• • • We do not use the following data for averages, fits, limits, etc. • • • |
$<6.4\times 10^{2}$ |
90 |
1 |
|
ICAR |
$<150$ |
90 |
2 |
|
MBNE |
$\text{0.4 - 9.0}$ |
99 |
3 |
|
MBNE |
$\text{0.4 - 9.0}$ |
99 |
4 |
|
MBNE |
$<3.3$ |
90 |
5 |
|
MBNE |
$<1.7$ |
90 |
6 |
|
KAR2 |
$<1.1$ |
90 |
|
|
NTEV |
$5.3$ $\pm1.3$ $\pm9.0$ |
|
7 |
|
LSND |
$6.2$ $\pm2.4$ $\pm1.0$ |
|
8 |
|
LSND |
$\text{3 - 12}$ |
80 |
9 |
|
|
$<6$ |
90 |
10 |
|
|
1
ANTONELLO 2013A obtained the limit by assuming ${{\overline{\mathit \nu}}_{{\mu}}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\overline{\mathit \nu}}_{{e}}}$ oscillation from the $\sim{}2\%$ of ${{\overline{\mathit \nu}}_{{\mu}}}$ evnets contamination in the CNGS beam.
|
2
CHENG 2012 is a combined fit of MiniBooNE and SciBooNE antineutrino data.
|
3
This value is for a two neutrino oscillation analysis for excess antineutrino events with E$_{{{\mathit \nu}}}>$ 475 MeV. At 90$\%$ CL there is no solution at high $\Delta \mathit m{}^{2}$. The best fit is at maximal mixing. The allowed region is consistent with LSND reported by AGUILAR 2001 . Supercedes AGUILAR-AREVALO 2009B.
|
4
This value is for a two neutrino oscillation analysis for excess antineutrino events with E$_{{{\mathit \nu}}}>$ 200 MeV with subtraction of the expected 12 events low energy excess seen in the neutrino component of the beam. At 90$\%$ CL there is no solution at high $\Delta \mathit m{}^{2}$. The best fit value is 0.007 for $\Delta \mathit m{}^{2}$ = 4.4 eV${}^{2}$.
|
5
This result is inconclusive with respect to small amplitude mixing suggested by LSND.
|
6
ARMBRUSTER 2002 is the final analysis of the KARMEN$~$2 data. See footnote in the preceding table for further details, and the paper for the exclusion plot.
|
7
AGUILAR 2001 is the final analysis of the LSND full data set. The deduced oscillation probability is $0.264$ $\pm0.067$ $\pm0.045\%$; the value of sin$^22\theta $ for large $\Delta \mathit m{}^{2}$ is twice this probability (although these values are excluded by other constraints). See footnote in preceding table for further details, and the paper for a plot showing allowed regions. Supersedes ATHANASSOPOULOS 1995 , ATHANASSOPOULOS 1996 , and ATHANASSOPOULOS 1998 .
|
8
ATHANASSOPOULOS 1996 reports ($0.31$ $\pm0.12$ $\pm0.05)\%$ for the oscillation probability; the value of sin$^22\theta $ for large $\Delta \mathit m{}^{2}$ should be twice this probability. See footnote in preceding table for further details, and see the paper for a plot showing allowed regions.
|
9
ATHANASSOPOULOS 1995 error corresponds to the $1.6\sigma $ band in the plot. The expected background is $2.7$ $\pm0.4$ events. Corresponds to an oscillation probability of ($0.34$ ${}^{+0.20}_{-0.18}$ $\pm0.07)\%$. For a different interpretation, see HILL 1995 . Replaced by ATHANASSOPOULOS 1996 .
|
10
HILL 1995 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 1995 ). Contrary to the rest of the LSND Collaboration, Hill finds no evidence for the neutrino oscillation ${{\overline{\mathit \nu}}_{{\mu}}}$ $\rightarrow$ ${{\overline{\mathit \nu}}_{{e}}}$ and obtains only upper limits.
|