No abstract

The JUNO experiment locates in Jinji town, Kaiping city, Jiangmen city, Guangdong province. The geographic location is east longitude 112 • 31'05' and North latitude 22 • 07'05'. The experimental site is 43 km to the southwest of the Kaiping city, a county-level city in the prefecture-level city Jiangmen in Guangdong province. There are five big cities, Guangzhou, Hong Kong, Macau, Shenzhen, and Zhuhai, all in ∼200 km drive distance, as shown in figure 3.

A measurement of electron antineutrino oscillation by the Daya Bay Reactor Neutrino Experiment is described in detail. Six 2.9-GWth nuclear power reactors of the Daya Bay and Ling Ao nuclear power facilities served as intense sources of ν e 's. Comparison of theν e rate and energy spectrum measured by antineutrino detectors far from the nuclear reactors (∼1500-1950 m) relative to detectors near the reactors (∼350-600 m) allowed a precise measurement ofν e disappearance. More than 2.5 millionν e inverse beta-decay interactions were observed, based on the combination of 217 days of operation of six antineutrino detectors (December, 2011-July, 2012) with a subsequent 1013 days using the complete configuration of eight detectors (October, 2012-July, 2015. Theν e rate observed at the far detectors relative to the near detectors showed a significant deficit, R ¼ 0.949 AE 0.002ðstatÞAE 0.002ðsystÞ. The energy dependence ofν e disappearance showed the distinct variation predicted by neutrino oscillation. Analysis using an approximation for the three-flavor oscillation probability yielded the flavor-mixing angle sin 2 2θ 13 ¼ 0.0841 AE 0.0027ðstatÞ AE 0.0019ðsystÞ and the effective neutrino mass-squared difference of jΔm 2 ee j ¼ ð2.50 AE 0.06ðstatÞ AE 0.06ðsystÞÞ × 10 −3 eV 2 . Analysis using the exact three-flavor probability found Δm

We have studied the muon neutrino and antineutrino quasi-elastic (QEL) scattering reactions (ν μ n → μ − p andν μ p → μ + n) using a set of experimental data collected by the NOMAD Collaboration. We have performed measurements of the cross-section of these processes on a nuclear target (mainly carbon) normalizing it to the total ν μ (ν μ ) charged-current cross section. The results for the flux-averaged QEL cross sections in the (anti)neutrino energy interval 3-100 GeV are σ qel ν μ = (0.92 ± 0.02(stat) ± 0.06(syst)) × 10 −38 cm 2 and σ qel ν μ = (0.81 ± 0.05(stat) ± 0.09(syst)) × 10 −38 cm 2 for neutrino and antineutrino, respectively. The axial mass parameter M A was extracted from the measured quasi-elastic neutrino cross section. The corresponding result is M A = 1.05±0.02(stat)±0.06(syst) GeV. It is consistent with the axial mass values recalculated from the antineutrino cross section and extracted from the pure Q 2 shape analysis of the high purity sample of ν μ quasielastic 2-track events, but has smaller systematic error and should be quoted as the main result of this work. Our measured M A is found to be in good agreement with the world average value obtained in previous deuterium filled bubble chamber experiments. The NOMAD measurement of M A is lower than those recently published by K2K and MiniBooNE Collaborations. However, within the large errors quoted by these experiments on M A , these results are compatible with the more precise NOMAD value.PACS 13.15.+g · 25.30.Pt

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Reactor neutrino experiments play a crucial role in advancing our knowledge of neutrinos. A precise measurement of reactor electron antineutrino flux and spectrum evolution can be key inputs in improving the knowledge of neutrino mass and mixing as well as reactor nuclear physics and searching for physics beyond the standard model. In this work, the evolution of the flux and spectrum as a function of the reactor isotopic content is reported in terms of the inverse-beta-decay yield at Daya Bay with 1958 days of data and improved systematic uncertainties. These measurements are compared with two signature model predictions: the Huber-Mueller model based on the conversion method and the SM2018 model based on the summation method. The measured average flux and spectrum, as well as their evolution with the 239 Pu isotopic fraction, are inconsistent with the predictions of the Huber-Mueller model. In contrast, the SM2018 model is shown to agree with the average flux and its evolution but fails to describe the energy spectrum. Altering the predicted IBD spectrum from 239 Pu fission does not improve the agreement with the measurement for either model. The models can be brought into better agreement with the measurements if either the predicted spectrum due to 235 U fission is changed or the predicted 235 U, 238 U, 239 Pu, and 241 Pu spectra are changed in equal measure.