Multidifferential cross section measurements of ${\ensuremath{\nu}}_{\ensuremath{\mu}}$-argon quasielasticlike reactions with the MicroBooNE detector

Open Access

Multidifferential cross section measurements of $ν_{μ}$ -argon quasielasticlike reactions with the MicroBooNE detector

P. Abratenko et al. (MicroBooNE Collaboration)

Phys. Rev. D 108, 053002 – Published 6 September 2023

Abstract

We report on a flux-integrated multidifferential measurement of charged-current muon neutrino scattering on argon with one muon and one proton in the final state using the Booster Neutrino Beam and MicroBooNE detector at Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory. The data are studied as a function of various kinematic imbalance variables and of a neutrino energy estimator, and are compared to a number of event generator predictions. We find that the measured cross sections in different phase-space regions are sensitive to nuclear effects. Our results provide precision data to test and improve the neutrino-nucleus interaction models needed to perform high-accuracy oscillation analyses. Specific regions of phase space are identified where further model refinements are most needed.

35 More

Received 11 January 2023
Accepted 12 July 2023

DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.108.053002

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI. Funded by SCOAP³.

Published by the American Physical Society

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Neutrinos

Particles & Fields

Authors & Affiliations

Click to Expand

First Double-Differential Measurement of Kinematic Imbalance in Neutrino Interactions with the MicroBooNE Detector

P. Abratenko et al. (The MicroBooNE Collaboration)

Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 101802 (2023)

Article Text

Click to Expand

Supplemental Material

Click to Expand

References

Click to Expand

Issue

Vol. 108, Iss. 5 — 1 September 2023

Reuse & Permissions

Author publication services for translation and copyediting assistance advertisement

Images

Figure 1
The LLR PID score distribution used to tag the muon and proton candidates.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 2
(a) the proton candidate LLR PID score distribution, illustrating the fitness of a cut at LLR $PID < 0.05$ to reject cosmic and $non − CC 1 p 0 π$ background events. (b) the muon candidate LLR PID score distribution, illustrating a peak close to 1. Only statistical uncertainties are shown in the data. The bottom panel shows the ratio of data to prediction.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 3
Muon momentum reconstruction (a) before and (b) after the application of the muon momentum quality cut using contained muon tracks.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 4
Schematic representation of the kinematic imbalance variables on the plane transverse to the beam direction using $CC 1 p 0 π$ events.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 5
Distribution of the selected $CC 1 p 0 π$ events as a function of the transverse missing momentum $δ p_{T}$ . Only statistical uncertainties are shown in the data. The interaction contributions are obtained from simulation, and their separation in signal (S) and background (B) events is presented. The bottom panel shows the ratio of data to prediction.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 6
Distribution of the selected $CC 1 p 0 π$ events as a function of the transverse missing momentum direction $δ α_{T}$ . Only statistical uncertainties are shown in the data. The interaction contributions are obtained from simulation, and their separation in signal (S) and background (B) events is presented. The bottom panel shows the ratio of data to prediction.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 7
Distribution of the selected $CC 1 p 0 π$ events as a function of the muon-proton transverse opening angle $δ ϕ_{T}$ . Only statistical uncertainties are shown in the data. The interaction contributions are obtained from simulation, and their separation in signal (S) and background (B) events is presented. The bottom panel shows the ratio of data to prediction.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 8
Distribution of the selected $CC 1 p 0 π$ events as a function of the perpendicular component of the transverse missing momentum $δ p_{T, x}$ . Only statistical uncertainties are shown in the data. The interaction contributions are obtained from simulation, and their separation in signal (S) and background (B) events is presented. The bottom panel shows the ratio of data to prediction.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 9
Distribution of the selected $CC 1 p 0 π$ events as a function of the longitudinal component of the transverse missing momentum $δ p_{T, y}$ . Only statistical uncertainties are shown in the data. The interaction contributions are obtained from simulation, and their separation in signal (S) and background (B) events is presented. The bottom panel shows the ratio of data to prediction.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 10
Distribution of the selected $CC 1 p 0 π$ events as a function of the calorimetric energy reconstruction $E^{Cal}$ . Only statistical uncertainties are shown in the data. The interaction contributions are obtained from simulation, and their separation in signal (S) and background (B) events is presented. The bottom panel shows the ratio of data to prediction.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 11
The flux-integrated single-differential cross sections as a function of $\cos θ_{μ}$ . (a) Generator and (b) genie configuration predictions are 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 show the $χ^{2} / bins$ calculation for each one of the predictions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 12
The flux-integrated (a) single- and (b)–(e) double- (in $δ α_{T}$ bins) differential cross sections as a function of $δ p_{T}$ . 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. Colored lines show the results of theoretical cross section calculations using the g18 genie (blue), gibuu (green), neut (pink), and nuwro (red) event generators. The numbers in parentheses show the $χ^{2} / bins$ calculation for each one of the predictions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 13
The flux-integrated (a) single- and (b)–(e) double- (in $δ α_{T}$ bins) differential cross sections as a function of $δ p_{T}$ . 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. Colored lines show the results of theoretical cross section calculations using the g18 (light blue), Untuned (magenta), g21 (orange), and gv2 (dark blue) genie configurations. The numbers in parentheses show the $χ^{2} / bins$ calculation for each one of the predictions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 14
Cross section interaction breakdown for the selected events for the g18 configuration (a) with FSI effects, and (b) without FSI effects as a function of $δ p_{T}$ .
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 15
The flux-integrated double-differential cross sections as a function of $δ p_{T}$ in $\cos θ_{μ}$ bins. 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. Colored lines show the results of theoretical cross section calculations using the g18 genie (blue), gibuu (green), neut (pink), and nuwro (red) event generators. The numbers in parentheses show the $χ^{2} / bins$ calculation for each one of the predictions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 16
Comparison between the flux-integrated double-differential cross sections as a function of $δ p_{T}$ for data and the g18 genie prediction in $\cos θ_{μ}$ bins. 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. Colored stacked histograms show the results of theoretical cross section calculations using the genie prediction for QE (blue), MEC (orange), RES (green), and DIS (red) interactions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 17
Comparison between the flux-integrated double-differential cross sections as a function of $δ p_{T}$ for data and the gibuu prediction in $\cos θ_{μ}$ bins. 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. Colored stacked histograms show the results of theoretical cross section calculations using the gibuu prediction for QE (blue), MEC (orange), RES (green), and DIS (red) interactions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 18
The flux-integrated double-differential cross sections as a function of $δ p_{T}$ in $\cos θ_{μ}$ bins. 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. Colored lines show the results of theoretical cross section calculations using the g18 (light blue), Untuned (magenta), g21 (orange), and gv2 (dark blue) genie configurations. The numbers in parentheses show the $χ^{2} / bins$ calculation for each one of the predictions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 19
The flux-integrated double-differential cross sections as a function of $δ p_{T}$ in $\cos θ_{p}$ bins. 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. Colored lines show the results of theoretical cross section calculations using the g18 genie (blue), gibuu (green), neut (pink), and nuwro (red) event generators. The numbers in parentheses show the $χ^{2} / bins$ calculation for each one of the predictions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 20
The flux-integrated double-differential cross sections as a function of $δ p_{T}$ in $\cos θ_{p}$ bins. 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. Colored lines show the results of theoretical cross section calculations using the g18 (light blue), Untuned (magenta), g21 (orange), and gv2 (dark blue) genie configurations. The numbers in parentheses show the $χ^{2} / bins$ calculation for each one of the predictions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 21
Comparison between the flux-integrated double-differential cross sections as a function of $δ p_{T}$ for data and the gv2 genie prediction in $\cos θ_{p}$ bins. 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. Colored stacked histograms show the results of theoretical cross section calculations using the genie prediction for QE (blue), MEC (orange), RES (green), and DIS (red) interactions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 22
The flux-integrated (a) single- and (b)–(d) double- (in $δ p_{T}$ bins) differential cross sections as a function of $δ α_{T}$ . 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. Colored lines show the results of theoretical cross section calculations using the g18 genie (blue), gibuu (green), neut (pink), and nuwro (red) event generators. The numbers in parentheses show the $χ^{2} / bins$ calculation for each one of the predictions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 23
The flux-integrated (a) single- and (b)–(d) double- (in $δ p_{T}$ bins) differential cross sections as a function of $δ α_{T}$ . 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. Colored lines show the results of theoretical cross section calculations using the g18 (light blue), Untuned (magenta), g21 (orange), and gv2 (dark blue) genie configurations. The numbers in parentheses show the $χ^{2} / bins$ calculation for each one of the predictions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 24
Comparison between the data flux-integrated double-differential cross section as a function of $δ α_{T}$ for events in the region $δ p_{T} < 0.2 GeV / c$ region against the g18 and genie predictions. 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. Colored stacked histograms show the results of theoretical cross section calculations using the (a) g18 and (b) gv2 genie predictions for QE (blue), MEC (orange), RES (green), and DIS (red) interactions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 25
Cross section interaction breakdown for the selected events for the g18 configuration (a) with FSI effects, and (b) without FSI effects as a function of $δ α_{T}$ .
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 26
The flux-integrated double-differential cross sections as a function of $δ α_{T}$ in $\cos θ_{μ}$ bins. 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. Colored lines show the results of theoretical cross section calculations using the g18 genie (blue), gibuu (green), neut (pink), and nuwro (red) event generators. The numbers in parentheses show the $χ^{2} / bins$ calculation for each one of the predictions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 27
The flux-integrated double-differential cross sections as a function of $δ α_{T}$ in $\cos θ_{μ}$ bins. 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. Colored lines show the results of theoretical cross section calculations using the g18 (light blue), Untuned (magenta), g21 (orange), and gv2 (dark blue) genie configurations. The numbers in parentheses show the $χ^{2} / bins$ calculation for each one of the predictions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 28
The flux-integrated double-differential cross sections as a function of $δ α_{T}$ in $\cos θ_{p}$ bins. 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. Colored lines show the results of theoretical cross section calculations using the g18 genie (blue), gibuu (green), neut (pink), and nuwro (red) event generators. The numbers in parentheses show the $χ^{2} / bins$ calculation for each one of the predictions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 29
The flux-integrated double-differential cross sections as a function of $δ α_{T}$ in $\cos θ_{p}$ bins. 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. Colored lines show the results of theoretical cross section calculations using the g18 (light blue), Untuned (magenta), g21 (orange), and gv2 (dark blue) genie configurations. The numbers in parentheses show the $χ^{2} / bins$ calculation for each one of the predictions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 30
Comparison between the data flux-integrated double-differential cross section as a function of $δ α_{T}$ for events in the region $- 1 < \cos θ_{p} < 0$ region against the g18 and genie predictions. 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. Colored stacked histograms show the results of theoretical cross section calculations using the (a) g18 and (b) gv2 genie predictions for QE (blue), MEC (orange), RES (green), and DIS (red) interactions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 31
The flux-integrated (a) single- and (b)–(d) double- (in $δ p_{T}$ bins) differential cross sections as a function of $δ ϕ_{T}$ . 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. Colored lines show the results of theoretical cross section calculations using the g18 genie (blue), gibuu (green), neut (pink), and nuwro (red) event generators. The numbers in parentheses show the $χ^{2} / bins$ calculation for each one of the predictions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 32
The flux-integrated (a) single- and (b)–(d) double- (in $δ p_{T}$ bins) differential cross sections as a function of $δ ϕ_{T}$ . 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. Colored lines show the results of theoretical cross section calculations using the g18 (light blue), Untuned (magenta), g21 (orange), and gv2 (dark blue) genie configurations. The numbers in parentheses show the $χ^{2} / bins$ calculation for each one of the predictions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 33
Comparison between the flux-integrated double- (in $δ p_{T}$ bins) differential cross sections as a function of $δ ϕ_{T}$ for data and the g18 genie prediction. 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. Colored stacked histograms show the results of theoretical cross section calculations using the g18 prediction for QE (blue), MEC (orange), RES (green), and DIS (red) interactions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 34
The flux-integrated (a) single- and (b)–(d) double- (in $δ p_{T, y}$ bins) differential cross sections as a function of $δ p_{T, x}$ . 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. Colored lines show the results of theoretical cross section calculations using the g18 genie (blue), gibuu (green), neut (pink), and nuwro (red) event generators. The numbers in parentheses show the $χ^{2} / bins$ calculation for each one of the predictions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 35
The flux-integrated (a) single- and (b)–(d) double- (in $δ p_{T, y}$ bins) differential cross sections as a function of $δ p_{T, x}$ . 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. Colored lines show the results of theoretical cross section calculations using the g18 (light blue), Untuned (magenta), g21 (orange), and gv2 (dark blue) genie configurations. The numbers in parentheses show the $χ^{2} / bins$ calculation for each one of the predictions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 36
Comparison between the flux-integrated double- (in $δ p_{T, y}$ bins) differential cross sections as a function of $δ p_{T, x}$ for data and the g18 vgenie prediction. 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. Colored stacked histograms show the results of theoretical cross section calculations using the g18 genie prediction for QE (blue), MEC (orange), RES (green), and DIS (red) interactions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 37
The flux-integrated (a) single- and (b)–(d) double- (in $δ p_{T}$ bins) differential cross sections as a function of $E^{Cal}$ . 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. Colored lines show the results of theoretical cross section calculations using the g18 genie (blue), gibuu (green), neut (pink), and nuwro (red) event generators. The numbers in parentheses show the $χ^{2} / bins$ calculation for each one of the predictions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 38
The flux-integrated (a) single- and (b)–(d) double- (in $δ p_{T}$ bins) differential cross sections as a function of $E^{Cal}$ . 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. Colored lines show the results of theoretical cross section calculations using the g18 (light blue), Untuned (magenta), g21 (orange), and gv2 (dark blue) genie configurations.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 39
The flux-integrated double-differential cross sections as a function of $E^{Cal}$ in $δ α_{T}$ bins. 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. Colored lines show the results of theoretical cross section calculations using the g18 genie (blue), gibuu (green), neut (pink), and nuwro (red) event generators. The numbers in parentheses show the $χ^{2} / bins$ calculation for each one of the predictions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 40
The flux-integrated double-differential cross sections as a function of $E^{Cal}$ in $δ α_{T}$ bins. 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. Colored lines show the results of theoretical cross section calculations using the g18 (light blue), Untuned (magenta), g21 (orange), and gv2 (dark blue) genie configurations. The numbers in parentheses show the $χ^{2} / bins$ calculation for each one of the predictions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 41
The flux-integrated double-differential cross sections as a function of $E^{Cal}$ in $δ p_{T, y}$ bins. 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. Colored lines show the results of theoretical cross section calculations using the g18 genie (blue), gibuu (green), neut (pink), and nuwro (red) event generators. The numbers in parentheses show the $χ^{2} / bins$ calculation for each one of the predictions.
Reuse & Permissions
Figure 42
The flux-integrated double-differential cross sections as a function of $E^{Cal}$ in $δ p_{T, y}$ bins. 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. Colored lines show the results of theoretical cross section calculations using the g18 (light blue), Untuned (magenta), g21 (orange), and gv2 (dark blue) genie configurations. The numbers in parentheses show the $χ^{2} / bins$ calculation for each one of the predictions.
Reuse & Permissions

Physical Review D

covering particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology

Multidifferential cross section measurements of $ν_{μ}$ -argon quasielasticlike reactions with the MicroBooNE detector

P. Abratenko et al. (MicroBooNE Collaboration)

Phys. Rev. D 108, 053002 – Published 6 September 2023

Abstract

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Authors & Affiliations

See Also

First Double-Differential Measurement of Kinematic Imbalance in Neutrino Interactions with the MicroBooNE Detector

P. Abratenko et al. (The MicroBooNE Collaboration)

Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 101802 (2023)

Article Text

Supplemental Material

References

Issue

Physical Review D

covering particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology

Multidifferential cross section measurements of νμ-argon quasielasticlike reactions with the MicroBooNE detector

P. Abratenko et al. (MicroBooNE Collaboration)

Phys. Rev. D 108, 053002 – Published 6 September 2023

Abstract

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Authors & Affiliations

See Also

First Double-Differential Measurement of Kinematic Imbalance in Neutrino Interactions with the MicroBooNE Detector

P. Abratenko et al. (The MicroBooNE Collaboration)

Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 101802 (2023)

Article Text

Supplemental Material

References

Issue

Authorization Required

Other Options

Download & Share

Images

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5

Figure 6

Figure 7

Figure 8

Figure 9

Figure 10

Figure 11

Figure 12

Figure 13

Figure 14

Figure 15

Figure 16

Figure 17

Figure 18

Figure 19

Figure 20

Figure 21

Figure 22

Figure 23

Figure 24

Figure 25

Figure 26

Figure 27

Figure 28

Figure 29

Figure 30

Figure 31

Figure 32

Figure 33

Figure 34

Figure 35

Figure 36

Figure 37

Figure 38

Figure 39

Figure 40

Figure 41

Figure 42

Reuse & Permissions

Log In

Search

Article Lookup

Paste a citation or DOI

Enter a citation

Multidifferential cross section measurements of $ν_{μ}$ -argon quasielasticlike reactions with the MicroBooNE detector