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

Comparison of the calorimetric and kinematic methods of neutrino energy reconstruction in disappearance experiments

A. M. Ankowski, O. Benhar, P. Coloma, P. Huber, C.-M. Jen, C. Mariani, D. Meloni, and E. Vagnoni
Phys. Rev. D 92, 073014 – Published 22 October 2015
PDFHTMLExport Citation
Abstract
Authors
Article Text
  • INTRODUCTION
  • ENERGY RECONSTRUCTION METHODS
  • EVENT GENERATION
  • CONSIDERED DETECTOR EFFECTS
  • MIGRATION MATRICES
  • OSCILLATION ANALYSIS
  • SUMMARY
  • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    • Supplemental Material
    References

    Abstract

    To be able to achieve their physics goals, future neutrino-oscillation experiments will need to reconstruct the neutrino energy with very high accuracy. In this work, we analyze how the energy reconstruction may be affected by realistic detection capabilities, such as energy resolutions, efficiencies, and thresholds. This allows us to estimate how well the detector performance needs to be determined a priori in order to avoid a sizable bias in the measurement of the relevant oscillation parameters. We compare the kinematic and calorimetric methods of energy reconstruction in the context of two νμ→νμ disappearance experiments operating in different energy regimes. For the calorimetric reconstruction method, we find that the detector performance has to be estimated with an O(10%) accuracy to avoid a significant bias in the extracted oscillation parameters. On the other hand, in the case of kinematic energy reconstruction, we observe that the results exhibit less sensitivity to an overestimation of the detector capabilities.

    • Figure
    • Figure
    • Figure
    • Figure
    • Figure
    • Figure
    • Figure
    7 More
    • Received 30 July 2015

    DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.92.073014

    © 2015 American Physical Society

    Authors & Affiliations

    A. M. Ankowski1,*, O. Benhar2,1, P. Coloma3, P. Huber1, C.-M. Jen1, C. Mariani1, D. Meloni4, and E. Vagnoni4

    • 1Center for Neutrino Physics, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia 24061, USA
    • 2INFN and Department of Physics, “Sapienza” Università di Roma, I-00185 Roma, Italy
    • 3Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Batavia, Illinois 60510, USA
    • 4INFN and Dipartimento di Matematica e Fisica, Università di Roma Tre, Via della Vasca Navale 84, 00146 Rome, Italy

    • *ankowski@vt.edu

    Article Text (Subscription Required)

    Click to Expand

    Supplemental Material (Subscription Required)

    Click to Expand

    References (Subscription Required)

    Click to Expand
    Issue

    Vol. 92, Iss. 7 — 1 October 2015

    Reuse & Permissions
    Access Options
    CHORUS

    Article Available via CHORUS

    Download Accepted Manuscript
    Author publication services for translation and copyediting assistance advertisement

    Authorization Required

    Log In
    Other Options
    ×

    Images

    • Figure 1
      Figure 1

      Panel (a): Per-nucleon CC inclusive νμ cross section divided by neutrino energy, obtained using genie 2.8.0+νT [29, 30] with the relativistic Fermi gas model (dashed line) and the spectral function approach (solid line) as a nuclear model in QE interaction. The results for carbon are compared to the experimental data for carbon extracted from NOMAD [8] and those for hydrocarbon (CH) reported from SciBooNE [14] and T2K [17, 19]. Panel (b): Breakup of the contributions to the inclusive cross section. The labels DIS, res, 2p2h, and QE refer to deep-inelastic scattering, resonant pion production, two-nucleon knockout, and quasielastic scattering, respectively.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 2
      Figure 2

      Same as in Fig. 1 but for the muon antineutrino.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 3
      Figure 3

      Fraction of the (a) ν¯μ and (b) νμ energy converted into the kinetic energies of neutrons (solid lines) and protons (dotted lines) and the total energies of charged (short dashed lines) and neutral (long dashed lines) pions.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 4
      Figure 4

      Probability distribution functions for a νμ event of the energy Etrue to be reconstructed at an energy Erec. The results obtained for a QE event at Etrue=1.45  GeV (top) and a DIS event at Etrue=3.45  GeV (bottom) show the effects of different assumptions on the detector performance; see the text for details.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 5
      Figure 5

      Same as in Fig. 4 but for a ν¯μ event.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 6
      Figure 6

      Effective energy resolution as a function of the true energy for muon neutrinos. The results of our Monte Carlo simulations for QE (DIS) events are shown as lower (upper) bands. For each band, the upper (lower) edge corresponds to the realistic (perfect) detection capabilities, defined in Sec. 4. For comparison, a few smearing functions frequently used in phenomenological oscillation studies are also shown.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 7
      Figure 7

      Same as in Fig. 6 but for ν¯μ’s.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 8
      Figure 8

      Mode of the reconstructed-energy distributions as a function of the true energy calculated for muon neutrinos. The bands show our Monte Carlo results, with the lower (upper) edge obtained assuming the realistic (perfect-reconstruction) scenario. The darker (lighter) bands present the results for QE (DIS) events. For reference, the lines corresponding to the true value and its underestimation by 10% and 20% are also shown.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 9
      Figure 9

      Same as in Fig. 8 but for ν¯μ’s.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 10
      Figure 10

      The muon neutrino fluxes (in arbitrary units) as a function of the neutrino energy for the two configurations considered in this work. The solid (dashed) line corresponds to the low- (high-)energy setup.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 11
      Figure 11

      Results for the low-energy setup and the calorimetric reconstruction method. Upper panel: Simulated charged-current event distributions in the far detector as a function of the reconstructed energy, for the oscillation parameters (17). The shaded histogram corresponds to a perfect estimate of detector effects (see Sec. 4). The dashed and solid lines show the event rates obtained with the detector performance overestimated by 10% and 30%. Lower panel: Confidence regions in the (θ23,Δm312) plane, at 1σ C.L. (2 degrees of freedom). The shaded area corresponds to the perfect estimate of the detector effects. The lines show the contours obtained for the detector performance overestimated by 10%, 20%, and 30% in the fit. The star indicates the true values of the oscillation parameters, the same for all confidence regions shown.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 12
      Figure 12

      Same as in Fig. 11 but for the high-energy setup and the calorimetric reconstruction method.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 13
      Figure 13

      Same as in Fig. 11 but using the kinematic method to reconstruct the neutrino energy.

      Reuse & Permissions
    • Figure 14
      Figure 14

      Same as in Fig. 11 but for the high-energy setup and the kinematic energy reconstruction.

      Reuse & Permissions
    ×

    Sign up to receive regular email alerts from Physical Review D

    Log In

    Cancel
    ×

    Search

    Article Lookup

    Paste a citation or DOI
    Enter a citation
    ×