Degeneracy and strategies of LBL Osamu Yasuda Tokyo Metropolitan University NuFACT04 workshop July...
-
Upload
victor-james -
Category
Documents
-
view
218 -
download
0
Transcript of Degeneracy and strategies of LBL Osamu Yasuda Tokyo Metropolitan University NuFACT04 workshop July...
Degeneracy and strategies of LBL
Osamu Yasuda
Tokyo Metropolitan University
NuFACT04 workshop July 28, 2004 at Osaka
Univ.
Contents
1. Introduction
2. θ13
3. δ
4. Summary
hep-ph/0405005 hep-ph/0405222
Based on
● Discussions on probabilities only w/o statistical and systematic errors
● Discussions in sect. 2 &3 assume JPARC at @ Osc. Max.νν
scenarios 10 years from now
Notation in this talk
Notations in this talk:
Oscillation Maximum (OM)
4EL|Δm|
Δ231
2π
4EL|Δm|
Δ231
)ννP(P eμ
eμ ννPP
21m
22m
23m
23m
21m
22m
0Δm231
0Δm231
normal hierarchy
inverted
hierarchy
1. Introduction
● intrinsic (δ, θ13)degeneracy
● Δm231⇔-Δm2
31 degeneracy
● θ23⇔π/2-θ23 degeneracy
Even if we know and in a long baseline accelerator experiments with approximately monoenergetic neutrino beam, precise determination of θ13, sign(Δm2
31) and δ is difficult because of the 8-fold parameter degeneracy.
eμ ννP eμ ννP
straight lines
hyperbolas
(or ellipses)
(P=const& =const’ on OM )P
(P=const& =const’ off OM )
(P=const, δ=const)
P( =const, δ=const) P
Plots in (sin22θ13, 1/s223) plane
The way curves intersectis easy to see
● θ23⇔π/2-θ23 degeneracy
● intrinsic (δ, θ13) degeneracy
● Δm231⇔-Δm2
31 degeneracy
0351
(b)0(a) |Δm|
Δm|Δm|
Δm231
221
231
221
0(b)cos2θ0(a)cos2θ 2323
0(b)AL/20(a)AL/2
1/2000kmeFNG2 A
JPARC is almost enough, since (a) there is no intrinsic (δ,θ13) degeneracy, and (b) sign(Δm2
31)degeneracy is small.
12θsin(1) 232
νν 12θsin(2) 23
2
Ambiguity due toθ23⇔π/2-θ23 degeneracy is significant.
2. Determination of θ13
Assumption: and will be measured at JPARC (@OM, 4MW, HK) .
eμ νν e
νμ
ν
Question: Will that be enough to determine |Ue3|?
Yes! No!
(A)reactor measurement of θ13
(B) LBL measurement of (or)
(C) measurement of
To resolve θ23 ambiguity, possible ways are:
eμ νν μe νν
τe νν
The reference values used here are:
sin22θ23=0.96, sin22θ13=0.05, δ=π/4, Δm231>0
eνeν
(A) reactor measurement of θ13
One can resolve
θ23 ambiguity at
90%CL.
To compete with
accelerator experiments, improvements in the sensitivity is necessary.
eνeν
One possible way to improve sensitivity of reactor measurements (theorist’s personal speculation) O.Y. LENE3@Niigata, March 20, 2004If one puts N near detectors and N far detectors with the same σu, then theoretically sensitivity becomes:
σu : the uncorrelated systematic error ( ~ 0.005 by optimistic estimate)
uonlysys
limit132
nL,fL2.8σ2θsinmin
uonlysys
limit132
nL,fLσ
12.82θsinmin
N
@90%CL
@90%CL
χ2 ⇒ Nχ2
Consider 3rd measurement of (or )
in addition to JPARC .
(B) LBL measurement of (or )
νν
δ+w δ-c
δ-w
δ+c
The value of δ for each point can be deduced (up to δ⇔π-δ) from
AL/2Δ/AL/2sing
,AL/2Δ1/AL/2Δsinff,,sin2θc|/ΔmΔm|y
,sin2θsx
,2fgxy
ygxfPsinδ
1223231
221
1323
2222
correct assumption wrong assumption on mass hierarchy
μe νν
μe νν
eμ νν
eμ νν
↓(exaggerated figure)
we can get a unique line (a hyperbola or an ellipse) in (sin22θ13,
1/s223) plane for
or .
Then from the equation for the probability of (or ) in the 3rd experiment
2
23[cw]13
2
2
23[cw]13
2
s,δ,2sinPP
s,δ,2sinPP
true
true
πθ
or
θ
true
2
23truetrue13
2 )(s,δ,)2(sinPP
where
true θ
eμ νν μe νν
[cw]δ
[cw]δ- π
JPARC
● δ⇔π-δ ambiguity
Δδcos2f
PC2
δdYdX
Δδcos2f
PC2
δ-πdY
dX
Δcoscosδ2f
PC4
δ-πdYdX
δdYdX
Difference in the gradients is large for Δ=0 or π
Assuming for simplicity P>>C
AL/2Δ/AL/2sing
2θsing/ΔmΔmC 122222
31221
Δcoscosδ
● sign(Δm231) ambiguity
(a) L: AL~ L/1900km
→ L>2000km is good to identify sgn(Δm2
31 )
(b) E: → low energy is advantageous
Enhancement of matter effect for π/2<Δ<π
i1322θsin
n1322θsin
tanΔ1
Δ1
2AL1n
i
132
132
2θsin
2θsin
X-intercepts
In my personal opinion nova should run with lower E!
● θ23 ambiguity
Resolution of θ23 ambiguity
(a) has to be small
(b) has to be large
δ is unknown at first, so it is
impossible to design to optimize
this resolution.
It may happen that this ambiguity
can be resolved as a byproduct.
Δ)cos(δxyfg
2
AL/2Δ-1
AL/2-Δsinf
Δ)cos(δ
The situation doesn’t change much for
if Δ π/2.≦e
νμ
ν
JPARC
Off-axis NuMI νfactory
νν
ν
(C) measurement of
Curves intersect with the JPARC line almost orthogonally.
τe νν
● θ23 ambiguity may be
resolved.
● δ⇔π-δ ambiguity may be resolved.
● sign(Δm231) ambiguity
may be resolved .
This channel may be interesting to be combined with JPARC in the future.
3. δ
Assumption: at JPARC (@OM, 4MW, HK)
and will be measured.eμ νν
Question:
Will that be enough to determine arg(Ue3)?
Answer: In general no.
Resolution of sign(Δm231)
ambiguity is important.
eν
μν
If δ0 =0, then at JPARC
δ0
δ1δ0 : by correct assumption
=true value
δ1 : by wrong assumption
on sign(Δm231)
Difference between δ0 & δ1 turns out to be large.
131 sin2θ2.2sinδ
= -0.5 (if sin22θ13=0.05)
Identification of sign(Δm231) is important.
(1) Ambiguity due to sign(Δm231)
3σ sensitivity to δ
Kobayashi
@Nufact02
Assuming Δm231>0
↑modified from
Minakata-Sugiyama (PLB580,216)
Assuming Δm231<0
↑modified from
Minakata-Sugiyama
(PLB580,216)
(2) Ambiguity of δ due to θ23 :
The Ambiguity due to θ23 is not serious.
132
132
23
232
2θsin
15001
2θsin
1t
cot2θ
2001
sinδ
)(ν1.02θsin0.9 atm232
outside of red or blue lines
JPARC@OM
is almost enough
In addition to JPARC
@OM,
is necessary to resolve θ23 ambiguity
inside of red or blue lines
In addition to JPARC
@OM,
LBL w/ L>~ 1000km
is necessary to resolve sign(Δm2
23 )
ambiguity
In addition to JPARC
@OM,
(A)
is necessary to resolve θ23 ambiguity
(B) LBL w/ L>~ 1000km
is necessary to resolve sign(Δm2
23 ) ambiguity
12θsin 232 12θsin 23
2
τe νν eνeν &
or
ν&ν
ν&νν&ν
eμ νν eν
μν
)2θsin (sinδ, 132
)2θsin (sinδ, 132
eνeν or τe νν
4.Summary
13θδ
Phase II Phase I
● for determination of θ13
to resolve θ23 ambiguity
if .
● for determination of δ
to resolve sign(Δm231)
ambiguity.
It is important
12θsin 232
If nova runs with lower E, then it will become complementary to JPARC, and only in this case it will play an important role.