DOCSLIB.ORG

Accelerator-Based Neutrinos Lecture 1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Accelerator-Based Neutrinos Lecture 1 Accelerator-based neutrinos Lecture 1 Kendall Mahn 26/08/2015, INSS K.Mahn, Acc-nu sources 1 Neutrino sources The Sun (fusion) GalacGc and Our atmosphere extra-galacGc sources (e.g SN) RadioacGve Accelerators decays Reactors 26/08/2015, INSS K.Mahn, Acc-nu sources 2 Neutrino sources The Sun (fusion) GalacGc and Our atmosphere extra-galacGc sources (e.g SN) At solar neutrino energies, mean free path through lead is 1 light year Making precision neutrino measurements require enormous detectors and intense sources RadioacGve Accelerator-driven neutrino beams are one such method Accelerators decays Reactors 26/08/2015, INSS K.Mahn, Acc-nu sources 3 Physics of accelerator based ν experiments Neutrino oscillaon • Measurements of neutrino mixing parameters • Nonstandard neutrino mixing Electroweak tests • Lorentz violaon 2 • Measurement of sin θW • Discovery of νµ, ντ Neutrino interacGons • Charged current interacGons • Neutral current interacGons • Deep inelasGc scaering • Structure funcGons Detector R&D 26/08/2015, INSS K.Mahn, Acc-nu sources 4 Physics of accelerator based ν experiments Neutrino oscillaon K2K, MINOS, T2K, NOvA • Measurements of neutrino mixing parameters OPERA (& ICARUS) • Nonstandard neutrino mixing LSND, Karmen, MiniBooNE, MicroBooNE CHORUS, NOMAD Electroweak tests • Lorentz violaon CCFR, CDHS, NuTeV 2 • Measurement of sin θW Gargamelle, DONUT • Discovery of νµ, ντ CHARM Neutrino interacGons • Charged current interacGons ANL, BNL bubble chamber • Neutral current interacGons experiments • Deep inelasGc scaering SciBooNE, MINERvA • Structure funcGons COHERENT, CONNIE Detector R&D Incomplete list of experiments; later lectures will ArgoNeuT cover future and proposed experiments PEANUT Most experiments cover mul;ple physics topics 26/08/2015, INSS K.Mahn, Acc-nu sources 5 Physics of accelerator based ν experiments Neutrino oscillaon K2K, MINOS, T2K, NOvA • Measurements of neutrino mixing parameters OPERA (& ICARUS) • Nonstandard neutrino mixing LSND, Karmen, MiniBooNE, MicroBooNE Focus for this set of talks CHORUS, NOMAD Electroweak tests • Lorentz violaon CCFR, CDHS, NuTeV 2 • Measurement of sin θW Gargamelle, DONUT • Discovery of νµ, ντ CHARM Neutrino interacGons Neutrino cross secGons covered by K. McFarland • Charged current interacGons ANL, BNL bubble chamber • Neutral current interacGons experiments • Deep inelasGc scaering SciBooNE, MINERvA • Structure funcGons COHERENT, CONNIE Detector R&D Neutrino detecGon techniques covered by K. Scholberg ArgoNeuT PEANUT 26/08/2015, INSS K.Mahn, Acc-nu sources 6 Open quesGons about neutrino mixing Open questions in neutrino mixing # νe & #Ue1 Ue2 Ue3 & # ν1 & Flavor eigenstates % ( % ( % ( Mass eigenstates (coupling to the W) νµ = Uµ1 Uµ2 Uµ 3 ν2 (definite mass) % ( % ( % ( $ ντ ' $Uτ1 Uτ 2 Uτ 3 ' $ν3 ' Unitary PMNS mixing matrix Three observed flavors of neutrinos (νe, νµ , ντ) means U is represented by three independent mixing angles (θ , θ , θ ) and a CP-violang phase δ 12 23 13 Measurements by accelerator-based experiments Is θ23 mixing maximal (θ23=46°±3°) Is there CP viola;on (non- PDG2014 PDG2014 zero δ?) 26/08/2015, INSS K.Mahn, Acc-nu sources 7 Open quesGons about neutrino mixing Open questions in neutrino mixing 3 2 Δm 32 > 0 2 2 2 Δmij = mi − m j 2 2 Δm 21 1 2 Neutrino mass squared (m€ i ) Neutrino oscillaon measurements are sensiGve to the interference of the mass eigenstates (Δm2) Two observed mass “splings”, determined from atmospheric/accelerator and solar/reactor neutrino experiments, respecGvely 2 2 -3 2 § Δm (atmospheric) = |Δm 32|~ 2.4 x 10 eV 2 2 -5 2 § Δm (solar) = Δm 21 ~ 7.6 x 10 eV 26/08/2015, INSS K.Mahn, Acc-nu sources 8 Open quesGons about neutrino mixing Open questions in neutrino mixing 3 2 2 Δm 21 2 Δm 32 > 0 1 m2 2 Δ 32 < 0 2 Δm 21 1 3 2 Neutrino mass squared (mi ) 2 The sign of Δm 32, or the “mass hierarchy” is sGll unknown 2 § Normal “hierarchy” is like quarks (m1 is lightest, Δm 32 >0 ) 2 § Inverted hierarchy has m3 lightest (Δm 32 <0) What is the mass hierarchy? 26/08/2015, INSS K.Mahn, Acc-nu sources 9 Oscillaon probabiliGes Oscillation probabilities 2 2 |Δm 32| >> Δm 21, producing high frequency and low frequency oscillaon terms ( 1.27Δm2 L + ( 2.54Δm2 L+ P 4 Re U U * U * U sin2 ij 2 Im U U * U * U sin ij αβ = δαβ − ∑ [ βi αi βj αj ] * - + ∑ [ βi αi βj αj ] * - i> j ) E , i> j ) E , 2 2 2 If choose L, E, such that sin (Δm 32L/E) is of order 1, then Δm 21 terms will be € small. Then... ν “disappear’’ into ν , ν µ e τ ( 1.27 m2 L + 2 2 Δ 32 P(νµ → ν µ ) ≅ 1− sin 2θ23 sin * - ) E , A small amount of νe will “appear’’ 2 2 Δm 31 ~ Δm 32 € 2 2 2 2 ' 1.27Δm31L * P(νµ → νe ) ≅ sin 2θ13 sin θ23 sin ) , ( E + Only leading order terms shown 26/08/2015, INSS K.Mahn, Acc-nu sources 10 € Accelerator-basedAccelerator based neutrino neutrino sources sources 95m Decay region Neutrino beam π+ 30 GeV Carbon 3 MagneGc Pions and kaons Beam Proton beam Target focusing decay to neutrinos dump ``horns” To measure νµ disappearance, and νe appearance requires a νµ source* § Atmospheric neutrinos include both νe and νµ from producon § Accelerator based beams are pure νµ from a proton -> meson -> decay chain: § Typically >99.9% νµ § ProducGon of neutrinos is “known”, scalable with accelerator improvements § Also possible to create anGneutrino source *There are other ways to probe oscilla;on physics with intense sources, more later 26/08/2015, INSS K.Mahn, Acc-nu sources 11 Oscillaon probabiliGes Oscillation probabilities νµ to νe appearance probability expansion: E A =2 √2G N ν F e ∆m2 32 Key players: 2 -3 2 § |Δm 32|~ 2.4 x 10 eV (atmospheric mass spling) § Mixing angles: θ12, θ23, θ13 Approxima;on from § CP-violang phase δCP M. Freund, PRD 64, 053003 Neutrinos vs. anneutrinos probability depends on δCP, mass hierarchy (sign 2 of Δm 32 ) • Mass hierarchy is determined through energy dependence of νe, νµ interacGons in maer (maer effects, A terms) 26/08/2015, INSS K.Mahn, Acc-nu sources 12 Oscillaon probabiliGes Oscillation probabilities νµ to νe appearance probability expansion: E A =2 √2G N ν F e ∆m2 32 Key players: 2 -3 2 § |Δm 32|~ 2.4 x 10 eV (atmospheric mass spling) § Mixing angles: θ12, θ23, θ13 Approxima;on from § CP-violang phase Subleading terms of δCPνµ to νe appearance depend on δCP, mass hierarchy, but interpretaon requires precision measurements of: M. Freund, PRD 64, 053003 Δm2 , θ (disappearance) and Δm2 , θ and θ Neutrinos vs. anneutrinos probability depends on 32 23 21 δ12CP, mass hierarchy13 (sign 2 of Δm 32 ) Measurements of νµ to νe (and νµ to νe ) appearance are sensi;ve to • Mass hierarchy is determined through energy dependence of currently unknown physics νe, νµ interacGons in maer (maer effects, A terms) 26/08/2015, INSS K.Mahn, Acc-nu sources 13 Oscillation probabilities 2 2 2 ( 1.27Δm32 L + P(νµ → ν µ ) ≅ 1− sin 2θ23 sin * - ) E , 2 2 Measure: Δm 32 and sin 2θ23 Experimental controls: § Fix beam energy (E) € § Place a detector at L, the (first) oscillaon maximum Why not place two detectors, one at L and one at 2L? P(ν ) µ Flux decreases as 1/L2: Osc maximum Event rate scales with flux: N = Φ x σ x ε P(ν ) ξ Event rate is (currently) too small 26/08/2015, INSS K.Mahn, Acc-nu sources KARMEN website graphic 14 Long baseline experiments 2 2 2 ( 1.27Δm32 L + P(νµ → ν µ ) ≅ 1− sin 2θ23 sin * - +... ) E , Unknown road to Unknown road - Google Maps http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&tab=wl Δm2 ~3x10-3 eV2, want sin2(Δm2 L/E) to be of order 1 32 To see all the details that are visible on the screen, use the "Print" link next to the map. Tokai To € Kamioka (T2K) experiment: MINOS experiment: Eν(peak) ~0. 6GeV, L=295km Eν(peak) ~3 GeV, L=735km First part of lecture: What are the physics results from long baseline experiments? ©2011 Google - Imagery ©2011 TerraMetrics - 26/08/2015, INSS K.Mahn, Acc-nu sources 15 1 of 1 4/23/11 10:27 AM Accelerator-basedThe Tokai-to- Kamiokaexperiment experiment example: T2K The physics so far: νµ to νe (and νµ to νe) appearance: § Discovery of νe appearance (2013) § Search for presence of appearance Neutrino flux at SK with anGneutrinos; necessary step (no oscillaon) toward future CPV searches νµ, νµ disappearance: § World’s best measurement of θ23 § With anGneutrinos: test of NSI or CPT theorem 26/08/2015, INSS K.Mahn, Acc-nu sources 16 νµ disappearance at T2K For a fixed baseline (L=295km) 2 2 2 ( 1.27Δm32 L + oscillaon probabiliGes depend on P(νµ → ν µ ) ≅ 1− sin 2θ23 sin * - +... ) E , the neutrino energy Eν 2 2 Data Extract Δm , sin θ23 from observed 60 change in overall rate and spectrum MC€ Unoscillated Spectrum 40 MC Best Fit Spectrum § Energy esGmated using lepton NC MC Prediction Events/0.10 GeV momentum, angle and assumed 20 CCQE kinematcs 0 0 2 4 > 5 PRD 91, 072010 (2015) Reconstructed ν Energy (GeV) 10 1 10−1 10−2 0 2 4 > 5 Osc. to unosc Events/0.1 GeV Reconstructed ν Energy (GeV) 26/08/2015, INSS K.Mahn, Acc-nu sources 17 T2K observed event distributions) 4 /c 2 T2K data favors maximal disappearance 3.2 eV -3 § Provides best constraint on θ to date, SK joint OA 23 (10 3 consistent with maximal (45°) mixing 2 32 m ∆ 2.8 T2K joint OA 2.6 2.4 2.2 MINOS joint OA 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65 0.7 ) 4 -2 /c 2 eV -3 -2.2 MINOS joint OA (10 2 32 PRD 91, 072010 (2015) m -2.4 ∆ -2.6 -2.8 T2K joint OA -3 SK joint OA 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65 0.7 2 sin θ23 26/08/2015, INSS 18 K.Mahn, Acc-nu sources T2K observed event distributions) 4 /c 2 T2K data favors maximal disappearance 3.2 eV -3 § Provides best constraint on θ to date, SK joint OA 23 (10 3 consistent with maximal (45°) mixing 2 32 m ∆ § Atmospheric measurements also 2.8 T2K joint OA important (SK, IceCube) 2.6 Best constraint on mass spling from MINOS experiment 2.4 • Energy uses lepton and hadronic state 2.2 MINOS joint OA 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55 0.6 0.65 0.7 ) 4 -2 /c 2 eV -3 -2.2 MINOS joint OA (10 2 32 PRD 91, 072010 (2015) m -2.4 ∆ -2.6 -2.8 T2K joint OA -3 SK joint OA Phys.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Arxiv:1812.08768V2 [Hep-Ph] 3 Dec 2019
    IPPP/18/113/FERMILAB-PUB-18-686-A-ND-PPD-T Testing New Physics Explanations of MiniBooNE Anomaly at Neutrino Scattering Experiments 1, 2, 3, Carlos A. Argüelles, ∗ Matheus Hostert, y and Yu-Dai Tsai z 1Dept. of Physics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA 2Institute for Particle Physics Phenomenology, Department of Physics, Durham University, South Road, Durham DH1 3LE, United Kingdom 3Fermilab, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Batavia, IL 60510, USA (Dated: December 5, 2019) Heavy neutrinos with additional interactions have recently been proposed as an explanation to the MiniBooNE excess. These scenarios often rely on marginally boosted particles to explain the excess angular spectrum, thus predicting large rates at higher-energy neutrino-electron scattering experiments. We place new constraints on this class of models based on neutrino-electron scattering sideband measurements performed at MINERνA and CHARM-II. A simultaneous explanation of the angular and energy distributions of the MiniBooNE excess in terms of heavy neutrinos with light mediators is severely constrained by our analysis. In general, high-energy neutrino-electron scattering experiments provide strong constraints on explanations of the MiniBooNE observation involving light mediators. Introduction – Non-zero neutrino masses have been the experiment has observed an excess of νe-like events established in the last twenty years by measurements of that is currently in tension with the standard three- neutrino flavor conversion in natural and human-made neutrino prediction and is beyond statistical doubt at the sources, including long- and short-baseline experiments. 4:7σ level [5]. While it is possible that the excess is fully The overwhelming majority of data supports the three- or partially due to systematic uncertainties or SM back- neutrino framework.
    [Show full text]
  • Book of Abstracts
    12th International Neutrino Summer School 2019 Monday 05 August 2019 - Friday 16 August 2019 Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory Book of Abstracts Contents Intro to Group Exercises .................................... 1 Neutrinos and nuclear non-proliferation ........................... 1 INSS2019 welcome and introduction .............................. 1 Solar and Reactor Neutrino Experiments ........................... 1 Precise Measurement of Reactor Antineutrino Oscillation Parameters and Fuel-dependent Variation of Antineutrino Yield and Spectrum at RENO ................. 1 Using Convolutional Neural Networks to Reconstruct Dead Channels in MicroBooNE . 1 Origin and Nature of Neutrino Mass I ............................. 2 Introduction to Leptogenesis .................................. 2 Origin and Nature of Neutrino Mass II ............................ 2 Direct Neutrino Mass Measurements ............................. 2 Neutrinoless Double-beta Decay Experiments ........................ 2 Neutrino Beams and Fluxes .................................. 3 Lepton-Nucleus Cross Section Theory ............................. 3 Neutrino Cross Section Experiments ............................. 3 Origin and Nature of Neutrino Mass III ............................ 3 Particle Astrophysics with High-Energy Neutrinos ..................... 3 Neutrino Detection II ...................................... 3 Phenomenology of Atmospheric and Accelerator Neutrinos ................ 3 Tau neutrinos and upward-going air showers: stochastic versus continuous
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Miniboone Anomaly and Nuclear Physics 4
    1. MiniBooNE 2. Beam 3. Detector MiniBooNE Anomaly and Nuclear physics 4. Oscillation 5. Discussion PRL121(2018)221801 outline 1. MiniBooNE neutrino experiment 2. Nucleon correlations 3. Pion puzzle 4. NC single photon production 5. Conclusions Teppei Katori Queen Mary University of London ECT* workshop, Trento, Italy, April 15, 2019 Teppei Katori, [email protected] 15/04/19 1 1. MiniBooNE 2. Beam 3. Detector 4. Oscillation 5. Discussion 1. MiniBooNE neutrino experiment 2. Nucleon correlations 3. Pion puzzle 4. NC single photon production 5. Discussions Teppei Katori, [email protected] 15/04/19 2 1. MiniBooNE 2. Beam 3. Detector 4. Oscillation 5. Discussion Teppei Katori, [email protected] 15/04/19 3 1. MiniBooNE 2. Beam 3. Detector 4. Oscillation 5. Discussion The most visible particle physics result of the year Teppei Katori, [email protected] 15/04/19 4 https://physics.aps.org/articles/v11/122 PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS 120, 141802 (2018) signature of dark matter annihilation in the Sun [5,6]. 1. MiniBooNE Despite the importance of the KDAR neutrino, it has never MiniBooNE 2. Beam been isolated and identified. 3. Detector 86 m 4. Oscillation In the charged current (CC) interaction of a 236 MeV νμ background KDAR 12 − NuMI 5. Discussion (νμ C → μ X), the muon kinetic energy (Tμ) and closely beam decay pipe related neutrino-nucleus energy transfer (ω E − E ) horns ν μ target distributions are of particular interest for benchmarking¼ absorber neutrino interaction models and generators, which report widely varying predictions for kinematics at these tran- 5 m 675 m sition-region energies [7–14].
    [Show full text]
  • Design and Construction of the Microboone Detector
    BNL-113631-2017-JA Design and Construction of the MicroBooBE Detector The MicroBooNE Collaboration Submitted to Journal of Instrumentation January 17, 2017 Physics Department Brookhaven National Laboratory U.S. Department of Energy USDOE Office of Science (SC), High Energy Physics (HEP) (SC-25) Notice: This manuscript has been co-authored by employees of Brookhaven Science Associates, LLC under Contract No. DE-SC0012704 with the U.S. Department of Energy. The publisher by accepting the manuscript for publication acknowledges that the United States Government retains a non-exclusive, paid-up, irrevocable, world-wide license to publish or reproduce the published form of this manuscript, or allow others to do so, for United States Government purposes. DISCLAIMER This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, nor any of their contractors, subcontractors, or their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or any third party’s use or the results of such use of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof or its contractors or subcontractors. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof.
    [Show full text]
  • Status of the Opera Experiment∗
    Vol. 37 (2006) ACTA PHYSICA POLONICA B No 7 STATUS OF THE OPERA EXPERIMENT ∗ R. Zimmermann on behalf of the OPERA Collaboration Institut für Experimentalphysik, Universität Hamburg D-22761 Hamburg, Germany (Received May 15, 2006) In this article the physics motivation and the detector design of the OPERA experiment will be reviewed. The construction status of the de- tector, which will be situated in the CNGS beam from CERN to the Gran Sasso laboratory, will be reported. A survey on the physics performance will be given and the physics plan in 2006 will be presented. PACS numbers: 14.60.Pq 1. Introduction The CNGS project is designed to search for the νµ ντ oscillation in the parameter region indicated by the SuperKamiokande,↔ Macro and Soudan2 atmospheric neutrino analysis [1–3]. The main goal is to find ντ appearance by direct detection of the τ from ντ CC interactions. One will also search for the subleading νµ νe oscillations, which could be observed if θ13 is close to the present limit↔ from CHOOZ [4] and PaloVerde [5]. In order to reach these goals a νµ beam will be sent from CERN to Gran Sasso. In the Gran Sasso laboratory, the OPERA experiment (CNGS1) is under construction. At the distance of L = 732 km between the CERN and the Gran Sasso laboratory the νµ flux of the beam is optimized to yield a maximum num- ber of CC ντ interactions at Gran Sasso. With a mean beam energy of E = 17 GeV the contamination with ν¯µ is around 2% and with νe (ν¯e) is less than 1%.
    [Show full text]
  • The Hunt for Sub-Gev Dark Matter at Neutrino Facilities: a Survey of Past and Present Experiments
    Prepared for submission to JHEP The hunt for sub-GeV dark matter at neutrino facilities: a survey of past and present experiments Luca Buonocore,a;b Claudia Frugiuele,c;d Patrick deNivervillee;f aDipartimento di Fisica, Università di Napoli Federico II and INFN, Sezione di Napoli, I-80126 Napoli, Italy bPhysik Institut, Universität Zürich, CH-8057 Zürich, Switzerland cCERN, Theoretical Physics Departments, Geneva, Switzerland dINFN, Sezione di Milano, Via Celoria 16, I-20133 Milano, Italy. eCenter for Theoretical Physics of the Universe, IBS, Daejeon 34126, Korea f T2, Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), Los Alamos, NM, USA E-mail: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Abstract: We survey the sensitivity of past and present neutrino experiments to MeV-GeV scale vector portal dark matter and find that these experiments possess novel sensitivity that has not yet fully explored. Taking αD = 0:1 and a dark photon to dark matter mass ratio of three, the combined recast of previous analyses of BEBC and a projection of NOνA’s sensitivity are found to rule out the scalar thermal target for dark matter masses between 10 MeV to 100 MeV with existing data, while CHARM-II and MINERνA place somewhat weaker limits. These limits can be dramatically improved by off-axis searches using the NuMI beamline and the MicroBooNE, MiniBooNE or ICARUS detectors, and can even begin to probe the Majorana thermal target. We conclude that past and present neutrino facilities can search for light dark matter concurrently with their neutrino program and reach a competitive sensitivity to proposed future experiments.
    [Show full text]
  • Search for Electron Neutrinos in Multiple Topologies with the Microboone Experiment
    Search for Electron Neutrinos in Multiple Topologies with the MicroBooNE Experiment MICROBOONE-NOTE-1085-PUB The MicroBooNE Collaboration June 23, 2020 Abstract This note presents the status of the measurement of electron neutrinos from the Fermilab Booster Neutrino Beamline (BNB) with the MicroBooNE experiment. The analysis is aimed at investigating the nature of the low energy excess of electromagnetic activity observed by the MiniBooNE experiment. The νe event selection relies on topological and calorimetric information to characterise particles produced in these interactions, leveraging the Pandora multi-algorithm reconstruction framework as well as custom particle identification and pattern recognition tools. Results presented in this note use 5:88 × 1020 protons on target of data collected between 2015 and 2018. These include the performance of particle identification tools for µ/p and e/γ separation, along with electromagnetic shower calibration with the largest sample of π0 events measured on argon. Progress towards the completion of this analysis is shown through the measurement of high-energy charged-current νe interactions and their kinematic distributions using both inclusive (1eX) and exclusive (1e0p0π and 1eNp0π) channels. Measurements of charged-current νµ interactions aimed at constraining flux and cross-section systematic uncertainties are also shown. We present the analysis' preliminary sensitivity of an electron-like signal hypothesis to the MiniBooNE excess which includes flux, cross-section, and detector systematic uncertainties. 1 Contents 1 Introduction 3 2 Analysis Approach3 3 Event Reconstruction and Analysis Tools4 4 Electron Neutrino Event Selection7 5 Muon Neutrino Constraint, Systematics, and Analysis Sensitivity 13 6 Selected Electron Neutrinos at High Energy 15 7 Conclusions 16 A Measuring Electron Neutrinos with Particle Identification in the MicroBooNE LArTPC for sensitivity to new Physics 17 B Charged-Current Electron Neutrino Measurement with the MicroBooNE De- tector 20 B.1 Electron identification..................................
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Icecube Sterile Neutrino Searches
    EPJ Web of Conferences 207, 04005 (2019) https://doi.org/10.1051/epjconf/201920704005 VLVnT-2018 IceCube Sterile Neutrino Searches 1, B.J.P. Jones ∗ For the IceCube Collaboration 1University of Texas at Arlington, 108 Science Hall, 502 Yates St, Arlington, TX Abstract. Anomalies in short baseline experiments have been interpreted as evidence for additional neutrino mass states with large mass splittings from the known, active flavors. This explanation mandates a corresponding signa- ture in the muon neutrino disappearance channel, which has yet to be observed. Searches for muon neutrino disappearance at the IceCube neutrino telescope presently provide the strongest limits in the space of mixing angles for eV- scale sterile neutrinos. This proceeding for the Very Large Volume Neutrino Telescopes (VLVnT) Workshop summarizes the IceCube analyses that have searched for sterile neutrinos and describes ongoing work toward enhanced, high-statistics sterile neutrino searches. 1 Introduction Sterile neutrinos are hypothetical particles that have been invoked to explain anomalies in short baseline accelerator decay-at-rest [1] and decay-in-flight experiments [2], reactor neu- trino fluxes [3, 4] and radioactive source experiments [5]. In low-energy, short baseline exper- iments that are sensitive to νe appearance, matter effects can be neglected and an oscillation of the form: 2 2 2 ∆m L Pν ν = sin 2θµe sin (1) µ→ e 4E is predicted. A large ∆m2 thus introduces an oscillation at a small characteristic L/E, with 2 the effective mixing parameter, sin 2θµe governing the amplitude of oscillation. To introduce flavor-change at similar L/E as exhibited in the MiniBooNE and LSND experiments, mixing 2 3 parameters sin 2θµe of 10− or larger are required, with favored parameter space in the one- to-few eV2 mass splittings.
    [Show full text]
  • Determination of the Νµ-Spectrum of the CNGS Neutrino Beam by Studying Muon Events in the OPERA Experiment
    Determination of the νµ-spectrum of the CNGS neutrino beam by studying muon events in the OPERA experiment Diplomarbeit der Philosophisch-naturwissenschaftlichen Fakultät der Universität Bern vorgelegt von Claudia Borer 2008 Leiter der Arbeit: Prof. Dr. Urs Moser Laboratorium für Hochenergiephysik Contents Introduction 1 1 Neutrino Physics 3 1.1 History of the Neutrino . 3 1.2 The Standard Model of particles and interactions . 6 1.3 Beyond the Standard Model . 12 1.3.1 Sources for neutrinos . 14 1.3.2 Two avour neutrino oscillation in vacuum . 14 1.3.3 Three avour neutrino oscillation in vacuum . 17 1.3.4 Neutrino oscillation in matter . 20 2 The OPERA experiment 23 2.1 Expected physics performance . 24 2.1.1 Signal detection eciency . 24 2.1.2 Expected background . 25 2.1.3 Sensitivity to νµ → ντ oscillations . 26 2.2 The CNGS neutrino beam . 27 2.3 The OPERA detector . 28 2.3.1 Emulsion target . 29 2.3.2 The Target Tracker . 31 2.3.3 The muon spectrometers . 33 2.3.4 The veto system . 35 2.3.5 Data acquisition system (DAQ) . 37 3 Analysis methods 39 3.1 Kalman ltering . 39 3.2 Monte Carlo samples . 42 3.3 Producing histogramms . 46 3.4 Unfolding method based on Bayes' Theorem . 47 i ii CONTENTS 4 Physical results 51 Conclusion 57 A Two avour neutrino oscillation in vacuum 59 Acknowledgement 61 List of Figures 63 List of Tables 65 Bibliography 67 Introduction The Standard Model (SM) of particles and interactions successfully describes particle physics. In the last years growing evidence has been established, indicating that the SM must be extended to possibly include new physics.
    [Show full text]