Quasielastic and multinucleon excitations in antineutrino-nucleus interactions

Martini, M.; Ericson, M.

doi:10.1103/physrevc.87.065501

Cited by 94 publications

(117 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

110

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Recently, experimental [67,[113][114][115] and theoretical [24,25,[116][117][118][119][120][121][122][123][124][125][126][127][128][129] results have suggested that the chargedcurrent neutrino-nucleus scattering cross section at T2K energies could contain a significant multinucleon component. Such processes are known to be important in describing electron-nucleus scattering (for a review, see [130]), but have not yet been included in the model of neutrino-nucleus interactions in our muon neutrino disappearance analyses.…”

Section: Multinucleon Effects Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Measurements of neutrino oscillation in appearance and disappearance channels by the T2K experiment with6.6×1020protons on target

Abe¹,

Adam²,

Aihara³

et al. 2015

Phys. Rev. D

278

376

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We report on measurements of neutrino oscillation using data from the T2K long-baseline neutrino experiment collected between 2010 and 2013. In an analysis of muon neutrino disappearance alone, we find the following estimates and 68% confidence intervals for the two possible mass hierarchies: normal hierarchy∶ sin 2 θ 23 ¼ 0.514 þ0.055 −0.056 and Δm 2 32 ¼ ð2.51 AE 0.10Þ × 10 −3 eV 2 =c 4 and inverted hierarchy∶ sin 2 θ 23 ¼ 0.511 AE 0.055 and Δm 2 13 ¼ ð2.48 AE 0.10Þ × 10 −3 eV 2 =c 4 . The analysis accounts for multinucleon mechanisms in neutrino interactions which were found to introduce negligible bias. We describe our first analyses that combine measurements of muon neutrino disappearance and electron neutrino appearance to estimate four oscillation parameters, jΔm 2 j, sin 2 θ 23 , sin 2 θ 13 , δ CP , and the mass hierarchy. Frequentist and Bayesian intervals are presented for combinations of these parameters, with and without including recent reactor measurements. At 90% confidence level and including reactor measurements, we exclude the region δ CP ¼ ½0.15; 0.83 π for normal hierarchy and δ CP ¼ ½−0.08; 1.09 π for inverted hierarchy. The T2K and reactor data weakly favor the normal hierarchy with a Bayes factor of 2.2. The most probable values and 68% one-dimensional credible intervals for the other oscillation parameters, when reactor data are included, are sin 2 θ 23 ¼ 0.528 þ0.055 −0.038 and jΔm 2 32 j ¼ ð2.51 AE 0.11Þ × 10 −3 eV 2 =c 4 .

show abstract

Section: Multinucleon Effects Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Measurements of neutrino oscillation in appearance and disappearance channels by the T2K experiment with6.6×1020protons on target

Abe¹,

Adam²,

Aihara³

et al. 2015

Phys. Rev. D

278

376

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For the test of our theoretical model on these combinations, to avoid unnecessary errors in the following we calculate them with the real neutrinos and antineutrinos fluxes. Our present results are then the sum and the difference of our previously published neutrino [8] and antineutrino [13] and D(cos θ,E μ ) as a function of the muon emission angle, for various values of the muon kinetic energy, together with the experimental data points. Our predictions, which incorporate the multinucleon component account quite well for the data for all angles and in the full range of muon energies, both for the sum and for the difference.…”

Section: Analysis and Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We have previously tested our model on the MiniBooNE data for the differential cross sections [3,17], independently for neutrinos [8] and antineutrinos [13] reaching a good fit of the data. However in these works, the test was performed separately for the neutrinos and the antineutrinos and we did not specifically address the detailed comparison between the two.…”

Section: Analysis and Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…6 our previous evaluations of the neutrino and antineutrino Q 2 distributions, published in Refs. [8] and [13], respectively, to evaluate their sum and their difference. We also display the result obtained with the averaged flux + .…”

Section: Analysis and Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One example concerns the role of the multinucleon emission process, which in a Cherenkov detector is misidentified as a quasielastic one [1,2]. This error produces an apparent increase of the neutrino quasielastic cross section, at the origin of the so-called axial mass anomaly found in the MiniBooNE experiments [3] as now widely accepted [2,[4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15]. The detection of CP violation, which involves a comparison between neutrino and antineutrino events, needs an even more detailed understanding of the multinucleon processes because it concerns the difference between neutrino and antineutrino…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Neutrino versus antineutrino cross sections andCPviolation

Ericson

Martini

2015

Phys. Rev. C

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We discuss the nuclear interactions of neutrinos versus those of antineutrinos, a relevant comparison for CP violation experiments in the neutrino sector. We consider the MiniBooNE quasielastic-like double-differential neutrino and antineutrino cross sections that are dependent on the energy profiles of the neutrino fluxes and hence specific to the MiniBooNE setup. We combine them introducing their sum (ν +ν) and their difference (ν −ν). We show that the last combination gives general information on the multinucleon content of the axial-vector interference term. Our theoretical model reproduces well the two cross-section combinations, confirming the need for a sizable multinucleon component.

show abstract

Effect of Outgoing Nucleon Wave Function on Reconstructed Neutrino Energy

Nikolakopoulos¹,

Martini²,

Dessel³

et al. 2019

Springer Proceedings in Physics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The main goal of accelerator-based neutrino experiments is the determination of the neutrino oscillation parameters, The oscillation probability depends on the ratio of the distance traveled by the neutrino to its energy, therefore the determination of the distribution of neutrino energies in a detector is crucial. The reconstructed neutrino energy is a kinematic variable which is determined by the energy and scattering angle of the final state lepton in charged current (CC) scattering off an atomic nucleus. The distribution of reconstructed energies around the true incoming energy depends on the nuclear model used to describe the ν-nucleus cross section. We show the effect of distortion of the outgoing nucleon wave function on these distributions.In a detector one observes the CC scattering of a neutrino off a nucleus where a single final-state lepton, with energy E l and scattering angle cos θ l , is detected. In the experimental analysis the reconstructed energy E ν (E l , cos θ l ) is the energy of the neutrino scattering of a neutron at rest, corrected for binding [1,2]. After binning the data in terms of E ν , the true energy distribution has to be recovered. This requires a nuclear model for the interaction. In the experimental analysis a relativistic Fermi gas (RFG) model is commonly used for this task.

show abstract

Quasielastic and multinucleon excitations in antineutrino-nucleus interactions

Cited by 94 publications

References 26 publications

Measurements of neutrino oscillation in appearance and disappearance channels by the T2K experiment with6.6×1020protons on target

Measurements of neutrino oscillation in appearance and disappearance channels by the T2K experiment with6.6×1020protons on target

Neutrino versus antineutrino cross sections andCPviolation

Effect of Outgoing Nucleon Wave Function on Reconstructed Neutrino Energy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About