[BDXlist] Update regarding neutrinos

[Andrea Celentano]

Dear all,
here:

https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__wiki.ge.infn.it_hps_index.php_NeutrinosComparisons&d=DwIFaQ&c=lz9TcOasaINaaC3U7FbMev2lsutwpI4--09aP8Lu18s&r=fi3LZSf8iWcLRaOze3M0UA&m=QM5GIH9It4RA5FGIYX54jboczNYfLhy9stL6KGA8bnM&s=rRm5mSd35jXcdLY_5suk0r_Wlh0pvHnvIUF2ISoyvls&e=  <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__wiki.ge.infn.it_hps_index.php_NeutrinosComparisons&d=DwIFaQ&c=lz9TcOasaINaaC3U7FbMev2lsutwpI4--09aP8Lu18s&r=fi3LZSf8iWcLRaOze3M0UA&m=QM5GIH9It4RA5FGIYX54jboczNYfLhy9stL6KGA8bnM&s=rRm5mSd35jXcdLY_5suk0r_Wlh0pvHnvIUF2ISoyvls&e= >

you can find updated studies concerning neutrino fluxes in the BDX experiment. So far, I considered 3 beamline configurations:

No elements on the beamline other than the beamdump
As 1. + diffuser - 50% rad. length, Al
As 1. + Moller target (150 cm LH2 target)
As you can see, for case 2. there’s a slightly increase in neutrino flux on the detector (expecially at higher energies, i.e. for those neutrinos emitted more forward), while this effect in case 3. seems to be lower, probably because the nominal target location is very far upstream from the beamdump (while the diffuser is, in comparison, closer to the beam-dump).

In the high-energy part of the spectrum - that more problematic for BDX - statistics is still limited. My proposal, thus, is to continue running case 3. simulations, then use these to evaluate the effect of nu background on BDX.

I’ll show these results at our next weekly meeting - any comment or suggestion is welcome!

Bests,
Andrea
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/bdxlist/attachments/20171008/0e69cfb2/attachment.html>