a plot showing allowed regions.
9 ATHANASSOPOULOS 95 error corresponds to the 1.6σ band in the plot. The expected background is 2.7 ± 0.4 events. Corresponds to an oscillation probability of+ 0.20 ± 0.07)%. For a different interpretation, see HILL 95. Replaced by(0.34 −
0.18
ATHANASSOPOULOS 96.
10 HILL 95 is a report by one member of the LSND Collaboration, reporting a different conclusion from the analysis of the data of this experiment (see ATHANASSOPOULOS 95).
Contrary to the rest of the LSND Collaboration, Hill finds no evidence for the neutrino
oscillation ν µ → ν e and obtains only upper limits.

Sterile neutrino limits∆(m2 ) for sin2 (2θ) = 1 (νµ → νs )
νs means ντ or any sterile (noninteracting) ν.
VALUE (10−5 eV2 )CL%

DOCUMENT ID

TECNCOMMENT• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •1 OYAMA<3000 (or <550)90
89 KAMI Water Cherenkov< 4.2 or > 54.

90

BIONTA88

IMB

Flux has νµ , ν µ , νe , and ν e

1 OYAMA 89 gives a range of limits, depending on assumptions in their analysis. They
argue that the region ∆(m2 ) = (100–1000) × 10−5 eV2 is not ruled out by any data
for large mixing.

Search for νµ or νe → νs
VALUE

CL%

DOCUMENT ID

TECNCOMMENT• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •1 AKER<5× 10−4 95
23
T β decay
2
<0.05
95
ALMAZAN23
STEREO
3 AKER<0.02
95
22A SPEC T β decay
4 ATIF<0.003595
22
RENO, NEOS
0.42

+ 0.15− 0.17<0.05<0.005https://pdg.lbl.gov

68
95
95

5 BARINOV

22A
6 ANDRIAMIR... 21
7 SEREBROV
21

Page 54BESTPROSPECT
Neutrino-4

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)<0.008
<0.01
<0.06
<0.1
<0.4
<8
<1
<2
<4.5
<8.6
<1.1

× 10−3× 10−2× 10−2× 10−4× 10−2× 10−2

95
90
90
95
90
95
90
90
95
95
95

8 SKROBOVA
20
9 ALEKSEEV
18
10 ALMAZAN
18
11 ASHENFELT... 18
12 AARTSEN
17B
13 ABDURASHI... 1714 KO
1715 AARTSEN
16
16 ADAMSON
16B
17 ADAMSON
16C
18 AN
16B
19 AMBROSIO
01
20 FUKUDA
00

ICCB

DANSS
DANSS
STEREOPROSPECT
IceCube-DeepCore
T β decay

NEOS
ICCB IceCube
MINOS, DayaBay
MINS
DAYA
MCRO matter effects
SKAM neutral currents + matter effects
1 AKER 23 assume a 3+1 neutrino mixing model, use low-rate commissioning data of the
KATRIN tritium β decay experiment to place a limit on sin2 (θ14 ) for a admixture sterile
neutrino mass m4 of ∼ 300 eV.
2 ALMAZAN 23 use inverse beta decay data collected by the STEREO experiment, placed
9 to 11 m from the ILL research reactor, to search for ν e → ν s oscillations. The ILL
research reactor uses highly enriched 235 U fuel. No indication of the oscillation to sterile
neutrinos is found, the stated limit on sin2 (2θ14 ) correspond to ∆m2 ∼ 1 eV2 where41
the exclusion is maximal. Supersedes ALMAZAN 18.
3 AKER 22A uses the first two science runs of the KATRIN tritium β decay neutrino mass
experiment to search for an admixture of sterile neutrinos. No evidence is found for aspectral anomaly, indicating such admixture. The resulting limit is on sin2 (2θ14 ) for
sterile neutrino masses m4 < 40 eV. It is most restrictive at ∆m2 ∼ 400 eV2 . A
41
3+1 model is assumed.
4 ATIF 22 report results from the combined analysis of the RENO (419 m) and NEOS (24m) experiments data, collected at the Hanbit Nuclear Power Plant. Results, in termsof sin2 (2θ14 ), constrain for ν e → ν s oscillations. The authors report both excluded
and allowed parameter combinations. The exclusion result reported here is based on
the Feldman-Cousins method and for ∆m2 ≃ 0.55 eV2 . Part of the allowed area is41
excluded by the STEREO and PROSPECT experiments.
5 BARINOV 22A report an event deficit observed using the segmented Baksan Ga neutrino
detector, exposed to a 3.4 MCi 51 Cr source. Equal suppression factors are observed forthe inner and outer segments. The deficit is interpreted as evidence for oscillations tosterile neutrinos. The result is in terms of sin2 (2θ14 ), for a best fit of ∆m2 =3.3 +∞41−2.3
eV2 . Some, but not all, of the allowed neutrino parameter space conflicts with otherexperiments.
6 ANDRIAMIRADO 21 reports a search for ν → ν oscillations at the HFIR researchesreactor, at baselines from 6.7 to 9.2 m. The reactor has a 235 U core. 4 tons of 6 Li-doped
liquid scintillator are used in a segmented detector. Oscillations into sterile neutrinos are
disfavored. The stated limit for sin2 (2θ14 ) is for ∆m2 ∼ 2 eV2 where the sensitivity
41
is maximal.
7 SEREBROV 21 searches for ν → ν oscillations with a moveable detector with baselinees
6–12 m from the SM-3 research reactor with highly enriched 235 U fuel. Analyzing
the L/E dependence a χ2 minimum is found at ∆m2 = 7.3 ± 0.13 ± 1.16 eV2 and41
sin2 (2θ14 ) = 0.36 ± 0.12. The quoted limit of 0.005 for sin2 (2θ14 ) corresponds to∆m2∼ 2 eV2 . This is the result from 720 days of reactor ON and 860 days of41

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 55

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

reactor OFF measurements. The significance of the χ2 minimum is 2.9 σ. Supersedes
SEREBROV 20, SEREBROV 19 and SEREBROV 18A.
8 SKROBOVA 20 searches for ν −ν oscillations using the DANSS detector at 10.7, 11.2,
es
and 12.7 m from the 3.1 GWth power reactor. The DANSS detector is highly segmented
and moveable; the positions are changed usually 3 times a week. The analysis is basedon the ratio of the events at top and bottom position; the middle position is used forchecks of consistency. No evidence for sterile neutrinos is found. The quoted limit
0.008, the smallest excluded sin2 (2θ14 ), corresponds to ∆m2 ∼ 1.0 eV2 . Supersedes
41
ALEKSEEV 18.
9 ALEKSEEV 18 searches for ν → ν oscillations using the DANSS detector at 10.7, 11.2,
es
and 12.7 m from the 3.1 GWth power reactor. The DANSS detector is highly segmented
and moveable; the positions are changed usually 3 times a week. The analysis is basedon the ratio of the events at top and bottom position; the middle position is used forchecks of consistency. The best fit point is at ∆m2 = 1.4 eV2 and sin2 (2θ14 ) = 0.05
41
with ∆χ2 = 13.1 (statistical errors only) compared to the fit with 3 active neutrinos only.
The quoted limit of 0.01 for sin2 (2θ14 ) corresponds to ∆m2 ∼ 1.0 eV2 . Superseded41
by SKROBOVA 20.
10 ALMAZAN 18 searches for the ν → ν oscillations with baseline from 9.4 to 11.1 mesfrom the ILL research reactor with highly enriched 235 U fuel. The STEREO detector
consists of six separated cells with Gd loaded scintillator, with 15 m water equivalent
overburden. The detected rate is 396.3 ± 4.7 ν e /day with signal to background ratio
of about 0.9. The reported results corresponds to 66 days of reactor-on. The analysis
uses the relative rates normalized to the cell number 1. No indication of the oscillation
to the sterile neutrinos is found, the stated limit on sin2 (2θ14 ) correspond to ∆m2 ∼41
3.5 eV2 where the exclusion is maximal. Superseded by ALMAZAN 23.
11 ASHENFELTER 18 searches for the ν → ν oscillations at baseline from 6.7 to 9.2 mesfrom the 85 MW research reactor with pure 235 U core. The segmented 4 ton 6 Li-doped
liquid scintillator is operated with about 1 m water equivalent overburden and recorded
25461 ± 283 IBD events. No indication of oscillations into sterile neutrinos was observed.
The stated limit for sin2 (2θ14 ) is for ∆m2 ∼ 2 eV2 where the sensitivity is maximal.
41
12 AARTSEN 17B uses three years of upward-going atmospheric neutrino data in the energy
range of 10-60 GeV to constrain their disappearance into light sterile neutrinos. The
reported limit sin2 θ24 < 0.11 at 90% C.L. is for ∆m2 = 1.0 eV2 . We convert the41
result to sin2 2θ24 for the listing. AARTSEN 17B also reports cos2 θ24 · sin2 θ34 < 0.15
at 90% C.L. for ∆m2 = 1.0 eV2 .
41
13 ABDURASHITOV 17 use the Troitsk nu-mass experiment to search for sterile neutrinos with mass 0.1 - 2 keV. We convert the reported limit from U2 <0.002 toe4
sin2 2θ14 <0.008 assume Ue4 ∼ sinθ14 . The stated limit corresponds to the smallest U2 . The exclusion curve begins at U2 of 0.02 for m4 = 0.1 keV.
e4e4
14 KO 17 reports on short baseline reactor oscillation search (ν → ν ), motivated bees
the so-called ”reactor antineutrino anomaly”. The experiment is conducted at 23.7 mfrom the core of unit 5 of the Hanbit Nuclear Power Complex in Korea. the reported
limited on sin2 (2θ41 ) for sterile neutrinos was determined using the reactor antineutrino
spectrum determined by the Daya Bay experiment for ∆m2 around 0.55 eV2 where14
the sensitivity is maximal. A fraction of the parameter space derived from the ”reactor
antineutrino anomaly” is excluded by this work. Compared to reactor models an event
excess is observed at about 5 MeV, in agreement with other experiments.
15 AARTSEN 16 use one year of upward-going atmospheric muon neutrino data in theenergy range of 320 GeV to 20 TeV to constrain their disappearance into light sterile
neutrinos. Sterile neutrinos are expected to produce distinctive zenith distribution forthese energies for 0.01 ≤ ∆m2 ≤ 10 eV2 . The stated limit is for sin2 2θ24 at ∆m2
around 0.3 eV2 .

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 56

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

16 ADAMSON 16B combine the results of AN 16B, ADAMSON 16C, and Bugey-3 reactor
experiments to constrain νµ to νe mixing through oscillations into light sterile neutrinos.
The stated limit for sin2 2θµ e is at ∆m2 = 1.2 eV2 .
41
17 ADAMSON 16C use the NuMI beam and exposure of 10.56 × 1020 protons on target tosearch for the oscillation of νµ dominated beam into light sterile neutrinos with detectors
at 1.04 and 735 km. The reported limit sin2 (θ24 ) < 0.022 at 95% C.L. is for ∆m2
41= 0.5 eV2 . We convert the result to sin2 (2θ24 ) for the listing.
18 AN 16B utilize 621 days of data to place limits on the ν disappearance into a lightesterile neutrino. The stated limit corresponds to the smallest sin2 (2θ14 ) at ∆m2∼
41
3 × 10−2 eV2 (obtained from Figure 3 in AN 16B). The exclusion curve begins at∆m2 ∼ 1.5×10−4 eV2 and extends to ∼ 0.25 eV2 . The analysis assumes sin2 (2θ12 )41= 0.846 ± 0.021, ∆m2 = (7.53 ± 0.18)×10−5 eV2 , and ∆m2 = (2.44 ± 0.06)×10−3
21
32
eV2 .
19 AMBROSIO 01 tested the pure 2-flavor ν → ν hypothesis using matter effects whichµschange the shape of the zenith-angle distribution of upward through-going muons. With
maximum mixing and ∆m2 around 0.0024 eV2 , the νµ → νs oscillation isdisfavoredwith 99% confidence level with respect to the νµ → ντ hypothesis.
20 FUKUDA 00 tested the pure 2-flavor ν → ν hypothesis using three complementaryµ
s
atmospheric-neutrino data samples. With this hypothesis, zenith-angle distributions are
expected to show characteristic behavior due to neutral currents and matter effects. In the∆m2 and sin2 2θregion preferred by the Super-Kamiokande data, the νµ → νs hypothesis
isrejected at the 99% confidence level, while the νµ → ντ hypothesis consistently fits allof the data sample.

CPT tests∆m 221 − ∆m221
VALUE (10−4 eV2 )CL%

DOCUMENT ID

TECNCOMMENT

1 DEGOUVEA

<1.1
99.7
05 FIT
solar vs. reactor
1 DEGOUVEA 05 obtained this bound at the 3σ CL from the KamLAND (ARAKI 05) andsolar neutrino data.

∆m 232 − ∆m232
VALUE (10−3 eV2 )CL%+ 0.26− 0.12 −0.24

DOCUMENT ID

1 ADAMSONTECN

13B MINSCOMMENT

beam and atmosperic• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • •
+ 2.4
0.6 −
0.8

90

2 ADAMSON

12B MINSMINOS atmospheric

1 ADAMSON 13B quotes this difference as a negative of our convention.
2 The quoted result is the single-parameter 90% C.L. interval determined from the 90% C.L.
contour in the (∆m2 , ∆m2 ) plane, which is obtained by minimizing the four parameter
log-likelihood function with respect to the other oscillation parameters.

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 57

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

REFERENCES FOR Neutrino Mixing
ABBASI
23
ABE
23D
ABE
23F
AKER
23
ALMAZAN
23
AN
23
BASILICO
23
MA
23A
PDG
23
ACERO
22
AKER
22A
APPEL
22
ATIF
22
BARINOV
22A
Also
ABE
21A
ABRAHAO
21
AGOSTINI
21
AGUILAR-AR... 21
ANDRIAMIR... 21
SALAS
21
SEREBROV
21
AARTSEN
20
ABE
20F
Also
ADAMSON
20A
AGOSTINI
20A
AGOSTINI
20D
AHARMIM
20
ALMAZAN20
DE-KERRET20
ESTEBAN
20APDG
20SEREBROV
20SHIN
20SKROBOVA
20AARTSEN
19C
ACERO
19
ADEY
19
AGAFONOVA 19
ALBERT
19
ANDERSON
19
SEREBROV
19
AARTSEN
18A
ABE
18B
ABE
18G
ACERO
18
ADEY
18A
AGAFONOVA 18
AGAFONOVA 18A
AGOSTINI
18B
AGUILAR-AR... 18C
ALEKSEEV
18
ALMAZAN18
ASHENFELT... 18
BAK
18
CAPOZZI
18
DE-SALAS
18
PDG
18
SEO
18
SEREBROV
18A
AARTSEN
17B
ABDURASHI... 17
ABE
17A
ABE
17C
ABE
17F
Also
ADAMSON
17A

PR D108 012014
R. Abbasi et al.
(IceCube Collab.)PR D108 072011
K. Abe et al.
(T2K Collab.)
EPJ C83 782
K. Abe et al.
(T2K Collab.)
EPJ C83 763
M. Aker et al.
(KATRIN Collab.)NAT 613 257
H. Almazan et al.
(STEREO Collab.)
PRL 130 161802
F.P. An et al.
(Daya Bay Collab.)PR D108 102005
D. Basilico et al.
(Borexino Collab.)
PRL 130 021802
W. Ma et al.
(PandaX-4T Collab.)
RPP 2023 at pdg.lbl.gov R.L. Workman et al.
(PDG Collab.)PR D106 032004
M.A. Acero et al.
(NOvA Collab.)PR D105 072004
M. Aker et al.
(KATRIN Collab.)
PRL 129 252701
S. Appel et al.
(Borexino Collab.)PR D105 L111101
Z. Atif et al.
(RENO and NEOS Collab.)
PR C105 065502
V.V. Barinov et al.
(BEST Collab.)
PRL 128 232501
V.V. Barinov et al.
(BEST Collab.)PR D103 L011101
K. Abe et al.
(T2K Collab.)
JHEP 2101 190
T. Abrahao et al.
(Double Chooz Collab.)
ASP 125 102509
M. Agostini et al.
(Borexino Collab.)PR D103 052002
A.A. Aguilar-Arevalo et al.
(MiniBooNE Collab.)PR D103 032001
M. Andriamirado et al.
(PROSPECT Collab.)
JHEP 2102 071
P.F. de Salas et al.
(STOH, VALE, INFN+)
PR D104 032003
A.P. Serebrov et al.
(Neutrino-4 Collab.)
EPJ C80 9
M.G. Aartsen et al.
(IceCube Collab.)
NAT 580 339
K. Abe et al.
(T2K Collab.)PR D103 112008
K. Abe et al.
(T2K Collab.)
PRL 125 131802
P. Adamson et al.
(MINOS+ Collab.)PR D101 062001
M. Agostini et al.
(Borexino Collab.)
NAT 587 577
M. Agostini et al.
(Borexino Collab.)PR D102 062006
B. Aharmim et al.
(SNO Collab.)
PRL 125 201801
H. Almazan et al.
(STEREO Collab.)
NATP 16 558
H. de Karret et al.
(Double Chooz Collab.)
JHEP 2009 178
I. Esteban et al.
(NuFIT Collab.)
PTEP 2020 083C01
P.A. Zyla et al.
(PDG Collab.)
JETPL 112 199
A.P. Serebrov, R.M. Samoilov(PNPI)
Translated from ZETFP 112 211.
JHEP 2004 029
C.D. Shin et al.
(RENO Collab.)
IJMP A35 2044015
N. Skrobova(DANSS Collab.)
PR D99 032007
M.G. Aartsen et al.
(IceCube Collab.)
PRL 123 151803
M.A. Acero et al.
(NOvA Collab.)PR D100 052004
D. Adey et al.
(Daya Bay Collab.)PR D100 051301
N. Agafonova et al.
(OPERA Collab.)
JHEP 1906 113
A. Albert et al.
(ANTARES Collab.)
PR D99 012012
M. Anderson et al.
(SNO+ Collab.)
JETPL 109 213
A.P. Serebrov et al.
(Neutrino-4 Collab.)
PRL 120 071801
M.G. Aartsen et al.
(IceCube Collab.)
PR D97 072001
K. Abe et al.
(Super-Kamiokande Collab.)
PRL 121 171802
K. Abe et al.
(T2K Collab.)
PR D98 032012
M.A. Acero et al.
(NOvA Collab.)
PRL 121 241805
D. Adey et al.
(Daya Bay Collab.)
PRL 120 211801
N. Agafonova et al.
(OPERA Collab.)
JHEP 1806 151
N. Agafonova et al.
(OPERA Collab.)
NAT 562 505
M. Agostini et al.
(Borexino Collab.)
PRL 121 221801
A.A. Aguilar-Arevalo et al.
(MiniBooNE Collab.)
PL B787 56
I. Alekseev et al.
(DANSS Collab.)
PRL 121 161801
H. Almazan et al.
(STEREO Collab.)
PRL 121 251802
J. Ashenfelter et al.
(PROSPECT Collab.)
PRL 121 201801
G. Bak et al.
(RENO Collab.)
PPNP 102 48
F. Capozzi et al.
PL B782 633
P.F. de Salas et al.
PR D98 030001
M. Tanabashi et al.
(PDG Collab.)
PR D98 012002
S.H. Seo et al.
(RENO Collab.)
PPN 49 701
A.P. Serebrov et al.
(Neutrino-4 Collab.)
PR D95 112002
M.G. Aartsen et al.
(IceCube Collab.)
JETPL 105 753
J.N. Abdurashitov et al.
(Troitsk nu-mass Collab.)
PRL 118 151801
K. Abe et al.
(T2K Collab.)
PR D96 011102
K. Abe et al.
(T2K Collab.)
PR D96 092006
K. Abe et al.
(T2K Collab.)
PR D98 019902 (errat.) K. Abe et al.
(T2K Collab.)
PRL 118 151802
P. Adamson et al.
(NOvA Collab.)https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 58

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

ADAMSON
17B
AN
17A
ESTEBAN
17
KO
17
VINYOLES
17
AARTSEN
16
ABE
16B
ABE
16C
ABE
16D
ADAMSON
16
ADAMSON
16A
ADAMSON
16B
ADAMSON
16C
AN
16
AN
16A
AN
16B
CHOI
16
PDG
16
AARTSEN
15A
ABE
15D
AGAFONOVA 15A
AN
15
BERGSTROM 15
GANDO
15
ABE
14
Also
ABE
14A
ABE
14B
ABE
14C
ABE
14H
Also
ADAMSON
14
AN
14
AN
14B
BELLINI
14A
FORERO14
GONZALEZ... 14PDG
14RENSHAW
14
AARTSEN
13B
ABE
13C
ABE
13E
ABE
13G
ADAMSON
13A
ADAMSON
13B
AGAFONOVA 13
AGUILAR-AR... 13A
AHARMIM
13
AN
13
ANTONELLO 13
ANTONELLO 13A
GANDO
13
ABE
12
ABE
12A
ABE
12B
ADAMSON
12
ADAMSON
12B
ADRIAN-MAR...12
AHN
12
AN
12
BELLINI
12A
CHENG
12
MAHN
12
ABE
11
ABE
11A
ABE
11B
ABE
11C
ADAMSON
11
ADAMSON
11B
ADAMSON
11C
ADAMSON
11D

PRL 118 231801
PR D95 072006
JHEP 1701 087
PRL 118 121802
APJ 835 202
PRL 117 071801
JHEP 1601 163
PR D94 052010
PRL 116 181801
PRL 116 151806
PR D93 051104
PRL 117 151801
PRL 117 151803
PRL 116 061801
PR D93 072011
PRL 117 151802
PRL 116 211801
CP C40 100001
PR D91 072004
PR D91 072010
PRL 115 121802
PRL 115 111802
JHEP 1509 200
PR C92 055808
PRL 112 181801
PR D91 072010
PL B735 51
PR D89 092003
PRL 112 061802
JHEP 1410 086
JHEP 1502 074 (errat.)
PRL 112 191801
PRL 112 061801
PR D90 071101
NAT 512 383
PR D90 093006
JHEP 1411 052
CP C38 070001
PRL 112 091805
PRL 111 081801
PL B723 66
PR D88 032002
PRL 111 211803
PRL 110 171801
PRL 110 251801
JHEP 1307 004
PRL 110 161801
PR C88 025501
CP C37 011001
EPJ C73 2345
EPJ C73 2599
PR D88 033001
PRL 108 131801
PR D85 031103
PR D86 052008
PRL 108 191801
PR D86 052007
PL B714 224
PRL 108 191802
PRL 108 171803
PRL 108 051302
PR D86 052009
PR D85 032007
PR D83 052010
PRL 107 041801
PR C84 035804
PRL 107 241801
PRL 106 181801
PRL 107 021801
PR D84 071103
PRL 107 181802

https://pdg.lbl.gov

P. Adamson et al.
(NOvA Collab.)
F.P. An et al.
(Daya Bay Collab.)
I. Esteban et al.
Y.J. Ko et al.
(NEOS Collab.)
N. Vinyoles et al.
M.G. Aartsen et al.
(IceCube Collab.)
Y. Abe et al.
(Double Chooz Collab.)
K. Abe et al.
(Super-Kamiokande Collab.)
K. Abe et al.
(T2K Collab.)
P. Adamson et al.
(NOvA Collab.)
P. Adamson et al.
(NOvA Collab.)
P. Adamson et al.
(Daya Bay and MINOS Collab.)
P. Adamson et al.
(MINOS Collab.)
F.P. An et al.
(Daya Bay Collab.)
F.P. An et al.
(Daya Bay Collab.)
F.P. An et al.
(Daya Bay Collab.)
J.H. Choi et al.
(RENO Collab.)
C. Patrignani et al.
(PDG Collab.)
M.G. Aartsen(IceCube Collab.)
K. Abe et al.
(T2K Collab.)
N. Agafonova et al.
(OPERA Collab.)
F.P. An et al.
(Daya Bay Collab.)
J. Bergstrom et al.
(BARC, STON, MADU+)
A. Gando et al.
(KamLAND Collab.)
K. Abe et al.
(T2K Collab.)
K. Abe et al.
(T2K Collab.)
Y. Abe et al.
(Double Chooz Collab.)
K. Abe et al.
(T2K Collab.)
K. Abe et al.
(T2K Collab.)
Y. Abe et al.
(Double Chooz Collab.)
Y. Abe et al.
(Double Chooz Collab.)
P. Adamson et al.
(MINOS Collab.)
F.P. An et al.
(Daya Bay Collab.)
F.P. An et al.
(Daya Bay Collab.)
G. Bellini et al.
(Borexino Collab.)
D.V. Forero, M. Tortola, J.W.F. Valle
M.C. Gonzalez-Garcia, M. Maltoni, T. Schwetz
K. Olive et al.
(PDG Collab.)
A. Renshaw et al.
(Super-Kamiokande Collab.)
M.G. Aartsen et al.
(IceCube Collab.)
Y. Abe et al.
(Double Chooz Collab.)
K. Abe et al.
(T2K Collab.)
K. Abe et al.
(T2K Collab.)
P. Adamson et al.
(MINOS Collab.)
P. Adamson et al.
(MINOS Collab.)
N. Agafonova et al.
(OPERA Collab.)
A.A. Aguilar-Arevalo et al.
(MiniBooNE Collab.)
B. Aharmim et al.
(SNO Collab.)
F.P. An et al.
(Daya Bay Collab.)
M. Antonello et al.
(ICARUS Collab.)
M. Antonello et al.
(ICARUS Collab.)
A. Gando et al.
(KamLAND Collab.)
Y. Abe et al.
(Double Chooz Collab.)
K. Abe et al.
(T2K Collab.)
Y. Abe et al.
(Double Chooz Collab.)
P. Adamson et al.
(MINOS Collab.)
P. Adamson et al.
(MINOS Collab.)
S. Adrian-Martinez et al.
(ANTARES Collab.)
J.K. Ahn et al.
(RENO Collab.)
F.P. An et al.
(Daya Bay Collab.)
G. Bellini et al.
(Borexino Collab.)
G. Cheng et al.
(MiniBooNE/SciBooNE Collab.)
K.B.M. Mahn et al.
(MiniBooNE/SciBooNE Collab.)
K. Abe et al.
(Super-Kamiokande Collab.)
K. Abe et al.
(T2K Collab.)
S. Abe et al.
(KamLAND Collab.)
K. Abe et al.
(Super-Kamiokande Collab.)
P. Adamson et al.
(MINOS Collab.)
P. Adamson et al.
(MINOS Collab.)
P. Adamson et al.
(MINOS Collab.)
P. Adamson et al.
(MINOS Collab.)

Page 59

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

BELLINI
11BELLINI
11A
FOGLI
11
GANDO
11
HUBER
11
Also
MUELLER
11
SERENELLI11ADAMSON
10A
AGUILAR-AR... 10
AHARMIM
10
BELLINI
10A
DENIZ
10
KAETHER
10WENDELL
10
ABDURASHI... 09
ADAMSON
09
AGUILAR-AR... 09B
ABE
08A
Also
ADAMSON08
ADAMSON
08A
AHARMIM
08
Also
ARPESELLA
08A
CRAVENS
08
FOGLI
08
ADAMSON
07
AGUILAR-AR... 07
AHARMIM07
ADAMSON
06
AHN
06A
BALATA
06
HOSAKA
06
HOSAKA
06A
MICHAEL
06
WINTER
06A
YAMAMOTO 06
AHARMIM
05A
ALIU
05
ALLISON
05
ALTMANN
05
ARAKI
05
ASHIE
05
BAHCALL
05
DEGOUVEA
05
AHARMIM
04
AHMED
04A
AHN
04
AMBROSIO
04
ASHIE
04
EGUCHI
04
SMY
04
AHN
03
AMBROSIO
03
APOLLONIO
03
ASTIER
03
EGUCHI
03
GANDO
03
IANNI
03
SANCHEZ
03
ABDURASHI... 02
AHMAD
02
AHMAD
02B
ARMBRUSTER 02
AVVAKUMOV 02
FUKUDA
02
AGUILAR
01
AHMAD
01
AMBROSIO
01

PL B696 191
G. Bellini et al.
(Borexino Collab.)
PRL 107 141302
G. Bellini et al.
(Borexino Collab.)
PR D84 053007
G.L. Fogli et al.
PR D83 052002
A. Gando et al.
(KamLAND Collab.)
PR C84 024617
P. Huber(VPI)
PR C85 029901 (errat.) P. Huber(VPI)
PR C83 054615
Th.A Mueller et al.
APJ 743 24
A.M. Serenelli, W.C. Haxton, C. Pena-Garay
PR D82 051102
P. Adamson et al.
(MINOS Collab.)
PRL 105 181801
A.A. Aguillar-Arevalo et al.
(MiniBooNE Collab.)
PR C81 055504
B. Aharmim et al.
(SNO Collab.)
PR D82 033006
G. Bellini et al.
(Borexino Collab.)
PR D81 072001
M. Deniz et al.
(TEXONO Collab.)
PL B685 47
F. Kaether et al.
PR D81 092004
R. Wendell et al.
(Super-Kamiokande Collab.)
PR C80 015807
J.N. Abdurashitov et al.
(SAGE Collab.)
PRL 103 261802
P. Adamson et al.
(MINOS Collab.)
PRL 103 111801
A.A. Aguilar-Arevalo et al.
(MiniBooNE Collab.)
PRL 100 221803
S. Abe et al.
(KamLAND Collab.)
PRL 101 119904E
S. Abe et al.
(KamLAND Collab.)
PR D77 072002
P. Adamson et al.
(MINOS Collab.)
PRL 101 131802
P. Adamson et al.
(MINOS Collab.)
PRL 101 111301
B. Aharmim et al.
(SNO Collab.)
PR C87 015502
B. Aharmim et al.
(SNO Collab.)
PRL 101 091302
C. Arpesella et al.
(Borexino Collab.)
PR D78 032002
J.P. Cravens et al.
(Super-Kamiokande Collab.)
PRL 101 141801
G.L. Fogli
PR D75 092003
P. Adamson et al.
(MINOS Collab.)
PRL 98 231801
A.A. Aguilar-Arevalo et al.
(MiniBooNE Collab.)
PR C75 045502
B. Aharmim et al.
(SNO Collab.)
PR D73 072002
P. Adamson et al.
(MINOS Collab.)
PR D74 072003
M.H. Ahn et al.
(K2K Collab.)
EPJ C47 21
M. Balata et al.
(Borexino Collab.)
PR D73 112001
J. Hosaka et al.
(Super-Kamiokande Collab.)
PR D74 032002
J. Hosaka et al.
(Super-Kamiokande Collab.)
PRL 97 191801
D. Michael et al.
(MINOS Collab.)
PR C73 025503
W.T. Winter et al.
PRL 96 181801
S. Yamamoto et al.
(K2K Collab.)
PR C72 055502
B. Aharmim et al.
(SNO Collab.)
PRL 94 081802
E. Aliu et al.
(K2K Collab.)
PR D72 052005
W.W.M. Allison et al.
(SOUDAN-2 Collab.)
PL B616 174
M. Altmann et al.
(GNO Collab.)
PRL 94 081801
T. Araki et al.
(KamLAND Collab.)
PR D71 112005
Y. Ashie et al.
(Super-Kamiokande Collab.)
APJ 621 L85
J.N. Bahcall, A.M. Serenelli, S. Basu
(IAS+)
PR D71 093002
A. de Gouvea, C. Pena-Garay
PR D70 093014
B. Aharmim et al.
(SNO Collab.)
PRL 92 181301
S.N. Ahmed et al.
(SNO Collab.)
PRL 93 051801
M.H. Ahn et al.
(K2K Collab.)
EPJ C36 323
M. Ambrosio et al.
(MACRO Collab.)
PRL 93 101801
Y. Ashie et al.
(Super-Kamiokande Collab.)
PRL 92 071301
K. Eguchi et al.
(KamLAND Collab.)PR D69 011104
M.B. Smy et al.
(Super-Kamiokande Collab.)
PRL 90 041801
M.H. Ahn et al.
(K2K Collab.)
PL B566 35
M. Ambrosio et al.
(MACRO Collab.)
EPJ C27 331
M. Apollonio et al.
(CHOOZ Collab.)
PL B570 19
P. Astier et al.
(NOMAD Collab.)
PRL 90 021802
K. Eguchi et al.
(KamLAND Collab.)
PRL 90 171302
Y. Gando et al.
(Super-Kamiokande Collab.)
JP G29 2107
A. Ianni(INFN Gran Sasso)
PR D68 113004
M. Sanchez et al.
(Soudan 2 Collab.)
JETP 95 181
J.N. Abdurashitov et al.
(SAGE Collab.)
Translated from ZETF 122 211.
PRL 89 011301
Q.R. Ahmad et al.
(SNO Collab.)
PRL 89 011302
Q.R. Ahmad et al.
(SNO Collab.)PR D65 112001
B. Armbruster et al.
(KARMEN 2 Collab.)
PRL 89 011804
S. Avvakumov et al.
(NuTeV Collab.)
PL B539 179
S. Fukuda et al.
(Super-Kamiokande Collab.)PR D64 112007
A. Aguilar et al.
(LSND Collab.)
PRL 87 071301
Q.R. Ahmad et al.
(SNO Collab.)
PL B517 59
M. Ambrosio et al.
(MACRO Collab.)https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 60

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16

Citation: S. Navas et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024)

BOEHM
01
FUKUDA
01
AMBROSIO
00
BOEHM
00
FUKUDA00
ALLISON
99
APOLLONIO99
Also
FUKUDA99C
FUKUDA
99D
HAMPEL99
AMBROSIO
98
APOLLONIO
98
ATHANASSO... 98
ATHANASSO... 98B
CLEVELAND 98
FELDMAN98
FUKUDA98C
HATAKEYAMA 98
CLARK
97
AGLIETTA
96
ATHANASSO... 96
ATHANASSO... 96B
FUKUDA96
FUKUDA
96B
GREENWOOD 96
HAMPEL96
LOVERRE
96
ACHKAR
95
AHLEN
95
ATHANASSO... 95
DAUM
95
HILL
95
DECLAIS94
FUKUDA
94
VILAIN
94C
FREEDMAN93
BECKER-SZ... 92B
BEIER
92
Also
HIRATA92
CASPER91
HIRATA91
KUVSHINN... 91
BERGER
90B
HIRATA90
AGLIETTA
89
DAVIS
89
OYAMA
89
BIONTA88
DURKIN88
ABRAMOWICZ 86
ALLABY86
ANGELINI
86
VUILLEUMIER 82
BOLIEV
81
KWON
BOEHM
CROUCH81
80
78

PR D64 112001
F. Boehm et al.
PRL 86 5651
S. Fukuda et al.
(Super-Kamiokande Collab.)
PL B478 5
M. Ambrosio et al.
(MACRO Collab.)
PRL 84 3764
F. Boehm et al.
PRL 85 3999
S. Fukuda et al.
(Super-Kamiokande Collab.)
PL B449 137
W.W.M. Allison et al.
(Soudan 2 Collab.)
PL B466 415
M. Apollonio et al.
(CHOOZ Collab.)
PL B472 434 (errat.)
M. Apollonio et al.
(CHOOZ Collab.)
PRL 82 2644
Y. Fukuda et al.
(Super-Kamiokande Collab.)
PL B467 185
Y. Fukuda et al.
(Super-Kamiokande Collab.)
PL B447 127
W. Hampel et al.
(GALLEX Collab.)
PL B434 451
M. Ambrosio et al.
(MACRO Collab.)
PL B420 397
M. Apollonio et al.
(CHOOZ Collab.)
PRL 81 1774
C. Athanassopoulos et al.
(LSND Collab.)
PR C58 2489
C. Athanassopoulos et al.
(LSND Collab.)
APJ 496 505
B.T. Cleveland et al.
(Homestake Collab.)
PR D57 3873
G.J. Feldman, R.D. Cousins
PRL 81 1562
Y. Fukuda et al.
(Super-Kamiokande Collab.)
PRL 81 2016
S. Hatakeyama et al.
(Kamiokande Collab.)
PRL 79 345
R. Clark et al.
(IMB Collab.)
JETPL 63 791
M. Aglietta et al.
(LSD Collab.)
Translated from ZETFP 63 753.
PR C54 2685
C. Athanassopoulos et al.
(LSND Collab.)
PRL 77 3082
C. Athanassopoulos et al.
(LSND Collab.)
PRL 77 1683
Y. Fukuda et al.
(Kamiokande Collab.)
PL B388 397
Y. Fukuda et al.
(Kamiokande Collab.)
PR D53 6054
Z.D. Greenwood et al.
(UCI, SVR, SCUC)
PL B388 384
W. Hampel et al.
(GALLEX Collab.)
PL B370 156
P.F. Loverre
NP B434 503
B. Achkar et al.
(SING, SACLD, CPPM, CDEF+)
PL B357 481
S.P. Ahlen et al.
(MACRO Collab.)
PRL 75 2650
C. Athanassopoulos et al.
(LSND Collab.)
ZPHY C66 417
K. Daum et al.
(FREJUS Collab.)
PRL 75 2654
J.E. Hill(PENN)PL B338 383
Y. Declais et al.
PL B335 237
Y. Fukuda et al.
(Kamiokande Collab.)
ZPHY C64 539
P. Vilain et al.
(CHARM II Collab.)PR D47 811
S.J. Freedman et al.
(LAMPF E645 Collab.)PR D46 3720
R.A. Becker-Szendy et al.
(IMB Collab.)
PL B283 446
E.W. Beier et al.
(KAM2 Collab.)
PTRSL A346 63
E.W. Beier, E.D. Frank(PENN)PL B280 146
K.S. Hirata et al.
(Kamiokande II Collab.)
PRL 66 2561
D. Casper et al.
(IMB Collab.)
PRL 66 9
K.S. Hirata et al.
(Kamiokande II Collab.)
JETPL 54 253
A.A. Kuvshinnikov et al.
(KIAE)PL B245 305
C. Berger et al.
(FREJUS Collab.)
PRL 65 1297
K.S. Hirata et al.
(Kamiokande II Collab.)
EPL 8 611
M. Aglietta et al.
(FREJUS Collab.)
ARNPS 39 467
R. Davis, A.K. Mann, L. Wolfenstein(BNL, PENN+)
PR D39 1481
Y. Oyama et al.
(Kamiokande II Collab.)
PR D38 768
R.M. Bionta et al.
(IMB Collab.)
PRL 61 1811
L.S. Durkin et al.
(OSU, ANL, CIT+)PRL 57 298
H. Abramowicz et al.
(CDHS Collab.)
PL B177 446
J.V. Allaby et al.
(CHARM Collab.)
PL B179 307
C. Angelini et al.
(PISA, ATHU, PADO+)
PL 114B 298
J.L. Vuilleumier et al.
(CIT, SIN, MUNI)SJNP 34 787
M.M. Boliev et al.
(INRM)
Translated from YAF 34 1418.
PR D24 1097
H. Kwon et al.
(CIT, ISNG, MUNI)
PL 97B 310
F. Boehm et al.
(ILLG, CIT, ISNG, MUNI)PR D18 2239
M.F. Crouch et al.
(CASE, UCI, WITW)

https://pdg.lbl.gov

Page 61

Created: 5/31/2024 10:16