Properties of83mKrconversion electrons and their use in the KATRIN experiment

Vénos, D.; Sentkerestiová, J.; Dragoun, O.; Slezák, M.; Ryšavý, M.; Špalek, A.

doi:10.1088/1748-0221/13/02/t02012

Cited by 32 publications

(49 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…3(6) eV between L 3 and L 1 . The present data are in line with the larger splittings between L 1 and L 3 reported in the literature, and in particular with the value of 245.4(8) eV suggested in the critical review by Vénos et al [41].…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 93%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Experimental and theoretical study of the Kr L -shell Auger decay

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The LMM Auger spectra of krypton are measured using the photon energies hν = 1709 eV, 1792 eV, 1950 eV, and 13 keV. This approach allows separating the contributions from the various core holes L 1 , L 2 , and L 3 . Previously unobserved transitions are presented. Complementary theoretical work is performed allowing the assignment of the spectral features. The L 2,3 Y -MMY (Y = M 4,5 , N 1,2,3 ) Auger transitions of Kr 2+ formed via Coster-Kronig Auger decay of the core holes L 1 and L 2 are also investigated. These spectra comprise about 4000 and 13 000 transitions, respectively, so that only general statements on the assignment, such as the configurations involved in the transitions, can be given.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 93%

“…The splitting between the L 3 and L 1 scatters in the literature between 241.61(33) eV and 246.4(1.4) eV, i.e., by almost 5 eV; see Refs. [40,41] and references therein. In contrast to this, the values for the splittings between the L 2 and L 3 thresholds reported in the literature are all between 52.4 and 52.7 eV.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Experimental and theoretical study of the Kr L -shell Auger decay

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The energy of the conversion electrons, emitted from a particular subshell of the 83m Kr atom, is 30 472.6 eV for the L 3 -32 singlet and 32 137.1 eV (32 137.8 eV) for the N 2,3 -32 doublet 74 . The L 3 -32-line, on the one hand, has a high intensity, but its natural line width is not known precisely 75 Finally, we conservatively extrapolate with exponential scaling this value to 84 % of the nominal column density, leading to In the analysis, we limit the broadening σ P to positive values. We construct the probability density function of the asymmetry parameter ∆ P based on phenomenological considerations on the relation of both plasma parameters given by |∆ P | ≤ σ P /1.3 76 .…”

Section: Source Potential Calibrationmentioning

confidence: 99%

First direct neutrino-mass measurement with sub-eV sensitivity

Aker¹,

Böttcher²,

Beglarian³

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We report the results of the second measurement campaign of the Karlsruhe Tritium Neutrino (KATRIN) experiment. KATRIN probes the effective electron anti-neutrino mass, mν, via a high-precision measurement of the tritium β-decay spectrum close to its endpoint at 18.6 keV. In the second physics run presented here, the source activity was increased by a factor of 3.8 and the background was reduced by 25% with respect to the first campaign. A sensitivity on mν of 0.7 eV/c2 at 90% confidence level (CL) was reached. This is the first sub-eV sensitivity from a direct neutrino-mass experiment. The best fit to the spectral data yields mν2=(0.26±0.34) eV2/c4, resulting in an upper limit of mν<0.9 eV/c2 (90% CL). By combining this result with the first neutrino mass campaign, we find an upper limit of mν<0.8 eV/c2 (90% CL).

show abstract

“…Additional information on plasma effects is provided by comparing the line shape and position of quasimonoenergetic conversion electrons (L 3 -32) from 83 m Kr runs in T 2 to 83 m Kr runs without the carrier gas at 100 K [47]. We do not identify sizeable shifts (< 0.04 eV) or broadening (< 0.08 eV) of lines so that the contribution of plasma effects at ρd exp to the systematic error budget in Table I can be neglected.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%