A combination of fifteen top quark mass measurements performed by the ATLAS and CMS experiments at the LHC is presented. The data sets used correspond to an integrated luminosity of up to 5 and 20$^{-1}$ of proton-proton collisions at center-of-mass energies of 7 and 8 TeV, respectively. The combination includes measurements in top quark pair events that exploit both the semileptonic and hadronic decays of the top quark, and a measurement using events enriched in single top quark production via the electroweak $t$-channel. The combination accounts for the correlations between measurements and achieves an improvement in the total uncertainty of 31% relative to the most precise input measurement. The result is $m_\mathrm{t}$ = 172.52 $\pm$ 0.14 (stat) $\pm$ 0.30 (syst) GeV, with a total uncertainty of 0.33 GeV.
Uncertainties on the $m_{t}$ values extracted in the LHC, ATLAS, and CMS combinations arising from the categories described in the text, sorted in order of decreasing value of the combined LHC uncertainty.
Measurements of the suppression and correlations of dijets is performed using 3 $\mu$b$^{-1}$ of Xe+Xe data at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = 5.44$ TeV collected with the ATLAS detector at the LHC. Dijets with jets reconstructed using the $R=0.4$ anti-$k_t$ algorithm are measured differentially in jet $p_{\text{T}}$ over the range of 32 GeV to 398 GeV and the centrality of the collisions. Significant dijet momentum imbalance is found in the most central Xe+Xe collisions, which decreases in more peripheral collisions. Results from the measurement of per-pair normalized and absolutely normalized dijet $p_{\text{T}}$ balance are compared with previous Pb+Pb measurements at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} =5.02$ TeV. The differences between the dijet suppression in Xe+Xe and Pb+Pb are further quantified by the ratio of pair nuclear-modification factors. The results are found to be consistent with those measured in Pb+Pb data when compared in classes of the same event activity and when taking into account the difference between the center-of-mass energies of the initial parton scattering process in Xe+Xe and Pb+Pb collisions. These results should provide input for a better understanding of the role of energy density, system size, path length, and fluctuations in the parton energy loss.
The centrality intervals in Xe+Xe collisions and their corresponding TAA with absolute uncertainties.
The centrality intervals in Xe+Xe and Pb+Pb collisions for matching SUM ET FCAL intervals and respective TAA values for Xe+Xe collisions.
The performance of the jet energy scale (JES) for jets with $|y| < 2.1$ evaluated as a function of pT_truth in different centrality bins. Simulated hard scatter events were overlaid onto events from a dedicated sample of minimum-bias Xe+Xe data.
Several extensions of the Standard Model predict the production of dark matter particles at the LHC. A search for dark matter particles produced in association with a dark Higgs boson decaying into $W^{+}W^{-}$ in the $\ell^\pm\nu q \bar q'$ final states with $\ell=e,\mu$ is presented. This analysis uses 139 fb$^{-1}$ of $pp$ collisions recorded by the ATLAS detector at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV. The $W^\pm \to q\bar q'$ decays are reconstructed from pairs of calorimeter-measured jets or from track-assisted reclustered jets, a technique aimed at resolving the dense topology from a pair of boosted quarks using jets in the calorimeter and tracking information. The observed data are found to agree with Standard Model predictions. Scenarios with dark Higgs boson masses ranging between 140 and 390 GeV are excluded.
Probability of finding at least one TAR jet, where the p<sub>T</sub>-leading TAR jet passes the m<sub>Wcand</sub> and D<sub>2</sub><sup>β=1</sup> requirements, as a function of m<sub>s</sub>. The probability is determined in a sample of signal events with m<sub>Z'</sub>=500 GeV, with the preselections applied.
Probability of finding at least one TAR jet, where the p<sub>T</sub>-leading TAR jet passes the m<sub>Wcand</sub> and D<sub>2</sub><sup>β=1</sup> requirements, as a function of m<sub>s</sub>. The probability is determined in a sample of signal events with m<sub>Z'</sub>=1000 GeV, with the preselections applied.
Probability of finding at least one TAR jet, where the p<sub>T</sub>-leading TAR jet passes the m<sub>Wcand</sub> and D<sub>2</sub><sup>β=1</sup> requirements, as a function of m<sub>s</sub>. The probability is determined in a sample of signal events with m<sub>Z'</sub>=1700 GeV, with the preselections applied.
A measurement of the top-quark mass ($m_t$) in the $t\bar{t}\rightarrow~\textrm{lepton}+\textrm{jets}$ channel is presented, with an experimental technique which exploits semileptonic decays of $b$-hadrons produced in the top-quark decay chain. The distribution of the invariant mass $m_{\ell\mu}$ of the lepton, $\ell$ (with $\ell=e,\mu$), from the $W$-boson decay and the muon, $\mu$, originating from the $b$-hadron decay is reconstructed, and a binned-template profile likelihood fit is performed to extract $m_t$. The measurement is based on data corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ of $\sqrt{s} = 13~\textrm{TeV}$$pp$ collisions provided by the Large Hadron Collider and recorded by the ATLAS detector. The measured value of the top-quark mass is $m_{t} = 174.41\pm0.39~(\textrm{stat.})\pm0.66~(\textrm{syst.})\pm0.25~(\textrm{recoil})~\textrm{GeV}$, where the third uncertainty arises from changing the PYTHIA8 parton shower gluon-recoil scheme, used in top-quark decays, to a recently developed setup.
Top mass measurement result.
List of all the individual sources of systematic uncertainty considered in the analysis. The individual sources, each corresponding to an independent nuisance parameter in the fit, are grouped into categories, as indicated in the first column. The second column shows the impact of each of the individual sources on the measurement, obtained as the shift on the top mass induced by a positive shift of the each of the nuisance parameters by its post-fit uncertainty. Sources for which no impact is indicated are neglected in the fit procedure as their impact on the total prediction is negligible in any of the bins. The last column shows the statistical uncertainty in each of the reported numbers as estimated with the bootstrap method.
Ranking, from top to bottom, of the main systematic uncertainties (excluding recoil) showing the pulls and the impact of the systematic uncertainties on the top mass, from the combined opposite sign (OS) and same sign (SS) binned-template profile likelihood fit to data. The OS or SS refers to the charge signs of the primary lepton and the soft muon. The gamma parameters are NPs used to describe the effect of the limited statistics of the sample.
Inclusive and differential measurements of the top-antitop ($t\bar{t}$) charge asymmetry $A_\text{C}^{t\bar{t}}$ and the leptonic asymmetry $A_\text{C}^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ are presented in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV recorded by the ATLAS experiment at the CERN Large Hadron Collider. The measurement uses the complete Run 2 dataset, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$, combines data in the single-lepton and dilepton channels, and employs reconstruction techniques adapted to both the resolved and boosted topologies. A Bayesian unfolding procedure is performed to correct for detector resolution and acceptance effects. The combined inclusive $t\bar{t}$ charge asymmetry is measured to be $A_\text{C}^{t\bar{t}} = 0.0068 \pm 0.0015$, which differs from zero by 4.7 standard deviations. Differential measurements are performed as a function of the invariant mass, transverse momentum and longitudinal boost of the $t\bar{t}$ system. Both the inclusive and differential measurements are found to be compatible with the Standard Model predictions, at next-to-next-to-leading order in quantum chromodynamics perturbation theory with next-to-leading-order electroweak corrections. The measurements are interpreted in the framework of the Standard Model effective field theory, placing competitive bounds on several Wilson coefficients.
- - - - - - - - Overview of HEPData Record - - - - - - - - <br/><br/> <b>Results:</b> <ul> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=Resultsforchargeasymmetryinclusive">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=Resultsforchargeasymmetryvsmtt">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=Resultsforchargeasymmetryvspttt">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $p_{T,t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=Resultsforchargeasymmetryvsbetatt">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=Resultsforleptonicchargeasymmetryinclusive">$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=Resultsforchargeasymmetryvsllmll">$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=Resultsforchargeasymmetryvsllptll">$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=Resultsforchargeasymmetryvsllbetall">$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> </ul> <b>Bounds on the Wilson coefficients:</b> <ul> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=BoundsonWilsoncoefficientschargeasymmetryinclusive">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=BoundsonWilsoncoefficientschargeasymmetryvsmtt">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$</a> </ul> <b>Ranking of systematic uncertainties:</b></br> Inclusive:<a href="132116?version=2&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryinclusive">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$</a></br> <b>$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$:</b> <ul> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsbetattbin0">$\beta_{z,t\bar{t}} \in[0,0.3]$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsbetattbin1">$\beta_{z,t\bar{t}} \in[0.3,0.6]$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsbetattbin2">$\beta_{z,t\bar{t}} \in[0.6,0.8]$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsbetattbin3">$\beta_{z,t\bar{t}} \in[0.8,1]$</a> </ul> <b>$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$:</b> <ul> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsmttbin0">$m_{t\bar{t}}$ < $500$GeV</a> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsmttbin1">$m_{t\bar{t}} \in [500,750]$GeV</a> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsmttbin2">$m_{t\bar{t}} \in [750,1000]$GeV</a> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsmttbin3">$m_{t\bar{t}} \in [1000,1500]$GeV</a> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsmttbin4">$m_{t\bar{t}}$ > $1500$GeV</a> </ul> <b>$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $p_{T,t\bar{t}}$:</b> <ul> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsptttbin0">$p_{T,t\bar{t}} \in [0,30]$GeV</a> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsptttbin1">$p_{T,t\bar{t}} \in[30,120]$GeV</a> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsptttbin2">$p_{T,t\bar{t}}$ > $120$GeV</a> </ul> Inclusive leptonic:<a href="132116?version=2&table=NPrankingleptonicchargeasymmetryinclusive">$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a></br> <b>$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$</b> <ul> <li><a href="132116?version=2&tableNPrankingchargeasymmetry=vsllbetallbin0">$\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}} \in [0,0.3]$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=2&tableNPrankingchargeasymmetry=vsllbetallbin1">$\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}} \in [0.3,0.6]$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=2&tableNPrankingchargeasymmetry=vsllbetallbin2">$\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}} \in [0.6,0.8]$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=2&tableNPrankingchargeasymmetry=vsllbetallbin3">$\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}} \in [0.8,1]$</a> </ul> <b>$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$</b> <ul> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsllmllbin0">$m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ < $200$GeV</a> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsllmllbin1">$m_{\ell\bar{\ell}} \in [200,300]$GeV</a> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsllmllbin2">$m_{\ell\bar{\ell}} \in [300,400]$Ge$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsllmllbin3">$m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ > $400$GeV</a> </ul> <b>$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$</b> <ul> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsllptllbin0">$p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}\in [0,20]$GeV</a> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsllptllbin1">$p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}\in[20,70]$GeV</a> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsllptllbin2">$p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ > $70$GeV</a> </ul> <b>NP correlations:</b> <ul> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=NPcorrelationschargeasymmetryinclusive">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=NPcorrelationschargeasymmetryvsmtt">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=NPcorrelationschargeasymmetryvspttt">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $p_{T,t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=NPcorrelationschargeasymmetryvsbetatt">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=NPcorrelationsleptonicchargeasymmetryinclusive">$A_c^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=NPcorrelationschargeasymmetryvsllmll">$A_c^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=NPcorrelationschargeasymmetryvsllptll">$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=NPcorrelationschargeasymmetryvsllbetall">$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> </ul> <b>Covariance matrices:</b> <ul> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=Covariancematrixchargeasymmetryvsmtt">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=Covariancematrixchargeasymmetryvspttt">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $p_{T,t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=Covariancematrixchargeasymmetryvsbetatt">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=Covariancematrixleptonicchargeasymmetryvsllmll">$A_c^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=Covariancematrixleptonicchargeasymmetryvsllptll">$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=2&table=Covariancematrixleptonicchargeasymmetryvsllbetall">$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> </ul>
The unfolded inclusive charge asymmetry. The measured values are given with statistical and systematic uncertainties. The SM theory predictions calculated at NNLO in QCD and NLO in EW theory are listed, and the impact of the linear term of the Wilson coefficient on the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ prediction is shown for two different values. The scale uncertainty is obtained by varying renormalisation and factorisation scales independently by a factor of 2 or 0.5 around $\mu_0$ to calculate the maximum and minimum value of the asymmetry, respectively. The nominal value $\mu_0$ is chosen as $H_T/4$. The variations in which one scale is multiplied by 2 while the other scale is divided by 2 are excluded. Finally, the scale and MC integration uncertainties are added in quadrature.
The unfolded differential charge asymmetry as a function of the invariant mass of the top pair system. The measured values are given with statistical and systematic uncertainties. The SM theory predictions calculated at NNLO in QCD and NLO in EW theory are listed, and the impact of the linear term of the Wilson coefficient on the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ prediction is shown for two different values. The scale uncertainty is obtained by varying renormalisation and factorisation scales independently by a factor of 2 or 0.5 around $\mu_0$ to calculate the maximum and minimum value of the asymmetry, respectively. The nominal value $\mu_0$ is chosen as $H_T/4$. The variations in which one scale is multiplied by 2 while the other scale is divided by 2 are excluded. Finally, the scale and MC integration uncertainties are added in quadrature.
A combination of measurements of the inclusive top-quark pair production cross-section performed by ATLAS and CMS in proton-proton collisions at centre-of-mass energies of 7 and 8 TeV at the LHC is presented. The cross-sections are obtained using top-quark pair decays with an opposite-charge electron-muon pair in the final state and with data corresponding to an integrated luminosity of about 5 fb$^{-1}$ at $\sqrt{s}=7$ TeV and about 20 fb$^{-1}$ at $\sqrt{s}=8$ TeV for each experiment. The combined cross-sections are determined to be $178.5 \pm 4.7$ pb at $\sqrt{s}=7$ TeV and $243.3^{+6.0}_{-5.9}$ pb at $\sqrt{s}=8$ TeV with a correlation of 0.41, using a reference top-quark mass value of 172.5 GeV. The ratio of the combined cross-sections is determined to be $R_{8/7}= 1.363\pm 0.032$. The combined measured cross-sections and their ratio agree well with theory calculations using several parton distribution function (PDF) sets. The values of the top-quark pole mass (with the strong coupling fixed at 0.118) and the strong coupling (with the top-quark pole mass fixed at 172.5 GeV) are extracted from the combined results by fitting a next-to-next-to-leading-order plus next-to-next-to-leading-log QCD prediction to the measurements. Using a version of the NNPDF3.1 PDF set containing no top-quark measurements, the results obtained are $m_t^\text{pole} = 173.4^{+1.8}_{-2.0}$ GeV and $\alpha_\text{s}(m_Z)= 0.1170^{+ 0.0021}_{-0.0018}$.
Full covariance matrix including all systematic uncertainties expressed as nuisance parameters. With the exception of the cross section parameters, all parameters were normalised to 1 before the fit. Therefore, the diagonal elements represent the constraint in quadrature.
Full covariance matrix including all systematic uncertainties expressed as nuisance parameters. With the exception of the cross section parameters, all parameters were normalised to 1 before the fit. Therefore, the diagonal elements represent the constraint in quadrature.
We report a measurement of the energy-dependent total charged-current cross section $\sigma\left(E_\nu\right)$ for inclusive muon neutrinos scattering on argon, as well as measurements of flux-averaged differential cross sections as a function of muon energy and hadronic energy transfer ($\nu$). Data corresponding to 5.3$\times$10$^{19}$ protons on target of exposure were collected using the MicroBooNE liquid argon time projection chamber located in the Fermilab Booster Neutrino Beam with a mean neutrino energy of approximately 0.8~GeV. The mapping between the true neutrino energy $E_\nu$ and reconstructed neutrino energy $E^{rec}_\nu$ and between the energy transfer $\nu$ and reconstructed hadronic energy $E^{rec}_{had}$ are validated by comparing the data and Monte Carlo (MC) predictions. In particular, the modeling of the missing hadronic energy and its associated uncertainties are verified by a new method that compares the $E^{rec}_{had}$ distributions between data and an MC prediction after constraining the reconstructed muon kinematic distributions, energy and polar angle, to those of data. The success of this validation gives confidence that the missing energy in the MicroBooNE detector is well-modeled and underpins first-time measurements of both the total cross section $\sigma\left(E_\nu\right)$ and the differential cross section $d\sigma/d\nu$ on argon.
$\nu_\mu$CC inclusive total cross section per nucleon in each neutrino energy bin with statistical plus systematic uncertainty. The total uncertainty comes from the square root of the covariance matrix diagonal entries.
$\nu_\mu$CC inclusive differential cross section per nucleon in each muon energy bin with statistical plus systematic uncertainty. The total uncertainty comes from the square root of the covariance matrix diagonal entries.
$\nu_\mu$CC inclusive differential cross section per nucleon in each hadronic energy transfer bin with statistical plus systematic uncertainty. The total uncertainty comes from the square root of the covariance matrix diagonal entries.
We present a measurement of the $\nu_e$-interaction rate in the MicroBooNE detector that addresses the observed MiniBooNE anomalous low-energy excess (LEE). The approach taken isolates neutrino interactions consistent with the kinematics of charged-current quasi-elastic (CCQE) events. The topology of such signal events has a final state with 1 electron, 1 proton, and 0 mesons ($1e1p$). Multiple novel techniques are employed to identify a $1e1p$ final state, including particle identification that use two methods of deep-learning-based image identification, and event isolation using a boosted decision-tree ensemble trained to recognize two-body scattering kinematics. This analysis selects 25 $\nu_e$-candidate events in the reconstructed neutrino energy range of 200--1200 MeV, while $29.0 \pm 1.9_\text{(sys)} \pm 5.4_\text{(stat)}$ are predicted when using $\nu_\mu$ CCQE interactions as a constraint. We use a simplified model to translate the MiniBooNE LEE observation into a prediction for a $\nu_e$ signal in MicroBooNE. A $\Delta \chi^2$ test statistic, based on the combined Neyman--Pearson $\chi^2$ formalism, is used to define frequentist confidence intervals for the LEE signal strength. Using this technique, in the case of no LEE signal, we expect this analysis to exclude a normalization factor of 0.75 (0.98) times the median MiniBooNE LEE signal strength at 90% ($2\sigma$) confidence level, while the MicroBooNE data yield an exclusion of 0.25 (0.38) times the median MiniBooNE LEE signal strength at 90% ($2\sigma$) confidence
Observed NuE data and background (+ LEE) prediction, including the muon neutrino background prediction from the empirical fit, for arXiv:2110.14080. The prediction incorporates the constraint from the 1mu1p sample
Observed NuE data and background (+ LEE) prediction, including the muon neutrino background prediction from the empirical fit, for arXiv:2110.14080. The prediction does not incorporate the constraint from the 1mu1p sample
NuE background fractional covariance matrix after the 1mu1p constraint from arXiv:2110.14080
We report a search for an anomalous excess of inclusive charged-current (CC) $\nu_e$ interactions using the Wire-Cell event reconstruction package in the MicroBooNE experiment, which is motivated by the previous observation of a low-energy excess (LEE) of electromagnetic events from the MiniBooNE experiment. With a single liquid argon time projection chamber detector, the measurements of $\nu_{\mu}$ CC interactions as well as $\pi^0$ interactions are used to constrain signal and background predictions of $\nu_e$ CC interactions. A data set collected from February 2016 to July 2018 corresponding to an exposure of 6.369 $\times$ 10$^{20}$ protons on target from the Booster Neutrino Beam at FNAL is analyzed. With $x$ representing an overall normalization factor and referred to as the LEE strength parameter, we select 56 fully contained $\nu_e$ CC candidates while expecting 69.6 $\pm$ 8.0 (stat.) $\pm$ 5.0 (sys.) and 103.8 $\pm$ 9.0 (stat.) $\pm$ 7.4 (sys.) candidates after constraints for the absence (eLEE$_{x=0}$) of the median signal strength derived from the MiniBooNE observation and the presence (eLEE$_{x=1}$) of that signal strength, respectively. Under a nested hypothesis test using both rate and shape information in all available channels, the best-fit $x$ is determined to be 0 (eLEE$_{x=0}$) with a 95.5% confidence level upper limit of $x$ at 0.502. Under a simple-vs-simple hypotheses test, the eLEE$_{x=1}$ hypothesis is rejected at 3.75$\sigma$, while the eLEE$_{x=0}$ hypothesis is shown to be consistent with the observation at 0.45$\sigma$. In the context of the eLEE model, the estimated 68.3% confidence interval of the $\nu_e$ hypothesis to explain the LEE observed in the MiniBooNE experiment is disfavored at a significance level of more than 2.6$\sigma$ (3.0$\sigma$) considering MiniBooNE's full (statistical) uncertainties.
Fully contained $\nu_e$CC data, signal, background, and LEE(x=1) predictions constrained by the $\nu_e$CC PC, $\nu_\mu$CC FC, $\nu_\mu$CC PC, $\nu_\mu$CC $\pi^0$ FC, $\nu_\mu$CC $\pi^0$ PC, and NC $\pi^0$ channels under a LEE(x=0) hypothesis. Note that here we show the sum of the constrained signal and constrained background; due to correlations between signal and background, this is not identical to constraining after summing signal and background, but the difference here is minimal. Note that the rightmost bin is an overflow bin, containing all events with reconstructed neutrino energy greater than 2.5 GeV. The background includes neutral current events, $\nu_\mu$CC events, events with a true neutrino interaction vertex outside the fiducial volume (3 cm inside the TPC active volume), and cosmic ray backgrounds. The signal includes the remaining intrinsic $\nu_e$CC events. The LEE(x=1) includes the predicted excess from an unfolding of the MiniBooNE LEE under a $\nu_e$CC hypothesis.
Fully contained $\nu_e$CC data, signal, background, and LEE(x=1) predictions constrained by the $\nu_e$CC PC, $\nu_\mu$CC FC, $\nu_\mu$CC PC, $\nu_\mu$CC $\pi^0$ FC, $\nu_\mu$CC $\pi^0$ PC, and NC $\pi^0$ channels under a LEE(x=0) hypothesis. Note that here we show the sum of the constrained signal and constrained background; due to correlations between signal and background, this is not identical to constraining after summing signal and background, but the difference here is minimal. Note that the rightmost bin is an overflow bin, containing all events with reconstructed neutrino energy greater than 2.5 GeV. The background includes neutral current events, $\nu_\mu$CC events, events with a true neutrino interaction vertex outside the fiducial volume (3 cm inside the TPC active volume), and cosmic ray backgrounds. The signal includes the remaining intrinsic $\nu_e$CC events. The LEE(x=1) includes the predicted excess from an unfolding of the MiniBooNE LEE under a $\nu_e$CC hypothesis.
Fully contained $\nu_e$CC data, signal, background, and LEE(x=1) predictions constrained by the $\nu_e$CC PC, $\nu_\mu$CC FC, $\nu_\mu$CC PC, $\nu_\mu$CC $\pi^0$ FC, $\nu_\mu$CC $\pi^0$ PC, and NC $\pi^0$ channels under a LEE(x=0) hypothesis. Note that here we show the sum of the constrained signal and constrained background; due to correlations between signal and background, this is not identical to constraining after summing signal and background, but the difference here is minimal. Note that the rightmost bin is an overflow bin, containing all events with reconstructed neutrino energy greater than 2.5 GeV. The background includes neutral current events, $\nu_\mu$CC events, events with a true neutrino interaction vertex outside the fiducial volume (3 cm inside the TPC active volume), and cosmic ray backgrounds. The signal includes the remaining intrinsic $\nu_e$CC events. The LEE(x=1) includes the predicted excess from an unfolding of the MiniBooNE LEE under a $\nu_e$CC hypothesis.
We report results from a search for neutrino-induced neutral current (NC) resonant $\Delta$(1232) baryon production followed by $\Delta$ radiative decay, with a $\langle0.8\rangle$~GeV neutrino beam. Data corresponding to MicroBooNE's first three years of operations (6.80$\times$10$^{20}$ protons on target) are used to select single-photon events with one or zero protons and without charged leptons in the final state ($1\gamma1p$ and $1\gamma0p$, respectively). The background is constrained via an in-situ high-purity measurement of NC $\pi^0$ events, made possible via dedicated $2\gamma1p$ and $2\gamma0p$ selections. A total of 16 and 153 events are observed for the $1\gamma1p$ and $1\gamma0p$ selections, respectively, compared to a constrained background prediction of $20.5 \pm 3.65 \text{(sys.)} $ and $145.1 \pm 13.8 \text{(sys.)} $ events. The data lead to a bound on an anomalous enhancement of the normalization of NC $\Delta$ radiative decay of less than $2.3$ times the predicted nominal rate for this process at the 90% confidence level (CL). The measurement disfavors a candidate photon interpretation of the MiniBooNE low-energy excess as a factor of $3.18$ times the nominal NC $\Delta$ radiative decay rate at the 94.8% CL, in favor of the nominal prediction, and represents a greater than $50$-fold improvement over the world's best limit on single-photon production in NC interactions in the sub-GeV neutrino energy range
Data and MC comparison of the reconstructed $\pi^0$ momentum distribution for the 2$\gamma$1p selected events
Data/MC ratio as a function of reconstructed $\pi^0$ momentum for the 2$\gamma$1p selection
Data and MC comparison of the reconstructed $\pi^0$ momentum distribution for the 2$\gamma$0p selected events
Forum