Effect of systematics in T2HK, T2HKK, DUNE

Transcription

1 1/22 Effect of systematics in T2HK, T2HKK, DUNE Osamu Yasuda Tokyo Metropolitan University September 14, 2018 Ostuni Rosa Marina Based on PRD 96 ( 17) , Monojit Ghosh & OY PTEP 2018 ( 18) 063C01, 7.1, Monojit Ghosh & OY et al. (Hyper-Kamiokande Proto- Collaboration)

2 2/22 Outline of this talk 1. Introduction 2. Sensitivity of T2HK, DUNE, T2HKK for std case 3. Sensitivity of T2HK, DUNE, T2HKK for NSI 4. Conclusions

3 1. Introduction Framework of 3 flavor ν oscillation Mixing matrix Functions of mixing angles θ 12, θ 23, θ 13, and CP phase δ ν ν ν e = μ τ U U U e1 μ1 τ1 U U U e2 μ2 τ2 U U U e3 μ3 τ3 All 3 mixing angles have been measured (2012): ν ν ν Both hierarchy patterns are allowed Normal Hierarchy Inverted Hierarchy ν solar +KamLAND (reactor) θ π , m ev ν atm +K2K,MINOS(accelerators) π DCHOOZ+Daya Bay+Reno (reactors), T2K+MINOS+Nova etc θ 23, m ev 4 θ 13 π / 20 3/22

4 Next task is to measure sign(δm 2 31 ) (Mass Hierarchy), π/4-θ 23 (Octant) and δ (CP) Proposed experiments Normal Hierarchy Inverted Hierarchy T2HK(JP, JPARC-->HK) L=295km, E~0.6GeV T2HHK(JP, JPARC-->Korea) L=1100km, E~1GeV DUNE (US, FNAL-->Homestake, SD), L=1300km, E~2GeV (----) ν μ ν (----) (----) (----) μ + ν μ ν e These experiments are expected to measure sign(δm 2 31 ), π/4-θ 23 and δ 4/22

5 5/22 In these long baseline experiments with intensive beams, systematic errors become important to sensitivity. In this talk, we examine dependence of the sensitivity on the systematic errors.

6 6/22 2. Sensitivity of T2HK, DUNE, T2HKK for std case 2.1 Preliminary The parameters assumed here: T2HK (L=295km, 187 kton fiducial volume) x2 ν:anti-ν = 1:3 Total exposure: 27 x POT DUNE L=1300km, 1.2MW, 40 kt LiAr detector, ν:anti-ν = 1:1 Total exposure: 10 X POT

7 T2HKK (L=295km, 187 kton fiducial volume) + (L=1100km, 187 kton fiducial volume) ν:anti-ν = 1:3 Total exposure: 27 x POT Off axis Angle = 1.5 o is the best (w/ max #(events)) 7/22

8 Sensitivity to Mass Hierarchy, Octant, CP has been studied in the past 8/22 Fukasawa, Ghosh, OY, NPB918 ( 17) 337

9 Outline of our Analysis Start with χ 2 with statistical errors: Sensitivity to Mass Hierarchy Sensitivity to Octant Sensitivity to CP N i true = N i true (δ) N i test = N i test (δ=0) N i true = N i true (Δm μμ 2 ) N i test = N i test (-Δm μμ 2 ) + N i true = N i true (θ 23 ) N i test = N i test (π/4-θ 23 ) N i true = N i true (δ) N i test = N i test (δ=π) 9/22

10 10/22 Then introduce the systematic errors: normalization error tilt error Final χ 2 we work with:

11 Reference values of the systematic errors HK arxiv: DUNE arxiv: channel HK DUNE ν disappearance 3.3% 5% appearance 3.3% 2% ν disappearance 4.5% 5% appearance 6.2% 2% c 1 = signal normalization error c 2 = background normalization error c 3 = signal tilt error c 4 = background tilt error For simplicity we assume c 1 = c 2 for all channels and vary only c 1 & c 2 ; c 3 = c 4 = 10% (2.5%) for T2HK(K) (DUNE) 11/22

12 2.2 Sensitivity to Mass Hierarchy PRD 96 ( 17) , Monojit Ghosh & OY True IH True NH θ 23 =45 o θ 23 =45 o c 1 = c 2 c 1 = c 2 Dependence of T2HK & DUNE stronger than that of T2HKK If true MH is NH & δ=-90 o & c 1 < 3.5% then T2HK is sufficient to determine MH at 5σ 12/22

13 2.3 Sensitivity to Octant PRD 96 ( 17) , Monojit Ghosh & OY θ 23 =42 o θ 23 =48 o c 1 = c 2 c 1 = c 2 Dependence of T2HK stronger than that of others Significance of Lower Octant (θ 23 <45 o ) larger than that of Higher Octant (θ 23 >45 o ) 13/22

14 14/ Sensitivity to CP PRD 96 ( 17) , Monojit Ghosh & OY True NH True IH c c 1 = 1 = c 2 c 2 Dependence of T2HK stronger than that of T2HKK If MH is known then T2HK w/ c 1 <2% is better than T2HKK

15 3. Sensitivity of T2HK, DUNE, T2HKK for NSI in ν propagation 2. New Physics in propagation 3.1 Preliminary Phenomenological New Physics considered in this talk: 4-fermi Non Standard Interactions: ν α f neutral current non-standard interaction ν β f Modification of matter effect NP 15/22

16 Constraints on ε αβ Various non-oscillation ν experiments Davidson et al., JHEP 0303:011,2003; Berezhiani, Rossi, PLB535 ( 02) 207; Barranco et al., PRD73 ( 06) ; Barranco et al., arxiv: Biggio et al., JHEP 0908, 090 (2009) w/o 1-loop arguments μ-components are all small High energy behavior of ν atm data ε ττ - ε eτ 2 /(1+ε ee ) <<1 Friedland-Lunardini, PRD72:053009, 05 16/22

17 17/22 Ansatz of our analysis on ε αβ To a good approximation, we are left with 3 independent variables ε ee, ε eτ, arg(ε eτ )=φ 31 : We perform analysis with 3 independent variables ε ee, ε eτ, φ 31 =arg(ε eτ ) and give the allowed region in the (ε ee, ε eτ ) plane by marginalizing w.r.t. φ 31 =arg(ε eτ )

18 Comment on the approximation ε ττ = ε eτ 2 /(1+ε ee ) The sensitivity to (ε ee, ε eτ ) w/ or w/o this approximation is slightly different. ε eτ Sensitivity of T2HKK to (ε ee, ε eτ ) at 3σ ε ττ = ε eτ 2 /(1+ε ee ) ε ττ free δ CP =-90 o θ 23 =45 o PTEP 2018 ( 18) 063C01, 7.1, Monojit Ghosh & OY et al. (Hyper- Kamiokande Proto- Collaboration) ε 18/22

19 3.1 Sensitivity to (ε ee, ε eτ ) T2HK (not plotted) has too short baseline length (L=295km)-> Sensitivity to NSI is much worse than others δ CP =-90 o θ 23 =45 o arg(ε eτ )=0 PRD 96 ( 17) , Monojit Ghosh & OY DUNE better than T2HKK; Reduction from 5% to 3% enhances sensitivity to NSI in both experiments 19/22

20 Sensitivity of T2HKK to (ε ee, ε eτ ) for various values of θ 23 and δ CP NH 3σ PTEP 2018 ( 18) 063C01, 7.1, Monojit Ghosh & OY et al. (Hyper- Kamiokande Proto- Collaboration) The behaviors w.r.t. the systematic errors are similar. 20/22

21 21/ Sensitivity to φ 31 arg(ε eτ ) & δ CP PRD 96 ( 17) , Monojit Ghosh & OY T2HKK better than DUNE; Reduction from 5% to 3% in T2HKK enhances sensitivity to the phases

22 4. Conclusion 22/22 Measurements of the oscillation parameters at the future LBL experiments are sensitive to the systematic errors in the standard 3 flavor case as well as in the NSI case. [Standard case] If Mass Hierarchy is known & systematic error can be reduced to < 2%, then T2HK has the best sensitivity to CP. [NSI case] T2HK has much poorer sensitivity to NSI than other two; For (ε ee, ε eτ ), DUNE w/ c 1 < 5% is the best; For (δ CP, arg(ε eτ )), T2HKK w/ c 1 < 3% is the best.

23 Backup slides 23/22

24 24/22 Hierarchy degeneracy in the three-flavor scenario H. Nunokawa, S. J. Parke, R. Zukanovich Funchal, PRD 72, (2005)

25 Sensitivity to Mass Hierarchy 25/22 PRD 96 ( 17) , Monojit Ghosh & OY θ 23 =45 o θ 23 =45 o

26 Sensitivity to Mass Hierarchy 26/22 PRD 96 ( 17) , Monojit Ghosh & OY θ 23 =45 o θ 23 =45 o

27 Sensitivity to Octant 27/22 PRD 96 ( 17) , Monojit Ghosh & OY

28 Sensitivity to Octant 28/22 PRD 96 ( 17) , Monojit Ghosh & OY

29 Sensitivity to (ε ee, ε eτ ) 29/22 PRD 96 ( 17) , Monojit Ghosh & OY True δ CP =-90 o θ 23 =45 o φ 31 =0

30 Sensitivity to (ε ee, ε eτ ) 30/22 PRD 96 ( 17) , Monojit Ghosh & OY True δ CP =-90 o θ 23 =45 o φ 31 =0

31 31/22 Sensitivity to φ 31 arg(ε eτ ) & δ CP PRD 96 ( 17) , Monojit Ghosh & OY True δ CP =-90 o θ 23 =45 o φ 31 =0

32 32/22 Sensitivity to φ 31 arg(ε eτ ) & δ CP PRD 96 ( 17) , Monojit Ghosh & OY True δ CP =-90 o θ 23 =45 o φ 31 =0

33 33/22 Sensitivity of T2HKK to (ε ee, ε eτ ) w/ or w/o marginalization w.r.t. each Δm 2 jk PTEP 2018 ( 18) 063C01, 7.1, Monojit Ghosh & OY et al. (Hyper-Kamiokande Proto-Collaboration)

34 34/22 Sensitivity of T2HKK to (ε ee, ε eτ ) for various values of θ 23 and δ CP PTEP 2018 ( 18) 063C01, 7.1, Monojit Ghosh & OY et al. (Hyper-Kamiokande Proto-Collaboration)

35 35/22 Sensitivity of T2HKK to (ε ee, ε eτ ) for various values of θ 23 w/o the condition ε ττ = ε eτ 2 /(1+ε ee ) PTEP 2018 ( 18) 063C01, 7.1, Monojit Ghosh & OY et al. (Hyper- Kamiokande Proto- Collaboration)