Results and Prospectives of Reactor Neutrino Experiments · The 12th particle physics phenomenology...
Transcript of Results and Prospectives of Reactor Neutrino Experiments · The 12th particle physics phenomenology...
Results and Prospectives of Reactor Neutrino Experiments
Liangjian Wen
The 12th particle physics phenomenology workshop (PPP12) 16-19 May, NCTU, Hsinchu, Taiwan
Outline• Reactor Neutrinos• Oscillation measurement: θ13 and Δm2
ee– Daya Bay, Double Chooz, RENO
• Sterile Neutrino Search• Rate and spectrum anomaly• Future: determining Neutrino Mass Ordering
– JUNO, RENO-50
• Summary
2
What we have learned?
3
𝑉𝑉 =1 0 00 𝑐𝑐23 𝑠𝑠230 −𝑠𝑠23 𝑐𝑐23
𝑐𝑐13 0 𝑠𝑠13𝑒𝑒−𝑖𝑖𝛿𝛿0 1 0
−𝑠𝑠13𝑒𝑒𝑖𝑖𝛿𝛿 0 𝑐𝑐13
𝑐𝑐12 𝑠𝑠12 0−𝑠𝑠12 𝑐𝑐12 0
0 0 1
𝑒𝑒𝑖𝑖𝜌𝜌 0 00 𝑒𝑒𝑖𝑖𝜎𝜎 00 0 1
Standard Parametrization of the PMNS Matrix
𝜽𝜽𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐 ~ 𝟒𝟒𝟒𝟒∘
Atmospheric,LBL accelerator
𝜽𝜽𝟏𝟏𝟐𝟐 ~ 𝟗𝟗∘
Reactor,LBL accelerator
𝜽𝜽𝟏𝟏𝟐𝟐 ~ 𝟐𝟐𝟒𝟒∘
Solar,KamLAND
0ν2β, LNV?
Quarks vs. Leptons: A big puzzle of fermion flavor mixings
|𝑈𝑈| = |𝑉𝑉| =
CKM PMNS
Hierarchy! Approximate μ-τ symmetry?
|𝚫𝚫𝒎𝒎𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐𝟐 | ~ 𝟐𝟐.𝟒𝟒 × 𝟏𝟏𝟏𝟏−𝟐𝟐 eV𝟐𝟐 𝜹𝜹 ~ ? 𝚫𝚫𝒎𝒎𝟐𝟐𝟏𝟏
𝟐𝟐 ~ 𝟖𝟖× 𝟏𝟏𝟏𝟏−𝟒𝟒 eV𝟐𝟐
• Discovery of neutrino in 1956• Early search for oscillation 70’s-80’s• Small θ13 in 1990s• limit on neutrino magnetic moment (00’s)• Observation of reactor 𝝂𝝂𝒆𝒆 disappearance in 2003• Discovery of non-zero θ13 in 2012• Mass hierarchy and precision measurements• Sterile neutrinos, Magnetic moment, …
Reactor Neutrinos
4
5
Neutrino spectra of fission isotopes, ILL
Isotope evolution
fissio
n fra
ctio
n (%
)
X
• Neutrino flux of a commercial reactor with 3 GWth : ~6×1020 ν/s
• Distinguishing correlated and un-correlated errors is important
Reactor ν Flux
Capture on H
Capture on Gd
0.1% Gd
nepe +→+ +ν
10-40 keV
++ +−++≅ epnne mMMTTE )(ν
1.8 MeV: Threshold
• ν-e scattering• Inverse-β reaction (IBD)
Reactor ν Detection
6
A little history of νe disappearance …
7
PRD 62 (2000) 072002
PRL 90, 021802 (2003)
Precision of early Reactor experiments (3-6%):• Reactor power:~1%• ν spectrum:~0.3%• Fission rate: ~ 2%• Target mass:~1-2%• Backgrounds:~1-3%• Efficiency:~2-3%
Near-far relative measurement was proposed (Mikaelyan and Sinev, hep-ex/9908047) to reduce the uncertainties from reactor and detector
Daya Bay, Double Chooz, RENO
8
Daya Bay Double Chooz
RENO
Daya BayRENO
Double Chooz
40t
40t80t
365 m
490 m17.4 GWth
8.5 GWth
8t
8t290 m
1380 m
16t 16t
16.8 GWth
Daya Bay: Best Site for θ13
• Powerful reactor complex (Top 5)• Close to mountains enough shielding • Luminosity 5-20 times of DC and RENO• Featured design side-by-side
calibration (2-4 ADs at each site) actual relative det. error 0.13% /√N,
• Discovered an unexpectedly large θ13 in Mar. 2012. precision measurement afterwards Huber et al. JHEP 0911:044, 2009
9
Daya Bay
RENO
DC
Designs Luminosity(ton⋅GW)
Detector Systematics
Overburden (near/far, mwe)
Sensitivity(3y, 90%CL)
Daya Bay 1400 0.38%/√N 250 / 860 ~ 0.008Double Chooz 70 0.6% 120 / 300 ~ 0.03
RENO 260 0.5% 120 / 450 ~ 0.02
Daya Bay Experiment
10
Aug. 2011
Nov. 2011
Dec, 2012
Full detectors:Aug, 2012
Water pool
The Daya Bay Detectors
11
• Multiple AD modules at each site to check Uncorr. Syst. Err. – Far: 4 modules,near: 2 modules
• Multiple muon detectors to reduce veto eff. uncertainties– Water Cherenkov: 2 layers – RPC: 4 layers at the top + telescopes Redundancy !!!
40 t MO
20 t LS20 t Target
reflector
reflector
Automated Calibration Units (ACU)
Data Periods
12
EH1 EH2 EH3
2017/02, EH1-AD1 offline
θ13, ∆𝑚𝑚𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒2 [PRD]θ13, ∆𝑚𝑚𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒
2 [PRL]nH θ13 [PRD]sterile ν [PRL, PRL]reactor [CPC]wave packet [EPJC*]
θ13, ∆𝑚𝑚𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒2 [PRL]
nH θ13 [PRD(R)]sterile ν [PRL]reactor [PRL]
θ13 [PRL]
θ13 [CPC]
*submitted
55 d
ays
139
days
217
days
621
days
1230
day
s
8-AD Data Taking6-AD 2012 Summer
reactor evolution [PRL*]
40 t MO
20 t LS20 t Target
reflector
reflector
Automated Calibration Units (ACU)
Energy Calibration
13
The relative energy scale uncertainty <0.2%
PMT gain calibration
(dark noise, LED)
Energy Rec.
• calibration Sources• spallation neutrons
Relative Energy Scale
• 68Ge, 60Co, 241Am-13C• Neutrons (IBD, spallation)• Special sources• Natural radioactivity
Detector energy response model
14
• Energy model: fit to various gamma lines and 12B beta-decay spectrum
• Validated with– 208Th, 212Bi, 214Bi beta-decay spectrum; Michel electron
– Bench tests of Compton scattering electrons in LS
• Non-linear energy response in Liquid scintillator– Quenching (known as Birks’ law) and Cerenkov (particle-, E- dep.)
– Electronics (E- dep, modeled based on MC and single channel FADC measurement)
gamma electron positron
Uncertainty <1%
Experience on DYB energy model is valuable to JUNO (similar LS).
Signal & Backgrounds
15nGd Background (Far hall)n-H Background (Far hall)
• Accidental background• 9Li/8He• Fast neutrons• Am-C neutron calib. sources• 13C(α,n)16O
AD
IWS
RPC Array
Telescope RPC
RPC-only taggedOWS tagged
Side-By-Side Comparison• Cross check with multiple detectors at the same site• The relative detection efficiency uncertainty down to 0.13%,
verified by comparing the rates of detectors
16
χ2/NDF = 232.6/263
Precision Oscillation Measurement
17
1230 days
Sin22θ13 = [8.41 ± 0.33] × 10-2
NH: Δm232 = [2.45 ± 0.08] × 10-3 eV2
IH: Δm232 = [-2.55 ± 0.08] × 10-3 eV2
1230 days• Independent sin22θ13 meas. from nH• run until 2020, achieve uncertainty ≤3%
Global Comparison
18
NH
Most precise measurement• Sin22θ13 uncertainty: 3.9%• |Δm2
32| uncertainty: 3.4%
Consistent results with reactor and accelerator experiments.
Independent n-H analysis
19
The n-H analysis, where the neutron captures on hydrogen, is statistically and (largely) systematically independent from the nGd one.One of the challenges: large accidental background
Phys. Rev. D 93, 072011 (2016)Rate analysis: sin22θ13 = 0.071±0.11, χ2/ndf = 6.3/6
Future Sensitivity• Daya Bay:
– Δ(sin22θ13) ~ 0.003 ~3%– Δ(Δm2
ee) ~ 0.07 ~ 3%
• RENO: ~5%. • Double Chooz: ~10%
20
Daya Bay: operation till 2020RENO: “operation funding secured until Feb. 2019”Double Chooz: “secured to Jan. 2018 (may change)”
by J. Zhao
Reactor Anomaly• ILL spectra agree with data• Mueller/Huber spectra higher than data• Sterile neutrino?
21
G. Mention et al. Phys.Rev. D83 (2011) 073006
fit with sterile 𝜈𝜈Δ𝑚𝑚2 ≈ 1 𝑒𝑒𝑉𝑉2
Absolute Reactor νe flux
22
Discrepancies to the Huber+Mueller model indicate: Over estimated flux and/or underestimated flux uncertainty Or the existence of a sterile neutrino
Consistent flux measurement with previous short baseline reactor experiments
PRL 116, 061801 (2016)
• Daya Bay measurement of absolute Flux– Data/(Huber+Mueller):0.946±0.020– Data/(ILL+Vogel):0.992 ± 0.021
621 days data
CPC Vol. 41, No. 1 (2017) 013002
Future Reactor Exp. for Sterile Neutrino
23
• Different technologies: (Gd, Li, B) (seg.)(movable)(2 det.)• Most have sensitivity 0.02~0.03 @∆m~1eV2 @90%CL
Talk by Nathaniel Bowden @NEUTRINO2016
Search for light sterile neutrinos
24
• An unique opportunity for sterile neutrino searches– Sterile neutrino would introduce additional oscillation mode– Relative meas. at multiple baselines: EH1 (~350m), EH2 (~500m), EH3 (~1600m)
• Oscillation analysis– No significant signal observed, consistent with 3-flavor neutrino oscillation. – Set most stringent limit at 10-3 eV2 < Δm2
41 < 0.1 eV2
PRL 113, 141802 (2014)
Excluded
MINOS, Daya Bay and Bugey-3
25
Parameter space allowed by LSND and MiniBooNE is excludedPRL. 117, 151801 (2016)
5 MeV Bump on Reactor Spectrum
26
• Events are reactor power related & time independent
• Events are IBD-like:– Disfavors unexpected backgrounds
• No effect to θ13 if near-far meas.• Possibly due to forbidden decays
(PRL112: 2021501; PRL114:012502)
RENO, Neutrino 2014
DC, Neutrino 2014
Jetter, Tau2014
Reactor Antineutrino Spectrum• Bump local significance ~ 4.4 σ• Unfolding the reactor neutrino spectrum
27Chin. Phys. C, 41(1) 13002-013002 (2017) PRL 116, 061801 (2016)
Evolution of reactor neutrino flux and spectrum
28
Probe the reactor anomaly
1230 days
Rescaled model (equal deficit in the IBD yields from four fission isotopes)
arXiv:1704.01082
Evolution of reactor neutrino flux and spectrum
29
• Combined fit for major fission isotopes 235U and 239Pu
• σ235 is 7.8% lower than Huber-Mueller model (2.7% meas. uncertainty)
• σ239 is consistent with the prediction (6% meas. uncertainty)
• 2.8σ disfavor equal deficit (H-M model & sterile hypothesis)
Exploring ν mass ordering with Reactors
30
Phys.Rev.D78:111103,2008
• Large θ13 open doors to MH– Exploit L/E spectrum with reactorsPrecision energy spectrum measurementLook for interference between solar- and atmospheric- oscillations relative measurement
S.T. Petcov et al., PLB533(2002)94S.Choubey et al., PRD68(2003)113006J. Learned et al., PRD78, 071302 (2008)L. Zhan, Y. Wang, J. Cao, L. Wen, PRD78:111103, 2008, PRD79:073007, 2009J. Learned et al., arXiv:0810.2580…
Independent on CP phase and θ23 (Acc. & Atm. do)Energy Resolution is the key
JUNO and RENO-50
31
Hong KongJUNO
Daya Bay
RENO-50
RENO
18 kton LS Detector ~47 km from YG reactors
Mt. Guemseong (450 m) ~900 m.w.e. overburden
20 kton LS Detector
~53 km from Taishan & Yangjiang reactors ~750 m rock overburden
J. Phys. G43:030401 (2016)(arXiv: 1507.05613)
∆M223
6 years,3σ
Determine NMO at JUNO
32
L. Zhan, Y. Wang, J. Cao, L. Wen, PRD78:111103, 2008, PRD79:073007, 2009
Detector size: 20kt Energy resolution: 3%/√EThermal power: 36 GWBaseline 58 km
3%/ 𝐸𝐸
17.4 GW18.4 GW
17.4 GW
33
Cosmic muons~ 250k/day
Atmospheric νseveral/day
Geo-neutrinos1-2/day
Solar ν(10s-1000s)/day
reactor ν, ~ 60/day
700 m
Supernova ν~ 5k in 10s for 10kpc
36 GW, 53 km
0.003 Hz/m2
215 GeV10% multiple-muon
Neutrino Rates
Δχ2 Relative Meas.
(a)Use absolute ∆mμμ
2
Ideal case 4 5(b)Realistic case 3 4
Sensitivity on NMO
Y.F Li et alPRD 88, 013008 (2013)
JUNO MH sensitivity with 6 years' data:
(a) If accelerator experiments, e.g NOvA, T2K, can measure ∆M2
µµ to ~1% level(b) Take into account multiple reactor cores, uncertainties from energy non-linearity, etc
Ideal Core distr. DYB & HZ Shape B/S (stat.) B/S (shape) |∆m2µµ|
Size 52.5 km Real Real 1% 6.3% 0.4% 1%
∆χ2ΜΗ +16 - 3 -1 - 1 - 0.6 - 0.1 + (4-12)
34
Precision Measurement
0.16%0.24% 0.39%0.54%0.16%0.27%E resolution
Correlation among parameters
Statistics+BG, +1% b2b+1% EScale , +1% EnonL
sin2 θ12 0.54% 0.67%
Δm221 0.24% 0.59%
Δm2ee 0.27% 0.44%
Probing the unitarity of UPMNS to ~1%, more precise than CKM matrix elements!
35
Current precision
J. Phys. G43:030401 (2016)
Matter Effects
36
• With six years of running, the Δχ2 of mass ordering measurements will reduce from 10.28 (vacuum) to 9.64 (matter).
• The reduction of Δχ2 is comparable with other systematic error.
Chinese Physics C 40(9) (2016) 091001
Supernova neutrinos at JUNO
37
no osc.complete
Measure energy spectra & fluxes of almost all types of neutrinos
Correlated events. Better detection in LSthan in Water
Typical galactic SN assumptions: 10 kpc galactic distance, 3×1053 erg, Lν the same for all types
SN researches at JUNO• NMO sensitivity• Absolute v mass• SN direction• flux/spectra meas. & recon.• time evolution• test various SN models• …
J. Phys. G43:030401 (2016)
Supernova neutrinos
38
• Test average-energy hierarchy of SN ν, and how total energy is partitioned among ν flavors
• ν mass: < 0.83±0.24 eV at 95% CL (JCAP 05 (2015) 044)• Locating the SN: ~9°
PRD 94, 023006 (2016)
Spectra
Precision of 1%
Precision of 10%
Supernova neutrinos• Reconstruct the flux & spectra of all flavor neutrinos from the
observed ν-e, ν-p and IBD interactions, by using the SVD-unfolding technique
• Toy MC including E-resolution, quenching, E-threshold, etc• Verify the method with different SN models model
independent
39H. Li et al, paper to appear soon
Supernova neutrinos
40
K-C. Lai et al, JCAP 1607 (2016) no.07, 039
Probing neutrino mass ordering with SN νs
Diffuse Supernova Neutrino Background
• DSNB: Past core-collapse events– Cosmic star-formation rate– Core-collapse neutrino spectrum– Rate of failed SNe
10 Years’ sensitivity
34J. Phys. G43:030401 (2016)
Other Physics Topics
42
• JUNO will have 1-2 σ NMO sensitivity with atmospheric neutrinos– Measure both lepton and hadron energy– Good tracking and energy resolution
• Geo-v measurement at JUNO– Huge reactor neutrino backgrounds– Need accurate reactor spectra
– 20 x statistics than previous meas.KamLAND: 30±7 TNU (PRD 88 (2013) 033001)
Borexino: 38.8±12.2 TNU (PLB 722 (2013) 295)
Best fit 3 y 5 y 10 y
U+Thfix ratio
0.96 10% 8% 6%
U (free) 1.03 19% 15% 11%
Th (free) 0.80 37% 30% 21%
Combined shape fit of geo-ν and reactor-ν
Others (sterile neutrinos, proton decay, neutrinos from dark matter… etc)
J. Phys. G43:030401 (2016)
Central detector
Water Cherenkov
Top Tracker
Calibration
Pool
Dep
th: 4
4m
Pool ID:43.5m
AS: ID35.4m
SSLS: ID40.1m
AS: Acrylic sphere; SSLS: stainless steel latticed shell
Filling +Overflow
Acrylic sphere(20Kt LS in it)
~18000 20” PMT+~25000 3’’ PMT
~2000 20’’ PMT
SS latticed shell
Electronics
Acrylic Sphere: ID: 35.4mThickness:120mm
SSLS:ID: 40.1mOD: 41.1m
Water poolID: 43.5mHeight: 44mWater Depth: 43.5m
JUNO Detectors
R&D of 20” MCP-PMT
44
MCP Principle
Project Team
• Advantages:– Higher QE: transmissive
photocathode at top + reflective photocathode at bottom
– High CE: less shadowing effect– Easy for production: less manual
operation and steps
5”(8”) Prototype
20” Prototype
Design Production
2009 2010~2013 2013~2015 2016~2019
MCP-PMT Performance
45Min:24.5%; Max:29%
Average:26.5%
QE & uniformity Dark rate
After pulse
PMT Purchasing of JUNO
46
15k MCP-PMT (75%) from NNVT5k Dynode(25%) from Hamamatzu
Dec.16, 2015Characteristics unit MCP-PMT
(NNVC)R12860
(Hamamatsu)Detection Efficiency
(QE*CE*area) % 27%, > 24% 27%, > 24%
P/V of SPE 3.5, > 2.8 3, > 2.5TTS on the top point ns ~12, < 15 2.7, < 3.5Rise time/ Fall time ns R~2, F~12 R~5,F~9 Anode Dark Count Hz 20K, < 30K 10K, < 50K
After Pulse Rate % 1, <2 10, < 15
Radioactivity of glass ppb238U:50232Th:5040K: 20
238U:400232Th:40040K: 40
By Scaling PMT Spec for LS quantity to reach 3σ@ 6year
Decision based on risk, price, performance merit for physics
47
Acrylic Sphere R&D
48
Acrylic divided into 200+ panels Acrylic nodes test:
Upto ~700 kN pulling forces when it breaks
Part of sphere are manufactured to test the techniques
Sphere sheet manufacturing: 3m X 8m X 0.12 mThe problems of shrinkage and shape variation were
resolved.
Progress of LS R&D
49
Al2O3column
LAB and Al2O3mixing tank
Pure LAB
• Test the overall design of purification system at Daya Bay. Replaced the target LS in one detector
• Quantify the effectivities of subsystems– Optical : > 20m A.L @430nm– Radio-purity: < 10-15 g/g (U, Th)
• Determine the choice of sub-systems– Al2O3 column, distillation, gas striping, water extraction
Distillation system
Steam stripping system
Distillation and steam stripping system.
JUNO-LS Pilot plant
50
Full system tested in Daya Bay LS hall.A new batch of purified LS was produced and filled into DYB-AD1.LS radioactivity being evaluated with data. Further tests to optimize the LS recipe
CLS GT
Calibration System
51
Guide Tube
JUNO Schedule
52
Schedule:• Civil preparation:2013-2014• Civil construction:2014-2018• Detector component production:2016-2017• Detector assembly & installation:2018-2019 • Filling & data taking:2020-2021
Future Plan• Run for 20-30 years• Likely, double beta decay experiment in 2030
vertical shaft sloped tunnel
Exploring nature of v’s mass• 0νββ is currently the viable and
sensitive probe to the Majorananature of ν
53
Z.Z. Xing, Y.L. Zhou, CPC39 (2015) 011001
Current Limit
Next generation𝑻𝑻𝟏𝟏/𝟐𝟐𝟏𝟏𝝊𝝊𝝊𝝊𝝊𝝊~1028 yr
ν is MajoranaYes
NO
Inverted NMO? Yes(by other exp.)
Observed 0νββ?
ν is Dirac(if NOT intro. new physics)
NO
Little hope for next generation 0νββexperiment to determine ν’s Majorana
The JUNO LS detector has good potential for DBD search• 3%/ 𝐸𝐸 energy resolution• 35.4 m diameter of LS• Clean balloon hold enrXe gas (>80% 136Xe) dissolved LS• LS purity: 10-15 g/g (U/Th) 10-17 g/g (U/Th)• Excellent muon track rec. reject cosmogenic
isotopes
54
Ultimate 0νββ search at JUNO
Chin.Phys.C 2017, 41(5): 53001-053001
Expected Background: 1.34/FWHM/ (ton 136Xe)/yr
Possibly in 2030
Summary• Significant improvement on Sin22θ13 precision from the Daya
Bay, Double Chooz and RENO experiments. Ultimate precision of Sin22θ13 will reach ~ 3%
• Precision measurement of the absolute neutrino flux and spectrum.
• Reactor anomaly may have a definite answer before 2020.• Future reactor neutrino experiments:
– Mass hierarchy (3-4 σ in 2026)– Precision measurement of 3/6 mixing parameters up to <
~1% level unitarity test of the mixing matrix– Sterile neutrinos– Rich physics topics with a detector like JUNO
55
Thanks!
56
Spectra of Isotopes
57
• Ab initio: Nuclear database, Σ fragments, Σ chains, Σ branches 10%uncertainty (e.g. Vogel et al., PRC24, 1543 (1981)).
• ILL measured the β-spectra convert to neutrino spectra– ILL spectra: Use spectra of 30 virtual branches, fit amplitude and
endpoints – Mueller spectra: 90% Ab initio, 10% fit rate anomaly– Huber spectra: fit w/ improved nuclear effects
K. Schreckenbach et al. PLB118, 162 (1985)A.A. Hahn et al. PLB160, 325 (1985) Shape verified by Bugey-3 data
Normalization by Bugey-4, 1.6%
Combination Prospectives• The 3 experiments started to discuss combination• To the end of 2016 (by J. Zhao)
– Daya Bay: 0.00307– Daya Bay + RENO: 0.00287 improve by 6.5%– Daya Bay + RENO + DC: 0.00282 improve by 8.2%
• Assumed uncorrelated– Reactor, detector, background– Cosmogenic bkg correlation worse– Cosmogenic bkg (50% systematic uncer.) reduction better
58
Zoom
Beyond Photo-statistics
• Generic form of E resolution– a: stochastic term– b: constant term– c: noise term
Impact to MH sensitivity
41
• Data validated Full MC (DYB&DC)• Noise term dominated by PMT dark noise• Constant term
– Residual non-uniformity– Flaws in readout electronics– Artifacts from resolution plotting
• No JUNO show stopper found in DYB model
NH IH
Dighe & Smirnov, hep-ph/9907423
L – Resonance Res. for neutrinos Always adiabatic
( )12221 θ ,Δm H – Resonance
Res. for neutrinos (NH) Res. for antineutrinos (IH)
( )13231 θ ,Δm
Adiabatic for a ‘large’ θ13
Supernova Neutrinos: Elementary Particle Physics
Flavor Conversion: MSW effects in the SN envelope
for
for
for
0eF0
eF0
xF
eν
eν
ττµµ νννν ,,,
00 )1( xee FpFpF −+=00 )1( xee FpFpF −+=
000
41
41
42
41
eexx FpFpFppF −+
−+
++=∑
Normal
Inverted
sin2(2θ13)
≳ 10−3
Mass ordering
sin2(θ12)
0 cos2(θ12)
0
Case
A
B
Survival probabilities
)for(p eν )for(p eν
Dighe & Smirnov, hep-ph/9907423 Dighe, Kachelriess, Raffelt & Tomàs, hep-ph/0311172
Primary fluxes (+ collective) Leaving the SN (+ Collective & MSW effects)
Supernova Neutrinos: Elementary Particle Physics
Flavor Conversion: MSW effects in the SN envelope
Short Baseline Exp. with Gas TPC• Gas TPC detector at ~20 m from a reactor
– ν-e scattering– High energy precision ( <3%/sqrt(E) )
• Major motivation: high precision reactor spectrum to 1%– Input for JUNO. Daya Bay energy resolution 8%, JUNO 3%
• Other motivations:– The weak mixing angle θw– Abnormal magnetic moment– Sterile neutrino
• Prototyping at IHEP. Prepare LOI in 2017MUNU exp:µν < 0.9 × 10−10 µBCF4 , T > 700 keVPLB 615(2005)153
Instrumental background: PMT Flasher
63
Flashers
Signal Flasher
Common phenomena in the past large neutrino experiments (KamLAND, Super-K, Borexino, SNO), caused by discharge on dynodes or bases. Not easy to efficiently reject at that time Turn off the problematic PMTA highly-efficient flasher cut developed for DYB: ~100% eff., 0.01% error
8He/9Li
8He/9Li background
64
Old approachNew approach
Classical method: time-since-last-muon fitDifficulty: large error when muon rate is high, impossible to estimate the Li9 production yield for muons that havelow energy deposition
Guess: 8He/9Li production accompanied with neutron reduce the rate of muon sampleResult: successful data-driven test and significantly reduced the error
L. J. Wen et al., NIMA 564 (2006) 471-474
β-n emitter: muon spallation on Carbon nuclei
13C μn?
8He/9Li dominates the background uncertainty
Optical Model for large LS detectors
65
L.J Wen, Ph.D thesisX.F. Ding, L.J. Wen,et al, CPC 39 (12) (2015) 126001.X.Y. Li, L.J. Wen, et al, paper in preparation
Developed a new optical model to address those issues. Key optical parameters:• Molar attn. coefficient of
each composition• Quantum yield of each fluor
LAB PPO
bis-SMB
• What’s the best LS recipe?– Detector size dependent, cannot rely on lab
experiment
• Predict the detector non-uniformity• Understand non-linearity from Cerenkov
PreliminaryTab-top meas.
By Wavelength shifter (WLS)?
By Primary fluor (PF)?
By Solvent ?Photon
Absorbed?
TransportationReemission?
Dead
Reemission?
Re-emission (by PF or WLS)
Dead
Yes
NO