Measurement of atmospheric neutrino mixing with improved IceCube DeepCore calibration and data processing

Search for Galactic Core-collapse Supernovae in a Decade of Data Taken with the IceCube Neutrino Observatory

“…The ice density is known to better than 0.2%. The uncertainties on the scattering length, λ s , and absorption length, λ a , are presently estimated at 5% each (Abbasi et al 2023). Figure 6 shows the result of studies with Monte Carlo samples of 10 7 generated positrons each, where λ a was varied within ±10%.…”

Treating detector systematics via a likelihood free inference method

“…One approach to account for the resulting variation regarding a changing detector response is to reevaluate observable distributions from different simulation sets and parameterize the corresponding shift in the final analysis binning [1]. However, to get the observable distributions, an explicit assumption of the physics parameters has to be made, which intrinsically couples the parameterized variations to the assumed physics model.…”

“…(2.2), however, is only valid for the particular detector parameter values that were assumed during the MC generation. The method proposed in previous works [1,3] to estimate 𝜇 𝑖 as a function of the detector parameters is to find gradients ∇ 𝛼 𝜇 𝑖 of the estimate with respect to these parameters in every analysis bin. These gradients, however, have to be calculated for a particular choice of physics parameters because the flux Φ(x|𝜽) is integrated inside a product with the detector response over the true event parameters x as shown in eq.…”

“…We sample the true energies of the neutrinos from a log-normal distribution over the range between O (GeV) to O (100 GeV) with its mode at 20 GeV to approximately match the energy distribution observed by atmospheric neutrino oscillation experiments [1,9]. After weighting the sampled events with the oscillation probability from eq.…”

The impact of different parameterizations on the interpretation of CP violation in neutrino oscillations

“…One could also consider ν µ disappearance with atmospheric neutrinos at HK [69], IceCube [70], KM3NeT [71], or JUNO [72,73]. The expected precision in the standard disappearance oscillation parameters (∆m 2 31 and sin 2 2θ 23 ) is expected to be much better in the upcoming long-baseline accelerator-based experiments than in the atmospheric experiments.…”