Supernova Relic Neutrinos at Super-Kamiokande Kirk Bays University of California, Irvine 1TAUP 2011.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Expected Sensitivity of the NO A  Disappearance Analysis Kirk Bays (Caltech) for the NO A Collaboration April 14, 2013 APS DPF Denver Kirk Bays, APS DPF.
Advertisements

London Collaboration Meeting September 29, 2005 Search for a Diffuse Flux of Muon Neutrinos using AMANDA-II Data from Jessica Hodges University.
Recent Discoveries in Neutrino Physics: Understanding Neutrino Oscillations 2-3 neutrino detectors with variable baseline 1500 ft nuclear reactor Determining.
MiniBooNE: (Anti)Neutrino Appearance and Disappeareance Results SUSY11 01 Sep, 2011 Warren Huelsnitz, LANL 1.
11-September-2005 C2CR2005, Prague 1 Super-Kamiokande Atmospheric Neutrino Results Kimihiro Okumura ICRR Univ. of Tokyo ( 11-September-2005.
Takaaki Kajita ICRR, Univ. of Tokyo Nufact05, Frascati, June 2005.
The Diffuse Supernova Neutrino Background Louie Strigari The Ohio State University Collaborators: John Beacom, Manoj Kaplinghat, Gary Steigman, Terry Walker,
Super-Kamiokande Introduction Contained events and upward muons Updated results Oscillation analysis with a 3D flux Multi-ring events  0 /  ratio 3 decay.
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.
Prospect for detection of supernova neutrino NOW2014 Sep. 9 th, 2014 Otranto, Lecce, Italy 森俊彰 Takaaki Mori for the Super-Kamiokande Collaboration Okayama.
Sinergia strategy meeting of Swiss neutrino groups Mark A. Rayner – Université de Genève 10 th July 2014, Bern Hyper-Kamiokande 1 – 2 km detector Hyper-Kamiokande.
Neutrino Physics - Lecture 5 Steve Elliott LANL Staff Member UNM Adjunct Professor ,
Neutrino Physics - Lecture 2 Steve Elliott LANL Staff Member UNM Adjunct Professor ,
A Search for Point Sources of High Energy Neutrinos with AMANDA-B10 Scott Young, for the AMANDA collaboration UC-Irvine PhD Thesis:
Diffuse supernova neutrino flux Cecilia Lunardini Arizona State University And RIKEN BNL Research Center UCLA, September 2009.
Status of  b Scan Jianchun Wang Syracuse University Representing L b scanners CLEO Meeting 05/11/02.
21-25 January 2002 WIN 2002 Colin Okada, LBNL for the SNO Collaboration What Else Can SNO Do? Muons and Atmospheric Neutrinos Supernovae Anti-Neutrinos.
SN Physics Workshop September 17 th 2009 Michael Smy UC Irvine SN Relic Neutrinos in Large Water Cherenkov Detectors Chandra/Hubble View of E
Super-Kamiokande – Neutrinos from MeV to TeV Mark Vagins University of California, Irvine EPS/HEP Lisbon July 22, 2005.
Atmospheric Neutrino Oscillations in Soudan 2
1 Super-Kamiokande atmospheric neutrinos Results from SK-I atmospheric neutrino analysis including treatment of systematic errors Sensitivity study based.
Expected Sensitivity of the NO A  Disappearance Analysis Kirk Bays (Caltech) for the NO A Collaboration April 14, 2013 APS DPF Denver Kirk Bays, APS DPF.
Solar neutrino measurement at Super Kamiokande ICHEP'04 ICRR K.Ishihara for SK collaboration Super Kamiokande detector Result from SK-I Status of SK-II.
Results from Sudbury Neutrino Observatory Huaizhang Deng University of Pennsylvania.
25/07/2002G.Unal, ICHEP02 Amsterdam1 Final measurement of  ’/  by NA48 Direct CP violation in neutral kaon decays History of the  ’/  measurement by.
Irakli Chakaberia Final Examination April 28, 2014.
Present and Future of Super-Kamiokande Experiment Chen Shaomin Center for High Energy Physics Tsinghua University.
Michael Smy UC Irvine Solar and Atmospheric Neutrinos 8 th International Workshop on Neutrino Factories, Superbeams & Betabeams Irvine, California, August.
LAGUNA Large Apparatus for Grand Unification and Neutrino Astrophysics Launch meeting, Heidelberg, March 2007, Lothar Oberauer, TUM.
Monday, Feb. 24, 2003PHYS 5326, Spring 2003 Jae Yu 1 PHYS 5326 – Lecture #11 Monday, Feb. 24, 2003 Dr. Jae Yu 1.Brief Review of sin 2  W measurement 2.Neutrino.
SNS2 Workshop August 28-29, 2003 Richard Talaga, Argonne1 Calibration of the OMNIS-LPC Supernova Neutrino Detector Outline –OMNIS Experiment and Detectors.
Wednesday, Feb. 14, 2007PHYS 5326, Spring 2007 Jae Yu 1 PHYS 5326 – Lecture #6 Wednesday, Feb. 14, 2007 Dr. Jae Yu 1.Neutrino Oscillation Formalism 2.Neutrino.
Bruno Pontecorvo Pontecorvo Prize is very special for us: All the important works done by Super- Kamiokande point back to Bruno Pontecorvo – 1957 First.
Supernova relic neutrinos Kirk Bays December 8, 2011 UC Irvine.
TAUP Searches for nucleon decay and n-n oscillation in Super-Kamiokande Jun Kameda (ICRR, Univ. of Tokyo) for Super-Kamiokande collaboration Sep.
GADZOOKS! project at Super-Kamiokande M.Ikeda (Kamioka ICRR, U.of Tokyo) for Super-K collaboration 1 Contents GADZOOKS! project Supernova.
SNO and the new SNOLAB SNO: Heavy Water Phase Complete Status of SNOLAB Future experiments at SNOLAB: (Dark Matter, Double beta, Solar, geo-, supernova.
Mark Vagins Kavli IPMU/UC Irvine AAP2012, Manoa October 4, 2012 GADZOOKS! Status: Making World-class Water.
Solar neutrino results from Super-Kamiokande Satoru Yamada for the Super-Kamiokande collaboration Institute of cosmic ray research, University of Tokyo.
1 水质契仑科夫探测器中的中子识别 张海兵 清华大学 , 南京 First Study of Neutron Tagging with a Water Cherenkov Detector.
Detection of Supernova Neutrinos Mark Vagins IPMU, University of Tokyo Neutrino Athens June 19, 2010.
Results from RENO Soo-Bong Kim (KNRC, Seoul National University) “17 th Lomosonov Conference on Elementary Particle Physics” Moscow. Russia, Aug ,
Determining the Neutrino Hierarchy From a Galactic Supernova David Webber APS April Meeting May 3, 2011 SN 1572 “Tycho’s Nova” 7,500 light years (2.3 kPc)
GADZOOKS! Megaton Scale Neutron Detection Mark Vagins University of California, Irvine NNN05 - Aussios April 7, 2005.
N eutrino O scillation W orkshop Conca Specchiulla, September 11 th 2006 Michael Smy UC Irvine Low Energy Challenges in SK-III.
Neutrino Oscillations at Super-Kamiokande Soo-Bong Kim (Seoul National University)
Medium baseline neutrino oscillation searches Andrew Bazarko, Princeton University Les Houches, 20 June 2001 LSND: MeVdecay at rest MeVdecay in flight.
Gd Loading in Water Mark Vagins University of California, Irvine Homestake Detector Fermilab October 12, 2007.
A search for neutrinos from long-duration GRBs with the ANTARES underwater neutrino telescope arxiv C.W. James for the ANTARES collaboration.
Birth of Neutrino Astrophysics
Solar Neutrino Results from SNO
Results and Implications from MiniBooNE: Neutrino Oscillations and Cross Sections 15 th Lomonosov Conference, 19 Aug 2011 Warren Huelsnitz, LANL
Supernova Relic Neutrinos (SRN) are a diffuse neutrino signal from all past supernovae that has never been detected. Motivation SRN measurement enables.
September 10, 2002M. Fechner1 Energy reconstruction in quasi elastic events unfolding physics and detector effects M. Fechner, Ecole Normale Supérieure.
APS/JPS Joint Meeting Kapalua, Maui, September 2005 Michael Smy UC Irvine Relic Neutrino Detection in Large Water Cherenkov Detectors.
Guglielmo De Nardo for the BABAR collaboration Napoli University and INFN ICHEP 2010, Paris, 23 July 2010.
Charm Mixing and D Dalitz analysis at BESIII SUN Shengsen Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing (for BESIII Collaboration) 37 th International Conference.
Mark Vagins IPMU, University of Tokyo NNN11, Zurich Nov. 7, 2011 GADZOOKS! – Gadolinium in Water.
Mark Vagins Kavli IPMU, University of Tokyo/ UC Irvine Project X Physics Study, Fermilab June 20, 2012 Gadolinium in Water for a Next-Generation Detector.
I'm concerned that the OS requirement for the signal is inefficient as the charge of the TeV scale leptons can be easily mis-assigned. As a result we do.
Paper Committee: Moneti(chair?), Danko, Ehrlich, Galik 1 OCT 21, 2006.
Observation Gamma rays from neutral current quasi-elastic in the T2K experiment Huang Kunxian for half of T2K collaboration Mar. 24, Univ.
Mark Vagins Kavli IPMU, University of Tokyo 4 th Open Meeting for the Hyper-Kamiokande Project Kashiwa January 28, 2014 Gd Status.
30th International Cosmic Ray Conference in Merida, Mexico Michael Smy UC Irvine Low Energy Event Reconstruction and Selection in Super-Kamiokande-III.
(Xin-Heng Guo, Bing-Lin Young) Beijing Normal University
Neutrino astronomy Measuring the Sun’s Core
Observation of Diffractively Produced W- and Z-Bosons
Impact of neutrino interaction uncertainties in T2K
Observation of Diffractively Produced W- and Z-Bosons
Intae Yu Sungkyunkwan University (SKKU), Korea KNO 2nd KNU, Nov
Presentation transcript:

Supernova Relic Neutrinos at Super-Kamiokande Kirk Bays University of California, Irvine 1TAUP 2011

PeriodLive time# ID PMTs / % coverageComment SK-I1497 days11146 / 40%Experiment start SK-II791 days5182 / 19 %After accident SK-III562 days11129/ 40%After repair SK-IVrunning now11129/ 40%New electronics Super-Kamiokande (SK) SK is 50 kton water Cherenkov detector in the Kamioka mine, Japan (2700 mwe). It began operation in The data is divided into segments: SK-I, II, III, and IV. This study focuses on SK-I/II/III. 2TAUP 2011

Supernova Relic Neutrinos (SRNs) are a diffuse neutrino signal from all past supernovae. The SN1987A neutrinos are the only neutrinos ever detected from outside the solar system! Electron energy [MeV] SK Event Rate [/year /MeV] ν e + 16 O  16 N + e + ν e + 16 O  16 F + e - ν e + e  ν e + e - ν e + p  e + + n At Super-Kamiokande (SK), we can look for SRNs without waiting for a galactic supernova. The main interaction mode for SRNs in SK is charged current quasi-elastic interaction (inverse  decay) 3TAUP 2011

SRN rate in SK is low (few a year expected), and difficult to search for among the numerous backgrounds Most backgrounds can be fully eliminated: – Spallation – Solar neutrinos – radioactive backgrounds Some must be modeled: – Atmospheric backgrounds – World’s current best flux limit from 2003 SK study This study is now improved Visible energy [MeV] Atmospheric e Invisible  - e decay M. Malek, et al, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, (2003) 2003 final data sample. SRN events were searched for using a χ 2 fit, in an energy window of MeV, with two modeled atmospheric backgrounds 4TAUP 2011

Spallation cut improvement Cosmic ray muon spallation occurs < ~21 MeV; more as E lowers Spallation determines lower energy threshold Must be spall ‘free’ Cut highly improved E threshold now lowered from 18  16 MeV Efficiency of 2003 data: 64%  91% Improvements: New method of tracking spallation along muon track! (with dE/dx info) New tuning, better fitters, muon ID spallation products 5TAUP 2011

More data – (1497  2853 live days) Lower energy threshold – (18 MeV  16 MeV) – SK-II E thresh: 17.5 MeV More improved cuts: – Solar neutrino cut – radioactivity cut – new pion cut – many more SK-I efficiency increase Other improvements in event selection: final efficiencies (based on LMA MC) 6TAUP 2011

Remaining Backgrounds Final sample still mostly backgrounds, from atmospheric interactions; modeled w/ MC 1)  CC events – muons from atmospheric  ’s can be sub-Cherenkov; their decay electrons mimic SRNs – modeled with decay electrons 2) e CC events – indistinguishable from SRNs 3) NC elastic – low energy mostly 4 )  /  events – combination of muons and pions remaining after cuts all SRN cuts applied # events estimated in SK-I Backgrounds 1) and 2) were considered in the 2003 study. Backgrounds 3) and 4) are new! SK-I backgrounds 7TAUP 2011

Fitting method 2003 study used a binned  2 method to extract a SRN signal from the final data, assuming backgrounds We discovered the binning can have significant effect on result Moved to unbinned maximum likelihood method Now we model and search for many different SRN models, each with our four remaining backgrounds Where: F is the PDF for a particular channel; E is the event energy; c is the magnitude of each channel; and i represents a particular event, and j represents a channel: 1= SRN model 2-5 = background channels systematics considered: cut inefficiency systematic error energy scale and resolution background spectrum errors (conservative) 8TAUP 2011

SRN events expected (98% SK-I) in the central, signal region (38-50 o ) ‘Sidebands’ previously ignored Now that we consider new background channels, sidebands useful – NC elastic events occur at high C. angles –  /  events occur at low C. angles not used We now fit all three C. angle regions simultaneously Sidebands help normalize new backgrounds in signal region 9TAUP 2011 e e+e+ p n (invisible) Signal region 42 o μ, π Low angle events o NC region N reconstructed angle near 90 o

(LMA model) SK-I finds no evidence for SRNs 10TAUP 2011

SK-II and SK-III give positive fit for SRNs (no significance) Likelihoods (as fxn of SRN events) combined for a total result (limit) 11TAUP 2011

New Results: flux limits ( cm -2 s -1, 90% cl) E e+ > 16 MeVSK-ISK-IISK-IIICombinedPredicted LMA (03) <2.5<7.7<8.0< Cosmic gas Infall (97) <2.1<7.5<7.8< Heavy Metal (00) <2.2<7.4<7.8< Failed Supernova (09) <2.4<8.0<8.4< Chemical Evolution (97) <2.2<7.2<7.8< MeV (09)<2.7<7.4<8.7< TAUP 2011

COMPARISON TO PUBLISHED LIMIT /cm 2 /s >18 MeV Published limit1.2 cross section update to Strumia-Vissani1.2  1.4 Gaussian statistics  Poissonian statistics in fit1.4  1.9 New SK-I Analysis: E THRESH 18  16 MeV ε = 52%  78 % (LMA) (small statistical correlation in samples) improved fitting method takes into account NC 1.9  1.7 New SK-I/II/III combined fit1.7  2.0 (2.9 > 16 MeV) 13TAUP 2011

Limit Re-parameterization Elements of models now well known (very low error on cosmic star formation rate, initial mass functions, etc.) Elements are sufficiently known to recast new models into only 2 free parameters: – SN average luminosity – Temperature of a F-D spectrum Older models may use outdated parameters (i.e. incorrect star formation rate), care must be taken comparing with new results Positron spectra seen in SK resulting from F-D E spectrum 14TAUP 2011

LMA = Ando et al (LMA model) HMA = Kaplinghat, Steigman, Walker (heavy metal abundance) CGI = Malaney (cosmic gas infall) FS = Lunardini (failed SN model) CE = Hartmann/Woosley (chemical evolution) 4/6 MeV = Horiuchi et al temp Kamiokande 1987A allowed IMB 1987A allowed 15TAUP 2011

Outlook New SRN SK study ready Many improvements, now detailed, fully considered – better efficiency – more data – lower E threshold – new backgrounds considered – new fit, systematics Paper out soon SK-II/III shows excess; no statistical significance. Hint of a signal? Statistical fluctuation? How to get certainty? Gd 16TAUP 2011

IPMU Professor Mark Vagins and Fermilab theorist John Beacom proposed GADZOOKS! – Gadolinium Antineutrino Detector Zealously Outperforming Old Kamiokande, Super! [Phys. Rev. Lett., 93:171101, 2004]. GADZOOKS! - The Future of the SRN? Adding gadolinium to Super-K’s water would make neutrons visible, allowing: Rapid discovery and measurement of the diffuse supernova neutrino flux  determine total and average SN energy, rate of optically failed SN High statistics measurement of the neutrinos from Japan’s power reactors  greatly improved precision of  m 2 12 De-convolution of a galactic supernova’s signals  2X pointing accuracy Sensitivity to very late-time black hole formation following a galactic SN Early warning of an approaching SN burst (up to one week) from Si fusion Proton decay background reduction  about 5X, vital for future searches Matter- vs. antimatter-enhanced atmospheric samples  CPT violation? 17TAUP 2011

Following seven years of above ground studies in the US and Japan, we are now building a dedicated Gd test facility in the Kamioka mine, complete with its own water filtration system, cm PMT’s, and DAQ electronics. This 200 ton-scale R&D project is called EGADS – Evaluating Gadolinium’s Action on Detector Systems. EGADS Super-K Water system EGADS Hall (2500 m^ 3) Super-Kamiokande EGADS Facility 12/2009 2/2010 6/ /2010 By 2012, EGADS will have demonstrated conclusively whether or not gadolinium loading of Super-Kamiokande will be safe and effective. If it works, then this is the likely future of water Cherenkov detectors. 18

Latest EGADS News Egads test tank construction, water system complete – EGADS pure water transparency > SK Gd removal system ready – 10 6 removal in single pass Gd introduced in system – dissolved into water system, no problems – Gd water system circulation 99.97% efficient – Preliminary Gd water transparency good PMTs prepped, installed soon Electronics and DAQ by end of 2011 Full experimental program on track for 2012 TAUP

Thanks for your attention! TAUP

BACKUPS TAUP

List of models and references Cosmic Gas Infall – Malaney - R. A. Malaney, Astroparticle Physics 7, 125 (1997) Chemical evolution - D. H. Hartmann and S. E.Woosley, Astroparticle Physics 7, 137 (1997) Heavy Metal Abundance - M. Kaplinghat, G. Steigman, and T. P. Walker, Phys. Rev. D 62, (2000) Large Mixing Angle - S. Ando, K. Sato, and T. Totani, Astroparticle Physics 18, 307 (2003) (updated NNN05) Failed Supernova - C. Lunardini, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, (2009) (assume Failed SN rate = 22%, EoS = Lattimer-Swesty, and survival probability = 68%.) 6/4 MeV FD spectrum - S. Horiuchi, J. F. Beacom, and E. Dwek, Phys. Rev. D 79, (2009). TAUP

4 variable likelihood cut The 4 variables: – dl Longitudinal – dt – dl Transverse – Q Peak Use new, better μ fitters Tuned for each muon type (i.e. single, multiple, stopping μ) Improvements allow lowering of energy threshold to 16 MeV! distance along muon track (50 cm bins) p.e.’s Spallation Cut Q Peak = sum of charge in window spallation expected here New Cut (SK-I/III): 16 < E < 18 MeV: 18% signal inefficiency 18 < E < 24 MeV: 9% signal inefficiency Old cut (likelihood ms hard cut) 18 < E < 34: 36% signal inefficiency μ entry point μ track dl Transverse where peak of DE/DX plot occurs dl Longitudinal dE/dx Plot Relic Candidate OLD likelihood NEW! 23TAUP 2011

spallation distance variables TAUP

Solar 8 B and hep neutrino are a SRN background (hep at 18 MeV, and both at 16 MeV, because of energy resolution) Cut criteria is optimized using 8 B /hep MC New cut is now energy dependent, tuned in 1 MeV bins 25TAUP 2011 hep 8B8B pep pp e recoil energy (total) (MeV) energy resolution for an event of energy: 16 MeV 18 MeV Solar ν Events 7 Be 1618

combined ari good < < ari good < < ari good < < arigood integrated cos( θ sun ) cos( θ sun ) significances cos( θ sun ) Coulomb multiple scattering is estimated (‘arigood’); more scattering, more deviation from solar direction. Each energy bin is broken into ‘arigood’ bins; cut in each bin tuned using ‘significance’ function to maximize signal/background 1/2 26TAUP 2011

Systematics: NC elastic Keep spectra the same Change normalization in signal region by 100% – +1  = double (14.8% SK-I) – -1  = 0% Because of physical bound, apply error asymmetrically (-1  to +3  Instead of standard Gaussian weighing function (appropriate for symmetric case), use a weighted Gaussian function Maintain necessary properties: – expectation value = 0 – variance =   SK-I NC elastic normalization º º º 5.6%7.4%87% #  affect Weighing function applied (weighted Gaussian) 27TAUP 2011

Systematics: e CC 28 For e CC case, keep normalization, distort spectrum Use large error of 50% at 90 MeV (0 distortion at 16 MeV, linear between) Use same range (-1 to 3  ) and weighing function as NC case -2  would bring spectrum to 0 at 90 MeV, which is unphysical No distortion -1  +1  SK-I e CC PDF same weight fxn as NC case TAUP 2011

Systematics: Inefficiency 29 Define: – r = # relic events we see in data – R = # relic events actually occurring in detector – ε = efficiency (SK-I/II/III dependent) – assume ε follows a probability distribution P(ε) – assume P(ε) is shaped like Gaussian w/ width σ ineff – then we alter likelihood: then the 90% c.l. limit R 90 is such that σ ineff SK-I: 3.5% SK-II: 4.7% SK-III: 3.4% TAUP 2011

Systematics: energy scale, resolution Method: – Use MC, parameterize effects – ie for e-res, parameterize : f e-resolution (E) = (E true +(E recon - E true )*error) δ(E) = (f e-scale (E) 2 + f e-resolution (E) 2 ) 1/2 30 e-scale e-res SK-I: 1% 2.5% SK-II: 1.5% 2.5% SK-III: 1% 2.5% TAUP 2011

<1.8 Cosmic Gas Infall (Malaney, 1997) Chemical Evolution (Woosley & Hartmann, 1997) Heavy Metal Abundance (Kaplinghat et al, 2000) Low Mixing Angle (Ando et al, 2003) (NNN05 corrected) Failed Supernova (Lunardini, 2009) (failed SN rate =.22 survival P =.68) SK Limit Model Prediction Flux (/cm 2 /sec ) for E>16 MeV TAUP 2011