CHORUS Physics Workshop, 7 June 2004, Rome Luca Scotto Lavina Kinematical selection and FC analysis for oscillations

Montecarlo chain used for 0mu channel Events generated in emulsion Location program Selected events SatoMurat and Golden selection Stopped in bulk PRDC recontruction, CS, SS and bulk scanback [4,35] fiducial volume cut 1.0 cm fiducial volume border cut No spec muon in PRTK First 0mu definition For each track in PRVT  PRTK: 1)read MUON-ID = q(JSMTR+3) = = q(JMUTR+3) 2)If MUON-ID>0, the track is a spectrometer muon If there is no muon, the event is 0mu Production of.man files and charm.kin file 1.5 cm fiducial volume border cut Events in 0mu.list Second 0mu definition Based on MURECO flg_mu<4, IP cut respect to vertex,  2 cut This definition includes the first one SatoMurat: SatoMurat_mc-ver04.cppSelection: goldenMC-0mu awk

EMUL7131 In bulk2777 Spec 0mu209.man files201 0mu.list117 Selected events generated in emulsion with Location efficiency + 0mu request = 0mu.list EMUL = (1.65 ± 0.15) % Selection efficiency = Selected 0mu.list = (20.2 ± 3.7) % D +, D s,  c  1 prong MC charm 0mu, 1 prong 0mu request = 0mu.list In bulk · = 4.4% Spec 0mu In bulk = 7.5% If I consider only the first 0mu definition, based only on spectrometer muons: = 1.0 cm f.v. border cut 1.5 cm f.v. border cut (Full statistics)

EMUL9078 In bulk3585 Spec 0mu410.man files384 0mu.list197 Selected events generated in emulsion with Location efficiency + 0mu request = 0mu.list EMUL = (2.18 ± 0.15) % Selection efficiency = Selected 0mu.list = (50.8 ± 3.5) % D +, D s,  c  3 prong MC charm 0mu, 3 prong 0mu request = 0mu.list In bulk · = 5.7% Spec 0mu In bulk = 11.4% If I consider only the first 0mu definition, based only on spectrometer muons: = 1.0 cm f.v. border cut 1.5 cm f.v. border cut (Full statistics)

EMUL6831 In bulk1479 Spec 0mu1393.man files1322 0mu.list875 Selected events generated in emulsion with Location efficiency + 0mu request = 0mu.list EMUL = (12.8 ± 0.4) % Selection efficiency = Selected 0mu.list = (23.9 ± 1.4) %   e,h MC   e,h 0mu request = 0mu.list In bulk · = 61.7% Spec 0mu In bulk = 94.2% If I consider only the first 0mu definition, based only on spectrometer muons: = 1.0 cm f.v. border cut 1.5 cm f.v. border cut

EMUL1552 In bulk418 Spec 0mu394.man files367 0mu.list272 Selected events generated in emulsion with Location efficiency + 0mu request = 0mu.list EMUL = (17.6 ± 1.0) % Selection efficiency = Selected 0mu.list = (52.6 ± 3.0) %   3h MC   3h 0mu request = 0mu.list In bulk · = 67.9% Spec 0mu In bulk = 94.3% If I consider only the first 0mu definition, based only on spectrometer muons: = 1.0 cm f.v. border cut 1.5 cm f.v. border cut

EMUL1765 In bulk636 Spec 0mu107.man files99 0mu.list74 Selected events generated in emulsion with Location efficiency + 0mu request = 0mu.list EMUL = (4.2 ± 0.5) % Selection efficiency = Selected 0mu.list = (25.0 ± 4.9) %      MC    0mu request = 0mu.list In bulk · = 12.1% Spec 0mu In bulk = 16.8% If I consider only the first 0mu definition, based only on spectrometer muons: = 1.0 cm f.v. border cut 1.5 cm f.v. border cut

EMUL2233 In bulk938 Spec 1mu845.man files840 CC.list events generated in emulsion with Location efficiency + 1mu request = CC.list EMUL = (34.5 ± 1.0) %  CC MC  CC 1mu request = CC.list In bulk · = 85.7% Spec 1mu In bulk = 90.1% If I consider only the first 1mu definition, based only on spectrometer muons: = 1.0 cm f.v. border cut 1.5 cm f.v. border cut

Summary of efficiencies Charm 0mu 1 prong Charm 0mu 3 prong   e,h   3h      Location eff.+ 0mu request 1.65 ± ± ± ± ± 0.5 Selection efficiency 20.2 ± ± ± ± ± 4.9 numuCC Location eff.+ 1mu request 34.5 ± 1.0

N max (  e,h) expected events N max (  e,h) = N 0  loc · r  · r A · BR(  e,h) ·  sel N 0  loc = r  =   CC   NC   CC   CC   NC =·= 0.53/0.31 = 1.71 r A = A0A0 A  NC 0  = 1.06 ± 0.07 BR(  e,h) = N max (  e,h) = 6903  sel = (23.9 ± 1.4)%

N max (  3h) expected events N max (  3h) = N 0  loc · r  · r A · BR(  3h) ·  sel N 0  loc = r  =   CC   NC   CC   CC   NC =·= 0.53/0.31 = 1.71 r A = A0A0 A  NC 0  = 1.20 ± 0.12 BR(  3h) = N max (  3h) = 3884  sel = (52.6 ± 3.0)%

N max (  ) expected events N max (  ) = N 0  loc · r  · r A · BR(  ) ·  sel N 0  loc = r  =   CC   NC   CC   CC   NC =·= 0.53/0.31 = 1.71 r A = A0A0 A  NC 0  = 0.35 ± 0.09 BR(  ) = N max (  ) = 616  sel = (25.0 ± 4.9)%

Background: N charm  C1 0  expected events N charm  C1 0  = N 1  loc · r  · r A · BR(D  C1) ·  sel N 1  loc = r  =   charm+   CC = 0.03 r A = A  charm 0  A  CC 1  = ± BR(D  C1) = 0.65 N charm  C1 0  = 18  sel = (20.2 ± 3.7)%

Background: N charm  C3 0  expected events N charm  C3 0  = N 1  loc · r  · r A · BR(D  C1) ·  sel N 1  loc = r  =   charm+   CC = 0.03 r A = A  charm 0  A  CC 1  = ± BR(D  C1) = 0.35  sel = (50.8 ± 3.5)% N charm  C1 0  = 32

Background: N WSK 1prong expected events N WSK 1prong = N 0  loc =  sel = N WSK 1prong = 6.0 N 0  loc A  NC 0  ·  sel A  NC 0  = = 3.60 ·  w i selected N WSK generated in emulsion Using WHINTER =

Signal and background expected without post-scanning cuts BG: charmBG: WSKBG: TotalN  max Old 1   + 1prong  + 3prong Using Feldman & Cousins (NOMAD) approach we obtain: Sensitivity (zero events observed): P < 2.8 · 10 -4

  of the signal  = angle between parent particle and the mean of all primary tracks  c = angle between parent particle and the mean of all primary tracks, but the mean is done without the most far track from the parent   cc

D  of the BG  = angle between parent particle and the mean of all primary tracks  c = angle between parent particle and the mean of all primary tracks, but the mean is done without the most far track from the parent  D  

 c cut  c > 1.8 rad BG reduced to 15% Tau reduced to 70%

Signal and background expected applying  c cut BG: Total Observed (assumed) N  max Old 1   + 1prong  + 3prong Using Feldman & Cousins (NOMAD) approach we obtain: Sensitivity (zero events observed): P < 2.7 · Oscillation limit: P < 2.9 · 10 -4