Discrimination of electronic recoils from nuclear recoils in two-phase xenon time projection chambers

Abstract

We present a comprehensive analysis of electronic recoil vs nuclear recoil discrimination in liquid/gas xenon time projection chambers, using calibration data from the 2013 and 2014-2016 runs of the Large Underground Xenon experiment. We observe strong charge-to-light discrimination enhancement with increased event energy. For events with S1 ¼ 120 detected photons, i.e., equivalent to a nuclear recoil energy of ∼100 keV, we observe an electronic recoil background acceptance of <10 −5 at a nuclear recoil signal acceptance of 50%. We also observe modest electric field dependence of the discrimination power, which peaks at a field of around 300 V=cm over the range of fields explored in this study (50-500 V=cm). In the weakly interacting massive particle search region of S1 ¼ 1 − 80 phd, the minimum electronic recoil leakage we observe is ð7.3 AE 0.6Þ × 10 −4 , which is obtained for a drift field of 240-290 V=cm. Pulse shape discrimination is utilized to improve our results, and we find that, at low energies and low fields, there is an additional reduction in background leakage by a factor of up to 3. We develop an empirical model for recombination fluctuations which, when used alongside the Noble Element Scintillation Technique simulation package, correctly reproduces the skewness of the electronic recoil data. We use this updated simulation to study the width of the electronic recoil band, finding that its dominant contribution comes from electron-ion recombination fluctuations, followed in magnitude of contribution by fluctuations in the S1 signal, fluctuations in the S2 signal, and fluctuations in the total number of quanta produced for a given energy deposition.

A measurement of the mean electronic excitation energy of liquid xenon

“…4, right, features a slight asymmetry (skewness) that was also observed elsewhere [54,55]. This is due to DAQ and processing efficiencies, the low light level or charge loss and can be modelled with skew-Gaussians [56]. However, here the shape of the distribution is of less relevance to the analysis for we only extract its mean.…”

Fast and Flexible Analysis of Direct Dark Matter Search Data with Machine Learning

“…Details on how the MI is estimated are given in [33]. Lower WIMP masses show a larger MI (signal and background are more readily distinguished) largely due to better discrimination in (S1, S2) space at lower energy [18,34]. This plot and other similar ones demonstrate that the NN has learned to summarize all relevant input information in a single dimension.…”

“…Because of the remaining external radioactivity from cavern walls, internal sources like U and Th within the photomultiplier tubes (PMTs) [15,16], and most importantly Rn contamination from the environment [17], discrimination of backgrounds at the level of data analysis remains a key requirement. It is largely achieved thanks to the S1 and S2 discrimination power: ER exhibits larger S2/S1 at fixed S1 than NR [18]. This discrimination is complicated by decays at the radial edge of the TPC ("wall backgrounds") where the S2 signal is degraded, leading to partial overlap with the NR region.…”

Constraints on effective field theory couplings using 311.2 days of LUX data

“…For this analysis, data from WS2014-16 are used. Despite the challenges from the temporally varying gain factors (g 1 and g 2 ) and electric field distortions, WS2014-16 has been well-characterized by multiple analyses since LUX's decommissioning [31,36,37]. As the EFT ROI is significantly larger in fS1; S2g space than in the SI and SD WIMP analyses, implementation of data selection criteria are crucial for removing backgrounds, including: events with poor position reconstruction; multiple scatters with merged S2 signals; events with gaseous xenon interactions classified as the event's S2; and events with an overabundance of non-S1 and non-S2 pulses such as single photons and electrons not associated with the observed S1 or S2.…”