Background Understanding and Suppression in Very Long Baseline Neutrino Oscillation Experiments...
description
Transcript of Background Understanding and Suppression in Very Long Baseline Neutrino Oscillation Experiments...
Background Understanding andSuppression in Very Long
Baseline Neutrino Oscillation Experiments with Water Cherenkov
DetectorChiaki Yanagisawa
Stony Brook
Talk at NNN05, Aussois, France
April 7-9, 2005
VLBNO
Setting the stage
e ande +N e + invisible N' + (invisible n s, n0)
e e'invisible n s, n0)
Look for single electron events
Major background
econtamination in beam (typically 0.7%)
How do we find the signal for ve
~ a half megaton F.V. water Cherenkov detector, for example UNO
BNL very long baseline neutrino beam
VLB neutrino oscillation experiment
See, for example, PRD68 (2003) 12002 for physics argument
● Very long baseline neutrino oscillation
Neutrino spectra of on- and off-axis BNL Superbeams
on-axis beam
1 o off-axis beam
Neutrino energy (GeV)
s/
GeV
/m2 /P
OT
PRD68 (2003) 12002; private communication w/ M.Diwan
VLBNO
VLBNO
How is analysis done ? Use of SK atmospheric neutrino MC
Flatten SK atm. spectra and reweight with BNL beam spectra Normalize with QE events: 12,000 events for events for beame for 0.5 Mt F.V. with 5 years of running, 2,540 km baseline
Reweight with oscillation probabilities for and for e
Standard SK analysis package +
m221 =7.3 x 10- 5 eV2, m2
31=2.5 x 10- 3eV2
sin22ij(12,23,13)=0.86/1.0/0.04, CP=0,+45,+135,-45,-135o
Probability tables from Brett Viren of BNL
Oscillation parameters used:
distance from BNL to Homestake
special 0 finder
VLBNO
Selection criteria used to improve
Likelihood analysis using the following eight variables:
Initial cuts: One and only one electron-like ring with energy and reconstructed neutrino energy more than 100 MeV without any decay electron
mass, energy fraction, costh, -likelihood, e-likelihood
-likelihood, total charge/electron energy, Cherenkov angle
To reduce events with invisiblecharged pions
Traditional SK cuts only
With finder
VLBNO
QE events onlybefore likelihood cut
All CC eventsbefore likelihood cut
Erec Erec
Reconstructed energy Reconstructed energy
E EErec Erec
All CC events that survive the initial cuts are signals
What are sources of the signal (QE and nonQE) ?
Only single e-like events left after initial cut
0 finder
finder
reconstruction efficiency with standard SK software
measured opening angle vs. mass with finder
m (MeV/c2) true opening angle (deg)
effic
ienc
y
open
ing
angl
e m
easu
red(
deg)
Single e-like events from single int. All single interactionsSK atm. neutrino spectra
Always looks for an extra ring in a single ring event
inefficiencydue to overlap
inefficiency due toweak 2nd ring
● Finder
reconstruction efficiency
reconstruction efficiency with standard SK + finder ef
ficie
ncy
All the single int.
True opening angle (deg)
finder
0 mass cut:1- and 2-ring events
0 mass cut:2-ring events
With atmospheric neutrino spectra
with 0 finder
without 0 finder
with 0 finderw/o 0 finder
Variables
0.0-0.5 GeV 0.5-1.0 GeV
1.0-1.5 GeV 1.5-2.0 GeV
2.0-2.5 GeV 2.5-3.0 GeV
3.0-3.5 GeV 3.5-4.0 GeV
background
signal
0 mass• Useful Variables All the distributions of useful variables are obtained with
neutrino oscillation “on” with CPV phase angle +450
0 mass
0 mass 0 mass
0 mass
0 mass
0 mass
0 mass
0 mass
Variables
0.0-0.5 GeV 0.5-1.0 GeV
1.0-1.5 GeV 1.5-2.0 GeV
2.0-2.5 GeV 2.5-3.0 GeV
3.0-3.5 GeV 3.5-4.0 GeV
background
signal
Energy fraction of 2nd ring Fake ring has less energy than real one
Variables
Primary electron ring
An undetected weakring initially
- One algorithm optimized to find an extra ring near the primary ring (forward region)
- Another algorithm optimized to find an extra ring in wider space (wide region)
- See the difference ln -likelihood (forward) - ln -likelihood (wide)
Difference between ln of two -likelihood (wide vs. forward)
Variables
Difference between ln of two -likelihood (wide vs. forward)
0.0-0.5 GeV 0.5-1.0 GeV
1.0-1.5 GeV 1.5-2.0 GeV
2.0-2.5 GeV 2.5-3.0 GeV
3.0-3.5 GeV 3.5-4.0 GeV
background
signal
Variables
0.0-0.5 GeV 0.5-1.0 GeV
1.0-1.5 GeV 1.5-2.0 GeV
2.0-2.5 GeV 2.5-3.0 GeV
3.0-3.5 GeV 3.5-4.0 GeV
backgroundsignal
costh = cos e
Preli
minary
Likelihood Cut
ln likelihood distributionsTrained with e CC events for signal, CC/NC & e NC for bkg
0.0-0.5 GeV 0.5-1.0 GeV
1.0-1.5 GeV 1.5-2.0 GeV
2.0-3.0 GeV 3.0- GeV
likelihood
likelihood
likelihood
likelihood
likelihood likelihood
signal
background
Difference in ln likelihood between sig and bkg ln likelihood ratio
Preli
minary
Bkgs 169 (112 from +others) ( 57 from e)
ln likelihood cut (100%signal retained)
Background from CP+45 o
Signal 700 ev Bkgs 2005 (1878 from +others) ( 127 from e)
Signal
e backgroundo
CP+45
ln likelihood cut (~50%signal retained)
Effect of cut on ln likelihood
ErecErec
Preliminary Preliminary
Signal/Background
Signal 321 ev
e CC for signal ; all e NC , e beam for background
TRADITIONAL ANALYSIS
After initial cuts
ln likelihood cut (40%signal retained)
Background from
CP+45o
Signal 251 ev Bkgs 118 ( 74 from +others) ( 44 from e)
Signal
e background
oCP-45
ln likelihood cut (~40%signal retained) Effect of cut on likelihood
Erec Erec
Preliminary Preliminary
Signal/Background
Signal 142 ev
e CC for signal ; all e NC , e beam for backgrounds
Bkgs 118 ( 75 from +others) ( 43 from e)
Effect of cut on likelihood
ln likelihood cut (~40%signal retained)
Background from CP+135
o
Signal
e background
oCP-135
ln likelihood cut (~40%signal retained)
Erec Erec
Preliminary Preliminary
Signal/Background
Signal 342 ev Bkgs 126 ( 81 from +others) ( 45 from e)
Signal 233 ev Bkgs 122 ( 78 from +others) ( 44 from e)
e CC for signal ; all e NC , e beam for backgrounds
Preli
minary
Summary of BNL superbeam@UNOVariableremoved Signal Bkg Signal Bkg Effic
None e CC all, e, NC 321 112
e CC 321 59
e CC 316 56e CC
50% 311 127
333 167
310 143
pi0lh
pi0-lh
poa
e-lh
50%
50%
Beam e
57
119
126303 116 52
50%
50%
50% 50%
55
60
56
e CC
Issues
● S/B and variables
e CC
e CC
e CC 50%
efrac
pi0mass
costh 322 146 57
)(/ 0BS
2.86
1.80
2.51
2.61
2.53
1.99
2.17
2.21
Neutrino oscillation was on to define template distributionsFor analysis CPV=+45o
Some issues
all, e, NC
all, e, NC
all, e, NC
all, e, NC
all, e, NC
all, e, NC
all, e, NC
all, e, NC ange e CC 50% 321 119 55 2.70
Conclusion● Conclusion
Realistic MC simulation studies have been performed for the BNL very long baseline scenario with a water Cherenkov detector. It was found that BNL VLB combined with a UNO type detector seems to DO A GREAT JOB – Very exciting news but needs confirmation.
It was demonstrated that there is some room to improve S/B ratio beyond the standard water Cherenkov detector software even with currently available software
We may need further improvement of algorithm/software, which is quite possible
A larger detector such as UNO has an advantage over a smaller detector such as SK (we learned a lesson from 1kt at K2K)
Detailed studies on sensitivity on oscillation parameters needed