-
Although the gauge boson sector of the Standard Model (SM) with
SU(3)c⊗SU(2)L⊗U(1)Y local symmetry has been very successful [1−4], its Yukawa sector is still poorly understood. Questions related to this sector such as the total number of families in nature, the hierarchy of the charged fermion mass spectrum, the smallness of neutrino masses, the quark mixing angles, the neutrino oscillations, and the origin of CP violation, remain open questions to date in theoretical particle physics [5−10].In the context of the SM, a neutrino flavor created by the weak interaction and associated with a charged lepton will maintain its flavor, which implies that the lepton flavor is conserved and neutrinos are massless. Moreover, recent experimental results confirm that neutrinos oscillate, and, consequently, at least two of them have non-zero masses [11−13].
Current neutrino experiments are measuring the neutrino mixing parameters with unprecedented accuracy. The next generation of neutrino experiments will be sensitive to subdominant neutrino oscillation effects that can, in principle, provide information on the yet-unknown neutrino parameters: the Dirac CP-violating phase in the Pontecorvo-Maki-Nakagawa-Sakata (PMNS) mixing matrix
UPMNS , the neutrino mass ordering, and the octant of the mixing angles [14−16].To date, the solar and atmospheric neutrino oscillations have established the following values to 3 sigma of the deviation [17−19]:
Δm2atm=(2.47−2.63)×10−3eV2,Δm2sol=(6.94−8.14)×10−5eV2=Δm221,sin2θatm=(4.34−6.10)×10−1=sin2θ23,sin2θsol=(2.71−3.69)×10−1=sin2θ12,sin2θReac=(2.00−2.41)×10−2=sin2θ13,
(1) which implies, among other things, that at least two neutrinos have very small but non-zero masses.
Masses of neutrinos require physics beyond the SM connected either to the existence of right-handed neutrinos and/or to the breaking of the baryon minus lepton number (B−L) symmetry [20]. If right-handed neutrinos exist, the Yukawa terms, after electroweak symmetry breaking, result in Dirac neutrino masses, requiring Yukawa coupling constants for neutrinos
hϕν≤10−13 . However, the right-handed neutrinos, singlets under the SM gauge group, can acquire large Majorana masses and render the Type I see-saw mechanism [8, 21−23] to be an appealing and natural scenery for neutrino mass generation. Another possibility is to generate neutrino masses via quantum loops [24, 25]For Majorana fields, a process exists called neutrinoless double beta decay
(0νββ) , which is strongly disfavored by current experimental results ([26−28]), the reason for which the alternative is to assume that massive neutrinos must be related to Dirac fields. Therefore, for the model analyzed, we assume that Majorana masses are forbidden by some type of physical mechanism.In addition to the fact that no experiment has thus far excluded the possibility of Dirac neutrino masses, several theoretical motivations exist to assume them, for example, the generation of baryon asymmetry via leptogenesis [29], alternative approaches to the see-saw mechanism [30], and the generation of radiative neutrino masses via quantum loops [31−34]. Additionally, in models derived from string theories, the Majorana masses are strongly suppressed by selection rules related to the underlying symmetries [35].
Furthermore, the use of Dirac particle fields enables us to apply the polar decomposition theorem of algebra [36], which states that any complex matrix can be decomposed into the product of a Hermitian and a unitary matrix. This decomposition reduces the number of free parameters by half in this sector because the unitary matrix can be absorbed into the singlet representations of
SU(2)L , that is, in the right-handed sector (a simplification that is not possible for Majorana particles [37]).Other theoretical motivations to study Dirac neutrinos include the conservation of global lepton number, a common mass generation mechanism for all Fermion fields, and a clearer distinction between matter and antimatter, which could aid in explaining CP violation in nature [38, 39].
To obtain Dirac neutrinos, three right-handed neutrinos are added to the SM of particles and fields (one for each family), enabling the most general possible Hermitian Dirac mass matrix in the neutral lepton sector in our study. Subsequently, after using a weak basis transformation (WBT) to eliminate nonphysical phases in the Hermitian neutral mass matrix, we aim to fit the mass-squared differences and the mixing angles in the
UPMNS matrix, values well measured in neutrino physics thus far, into the parameters.In our analysis, we assume a diagonal charged lepton mass matrix in the weak basis, which implies that the mixing angles in
UPMNS are pure oscillation parameters with no relation with charged lepton mixing. Thus, the unitary matrix that diagonalizes the neutral mass matrix is the sameUPMNS , and then, by introducing texture zeros in the neutral sector, we obtain physical predictions that can be tested numerically. -
For the analysis that follows, we adopt the following three hypotheses: 1) We extend the electroweak sector of the SM with three right-handed neutrino fields,
(ναR;α=e,μ,τ) ; 2) The charged lepton mass matrix is diagonal in the weak flavor basis; 3) Majorana masses are forbidden. -
According to the previous hypothesis, for the charged lepton sector in the flavor basis, we have
Ml=(me000mμ000mτ),
(2) which implies that the most general 3 × 3 mass matrix for the neutrinos, which, owing to the decomposition polar theorem of the matrix algebra [36] we assume to be Hermitian without loss of generality, can be expressed as
Mν=(mνeνemνeνμmνeντmνμνemνμνμmνμντmντνemντνμmντντ)=UPMNS(m1000m2000m3)U†PMNS=[Ue1Ue2Ue3Uμ1Uμ2Uμ3Uτ1Uτ2Uτ3][m1000m2000m3][U∗e1U∗μ1U∗τ1U∗e2U∗μ2U∗τ2U∗e3U∗μ3U∗τ3]=[Ue1Ue2Ue3Uμ1Uμ2Uμ3Uτ1Uτ2Uτ3][m1U∗e1m1U∗μ1m1U∗τ1m2U∗e2m2U∗μ2m2U∗τ2m3U∗e3m3U∗μ3m3U∗τ3],
(3) where the mixing matrix
UPMNS for Dirac neutrinos is parametrized in the usual form as [40]UPMNS=[1000c23s230−s23c23][c130s13e−iδCP010−s13eiδCP0c13][c12s120−s12c120001]=[c12c13s12c13s13e−iδCP−s12c23−c12s23s13eiδCPc12c23−s12s23s13eiδCPs23c13s12s23−c12c23s13eiδCP−c12s23−s12c23s13eiδCPc23c13];
(4) where
Dg.(m1,m2,m3) represents the neutrino mass eigenvalues, andcij=cosθij andsij=sinθij are the cosine and sine, respectively, of the mixing angleθij,i<j=1,2,3 .Now, owing to the Hermiticity constraint, the elements of
Mν satisfymνeνe=m∗νeνe,mνμνμ=m∗νμνμ,mντντ=m∗ντντ , andmνμνe=m∗νeνμ ;mντνe=m∗νeντ andmνμντ=m∗ντνμ .For our analysis, it is convenient to use the following numerical values for the entries of
UPMNS evaluated at 3σ ranges, presented in Ref. [17]:(0.7838...0.84420.5135...0.60040.1901...0.21830.2508...0.49020.4665...0.67820.6499...0.77190.3135...0.54710.4841...0.69270.6161...0.7434),
(5) which include strong correlations between the allowed ranges owing to unitary constraints.
-
When the mass matrices for the lepton sector are given by (2) and (3), we observe that the Hermitian mass matrix
Mν has six real parameters and three phases that we can use to explain seven physical parameters: the three mixing anglesθ12,θ13 , andθ23 , one CP violating phase δ, and three neutrino massesm1,m2 , andm3 . Therefore, in principle, we have a redundant number of parameters (two more phases).Now, at this point, and contrary to the quark sector [41, 37], we cannot introduce texture zeros via the WBT [42−44] in the mass matrix
Mν because it will change the charged lepton diagonal mass matrix. However, as shown in the appendix, the WBT can be used to eliminate the two redundant phases.When the redundant phases are removed via the WBT, the Hermitian matrix
M′ν has six real parameters and one phase that can accommodate, in principle, the three mixing angles, three neutrino masses, and CP violation phase. Thus, one texture zero should imply a relationship between the mixing angles and physical masses.However, we do not have six experimental entries to input in the analysis because the neutrinos masses are not known. Instead, we know the mass square differences
Δm232=m23−m22 ;Δ231=m23−m21 , andΔm221=m22−m21 in normal hierarchy, with the mathematical constraintΔm221+Δm232−Δm231=0 , which leaves us with only five experimental real constraints to be accommodated. Therefore, patterns with one texture zero should, in principle, be compatible with the experimental data at the 3σ level, although the parameter space for each of these zero textures should be strictly constrained (an analysis presented somewhere else). Therefore, real physical predictions should begin only when two texture zeros are considered. -
The introduction of texture zeros in a general mass matrix has been an outstanding hypothesis that provides relationships between the mixing angles and mass values.
As discussed earlier, the six real mathematical parameters of the most general Hermitian mass matrix for Dirac neutrinos provides sufficient room to accommodate the five real experimental values with no prediction. Furthermore, one texture zero should not conduce to any prediction. Therefore, texture zeros become valuable when two of them are introduced, with two texture zeros providing one physical prediction.
In the following, for normal ordering, we study all the possible cases of two texture zeros in the Hermitian mass matrix of Dirac neutrinos and observe the prediction for the lightest Dirac neutrino mass, which consequently has the knowledge of the complete neutrino mass spectrum.
Three different cases must be analyzed: two texture zeros in the diagonal, one texture zero in the diagonal and the other outside the diagonal, and finally two off-diagonal texture zeros.
To set our mathematical notation, we begin studying the implications of one texture zero.
-
Let us assume that
mνeνe=0 and observe its implications:From (3), we obtain
mνeνe=m1|Ue1|2+m2|Ue2|2+m3|Ue3|2=0,
(6) dividing by
m3 and using the unitary constraint of matrix U, that is|Ue1|2+|Ue2|2+|Ue3|2=1 , we can express (6) asm1m3|Ue1|2+m2m3|Ue2|2+1−|Ue1|2−|Ue2|2=0;
which we can rearrange as
|Ue2|2=m3m3−m2−m3−m1m3−m2|Ue1|2.
(7) Similarly for
mνμνμ=0 , we have|Uμ2|2=m3m3−m2−m3−m1m3−m2|Uμ1|2,
(8) and for
mντντ=0 , we have|Uτ2|2=m3m3−m2−m3−m1m3−m2|Uτ1|2.
(9) The former three cases can be summarized as
|Uα2|2=m3m3−m2−m3−m1m3−m2|Uα1|2,
(10) for
α=e ifmνeνe=0 ,α=μ ifmνμνμ=0 , andα=τ ifmντντ=0 . This shows the dependence between two of theUPMNS matrix entries and the neutrino mass values. -
Let us now consider a texture zero outside the diagonal. Let us begin with
mνeνμ=0 (notice thatmνμνe=m∗νeνμ=0 ).For this scenario, (3) implies that
mνeνμ=m1Ue1U∗μ1+m2Ue2U∗μ2+m3Ue3U∗μ3=0,
(11) which, dividing by
m3 and using the orthogonality conditionUe1U∗μ1+Ue2U∗μ2+Ue3U∗μ3=0 , can be expressed as(m1m3−1)Ue1U∗μ1+(m2m3−1)Ue2U∗μ2=0,
(12) multiplying by
U∗e2Uμ2 and rearranging, we obtain(m1m3−1)Ue1U∗μ1U∗e2Uμ2+(m2m3−1)|Ue2|2|Uμ2|2=0,
(13) which we can finally expressed as
Ue1U∗μ1U∗e2Uμ2+(m3−m2m3−m1)|Ue2|2|Uμ2|2=0,
(14) which, together with its complex conjugate, can be separated in two parts: a real part and an imaginary part both equal to zero (note that for a Hermitian matrix, its eigenvalues must be real but not necessarily positive).
As
mνμνe must also be equal to zero, the two relations must also be equivalent to making the real and imaginary parts in (14) equal to zero. As the second term in (14) is real, making the imaginary part equal to zero producesIm.(Ue1U∗μ1U∗e2Uμ2)=J=0;
(15) which means that this texture zero is associated with a Jarlskog invariant [45] equal to zero, and no CP violation is present for this texture zero.
Similarly for
mνeντ=0 , we havemνeντ=m1Ue1U∗τ1+m2Ue2U∗τ2+m3Ue3U∗τ3=0.
(16) Dividing by
m3 and using the orthogonality relationshipUe1U∗τ1+Ue2U∗τ2+Ue3U∗τ3=0 , we can express (16) in the form(m1m3−1)Ue1U∗τ1+(m2m3−1)Ue2U∗τ2=0,
(17) multiplying by
U∗e2Uτ2 and rearranging, we obtain(m1m3−1)Ue1U∗τ1U∗e2Uτ2+(m2m3−1)|Ue2|2|Uτ2|2=0,
(18) which implies
Ue1U∗τ1U∗e2Uτ2+(m3−m2m3−m1)|Ue2|2|Uτ2|2=0,
(19) which again produces
Im.(Ue1U∗τ1U∗e2Uτ2)=J=0.
(20) The former means that this texture zero outside the diagonal is also associated with a Jarlskog invariant equal to zero and, again, there is no CP violation for this case.
Similarly, for
mνμντ=0 we obtainmνμντ=m1Uμ1U∗τ1+m2Uμ2U∗τ2+m3Uμ3U∗τ3=0,
(21) which, divided by
m3 and using the appropriate orthogonality relationship, we obtain(m1m3−1)Uμ1U∗τ1+(m2m3−1)Uμ2U∗τ2=0,
(22) which, multiplying by
U∗μ2Uτ2 , we obtainUμ1U∗τ1U∗μ2Uτ2+(m3−m2m3−m1)|Uμ2|2|Uτ2|2=0,
(23) which again yields
Im.(Uμ1U∗τ1U∗μ2Uτ2)=J=0.
(24) Therefore, a texture zero in
Mν outside the main diagonal implies CP conservation, a result also obtained in a different manner in Appendix A. -
According to (4), the right-hand side of (3) depends only on the neutrino mixing angles, CP-violating phase, and neutrino masses. Therefore, each of the possible six texture zeros in the matrix
Mν in (3) implies an equation relating neutrino masses with the CP-phase and neutrino mixing angles. The equation must be confronted with the measured experimental values. Hence, we must place each equation in terms of physical parameters. Let us observe this: -
The texture
mνeνe=0 produces the constraint in equation (7), which, when expressed in terms of physical parameters, becomess212c213=m3m3−m2−(m3−m1)(m3−m2)c212c213.
(25) This relationship that must be satisfied by experimentally measured values to obtain a realistic texture zero in the neutrino mass matrix.
The relationship (25) can be rearranged slightly by using the definitions
m=m1+m2+m3 andΔm232=m23−m22 s212c213Δm232m−m1=m3−(m3−m1)c212c213.
(26) The parameter space can be studied through a
χ2 analysis, which is defined asχ2(m1)=[sin2θ12−sin2˜θ12σ(sin2θ12)]2,
(27) where
sin2˜θ12 w is the value for this mixing angle obtained from Eq. (26), whereassin2θ12 andσ(sin2θ12) are the current best fit value and its one sigma deviation, respectively. Experimental data in (1) and (5) are used to perform the analysis.After defining the parameter space in terms of
Δm212 ,Δm213 and the mixing anglesθ12 ,θ13 , we perform a minimization process for theχ2 function. The best fit points obtained around the minimum (about zero) for our analysis arem1=0.00208eV,m2=−0.00886eV,m3=0.0501eV.
To study the
(m1,m2,m3) parameter space, we first fix them1 value in its minimum and search for the allowed values ofm2 andm3 at the 95% confidence level (CL); the results are presented in Fig. 1(a). Next, we fixm2 in its minimum and search for the allowed values ofm1 andm3 at the 95% CL, whose results are presented in 1(b). Finally, fixingm3 , we determine the parameter space allowed form1 andm2 , as presented in Fig. 1(c). The parameter spaces shown in the former three figures satisfy the experimental limits|m1|+|m2|+|m3|<0.12 eV [46], the square mass differences, and the three mixing angles.Equation (25) shows that the CP violation phase is entirely unconstrained, but the plots in the figure show that the experimentally measured values can be well accommodated in the allowed parameter space, as anticipated above. The mixing angle
θ23 is easily obtained from the (2,3) or (3,3) mixing matrix numerical entries.A similar analysis can be performed for the other five one texture zero in the matrix
Mν , that is, formνμνμ=0 ,mντντ=0 ,mνeνμ= mνμνe=0 , etc. The results for this analysis will be presented elsewhere. -
The next step is to study the different structures with two texture zeros in the neutrino mass matrix (with a diagonal charged lepton sector in the weak basis). We study three different cases: first, the two zeros are in the main diagonal (there are three CP violating patterns); next, one texture zero is in the main diagonal and the other one outside this diagonal (with nine CP conserving different patterns); finally, the two zeros are off the main diagonal (with three CP conserving different patterns).
1 The following section presents, for one particular pattern, the detailed analytic and numerical analysis for all the different fifteen two texture zeros patterns. Our numerical results are presented in one appendix at the end of the paper.
-
The number of different patterns in this category, all of them related to CP conservation, is nine. They are shown in Appendix B.B.1.
In our analysis, performed in two steps, we reconstruct first the neutrino mass matrix in terms of the three neutrino masses
m1,m2 , andm3 . This is achieved by using the invariant forms: tr[M], tr[M2], and det[M]. Thereafter, we derive the analytic orthogonal matrices that diagonalize the several 3×3 real neutrino mass matrices. The result is theUPMNS in analytic form as a function of the real mass eigenvalues and any other parameter required, this last one conveniently chosen.To observe this, let us use as an example here with the texture in
A7 :A7=(x10b0x2cb∗c∗0).
(28) Notice that the three eigenvalues of a general 3 × 3 Hermitian matrix are real but not necessarily positive. By taking the determinant of
A7 , we obtain|A7|=−x2|b|2−x1|c|2=m1m2m3 , which by fixingm3>0 by a global phase convention, we must have two classes of solutions:m1>0,m2<0 andm1<0,m2>0 . Let us perform our example for the particular case ofm1>0 andm2<0 After using the invariant forms for this
3×3 mass matrix, and solving the equations, we obtain(x10√(x1−m1)(x1+m2)(−x1+m3)2x1−m1+m2−m30−x1+m1−m2+m3√(x1−m1+m2)(−x1+m1+m3)(x1+m2−m3)2x1−m1+m2−m3√(x1−m1)(x1+m2)(−x1+m3)2x1−m1+m2−m3√(x1−m1+m2)(−x1+m1+m3)(x1+m2−m3)2x1−m1+m2−m30),
(29) where
m1,m2,m3 , andx1 are free parameters used to calculate the neutrino masses and mixing angles. After diagonalizing this texture, we obtain theUPMNS in terms of the free parameter.UPMNS=(−√(x1+m2)(x1+m2−m3)(m3−x1)(m1+m2)(m3−m1)(2x1−m1+m2−m3)√(x1−m1)(x1−m1+m2)(−x1+m1+m3)(m1+m2)(m1−m3)(−2x1+m1−m2+m3)√(x1−m1)(x1+m2−m3)(m1+m2)(−m1+m3)−√(m1−x1)(m3−x1)(−x1+m1+m3)(m1+m2)(m2+m3)(−2x1+m1−m2+m3)−√(x1+m2)(x1−m1+m2)(x1+m2−m3)(m1+m2)(m2+m3)(2x1−m1+m2−m3)√(x1+m2)(−x1+m1+m3)(m1+m2)(m2+m3)√(x1−m1)(x1+m2)(x1−m1+m2)(m1−m3)(m2+m3)(−2x1+m1−m2+m3)√(x1−m3)(x1−m1−m3)(x1+m2−m3)(m1−m3)(m2+m3)(−2x1+m1−m2+m3)√(x1−m1+m2)(x1−m3)(m1−m3)(m2+m3)).
After obtaining this expression, we conduct a
χ2 minimization procedure:χ2(m1,x1)=∑i<j[sin2θij−sin2˜θijσ(sin2θij)]2,withi,j=1,2,3.
(30) where
sin2˜θij represents the angles mixing predicted by our forms, whereassin2θij andσ(sin2θij) are the current best-fit value and its one sigma deviation, respectively. To obtain the best values that fit the experimental data. Note that the analytical results contain some square root terms that imply several limits on the parameters, such that the results are real; that is, we must havem3>x1>m1, 2x1>m3, x1+m2>m3.
The minimization procedure produces the following phenomenological results: The neutrino masses
|m1|=0.0333 eV,|m2|=0.0344 eV,|m3|=0.0608 eV, and the mixing anglessin2θ12=0.315,sin2θ23=0.646,sin2θ13=0.022. The numerical result agrees with the data reported experimentally by the Neutrino Global Fit [17].
The results of the other eight possibilities are shown in Appendix D.
-
None of the three cases is viable because each one of them is associated with a vanishing oscillation parameter (for
A10 , we haveθ13=0 , forA11 , we haveθ23=0 , and forA12 , we haveθ12=0 ). The forms are shown in Appendix B.B.2. -
Three different patterns are given by the matrices
A13,A14 , andA15 . Using the invariant forms as before, we obtain complicated analytic expressions for theUPMNS matrix, whose tracking does not reveal much. Therefore, we proceed immediately with the numerical analysis.Our result shows that none of the three different textures with two zeroes in the main diagonal can reproduce the three measured mixing angles in the
UPMNS oscillation matrix. -
In the context of a model with right-handed neutrinos (one for each family) and global lepton number conservation, we perform an analytic and numerical systematic study of the Dirac neutrino Hermitian mass matrix
Mν with two independent texture zeros, under the assumption that the charged lepton sector is diagonal in the weak basis.Analytic expressions for the entries of
Mν as functions of the the three neutrino masses are obtained using the mathematical invariant of a 3 × 3 matrix. Algebraic expressions are derived to obtain numerical values for the physical parameters via minimization with aχ2 statistical analysis.According to our study, the cases compatible with the current experimental data at the 3σ level are
A3 andA7 (in Appendix B), both of them associated to normal ordering an CP conservation. This is contrary to the results presented in Refs. [49, 50], where the analysis was performed for correlations between two of the three mixing angles. Now, performing our analysis but relaxing the correlation between the anglesinθ13 with the other two mixing parameters at the 3σ level, the results in Table [3] are obtained, now in agreement with the results reported in the literature [49, 50].A new feature in our analysis is the iterative use of WBTs [42−44], which provide the following results: first, the elimination of the two redundant phases in the most general Hermitian neutrino mass matrix ending up with only one physical phase connected with possible CP violation in the lepton sector; second, the demonstration the CP conservation in a novel manner in the context of our analysis when a texture zero outside the main diagonal is placed.
Note that in our analysis, based on the assumption of a diagonal charged lepton mass matrix in the weak basis, our
UPMNS matrix is a pure oscillation matrix and not a mixing one as it occurs in the quark sector. This is relevant because neutrino experiments have measured oscillations.From our study, the mass for one of the three neutrinos can be predicted (we select the lightest one). Using this value, and the experimental mass squared differences, the entire neutrino mass spectrum can be inferred, as presented in the three tables at the end of the paper. Those values are exact predictions in our analysis. For example, for
A3 in Table D1, we obtainm1=0.021 ,m2=0.087 , andm3=0.501 , whose values are predicted in eV.Texture sin2θ12 sin2θ23 sin2θ13 |m1| /eV|m2| /eV|m3| /eV1: A1 0.298 0.250 0.022 0.0018 0.0091 0.0512 2: A2 0.305 0.018 0.014 0.0044 0.0096 0.0503 3: A3 0.334 0.007 0.022 0.0021 0.0087 0.0501 4: A4 0.318 0.200 0.022 0.0046 0.0097 0.0512 5: A5 0.465 0.010 0.032 0.0153 0.0175 0.0534 6: A6 0.524 0.003 0.014 0.0209 0.0227 0.0546 7: A7 0.315 0.646 0.022 0.0333 0.0344 0.0608 8: A8 0.022 0.515 0.023 0.2685 0.2686 0.2731 9: A9 0.023 0.516 0.023 0.2765 0.2767 0.2810 Table D1. Results of the mixing angles and neutrino masses for the nine different textures obtained according to our analysis for
m1>0 andm2<0 .Although we realized that all the six one zero textures are compatible with current neutrino oscillations, we have not obtained in detail the constraints in the parameter space coming from the experimentally measured values (results presented elsewhere).
Finally, whether neutrinos are Dirac or Majorana particles remains an open question.
-
In this appendix, we address two problems: first, we show how to use the weak basis transformation (WBT) to reduce the number of phases from three to one in a general 3 × 3 Hermitian neutrino mass matrix (for a diagonal mass matrix in the charged lepton sector). Second, we discuss the mathematical reason for CP conservation when an off-diagonal vanishing element exists in the neutrino sector.
In the context of the SM extended with right-handed neutrinos and lepton number conservation, the most general WBT that leaves the two 3 × 3 lepton mass matrices Hermitian and does not alter the physics implicit in the weak currents (does not alter the physical content in the
UPMNS mixing matrix) is an arbitrary unitary transformation U acting simultaneously in the charged lepton and in the neutrino mass matrices [43]. That isMν⟶MRν=UMνU†,Ml⟶MRl=UMlU†.
(A1) Now, when the mass matrices for the charged lepton sector are diagonal, we have that the most general Hermitian mass matrix
Mν for the neutral sector has six real parameters and three phases that we can use to explain seven physical parameters: three neutrino massesm1,m2 , andm3 , the three mixing anglesθ12,θ13 , andθ23 , and one CP violating phase δ in theUPMNS mixing matrix. Therefore, in principle, we obtain a redundant number of parameters (two more phases).In contrast to the quark sector [41, 37], we cannot introduce texture zeros via WBTs in the mass matrix
Mν because it would change the charged lepton diagonal mass matrix. However, the WBTs can eliminate the redundant phases. Hence, we express the neutrino mass matrix asMν=(|mνeνe||mνeνμ|eiϕeμ|mνeντ|eiϕeτ|mνeνμ|e−iϕeμ|mνμνμ||mνμντ|eiϕμτ|mνeντ|e−iϕeτ|mνμντ|e−iϕμτ|mντντ|),
(A2) and perform a WBT using the following diagonal unitary matrix:
Mϕ=Diag(eiϕ1,1,eiϕ2),M†ϕ=Diag(e−iϕ1,1,e−iϕ2)=M−1ϕ,
which does not change the diagonal charged lepton mass matrix. After this, the matrix (32) has the following form:
M′ν=(|mνeνe||mνeνμ|ei(ϕeμ−ϕ1)|mνeντ|ei(ϕeτ+ϕ2−ϕ1)|mνeνμ|e−i(ϕeμ−ϕ1)|mνμνμ||mνμντ|ei(ϕμτ+ϕ2)|mνeντ|e−i(ϕeτ+ϕ2−ϕ1)|mνμντ|e−i(ϕμτ+ϕ2)|mντντ|),
where
M′ν=M†ϕMνMϕ . Three cases are present in this expression:Case A:
ϕ1=ϕeμ andϕ2=ϕ1−ϕeτ=ϕeμ−ϕeτ , producingM′ν=(|mνeνe||mνeνμ||mνeντ||mνeνμ||mνμνμ||mνμντ|eiψ|mνeντ||mνμντ|e−iψ|mντντ|)
(A3) with
ψ=ϕμτ+ϕ2=ϕμτ+ϕeμ−ϕeτ .Case B:
ϕ1=ϕeμ andϕ2=−ϕμτ , producingM′ν=(|mνeνe||mνeνμ||mνeντ|e−iψ|mνeνμ||mνμνμ||mνμντ||mνeντ|eiψ|mνμντ||mντντ|).
(A4) Case C:
ϕ2=−ϕμτ andϕ1=ϕ2+ϕeτ=ϕeτ−ϕμτ , producingM′ν(|mνeνe||mνeνμ|eiψ|mνeντ||mνeνμ|e−iψ|mνμνμ||mνμντ||mνeντ||mνμντ||mντντ|).
(A5) From the former, we can conclude that using a WBT, we can eliminate two unwanted phases, obtaining a single phase responsible for the possible CP violation phenomena present in the
UPMNS mixing matrix.Counting parameters once more, we find that in matrix (33) (or equivalently in (34) or (35)), the final number of parameters is six real numbers and one phase (ψ), just sufficient to accommodate the three mixing angles
θ12,θ13 , andθ23 and the three neutrino massesm1,m2 , andm3 , together with just one CP violating phase to consider the CP violation in theUPMNS matrix via the parameter(δCP ) for Dirac neutrinos. Further texture zeros will reveal relationships between neutrino masses and mixing parameters.Thus, one texture zero would enable us to express one of the mixing angles
θij as a function of the neutrino masses; meanwhile, two texture zeros enable us to express two mixing angles as a function of the three neutrino masses. Three or more texture zeros are meaningless.The most important consequence of the former analysis is that, because the phases
ϕ1 andϕ2 are arbitrary and they can take any value, the final phase ψ can be placed in any entry of the neutrino mass matrix, according to (33)−(35). In particular, if we impose an off-diagonal vanishing element, we can place the phase ψ in that entry, meaning that a phase will not be present in the mass matrix. That implies CP conservation for that case. This is a result obtained from the Jarlskog invariant analysis as shown in the main text. -
As mentioned in the main text, the mass matrix
Mν for Dirac neutrinos, in the context of the SM enlarged with the right-handed neutrinos, can be transformed to be Hermitian without loss of generality, which means that three independent off-diagonal matrix elements are generally complex, whereas the three independent diagonal ones are real. If n of them are taken to vanish (n independent texture zeros), then a combinatorial analysis enables us to express the number of independent matrices as [50]Cn=6!n!(6−n)!,
(B1) which means
C1=6 ,C2=15 , andC3=20 (Textures withn≥3 are not realistic). -
Two different scenarios occur: texture zero in the main diagonal and texture zero off the main diagonal, with three different cases for each scenario:
-
Three different cases are given by the three matrices
O1=(0aba∗x2cb∗c∗x3),O2=(x1aba∗0cb∗c∗x3),O3=(x1aba∗x2cb∗c∗0),
(B2) with all three cases related to CP violation.
-
Again, three different cases are given by the matrices
O4=(x10b0x2cb∗c∗x3),O5=(x1a0a∗x2c0c∗x3),O6=(x1aba∗x20b∗0x3),
(B3) with all of them related to CP conservation.
-
Fifteen different cases are grouped in three different categories:
-
Nine different cases occur:
A1=(00b0x2cb∗c∗x3),A2=(0a0a∗x2c0c∗x3),A3=(0aba∗x20b∗0x3),
(B4) A4=(x10b00cb∗c∗x3),A5=(x1a0a∗0c0c∗x3),A6=(x1aba∗00b∗0x3),
(B5) A7=(x10b0x2cb∗c∗0),A8=(x1a0a∗x2c0c∗0),A9=(x1aba∗x20b∗00),
(B6) with all of them CP conserving.
-
Three different cases occur:
A10=(x1a0a∗x2000x3),A11=(x10b0x20b∗0x3),A12=(x1000x2c0c∗x3).
All of them are related to CP conservation.
-
Three different cases occur:
A13=(0aba∗0cb∗c∗x3),A14=(0aba∗x2cb∗c∗0),A15=(x1aba∗0cb∗c∗0).
All of them related to CP violation.
-
In this appendix, we review the definition of the Jarlskog invariant.
The Swedish physicist Cecilia Jarlskog observed that the area of each of the six unitary triangles in a unitary matrix
3×3 (which is the same for all of them) is given by the relation:−Ar=J/2,
where
−J is known as the Jarlskog invariant [45], which, in the parametrization that makes use of the Euler angles takes the form−J=c12c23c213s12s23s13sinδ13,
(C1) which can also be expressed as
−|J|=Im(UijUklUkjUil),
(C2) for any combination of
i,j,k,l , wherei≠k andj≠l .Thus, the Jarlskog invariant is an important information carrier for CP-violation [51].
-
In this appendix, we present the summary of the numerical results obtained from our analysis for the nine cases of two texture zeroes, one in the main diagonal and the other one outside of it. For the analysis, we use
δCP=0 . From the results, normal ordering is suggested. Three tables are presented:The first one corresponds to the analysis for
m1>0 andm2<0 . The second is form1<0 andm2>0 . The third table presents the results obtained when we relax the constraints imposed by the valueθ13 ; that is, without having a correlation on thesinθ13 mixing angle with the other parameters.Table D1 shows that only the texture
A7 can accommodate the measured mixing angles, with the corresponding predictions for the neutrinos mass values.Table D2 shows that only the texture
A3 can accommodate the measured mixing angles, with the corresponding predictions for the neutrinos mass values.Texture sin2θ12 sin2θ23 sin2θ13 |m1| /eV|m2| /eV|m3| /eV1: A1 0.255 0.104 0.022 0.0026 0.0093 0.0599 2: A2 0.274 0.102 0.023 0.0040 0.0096 0.0513 3: A3 0.379 0.548 0.022 0.0411 0.0420 0.0649 4: A4 0.320 0.190 0.022 0.0041 0.0099 0.0508 5: A5 0.296 0.325 0.020 0.0442 0.0450 0.0665 6: A6 0.572 0.426 0.021 0.0315 0.0328 0.0600 7: A7 0.002 0.542 0.021 0.0769 0.0774 0.0920 8: A8 0.999 0.998 0.517 0.0237 0.0253 0.0557 9: A9 0.010 0.986 0.511 0.0241 0.0256 0.0553 Table D2. Results of the mixing angles and the neutrino masses for the nine different textures obtained according to our analysis for
m1<0 andm2>0 .To compare our results with previous published studies, we conducted an alternative analysis consisting in relaxing the constraint imposed by the value
θ13 , that is, without having a correlation of thesinθ13 mixing angle with the other parameters. The results obtained are presented in Table D3. These values show that texturesA1 ,A4 ,A7 , andA8 are in fairly good agreement with the experimentally measured numbers at3σ , resulting in agreement with the analysis already presented in Refs. [49, 50]. Note that when the parametersinθ13 is smoothed, we cannot make predictions about all the entries in theUPMNS mixing matrix.Texture sin2θ12 sin2θ23 |m1| /eV|m2| /eV|m3| /eV1: A1 0.320 0.522 0.0077 0.0114 0.0514 2: A2 0.215 0.318 0.0089 0.0126 0.0508 3: A3 0.334 0.0146 0 0.0089 0.0497 4: A4 0.320 0.522 0.0355 0.0365 0.0611 5: A5 0.230 0.430 0 0.0084 0.0512 6: A6 0.540 0.020 0.0230 0.0245 0.0551 7: A7 0.325 0.657 0.0283 0.0297 0.0569 8: A8 0.318 0.512 0 0.0087 0.0511 9: A9 0.364 0.909 0.0303 0.0585 0.0585 Table D3. Values of the parameters obtained for the nine different two zero textures for the alternative analysis.
