resolving neutrino mass hierarchy and cp degeneracy ... neutrino mass hierarchy and cp degeneracy...
TRANSCRIPT
Resolving Neutrino Mass Hierarchy and CP Degeneracy Using Two Identical Detectors
with Different BaselinesHiroshi Nunokawa
(Pontificia Universidade Catolica do Rio de Janeiro)
@Nufact05 WG1 June 22, 2005
Based on the work with M. Ishitsuka, T. Kajita and H. Minakata, hep-ph/0504026
Outline
• Introduction
• Basic Idea of 2 Detectors with Different Baselines
• Results of Our Analysis
• Summary
IntroductionCurrent Knowleadge about ν Mixing parameters
@ 90 % C.L.
+7.3 × 10−5
eV2
< ∆m221
< +9.0 × 10−5
eV2
0.25 < sin2θ12 < 0.37
1.5 × 10−3
eV2
< |∆m232| < 3.4 × 10
−3eV
2
0.36 < sin2θ23 ≤ 0.64
0 ≤ sin2θ13 < 0.04
Unknowns• How small is θ13 ?
• Is Mass Hierarchy Normal or Inverted ?
• What is the value of CP phase δ ?
However, it is well known that so called parameter degeneracy makes these determinations difficult
(1) θ23 octant degeneracy (Fogli and Lisi, 1996) (2) Intrinsic θ13-δ degeneracy (Burguet-Castell et al, 2001)
(3) sign of Δm13 degeneracy (Minakata, HN, 2001) 2
8 fold degeneracy (Barger et al, 2002)
Proposed Experiments
• T2K (Phase I + Phase II)
• NOvA
• BNL VLBL
• SPL-Frejus
• β Beam
• Reactor
It is GOOD to consider some alternative
We propose to determine both Mass Hierarchy and CP phase at the same time
• by using two Identical detectors with Different baselines
• in such a way that both detectors receive the neutrino beam with the same energy spectrum w/o oscillation
• by running both νµ→νe and νµ→νe modes
For alternative methods using only neutrino mode
See S. Palomarse-Ruiz’s (hep-ph/0504015) talkSee N. Okamura’s (hep-ph/0504061) talk
Clean Measurement of Specturm Modulation by Oscillation Effect
--
As a concrete example, we condisder JPARC as a source and 1 detector at Kamioka (L=295km) and other at Korea (L=1050km)
→cancellation of systematic errors
→reduction of BG uncertainties
→4 degenerate solutions
Degeneracy can be lifted at diffent L
4 non-degenerate points
0 2 4 6 80
2
4
6
8
10
P(!µ!
e) [%
]
Norm. sin22"
13=0.08
Norm. sin22"
13=0.0745
Inv. sin22"
13=0.0808
Inv. sin22"
13=0.0746
Kamioka (L=295 km)
0 2 4 6 8 10
Korea (L=1050 km)
P(!µ!
e) [%]
normal
inverted
overlap
E = 0.65 GeV
mass hierarchy undetermined
E=0.65 GeV
Comparing Probabilities at Different Baselines
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 70
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
P(!µ!
e)
[%]
E = 0.5 GeV (Normal)
E = 0.6 GeV (Normal)
E = 0.7 GeV (Normal)
E = 0.8 GeV (Normal)
E = 0.5 GeV (Inverted)
E = 0.6 GeV (Inverted)
E = 0.7 GeV (Inverted)
E = 0.8 GeV (Inverted)
Kamioka (L=295 km)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Korea (L=1050 km)
P(!µ!
e) [%]
Despite that events # is smaller at Korea, energy depedendence is much stronger !
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
P(!µ
!e)
[%]
True sol. ("/4, 0.02)
Same sign sol. (2.4, 0.022)
Mixed sign sol.1 (2.64, 0.019)
Mixed sign sol.2 (0.244, 0.022)
Kamioka
0.4 0.6 0.8 1.00
1
2
3
4
5
P(!µ
!e)
[%]
Korea
0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Neutrino Energy (GeV)
Korea (w/o matter)
0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
(#, sin22$
13)
Energy Spectrum Information is Crucial
WIN05, June 6-11 Hisakazu Minakata
Yes, we are the neighbours
!"#$%&'()*&+",-."("&$/&"01
How can we get the same energy spectrum at 2 detectors with different baselines?
Kamioka JPARC
It is possible to get the same Off-Axis Angle both at Kamioka and Korea
By Choosing the same Off-Axis Angle at Kamioka and Korea
Taken from Hagiwara et al (hep-ph/0504061)
We assume OA 2.5° Beam with 4 MW Powerand 2 HK (Mt) class detectors
Hyper-Kamiokande
48m
54
m
250m
Fiducial mass = 0.27!2
=0.54 Mton
What will happen if we construct one of the 2 detectors in Korea?We propose to place one of them at somewhere in Korea
Expected Event # Dist.
4+4 yrs of ν+ν2 × 0.27 Mt FV
2
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
0 0.5 1 1.5
Kamioka !µ
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
0 0.5 1 1.5
Kamioka !–
µ
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
0 0.5 1 1.5
Korea !µ
Reconstructed E! (GeV)
Num
ber
of e
ve
nts
/bin
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 0.5 1 1.5
Korea !–
µ
χ2 =4∑
k=1
(5∑
i=1
(N(e)obs
i − N(e)expi
)2
σ2i
)+
3∑j=1
(εj
σ̃j
)2
N(e)expi = NBG
i · (1 +2∑
j=1
fij · εj) + N signal
i · (1 + fi3 · ε3)
1
Definiton of χ
νν × kamioka
korea = 4 combinations ( ) ( )
5 energy binsSystematic Errors
5 % BG (Overall)5 % BG (Energy Dep.)
5 % Signal Efficiency
-
-
signalBG
sin 2θ13=0.1, δ = π/22
Kamioka 0.54Mton detector, ! 2yr + !– 6yr 4MW beams
10-2
10-1
(a)
normal
10-2
10-1
0 2 4 6
(b)
inverted
"
sin
22#
13
(c)
normal
0 2 4 6
(d)
inverted
Examples of Degenerate Solutions (w. only HK@Kamioka)
true sol.
fake sol.
fake sol. true sol.fake sol.
fake sol.
Only HK@Kamioka can not Resolv All the Degeneray
fiducial mass
Kamioka 0.27Mton + Korea 0.27Mton detectors, ! 4yr + !– 4yr 4MW beams
10-2
10-1
(a)
normal
10-2
10-1
0 2 4 6
(b)
inverted
"
sin
22#
13
(c)
normal
0 2 4 6
(d)
inverted
Twin HK at Kamioka and Korea: T2KK
true sol.
true sol.
fake sol.
fake sol.
Twin HKs can determine Mass Hierarchy if θ13 is not so small!
keep
ing
the
sum
= 0
.54
Mt
Regions of Sensitivities for Mass Hierarchy
10-2
10-1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
normal
Kamioka 0.54 Mton
Kamioka 0.27 Mton + Korea 0.27 Mton
Kamioka 0.16 Mton + Korea 0.38 Mton
Kamioka 0.05 Mton + Korea 0.49 Mton
Korea 0.54 Mton
10-2
10-1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
inverted
!
s
in22"
13
|χ (true hierachy) -χ (wrong hierachy)| > 4 (9) for 2(3) σ CL
Mass Hierarchy can beDetermined in the region
above these curves
2
2
Choice of the same detector size is BEST!
min
min
keeping sum of total FV = 0.54 Mt
10-2
10-1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
normal
10-2
10-1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
inverted
!
s
in22"
13
Sensitivity to CP violation
|χ (true value of δ) -χ (δ ≠0 or π)| > 4 (9) for 2(3) σ CL
CP violation can beEstablished in the region
above these curves
GOOD sensitivities also to CP violation!
2
2min
min
Optimizing Running Time
10-2
10-1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
normal
! 4yr + !– 4yr, 4MW beams
! 2yr + !– 6yr, 4MW beams
! 8yr, 4MW beam
10-2
10-1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
inverted
"
s
in22#
13
10-2
10-1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
normal
10-2
10-1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
inverted
!
s
in22"
13
Mass Hierarchy CP Violation
4+4 yrs runs of ν + ν seems to be Optimal -
Stability Check of Our Results Against
10-2
10-1
normal (a)
10-2
10-1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
inverted
!
s
in22"
13
5% systematic uncertainties
2% systematic uncertainties
10% systematic uncertainties
normal (b)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
inverted
!
#Korea
= 2.8 g/cm3
#Korea
= 2.5 g/cm3
#Korea
= 3.1 g/cm3
normal (c)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
inverted
!
sin2"
23 = 0.50
sin2"
23 = 0.45
sin2"
23 = 0.55
1
Change of Systematic errors
Change of mater density
Deviation of θ23 from maximal
Our Results are Stable
Sensitivity to mass hierarchy
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
10-2
10-1
sin22!13
Fra
ctio
n o
f "
Sensitivity to CP violation
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
10-2
10-1
sin22!13
Fra
ctio
n o
f "
Kamioka 0.27Mton + Korea 0.27Mton detectors
# 4yr + #– 4yr, 4MW beams
normal mass hierarchy
inverted mass hierarchy
Kamioka 0.54Mton detector
# 2yr + #– 6yr, 4MW beams
normal mass hierarchy
inverted mass hierarchy
1
Sensitivity: T2KK vs T2K-II (Orignal)
thin 2σthik 3σ
!"#$%&'(!,
!"#)&'*!
95% CL dashed: w/
solid: w/o proton D
Mena-Palomares-Ruiz-Pascoli;
L=200 and 810 km
Both 1st osci. max
Sensitivity to mass hierarchy:T2K-II vs. (Kam+Korea) vs. super-No"a
#
Summary• We propose to determine mass hierarchy and CP
phase at the same time by using Two Identical Detectors with Different Baselines
• As a concrete example, we consider JPARC Phase II 4MW Beam Power and 0.27 Mt Detector at Kamioka and other 0.27 Mt one at Korea
• 4 + 4 yrs runs of ν+ν modes, it is possible to determine mass hierachy for sin 2θ13 > 0.03 (0.055) at 2 (3) σ CL for any value of δ
• At the same time, good sensitivity to CP violation
- 2