arxiv: v3 [hep-ex] 20 Aug 2013

Transcription

1 A Global Fit Determination of Effective m 31 from Baseline Depenence of Reactor ν e Disappearance T.J.C. Bezerra, H. Furuta, an F. Suekane Research Center for Neutrino Science, Tohoku University, Senai, , Japan T. Matsubara Department of Physics, Tokyo Metropolitan University, Tokyo, , Japan (Date: August 1, 013) arxiv: v3 [hep-ex] 0 Aug 013 Recently, three reactor neutrino experiments, Daya Bay, Double Chooz an RENO have irectly measure the neutrino mixing angle θ 13. In this paper, another important oscillation parameter, effective m 31 (= m 31) is measure using baseline epenence of the reactor neutrino isappearances. A global fit is applie to publicly available ata an m 31 = ev, sin θ 13 = are obtaine by setting both parameters free. This result is complementary to m 31 to be measure by spectrum shape analysis. The measure m 31 is consistent with m 3 measure by ν µ isappearance in MINOS, TK an atmospheric neutrinoexperiments within errors. The minimum χ is small, which means the results from the three reactor neutrino experiments are consistent with each other. I. INTRODUCTION Neutrino oscillation is a phenomenon which is not accounte for by the Stanar Moel of elementary particles, which assumes neutrinos as massless. There are six parameters in stanar three flavor neutrino oscillation [1]: three mixing angles between flavor eigenstates an mass eigenstates (θ 1, θ 13 an θ 3 ), one CP violating imaginary phase (δ), an two inepenent square mass ifferences: m jk m j m k, where m i are neutrino masses (m 1, m, m 3 ) of the three mass eigenstates (ν 1, ν, ν 3 ) which correspon to the largest component of (ν e, ν µ, ν τ ), respectively. θ 1 an m 1 have been measure by solar neutrino isappearance experiments (ν e ν e ) an long baseline reactor neutrino isappearance experiments ( ν e ν e ). θ 3 an m 3 have been measure by (ν µ ν µ ) isappearance experiments at accelerators an atmospheric experiments. All these measurements are summarize in [1]. Here, m is a weighte average of m 31 an m 3, calle effective m as escribe in etail later in this section. Recently, finite θ 13 was finally measure by short baseline reactor neutrino experiments ( ν e ν e ) [ 4] anlongbaselineacceleratorexperiments (ν µ ν e ) [5, 6]. Another effective mass square ifference m 31 can be measure by energy spectrum istortion an baseline epenence of the reactor-θ 13 experiments. This paper is to measure m 31 by baseline epenence of the reactor neutrino-θ 13 experiments. In reactor-θ 13 experiments, usually the neutrino isappearance is analyse by a two flavor neutrino oscillation formula; P( ν e ν e ) = 1 sin θ 13 sin m 31 4E ν L, (1) where L is baseline which is 1 km an E ν is neutrino energy, which is aroun a few MeV. m 31 is a weighte average of the two mass square ifferences, m 31 an m 3 of the stanar parametrization, m 31 = c 1 m +s m, () with c ij an s ij representing cosθ ij an sinθ ij, respectively [7]. In the analyses of reactor-θ 13 experiments so far publishe, sin θ 13 is extracte assuming m 31 = m 3, which is measure by MINOS experiment [8]. m 3 can be expresse as, m 3 = (s 1 +s 13 t 3 sinθ 1 cosδ) m 31 +(c 1 s 13 t 3 sinθ 1 cosδ) m 3, (3) where t ij = tanθ ij [7]. Since there is a relation m 31 = m 3 + m 1, (4) in the stanar three neutrino flavor scheme, the ifference between m 31 an m 3 is expresse as follows, ( m 31 m 3) m 31 + m 3 ±(1 s 13 t 3 tanθ 1 cosδ) cosθ 1 m 1 m ±0.01 (1±0.3), (5) 31 + m 3 Electronic aress: thiago@awa.tohoku.ac.jp Electronic aress: furuta@awa.tohoku.ac.jp Electronic aress: suekane@awa.tohoku.ac.jp Electronic aress: matsubara@hepmail.phys.se.tmu.ac.jp where the overall sign epens on mass hierarchy, an the ±0.3 term comes from the ambiguity of cosδ. The ifference is much smaller than the current precisions of measurements an can be treate practically equivalent. A precision better than 1% is necessary to istinguish

2 the mass hierarchy. However, if m 31 an m 3 are separately measure an if they turn out to be significantly ifferent, it means the stanar three flavour neutrino scheme is wrong. Thus it is important to measure m 31 inepenently from m 3 to test the stanar three flavour neutrino oscillation. The E epenence an L epenence analyses to extract m 31 use inepenent information, namely energy istortion an normalization an thus are complementary. Some of the authors emonstrate m 31 measurement using L epenence of eficit value of each reactor-θ 13 experiment in 01 [9, 10]. In this paper the analysis is significantly improve by applying a etaile global fit making use of the publicly available information of the three reactor neutrino experiments. In next section we re-analyze the publishe ata of each experiment an compare with the results written in the papers in orer to emonstrate our analysis prouces ientical result. Section-III iscusses about possible correlations between the experiments. In section-iv, most recent Double Chooz, Daya Bay an RENO results [, 4, 11] are combine an m 31 is extracte. Finally, a summary of this stuy is presente in section- V. II. REACTOR NEUTRINO DATA Details of each experiment an their ata are presente in this section an they are re-analyse by the authors in orer to emonstrate that the analysis methos use in this work are consistent with the publications from the experimental groups. The χ use in this section will be use to form global χ function in section-iv. A. Daya Bay The Daya Bay (DB) reactor neutrino experiment consists of three experimental halls (EH), containing one or more antineutrino etectors (AD). The AD array sees 6 reactors clustere into 3 pairs: Daya Bay (DB1, DB), Ling Ao (L1, L) an Ling Ao-II (L3, L4) power stations. Fig.-1 shows the relative locations of reactors an AD an table-i shows the istance between each combination of reactor an etector. All reactors are functionally ientical pressurize water reactors with maximum thermal power of.9 GW [3]. In DB publication, the χ is efine as χ DB(θ 13, m 31) = ( 6 [M +η T 1+a+ )] 6 r ω rα r +ǫ + 6 r α r σ r + M +B 6 ( ) ǫ + η (σ b, ) σ (6) FIG. 1: Relative locations of etectors an reactors of Daya Bay Experiment. Scale is approximate. where M are the measure neutrino caniate events of the -th AD with backgroun subtracte, B is the corresponing backgroun, T is the preiction from neutrino flux, Monte Carlo simulation (MC) an neutrino oscillation. ωr is the fraction of neutrino event contribution of the r-th reactor to the - th AD etermine by baselines an reactor fluxes. The uncorrelate reactor uncertainty is σ r. σ is the uncorrelate etection uncertainty, an σ b is the backgroun uncertainty, with the corresponing pullterms (α r,ǫ,η ). An absolute normalization factor a is etermine from the fit to the ata. The values of ωr are not shown in Daya Bay publications an was estimate using ω r = p r/l r r (p r/l r ) with p r = w r r w r, (7) where w r is the thermal power of each reactor an L r is the baseline of r-th reactor to -th etector. In this analysis, the value of p r is consiere 1/6 since all reactors have same nominal thermal power. The calculate ωr is shown in table-ii. All the others terms are shown in table-iii. By using equation-(6) an the ata from tables-ii an -III, we were able to reprouce Daya Bay s result, where T was multiplie by the value of the eficit probability (P ef r ), efine as: 8.0MeV Pr ef = 1 sin 1.8MeV θ sin (1.7 m L r E )n ν (E)E, nν (E)E (8) with m being measure in ev, L r in meters an E in MeV. n ν (E) is the expecte energy spectrum of the observe neutrinos which is calculate by n ν (E) = S(E)σ IBD (E). S(E)istheenergyspectrumofthereactor neutrinos, which is a sum of the energy spectrum of neutrinos from the four fissile elements: S(E ν ) = β i S i (E ν ), (9) i= 35 U, 38 U, 39 Pu, 41 Pu

3 3 where S i (E ν ) is reactor neutrino spectrum per fission from fissile element i an β i is a fraction of fission rate of fissile element i. For equilibrium light water reactors, β i are similar an we use the values of Bugey paper [1], namely 35 U : 38 U : 39 Pu : 41 Pu = : : 0.38 : In this stuy, S i (E) is approximate as an exponential of a polynomial function which is efine in [13], 6 S i (E ν ) exp j=1 α j E (j 1) ν. (10) B. RENO The Reactor Experiment for Neutrino Oscillation (RENO) is locate in South Korea an has two ientical etectors, one near (ND) an one far (FD) from an array of six commercial nuclear reactors, as shown in fig.-3. σ IBD is the cross section of the inverse process of neutron β-ecay (IBD), that can be precisely calculate from the neutron lifetime [14]. The energy epenence of the IBD cross section is, σ IBD (E ν ) (E ν [MeV] 1.9) Eν.59E ν (11) sin θ 13 is extracte by fixing m 31 as the MINOS m 3 = ev [8]. The χ istributions of the Daya Bay paper an our calculation are compare in fig.-. The Daya Bay central value an uncertainty is sin θ 13DB = ± while our analysis showe sin θ 13 = , in goo agreement with the publishe value. We also verifie how ifferent values for the fission rates coefficients of equation-(10) an ifferent assumptions for equation-(7), affect the final result. Depenence on the burn-up values is less than 0.001, as it was etermine by replacing the burn-up assumption with that of the Chooz reactors at the beginning an en of the reactor cycle. Extreme assumptions on equation- (7) (one or two reactors off for the whole ata perio, for example) ha an effect of less than 0.00 on the central value, with no change on the sensitivity. Moreover, the goo agreement between the χ istributions, shows that the assumptions are reasonable. FIG. : χ istribution with respect to sin θ 13 by fixing m as m 3 for Daya Bay ata. The black curve is the χ istribution shown in their paper [11] with central value an 1σ uncertainty of 0.089±0.011, while the re curve shows the χ istribution calculate in this analysis with central value an 1σ uncertainty of FIG. 3: Relative locations of etectors an reactors of RENO. Scale is approximate. Together with the istances of each etector reactor pair, the contribution of each reactor flux to each etector for the perio of their first analysis is available [15] an are summarize in table-iv. The RENO χ is efine as: χ RE(θ 13, m 31) = [ Nobs +b (1+n+ξ ) 6 r (1+f r)nexp,r + N obs ( ) ξ (σ ξ + b ) (σ b + ) r fr σr, ] (1) where Nobs is the number of observe IBD caniates in each etector after backgroun subtraction an Nexp,r is the number of expecte neutrino events, incluing etection efficiency, neutrino oscillations an contribution from the r th reactor to each etector etermine from baseline istances an reactor fluxes. A global normalization n is taken free an etermine from the fit to the ata. The uncorrelate reactor uncertainty is σ r, σ ξ is the uncorrelate etection uncertainty, an σ b is the backgroun uncertainty, an the corresponing pull parameters are (f r, ξ, b ). The values of these variables are shown in the table-v. The expecte number of events for both etectors are not present in the RENO paper, but the ratio between ata an expectation is shown. This ratio an the quantities of table-iv were use to calculate the expectation value (Nexp).,r Using the ata in the table-v, equation-(8) an the MINOS m 3, we obtaine sin θ 13 = ± 0.04 which is in goo agreement with their publishe value

4 4 of sin θ 13RE = 0.113±0.03. The χ istributions are also very similar as shown in fig.-4. energy spectrum analysis. The relative neutrino-flux uncertainty for reactor-off perio is much larger than reactor-on perio. The ominant uncertainty comes from long-life isotopes whose abunance are not well known. It has negligible contribution in reactor-on perio [17]. Therefore, we regar the error correlation on neutrino flux between the reactor ON an OFF perios tobeuncorrelate. Weperformeasimilarχ analysisas Daya Bay an RENO cases, assuming that the etector an backgroun relate uncertainties of [17] an [] are fully correlate. FIG. 4: χ istribution with respect to sin θ 13 by fixing m as m 3 for RENO ata. The black curve shows the χ istribution shown in their paper [4] with central value an 1 σ uncertainty of 0.113±0.03, while the re curve shows the χ istribution calculate in this analysis with central value an 1 σ uncertainty of 0.111±0.04. χ DC (θ 13, m 31 [ ) = N obs i i=1 + i ( αi σ i r (N exp i (1+α i +ǫ)+b i (1+b)) ] ) + ǫ σ N exp i + b σb, +B i (13) C. Double Chooz The Double Chooz (DC) experiment uses the two Chooz B reactorswith thermal powerof 4.5GW th each. Currently, the experiment is using only the far etector, since its near etector is not complete yet. The Bugey-4 measurement [1] is use as a reference of the absolute neutrino flux in the analysis, an the relative location of the far etector an reactors are shown in fig.-5, where the istances from the etector to each reactor are an meters [16]. where N obs is the number of the observe neutrino event caniates. The subscript i represents reactor- ON an OFF perio. N exp is the number of expecte neutrino events, incluing etection efficiency an oscillation effects, an B is the total expecte number of backgroun events. The σ r, σ, an σ b are the reactor, etection an backgroun uncertainties, respectively. The corresponing pull parameters are (α, ǫ, b). Using the parameters shown in table-vi, we obtaine sin θ 13 = ± which is consistent with the result of the DC publication, sin θ 13 = 0.109± 0.039, although the backgroun evaluation methos are ifferent using ifferent atasets. We alsoi arate only analysis of the Double Chooz ata, which result agree with the publishe one. III. CORRELATION EVALUATION OF SYSTEMATIC UNCERTAINTIES FIG. 5: Relative locations of etector an reactors of Double Chooz experiment. Scale is approximate. The Double Chooz collaboration publishe a rate plus shape analysis result []. An effect of the shape analysis in this case is an evaluation of main backgrouns of 9 Li an fast-neutron from the energy spectrum beyon the reactor neutrino energy range. Since information of etaile energy spectrum, which is necessary to reprouce the analysis, are not publicly available, we o not consier here the shape analysis but restrict only to the rate analysis. After the secon publication on the sin θ 13 measurement, the Double Chooz group publishe a result of the irect measurement of backgrouns by making use of 7.53 ays reactor-off perio [17]. We use these ata in aition to the backgroun evaluation inputs written in [] to improve the backgroun estimation instea of the In reactor neutrino experiments, the expecte number of observe events (N exp ) is efine by: N exp = 1 4πL N pε P th E f σ f, (14) where L is the reactor-etector baseline, N p is the number of targets in the etector, ε is the etector efficiency, P th is the reactor thermal power, E f is the mean energy release per fission, an σ f is the crosssection per fission efine as: σ f = β i S i (E)σ IBD (E)E. (15) i For each experiment, L, N p, ε, an P th terms are etermine inepenently. Therefore they can be assume to be uncorrelate. Onthe other han, E f an σ f terms are taken from the same references an the uncertainties

5 5 of these terms are correlate between the experiments. From the Bugey an Chooz experimental results, the total uncertainty on spectrum preiction is.7%, where a % correlation is expecte between the experiments as treate in [18]. Fully correlate signal preiction uncertainties between experiments, which come from neutrino flux an etection efficiency, can be cancelle by overall normalization factors use in the analyses of the Daya Bay an RENO. It allows us only to take into account remaining uncertainties between etectors or perios for each experiment. Daya Bay an RENO treat the remaining uncertainties as uncorrelate in their publications. In fig.-8 the baseline epenence of the isappearance probability of each etector is shown, where the IV. COMBINED ANALYSIS As explaine before, the main metho of this work is to combine all the ata of the current neutrino reactor experiments in a single χ function. Then we look for the minimum χ value, calculate the χ istribution, an etermine the confience level regions. The χ function use for such analysis was chosen so as to use the ata fromtables-ito-viaswellasthe correlationasescribe in section-iii. The efinition of our global χ is, FIG. 6: Absolute χ value calculate for each pair of m 31 an sin θ 13, an by the minimization of the pull terms. For higher values of m 31 (bigger than 10 ev ) some valleys are present, although they are about more than ten times less sensitive than the minimum χ. χ G χ DB +χ DC +χ RE, (16) with the χ of each experiment efine as in section- II. Therefore, this function has 3 pull terms: 18 for Daya Bay (6 reactors, 6 etectors an 6 backgrouns), 10 for RENO (6 reactors, etectors an backgrouns) an 4 for Double Chooz ( reactors, 1 etector an 1 backgroun). It also contains the two overall normalization factors, one for Daya Bay an the other for RENO ata set. For all combinations of m an sin θ, the χ G is minimize with respect to the pull terms. Fig.-6 shows a map of the absolute χ an fig.-7 shows the χ contour map near the χ min, obtaine by such proceure. From the minimum point an the 1 σ error region in the 1-D χ istribution, χ min = 5.14/6 Degrees of Freeom, m 31 = ev, sin θ 13 = are obtaine. This m 31 is consistent with m 3 measure by accelerator experiments [8, 19], confirming the stanar three flavor neutrino oscillation within the error. The sin θ 13 obtaine here is inepenent from m 3. The small χ min /DoF means the ata from the three reactor neutrino experiments are consistent with each other. All the pull terms output were within 1 σ from the input value, an the normalization factors obtaine from the fit to the ata, were both less than 1%. ] ev -3 [10 31 m ~ ] ev -3 [10 m ~ sin θ sin 1 θ 13 FIG. 7: χ istribution aroun the χ min. From the inner to the outer part, the lines correspon to 1 σ, σ an 3 σ confience level. The star shows the best fit point. There is no solution more significant than 3 σ except for the χ min valley. probability is calculate using the parameters output which give the best fit. The Double Chooz has a large effect on this m 31 etermination because it locates at a baseline where the slope of the oscillation is large. In the near future, when the near etector of the Double Chooz experiment starts operation, the accuracy of this m 31 measurement is expecte to improve much.

6 6 / N expecte N etecte Best Fit: sin θ 13 = & m ~ 31 =.96 x 10-3 ev -3 Best Fit: sin θ m ~ 13 = & 31 =.95 x 10 ev -3 sin θ m ~ 13 = & 31 =.3 x 10 ev Daya Bay Double Chooz RENO Weighte Baseline [m] FIG. 8: Reactor ν e survival probabilities. The soli line is the oscillation pattern obtaine in this analysis an ot-ashe line uses MINOS m 3 an the sin θ 13 that returns the minimum χ. The ata points are below the m 3 because they are calculate using the parameters returne by the best fit solution. Generally, a etector sees several reactors. The horizontal axis is a weighte baseline L an the horizontal bar in each ata point shows the stanar eviation of the istribution of the baselines, which is efine by σ L = L L, where L n k P kl n k / k P kl k. k is the reactor inex an L k an P k are the baseline an thermal power of the reactor k. Complementary to this stuy, we emonstrate a similar, but simpler an robust measurement of the effective m 31 from the baseline epenence of the isappearance probabilities of the three reactor-θ 13 experiments [9, 10]. The result obtaine on that work of m 31 = ev, is compatible with the value obtaine in this paper. In aition, a similar χ istribution is presente in [0, fig.-4]. However, the central value of m 31 coul not be compare since only the istribution is presente. Acknowlegement This work was supporte by Ministry of Eucation, Culture, Sport an Technology of Japan; Grantin-Ai for Specially Promote Research (000100) an GCOE an focuse research project programs of Tohoku University. We appreciate, Dr. H. Nunokawa, Dr. G. Mention, Dr. D. Lhuillier, the DC an DCJapan groups for useful iscussions an comments. We also appreciate Daya Bay, RENO an Double Chooz members who have taken great effort to prouce the precious ata. V. SUMMARY Inthiswork,aglobalfitoftheatafromallthecurrent reactor-θ 13 experiments was performe to measure m 31. The combination of the ata from Daya Bay, RENOanDoubleChoozresultein m 31 = ev. This is consistent with m 3 an it confirms that the experiments are observing stanar three flavor neutrino oscillations within the error. The mixing angle obtaine this analysis is sin θ 13 = The small χ min /DoF value inicates that the ata from the three reactor experiments are consistent with each other. This analysis uses inepenent information from the energy spectrum istortion an it is possible to improve theaccuracyof m 31 combiningwithresultsfromenergy spectrum analysis. It will be important to perform this kin of analysis to improve m 31 accuracy an to check the consistency of the results from the reactor-θ 13 experiments.

7 7 Tables TABLE I: Daya Bay: Baselines, in meters, between each etector an core [11, tab.-]. DB1 DB L1 L L3 L4 AD AD AD AD AD AD TABLE II: Daya Bay: Contribution to each etector from reactor, ω r, calculate using equation-(7). DB1 DB L1 L L3 L4 AD AD AD AD AD AD TABLE III: Daya Bay: Fitting parameters. Differently from [11], here the efficiency an backgrouns (BKG) are combine in a single quantity for each etector. The total BKG is subtracte from the IBD caniates giving M. AD1 AD AD3 AD4 AD5 AD6 ν caniate T Total BKG [ay 1 ] 13.68± ± ± ± ± ±0.4 Live Time [ays] Efficiency M σ b σ σ r TABLE IV: RENO: Baselines an neutrino flux contributions [15, page-7]. R1 R R3 R4 R5 R6 FD baseline [m] FD contribution ND baseline [m] ND contribution TABLE V: RENO: Fitting parameters. Differently from [4], here the BKGs are summe into a single quantity. The total BKGissubtractefromtheIBDcaniatesgivingN obs. N exp is calculate as escribe in section II B. ND FD IBD caniates Nexp Total BKG [ay 1 ] 1.75± ±0.75 Live Time [ays] Efficiency N obs σ σ r σ b

8 8 TABLE VI: Double Chooz: Fitting parameters [, 17]. The etector uncertainty is the combination of etector response an efficiency uncertainties, an the BKGs are combine in a single quantity for each ata set. Reactor-On Reactor-Off IBD caniates IBD preiction Total BKG [ay 1 ].18± ±0.58 Live Time [ays] σ σ r

9 9 [1] K. Nakamura et al. (Particle Data Group), J. Phys. G 37: (010). [] Y. Abe et al. (Double Chooz Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 86: (01). [3] F.P. An et al.(daya Bay Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 108: (01). [4] J.K. Ahn et al. (RENO Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 108: (01). [5] P. Aamson et al. (MINOS Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 8: (011). [6] K. Abe et al. (TK Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 107: (011). [7] H. Nunokawa et al. Phys. Rev. D 7: (005). [8] P. Aamson et al. (MINOS Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 106: , (011). [9] T.J.C. Bezerra, H. Furuta an F. Suekane, arxiv [Hep-ex], 6/June/01. [10] T.J.C. Bezerra, H. Furuta an F. Suekane, Neutrino01, Poster ID.50-1, 4.June.01, [11] F.P. An et al. (Daya Bay Collaboration), Chinese Phys. C 37: (013). [1] Y. Declais et al. Phys. Lett. B 338 (1994). [13] Th.A. Mueller et al. Phys. Rev. C83: (011). [14] P. Vogel an J.F. Beacom, Phys. Rev. D 60: (1999). [15] S-B. Kim, Invite talk on Results from RENO, [16] M. Apollonio et al. (Chooz Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B 466: 415 (1999). [17] Y. Abe et al. (Double Chooz Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 87: (013). [18] G. Mention et al. Phys. Rev. D 83: (011). [19] K. Abe et al. (TK Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 85: (01). [0] M.C. Gonzalez-Garcia et al., J. High Energy Phys. 1: 1-4 (01).