Compared sensitivities of next generation DBD experiments IDEA - Zaragoza meeting – 7-8 November 2005 C. Augier presented by X. Sarazin LAL – Orsay – CNRS/IN2P3.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
LRP2010 WG5 Fundamental Interactions Nathal Severijns ( K.U.Leuven) for WG5 Scoping workshop Frankfurt, October th 2009.
Advertisements

IS THE NEUTRINO A MAJORANA OR A DIRAC PARTICLE ? Ettore Fiorini, Bologna June or Lepton number conservation or violation Has neutrino a finite.
Proposal to join NEMO-3  decay experiment P. Adamson, R. Saakyan, J. Thomas UCL 27 January 2003.
Amand Faessler, München, 24. November Double Beta Decay and Physics beyond the Standard Model Amand Faessler Tuebingen Accuracy of the Nuclear Matrix.
Neutrinoless Double Beta Decay
Claudia Nones Physics of Massive Neutrinos - Blaubeuren, July 1 - 5, 2007 Status of Cuoricino and CUORE with some remarks on nuclear matrix elements Centre.
Structure of the ECEC candidate daughter 112 Cd P.E. Garrett University of Guelph TRIUMF Excellence Cluster “Universe”, Technische Universität München.
Penning-Trap Mass Spectrometry for Neutrino Physics
Amand Faessler, GERDA, 11. November Double Beta Decay and Neutrino Masses Amand Faessler Tuebingen Accuracy of the Nuclear Matrix Elements. It determines.
Amand Faessler, Tuebingen1 Double Beta Decay and Neutrino Masses Amand Faessler Tuebingen Neutrino Masses and the Neutrinoless Double Beta Decay: Dirac.
Amand Faessler, 22. Oct Double Beta Decay and Neutrino Masses Amand Faessler Tuebingen Accuracy of the Nuclear Matrix Elements. It determines the.
Description of Double Beta Decay, Nuclear Structure and Physics beyond the Standard Model - Status and Prospects. Amand Faessler University of Tuebingen.
March 12, 2005Benasque Neutrinos Theory Neutrinos Theory Carlos Pena Garay IAS, Princeton ~
 decay and neutrino mass 35 isotopes in nature …and Mixing Neutrino Mass.. Imperial College/RAL Nottingham Nov 17 ’04 Dave Wark.
K. Zuber, University of Sussex Neutrinoless double beta decay SUSSP 61, St. Andrews, 9-23 Aug
Double beta decay nuclear matrix elements in deformed nuclei O. Moreno, R. Álvarez-Rodríguez, P. Sarriguren, E. Moya de Guerra F. Šimkovic, A. Faessler.
M. Dracos 1 Double Beta experiment with emulsions?
GERDA: GERmanium Detector Array
Neutrino Mass and Mixing David Sinclair Carleton University PIC2004.
DBD matrix elements Welcome and aim of the workshop Experimental situation Outcome.
-Nucleus Interactions Double-beta Decay and Cristina VOLPE Institut de Physique Nucléaire Orsay, France.
0νββ nuclear matrix elements within QRPA and its variants W. A. Kamiński 1, A. Bobyk 1 A. Faessler 2 F. Šimkovic 2,3, P. Bene š 4 1 Dept. of Theor. Phys.,
From CUORICINO to CUORE: To probe the inverted hierarchy region On behalf of the CUORE collaboration DUSL Meeting, Washington DC November 2,-4, 2007 Frank.
XXIV WWND South Padre, TX, April 08 W. Bauer Slide 1 Double  Decays, DUSEL, and the Standard Model Wolfgang Bauer Michigan State University.
M. Dracos, CEA, 10/04/ Double Beta experiment with emulsions?
Search for  + EC and ECEC processes in 112 Sn A.S. Barabash 1), Ph. Hubert 2), A. Nachab 2) and V. Umatov 1) 1) ITEP, Moscow, Russia 2) CNBG, Gradignan,
New limits on  + EC and ECEC processes in 74 Se and 120 Te A.S. Barabash 1), F. Hubert 2), Ph. Hubert 2), A. Nachab 2) and V. Umatov 1) 1) ITEP, Moscow,
Contents Lecture 1 General introduction What is measured in DBD ? Neutrino oscillations and DBD Other BSM physics and DBD Nuclear matrix elements Lecture.
Double Beta Decay Present and Future
Double beta search : experimental view Laurent SIMARD, LAL - Orsay 6 th Rencontres du Vietnam, Hanoi, 6 th -12 nd August 2006.
CUORICINO and CUORE Chiara Brofferio Università di Milano – Bicocca and INFN, Sez. di Milano NOW 2004 – Otranto 12 – 17 September 2004 On behalf of the.
NEMO-3  experiment First Results and Future Prospects Ruben Saakyan, UCL UK HEP Neutrino Forum The Cosener’s House, Abingdon.
NEMO-3 Double Beta Decay Experiment: Last Results A.S. Barabash ITEP, Moscow (On behalf of the NEMO Collaboration)
Massive neutrinos Dirac vs. Majorana
1 TCP06 Parksville 8/5/06 Electron capture branching ratios for the nuclear matrix elements in double-beta decay using TITAN ◆ Nuclear matrix elements.
Double Beta Decay in SNO+ Huaizhang Deng University of Pennsylvania.
Nuclear matrix elements 1 / T 1/2 = PS * NME 2 * (m / m e ) 2 measured quantityquantity of interest The big unknown Started worldwide effort for a coherent.
Effects of self-consistence violations in HF based RPA calculations for giant resonances Shalom Shlomo Texas A&M University.
Present status of CUORE / CUORICINO Andrea Giuliani Università dell’Insubria and INFN Milano 3rd IDEA meeting, Orsay, April 14 – 15, 2005.
ILIASN4 Cascina, November 3rd, 2005Dominique Lalanne.
New era of neutrino physics 1.Atmospheric neutrino oscillations (in particular zenith angle dependence of the muon neutrino flux) 2. Solar neutrino deficit.
M. Wójcik for the GERDA Collaboration Institute of Physics, Jagellonian University Epiphany 2006, Kraków, Poland, 6-7 January 2006.
M. Wójcik Instytut Fizyki, Uniwersytet Jagielloński Instytut Fizyki Doświadczalnej, Uniwersytet Warszawski Warszawa, 10 Marca 2006.
IOP HEPP Matthew Kauer Double beta decay of Zr96 using NEMO- 3 and calorimeter R&D for SuperNEMO IOP HEPP April Matthew Kauer UCL London.
July 29-30, 2010, Dresden 1 Forbidden Beta Transitions in Neutrinoless Double Beta Decay Kazuo Muto Department of Physics, Tokyo Institute of Technology.
Neutrino cross sections in few hundred MeV energy region Jan T. Sobczyk Institute of Theoretical Physics, University of Wrocław (in collaboration with.
DOUBLE BETA DECAY TO THE EXCITED STATES (EXPERIMENTAL REVIEW) A.S. BARABASH ITEP, MOSCOW.
Lecture 2: Is the total lepton number conserved? Are neutrinos Dirac
28 May 2008NEMO-3 Neutrino081 NEMO-3 A search for double beta decay Robert L. Flack University College London On behalf of the NEMO-3 collaboration.
May 19, 2005UAM-IFT, Madrid : Neutrino physics in underground labs Carlos Pena Garay IAS ~
NEMO3 experiment: results G. Broudin-Bay LAL (CNRS/ Université Paris-Sud 11) for the NEMO collaboration Moriond EW conference La Thuile, March 2008.
Results of the NEMO-3 experiment (Summer 2009) Outline   The  decay  The NEMO-3 experiment  Measurement of the backgrounds   and  results.
Double Beta Decay Experiments Jeanne Wilson University of Sussex 29/06/05, RAL.
„The uncertainty in the calculated nuclear matrix elements for neutrinoless double beta decay will constitute the principle obstacle to answering some.
Amand Faessler, Madrid, 8. June Double Beta Decay, a Test for New Physics Amand Faessler Tuebingen „The Nuclear Matrix Elements for the  are.
Proposal to join NEMO-3  decay experiment P. Adamson, R. Saakyan, J. Thomas UCL 27 January 2003.
1 Double Beta Decay of 150 Nd in the NEMO 3 Experiment Nasim Fatemi-Ghomi (On behalf of the NEMO 3 collaboration) The University of Manchester IOP HEPP.
OMC rates in different nuclei related to 2β-decay. K.Ya. Gromov, D.R. Zinatulina, C. Briançon, V.G. Egorov, A.V. Klinskih, R.V. Vasiliev, M.V.Shirchenko,I.
Scintillating Bolometers – Rejection of background due to standard two-neutrino double beta decay D.M. Chernyak 1,2, F.A. Danevich 2, A. Giuliani 1, M.
Search for Neutrinoless Double Beta Decay with NEMO-3 Zornitza Daraktchieva University College London On behalf of the NEMO3 collaboration PANIC08, Eilat,
The NEMO3 Double Beta Decay Experiment Ruben Saakyan IoP meeting on Double Beta Decay Manchester 21 November 2007.
Amand Faesler, University of Tuebingen, Germany. Short Range Nucleon-Nucleon Correlations, the Neutrinoless Double Beta Decay and the Neutrino Mass.
Search for Neutrinoless Double-Beta Decay Werner Tornow Duke University & Triangle Universities Nuclear Laboratory (TUNL) & Kavli-Tokyo Institute of the.
Fakultät Mathematik und Naturwissenschaften, Institut für Kern- und Teilchenphysik Various new measurements related to DBD Kai Zuber.
Kazuo Muto Tokyo Institute of Technology (TokyoTech)
NOW 2006 Recent developments in Double Beta Decay Fedor Šimkovic
Amand Faessler University of Tuebingen
Nuclear Matrix elements for the 0nbb-decay and double electron capture
Institut de Physique Nucléaire Orsay, France
Kazuo MUTO Tokyo Institute of Technology
Presentation transcript:

Compared sensitivities of next generation DBD experiments IDEA - Zaragoza meeting – 7-8 November 2005 C. Augier presented by X. Sarazin LAL – Orsay – CNRS/IN2P3 and Université Paris-Sud XI

This work was realised and included in my HDR report in June 2005 (Section « L’effet des éléments de matrice nucléaire », p ) Presentation of this work Main goals of this work:  For GERDA and CUORE sensitivities, use of their published expected sensitivities for the  period.  Concerning SuperNEMO sensitivity, use of the preliminary calculations to give the two extremal values for the expected T 1/2 (0 ) period. The SuperNEMO period limit obtained from actual Monte-Carlo simulations is just below the best value used in this work. 1) study the effect of the large nuclear matrix element (NME) range on the experimental sensitivities for different isotopes, in case of the exchange of a light massive Majorana neutrino in  process 2) obtain a useful method to directly compare the different NME calculations in terms of  period sensitivity. 3) compare the predicted sensitivities on the effective neutrino mass for GERDA, CUORE and SuperNEMO projects, using both their predicted limits of  periods and this study of NME range.

where G  is the  phase space factor calculated for all nuclei by Doi, and then Vogel (see « F. Boehm and P. Vogel, Physics of massive neutrinos, Cambridge University Press, second edition, 1992 »). Presentation of this work  In case of light massive Majorana neutrino exchange in , period of the process is related to the effective neutrino mass by the relation [ T  ]  = G  |M  |   m     It is difficult to compare directly the NME values from the different publications. In fact, one can find in these publications the NME value |M  |, or the product of |M  | by the phase space factor G   C mm, or the effective mass corresponding to a given period value… Morevoer, some of the authors use their own calculations of the phase space factor. Others omit the electron mass in their calculation and one have to reintroduce it before the comparison…

Presentation of this work Using the values obtained in different publications, the results are presented in a Table which contains the T  values, where T  is defined as T  (y) =  T  (y)  m    (eV) From this table containing the T  values, it is useful to recalculate the effective neutrino mass (in eV) associated to any given  period (in y), using the relation In fact, the T  value corresponds to an effective neutrino mass  m  eV. T  (y)   m    (eV) =  TT /

Two NME calculation techniques Shell model Quasi Random Phase Approximation (QRPA) and extensions Choice of the NME publications and studied isotopes Criteria used for the publication choice - reproduction of relevant nuclear properties ( , , nuclear states,...) - publications with comparison of different isotopes - recent publications if authors explain why their new calculations are more credible Important note - ref [173] Staudt, Kuo, Klapdor-Kleingrothaus, Phys. Rev. C46 (1992) is NOT USED : it gives results only for 76 Ge, 130 Te and 136 Xe, with the most favored NME values for 76 Ge and 130 Te, which provide period sensitivities around one order most favored than for other calculations.

Shell model calculations Choice of the NME publications and studied isotopes Few publications, I decided to use Ref. [154] = E. Caurier, A. Gniady, F. Nowacki, « Beyond NEMO3 », Orsay, Dec. 2003, (NEMO meeting) in association with published results from the same authors + Ref. [163] = E. Caurier, G. Martinez-Pinedo, F. Nowacki, A. Poves and P. Zuber, Rev. Mod. Phys. 77 (2005) , also nucl-th/ (2004) + Ref. [164] = E. Caurier, F. Nowacki, A. Poves and J. Retamosa, nucl-th/ (1996) They give the NME values for 6 nuclei : 48 Ca, 76 Ge, 82 Se, 124 Sn, 130 Te and 136 Xe Arbitrary choice based on the fact that these authors calculate all parameters for a given nucleus, which are used to reproduce experimental nuclear levels with a good precision. Results are presented in the 1st line of the Table and in plots, refered as « Shell Model »

QRPA and extensions’ calculations Choice of the NME publications and studied isotopes 1)Ref. [155] = V.A. Rodin, A.Faessler, F. Simkovic, P. Vogel, « Systematic analysis of the uncertainty in the  decay nuclear matrix elements », nucl-th/ recent paper (2005) from authors issued from different theoretical groups - they give some arguments to explain their calculations ; - they use QRPA and RQRPA (renormalized) approach, both with two different values of the vector-axial coupling constant g A = 1.0 and 1.25, that means 4 results per isotope - they adjust the particle-particle coupling constant (g pp ) value to  experimental half-lives (which allow to have a slight dependance on the size of model space), with g ph = 1 (particle-hole interaction fixed to Gamow-Teller resonance), using « higher-order » terms of nucleon currents - they use their own phase space factor value, calculated with R = 1.1 A 1/3 They give the NME values for 9 nuclei : 76 Ge, 82 Se, 96 Zr, 100 Mo, 116 Cd, 128 Te, 130 Te, 136 Xe and 150 Nd (I do not present 128 Te results) Results are presented in lines 2 to 5 of the Table QRPA 1, QRPA 1.25, RQRPA 1., RQRPA 1.25, and the two extremal values are plotted, refered as RFSV 05 – RQRPA (avec g pp de  et) g A = 1 and RFSV 05 – QRPA (avec g pp de  et) g A = 1.25

QRPA and extensions’ calculations Choice of the NME publications and studied isotopes 2) Ref. [165] = F. Simkovic, G. Pantis, J.D. Vergados and A. Faessler, « Additional nucleon current contributions to neutrinoless double beta decay », Phys. Rev. C60 (1999) paper with common authors than in the previous one, chosen for comparison with line 5 of the Table, - they use RQRPA (renormalized) approach, the vector-axial coupling constant g A = 1.25, - they use their own phase space factor value, calculated with R = 1.1 A 1/3 - the only difference is that they fix the particle-particle coupling constant (g pp ) value to 1, with g ph = 0.8 (particle-hole interaction) and using « higher- order » terms of nucleon currents They give the NME values for 9 nuclei : 76 Ge, 82 Se, 96 Zr, 100 Mo, 116 Cd, 128 Te, 130 Te, 136 Xe and 150 Nd (I do not present 128 Te results) Results are presented in line 6 of the Table, RQRPA 1.25, and plotted for all isotopes comparison, refered as SPVF 99 – RQRPA avec g pp = 1 et g A = 1.25

QRPA and extensions’ calculations Choice of the NME publications and studied isotopes 3) Ref. [166] = S. Stoica, H.V. Klapdor-Kleingrothaus, Nucl. Phys. A694 (2001) they use QRPA and 3 different extensions (RQRPA, f-RQRPA for fully renormalized, and SK-RQRPA for Stoica-Klapdor…) - For these 4 calculations, they use both small s and large l sizes of model space., with RQRPA approach, and the vector-axial coupling constant g A = 1.25, - they fix the particle-particle coupling constant (g pp ) value to the probability of  experimental transition, but only for J  = 1 + relevant state, and leave the strenght unrenormalized for the other states. They give the NME values for 8 nuclei : 76 Ge, 82 Se, 96 Zr, 100 Mo, 116 Cd, 128 Te, 130 Te, 136 Xe (I do not present 128 Te results) Results are presented in lines 7 to 14 of the Table (refered from QRPA s to SK- RQRPA l ). Also minimal and maximal values of T  from this publication are plotted and refered as SK 01 – min and SK 01 – max In this paper, NME values are different from one approximation to other, and one can find the most favored values of NME for numerous isotopes Also the needed phase space factor were corrected (for example for 100 Mo)

QRPA and extensions’ calculations Choice of the NME publications and studied isotopes 4) Ref. [167] = M. Aunola, J. Suhonen « Mean-field effects on neutrinoless double beta decay », Nucl. Phys. A643 (1998), and [168] J. Suhonen, M. Aunola, « Systematic study of neutrinoless double beta decay to excited 0+ states », Nucl. Phys. A723 (2003) - two review papers, with QRPA calculations. - the first one with AS1 (and AS2) for the use of standard (and adjusted) Woods-Saxon potential, the adjusted one used to obtain more realistic mean field ; the second paper refered AS3, is a compilation of different calculations of these authors. - for all the calculations, they use the vector-axial coupling constant g A = 1. - they adjust the particle-particle and particle-hole coupling constants (g pp and g ph ) values to the probability of  experimental transitions, They give the NME values for 8 nuclei : 76 Ge, 82 Se, 96 Zr, 124 Sn, 130 Te, 136 Xe, 100 Mo, 116 Cd Results are presented in lines 15 to 17 of the Table (refered from QRPA AS1 to QRPA AS3). With agreement of J. Suhonen, also minimal and maximal values of T  extracted from these two publications are plotted and refered as AS98 – AS03 – min and AS98 – AS03 – max

Results : T 0 values obtained from the studied publications Minimal and maximal values of T 0 used for the comparison plots Most favored valueLess favored value Model T 0 ( 76 Ge)T 0 ( 82 Se)T 0 ( 96 Zr)T 0 ( 100 Mo)T 0 ( 116 Cd)T 0 ( 130 Te)T 0 ( 136 Xe)

76 Ge : T 0 = 1.77 x y 82 Se : T 0 = 2.40 x y 130 Te : T 0 = 9.0 x y 136 Xe : T 0 = 1.3 x y Most favored isotope Less favored isotope m (eV) =  T 1/2 (0 ) (yr) /T 0 (eV) (Caurier, Nowacki, publication « beyond NEMO3 2003)S.M.

76 Ge : T 0 = 4.60 x y 82 Se : T 0 = 1.33 x y 130 Te : T 0 = 1.96 x y 136 Xe : T 0 = 4.17 x y 96 Zr : T 0 = 2.18 x y 100 Mo : T 0 = 2.79 x y 116 Cd : T 0 = 1.72 x y m (eV) =  T 1/2 (0 ) (yr) /T 0 (eV) (Rodin, Faessler, Simkovic, Vogel, 2005) Most favored isotope Less favored isotope RFSV 2005

76 Ge : T 0 = 6.24 x y 82 Se : T 0 = 2.03 x y 130 Te : T 0 = 2.87 x y 136 Xe : T 0 = 5.46 x y 96 Zr : T 0 = 1.88 x y 100 Mo : T 0 = 3.65 x y 116 Cd : T 0 = 2.82 x y m (eV) =  T 1/2 (0 ) (yr) /T 0 (eV) (Rodin, Faessler, Simkovic, Vogel, 2005) Most favored isotope Less favored isotope RFSV 2005

76 Ge : T 0 = 4.23 x y 82 Se : T 0 = 1.08 x y 130 Te : T 0 = 1.46 x y 136 Xe : T 0 = 1.04 x y 96 Zr : T 0 = 1.61 x y 100 Mo : T 0 = 4.6 x y 116 Cd : T 0 = 9.99 x y m (eV) =  T 1/2 (0 ) (yr) /T 0 (eV) (Simkovic, Pantis, Vogel, Faessler, 1999) Most favored isotope Less favored isotope SPVF 1999

The T 0 value, which corresponds to an effective mass m = 1 eV, has to be as low as possible to favor the possibility of  signal observation For 76 Ge : - the best sensitivity corresponds to the QRPA method with  adjustment, with T 0 = 1.96 x y (Aunola, Suhonen, 1998), - the worst one corresponds to the QRPA- l method, with T 0 = 1.40 x y (Stoica, Klapdor, 2001) For 82 Se : - the best sensitivity corresponds to the QRPA- s method, with T 0 = 2.96 x y (Stoica, Klapdor, 2001), - the worst one corresponds to the Shell-Model calculations, with T 0 = 2.40 x y (Caurier, Nowacki, 1996 and 2003) For 130 Te : - the best sensitivity corresponds to the QRPA- s method, with T 0 = 2.63 x y (Stoica, Klapdor, 2001), - the worst one corresponds to the RQRPA method with  adjustment and g A =1, with T 0 = 3.60 x y (Rodin, Faessler, Simkovic, Vogel, 2005) Study of the sensitivity range for 76 Ge, 82 Se and 130 Te

- Klapdor (best fit), T = 1.2 x yr, 0.40 < 1.21 eV m (eV) =  T 1/2 (0 ) (y) /T 0 (eV) - IGEX best limit, T < 1.57 x yr, 0.34 < 1.05 eV - HM best limit, T < 1.9 x yr, 0.32 < 0.97 eV 76 Ge (Past experiments)

m (eV) =  T 1/2 (0 ) (y) /T 0 (eV) - GERDA phase I, T < 3 x yr, 247 < 774 meV - GERDA phase II, T < 2 x yr, 96 < 293meV - GERDA phase III, T < 3 x yr, 25 < 77 meV 76 Ge (GERDA sensitivities)

m (eV) =  T 1/2 (0 ) (y) /T 0 - NEMO 3, T < 8 x yr, 0.61 < 1.72 eV -SuperNEMO, « low » resolution T < 1 x yr, 54 <155 meV -SuperNEMO, « high » resolution T < 2.2 x yr, 36 < 105 meV (eV) 82 Se (SuperNEMO sensitivities)

m (eV) =  T 1/2 (0 ) (y) /T 0 - CUORICINO T < 4 x yr, 0.26 < 0.84 eV - CUORE bkg = with 130 TeO 2 T < 1.9 x yr, 12 < 39 meV (eV) - CUORE bkg = with nat TeO 2 T < 6.6 x yr, 20 < 65 meV - CUORE bkg = 0.01 with nat TeO 2 T < 2.1 x yr, 36 < 117 meV 130 Te (CUORE sensitivities)

T 0 values corresponding to an effective mass of 50 meV T range = 50 meV

T 0 values corresponding to an effective mass of 50 meV For 76 Ge : -  period between 7.8 x y and 5.6 x y  Possible with GERDA phase III (T 1/2  3 x y) with 1000 kg.y and bkg = cts.keV -1.kg -1.y -1 (same conclusions for MAJORANA) For 130 Te : -  period between 1.1 x y and 1.4 x y  No problem for CUORE with minimal value ; the maximal period could be reached for bkg = cts.keV -1.kg -1.y -1 (T 1/2  6.6 x y) or with enriched crystals (T 1/2  1.0 x y) For 82 Se : -  period between 1.2 x y and 9.6 x y  No problem for SuperNEMO with minimal value, but it could be very difficult to measure if the NME value corresponds to the maximal period.

Shell Model: Caurier (2003) RQRPA Simkovic et al. (1999) Stoica et al. (2001) Suhonen et al. (1998 and 2003) Rodin, Simkovic (2005) Theoretical calculations of the NME Big theoretical uncertainties  Thus choice of the nucleus depends on: 1) detector technique 2) T 1/2 (  ) for  m  =50 meV In conclusion  enrichment possibility  high Q  value  high  period: T   10  y Goal  measure the highest possible experimental value of the  period... And wait for the good calculation

Used in the comparison plots Results : T 0 values obtained from the studied publications Model T 0 ( 76 Ge)T 0 ( 82 Se)T 0 ( 96 Zr)T 0 ( 100 Mo)T 0 ( 116 Cd)T 0 ( 130 Te)T 0 ( 136 Xe)

Study for other isotopes ( 48 Ca, 124 Sn, 150 Nd) Results for 48 Ca Ref. [163] = E. Caurier, G. Martinez-Pinedo, F. Nowacki, A. Poves and P. Zuber, Rev. Mod. Phys. 77 (2005) , for Shell Model calculation T 0 = 8.84 x y Ref. [169] = C. Barbera et al., Nucl. Phys. A650 (1999) for QRPA calculations T 0 = 2.31 x y Ref. [170] = Pantis, Simkovic,Vergados and Faessler, Phys. Rev C53 (1996), for QRPA calculations T 0 = 2.44 x y  QRPA values are nearly the same, and three times more favorable than the value obtained from SM calculation 48 Ca (Z and N are magic numbers) 20 24

Study for other isotopes ( 48 Ca, 150 Nd, 124 Sn) Results for 124 Sn (Q  = 2.29 MeV, magic proton number Z = 50) Ref [167] Aunola, Suhonen, Nucl. Phys. A643 (1998) adjustment on  -decay transition AS1 :T 0 = 4.58 x y(standard WS potential) AS2 : T 0 = 1.14 x y(adjusted WS potential)  1) There is a factor 2.3 between the two QRPA calculations, 2) AS2-QRPA and SM calculations give nearly the same value Ref. [154] = E. Caurier, A. Gniady, F. Nowacki, « Beyond NEMO3 », Orsay, Dec. 2003, (NEMO meeting) T 0 = 1.60 x y This nucleus is treated as a « core of 100 Sn » + 24 neutrons (stable) 50

Caurier, Nowacki, « beyond NEMO3 » 2003 → Shell Model Rodin, Faessler, Simkovic, Vogel, 2005 QRPA g pp from  and g A = 1.25 → RFSV 05 – QRPA gA = 1.25 RQRPA g pp from  and g A = 1 → RFSV 05 – RQRPA gA = 1. Simkovic, Pantis, Vergados, Faessler, 1999, g pp =1 and g A = 1.25 → SPVF 99 – RQRPA gA = 1.25 Examples of isotope comparison for different publications Publications used  See the 4 comparison plots

Study for other isotopes ( 48 Ca, 150 Nd, 124 Sn) Results for 150 Nd (deformed nucleus, difficult to calculate) Ref. [155] = V.A. Rodin, A.Faessler, F. Simkovic, P. Vogel, « Systematic analysis of the uncertainty in the  decay nuclear matrix elements », nucl-th/ from T 0 = 1.92 x y (QRPA g A = 1.25) to T 0 = 3.03 x y(RQRPA, g A = 1.0) Ref. [165] = F. Simkovic, G. Pantis, J.D. Vergados and A. Faessler, « Additional nucleon current contributions to neutrinoless double beta decay », Phys. Rev. C60 (1999) T 0 = 8.84 x y (this value was more favorable)  All these QRPA values are nearly the same, even if the value from 1999 was more favorable.

QRPA and extensions’ calculations Choice of the NME publications and studied isotopes Other publications found as reference in previous papers. Results are put in the Table but not used in the plots because their T  values are included in the range obtained from previous publications (except for 100 Mo, where the T  value in QRPA (4) is only 6% higher than the maximal value used in the plots) Ref. [171] = Simkovic, Novak, Kaminski, Raduta, Faessler, Phys. Rev. C64 (2001) Ref. [172] = Muto, Bender and Klapdor-Kleingrothaus, Z. Phys. A334 (1989) Ref. [169] = C. Barbera et al., Nucl. Phys. A650 (1999) Ref. [170] = Pantis, Simkovic,Vergados and Faessler, Phys. Rev C53 (1996) Results are presented in lines 18 to 21 of the Table (refered from QRPA (1) to QRPA (4)).