The relevance of XENON10 constraints in this low-mass region has been questioned [15] C.E. Aalseth et al. arxiv: v1

Transcription

1 The relevance of XENON10 constraints in this low-mass region has been questioned [15] C.E. Aalseth et al. arxiv: v1 Peter Sorensen LLNL on behalf of the XENON10 Collaboration at UC Davis HEFTI Workshop Light Dark Matter

2 Historical Note: last HEFTI workshop check check not yet check 2

3 arxiv: v1 [astro-ph.im] XENON10 detector 14 kg Xe S2: secondary scintillation S1: primary scintillation S2 hit pattern gives (x,y) t S2 - t S1 gives z 3

4 Discrimination (old news) γ,β neutrons γ,β neutrons Sorensen PhD Thesis (2008) 43

5 What determines threshold?...incorporating the S2 threshold, resulting in an energy-dependent acceptance at low energies... is complicated. M Kuhlen, N Weiner et al. JCAP02 (2010) 030 PRD (2009) reminder: kevr = phe in this case, i.e. assumption that Leff=0.19 5

6 S1 detection efficiency in XENON10 red (x) curve originally appeared in: Nucl. Instr. Meth. A (2009).295-6:01, "#! ""! "!! *! )! (! '! &! %! $! #! "! Compton background (~flat),3,.-425/4,.2;3/+<-< +<4=/><--,4/6,<4.1/+<-<!?" /@6;>93<-;25A/"/B42>/"'%/=,C/+<-<D!?" /@6;>93<-;25A/"/B3<-/#!E)!D! /! " # $ % & ' ( ) * "! "" "# "$ "% "& +,-,.-,+/012-2!,3,.-4256/////701,8 / we measure 7 ev photons (175 nm) roughly 10% total detection efficiency for scintillation photon => PMT photo-electron require n-fold PMT coincidence : XENON10: n>1 ZEPLIN III: n>2 efficiency predicted by Poisson stats. in PMT photo-electrons (simulation) S1 detection limits threshold... what about S2? 6

7 Single electron pulses ~25 phe '!,-.0/12,3.,-.0/12,3. %! #! "4& "!4& "$+,-. %!)!+,-. #&+,-.!! "! #! $! %! &! '! (! )! *! "!! ""! "#! "$! "%! "&! µ/ " # # "! "4& " &!4& /9:;3.!.3.<=>6:+8# 1 e-! ")4* "* µ/! (* )! )" )# )$ µ/! "!$ "!% µ/ Figure 4.6: The summed event record for a typical 4 kevee background γ scatter, showing a 61 µs drift time between S1 and S2, and also an isolated 25 phe single-electron S2 pulse at 103 µs. The primary S2 pulse (at 80 µs) triggered the DAQ in this event, however the S2 trigger was sensitive to single-electron S2 pulses as small as 10 phe (see Fig.??). The PMT hit-patterns are indicated for each pulse; the lower subplots show a zoom (and PMT hits on individual channels) on each pulse

8 Recent work on S2 calibration & threshold S2 trigger efficiency 10 3 kevr: from XENON10 neutron calibration (AmBe). The calibration, analysis, etc already described in (with focus on S1 signal): Nucl. Instr. Meth. A (2009) counts / electron require S1 S2 (electron) response to nuclear recoils, rather than S1 (scintillation) response 10 0 fit range electrons extracted from liquid xenon S2 energy resolution assumed Poisson in number of electrons 8

9 Result of monte carlo best fit E = 730 V/cm PRC (2010) energy scaling obtained from scattering angle Nucl. Instr. Meth. A (2009) energy scaling obtained from S1, via Leff This work energy scaling obtained from S2 systematic uncertainty The Qy curve allows us to assign a kevr value to every event, based on its S2 9

10 Nuclear recoils from AmBe neutrons log10(s2 / S1) log10(s2 / S1) all valid events in the 5.4 kg target kevr the same data after all cuts kevr

11 Coherent neutrino scattering P.S. Barbeau, J.I. Collar et al. IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON NUCLEAR SCIENCE, VOL. 50, NO. 5, OCTOBER 2003 ~ 1 kevr, assuming ~0.15 quenching of ionization signal... Yikes. 11

12 single-scatter Compton background in XENON accidentals trigger threshold ~8 kevee (above coherent neutrino scatter threshold) 10 1 clear need for a monoenergetic energy calibration at low energy same data scaled to kevr electrons 10 1 same data as previously reported in PRD (2009) PRL (2008) except no S2/S1 discrimination (hence Compton-dominated) counts / kevr / kg / day green/red show +/- 1sigma uncertainty in energy calibration kevr [from Q y ]

13 Typical Events at threshold phe / sample phe / sample phe ADC samples [105 MHz] phe ADC samples [105 MHz]

14 Coming back to S Nucl. Instr. Meth. A (2009) For each nuclear recoil: assign a kevr value based on S2, with scaling taken from PRC (2010), or the present work (very similar results either way) obtain Leff from the S1 data, via the usual formula L eff PRC (2010) This work PRC (2010) [kevr] E nr systematic uncertainty 14

15 S1 detection efficiency (scaled to kevr) PRC (2010) ratio of histogram in slide 7 same curve as in slide 5, scaled to kevr via Leff conservative assumption 15

16 Spin-independent sensitivity doesn t change (much)!3+ XENON10 solid curve: S1 efficiency assumed constant above threshold ()* +, -"". "/""""""""""#0! 1 '!31!32 PRL PRD dashed curves: S1 efficiency taken from conservative assumption on slide 10!33 +, + +, 1 +, 2!! """"""""""#$%&' 16

17 Comparing... JCAP02 (2010) 014 (appears overly optimistic)!3+ ()* +, -"". "/""""""""""#0! 1 '!31!32 PRL PRD !33 +, + +, 1 +, 2!! """"""""""#$%&' 17

18 Coming full-circle arxiv: v1 [astro-ph.co]!3+ ()* +, -"". "/""""""""""#0! 1 '!31!32 PRL PRD !33 +, + +, 1 +, 2!! """"""""""#$%&' 18

19 10 38 and around again log 10 ( " n ) [cm 2 ] arxiv: v1 [astro-ph.co] XENON10 S2-only (no discrimination) energy range kevr flat 0.35 cts/kevr/kg.day red curve: efficiency falling <4 kevr 58.6 live days 8.6 kg target Poisson 90% C.L. upper limit m! [GeV] XENON10 PRD with S1 detection efficiency 19

20 End 20