DOCSLIB.ORG

Searching for Reactor Antineutrino Flavor Oscillations with the Double Chooz Far Detector Arthur James Franke

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Searching for Reactor Antineutrino Flavor Oscillations with the Double Chooz Far Detector Arthur James Franke Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 2013 c 2012 Arthur James Franke All Rights Reserved ABSTRACT Searching for Reactor Antineutrino Flavor Oscillations with the Double Chooz Far Detector Arthur James Franke This dissertation presents results from a search for reactorν ¯e flavor oscillations using the Double Chooz Far Detector. The search was performed by observing the rate and energy spectrum ofν ¯e interacting via Inverse Beta Decay in a Gd-doped liquid scintillator detector, and comparing the observation to an expectation based on a prediction of the emitted reactor flux. The Columbia University neutrino group was instrumental in construction of the Double Chooz Outer Veto, as well as the analysis efforts leading to two oscillation measurement results. The most recent analysis is presented herein, focusing on 251.27 days of data (or 33.71 GW-ton-years of exposure). In these data, 8249 IBD candidates were observed, compared to a signal+background prediction of 8936.8. A fit to a two-neutrino oscillation model considering event rate, spectral shape, and time yields a best-fit value of sin2 (2θ ) = 0.109 0.030 (stat.) 0.025 (syst.) at ∆m2 = 2.32 10−3 eV2, with 13 ± ± 31 × 2 χRS/d.o.f. = 42.1/35. A frequentist method deems the null-oscillation hypothesis excluded by the data at 99.8% C.L., or 2.9σ. These results are in agreement with the measurements of other modern reactorν ¯e experiments. Table of Contents 1 Introduction 1 I Neutrino Oscillations & Experimental Searches 4 2 Neutrino Flavor Oscillations 5 2.1 Neutrinos in the Standard Model of Particle Physics . ......... 5 2.2 NeutrinoFlavorMixing . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 7 2.2.1 The PMNS Neutrino Mixing Matrix . 7 2.2.2 Oscillation Probability Formulas . .... 8 2.3 Possible Mechanisms for Neutrino Masses . ...... 14 3 Neutrino Oscillation Experiments 16 3.1 Past Experimental Oscillation Results . ....... 16 3.2 Modern Searches for θ13-Driven Oscillations . 20 3.2.1 Accelerator-Based Searches . 21 3.2.2 Reactor-Based Searches . 22 II The Double Chooz Experiment 26 4 The Double Chooz Experiment 27 4.1 ExperimentSite&Layout. 28 4.2 DetectorDesign.................................. 30 4.2.1 InnerDetector .............................. 30 i 4.2.2 InnerVeto................................. 34 4.2.3 SteelShielding .............................. 34 4.2.4 OuterVeto ................................ 34 4.2.5 CalibrationSystems ........................... 35 4.3 Main Detector Data Acquisition Systems . ..... 39 4.3.1 Performance ............................... 40 5 The Double Chooz Outer Veto 42 5.1 Design....................................... 42 5.2 ModuleDesign .................................. 44 5.3 DAQDesign.................................... 46 5.3.1 Electronics Hardware Design . 46 5.3.2 Maroc2CrosstalkTesting . 49 5.4 OVEventBuilderandDOGSifier . 59 5.5 MonitoringSoftware .............................. 59 5.5.1 OVOnlineMonitor ........................... 59 5.5.2 OVOfflineMonitor ........................... 60 5.6 Performance.................................... 61 III Double Chooz Analyses 64 6 Neutrino Signal Flux Estimation & Uncertainties 65 6.1 Instantaneousν ¯e RatefromaSingleReactor . 65 6.1.1 Reactor Fission Rate Calculation . 66 6.1.2 Mean Cross-Section per Fission . 71 6.2 BinnedExpectedNeutrinoCount. 76 6.3 Bugey4AnchorPoint............................... 78 6.4 Binned Expectation Uncertainty Propagation . ........ 79 6.4.1 Multiple Integration Periods . 81 6.4.2 Covariance Matrix Components of Prediction Anchored to ILL Spectra 81 6.4.3 Covariance Matrix Components of Prediction Anchored to Bugey4 Rate 84 ii 6.4.4 Covariance Matrix Components of Prediction Anchored to Measured NearDetectorSpectrum. 86 6.4.5 Comparison of Uncertainty Contributions . ..... 87 7 Second Double Chooz Publication 89 7.1 DataSet...................................... 89 7.2 CandidateSelectionCuts . 89 7.2.1 Second Publication Analysis . 89 7.2.2 PeripheralAnalyses ........................... 97 7.2.3 Effects of IBD Selection on Detector Livetime . ..... 98 7.3 SignalPrediction ................................ 99 7.3.1 ReactorPrediction ............................ 101 7.3.2 Signal Selection Efficiency . 102 7.3.3 SignalPredictionSummary . 110 7.4 BackgroundMeasurements . 112 7.4.1 Accidental Background . 112 7.4.2 CosmogenicLithium-9 . 114 7.4.3 Fast Neutron & Stopping µ Backgrounds . 117 7.4.4 Cross-checks of Background Measurements . 124 7.5 EnergyScale ................................... 127 7.5.1 Per-channelGainvs.Charge . 127 7.5.2 Detector Response Spatial Correction . 128 7.5.3 Detector Response Time Dependence Correction . 128 7.5.4 AbsoluteEnergyScale . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 131 7.5.5 Uncertainty Propagation . 131 7.6 Multiple Integration Periods . 133 7.7 OscillationFit&Results. 136 7.7.1 Parameter-Dependent Covariance Matrix . 139 7.7.2 Definitions of χ2 Statistics........................ 141 7.7.3 Results .................................. 145 7.7.4 Frequentist Confidence Intervals . 148 iii 2 7.7.5 Fit Without MINOS ∆m31 Constraint.. .. .. .. .. 151 7.8 MoreTwo-Reactor-OffData. 152 IV Context & Conclusions 158 8 Double Chooz Measurements in Context 159 8.1 Winter 2011/Spring 2012: First Oscillation Results . ........... 159 8.2 Summer2012: UpdatedResults. 160 8.3 The Post-θ13 Era................................. 162 8.3.1 Outlook on the PMNS Matrix . 162 8.3.2 Outlook on Reactorν ¯e Experiments . .. .. .. .. .. 164 9 Conclusions 168 V Bibliography 169 Bibliography 170 VI Appendices 188 A First Double Chooz Publication 189 A.1 DataSet...................................... 189 A.2 CandidateSelectionCuts . 189 A.2.1 First Publication Analysis . 189 A.2.2 Effects of IBD Selection on Detector Livetime . 190 A.3 SignalPrediction ................................ 191 A.3.1 ReactorPrediction ............................ 192 A.3.2 Signal Selection Efficiency . 192 A.3.3 SignalPredictionSummary . 197 A.4 BackgroundMeasurements . 198 A.4.1 Accidental Background . 199 iv A.4.2 CosmogenicLithium-9 . 200 A.4.3 Fast Neutron & Stopping µ Backgrounds . 201 A.4.4 Cross-checks of Background Measurements . 203 A.5 EnergyScale ................................... 205 A.5.1 Detector Response Correction Functions . 205 A.5.2 Uncertainty Propagation . 206 A.6 OscillationFit&Results. 206 A.6.1 Parameter-Independent Covariance Matrix . 210 A.6.2 Definitions of χ2 Statistics........................ 210 A.6.3 Results .................................. 213 A.6.4 Frequentist Confidence Intervals . 214 pred DC,far A.6.5 Synthesized Quantities: RDC , σf , and σf ........... 216 B CUfits 219 B.1 Design....................................... 219 B.2 Usage ....................................... 221 C The MultiSim Method 223 C.1 General Description of MultiSim Method . 223 C.2 Applied to Neutrino Reference Spectra . 225 C.2.1 Application&Results . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 227 C.2.2 Summary ................................. 229 C.3 Applied to Reactor Uncertainties . 229 C.4 Applied to Energy Scale Uncertainties . 232 C.4.1 FirstDoubleChoozPublication. 233 C.4.2 Second Double Chooz Publication . 234 D DCRxtrTools Neutrino Event Generator & Uncertainty Calculator 236 D.1 DescriptionofOperation. 236 D.1.1 Inputs................................... 237 D.1.2 Outputs.................................. 240 v D.1.3 GeneralProcess ............................. 240 D.2 Monte Carlo Event Generation . 241 D.3 Uncertainty Propagation . 243 true reco D.3.1 Propagation from Eν to Ee+ .................... 243 D.4 Rebinning of Reference Spectra and Uncertainties . .......... 243 D.4.1 RebinningReferenceSpectra . 244 D.4.2 Rebinning Covariance Matrices . 244 D.5 Power-Scaling of Fission Rates . 245 E OV Online Monitor 247 E.1 Architecture.................................... 247 E.2 Data Handling & Visualization . 251 F Drawing Confidence Intervals using a Frequentist Method 253 F.1 Procedure for Drawing Confidence Intervals . ....... 253 F.1.1 Generation of Pseudoexperiments . 254 F.1.2 Goodness-of-Fit Statistic Comparison . 255 F.1.3 DrawingConfidenceIntervals . 255 F.2 Procedure for Testing the Null-Oscillation Hypothesis ............ 256 G Pulls vs. Covariance χ2 257 G.1 Motivation .................................... 257 G.2 Tests With Two Simple χ2 Statistics ...................... 258 G.2.1 Uncertainties on Linear Parameters . 258 G.2.2 Uncertainties on Multiplicative Parameters . ....... 260 G.3 Commentary ................................... 263 G.4 Code........................................ 264 G.4.1 Linear Uncertainties . 264 G.4.2 Multiplicative Uncertainties . 264 G.4.3 Single Multiplicative Uncertainty . 264 vi H Covariance Matrix Component Break-Out 265 H.1 Method ...................................... 266 H.2 Limitations .................................... 266 I Second Publication Data Release 267 J IT Infrastructure 270 J.1 OuterVetoComputers.............................. 270 J.2 High-Availability MySQL Server . 271 J.2.1 BackupScheme.............................. 272 J.3 NagiosResourceMonitoring. 273 K Double Chooz Publications 274 K.1 FirstDoubleChoozPublication. 274 K.2 SecondDoubleChoozPublication . 282 vii List of Figures 2.1 Illustration of the neutrino mass eigenstates as superpositions of the flavor eigenstates (colored regions). Mass-squared splittings shown are approxi- mately those as observed by experiment
Recommended publications
  • In the Light of LSND, Miniboone and Other Data

    In the Light of LSND, Miniboone and Other Data

    DAPNIA-SPhT Joint Seminar, 21 May 2007 Exotic Neutrino Physics in the light of LSND, MiniBooNE and other data Marco Cirelli + Stéphane Lavignac SPhT - CEA/Saclay Introduction CDHSW Neutrino Physics (pre-MiniBooNE): CHORUS NOMAD NOMAD NOMAD 0 KARMEN2 CHORUS Everything fits in terms of: 10 LSND 3 neutrino oscillations (mass-driven) Bugey BNL E776 K2K SuperK CHOOZ erde 10–3 PaloV Super-K+SNO Cl +KamLAND ] 2 KamLAND [eV 2 –6 SNO m 10 Super-K ∆ Ga –9 10 νe↔νX νµ↔ντ νe↔ντ νe↔νµ 10–12 10–4 10–2 100 102 tan2θ http://hitoshi.berkeley.edu/neutrino Particle Data Group 2006 Introduction CDHSW Neutrino Physics (pre-MiniBooNE): CHORUS NOMAD NOMAD NOMAD 0 KARMEN2 CHORUS Everything fits in terms of: 10 LSND 3 neutrino oscillations (mass-driven) Bugey BNL E776 K2K SuperK Simple ingredients: CHOOZ erde 10–3 PaloV νe, νµ, ντ m1, m2, m3 Super-K+SNO Cl +KamLAND ] θ12, θ23, θ13 δCP 2 KamLAND [eV 2 –6 SNO m 10 Super-K ∆ Ga –9 10 νe↔νX νµ↔ντ νe↔ντ νe↔νµ 10–12 10–4 10–2 100 102 tan2θ http://hitoshi.berkeley.edu/neutrino Particle Data Group 2006 Introduction CDHSW Neutrino Physics (pre-MiniBooNE): CHORUS NOMAD NOMAD NOMAD 0 KARMEN2 CHORUS Everything fits in terms of: 10 LSND 3 neutrino oscillations (mass-driven) Bugey BNL E776 K2K SuperK Simple ingredients: CHOOZ erde 10–3 PaloV νe, νµ, ντ m1, m2, m3 Super-K+SNO Cl +KamLAND ] θ12, θ23, θ13 δCP 2 KamLAND Simple theory: [eV 2 –6 SNO m 10 |ν! = cos θ|ν1! + sin θ|ν2! Super-K ∆ −E1t −E2t |ν(t)! = e cos θ|ν1! + e sin θ|ν2! Ga 2 Ei = p + mi /2p 2 –9 ν ↔ν m L 10 e X 2 2 ∆ ν ↔ν P ν → ν θ µ τ ( α β) = sin 2 αβ sin ν ↔ν E e
  • Sensitivity Study and First Prototype Tests for the CHIPS Neutrino

    Sensitivity Study and First Prototype Tests for the CHIPS Neutrino

    Sensitivity study and first prototype tests for the CHIPS neutrino detector R&D program Maciej Marek Pfützner University College London Submitted to University College London in fulfilment of the requirements for the award of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy July 20, 2018 1 2 Declaration I, Maciej Marek Pfützner confirm that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Where information has been derived from other sources, I confirm that this has been indicated in the thesis. Maciej Pfützner 3 4 Abstract CHIPS (CHerenkov detectors In mine PitS) is an R&D project aiming to develop novel cost-effective detectors for long baseline neutrino oscillation experiments. Water Cherenkov detector modules will be submerged in an existing lake in the path of an accelerator neutrino beam, eliminating the need for expensive excavation. In a staged approach, the first detectors will be deployed in a flooded mine pit in northern Minnesota, 7 mrad off-axis from the existing NuMI beam. A small proof-of-principle model (CHIPS-M) has already been tested and the first stage of a fully functional 10 kt module (CHIPS-10) is planned for 2018. The main physics aim is to measure the CP-violating neutrino mixing phase (δCP). A sensitivity study was performed with the GLoBES package, using results from a dedicated detector simulation and a preliminary reconstruction algorithm. The predicted physics reach of CHIPS-10 and potential bigger modules is presented and compared with currently running experiments and future projects. One of the instruments submerged on board CHIPS-M in autumn 2015 was a prototype detection unit, constructed at Nikhef.
  • A Mislivec, Minerva Coherent

    A Mislivec, Minerva Coherent

    Charged Current Coherent Pion Production in MINERνA Aaron Mislivec University of Rochester w/ Aaron Higuera Outline • Motivation • MINERνA Detector and Kinematics Reconstruction • Event Selection • Background Tuning • Contribution from Diffractive Scattering off Hydrogen • Systematics • Cross Sections Aaron Mislivec, University of Rochester NuInt14 2 K. HIRAIDE et al. PHYSICAL REVIEW D 78, 112004 (2008) 100 TABLE III. Event selection summary for the MRD-stopped DATA charged current coherent pion sample. CC coherent π Event selection Data MC Coherent % CC resonant π Signal BG Efficiency Other Generated in SciBar fid.vol. 1939 156 766 100% CC QE 50 SciBar-MRD matched 30 337 978 29 359 50.4% MRD-stopped 21 762 715 20 437 36.9% two-track 5939 358 6073 18.5% Entries / 5 degrees Particle ID (" %) 2255 292 2336 15.1% Vertex activityþ cut 887 264 961 13.6% CCQE rejection 682 241 709 12.4% 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 Pion track direction cut 425 233 451 12.0% Reconstructed Q2 cut 247 201 228 10.4% ∆θp (degrees) FIG. 11 (color online). Á for the " % events in the MRD p þ stopped sample after fitting. which the track angle of the pion candidate with respect to the beam direction is less than 90 degrees are selected. Figure 13 shows the reconstructed Q2 distribution for the " % events after the pion track direction cut. Althoughþ a charged current quasielastic interaction is as- DATA 80 sumed, the Q2 of charged current coherent pion events is CC coherent π reconstructed with a resolution of 0:016 GeV=c 2 and a CC resonant π 2 ð Þ 60 shift of 0:024 GeV=c according to the MC simulation.
  • Synergy of Astroparticle Physics and Colliders

    Synergy of Astroparticle Physics and Colliders

    Snowmass2021 - Letter of Interest Synergy of astro-particle physics and collider physics Thematic Areas: (check all that apply /) (CF1) Dark Matter: Particle Like (CF2) Dark Matter: Wavelike (CF3) Dark Matter: Cosmic Probes (CF4) Dark Energy and Cosmic Acceleration: The Modern Universe (CF5) Dark Energy and Cosmic Acceleration: Cosmic Dawn and Before (CF6) Dark Energy and Cosmic Acceleration: Complementarity of Probes and New Facilities (CF7) Cosmic Probes of Fundamental Physics (Other) EF06, EF07, NF05, NF06,AF4 Contact Information: Luis A. Anchordoqui (City University of New York) [[email protected]] Authors: Rana Adhikari, Markus Ahlers, Michael Albrow, Roberto Aloisio, Luis A. Anchordoqui, Ignatios Anto- niadis, Vernon Barger, Jose Bellido Caceres, David Berge, Douglas R. Bergman, Mario E. Bertaina, Lorenzo Bonechi, Mauricio Bustamante, Karen S. Caballero-Mora, Antonella Castellina, Lorenzo Cazon, Ruben Conceic¸ao,˜ Giovanni Consolati, Olivier Deligny, Hans P. Dembinski, James B. Dent, Peter B. Denton, Car- ola Dobrigkeit, Caterina Doglioni, Ralph Engel, David d’Enterria, Ke Fang, Glennys R. Farrar, Jonathan L. Feng, Thomas K. Gaisser, Carlos Garc´ıa Canal, Claire Guepin, Francis Halzen, Tao Han, Andreas Haungs, Dan Hooper, Felix Kling, John Krizmanic, Greg Landsberg, Jean-Philippe Lansberg, John G. Learned, Paolo Lipari, Danny Marfatia, Jim Matthews, Thomas McCauley, Hiroaki Menjo, John W. Mitchell, Marco Stein Muzio, Jane M. Nachtman, Angela V. Olinto, Yasar Onel, Sandip Pakvasa, Sergio Palomares-Ruiz, Dan Parson, Thomas C. Paul, Tanguy Pierog, Mario Pimenta, Mary Hall Reno, Markus Roth, Grigory Rubtsov, Takashi Sako, Fred Sarazin, Bangalore Sathyaprakash, Sergio J. Sciutto, Dennis Soldin, Jorge F. Soriano, Todor Stanev, Xerxes Tata, Serap Tilav, Kirsten Tollefson, Diego F.
  • A Survey of the Physics Related to Underground Labs

    A Survey of the Physics Related to Underground Labs

    ANDES: A survey of the physics related to underground labs. Osvaldo Civitarese Dept.of Physics, University of La Plata and IFLP-CONICET ANDES/CLES working group ANDES: A survey of the physics related to underground labs. – p. 1 Plan of the talk The field in perspective The neutrino mass problem The two-neutrino and neutrino-less double beta decay Neutrino-nucleus scattering Constraints on the neutrino mass and WR mass from LHC-CMS and 0νββ Dark matter Supernovae neutrinos, matter formation Sterile neutrinos High energy neutrinos, GRB Decoherence Summary The field in perspective How the matter in the Universe was (is) formed ? What is the composition of Dark matter? Neutrino physics: violation of fundamental symmetries? The atomic nucleus as a laboratory: exploring physics at large scale. Neutrino oscillations Building neutrino flavor states from mass eigenstates νl = Uliνi i X Energy of the state m2c4 E ≈ pc + i i 2E Probability of survival/disappearance 2 ′ −i(Ei−Ep)t/h¯ ∗ P (νl → νl′ )= | δ(l, l )+ Ul′i(e − 1)Uli | 6 Xi=p 2 2 4 (mi −mp )c L provided 2Ehc¯ ≥ 1 Neutrino oscillations The existence of neutrino oscillations was demonstrated by experiments conducted at SNO and Kamioka. The Swedish Academy rewarded the findings with two Nobel Prices : Koshiba, Davis and Giacconi (2002) and Kajita and Mc Donald (2015) Some of the experiments which contributed (and still contribute) to the measurements of neutrino oscillation parameters are K2K, Double CHOOZ, Borexino, MINOS, T2K, Daya Bay. Like other underground labs ANDES will certainly be a good option for these large scale experiments.
  • Realization of the Low Background Neutrino Detector Double Chooz: from the Development of a High-Purity Liquid & Gas Handling Concept to first Neutrino Data

    Realization of the Low Background Neutrino Detector Double Chooz: from the Development of a High-Purity Liquid & Gas Handling Concept to first Neutrino Data

    Realization of the low background neutrino detector Double Chooz: From the development of a high-purity liquid & gas handling concept to first neutrino data Dissertation of Patrick Pfahler TECHNISCHE UNIVERSITAT¨ MUNCHEN¨ Physik Department Lehrstuhl f¨urexperimentelle Astroteilchenphysik / E15 Univ.-Prof. Dr. Lothar Oberauer Realization of the low background neutrino detector Double Chooz: From the development of high-purity liquid- & gas handling concept to first neutrino data Dipl. Phys. (Univ.) Patrick Pfahler Vollst¨andigerAbdruck der von der Fakult¨atf¨urPhysik der Technischen Universit¨atM¨unchen zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades eines Doktors des Naturwissenschaften (Dr. rer. nat) genehmigten Dissertation. Vorsitzender: Univ.-Prof. Dr. Alejandro Ibarra Pr¨uferder Dissertation: 1. Univ.-Prof. Dr. Lothar Oberauer 2. Priv.-Doz. Dr. Andreas Ulrich Die Dissertation wurde am 3.12.2012 bei der Technischen Universit¨atM¨unchen eingereicht und durch die Fakult¨atf¨urPhysik am 17.12.2012 angenommen. 2 Contents Contents i Introduction 1 I The Neutrino Disappearance Experiment Double Chooz 5 1 Neutrino Oscillation and Flavor Mixing 6 1.1 PMNS Matrix . 6 1.2 Flavor Mixing and Neutrino Oscillations . 7 1.2.1 Survival Probability of Reactor Neutrinos . 9 1.2.2 Neutrino Masses and Mass Hierarchy . 12 2 Reactor Neutrinos 14 2.1 Neutrino Production in Nuclear Power Cores . 14 2.2 Energy Spectrum of Reactor neutrinos . 15 2.3 Neutrino Flux Approximation . 16 3 The Double Chooz Experiment 19 3.1 The Double Chooz Collaboration . 19 3.2 Experimental Site: Commercial Nuclear Power Plant in Chooz . 20 3.3 Physics Program and Experimental Concept . 21 3.4 Signal . 23 3.4.1 The Inverse Beta Decay (IBD) .
  • The History of Neutrinos, 1930 − 1985

    The History of Neutrinos, 1930 − 1985

    The History of Neutrinos, 1930 − 1985. What have we Learned About Neutrinos? What have we Learned Using Neutrinos? J. Steinberger Prepared for “25th International Conference On Neutrino Physics and Astrophysics”, Kyoto (Japan), June 2012 1 2 3 4 The detector of the experiment of Conversi, Pancini and Piccioni, 1946, 5 which showed that the mesotron is not the Yukawa particle. Detector with 80 Geiger counters. The muon decay spectrum is continuous. My thesis experiment, under Fermi, which showed that the muon decays into two neutral particles, plus the electron. Fermi, myself and others, in 1954, at a summer school in Varenna, lake Como, a few months before Fermi’s untimely disappearance. 6 Demonstration of the Neutrino In 1956 Cowan and Reines detected antineutrinos from a nuclear reactor, reacting with protons in liquid scintillator which also contained cadmium, observing the positron as well as the scattering of the neutron on cadmium. 7 The Electron and Muon Neutrinos are Different. 1. G. Feinberg, 1958. 2. B. Pontecorvo, 1959. 3. M. Schwartz (T.D. Lee), 1959 4. Higher energy accelerators, Courant, Livingston and Snyder. Pontecorvo 8 9 A C B D Spark chamber and counter arrangement. A are triggering counters, Energy spectra of neutrinos B, C and D are anticoincidence counters from pion and kaon decays. 10 Event with penetrating muon and hadron shower 11 The group of the 2nd neutrino experiment in 1962: J.S., Goulianos, Gaillard, Mistry, Danby, technician whose name I have forgotten, Lederman and Schwartz. 12 Same group, 26 years later, at Nobel ceremony in Stockholm. 13 Discovery of partons, nucleon structure, scaling, in deep inelastic scattering of electrons on protons at SLAC in 1969.
  • Results in Neutrino Oscillations from Super-Kamiokande I

    Results in Neutrino Oscillations from Super-Kamiokande I

    Status of the RENO Reactor Neutrino Experiment RENO = Reactor Experiment for Neutrino Oscillation (For RENO Collaboration) K.K. Joo Chonnam National University February 15, 2011 Research Techniques Seminar @FNAL Outline Experiment Goals of the RENO Exp. - Short introduction - Expected q13 sensitivity - Systematic uncertainty Overview of the RENO Experiment - Experimental Setup of RENO - Schedule - Tunnel excavation - Status of detector construction - DAQ, data analysis tools Summary Brief History of Neutrinos 1930: Pauli postulated neutrino to explain b decay problem 1933: Fermi baptized the neutrino in his weak-interaction theory 1956: First discovery of neutrino by Reines & Cowan from reactor 1957: Neutrinos are left-handed by Glodhaber et al. 1962: Discovery of nm by Lederman et al. (Brookhaven Lab) 1974: Discovery of neutral currents due to neutrinos 1977: Tau lepton discovery by Perl et al. (SLAC) 1998: Atmospheric neutrino oscillation observed by Super-K 2000: nt discovery by DONUT (Fermilab) 2002: Solar neutrino oscillation observed by SNO and confirmed by Kamland What NEXT? Standard Model Neutrinos in SM Neutrino Oscillation . Three types of neutrinos exist & mixing among them Oscillation parameters (q12 , q23 , q13) Not measured yet . Elementary particles with almost no interactions . Almost massless: impossible to measure its mass Neutrino Mixing Parameters Matrix Components: νe Ue1 Ue2 Ue3 ν1 3 Angles (θ ; θ ; θ ) 12 13 23 ν U U U ν 1 CP phase (δ) μ μ1 μ2 μ3 2 2 Mass differences ντ Uτ1 Uτ2 Uτ3 ν3 1 0 0 c 0 s ei c s 0 13 13 12 12 U 0 c23 s23 0 1 0 s12 c12 0 i 0 s23 c23 s13e 0 c13 0 0 1 atmospheric SK, K2K The Next Big Thing? SNO, solar SK, KamLAND ≈ ≈ ° q23 qatm 45 q12 ≈qsol ≈ 32° Large and maximal mixing! Reduction of reactor neutrinos due to oscillations Disappearance Reactor neutrino disappearance Prob.
  • Measurement of the + ̅ Charged Current Inclusive Cross Section

    Measurement of the + ̅ Charged Current Inclusive Cross Section

    Measurement of the �! + �!̅ Charged Current Inclusive Cross Section on Argon in MicroBooNE Krishan Mistry on behalf of the MicroBooNE Collaboration 15 March 2021 New Directions in Neutrino-Nucleus Scattering (NDNN) NuSTEC Workshop ICARUS T600 MicroBooNE SBND Importance of the �!-Ar cross section • MicroBooNE + SBN Program + DUNE ⇥ Employ Liquid Argon Time Projection Chambers (LArTPCs) arXiv:1503.01520 [physics.ins-det] • Primary signal channel for these experiments is �!– Ar CC interactions arXiv:2002.03005 [hep-ex] 15 March 2021 K Mistry 2 Building a Picture of �! Interactions ArgoNeuT is the first A handful of measurements measurement made on on other nuclei in the argon hundred MeV to GeV range ⇥ Sample of 13 selected events Nuclear Physics B 133, 205 – 219 (1978) Phys. Rev. D 102, 011101(R) (2020) ⇥ Gargamelle Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 241803 (2014) ⇥ Phys. Rev. D 91, 112010 (2015) T2K J. High Energ. Phys. 2020, 114 (2020) ⇥ MINER�A Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 081802 (2016) !! " !! " Argon Other 15 March 2021 K Mistry 3 What are we measuring? ! /!̅ " # • Total �!+ �!̅ Charged Current (CC) ! ! $ /$ inclusive cross section • Signature: the neutrino event ? contains at least one electron-liKe shower Ar ⇥ No requirements on the presence (or absence) of any additional particle ⇥ Do not differentiate between �! and �!̅ Inclusive channel is the most straightforward channel to compare to predictions 15 March 2021 K Mistry 4 MicroBooNE • Measurement is performed • Features of a LArTPC using the MicroBooNE detector: LArTPC ⇥ Precise calorimetry ⇥ 4�
  • Super-Kamiokande Atmospheric Neutrino Analysis of Matter-Dependent Neutrino Oscillation Models

    Super-Kamiokande Atmospheric Neutrino Analysis of Matter-Dependent Neutrino Oscillation Models

    Super-Kamiokande Atmospheric Neutrino Analysis of Matter-Dependent Neutrino Oscillation Models Kiyoshi Keola Shiraishi A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Washington 2006 Program Authorized to Offer Degree: Physics University of Washington Graduate School This is to certify that I have examined this copy of a doctoral dissertation by Kiyoshi Keola Shiraishi and have found that it is complete and satisfactory in all respects, and that any and all revisions required by the final examining committee have been made. Chair of the Supervisory Committee: R. Jeffrey Wilkes Reading Committee: R. Jeffrey Wilkes Thompson Burnett Ann Nelson Cecilia Lunardini Date: In presenting this dissertation in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the doctoral degree at the University of Washington, I agree that the Library shall make its copies freely available for inspection. I further agree that extensive copying of this dissertation is allowable only for scholarly purposes, consistent with “fair use” as prescribed in the U.S. Copyright Law. Requests for copying or reproduction of this dissertation may be referred to Proquest Information and Learning, 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346, 1-800-521-0600, to whom the author has granted “the right to reproduce and sell (a) copies of the manuscript in microform and/or (b) printed copies of the manuscript made from microform.” Signature Date University of Washington Abstract Super-Kamiokande Atmospheric Neutrino Analysis of Matter-Dependent Neutrino Oscillation Models Kiyoshi Keola Shiraishi Chair of the Supervisory Committee: Professor R. Jeffrey Wilkes Physics Current data finds that the atmospheric neutrino anomaly is best explained with ν µ − ντ neutrino oscillations.
  • Letter of Interest Forthcoming Science from The

    Letter of Interest Forthcoming Science from The

    Snowmass2021 - Letter of Interest Forthcoming Science from the PROSPECT-I Data Set Neutrino Frontier Topical Groups: (NF02) Sterile neutrinos (NF03) Beyond the Standard Model (NF07) Applications (NF09) Artificial neutrino sources Contact Information: Nathaniel Bowden (LLNL) [[email protected]] Karsten Heeger (Yale University) [[email protected]] Pieter Mumm (NIST) [[email protected]] M. Andriamirado,6 A. B. Balantekin,16 H. R. Band,17 C. D. Bass,8 D. E. Bergeron,10 D. Berish,13 N. S. Bowden,7 J. P.Brodsky,7 C. D. Bryan,11 R. Carr,9 T. Classen,7 A. J. Conant,4 G. Deichert,11 M. V.Diwan,2 M. J. Dolinski,3 A. Erickson,4 B. T. Foust,17 J. K. Gaison,17 A. Galindo-Uribarri,12, 14 C. E. Gilbert,12, 14 C. Grant,1 B. T. Hackett,12, 14 S. Hans,2 A. B. Hansell,13 K. M. Heeger,17 D. E. Jaffe,2 X. Ji,2 D. C. Jones,13 O. Kyzylova,3 C. E. Lane,3 T. J. Langford,17 J. LaRosa,10 B. R. Littlejohn,6 X. Lu,12, 14 J. Maricic,5 M. P.Mendenhall,7 A. M. Meyer,5 R. Milincic,5 I. Mitchell,5 P.E. Mueller,12 H. P.Mumm,10 J. Napolitano,13 C. Nave,3 R. Neilson,3 J. A. Nikkel,17 D. Norcini,17 S. Nour,10 J. L. Palomino,6 D. A. Pushin,15 X. Qian,2 E. Romero-Romero,12, 14 R. Rosero,2 P.T. Surukuchi,17 M. A. Tyra,10 R. L. Varner,12 D. Venegas-Vargas,12, 14 P.B.
  • 3.5 Neutrinos Mx

    3.5 Neutrinos Mx

    news feature On the trail of the neutrino Huge arrays of detectors now have these ghostly particles CHAMBERS NEUTRINO OBSERVATORY/R. SUDBURY in their sights — but will what they see lead physicists to rethink the standard model? Dan Falk investigates. n the subatomic zoo, few particles are as elusive as the neutrino. The Universe is Iawash with them, but they slide through most forms of matter with ease. Billions have passed through your body since you started reading this article. By one estimate, the average neutrino could travel for 1,000 light-years through solid matter before being stopped. This reluctance to interact with matter makes neutrinos difficult to detect. But, almost half a century after they were first spotted, neutrinos have become the focus of intense study. Exciting results from existing detectors, together with plans for new detec- tor projects, promise to make this a busy decade for neutrino hunters. The Sudbury Neutrino Observatory (SNO) in Ontario is poised to illuminate the physics of neutrinos produced by the Sun, and a new detector in Antarctica is making Full house: the detector at Sudbury Neutrino Observatory can detect all three flavours of neutrino. progress towards studying neutrinos from deep space — a first step towards building a particles. The last of the three flavours to be neutrons or electrons it governs. Physicists larger astrophysical neutrino observatory. detected was the tau neutrino, finally snared maximize their chances of observing these Other detectors in North America, Europe last year in an experiment at the Tevatron rare interactions by monitoring huge num- and Japan are catching neutrinos produced accelerator in Fermilab, near Chicago1.