Limits on neutrino oscillations from<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mover><mml:mrow><mml:mi>ν</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>¯</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mover><mml:mrow><mml:mi>e</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math>appearance

Freedman, S. J.; Fujikawa, B. K.; Napolitano, J.; Nelson, J.; McKeown, R. D.; Lesko, K. T.; Donahue, J. B.; Garvey, G. T.; Sandberg, V.; Choi, W.C.; Fazely, A. R.; Imlay, R.; Metcalf, W.; Durkin, L. S.; Harper, R. W.; Ling, T. Y.; Mitchell, J.W.; Romanowski, T. A.; Smith, E. S.; Timko, M.

doi:10.1103/physrevd.47.811

Cited by 25 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The LANSCE beam dump has been used as the neutrino source for previous experiments [15,16,17]. A calibration experiment [18] measured the rate of stopped µ + from a low-intensity proton beam incident on an instrumented beam stop.…”

Section: The Neutrino Sourcementioning

confidence: 99%

Measurement of electron-neutrino electron elastic scattering

et al. 2001

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The cross section for the elastic scattering reaction νe + e − → νe + e − was measured by the Liquid Scintillator Neutrino Detector using a µ + decay-at-rest νe beam at the Los Alamos Neutron Science Center. The standard model of electroweak physics predicts a large destructive interference between the charge current and neutral current channels for this reaction. The measured cross section, σ νee − = [10.1 ± 1.1(stat.) ± 1.0(syst.)] × Eν e (MeV) ×10 −45 cm 2 , agrees well with standard model expectations. The measured value of the interference parameter, I = −1.01 ± 0.13(stat.) ± 0.12(syst.), is in good agreement with the standard model expectation of I SM = −1.09. Limits are placed on neutrino flavorchanging neutral currents. An upper limit on the muon-neutrino magnetic moment of 6.8 × 10 −10 µ Bohr is obtained using the νµ andνµ fluxes from π + and µ + decay.

show abstract

Section: The Neutrino Sourcementioning

confidence: 99%

Measurement of electron-neutrino electron elastic scattering

et al. 2001

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In 1993, the E645 experiment at the Los Alamos Meson Physics Facility (LAMPF) placed limits on ν e appearance from a beam consisting of ν µ , ν µ and ν e of energies below 55 MeV with a baseline of 26.6 m [133]. They detected 8.3 ± 3.4 ν e events, consistent with the expected non-oscillation, non-transition background of 5.2 ± 0.5 events.…”

Section: ν µ → ν µ Transitions In Minosmentioning

confidence: 56%

Measuring Antineutrino Oscillations with the MINOS Experiment

Devenish

Evans

2012

Nuclear Physics B - Proceedings Supplements

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

MINOS is a long baseline neutrino oscillation experiment. A manmade beam of predominantly muon neutrinos is detected both 1 km and 735 km from the production point by two functionally identical detectors. A comparison of the energy spectra measured by the two detectors shows the energy-dependent disappearance of muon neutrinos characteristic of oscillations and allows a measurement of the parameters governing the oscillations. This thesis presents work leading to measurements of disappearance in the 6% ν µ background in that beam.A calibration is developed to correct for time-dependent changes in the responses of both detectors, reducing the corresponding uncertainty on hadronic energy measurements from 1.8% to 0.4% in the near detector and from 0.8% to 0.4% in the far detector. A method of selecting charged current ν µ events is developed, with purities (efficiencies) of 96.5% (74.4%) at the near detector, and 98.8% (70.9%) at the far detector in the region below 10 GeV reconstructed antineutrino energy. A method of using the measured near detector neutrino energy spectrum to predict that expected at the far detector is discussed, and developed for use in the ν µ analysis. Sources of systematic uncertainty contributing to the oscillation measurements are discussed.In the far detector, 32 charged current ν µ events are observed below a reconstructed energy of 30 GeV, compared to an expectation of 47.8 for ∆m 2 atm = ∆m 2 atm , sin 2 (2θ 23 ) = sin 2 (2θ 23 ). This deficit, in such a low-statistics sample, makes the result difficult to interpret in the context of an oscillation parameter measurement. Possible sources for the discrepancy are discussed, concluding that considerably more data are required for a definitive solution. Running MINOS with a dedicated ν µ beam would be the ideal continuation of this work. AcknowledgementsWhen a piece of work takes four years to complete, far too many people play parts in its development to be thanked individually. However, certain people deserve specific mention for contributions without which the completion of this thesis would have been all the more difficult.First and foremost thanks go to my supervisor Giles Barr who guided me superbly through the process of learning to be a particle physics researcher. His perennially encouraging supervision and infectious enthusiasm for the subject benefited me hugely.The many members of the Oxford MINOS group who passed through during my time all deserve thanks. Alfons Weber could always be relied on to provide some insightful comments on any histogram. Nathaniel Tagg supervised me through my early work in the MINOS calibration group, his in-depth knowledge in that area proving invaluable. Jeff Hartnell was one of the driving forces behind the antineutrino analysis which forms the main part of this thesis, and our numerous conversations helped crystallise many of the ideas I present.I also shared my time at Oxford with Chris Backhouse, Anatael Cabrera, Katarzyna Grzelak, Phillip Litchfield, Paul Miyagawa, Robert Pittam, Tob...

show abstract

“…Previous results limited the pure V-A coupling to below 5% [18]. The LAMPF experiment has set an earlier limit from muon decay rates at #1.2% [19] for pure V-A couplings. Improved model-dependent limits on family lepton number violation can also be obtained from muonium-antimuonium experiments [20,21].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Search for the Lepton Family Number Violating Processν¯μe−→
Formaggio
¹
,
Yu²,
Adams³
et al. 2001
Phys. Rev. Lett.
8
0
0
0
View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The NuTeV experiment at Fermilab has used a sign-selected neutrino beam to perform a search for the lepton number violating process nu(mu)e(-)-->mu(-)nu(e), and to measure the cross section of the standard model inverse muon decay process nu(mu)e(-)-->mu(-)nu(e). NuTeV measures the inverse muon decay asymptotic cross-section slope sigma/E to be (13.8 +/- 1.2 +/- 1.4) x 10(-42) cm(2)/GeV. The experiment also observes no evidence for lepton number violation and places one of the most restrictive limits on the cross-section ratio sigma(nu(mu)e(-)-->mu(-)nu(e))/sigma(nu(mu)e(-)-->mu(-)nu(e)) < or = 1.7% at 90% C.L. for V-A couplings and < or = 0.6% for scalar couplings.

show abstract

Limits on neutrino oscillations fromν¯eappearance

Cited by 25 publications

References 47 publications

Measurement of electron-neutrino electron elastic scattering

Measurement of electron-neutrino electron elastic scattering

Measuring Antineutrino Oscillations with the MINOS Experiment

Search for the Lepton Family Number Violating Processν¯μe−→
Formaggio
¹
,
Yu²,
Adams³
et al. 2001
Phys. Rev. Lett.
8
0
0
0
View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Limits on neutrino oscillations fromν¯eappearance

Cited by 25 publications

References 47 publications

Measurement of electron-neutrino electron elastic scattering

Measurement of electron-neutrino electron elastic scattering

Measuring Antineutrino Oscillations with the MINOS Experiment

Search for the Lepton Family Number Violating Processν¯μe−→Formaggio1, Yu2, Adams3 et al. 2001Phys. Rev. Lett.8000View full textAdd to dashboardCite

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Search for the Lepton Family Number Violating Processν¯μe−→
Formaggio
¹
,
Yu²,
Adams³
et al. 2001
Phys. Rev. Lett.
8
0
0
0
View full text Add to dashboard Cite