R. Tayloe, Indiana University Lepton-Photon '07 1 Neutrino Oscillation Results from MiniBooNE Outline: - motivation, strategy - experiment - analysis -

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Neutrinos from kaon decay in MiniBooNE Kendall Mahn Columbia University MiniBooNE beamline overview Kaon flux predictions Kaon measurements in MiniBooNE.
Advertisements

Measurement of the off-axis NuMI beam with MiniBooNE Zelimir Djurcic Columbia University Zelimir Djurcic Columbia University Outline of this Presentation.
05/31/2007Teppei Katori, Indiana University, NuInt '07 1 Charged Current Interaction measurements in MiniBooNE hep-ex/XXX Teppei Katori for the MiniBooNE.
P AUL N IENABER S AINT M ARY ’ S U NIVERSITY OF M INNESOTA FOR THE M INI B OO NE C OLLABORATION J ULY DPF2009.
MiniBooNE: (Anti)Neutrino Appearance and Disappeareance Results SUSY11 01 Sep, 2011 Warren Huelsnitz, LANL 1.
H. Ray, University of Florida1 MINIBOONE  e e .
14 Sept 2004 D.Dedovich Tau041 Measurement of Tau hadronic branching ratios in DELPHI experiment at LEP Dima Dedovich (Dubna) DELPHI Collaboration E.Phys.J.
Super-Kamiokande Introduction Contained events and upward muons Updated results Oscillation analysis with a 3D flux Multi-ring events  0 /  ratio 3 decay.
Miami 2010 MINIBOONE  e e  2008! H. Ray, University of Florida.
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002 What Have We Learned from Super-K? –Before Super-K –SK-I ( ) Atmospheric Solar –SNO & SK-I Active solar –SK.
Off-axis Simulations Peter Litchfield, Minnesota  What has been simulated?  Will the experiment work?  Can we choose a technology based on simulations?
DPF Victor Pavlunin on behalf of the CLEO Collaboration DPF-2006 Results from four CLEO Y (5S) analyses:  Exclusive B s and B Reconstruction at.
F.Sanchez (UAB/IFAE)ISS Meeting, Detector Parallel Meeting. Jan 2006 Low Energy Neutrino Interactions & Near Detectors F.Sánchez Universitat Autònoma de.
03/07/2007Teppei Katori, Indiana University, PMN07 1 The first result of the MiniBooNE neutrino oscillation experiment Teppei Katori for the MiniBooNE.
First Results from MiniBooNE May 29, 2007 William Louis Introduction The Neutrino Beam Events in the MiniBooNE Detector Data Analysis Initial Results Future.
10/24/2005Zelimir Djurcic-PANIC05-Santa Fe Zelimir Djurcic Physics Department Columbia University Backgrounds in Backgrounds in neutrino appearance signal.
Analysis of  and e events from NuMI beamline at MiniBooNE
1 Updated Anti-neutrino Oscillation Results from MiniBooNE Byron Roe University of Michigan For the MiniBooNE Collaboration.
MiniBooNE Update Since Last PAC Meeting (Nov 2007) Steve Brice (FNAL) PAC Meeting 27 March 2008.
Atmospheric Neutrino Oscillations in Soudan 2
MiniBooNE Results & Future Experiments MiniBooNE Introduction Neutrino Oscillation Results MiniBooNE NuMI Data Antineutrino Oscillation Results Future.
HARP for MiniBooNE Linda R. Coney Columbia University DPF 2004.
5/1/20110 SciBooNE and MiniBooNE Kendall Mahn TRIUMF For the SciBooNE and MiniBooNE collaborations A search for   disappearance with:
Results and Implications from MiniBooNE LLWI, 25 Feb 2011 Warren Huelsnitz, LANL
Neutrino Oscillation Results from MiniBooNE Joe Grange University of Florida.
05/09/2011Teppei Katori, MIT1 Teppei Katori Massachusetts Institute of Technology Phenomenology 2011 symposium (Pheno11), Madison, WI, May 9, 2011 Test.
Sterile Neutrino Oscillations and CP-Violation Implications for MiniBooNE NuFact’07 Okayama, Japan Georgia Karagiorgi, Columbia University August 10, 2007.
MiniBooNE Michel Sorel (Valencia U.) for the MiniBooNE Collaboration TAUP Conference September 2005 Zaragoza (Spain)
Teppei Katori Indiana University Rencontres de Moriond EW 2008 La Thuile, Italia, Mar., 05, 08 Neutrino cross section measurements for long-baseline neutrino.
1 MiniBooNE Update and Extension Request Richard Van de Water and Steve Brice for the MiniBooNE Collaboration Nov 2, 2007.
MiniBooNE : Current Status Heather Ray Los Alamos National Lab.
Preliminary Results from the MINER A Experiment Deborah Harris Fermilab on behalf of the MINERvA Collaboration.
MiniBooNE Oscillation Searches Steve Brice (Fermilab) for the MiniBooNE Collaboration Neutrino 2008.
Latest Results from the MINOS Experiment Justin Evans, University College London for the MINOS Collaboration NOW th September 2008.
MiniBooNE Cross Section Results H. Ray, University of Florida ICHEP Interactions of the future!
DOE Review 3/18/03Steve Brice FNALPage 1 MiniBooNE Status Steve Brice Fermilab Overview Beam – Primary Beam – Secondary Beam Detector – Calibration – Triggering.
Search for Electron Neutrino Appearance in MINOS Mhair Orchanian California Institute of Technology On behalf of the MINOS Collaboration DPF 2011 Meeting.
Recent results from SciBooNE and MiniBooNE experiments Žarko Pavlović Los Alamos National Laboratory Rencontres de Moriond 18 March 2011.
A Letter of Intent to Build a MiniBooNE Near Detector: BooNE W.C. Louis & G.B. Mills, FNAL PAC, November 13, 2009 Louis BooNE Physics Goals MiniBooNE Appearance.
Mini Overview Peter Kasper NBI The MiniBooNE Collaboration University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa Bucknell University, Lewisburg University of California,
Search for Sterile Neutrino Oscillations with MiniBooNE
Medium baseline neutrino oscillation searches Andrew Bazarko, Princeton University Les Houches, 20 June 2001 LSND: MeVdecay at rest MeVdecay in flight.
MiniBooNE MiniBooNE Motivation LSND Signal Interpreting the LSND Signal MiniBooNE Overview Experimental Setup Neutrino Events in the Detector The Oscillation.
April 26, McGrew 1 Goals of the Near Detector Complex at T2K Clark McGrew Stony Brook University Road Map The Requirements The Technique.
4/19/2007Jonathan Link First Oscillation Results from the MiniBooNE Experiment Jonathan Link Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University April 19.
Status of MiniBooNE Short Baseline Neutrino Oscillation Experiment Jonathan Link Columbia University International Conference on Flavor Physics October.
Outline: IntroJanet Event Rates Particle IdBill Backgrounds and signal Status of the first MiniBooNE Neutrino Oscillation Analysis Janet Conrad & Bill.
Results and Implications from MiniBooNE: Neutrino Oscillations and Cross Sections 15 th Lomonosov Conference, 19 Aug 2011 Warren Huelsnitz, LANL
September 10, 2002M. Fechner1 Energy reconstruction in quasi elastic events unfolding physics and detector effects M. Fechner, Ecole Normale Supérieure.
Extrapolation Techniques  Four different techniques have been used to extrapolate near detector data to the far detector to predict the neutrino energy.
MiniBooNE: Status and Plans Outline Physics motivation Beamline performance Detector performance First look at the data Conclusions Fernanda G. Garcia,
Observation Gamma rays from neutral current quasi-elastic in the T2K experiment Huang Kunxian for half of T2K collaboration Mar. 24, Univ.
 CC QE results from the NOvA prototype detector Jarek Nowak and Minerba Betancourt.
Some Thoughts on Analysis Blindness Steve Brice Ex-Analysis Coordinator for MiniBooNE.
Details of the MiniBooNE Oscillation Result Chris Polly, Indiana University.
Results from MiniBooNE NuFact 2007 Chris Polly Indiana University.
MINERνA Overview  MINERνA is studying neutrino interactions in unprecedented detail on a variety of different nuclei  Low Energy (LE) Beam Goals: t Study.
Neutrino-Nucleon Neutral Current Elastic Interactions in MiniBooNE Denis Perevalov University of Alabama for the MiniBooNE collaboration presented by:
R. Tayloe, Indiana University CPT '07 1 Neutrino Oscillations and and Lorentz Violation Results from MiniBooNE Outline: - LSND - signal for oscillations.
EPS HEP 2007 M. Sorel – IFIC (Valencia U. & CSIC)1 MiniBooNE, Part 2: First Results of the Muon-To-Electron Neutrino Oscillation Search M. Sorel (IFIC.
Path forward: theory vs experiment needs, QE discussion input Comments/Observations: R. Tayloe, Nuint'09.
R. Tayloe, Indiana U. DNP06 1 A Search for  → e oscillations with MiniBooNE MiniBooNE does not yet have a result for the  → e oscillation search. The.
Neutrino-Nucleon Neutral Current Elastic Interactions in MiniBooNE Denis Perevalov University of Alabama for the MiniBooNE collaboration presented by:
Neutral Current Interactions in MINOS Alexandre Sousa, University of Oxford for the MINOS Collaboration Neutrino Events in MINOS Neutrino interactions.
The MiniBooNE Little Muon Counter Detector
First Anti-neutrino results!
Impact of neutrino interaction uncertainties in T2K
Study of e+e- pp process using initial state radiation with BaBar
Study of e+e collisions with a hard initial state photon at BaBar
DISCUSSION Is there a right-handed (‘sterile’) neutrino in the eV range? Alain Blondel.  My views and a few others.
Presentation transcript:

R. Tayloe, Indiana University Lepton-Photon '07 1 Neutrino Oscillation Results from MiniBooNE Outline: - motivation, strategy - experiment - analysis - results - New: further investigations of low-energy region R. Tayloe, Indiana University

R. Tayloe, Indiana University Lepton-Photon '07 2 The LSND Result  e events vs energy The LSND experiment observed an excess of`n e events in beam of   87.9 ± 22.4 ± 6.0 (4  ) consistent with    e oscillations. However, this result, with large Dm 2,does not fit in a 3 generation neutrino model (given results from other oscillation experiments) since  m  m  m 23 2 = 0 If LSND is correct  new physics. - additional (sterile) neutrinos - a different model for oscillations But LSND had not been tested by another experiment.. osc parameter likelihood regions

R. Tayloe, Indiana University Lepton-Photon '07 3 MiniBooNE experimental strategy P    e  sin   sin   m  L  - Test the LSND observation via   e appearance. - Keep L/E same, change beam, energy, and systematic errors neutrino energy (E): MiniBooNE: ~500 MeV LSND: ~30 MeV baseline (L): MiniBooNE: ~500 m LSND: ~30 m Booster K+K+ target and horndetectordirtdecay regionabsorber primary beamtertiary beamsecondary beam (protons)(mesons)(neutrinos)    e  

R. Tayloe, Indiana University Lepton-Photon '07 4 MiniBooNE Collaboration

R. Tayloe, Indiana University Lepton-Photon '07 5 which is within a Booster Target Hall MiniBooNE beam - Fermilab experiment E898 - proton beam from 8 GeV booster accelerator - Delivered to a beryllium target - within a magnetic horn pulsing with beam spill (current= 170 kA) - 4  protons per 1.6  s beam pulse delivered at ~ 5 Hz. - Published results use entire neutrino data set: - (5.58  0.12)x10 20 protons - Collected proton beam path the “horn”

R. Tayloe, Indiana University Lepton-Photon '07 6 MiniBooNE beam: total flux    K      e   e K   e e GEANT4 simulation used to predict flux at detector, includes: - pi, K production data (from other exps) - proton interactions (primary, 2ndary) - horn/decay pipe geometry - mean energy ~800MeV - e /  = 0.5% “Intrinsic” e sources:    e +    e (52%)  K +    e + e (29%)  K 0    e  e (14%)  Other ( 5%) “Intrinsic” e sources:    e +    e (52%)  K +    e + e (29%)  K 0    e  e (14%)  Other ( 5%) MB flux target and horn + - K+K+ K0K0 ✶ ✶ + ✶ decay region 8 GeV p

R. Tayloe, Indiana University Lepton-Photon ' meters from target - 12 meter diameter sphere tons mineral oil (CH 2 ) - 3 m overburden - includes 35 cm “veto region” - viewed by ” PMTs (10% coverage) veto - Simulated with a GEANT3 Monte Carlo program tuned with external/internal calibration data MiniBooNE Detector

R. Tayloe, Indiana University Lepton-Photon '07 8 Signal Background Events in MiniBooNE - Recall: search for e in a  beam - signature of a e reaction (signal): electron - need to distinguish from backgrounds (due to  reactions) that consist of a muon or  0 -  interaction products create (directed, prompt) Cerenkov light and (isotropic, delayed) scintillation light - pattern and timing of the detected light allows for event identification (and position, direction, energy meas.)

R. Tayloe, Indiana University Lepton-Photon '07 9 interactions in detector: -predicted  events and fractions from event generator* - extensively tuned using MiniBooNE data predicted # events in data set (no efficiency corrections) Z N X "NC": neutral- current  e W N X "CC": charged- current *NUANCE ( D. Casper, NPS, 112 (2002) 161)

R. Tayloe, Indiana University Lepton-Photon '07 10 charged-current quasielastic (CCQE) events CCQE processes: -  CCQE - highest-rate reaction channel - provides a measurement of interaction probability (cross section) and a check of the  flux - e CCQE - is the oscillation signal channel - meas. of lepton energy/angle yields  energy (  ) via 2-body quasi-elastic (QE) kinematics: e ee W n p e CCQE   W n p  CCQE

R. Tayloe, Indiana University Lepton-Photon '07 11 CCQE events: - Excellent description of  CCQE reaction has been obtained after adjustment of 2 Fermi-gas-model parameters: From Q 2 (4-mom. transfer) fits t  CCQE data: M A eff -- effective axial mass  -- Pauli blocking param - paper on this work: arXiv: [hep-ex], submitted for publication  CCQE Q 2 distribution  CCQE E distribution

R. Tayloe, Indiana University Lepton-Photon '07 12 oscillation analysis: strategy - need accurate, efficient particle identification algorithm to separate (signal) electron-like events from ubiquitous (background) muon, pion events - To avoid experimenter bias, this was done with “blind” procedure, signal data set kept in “box” until algorithms set. e ee W n p signal reaction:   W n p background: Z  p,n   

R. Tayloe, Indiana University Lepton-Photon '07 13 Two algorithms were used: - “track-based” (TB) Uses direct reconstruction of particle types and likelihood ratios for particle-ID - “boosted decision trees” (BDT) Set of low-level variables combined with BDT algorithm -> PID “score” - In the end, the TB analysis had slightly better sensitivity, so is used for primary results. BDT analysis is a powerful “double-check” oscillation analysis: strategy (TB) (BDT)

R. Tayloe, Indiana University Lepton-Photon '07 14 oscillation analysis: 2 algorithms TB event selection: - precuts (# PMT/veto hits, no  - decay, fiducial volume, etc) - reject “muon-like” events: log(L e /L  ) - reject “  0 -like” events: log(L e /L  )reconstructed  0 mass MC log(L e /L  ) vs fitted e energy BDT selection: - precuts (# PMT/veto hits, no  - decay, fiducial volume, etc) - PID “score” from boosting algorithm red: signal blue: background boosting output “score”

R. Tayloe, Indiana University Lepton-Photon '07 15 oscillation analysis: backgrounds intrinsic- e backgrounds (from e produced at source) -  → e : (indirectly) measured in  CCQE events via  -decay chain -  → e : “ “ “ “ “ “ “ - K → e : measured in high-energy   e CCQE (from Kaons), extrapolate to low-E “mis-ID” backgrounds (mainly from  ) - CC Inclusive: includes CCQE, measured, simulated - NC   : measured, simulated - NC  →N  : constrained in data, simulated - NC coherent, radiative  : calculated, negligible - Dirt:  interactions outside tank, simulated, measured - beam-unrelated events, measured, very small correlated errors on all backgrounds are considered TB analysis predicted backgrounds

R. Tayloe, Indiana University Lepton-Photon '07 16 oscillation analysis: box-opening With... - algorithms finalized, - cuts determined, - backgrounds predicted, - the neutrino oscillation box was opened on March 26, 2007

R. Tayloe, Indiana University Lepton-Photon '07 17 boosted decision tree analysis: - E > 300MeV cut for oscillation analysis region - good fit and no significant excess - Slight excess at lowest E, but larger normalization error weakens significance track-based analysis: - E > 475MeV cut for oscillation analysis region - no sign of an excess in the analysis region - visible excess at low E Neither analysis shows evidence for   e appearance in the analysis region oscillation analysis: results ● 2 null - 2 best =0.94 ● 2 null - 2 best =0.71

R. Tayloe, Indiana University Lepton-Photon '07 18 boosted decision tree analysis: Counting Experiment: 300<E <1600 MeV data: 971 events expectation: 1070  33 (stat)  225 (sys) significance:  0.38  track-based analysis: Counting Experiment: 475<E <1250 MeV data: 380 events expectation: 358  19 (stat)  35 (sys) significance: 0.55  oscillation analysis: results Neither analysis shows evidence for   e appearance in the analysis region

R. Tayloe, Indiana University Lepton-Photon '07 19 The results from the 2 different analyses are in agreement. Resulting limit curves: solid: primary,TB dashed: BDT oscillation analysis: results

R. Tayloe, Indiana University Lepton-Photon '07 20 MiniBooNE limit curve together with those from KARMEN2 and Bugey experiments oscillation analysis: results - MiniBooNE and LSND incompatible at a 98% CL for all Dm 2 under a 2n mixing hypothesis

R. Tayloe, Indiana University Lepton-Photon '07 21 Track-based analysis E  distributions: For: 300<E <475 MeV 96 ± 17 ± 20 events Excess: 3.7  The energy-dependence of excess is not consistent with   e  appearance assuming standard energy dependence oscillation results: low-energy region Best Fit (sin 2 2 ,  m 2 ) = (1.0, 0.03 eV 2 ) background subtracted data: P    e  sin   sin   m  L 

R. Tayloe, Indiana University Lepton-Photon '07 22 Continuing work to understand low-energy region - We continue to work to characterize and to determine the source of the event excess in the low-energy region (E <475MeV) This work includes further tests for - detector anomalies - reconstruction problems - incorrect estimation of calculated backgrounds - new backgrounds (not considered in original analysis) - new physics Note: If this is a background it may be relevant for other experiments searching for   e appearance

R. Tayloe, Indiana University Lepton-Photon ' Detector anomalies? - None found - For example: rate of electron candidate events is constant (within errors) over course of run MB low-energy events region event/POT vs day, 475<Enu<1500 MeV event/POT vs day, 300<Enu<475 MeV

R. Tayloe, Indiana University Lepton-Photon '07 24 MB low-energy events region - Reconstruction problems? - None found - All low-E electron candidate events have been examined via event displays, consistent with 1-ring events example osc-candidate event display

R. Tayloe, Indiana University Lepton-Photon '07 25 The “lower”-energy region - examining lower energy - excess persists in 200 < E   < 300 MeV bin reconstructed neutrino energy, 200<E <3000 MeV - NEW: this energy bin

R. Tayloe, Indiana University Lepton-Photon '07 26 cos  energy/angle distributions Recall: - two-body kinematics allow energy reconstruction from E_lepton (“visible energy”) and lepton angle - no anomalies in these distributions visible energy, 200<E <3000 MeV cos , 200<E <3000 MeV

R. Tayloe, Indiana University Lepton-Photon '07 27 energy/angle distributions in E bins 200< E <300 MeV 300 <E <475 MeV 475 <E <3000 MeV cos  200< E <300 MeV 300< E <475 MeV 475< E <3000 MeV At higher energy, data are well-described by predicted background Excess distributed among visible E, cos  bins visible energy distributions: cos  distributions:

R. Tayloe, Indiana University Lepton-Photon '07 28 Examination of backgrounds Oscillation candidate summary table: reconstructed neutrino energy bin (MeV) total background  284 ± ± ± 35  e intrinsic   induced NC  NC  →N  Dirt other data 375 ± ± ± 19 - no significant excess at higher E, where  e bkgd dominant - largest backgrounds at lower E, are  -induced, in particular: - NC  0 - NC  →N  - Dirt - currently scrutinizing these backgrounds

R. Tayloe, Indiana University Lepton-Photon '07 29 “Dirt” background - dirt background is due to interactions outside detector creating neutrals that enter tank - measured in “dirt-enhanced” samples: - before box-opening, fit predicted: 1.00 ± in different (open) sample, a fit says that meas/pred is shape of visible E and distance-to-wall distributions are well-described by MC shower dirt results from dirt-enhanced fits visible energy (GeV) dist to tank wall along track (cm)

R. Tayloe, Indiana University Lepton-Photon '07 30 Work in progress to exhaustively check background explanation of excess. Reexamining these (previously estimated and measured!) processes: -  -induced NC  0 -  -induced NC  →N  In addition, new processes being considered: -  -induced NC  0 with photonuclear absorption of  0 photon -  -induced NC photon production (eg: arXiv: v1 [hep-ph] ) arXiv: v1 Other data sets in will be available to check signal vs background hypotheses - e CC   channel for oscillations - antineutrinos, taking data since Jan'06 - recently commissioned SciBooNE experiment - NuMI neutrinos in MB (very soon!) Other background explanations

R. Tayloe, Indiana University Lepton-Photon '07 31 Summary - MiniBooNE rules out (to 98%CL) the LSND result interpreted as   e oscillations described with standard L/E dependence (Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, (2007), arXiv: v2 [hep-ex]) This eliminates the following interpretations of LSND: -    e oscillations with (w/”standard” assumptions of CPT, E-dependence) -    e via a single sterile neutrino ( “ “ ) - The as-yet-unexplained deviation of MiniBooNE data from prediction at low-energy could be a background... Currently working on this with very high priority.... Or perhaps, new physics* *e.g.: Sterile neutrinos, hep-ph/ , Phys.Rev.D75:013011,2007. Neutrino decay, hep-ph/ , J.Phys.Conf.Ser.39: ,2006. Extra dimensions, hep-ph/ , Phys.Rev.D72:095017,2005. Lorentz Violation: hep-ph/ , Phys.Rev.D74:105009,