Measurement of nuclear effects in neutrino-argon interactions using generalized kinematic imbalance variables with the MicroBooNE detector

Editors' Suggestion

Measurement of nuclear effects in neutrino-argon interactions using generalized kinematic imbalance variables with the MicroBooNE detector

P. Abratenko et al. (MicroBooNE Collaboration)

Phys. Rev. D 109, 092007 – Published 14 May 2024

Abstract

We present a set of new generalized kinematic imbalance variables that can be measured in neutrino scattering. These variables extend previous measurements of kinematic imbalance on the transverse plane and are more sensitive to modeling of nuclear effects. We demonstrate the enhanced power of these variables using simulation and then use the MicroBooNE detector to measure them for the first time. We report flux-integrated single- and double-differential measurements of charged-current muon neutrino scattering on argon using a topology with one muon and one proton in the final state as a function of these novel kinematic imbalance variables. These measurements allow us to demonstrate that the treatment of charged current quasielastic interactions in genie version 2 is inadequate to describe data. Further, they reveal tensions with more modern generator predictions particularly in regions of phase space where final state interactions are important.

19 More

Received 9 October 2023
Accepted 15 February 2024

DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.109.092007

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Neutrinos

Particles & Fields

Authors & Affiliations

Click to Expand

Article Text (Subscription Required)

Click to Expand

Supplemental Material (Subscription Required)

Click to Expand

References (Subscription Required)

Click to Expand

Issue

Vol. 109, Iss. 9 — 1 May 2024

Reuse & Permissions

Access Options

Article part of CHORUS

Accepted manuscript will be available starting 14 May 2025.

Author publication services for translation and copyediting assistance advertisement

Images

Figure 1
(a) Representation of the kinematic imbalance variables on the transverse plane and (b) alternative representation using the projections parallel and perpendicular to the transverse momentum transfer vector. The finely dashed lines correspond to the direction of the momentum transfer (blue) and the proton (orange). The $z$ axis corresponds to the neutrino direction of travel.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 2
(a) Representation of the generalized kinematic imbalance variables and (b) alternative representation using the projections parallel and perpendicular to the missing momentum vector. The $z$ axis corresponds to the neutrino direction of travel.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 3
The flux-integrated single-differential cross section interaction breakdown as a function of (a) $p_{n}$ and (b) $δ p_{T}$ for the selected $CC 1 p 0 π$ events. Colored lines show the results of theoretical cross section calculations using the g18 prediction for QE (blue), MEC (red), RES (orange), and DIS (green) interactions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 4
(a) Signal acceptance fraction vs background rejection fraction as a function of the minimum requirement on either the missing momentum $p_{n}$ (orange) or the transverse missing momentum $δ p_{T}$ (blue) for $CC 1 p 0 π$ events using the g18 prediction. (b) Evolution of the product between the signal acceptance and the background rejection denoted as “rejection $\times$ acceptance” as a function of the minimum requirement.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 5
Comparison of the flux-integrated single-differential cross section as a function of (a) $α_{3 D}$ and (b) $δ α_{T}$ with (solid) and without (dashed) final state interaction effects using the g18 prediction for the selected $CC 1 p 0 π$ events.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 6
The flux-integrated single-differential cross section as a function of (a) $α_{3 D}$ and (b) $δ α_{T}$ for the selected $CC 1 p 0 π$ events. Colored lines show the results of cross section calculations using the g18 (solid black), gv2 (blue), neut (dashed pink), nuwro (red), and gibuu (green) predictions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 7
The flux-integrated single-differential cross section interactions as a function of (a) $ϕ_{3 D}$ and (b) $ϕ_{T}$ for the selected $CC 1 p 0 π$ events. Colored lines show the results of cross section calculations using the g18 prediction for QE (blue), MEC (red), RES (orange), and DIS (green) predictions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 8
Ratios with and without FSI for g18, neut, and nuwro predictions as a function of (a) the struck nucleon-missing momentum angle ( $δ α_{T}$ or $α_{3 D}$ ) and (b) the proton-missing momentum angle ( $δ ϕ_{T}$ or $ϕ_{3 D}$ ) for the selected $CC 1 p 0 π$ events.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 9
The flux-integrated single-differential cross section as a function of (a) $p_{n ∥}$ and (b) $p_{n ⊥}$ for the selected $CC 1 p 0 π$ events. Colored lines show the results of cross section calculations using the g18 (solid black), gv2 (blue), neut (dashed pink), nuwro (red), and gibuu (green) generators.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 10
The flux-integrated single-differential cross section interaction breakdown as a function of $p_{n ∥}$ (a) with FSI and (b) without FSI for the selected $CC 1 p 0 π$ events. Colored lines show the results of cross section calculations using the gibuu prediction for QE (blue), MEC (red), RES (orange), and DIS (green) generators.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 11
The flux-integrated single-differential cross section as a function of (a) $p_{n ⊥, x}$ and (b) $p_{n ⊥, y}$ for the selected $CC 1 p 0 π$ events. Colored lines show the results of cross section calculations using the g18 (solid black), gv2 (blue), neut (dashed pink), nuwro (red), and gibuu (green) generators.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 12
Comparison of the flux-integrated double-differential cross section as a function of $p_{n}$ for (a) $α_{3 D} < 45 °$ and (b) 135° $< α_{3 D} < 180 °$ with (solid) and without (dashed) FSI effects using the g18 prediction for the selected $CC 1 p 0 π$ events.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 13
The flux-integrated double-differential cross section interaction breakdown as a function of $p_{n ∥}$ for (a) $α_{3 D} < 45 °$ and (b) 135° $< α_{3 D} < 180 °$ for the selected $CC 1 p 0 π$ events. Colored lines show the results of theoretical cross section calculations using the g18 prediction for QE (blue), MEC (red), RES (orange), and DIS (green) interactions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 14
The flux-integrated double-differential cross sections as a function of $α_{3 D}$ for (a) $p_{n} < 0.2 GeV / c$ and (b) $p_{n} > 0.4 GeV / c$ for the selected $CC 1 p 0 π$ events. Colored lines show the results of cross section calculations using the g18 prediction for QE (blue), MEC (red), RES (orange), and DIS (green) predictions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 15
The flux-integrated double-differential cross sections as a function of $α_{3 D}$ for (a) $p_{n} < 0.2 GeV / c$ and (b) $p_{n} > 0.4 GeV / c$ with (solid) and without (dashed) FSI effects using the g18 prediction for the selected $CC 1 p 0 π$ events.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 16
The flux-integrated single-differential cross sections as a function of $p_{n}$ with (a) generator and (b) genie configuration predictions compared to data. Inner and outer error bars show the statistical and total (statistical and shape systematic) uncertainty at the $1 σ$ , or 68%, confidence level. The gray band shows the normalization systematic uncertainty. The numbers in parentheses give the $χ^{2} / ndf$ calculation for each one of the predictions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 17
The flux-integrated single-differential cross sections as a function of $α_{3 D}$ with (a) generator and (b) genie configuration predictions compared to data. Inner and outer error bars show the statistical and total (statistical and shape systematic) uncertainty at the $1 σ$ , or 68%, confidence level. The gray band shows the normalization systematic uncertainty. The numbers in parentheses give the $χ^{2} / ndf$ calculation for each one of the predictions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 18
The flux-integrated single-differential cross sections as a function of $ϕ_{3 D}$ with (a) generator and (b) genie configuration predictions compared to data. Inner and outer error bars show the statistical and total (statistical and shape systematic) uncertainty at the $1 σ$ , or 68%, confidence level. The gray band shows the normalization systematic uncertainty. The numbers in parentheses give the $χ^{2} / ndf$ calculation for each one of the predictions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 19
The flux-integrated single-differential cross sections as a function of $p_{n ⊥}$ with (a) generator and (b) genie configuration predictions compared to data. Inner and outer error bars show the statistical and total (statistical and shape systematic) uncertainty at the $1 σ$ , or 68%, confidence level. The gray band shows the normalization systematic uncertainty. The numbers in parentheses give the $χ^{2} / ndf$ calculation for each one of the predictions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 20
The flux-integrated single-differential cross sections as a function of $p_{n ⊥, x}$ with (a) generator and (b) genie configuration predictions compared to data. Inner and outer error bars show the statistical and total (statistical and shape systematic) uncertainty at the $1 σ$ , or 68%, confidence level. The gray band shows the normalization systematic uncertainty. The numbers in parentheses give the $χ^{2} / ndf$ calculation for each one of the predictions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 21
The flux-integrated single-differential cross sections as a function of $p_{n ⊥, y}$ with (a) generator and (b) genie configuration predictions compared to data. Inner and outer error bars show the statistical and total (statistical and shape systematic) uncertainty at the $1 σ$ , or 68%, confidence level. The gray band shows the normalization systematic uncertainty. The numbers in parentheses give the $χ^{2} / ndf$ calculation for each one of the predictions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 22
The flux-integrated single-differential cross sections as a function of $p_{n ∥}$ with (a) generator and (b) genie configuration predictions compared to data. Inner and outer error bars show the statistical and total (statistical and shape systematic) uncertainty at the $1 σ$ , or 68%, confidence level. The gray band shows the normalization systematic uncertainty. The numbers in parentheses give the $χ^{2} / ndf$ calculation for each one of the predictions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 23
The flux-integrated double-differential cross sections as a function of $p_{n}$ for $α_{3 D} < 45 °$ with (a) generator and (b) genie configuration predictions compared to data. Inner and outer error bars show the statistical and total (statistical and shape systematic) uncertainty at the $1 σ$ , or 68%, confidence level. The gray band shows the normalization systematic uncertainty. The numbers in parentheses give the $χ^{2} / ndf$ calculation for each one of the predictions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 24
The flux-integrated double-differential cross sections as a function of 135° $< α_{3 D} < 180 °$ with (a) generator and (b) genie configuration predictions compared to data. Inner and outer error bars show the statistical and total (statistical and shape systematic) uncertainty at the $1 σ$ , or 68%, confidence level. The gray band shows the normalization systematic uncertainty. The numbers in parentheses give the $χ^{2} / ndf$ calculation for each one of the predictions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 25
The flux-integrated double-differential cross sections as a function of $α_{3 D}$ for $p_{n} < 0.2 GeV / c$ with (a) generator and (b) genie configuration predictions compared to data. Inner and outer error bars show the statistical and total (statistical and shape systematic) uncertainty at the $1 σ$ , or 68%, confidence level. The gray band shows the normalization systematic uncertainty. The numbers in parentheses give the $χ^{2} / ndf$ calculation for each one of the predictions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 26
The flux-integrated double-differential cross sections as a function of $α_{3 D}$ for $p_{n} > 0.4 GeV / c$ with (a) generator and (b) genie configuration predictions compared to data. Inner and outer error bars show the statistical and total (statistical and shape systematic) uncertainty at the $1 σ$ , or 68%, confidence level. The gray band shows the normalization systematic uncertainty. The numbers in parentheses give the $χ^{2} / ndf$ calculation for each one of the predictions.
Reuse & Permissions

Physical Review D

covering particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology