Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
  • Open Access

Measurement of electron neutrino and antineutrino cross sections at low momentum transfer

S. Henry et al. (The MINERvA Collaboration)
Phys. Rev. D 109, 092008 – Published 13 May 2024
PDFHTMLExport Citation
Abstract
Authors
Article Text
  • INTRODUCTION
  • MINERVA EXPERIMENT AND NUMI BEAM LINE
  • NEUTRINO INTERACTION SIMULATION
  • ELECTRON RECONSTRUCTION AND…
  • BACKGROUNDS AND CONTROL SAMPLES
  • SEPARATION OF νe AND ν¯e EVENTS
  • MEASUREMENT OF DIFFERENTIAL CROSS…
  • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    • References

    Abstract

    Accelerator based neutrino oscillation experiments seek to measure the relative number of electron and muon (anti)neutrinos at different L/E values. However high statistics studies of neutrino interactions are almost exclusively measured using muon (anti)neutrinos since the dominant flavor of neutrinos produced by accelerator based beams are of the muon type. This work reports new measurements of electron (anti)neutrinos interactions in hydrocarbon, obtained by strongly suppressing backgrounds initiated by muon flavor (anti)neutrinos. Double differential cross sections as a function of visible energy transfer, Eavail, and transverse momentum transfer, pT, or three momentum transfer, q3 are presented.

    • Figure
    • Figure
    • Figure
    • Figure
    • Figure
    • Figure
    • Figure
    25 More
    • Received 27 December 2023
    • Accepted 14 March 2024

    DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.109.092008

    Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI. Funded by SCOAP3.

    Published by the American Physical Society

    Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

    1. Research Areas
    Neutrino interactions
    Particles & Fields

    Authors & Affiliations

    Click to Expand

    Article Text

    Click to Expand

    References

    Click to Expand
    Issue

    Vol. 109, Iss. 9 — 1 May 2024

    Reuse & Permissions
    Author publication services for translation and copyediting assistance advertisement

    Authorization Required

    Log In
    Other Options
    ×

    Images

    • Figure 1
      Figure 1

      Flux predictions for FHC mode (Left) and RHC mode (Right). The contributions from all neutrino types are shown for each beam mode.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 2
      Figure 2

      RHC mean dE/dX distribution.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 3
      Figure 3

      Graphic description of upstream inline energy. Upstream inline energy is defined as the energy deposited inside a backward oriented 7.5° cone with its apex emanating from the interaction vertex.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 4
      Figure 4

      Representation of signal and sideband regions with respective cuts. The “excess” sideband has been subdivided into low and high upstream inline energy.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 5
      Figure 5

      Prebackground tuned FHC (top) and RHC (bottom) pT distribution for the incoherent π0 sideband (dE/dx>2.4  MeV/cm, ψ*Ee>0.5  GeV).

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 6
      Figure 6

      Postbackground tuned pT FHC (top) and RHC (bottom) distribution for the incoherent π0 sideband (dE/dx>2.4  MeV/cm, ψ*Ee>0.5  GeV).

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 7
      Figure 7

      Prebackground tuned pT FHC (top) and RHC (bottom) pT distribution for the coherent π0 (low UIE) sideband (dE/dx>2.4  MeV/cm, ψ*Ee<0.5  GeV, Euie<10  MeV).

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 8
      Figure 8

      Postbackground tuned pT FHC (top) and RHC (bottom) pT distribution for the coherent π0 (low UIE) sideband (dE/dx>2.4  MeV/cm, ψ*Ee<0.5  GeV, Euie<10  MeV).

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 9
      Figure 9

      Prebackground tuned FHC (top) and RHC (bottom) pT distribution for the diffractive π0 (high UIE) sideband (dE/dx>2.4  MeV/cm, ψ*Ee<0.5  GeV, Euie>10  MeV).

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 10
      Figure 10

      Postbackground tuned FHC (top) and RHC (bottom) pT distribution for the diffractive π0 (high UIE) sideband (dE/dx>2.4  MeV/cm, ψ*Ee<0.5  GeV, Euie>10  MeV). The disagreement in FHC, as a result of tension between this region and the incoherent π0 sideband, is discussed in the text.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 11
      Figure 11

      The high UIE sideband in FHC: demonstration of the tension in the tuning, and the alternate scenarios considered for (top) the coherent π0 (low UIE) sideband, (middle) the diffractive π0 (high UIE) sideband, and (bottom) the incoherent π0 sideband.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 12
      Figure 12

      RHC energy outside of electron candidate cone and vertex region in the diffractive π0 (high UIE) sideband region of dE/dx >2.4  MeV/cm, ψ*Ee<0.5  GeV, Euie>10  MeV.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 13
      Figure 13

      RHC upstream inline energy in the diffractive π0 (high UIE) sideband region of dE/dx >2.4  MeV/cm, ψ*Ee<0.5  GeV, Euie>10  MeV.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 14
      Figure 14

      Postbackground tuned FHC (top) and RHC (bottom) pT distribution for the signal region of dE/dx<2.4  MeV/cm.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 15
      Figure 15

      Ratio of RHC/FHC νe in true neutrino energy.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 16
      Figure 16

      Neutrino energy estimator vs true neutrino energy in RHC.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 17
      Figure 17

      The top (bottom) plots show the scaled RHC (FHC) prediction for the electron antineutrino background to the FHC sample (electron neutrino background to the RHC sample) compared to the prediction for pT<1.6 GeV/c.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 18
      Figure 18

      ν¯e efficiency for Eavail vs q3 distribution.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 19
      Figure 19

      ν¯e efficiency for Eavail vs pT distribution.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 20
      Figure 20

      νe efficiency for Eavail vs q3 distribution.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 21
      Figure 21

      νe efficiency for Eavail vs pT distribution.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 22
      Figure 22

      A decomposition of the ν¯e cross section result into contributing interaction types in Eavail vs q3 on a y log scale. The y axis is on a log scale truncated at 10−2 to enable a better view of the tail end of the cross section.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 23
      Figure 23

      A decomposition of the ν¯e cross section result into contributing interaction types in Eavail vs pT on a y log scale. The y axis is on a log scale truncated at 10−2 to enable a better view of the tail end of the cross section.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 24
      Figure 24

      A decomposition of the νe cross section result into contributing interaction types in Eavail vs q3.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 25
      Figure 25

      A decomposition of the νe cross section result into contributing interaction types in Eavail vs pT.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 26
      Figure 26

      ν¯e: Total cross section error summary broken down into four major subgroups for Eavail vs q3.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 27
      Figure 27

      ν¯e: Total cross section error summary broken down into four major subgroups for Eavail vs pT.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 28
      Figure 28

      νe: Total cross section error summary broken down into four major subgroups for Eavail vs q3.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 29
      Figure 29

      νe: Total cross section error summary broken down into four major subgroups for Eavail vs pT.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 30
      Figure 30

      d2σ/dEavaildq3 cross section per nucleon compared to the model with RPA and tune 2p2h components. Figure from Ref. [46].

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 31
      Figure 31

      The ν¯e cross section result truncated at 0.8 GeV on logy scale in q3 for comparison to the LE result.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 32
      Figure 32

      Comparison of published MINERvA νμ ME measurements with the present ME νe results.

      Reuse & Permissions
    ×

    Sign up to receive regular email alerts from Physical Review D

    Reuse & Permissions

    It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

    ×

    Log In

    Cancel
    ×

    Search

    Article Lookup

    Paste a citation or DOI
    Enter a citation
    ×