Critical look at the cosmological neutrino mass bound
Daniel Naredo-Tuero, Miguel Escudero, E. Fernández-Martínez, Xabier Marcano, Vivian Poulin · 2024 · 60 citationsRead the paper
Cosmological neutrino mass bounds are becoming increasingly stringent. The latest limit within Λ CDM from Planck 2018 + ACT lensing + DESI is ∑ m ν < 0.072 eV at 95% CL, very close to the minimum possible sum of neutrino masses ( ∑ m ν > 0.06 eV ), hinting at vanishing or even “negative” cosmological neutrino masses. In this context, it is urgent to carefully evaluate the origin of these cosmological constraints. In this paper, we investigate the robustness of these results in three ways: (i) we check the role of potential anomalies in Planck CMB and DESI BAO data; (ii) we compare the results for frequentist and Bayesian techniques, as very close to physical boundaries subtleties in the derivation and interpretation of constraints can arise; (iii) we investigate how deviations from Λ CDM , potentially alleviating these anomalies, can alter the constraints. From a profile likelihood analysis, we derive constraints in agreement at the ∼ 10 % level with Bayesian posteriors. We find that the weak preference for negative neutrino masses is mostly present for Planck 18 data, affected by the well-known “lensing anomaly.” It disappears when the new Planck 2020 HiLLiPoP is used, leading to significantly weaker constraints. Additionally, the pull toward negative masses in DESI data stems from the z = 0.7 bin, which contains a BAO measurement in ∼ 3 σ tension with Planck expectations. Without this bin, and in combination with HiLLiPoP, the bound relaxes to ∑ m ν < 0.11 eV at 95% CL. The recent preference for dynamical dark energy alleviates this tension and further weakens the bound. As we are at the dawn of a neutrino mass discovery from cosmology, it will be very exciting to see if this trend is confirmed by future data. Published by the American Physical Society 2024
What the full text shows
Theory or simulation- The neutrino mass bound relaxes when using the HiLLiPoP likelihood and removing the z = 0.7 BAO bin from DESI data. — ∑ mν < 0.11 eV at 95% CL (HiLLiPoP + DESI-Y1-no07)
- Frequentist profile likelihood constraints are consistent with Bayesian posteriors. — ~10% agreement (Across various likelihood combinations)
- The preference for negative neutrino masses is primarily driven by the Planck 2018 'lensing anomaly'. (Planck 18 data)
- The pull toward negative masses in DESI data is driven by a specific redshift bin. — ~3σ tension with Planck (DESI-Y1 at z = 0.7 bin)
- The most stringent bound within ΛCDM from Planck 2018 + ACT lensing + DESI is very close to the physical minimum. — ∑ mν < 0.072 eV at 95% CL (ΛCDM model)
- Setup
- Cosmological datasets including Planck (PR3, CamSpec, HiLLiPoP), DESI-Y1, SDSS, and Pantheon+ SN catalog; Boltzmann code CLASS used for power spectra.
- How
- The authors performed a comparative analysis using both Bayesian MCMC sampling (via MontePython) and frequentist profile likelihood optimization (via Procoli simulated annealing). They tested multiple data combinations (Planck PR3/PR4, DESI, SDSS, Pantheon+) and compared the standard ΛCDM model against dynamical dark energy.
- Limitations
- Frequentist profiling for HiLLiPoP is computationally difficult due to the likelihood being unbinned and noisy. · Dependence of Bayesian results on the choice of priors when constraints are near physical boundaries.
Summarized by Gemma 4 from the open-access full text · 7 Oct 2026. Read it