Nuclear Physics B312 (1989) 492-508

North-Holland, Amsterdam

THE SEESAW MECHANISM IN THE PRESENCE

OF A C O N S E R V E D L E P T O N N U M B E R
G.C. BRANCO, W. GRIMUS1 and L. LAVOURA
CFMC-INIC, Av. prof. Gama Pinto, 2, 1699 Lisboa Codex, Portugal

Received 10 June 1988

We investigate systematically the possibility of having a conserved lepton number within a

minimal extension of the standard model where the Higgs sector is not enlarged, but one
right-handed neutrino per family is added to the fermion sector. We study the restrictions on the
Majorana and Dirac neutrino-mass matrices implied by the existence of one conserved lepton
number, and identify the leptonic charge assignments which lead to a fully effective seesaw
mechanism. The most salient phenomenological consequences of the emergent models are discussed. It is pointed out that, for special assignments of leptonic charges, some of the neutrinos
are naturally massless in the tree approximation but acquire calculable small masses through
radiative corrections.

1. Introduction
T h e s i m p l e s t extension of the s t a n d a r d SU(2) x U(1) electroweak m o d e l (SM) [1]
w h i c h l e a d s to non-vanishing n e u t r i n o masses consists of i n t r o d u c i n g r i g h t - h a n d e d
n e u t r i n o s . This has the a p p e a l of establishing a q u a r k - l e p t o n symmetry, with
n e u t r i n o s a c q u i r i n g D i r a c masses through Y u k a w a couplings to the s t a n d a r d Higgs
d o u b l e t , in the s a m e m a n n e r as quarks a n d c h a r g e d l e t p o n s get their masses. Since
the r i g h t - h a n d e d neutrinos are singlets u n d e r SU(2) x U(1), one can also i n t r o d u c e
r i g h t - h a n d e d M a j o r a n a n e u t r i n o masses either directly at the l a g r a n g i a n level or
t h r o u g h the couplings to a SU(2) x U(1) Higgs singlet. The i m p o r t a n t p o i n t is that
the scale of the r i g h t - h a n d e d M a j o r a n a n e u t r i n o masses can be m u c h larger t h a n the
w e a k scale, since it is not p r o t e c t e d b y the SU(2) x U(1) gauge symmetry. O n e is
thus led to l e f t - h a n d e d M a j o r a n a neutrinos with n a t u r a l l y small masses t h r o u g h the
w e l l - k n o w n seesaw m e c h a n i s m [2]. In this framework, the fact that n e u t r i n o masses
a r e m u c h s m a l l e r than the c o r r e s p o n d i n g c h a r g e d - l e p t o n masses is no longer a
" p u z z l e " , b u t i n s t e a d " h i n t s " at some new physics b e y o n d the SM, characterized b y
s o m e large m a s s scale M. U n f o r t u n a t e l y it is not possible to derive a m o d e l - i n d e p e n d e n t l o w e r b o u n d on M. This is due to the fact that the structure of D i r a c a n d
1 Permanent address: Institut ftir Theoretische Physik der Universit~it Wien, Boltzmanngasse 5, A-1090
Wien, Austria.
0550-3213/89/$03.50@ Elsevier Science Publishers B.V.
(North-Holland Physics Publishing Division)

G.C. Branco et al. / Seesaw mechanism

493

Majorana mass matrices in generation space is not constrained by gauge invariance.

As a result, there is a great arbitrariness in the spectrum of neutrino masses and the
pattern of neutrino mixing.
One way of having a more restrictive neutrino mass spectrum and pattern of
mixing is by assuming that, in spite of the presence of Majorana mass terms, there is
one lepton number which is left unbroken. Another motivation for considering the
existence of a lepton-number conservation is provided by the present experimental
limits on neutrino masses. At the moment, the only experimental evidence for a
non-vanishing neutrino mass comes from the controversial 1TEP tritium beta decay
experiment [3], which gave the bounds 17eV < m~o < 40eV. This result has been
challenged by a similar experiment at SIN [4] which gave an upper bound m~e <
18 eV. Furthermore, from the non-observation of neutrinoless double beta decay
one obtains an upper limit [5] on a certain effective electron Majorana neutrino
mass: ( m , , ) < (2-10) eV. The simplest way of reconciling these results is, of course,
to assume that the electron neutrino is a Dirac particle. We will see that the class of
models with a conserved lepton number can lead to the appearance of Dirac
neutrinos with naturally small masses.
In this paper, we investigate systematically the possibility of having one exactly
conserved lepton number within a minimal extension of the SM, where the Higgs
sector is not enlarged, but one right-handed neutrino per family is added to the
fermion sector. This is clearly the most conservative departure from the SM and
establishes a sort of quark-lepton symmetry. We will not discuss models with two
or more independent lepton numbers, or cases with one or more generations with
massless neutrinos which are exactly like SM lepton generations. We will address
the following questions.
(i) How does the seesaw mechanism work in the presence of one conserved lepton
number? In particular, how does the requirement of an effective seesaw mechanism
constrain the assignment of leptonic charges?
(ii) What are the limits on the scale M of the right-handed neutrino masses?
(iii) Can lepton-number conservation naturally lead to a scheme with m~e of the
order of eV, without violating cosmological constraints [6]?
The possibility of having one lepton-number symmetry in the presence of Majorana neutrino masses has been previously considered in a special model of
lepton-number violation [7] and, more recently, in the framework of left-right
symmetric models [8, 9]. The main interest of our systematic analysis is to explore
the whole spectrum of possibilities arising in the presence of a conserved lepton
number. Since the investigation is based on a minimal extension of the SM, we
expect it to be, to a great extent, model independent.
This paper is organized as follows. In the next section we derive constraints on
the leptonic charges from the requirement that the seesaw mechanism be fully
effective. We find that this requirement severely restricts the leptonic charges, and
we then analyse in a systematic way the resulting models. In sect. 3 we discuss the

494

G.C. Branco et a L / Seesaw mechanism

most salient phenomenological implications of the models we have discovered. Sect.

4 contains our conclusions.
2. Constraints on the leptonic charges
We consider a minimal extension of the standard SU(2) U(1) model, where one
right-handed neutrino is added to each fermion family. For simplicity, we do not
alter the Higgs sector of the SM, and therefore we have only one Higgs doublet. The
most general Yukawa couplings can be written
#v = - L i ~ s O l R j - Li k i s O / I R j + h.c.,

(2.1)

where L i = ( / I L i , lLi)Tdenotes the left-handed leptonic doublets, while ~litj, IRj stand
for the right-handed components of neutrinos and charged leptons, respectively. The
matrices of Yukawa coupling constants F and A act in flavour space and couple the
Higgs doublets q~, ~ -= iOEt~* to the leptons. Furthermore, since the /IRj are SU(2)
U(1) singlets, one can introduce a Majorana mass term
1 lIT
.WM = (~)
IuC - 1M ~ j / I R j + h.c.,

(2.2)

in the lagrangian, where C denotes the Dirac-Pauli charge conjugation matrix.

Alternatively, this mass term could be generated through the Yukawa couplings to a
SU(2) U(1) Higgs singlet, acquiring a large expectation value upon spontaneous
symmetry breaking. The matrix M R sets the heavy scale(s) M of the theory. The
D i r a c - M a j o r a n a mass terms can then be written
oLJCi+n = ( ) N T C - 1 M N R + h.c.,

(2.3)

with the right-handed neutrino field vector

NR=

(2.4)

For n generations, M is a 2n 2n matrix

(o )

M=

MDr

MD
MR,

(2.5)

with M D = v*A and v = (~)o.

We assume now that the lagrangian is invariant under the lepton-number transformation
L --* ei~&L;

l R --~ eiaXRlR;

v R --> eiax'VR,

(2.6)

495

G.C. Branco et al. / Seesaw mechanism

where a ~ R and ?'L, hl~ and X, are hermitian matrices acting in flavour space. All
other fields, including ~, are neutral under this transformation. Therefore, in the
present model the symmetry (2.6) remains exact even after spontaneous gauge
symmetry breaking.
We will restrict our analysis to the case of three generations. Let us choose a weak
basis where the charged-lepton mass matrix Mz = oF is diagonal, real and positive.
In this weak basis, as the charged lepton masses are non-vanishing and non-degenerate, invariance of the Yukawa couplings constrains the matrices XL, )t R to be of
the form
?~L = XR = diag(ql, q2, q3)-

(2.7)

Here, ql, q2 and q3, or a permutation of these numbers, denote the leptonic charges
of e, /~ and ~-, respectively. Without loss of generality, one still has the freedom to
choose a weak basis where ?% is diagonal. Next we analyse how the requirement of
an effective seesaw mechanism constrains the assignment of leptonic charges.
2.1. NECESSARY CONDITIONS FOR AN EFFECTIVE SEESAW MECHANISM

The great attractiveness of the seesaw mechanism lies in its simplicity and
generality; no fine-tuning or special choice of Yukawa couplings is required for it to
work. However, in the presence of an unbroken leptonic number one has to examine
under what conditions the seesaw mechanism continues to be effective. The problem
arises because for some choices of leptonic charges det M R will vanish. It has been
shown [9] that if det MR does not vanish, then the seesaw mechanism always works.
On the other hand, if the choice of leptonic charges is such that det M R vanishes,
the seesaw mechanism will not work in all cases. In order to see how this comes
about, let us consider [9] that det MR has one eigenvalue zero. In this case, there is a
weak basis where
roll

m12

m13

m21

m22

m31

m32

roll

m21

m31

M1

m12

m22

m32

m13

0
0

M2
0

0
0

M=

(2.8)

It has been shown in ref. [9] that a matrix of this form leads to two almost
degenerate Majorana neutrinos with a mass very close to m13 which, unless it
vanishes, is of the order of the charged lepton masses. This means that if one of the
eigenvalues of M R vanishes (for definiteness we chose it to be M3), then a necessary
condition for the seesaw mechanism to be fully effective is that the assignment of
leptonic charges be such that it naturally leads to m13 = 0, in the weak basis where

496

G.C. Branco et a L / Seesaw mechanism

M assumes the form of eq. (2.8). In this case, it is obvious that vR3 is massless and
completely decouples. It may be verified that all the models to be found below
comply with this criterion.
2.2. THE MODELS
Next we will identify all the models for three generations which have one
conserved lepton number and a fully effective seesaw mechanism. From our
previous discussion, it is clearly convenient to consider separately the models with
det M R ~ 0 and those where det M R vanishes.
2~2.1. Models with det M R ~ 0 and ~ O. If one assumes that det M R does not
vanish, then X v is constrained to be [9]
X~ = diag(1, - 1,0),

(2.9)

apart from an overall normalization and a trivial reordering of the v R. The

Majorana mass matrix M R is then of the form

MR=

(iA o)
0

(2.10)

To get the possible structures of M D w e observe that the qi's can only take the
values 0, + 1 and - 1 . Fields with other lepton numbers would decouple from all
the v R and constitute a sector of the theory with at least one additional independent
lepton number, and no seesaw mechanism, contrary to our assumptions. Thus, in
principle there are 27 possibilities for (ql, q2, q3)- If we do not yet assign lepton
flavours to the indices 1, 2, and 3, then by permutations of the q/s we get equivalent
cases. One can also easily show that (ql, q2, q3) is equivalent to ( - q2, - q l , -q3)- In
this way there remain six inequivalent choices for (ql, q2, q3) which give corresponding forms of M D
(1,

1,

1)

(1,

1,

0)

(1,

-1,

0)

(i)oO O!}oO
{
aO
)
(OOa
(Oi)oc
a
0
0

(1,

1,

-1)

(1,

0
0

O,

0
0

O)

(0,

0
0

0
b
0

0
0
c

O,

0
0

O)

b
c

(2.11)

The values chosen for the q, have been explicitly indicated above each matrix.

G.C. Branco et al. / Seesaw mechanism

497

In all the models (2.11) all phases can be transformed away from the mass matrix
214 b y redefining the fields in N R. The main reason for this is that there is only one
non-vanishing element in each row of M D. Thus, as a consequence of the conserved
lepton number, there will be no CP violation in the neutrino-mixing matrix,
independently of the number of Higgs doublets. For just one Higgs doublet, taking
v > 0 and absorbing the phases of M D in ~'L to make M real also removes the
phases of A, of course. Thus, in this case there is no CP violation at all in the lepton
sector. However, for more than one Higgs doublet there will be, in general, CP
violation in the Yukawa interactions.
2.2.2. Models with det M R = 0 or ~tv = 0. Since we do not allow for more than
one independent lepton number, the diagonal matrix X, must have elements 0, + 1
and - 1 . There are therefore 27 possibilities for ~,. However, permutations of the
PRi and different overall signs of ~, lead to equivalent right-handed mass matrices
M R. One can easily check that, in this way, only six inequivalent cases remain. From
these only ~, = d i a g ( 1 , - 1,0) (eq. (2.9)) allows for det M R 4:0 with a non-trivial
lepton n u m b e r for the v R. With the remaining five choices of ~ and the possibilities for ~L = ~R a lot of different mass matrices M can be obtained. However,
nearly all these models can be discarded for one of the following two reasons.
(i) The seesaw mechanism is not operative for at least one light neutrino. In
subsect. 2.1 it has been explained how this situation can occur.
(ii) There is at least one SM lepton generation, i.e. one whose PL does not couple
to the ~'R, and therefore stays massless. There will be a separate lepton number
adherent to such a generation. Such cases are left out somewhat arbitrarily, since the
rest of the generations could be treated as is done for three generations in this
paper, and exhibit no special features.
N o w we go through the five choices for ~,~ not yet discussed.
h~ = diag(O, O, 0).
Here det M R 4:0 but only the choice ql = q2 = q3 = 0 avoids situation (ii). In this
case the usual seesaw mechanism is operative, but there is no lepton number and
therefore we will discard this trivial case.
~=diag(1,1,1).
As a consequence

M R =

0 and there can be no seesaw mechanism.

X~= d i a g ( 0 , 0 , 1 ) .

The only model which is not discarded by (i) and (ii) is obtained by setting

G.C. Branco et al. / Seesaw mechanism

498

ql = q2 = q3 = 0 and M has the form

0
M=

al

a2

0~

b1

b2

c2

A12

A22

0
0

a1

b1

c1

All

a2
0

b2
0

c2
0

A12
0

(2.12)

PR3 completely decouples and remains massless. Actually, in the rest of the theory
there is no lepton number, but this model is interesting from the point of view of
neutrino masses, as will be discussed in subsect. 2.3. In eq. (2.12) phases cannot be
t r a n s f o r m e d away completely in the most general case, and there might be a
possibility of transmitting CP violation from a high-energy scale to low energies
t h r o u g h a complex M R.
X~ = d i a g ( 1 , 1 , 0 ) .
A g a i n to avoid (i) and (ii) only ql = q2 = q3 = 0 is possible. The resulting neutrino
mass matrix is

0
M=

0
0

0
0

0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0

a
b
c
0
0
B

(2.13)

T h e physics of this model is practically identical to that of case (0, 0, 0) of eq. (2.11).
In b o t h cases ~'R1, ~'~2 combine to give a Dirac neutrino which is decoupled from the
theory, b u t in eq. (2.13) this neutrino is massless whereas in eq. (2.11) it is massive.
T h e other sector of the models is identical.
~ , = diag(1,1, - 1).
T h e choice ql = q2 =

q3 =

--

1 gives

0
M=

0
0
a

0
0
b

0
0
c

0
0
0
0
0
A

0
0
0
0
0
B

a
b
c
A
B
0

(2.14)

G.C. Branco et al. / Seesaw mechanism

499

All phases of M can be transformed away. The remaining choices of ~kL = ~kR are
discarded, for reason (ii) if any of the q~ vanishes, and for reason (i) if any of the qi
equals + 1.
2.3. MASS S P E C T R A

In this subsection we want to describe the general features of the mass spectra of
the models we have found in subsect. 2.2, and how to read them off directly from
the lepton-number assignment. The neutrino mass matrix M separates into a Dirac
and a Majorana part: Dirac and Majorana neutrinos do not mix [10]. Therefore we
can discuss the two parts of M separately.
2.3.1. Dirac mass matrix. We assume that there are p fields with lepton number
L = + 1, and q fields with L = - 1 in N R. The rest has L = 0 and belongs to the
Majorana sector. Putting the fields with L = + 1 ( - 1 ) in the vector v{~ (UD) the
Dirac mass term has the form

with J / D being a p q matrix.

N o w the following statement holds: in a model with p fields with L = + 1 and q
fields with L = - 1 in the right-handed neutrino field vector N R there are m i n ( p , q)
massive Dirac fields and I P - qJ chiral neutrinos with a non-zero lepton number
which remain massless to all orders. In other words, only m i n ( p , ( q ) fields with
L = + 1 have counterparts with L = - 1 to combine to form a massive Dirac
neutrino; I P - q J fields remain massless right-handed degrees of freedom.
The mathematical background for this statement is supplied by the following
theorem [11], where for definiteness we take p > q. Given Mr D there exists a unitary
p x p matrix U and a unitary q q matrix V such that
'm 1

m2

U+JgD V =

(2.16)

mq
0
with m i > 0 . In eq. (2.16) 0 is the ( p - q ) q
zero matrix. In higher order in
perturbation theory the situation does not change; there will always be ] p - qf
massless degrees of freedom which will however be slightly rotated in neutrino
flavour space compared with tree level.
Applying our findings to the models (2.11) the following picture emerges. There is
always one heavy Dirac neutrino. There is also a light Dirac neutrino in cases

500

G.C. Branco et aL / Seesaw mechanism

( 1 , - 1, 0) a n d ( 1 , 1 , - 1). There is one massless D i r a c state in cases ( 1 , 1 , - 1) a n d

(1, 0, 0), two massless D i r a c states in case (1,1, 0), a n d three in case (1,1,1).
I n eq. (2.14) there are four massless fields a n d one h e a v y D i r a c neutrino.
2.3.2. Majorana mass matrix.
Assuming n L left-handed and n R right-handed
fields with L = 0 we p u t t h e m together in the r i g h t - h a n d e d field vector N M which is
o b t a i n e d f r o m N R b y deleting the fields with L 4: 0. T h e n the M a j o r a n a p a r t of eq.
(2.3) looks, o f course, again like eq. (2.3)
1 T -1j~MN M +
"~M = ~NMC

h.c.,

(2.17a)

with

"t'M=

ml )

M T

M 2

(2.17b)
'

w h e r e M 1 is a n L X n R m a t r i x a n d M 2 is n R n R. I n general there will be n o zero

entries in M 1 a n d M 2. T h e 0 in J g M comes f r o m the fact that there are no u ~ C - l v L
M a j o r a n a m a s s terms in the S M enlarged b y r i g h t - h a n d e d singlets. This is crucial
for the following observation.
If n R > n L, all M a j o r a n a neutrinos are in general massive at the tree level, n R of
t h e m heavy, n L of t h e m light. However, if n L > n R there will b e (n L - nR) massless
M a j o r a n a n e u t r i n o s at the tree level a p a r t from n R heavy a n d n R light M a j o r a n a
n e u t r i n o s . O n e can show that the n L - n R massless fields acquire " c a l c u l a b l e "
m a s s e s at the one- or two-loop levels [12].
T o p r o v e the a b o v e s t a t e m e n t for n L > n R we note that the kernel of M E has
d i m e n s i o n d = n L -- n R for a general n L n R m a t r i x M 1. Choosing an o r t h o n o r m a l
basis u~ . . . . . u~ of this kernel we can a p p e n d n R zeros to each of these vectors to get
o r t h o n o r m a l vectors u I . . . . . u d of the (n L + n R ) - d i m e n s i o n a l c o m p l e x space. F u r t h e r m o r e w e c a n find vectors v 1. . . . . v d, ( d ' = 2 n R ) such that ( u 1. . . . . U d, Vl . . . . . Vd' }
b e a n o r t h o n o r m a l basis. Then, with the u n i t a r y m a t r i x U = ( U l , . . . , u d, V l , . . . , Vd,),
a n d using ~ g M u i = 0 ( i = 1 , . . . , d ) , we get

uTdf~MU =

(0 0)

w i t h a d ' d ' m a t r i x M ' . This shows that n L

M'

rt R fields have zero mass, p r o v i n g

the a b o v e s t a t e m e n t .
M o d e l (2.12) is a p r o t o t y p e of such a situation, with two heavy M a j o r a n a
n e u t r i n o s , two light ones a n d a n o t h e r one massless at the tree level.
A l l the m o d e l s u n d e r discussion will be classified a c c o r d i n g to the o b s e r v a t i o n s of
this subsection.

G.C. Branco et aL / Seesaw mechanism

501

3. Phenomenologieal implications
In this section we will analyse the most striking phenomenological features of the
models that we have found in sect. 2. To do this we must make assumptions on the
order of magnitude of the parameters occurring in the coupling matrix A. It is
natural to assume that the non-zero parameters of the i' th row of M D are of the
order of the corresponding charged lepton mass mr,. Therefore we have ( M D)i j - ml,.
F o r definiteness, in numerical calculations we take ( M D ) i j = mr, in the models
(2.11).
T w o further ingredients which are important for determining a lower bound on
the heavy right-handed scale are the SIN [4] bound on the electron antineutrino
mass m ~ < 18eV and the cosmological bound [6] on the light neutrino masses
~m~ < 100 eV. We will not take into account the ITEP limits on m~ explicitly, but
one easily gets a feeling for their effects since the lower limit on m ~ from ITEP
practically coincides with the upper bound from SIN. Finally, we will also take into
account the non-observation of neutrinoless double beta decay by using ~-i m o U~ <
5 eV [5]. Here U denotes the lepton weak-mixing matrix. The sum runs over the light
neutrinos v~ only; heavy neutral leptons give a negligible contribution for all
sensible nuclear correlation functions.
In the following, massless neutrinos with definite chirality, which possess a
non-zero lepton number, will be called massless Dirac neutrinos for simplicity. In all
models except (2.12) we will assume the mass matrices to be real, having shown that
there is a phase convention for the neutrino fields where this is so.
We start our analysis with the models (2.11).

(1, 1, 1).
This model contains a heavy Majorana neutrino VR3 which is completely decoupied from the rest of the theory and therefore uninteresting. All other neutrinos are
of Dirac nature and from the discussion in subsect. 2.3. it is obvious that one of
them is heavy and three are massless. The mass term is given by

--VRl(a,b,c,

PR2 ]

+ h . c . = -VRl(O,O,O,M)v[C+h.c.

(3.1)

with M = ( a 2 + b 2 + c 2 +A2) 1/2. The fields v[ are obtained by

] = u" c'

(3.2)

with the unitary 4 4 matrix

u = (Ul, U2,U3, u),

(3.3a)

u r = (a, b, e, A ) / M .

(3.3b)

where

502

G.C. Branco et al. / Seesaw mechanism

The column vectors u 1, u 2 and u 3 are chosen so that U be a unitary matrix, but
otherwise they are arbitrary, which reflects the degeneracy of the three massless
Dirac neutrinos. The heavy Dirac neutrino with mass M is given by UR1 + U[4- It
has lepton number + 1, just as the massless states P~.I,2,3The total width of an unstable charged lepton l~ is proportional to
3

E [UJ 2=l-u

2,

(3.4)

a~l

which gives a reduction compared to the SM. For the T-lepton u 2 is of order
m ~ / M 2. Therefore, in order not to be in conflict with the measured width, M or IAI
must be at least about 3m,.
Otherwise this model is not specially interesting. There are no oscillations among
light neutrinos and neutrinoless double beta decay is forbidden by the lepton
number. In principle the neutrino ULi associated with the charged lepton li could
produce a different charged lepton lj, j v~ i, by scattering. However, this process is
heavily suppressed because the probability of finding VLj in PL~ is of order
( m l r n t j A 2 ) 2.

(1, 1,0).
In this model there is one light and one heavy Majorana neutrino with masses

m M=c2/IBI

and

M M= IBI,

(3.5)

respectively. The Dirac sector contains two massless neutrinos and a heavy one with
mass
M D =

(a 2 +

b 2 + A 2 ) 1/2 .

(3.6)

The phenomenology of the Dirac sector is as in the previous model, therefore we

will not dwell on it any longer.
There are three possible assignments for the 13 generation, which give different
lower bounds on ]B].
( a ) 13 = e.
In this case neutrinoless 13/3 decay is possible giving Inl >-- 50 GeV.
(b) l 3 = ~ .
From the cosmological bound we get IBI >-- 100 TeV.
(c) 13 = ~'.
This case is like (b) but we obtain a higher bound: IBI >- 4 1 0 4 TeV. There are
no neutrino oscillations at low energies in this model since Majorana and Dirac
neutrinos do not mix.

G.C. Branco et al. / Seesaw mechanism

503

H, -1,0).
The corresponding model has been found previously within a minimal left-right
symmetric theory, where it is the unique model which simultaneously allows a
non-trivial lepton number and a seesaw mechanism [9]. The Majorana sector is the
same as for (1,1, 0), eq. (3.5), and therefore it is not repeated here.
The Dirac sector exhibits a quite interesting structure with a lepton number
L = Z 1 - L 2 of the Z e l ' d o v i c h - K o n o p i n s k i - M a h m o u d (ZKM) [13] type, which
assigns L = + 1 to ll, PL1 and L = - 1 t o / 2 , /PL2 and /~R2"The mass term is given by

(0a

--('U-~L2'-d--Rml)

l.ll

A 1~ @.2I + h.c.

(3.7)

There is a light Dirac neutrino/.t D and a heavy one ND, with masses

roD---- lab/A]

and

M D--- ]A[,

(3.8)

respectively. We see that the seesaw mechanism for v D works in an interesting way,
namely it combines charged lepton masses of two different generations, contrary to
the usual case as exhibited in eq. (3.5). The weak eigenstate neutrino fields can be
expressed by the mass eigenstates PD, ND giving approximately

PL1 = (AUDL -b a N D L ) / ( a 2 + A2) 1/2,

/PL2 = ( --AP~)R 4- bN~R)/(

b2 + A2) 1/2,

PR1 = (bUDR 4- A N D R ) / ( b 2 + A2) 1/2,

PR2 = ( -- a/~)L 4- ANDL)/(a2 + A2) 1/2-

(3.9)

This shows that l I couples predominantly to v o whereas l 2 is coupled to u~. This

expresses the essence of the Z K M mechanism: there is only one massive Dirac
neutrino v o with L = + 1 for two generations of charged leptons ll, l 2 with opposite
lepton numbers + 1 , - 1 , respectively. As a consequence l I interacts with v D
whereas 12 m u s t interact with p~ in order to conserve the lepton number. Of course,
in our case there is also a small admixture of a heavy neutrino N D with L = + 1.
We can distinguish three cases according to which charged lepton is assigned to l 3
(a) l 3 = ~.
F r o m the cosmological bound we get Ib] _> 100TeV whereas from the SIN bound
IA] >_ 50TeV is obtained. As both bounds are of the same order of magnitude in the
100 TeV range we can think of one right-handed scale rather than two. In addition,
we find that this right-handed scale can be rather low. Such a low scale of 100TeV

G.C. Branco et a L / Seesaw mechanism

504

is a counterexample to a statement in ref. [6] and comes about in our model because
of the Z K M lepton n u m b e r L = L e - L , which entails the mass formula (3.8)*.
(b) l 3 --= e.
F r o m the non-observation of (flfl)o~ decay [BJ >__50 GeV is obtained. In this case
the b o u n d o n IBI is vastly different from IAI >_ 2000TeV which is derived from the
cosmological bound.
(c) l 3 = 'r.
T h e discrepancy between the bounds on A and B is also very large for this
assignment, giving IBI > - 4 x l 0 a T e V
from the cosmological b o u n d and IA I >_
2.5 TeV f r o m the SIN bound.
I n this m o d e l no neutrino oscillations are possible and neutrinoless fir decay is
only allowed in case (b). In all the cases processes like/~ ~ e y , / t ---, eee, e-/~+---> e+/~ etc. are forbidden because of the lepton number. T h o u g h the Z K M scheme looks
quite different from the standard lepton-number scheme, deviations from the SM
are very hard to detect since they all vanish with the low neutrino masses. The most
obvious test of the present model seems to be the direct determination of the masses
of i, M and u D. Case (a) with L = L e - L , looks most appealing because we can
assume a c o m m o n , rather low, right-handed scale of order 100 TeV.
(1, 1, - 1).

I n this model the heavy Majorana neutrino uR3 decouples from the theory and all
the interacting neutrinos are of Dirac type. The mass term is given by
L1
a

0
b

c
A

,h.c.

(3.10)

~ I/R2

There is one massless left-handed neutrino t5 L and two massive neutrinos ta, I2 with
masses

m= Ic(a2+b2)l/2/AI

and

M=

IA],

(3.11)

respectively. Expressing VL, VR by mass eigenstates we get approximately

eL1 = ( a A / R r ) t o L + ( a / R ) 1 2 L - ( b / r ) ~ o L ,
VL2 ----( b A / R r ) t o L + ( b / R ) ~ 2 L + ( a / r ) ~ o L,
=

+ (

PR1 = (C~//Rt)~R-t-" ( A e ' / R ' ) ~ R ,

uR2 -~ ( - - r / g )~o~L+ ( A / R )I2~,

(3.12)

* In the left-right symmetric model of ref. [9] the right-handed scale can be even in the TeV range,
because of an additional suppression factor in the neutrino masses.

G.C. Branco et al. / Seesaw mechanism

where r = ( a 2 +

b2) 1/2,

R = (a 2 +

A2) 1/2,

505

R' = (c 2 + A2) 1/2, e = sgn(Ac) and e' =

sgn A.
The fields /1, /2, ~, to and ~2 have lepton number + 1 whereas l 3 has L = - 1. As
in the previous model there is a Z K M scheme, which is now complicated by
additional mixing with o3L. Since all the leptons have a non-trivial lepton number,
neutrinoless double beta decay is forbidden. Again three cases can be distinguished
by assign indices to e, # and ~-.
(a) l 3 = "r.
As a consequence e,/~, ~" couple predominantly to ~3L, 0~, toc, respectively, which
exhibit the Z K M structure. The to-~ mixing angle is of order mJm~,. From the
cosmological bound we get for the single right-handed scale IA I >_ 2000TeV. The
decay # ~ ey is allowed in principle, but the branching ratio is of order 10 -20 [14].
(b)

l 3 = ~.

With this assignment e, # and ~" are associated with o3, wc and to, respectively. As
before IAI >~2000TeV but now w-o3 mixing is of order me/m. ~.
(c) l 3 = e.
This is the most interesting assignment, and combines e,/~, with toe, 6 and to,
respectively. The SIN bound results in IAI >
_ 50TeV and to-o3 mixing is of order
m~/m~, which is very large, lying in the range of the experimental limits. The lepton
n u m b e r can be written L = L~ + L, - L e.
Models with a lepton number L = L 1 + L 2 - L 3 have also been discussed in the
literature in connection with the deceased 17keV neutrino [15]. However, in this
case the mass lay in the range forbidden by the cosmological bound and therefore
the Majoron mechanism was invoked to let it decay sufficiently fast. As a consequence, the Higgs sector played an important role and the lepton number was
broken spontaneously. Here the cosmological bound is obeyed by taking A to be
sufficiently large. In case (c) one must take into account the SIN bound which is
smaller than the cosmological bound. As in case (a) of the previous model the
right-handed scale of case (c) is rather low, due to the Z K M scheme. The neutrino to
is unstable. However, the decay to ~ a3o3~ through Z exchange is forbidden at the
tree level and ~0 --* 6 7 is by far too slow [16] to circumvent the cosmological bound
on the ~o mass.

(1, 0,0).
The Dirac sector consists of a massless neutrino and a heavy one with mass
This is a simplified version of the model (1,1,1) and can be
treated accordingly.
The Majorana neutrinos have a mass matrix

M = ( a 2 + A 2 ) 1/2.

~t'M=

0
0
b

0
0
c

(3.13)

506

G. C. Branco et aL / Seesaw mechanism

with a neutrino ,3 massless at the tree level, and two massive ones ~o, I2 with masses

m = (b 2 + c 2 ) / I B I

and

M = IBI,

(3.14)

respectively. There is ~0-~5 oscillation, the magnitude of which can be read off from
the approximate mixing matrix

().2
VL3

(1/p

,( - b c

~o '

.15,

with O = ( b2 + c2) 1/2. Again there are three physically different cases.
(a) l 1 = e.
In this case there is no neutrinoless double beta decay and ]B I >_ 4 104TeV
from the cosmological bound. The ~0-o5 mixing angle is very large, of order r n ~ / m , .
(b) l~ = t~.
As before we obtain [B I >_ 4 10 4 TeV from the cosmological bound, but now ~0-~5
mixing is of order rne/m ~. Neutrinoless double beta decay can occur in this case,
but it is heavily suppressed by the high scale of IB].
(c) ll = r.

[B] >_ 100TeV and ~0-a5 mixing is of order r n J r n . . As before (~8/~)o~ decay occurs
at a rate much lower than the present experimental bound.

(o,o, o).
Here the heavy Dirac neutrino VR1 + /~.2 completely decouples from the theory.
Only Majorana neutrinos remain, consisting of three left-handed fields and only one
right-handed field. Thus, there will be two neutrinos massless at the tree level. They
will get radiatively produced Majorana masses, as will be discussed in a separate
paper [12]. The non-zero masses are given by

m'~p2/lB]

and

M=IB[,

(3.16)

with p = (a 2 + b 2 + c2) 1/2.

Bounds on B can be found as in the previous models. We only want to mention
neutrino oscillation among the three light Majorana neutrinos. The probability of
finding vj in vi ( j 4: i) at a time t after the production of vi is approximately given
by

P ( v i ~ vj) 2( a i a j p 2 )2[1 - cos(E 3 - p )t] ,

(3.17)

where a i, aj = a, b or c, and E 3 (p2 + rn2)1/2. The momentum of the neutrinos is

p. It is evident from eq. (3.17) that the oscillations between v, and v, will be very
large.
Now there remain only three models, given by eqs. (2.12), (2.13) and (2.14). In
model (2.12) there are two heavy, two light and one massless (at the tree level)
Majorana neutrinos. This model is very similar to model (0,0,0) of eq (2.11). The
=

G.C. Branco et al. / Seesaw mechanism

507

same similarity holds for model (2.13). Model (2.14) is analogous to model (1, 1,1)
of eq. (2.11), and its discussion is therefore superfluous.
4. Conclusions
We have analysed in a systematic way the possibility of simultaneously having
one conserved lepton number and the seesaw mechanism in a minimal extension of
the SM inspired by a quark-lepton symmetry. We have simply added right-handed
gauge singlet neutrinos to the SM and introduced the most general Yukawa
couplings consistent with gauge invariance, and Majorana mass terms for the
right-handed neutrinos which set the heavy scale(s) relevant for the seesaw mechanism. There is no Majorana mass term for the left-handed neutrinos since we do not
introduce additional Higgs fields. We assume the existence of a single lepton
number, remaining unbroken after the spontaneous breaking of SU(2) U(1). The
second basic assumption is that the seesaw mechanism is responsible for the
lightness of all the predominantly left-handed neutrinos, except in the cases where
such masses vanish automatically, Since our analysis was done in a minimal
extension of the SM, we expect it to exhibit quite general features and to be useful
in a large variety of specific models.
The requirement of an effective seesaw mechanism severely restricts the possible
assignments for the leptonic charges. We have classified systematically all the
models which comply with our assumptions. Whereas in the context of a minimal
left-right symmetric theory a similar analysis yielded only one model, several
models are possible within the framework of our minimal extension of the SM. We
demand that the neutrino masses obey both the laboratory bounds and the cosmological bound on the masses of stable neutrinos, since it turns out that unstable
neutrinos cannot decay fast enough to evade the cosmological bound in the schemes
under consideration.
In most of the cases there are two right-handed scales, one for the Majorana and
one for the Dirac sector, as a consequence of the existence of a single lepton
number. We have estimated the order of magnitude of lower bounds on these scales
by using the various neutrino mass bounds. There are two outstanding models with
a lepton number of the Zel'dovich-Konopinski-Mahmoud (ZKM) type. One of
them corresponds to the case found in the context of left-fight symmetric models.
Combining e and ~- in the Z K M scheme, these models have the virtue of allowing
for a common, rather low, right-handed scale A of order 100 TeV, without violating
the cosmological bound. This is a consequence of the fact that the light Dirac
neutrino has a mass of order mem,/A. Mass formulas combining two charged-lepton masses in the seesaw mechanism are a special feature of letpon numbers of the
Z K M type, which can naturally appear by demanding an effective seesaw mechanism and a lepton number at the same time.
We emphasized that the pattern of neutrino masses can be read off directly from
the lepton-number assignments. In this context, an attractive feature of some of our

508

G. C. Branco et al. / Seesaw mechanism

models is the possibility that some of the left-handed neutrinos are massless at the
tree level but acquire small calculable Majorana masses at the one- or two-loop
levels. The essential requirements for this to happen are the presence of a greater
number of left-handed than of right-handed neutrinos with zero lepton charge, and
the fact that left-handed Majorana masses are absent at the tree level. We will
explore this mechanism of radiatively produced Majorana neutrino masses in an
ensuing paper.
W.G. wants to thank G. Ecker for helpful discussions.

Note added in proof

After having completed this work, we received a paper by Babu and Ma [17]
where the authors also propose the mechanism of subsect. 2.3.2 for radiative
generation of Majorana neutrino masses and give an estimate of the corresponding
two-loop diagrams.

References
[1] S.L. Glashow, Nucl. Phys. 22 (1961) 579;
S. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. Lett. 19 (1967) 1264;
A. Salam, in Elementary particle theory: Relativistic groups and analyticity, ed. N. Svartholm
(Almqvist and Wiksell, Stockholm, 1968)
[2] M. Gell-Mann, P. Ramond and R. Slansky, in Supergravity, ed. D.Z. Freedman and P. van
Nieuwenhuizen (North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1979);
T. Yanagida, in Proc. workshop on unified theory and baryon number in the universe, ed. O. Sawata
and A. Sugamoto (KEK, Japan, 1979)
[3] V.A. Lubimov, E.G. Novikov, V.Z. Nozik, E.F. Tretyakov and V.S. Kosik, Phys. Lett. B94 (1980)
266;
S. Boris et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 58 (1987) 2019
[4] M. Fritschi et al., Phys. Lett B173 (1986) 485
[5] S.M. Bilenky and S.T. Petcov, Rev. Mod. Phys. 59 (1987) 671, and references therein
[6] H. Harari and Y. Nir, Nucl. Phys. B292 (1987) 251, and references therein
[7] A. Zee, Nucl. Phys. B264 (1986) 99
[8] J.C. Pati and A. Salam, Phys. Rev. D10 (1974) 275;
R.N. Mohapatra and J.C. Pati, Phys. Rev. D l l (1975) 566; 2558;
R.N. Mohapatra and G. Senjanovic, Phys. Rev. D12 (1975) 1502
[9] G. Ecker, W. Grimus and M. Gronau, Nucl. Phys. B279 (1987) 429
[10] S.T. Petcov and S.T. Toshev, Phys. Lett. B143 (1984) 175
[11] D. Wyler and L. Wolfenstein, Nucl. Phys. B218 (1983) 205
[12] M. Doi, M. Kenmoku, T. Kotani and E. Takasugi, Phys. Rev. D30 (1984) 626;
S.T. Petcov and S.T. Toshev, ref. [10];
G.C. Branco et al., in preparation
[13] Ya.B. Zel'dovich, Dokl. Nauk USSR 86 (1952) 505;
E.J. Konopinski and H. Mahmoud, Phys. Rev. 92 (1953) 1045;
S.M. Bilenky and B. Pontecorvo, Phys. Lett. B102 (1981) 32
[14] B.W. Lee, S. Pakvasa, R.E. Schrock and H. Sugawara, Phys. Rev. Lett. 38 (1977) 937
[15] M.J. Dugan, G.B. Gelmini, H. Georgi and L.J. Hall, Phys. Rev. Lett. 54 (1985) 2302;
M.J. Dugan, A. Manohar and A.E. Nelson, Phys. Rev. Lett. 55 (1985) 170
[16] P.B. Pal and L. Wolfenstein, Phys. Rev. D25 (1982) 766
[17] K. Babu and E. Ma, University of Rochester preprint UR-1063