format: text

text:
# Past and future evolution of Sakurai’s object

## References

Asplund, M., Lambert, D. L., Kipper, T., Pollacco, D., & Shetrone, M. D. 1999, A&A, 343, 507

Duerbeck, H. W., Liller, W., Sterken, C., et al. 2000, AJ, 119, 2360

Herwig, F. 2001, ApJ Lett., 554, L71

Herwig, F., Blöcker, T., Langer, N., & Driebe, T. 1999, A&A, 349, L5

Herwig, F. & Langer, N. 2001, Nucl. Phys. A, 688, 221, astro-ph/0010120

Iben, Jr., I. & MacDonald, J. 1995, in White Dwarfs, ed. D. Koester & K. Werner, LNP No. 443 (Heidelberg: Springer), 48


text:
# Background of gravitational waves from pre-galactic black hole formation

## 1 Introduction

Because of the fact that gravitational waves (GWs) are produced by a large variety of astrophysical sources and cosmological phenomena, it is quite probable that the Universe is pervaded by a background of such waves. A variety of binary stars (ordinary, compact or combinations of them), Population III stars, phase transitions in the early Universe and cosmic strings are examples of sources that could produce such a putative background of GWs (Thorne 1987, Blair and Ju 1996, Owen et al1998, Ferrari et al1999a, 1999b, Schutz 1999, Giovannini 2000, Maggiore 2000, Schneider et al2000, among others).

In the present study we have considered the background of GWs produced from a Population III black hole formation. The basic arguments in favour of the existence of these pre-galactic black holes are the following: (a) from the Gunn-Peterson effect (Gunn and Peterson 1965), it is widely accepted that the Universe underwent a reheating (or reionization) phase between the standard recombination epoch (at $`z1000`$) and $`z>5`$ as a result of the formation of the first structures of the Universe (see, Haiman and Loeb 1997, Loeb and Barkana 2001 for a review). However, at what redshift the reionization occured is still an open question (Loeb and Barkana 2001), although recent studies conclude that it occurred at redshifts in the range $`6<z<30`$ (Venkatesan 2000); (b) the metallicity of $`10^2Z_{}`$ found in $`\mathrm{high}z`$ Ly$`\alpha `$ forest clouds (Songaila and Cowie 1996, Ellison et al2000) is consistent with a stellar population formed at $`z>5`$ (Venkatesan 2000).

In the present paper we have adopted a stellar generation with a Salpeter initial mass function (IMF) as well as different stellar formation epochs. We then discuss what conclusions would be drawn from whether (or not) the stochastic background studied here is detected by forthcoming GW observatories such as LIGO and VIRGO.

The paper is organized as follows. In section 2 we describe how to calculate the background of GWs produced during the formation of the stellar black holes in this scenario (the reader finds a more detailed description in de Araujo et al2002), in section 3 we present some numerical results and the discussions, in section 4 we consider the detectability of this putative GW background and finally in section 5 we present our conclusions.

## 2 The gravitational wave production from pre-galactic stars

Before going into detail of the calculation of the background of GWs produced by pre-galactic stars, it is import to consider in what ways the present study differs from previous ones.

Ferrari et al(1999a), for example, consider the background of GWs produced by the formation of black holes of galactic origin, i.e., those formed at redshifts $`z<5`$. Schneider et al(2000) study the collapse of Very Massive Objects (VMO), and the eventual formation of very massive black holes and the GWs they generate. Fryer et al(2002) study, among other issues, the collapse of very massive Population III stars ($`>300\mathrm{M}_{}`$) and the GWs generated by them.

Here, we consider a different approach to the formation of pre-galactic objects. We take into account the formation of Population III stellar black holes, considering that the progenitor stars follow a Salpeter’s IMF. In this case, the progenitor stars have masses in the range $`25125M_{}`$. We also consider that the formation of these black holes occurs at high redshifts, namely, $`z>10`$. It is worth noting that Sapeter’s Population III stars could account for the metallicity found in high-z Ly$`\alpha `$ forest clouds, and, at least in part, since the QSOs could also be important, for the reionization of the Universe.

Let us now focus on how to calculate the background of GWs produced by the Population III stellar black holes we propose exist.

The spectral energy density, the flux of GWs, received on Earth, $`F_\nu `$, in $`\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{Hz}^1`$, reads (see, e.g. Douglass and Braginsky 1979, Hils et al1990)

$$F_\nu =\frac{c^3s_\mathrm{h}\omega _{\mathrm{obs}}^2}{16\pi G},$$
(1)
where $`\omega _{\mathrm{obs}}=2\pi \nu _{\mathrm{obs}}`$, with $`\nu _{\mathrm{obs}}`$ being the GW frequency (Hz) observed on Earth, $`c`$ is the velocity of light, $`G`$ is the gravitational constant and $`\sqrt{s_\mathrm{h}}`$ is the strain amplitude of the GW ($`\mathrm{Hz}^{1/2}`$).

The stochastic GW background produced by gravitational collapses that lead to black holes would have a spectral density of the flux of GWs and strain amplitude also related to equation (1). The strain amplitude at a given frequency, at the present time, is the contribution of black holes with different masses at different redshifts. Thus, the ensemble of black holes formed produces a background whose characteristic strain amplitude at the present time is $`\sqrt{s}_\mathrm{h}`$.

On the other hand, the spectral density of the flux can be written as (Ferrari et al1999a)

$$F_\nu =_{z_{\mathrm{cf}}}^{z_{\mathrm{ci}}}_{m_{\mathrm{min}}}^{m_\mathrm{u}}f_\nu (\nu _{\mathrm{obs}})𝑑R_{\mathrm{BH}}(m,z)$$
(2)
where $`f_\nu (\nu _{\mathrm{obs}})`$ is the energy flux per unit of frequency (in $`\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{Hz}^1`$) produced due to the formation of a unique black hole and $`dR_{\mathrm{BH}}`$ is the differential rate of black hole formation.

The above equation takes into account the contribution of different masses that collapse to form black holes occurring between redshifts $`z_{\mathrm{ci}}`$ and $`z_{\mathrm{cf}}`$ (beginning and end of the star formation phase, respectively) that produce a signal at the same frequency $`\nu _{\mathrm{obs}}`$. On the other hand, we can write $`f_\nu (\nu _{\mathrm{obs}})`$ (Carr 1980) as

$$f_\nu (\nu _{\mathrm{obs}})=\frac{\pi c^3}{2G}h_{\mathrm{BH}}^2$$
(3)
where $`h_{\mathrm{BH}}`$ is the dimensionless amplitude produced by the collapse, to a black hole, of a given star with mass $`m`$ that generates at the present time a signal with frequency $`\nu _{\mathrm{obs}}`$. Then, the resulting equation for the spectral density of the flux is

$$F_\nu =\frac{\pi c^3}{2G}h_{\mathrm{BH}}^2𝑑R_{\mathrm{BH}}.$$
(4)
From the above equations, we obtain for the strain amplitude

$$s_\mathrm{h}=\frac{1}{\nu _{\mathrm{obs}}^2}h_{\mathrm{BH}}^2𝑑R_{\mathrm{BH}}.$$
(5)
Then, the dimensionless amplitude of the background of GWs, $`h_{\mathrm{BG}}`$, reads

$$h_{\mathrm{BG}}^2=\frac{1}{\nu _{\mathrm{obs}}}h_{\mathrm{BH}}^2𝑑R_{\mathrm{BH}}$$
(6)
(see, de Araujo et al2000 for details) where $`\nu _{\mathrm{obs}}`$, $`h_{\mathrm{BH}}`$ and $`dR_{\mathrm{BH}}`$ are defined below.

The dimensionless amplitude $`h_{\mathrm{BH}}`$ produced by the collapse of a star, or star cluster, to form a black hole is (Thorne 1987)

$$h_{\mathrm{BH}}7.4\times 10^{20}\epsilon _{\mathrm{GW}}^{1/2}\left(\frac{M_\mathrm{r}}{𝐌_{}}\right)\left(\frac{d_\mathrm{L}}{1\mathrm{M}\mathrm{p}\mathrm{c}}\right)^1$$
(7)
where $`\epsilon _{\mathrm{GW}}`$ is the efficiency of generation of GWs, $`M_\mathrm{r}`$ is the remnant black hole mass and $`d_\mathrm{L}`$ is the luminosity distance to the source.

It is worth mentioning that equation (7) refers to the black hole ‘ringing’, which has to do with the de-excitation of the black hole quasi-normal modes. Note also that $`\epsilon _{\mathrm{GW}}a^4`$ (see, e.g. Stark and Piran 1986), where ‘$`a`$’ is the the dimensionless angular momentum. Thus, greater the GW efficiency, greater the dimensionless angular momentum.

We assume that the progenitor masses of the black holes range from $`M=25125\mathrm{M}_{}`$ (see Timmes et al1995, Woosley and Timmes 1996). The remnant and the progenitor masses are related to $`M_\mathrm{r}=\alpha M`$ and, we assume $`\alpha =0.1`$ (see, e.g. Ferrari et al1999a).

The collapse of a star to a black hole produces a signal with an observed frequency $`\nu _{\mathrm{obs}}`$ at the Earth (Thorne 1987)

$$\nu _{\mathrm{obs}}1.3\times 10^4\mathrm{Hz}\left(\frac{\mathrm{M}_{}}{M_\mathrm{r}}\right)(1+z)^1$$
(8)
where the factor $`(1+z)^1`$ takes into account the redshift effect on the emission frequency.

The differential rate of black hole formation $`dR_{\mathrm{BH}}`$ reads

$$dR_{\mathrm{BH}}=\dot{\rho }_{}(z)\frac{dV}{dz}\varphi (m)dmdz$$
(9)
where $`dV`$ is the co-moving volume element, $`\varphi (m)`$ is the stellar initial mass function (IMF) and $`\dot{\rho }_{}(z)`$ is the star formation rate (SFR) density.

The SFR density can be related to the reionization of the Universe. The amount of baryons necessary to participate in early star formation, to account for the reionization, would amount to a small fraction, $`f_{}`$, of all baryons of the Universe (see, e.g. Loeb and Barkana 2001). We then assume that

$$\dot{\rho }_{}\frac{d\rho _{}}{dt}=\frac{d}{dt}[\mathrm{\Omega }_{}\rho _\mathrm{c}(1+z)^3]$$
(10)
where the term in brackets represents the stellar mass density at redshift $`z`$, with $`\rho _\mathrm{c}`$ the present critical density, and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{}`$ the stellar density parameter. The latter can be written as a fraction of the baryonic density parameter, namely, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{}=f_{}\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{B}`$, which we assume to be independent of the redshift.

From the above equations, we obtain for the dimensionless amplitude

$`h_{\mathrm{BG}}^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(7.4\times 10^{20}\alpha )^2\epsilon _{\mathrm{GW}}}{\nu _{\mathrm{obs}}}}`$ (11)
$`\times \left[{\displaystyle _{z_{\mathrm{cf}}}^{z_{\mathrm{ci}}}}{\displaystyle _{m_{\mathrm{min}}}^{m_\mathrm{u}}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{m}{\mathrm{M}_{}}}\right)^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{d_\mathrm{L}}{1\mathrm{M}\mathrm{p}\mathrm{c}}}\right)^2\dot{\rho }_{}(z){\displaystyle \frac{dV}{dz}}\varphi (m)𝑑m𝑑z\right]`$
where $`m_{\mathrm{min}}=25\mathrm{M}_{}`$, $`m_\mathrm{u}=125\mathrm{M}_{}`$ and $`z_{\mathrm{ci}}`$ ($`z_{\mathrm{cf}}`$) is the beginning (end) of the black hole formation phase. Equation (11) is computed for each observed frequency. Also, looking at equation (11), one notes that to integrate it, one needs to choose the IMF, the cosmological parameters and set values for the following parameters: $`z_{\mathrm{ci}}`$, $`z_{\mathrm{cf}}`$, $`\alpha `$, $`\epsilon _{\mathrm{GW}}`$, $`f_{}`$. In the next section we present the numerical results and discussions.

## 3 Numerical results and discussions

To evaluate the background of GWs produced by the formation of the Population III black holes, it is necessary to know in which redshifts they began and finished formation. This is a very difficult question to answer, since it involves knowledge of the role of the negative and positive feedbacks of star formation which are regulated by cooling and injection of energy processes.

Should the stochastic background of GWs studied here be significantly produced and detected at a reasonable confidence level, the present study can be used to obtain the redshift range where the Population III black holes were formed. We refer the reader to the paper by de Araujo et al(2002) for further discussions. In figure 1 an example is given of how one could get $`z_{\mathrm{ci}}`$ and $`z_{\mathrm{cf}}`$ from the curve $`h_{\mathrm{BG}}`$ versus $`\nu _{\mathrm{obs}}`$. Knowing the frequency band $`\nu _{\mathrm{min}}\nu _{\mathrm{max}}`$ detected from a cosmological source, and using equation (8), one can obtain both $`z_{\mathrm{ci}}`$ and $`z_{\mathrm{cf}}`$ from figure 1. Thus, these redshifts are therefore observable. Note that we have assumed as did Ferrari et al(1999a) that $`\alpha `$ is a constant ($`\alpha =0.1`$).

Stars start forming at different redshifts, creating ionized bubbles (Strömgren spheres) around themselves, which expand into the intergalactic medium (IGM), at a rate dictated by the source luminosity and the background IGM density (Loeb and Barkana 2001). The reionization is complete when the bubbles overlap to fill the entire Universe. Thus the epoch of reionization is not the epoch of star formation. There is a non-negligible time span between them. Here, we have chosen different formation epochs to see their influence on the putative background of GWs and also to see if it could be detected by the forthcoming GW antennas.

To calculate $`h_{\mathrm{BG}}`$ we adopted the standard Salpeter IMF. For $`\epsilon _{\mathrm{GW}}`$, the efficiency of production of GWs, whose distribution function is unknown, we have parametrized our results in terms of its maximum value, namely, $`\epsilon _{\mathrm{GW}_{\mathrm{max}}}=7\times 10^4`$. This figure is obtained from studies by Stark and Piran (1986) who simulated the axisymmetric collapse of a rotating star to a black hole.

To calculate $`h_{\mathrm{BG}}`$ we still need to know $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{}`$, which has a key role in the definition of the SFR density. From different studies one can conclude that a few per cent, may be up to $`10\%`$, of the baryons must be condensed into stars in order for the reionization of the Universe to take place (see, e.g. Venkatesan 2000). Here we have set the value of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{}`$ in such a way that it amounts to $`1\%`$ of all baryons (our fiducial value).

Looking at equation (11), one could think it would depend critically on the cosmological parameters $`H_0`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{B}`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{DM}}`$ (the density parameter for the dark matter) and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ (the density parameter associated with the cosmological constant). But our results show that $`h_{\mathrm{BG}}`$ depends only on $`H_0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{B}`$, the Hubble parameter and the baryonic density parameter, respectively.

The quantity $`h_{100}^2\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{B}=0.019\pm 0.0024`$ (where $`h_{100}`$ is the Hubble parameter given in terms of 100 $`\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{Mpc}^1`$) is adopted in the present model. This figure is obtained from Big Bang nucleosynthesis studies (see, e.g. Burles et al1999).

In table 1 we present the redshift band, $`z_{\mathrm{ci}}`$ and $`z_{\mathrm{cf}}`$, for the models studied and the corresponding GW frequency bands. For the cosmological parameters, we have adopted $`h_{100}=0.65`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{M}=0.3`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{B}=0.045`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0.7`$. We have also adopted $`\alpha =0.1`$, $`f_{}=0.01`$ and the standard IMF.

It is worth noting that no structure formation model has been used to find the black holes formation epoch; instead, we have simply chosen the values of $`z`$ to see whether it is possible to obtain detectable GW signals. In the next section, it will be seen that unless $`\epsilon _{\mathrm{GW}}`$ is negligible, the background of GWs we propose here can be detected. Our choices, however, can be understood as follows. The greater the redshift formation, the more power the masses related to the Population III objects have. Thus from our models A to D, our model D (A) has more (less) power when compared to the others. The models E, F and G would mean a more extended star formation epoch, which means that the feedback processes of star formation are such that they allow a more extended star formation epoch when compared to the models B, C and D, respectively.

Note that the reionization epoch occurred at lower redshifts as compared to the first stars formation redshifts. Loeb and Barkana (2001) found, for example, that if the stars were formed at $`z1030`$, with standard IMF, they could have reionized the Universe at redshift $`z6`$. Our models A, B and E, for example, could account for such a reionization redshift.

If the process of structure formation of the Universe and the consequent star formation were well known, one could obtain the redshift formation epoch of the first stars. On the other hand, if the background of GWs really exists and is detected, one can obtain information about the formation epoch of the first stars.

A relevant question is whether the background we study here is continuous or not. The duty cycle indicates if the collective effect of the bursts of GWs generated during the collapse of a progenitor star generates a continuous background. For all the models studied here the duty cycle is $`1`$ (see de Araujo et al2002 for details).

We find, for example, that the formation of a Population (III) of black holes, in the model D, could generate a stochastic background of GWs with amplitude $`h_{\mathrm{BG}}(0.82)\times 10^{24}`$ and a corresponding closure density of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{GW}}(0.71.4)\times 10^8`$, at the frequency band $`\nu _{\mathrm{obs}}20130\mathrm{Hz}`$ (assuming an efficiency of generation $`\epsilon _{\mathrm{GW}}7\times 10^4`$, the maximum one).

In other paper to appear elsewhere (de Araujo et al2002), we study in detail how the variations of the several parameters modify our results.

## 4 Detectability of the background of gravitational waves

The background predicted in the present study cannot be detected by single forthcoming interferometric detectors, such as VIRGO and LIGO (even by advanced ones). However, it is possible to correlate the signal of two or more detectors to detect the background that we propose to exist.

To assess the detectability of a GW signal, one must evaluate the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), which for a pair of interferometers is given by (see, e.g. Flanagan 1993)

$$\mathrm{SNR}^2=\left[\left(\frac{9H_0^4}{50\pi ^4}\right)T_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\nu \frac{\gamma ^2(\nu )\mathrm{\Omega }_{GW}^2(\nu )}{\nu ^6S_\mathrm{h}^{(1)}(\nu )S_\mathrm{h}^{(2)}(\nu )}\right]$$
(12)
where $`S_\mathrm{h}^{(i)}`$ is the spectral noise density, $`T`$ is the integration time and $`\gamma (\nu )`$ is the overlap reduction function, which depends on the relative positions and orientations of the two interferometers. The closure energy density is given by

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{GW}}=\frac{1}{\rho _\mathrm{c}}\frac{d\rho _{\mathrm{GW}}}{d\mathrm{log}\nu _{\mathrm{obs}}}=\frac{4\pi ^2}{3H_0^2}\nu _{\mathrm{obs}}^2h_{\mathrm{BG}}^2.$$
(13)
Here we consider, in particular, the LIGO interferometers, and their spectral noise densities have been taken from a paper by Owen et al(1998).

In table 2 we present the SNR for 1 year of observation with $`\alpha =0.1`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{B}h_{100}^2=0.019`$, $`f_{}=0.01`$ and $`\epsilon _{\mathrm{GW}_{\mathrm{max}}}=7\times 10^4`$ for the models in table 1, for the three LIGO interferometer configurations.

Note that for the ‘initial’ LIGO (LIGO I), there is no hope of detecting the background of GWs we propose here. For the ‘enhanced’ LIGO (LIGO II) there is some possibility of detecting the background, since $`\mathrm{SNR}>1`$, if $`\epsilon _{\mathrm{GW}}`$ is around the maximum value. Even if the LIGO II interferometers cannot detect such a background, it will be possible to constrain the efficiency of GW production.

The prospect of detection with the ‘advanced’ LIGO (LIGO III) interferometers is much more optimistic, since the SNR for almost all models is significantly greater than unity. Only if the value of $`\epsilon _{\mathrm{GW}}`$ were significantly lower than the maximum value would the detection not be possible. In fact, the signal-to-noise ratio is critically dependent on this parameter.

Note that the larger the star formation redshift band, the greater the SNR. Secondly, the earlier the star formation, the greater the SNR. It is worth recalling that, if one can obtain the curve ‘$`h_{\mathrm{BG}}`$ versus $`\nu _{\mathrm{obs}}`$’ and the value of $`\alpha `$ is known, one can find the redshift of star formation.

## 5 Conclusions

We have shown that a background of GWs is produced from Population III black hole formation at high redshift. This background can in principle be detected by a pair of LIGO II (or more probably by a pair of LIGO III) interferometers. However, a relevant question should be considered: what astrophysical information can one obtain whether or not such a putative background is detected?

First, let us consider a non-detection of the GW background. The critical parameter to be constrained here is $`\epsilon _{\mathrm{GW}}`$. A non-detection would mean that the efficiency of GWs during the formation of black holes is not high enough. Another possibility is that the first generation of stars is such that the black holes formed had masses $`>100M_{}`$, and should they form at $`z>10`$ the GW frequency band would be out of the LIGO frequency band.

Secondly, a detection of the background with a significant SNR would permit us to obtain the curve of $`h_{\mathrm{BG}}`$ versus $`\nu _{\mathrm{obs}}`$. From it, one can constrain $`\alpha `$ and the redshift formation epoch; and for a given IMF and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{B}h^2`$, one can also constrain the values of $`f_{}`$ and $`\epsilon _{\mathrm{GW}}`$. On the other hand, using the curve of $`h_{\mathrm{BG}}`$ versus $`\nu _{\mathrm{obs}}`$ and in addition other astrophysical data, say CBR data, models of structure formation and reionization of the Universe, constraint on $`\epsilon _{\mathrm{GW}}`$ can also be imposed. We refer the reader to the paper by de Araujo et al(2002) for further discussions.

It is worth mentioning that a significant amount of GWs can also be produced during the formation of neutron stars and if such stars are r-mode unstable (Andersson 1998). We leave these issues for other studies to appear elsewhere.

The authors thank FAPESP (Brazil) for support (grant numbers 97/06024-4, 97/13720-7, 98/13468-9, 98/13735-7, 00/00116-9, 01/04086-0, and 01/04189-3). JCNA and ODA also thank CNPq (Brazil) for support (grant numbers 450994/01-5 and 300619/92-8, respectively). We also thank the referees for the suggestions and criticisms.

## References


text:
# MC generators in CHORUS

## 1 Introduction

CHORUS is an experiment primarily designed to search for $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ oscillations in the CERN wide-band neutrino beam. It also aims to investigate a wide range of charm physics. In four years of exposure, more than 106 neutrino interactions have been accumulated in the emulsion target, out of which several thousands lead to the production of a charmed particle. Using its massive calorimeter as a target, CHORUS also has a potential to study other neutrino physics for which large statistics is the crucial point.

Monte-Carlo (MC) simulation is an essential part of the experiment. It includes a detailed model of the neutrino beam, generation of neutrino events, full GEANT-based simulation of the detector response and the reconstruction.

This report is organized as follows. In Section 2, a brief description of the CHORUS physics and experimental set-up is given. The MC procedure is reviewed in Section 3. Section 4 is devoted to general-purpose event generators and their verification on the existing experimental data. In Section 5, more specific generators are considered.

## 2 CHORUS: physics and set-up

The CHORUS detector  is a hybrid setup. A 770-kg nuclear emulsion is used as the primary target for neutrino interactions, allowing three-dimensional reconstruction of short-lived particles like the $`\tau `$ lepton and any charmed hadron. The emulsion target consists of four stacks. Each stack is followed by three interface emulsion sheets and by a set of scintillating fibre tracker planes. They provide accurate predictions of particle trajectories into the emulsion stack for the location of vertex positions. The emulsion scanning is performed by fully automatic microscopes equipped with CCD cameras and a read-out system. The electronic detectors downstream of the emulsion target include a hadron spectrometer which measures the bending of charged particles in an air-core magnet, a 100t calorimeter where the energy and direction of showers are measured and a muon spectrometer which determines charge and momentum of muons. In addition, the calorimeter was used as an active (lead) target for neutrino events.

The West Area Neutrino Facility at CERN provides a beam of 27 GeV average energy consisting mainly of $`\nu _\mu `$ with a 5% $`\overline{\nu }_\mu `$ contamination. During the four years of operation, emulsion target material was exposed to the beam with an integrated intensity which corresponds to $`5.06\times 10^{19}`$ protons on target. The data from the electronic detectors were analysed and the events possibly originating from the emulsion stacks were identified.

Since the CHORUS experiment was designed primarily to search for $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ oscillation, the data selection for the first phase of the analysis was optimized for the detection of a $`\tau `$ decaying into a single charged particle. It allowed to reach the limit on the $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ oscillation probability as $`P_{\mu \tau }`$ 3.4 $`\times `$ 10-4 at large $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ value . CHORUS has also seen neutrino induced diffractive $`D_s^{}`$ production  and charm pair production in charged-current (CC) interactions . In addition, with the calorimeter target, neutral-current (NC) production of J/$`\psi `$ was observed  and preliminary results on differential cross-sections and structure functions on lead were obtained .

Recently, the second phase of CHORUS scanning and analysis has been started. It is based on new reconstruction software and improved MC packages. The key point is the new emulsion scanning method called ’netscan’. This method, originally developed for the DONUT experiment , consists of recording all track segments within a large angular acceptance in a volume surrounding the located vertex position. It can improve the limit on the $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ oscillation probability by a factor of 3 to reach the design goal. In the second phase, a search for charm decays in the emulsion is also performed. Several thousands of such events are expected to be located. Based on a small part of the statistics, the $`D^0`$ production cross section has already been measured with an accuracy better than 10% . The following charm physics is of interest:

* meson rates, branching ratios for different channels, extraction of CKM matrix elements $`|V_{cd}|`$ and $`|V_{cs}|`$, strange sea of the nucleon and fragmentation functions;
* charmed baryon production and decays;
* diffractive production of $`D_s^{}`$ to measure different branching ratios and determine $`|V_{cs}|`$;
* associated charm production;
* rare charm decays.

With the calorimeter as a target, it is possible to measure $`\mathrm{d}^2\sigma /\mathrm{d}x\mathrm{d}y`$ and structure functions from $`\nu _\mu `$ and $`\overline{\nu }_\mu `$ interactions on lead, to study dimuon production and to search for rare processes. Potentially the same tasks can be also fulfilled using the first two magnets of the iron muon spectrometer as an active target. In addition, with a set of lead, iron, marble and plastic targets111At the end of experiment the emulsion target was replaced by this set of 4 targets. placed in the neutrino beam ratios of CC total cross-sections are being determined.

## 3 CHORUS MC simulation procedure

The procedure of MC simulation in the CHORUS experiment consists of modelling the neutrino beam, the generation of physical events, the simulation of the detector response and the reconstruction.

### 3.1 Simulation of the neutrino beam

Parent mesons for neutrinos, modelled with FLUKA  by NOMAD , are fed into the CHORUS GEANT 3.21-based  neutrino beam simulator called GBEAM . It performs tracking of these mesons through the neutrino tunnel and models their decays into neutrinos. The output of the simulation is the flavour, the creation-vertex and the four-momentum of the neutrino.

### 3.2 Generation of physical events

Deep-inelastic (DIS) events are simulated with the JETTA  package. (Quasi)-elastic (QE) processes and resonance production are modelled with the RESQUE  code. Information about these general-purpose packages can be found in Section 4. For specific processes, dedicated generators were developed (Section 5). All event generators use incoming neutrino information produced by GBEAM. Their output is similar to the LUND LUJETS common block  (particle codes, momenta, vertices and history).

### 3.3 Simulation of the detector response

The package which simulates the detector response, called Eficass (Emulsion FIbers CAlorimeter and Spectrometer Simulation), contains a very detailed description of the detector geometry in the GEANT 3.21 framework. The longitudinal vertex positioning is performed with a special geantino-based algorithm in accordance with the material density the neutrino traverses. Eficass digitizes GEANT hits in each active volume of the CHORUS detector subsystem. Its output, similar to what is produced by the data acquisition system, is sent to the reconstruction program.

## 4 General-purpose generators

### 4.1 JETTA

JETTA (JETs in Tau Analysis)  was written for the CHORUS kinematical pre-selection of events by embedding into a general DIS generator (LEPTO 6.1 ) the formalism of Ref.  to describe interactions with a massive charged lepton (5 structure functions). The code takes care of the polarization effects of the outgoing lepton also with respect to its decays by using the TAUOLA  package. The rest, is plain JETSET  code, tuned on the BEBC data  and it deals reasonably well with some charm production aspects and different interactions (NC and CC). JETTA generates DIS events ($`W^2`$2 GeV2) initiated by $`\nu _e`$, $`\nu _\mu `$ or $`\nu _\tau `$ with energies in the region of 3$`÷`$300 GeV. Structure functions GRV94LO  are used by default, other choices are possible via steering cards. Nucleon composition of the target and Fermi motion are also taken into account. JETTA is able to simulate events of specific classes like open charm and dimuon production. Threshold behaviour of the cross section due to the non-zero charm quark mass ($`m_c`$) is introduced but without slow rescaling. The Peterson longitudinal fragmentation function  with $`\epsilon =`$ 0.072  is used for charm quark hadronization.

JETTA reproduces reasonably well neutrino bubble chamber experimental data on charged track multiplicities, transverse shower development, pion energies and fragmentation functions for hadrons. It was also checked on our CC, charm and dimuon data obtained both with emulsion and calorimeter targets.

### 4.2 RESQUE

RESQUE , an event generator for RESonance and (QUasi)Elastic events, has been derived from a preexisting code. Computation of cross sections, as well as the routines which describe resonance decays have been adapted from the Soudan-II RSQ generator . The main changes concern:
\- significant extension of the energy range for the calculation of cross-sections and for the generation of events;
\- the incorporation of nuclear effects, Fermi motion  and Pauli suppression;
\- the inclusion of $`\nu _\tau `$ interactions, and $`\tau `$ decays, taking into account the polarization of the lepton in the final state.222It is assumed that the generated $`\tau `$ has always helicity -1 as obtained from an extrapolation from DIS case .
Three nucleon formfactors are used in the calculation of QE CC cross section . The fourth formfactor which is proportional to mass squared of the outgoing lepton, is taken into account in the case of $`\nu _\tau `$ interactions. For elastic NC interactions, the cross sections are taken from Ref..

The original routines from RSQ code  are used to generate the contribution of 16 baryonic resonances ($`N^{}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$) with invariant-mass $`W`$ 2 GeV. All resonances and their decays are generated separately. The production cross-sections have been computed in Ref. using the FKR  semirelativistic quark model. Total cross sections of QE $`\nu `$n interactions and $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{++}`$ production in $`\nu `$p- interactions are found to be in an agreement with experimental data .

### 4.3 Verification of CHORUS MC chain

The combined performance of JETTA and RESQUE generators was checked on CHORUS data. Fig.1 shows the reconstructed neutrino and antineutrino energy of CC events in the calorimeter. The difference between detector-deconvoluted data and MC does not exceed 10$`÷`$15%. It is partially due to imperfections in our simulation of neutrino parent meson transportation through the decay tunnel. Charged multiplicity of tracks predicted in the emulsion is presented in Fig.2. The agreement between data and MC333Both data and MC were passed through the same reconstruction program. is quite satisfactory.

### 4.4 MICKEY

MICKEY  is used as a fast MC generator for CC interactions in the calorimeter. Instead of doing a full GEANT simulation, it applies parameterized detector resolution and inefficiencies. These parameterizations have been obtained from test-beam data and from full detector simulations. The parton distribution set used in MICKEY is that of GRV94LO . Violation of the Callan-Gross relation is modelled using a parameterization of $`R(x,Q^2)`$ taken from a fit to the world data . Target mass effects and non-zero $`m_c`$ (slow rescaling) are taken into account. The structure functions are multiplied by a nuclear correction as a function of $`x`$ according to Ref.. QED radiative corrections are calculated following the scheme of Ref.. The generator was tuned and validated using our calorimeter and emulsion data .

## 5 Specific generators

Four generators were developed for charm studies:
\- ASTRA for diffractive $`D_s`$ production ;
\- QEGEN for QE production of charmed baryons ;
\- MCDIMUON for dimuon - involving charm - production ;
\- CCBAR for pair production of charmed particles both in CC and NC .
In addition, there is a generator for detailed simulation of “white star kinks”, WSK .

### 5.1 ASTRA

The core of ASTRA  consists of a set of functions $`F_n`$ describing the matrix elements for diffractive production of (vector) $`D_s^{}`$ and direct production of (pseudoscalar) $`D_s`$, in neutrino interactions, according to the choice of theoretical models indexed by $`n`$. It is left to the user to select her/his favourite model. By default, models from Ref. (Ref.) are used for $`D_s^{}`$ ($`D_s`$) production. The first approach is based on generalized vector dominance while the second one uses PCAC as a fundamental ingredient. Non-zero $`m_c`$ is taken into account in both.

It should be noted that a correctly selected integration algorithm and correctly computed integration limits are crucial. Ref. contains a thorough study of physical and computational pitfalls to be avoided.

Fragmentation and decays are performed with JETSET . Nuclear effects other than an ad-hoc diffractive slope are not included in ASTRA.

### 5.2 QEGEN

In the QE charm production a valence $`d`$-quark is transformed, through weak interaction, into a $`c`$-quark. The other two valence quarks in the nucleon behave as spectators, so only one hadronic state (charmed baryon $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_c^+`$, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_c^{++}`$ or $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_c^+`$, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_c^{++}`$) is produced and finally each event will contain a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ baryon. There are two classes of theoretical models which try to describe the QE charm production. The first class is based on $`SU(4)`$ flavour symmetry which is badly broken. A different approach is based on local duality in $`\nu `$N scattering on the basis of QCD. Although the predictions of the models for the total cross sections differ by one order of magnitude, $`Q^2`$-distributions are very similar. To simulate the dynamics of QE charmed baryon production, the differential cross sections from Ref. are used. JETSET  is employed to perform fragmentation and charmed baryon decays. The model to generate Fermi motion in emulsion target nuclei is adopted from Ref.. Note that experimental data on QE charm production are very poor.

### 5.3 MCDIMUON

The event generator MCDIMUON  was originally developed to simulate opposite-sign dimuon events in the CHARM-II detector . CTEQ3L  parton distribution functions are used. The masses of the charm quark and the nucleon are not neglected in the hard-scattering cross-section (slow rescaling is included). The fragmentation of charm quarks is described by the fragmentation function from Ref.. Excited charmed hadrons are not taken into consideration. The transverse momentum distribution is chosen as an exponential function of $`p_t^2`$. A correction for radiative effects is calculated for the inclusive CC cross-section using the prescription of Ref.. Decays of charmed hadrons only depend on the phase space. The nucleon content of the target is also taken into account.

The code is very flexible and the user can provide many parameters through steering cards. It was tuned for simulation of dimuon events in the CHORUS calorimeter . MCDIMUON was verified both on CHARM-II and CHORUS data.

### 5.4 CCBAR

The simulation of charm pair production in NC and CC interactions is performed using the general-purpose HERWIG event generator , version 6.1 . Several features of this generator, like heavy flavour hadron production and decay via QCD coherence effects and the cluster hadronization of the jets via non-perturbative gluon splitting, are especially relevant. The parton-shower approach is used both for initial and final states. MRS 5 (Owens) structure functions are used . The Peterson’s model for fragmentation functions is used with $`\epsilon =`$ 0.072. Nuclear effects such as evaporation and re-interactions are not simulated.

The process in NC is based on the $`Z^0`$-gluon fusion. A dedicated mode to produce this process is foreseen by the generator. Associated charm production in CC is based on the splitting of $`c\overline{c}`$ quarks from a gluon which is radiated through bremsstrahlung of a light quark. No dedicated mode is foreseen for such a process which is therefore obtained among conventional CC interactions. It should be noted however that total cross sections predicted by HERWIG  and calculated in Ref. differ by one order of magnitude. The CCBAR generator cannot be validated as the available experimental data for associated charm production are very poor .

### 5.5 WSK

A hadron-nucleus interaction which produces only one mimimum ionizing particle and no heavily ionizing tracks or other signs of nuclear break up is usually called “white star kink” (WSK). Note that, this is the main background for oscillation searches in CHORUS in “0$`\mu `$” mode , which is very difficult to estimate.

The simulation  is composed of two separate parts. The first is the generation of hadron interactions in emulsion, the second is the simulation of emulsion response to the different particles. The hadron-emulsion interactions have been simulated using FLUKA . The emulsion response description is a very delicate point. It is based on the range in emulsion, for which the parameterization is obtained by an old experiment . The generator has been tested and it reproduces the CHORUS data  quite well.

## 6 Conclusions

The CHORUS experiment has two general-purpose MC event generators which were validated using available experimental data. Tuning of dedicated generators, developed for charm physics, is well advanced. Currently, a complete set of CHORUS MC generators is available.


text:
# Faraday rotation and sensitivity of (100) bismuth-substituted ferrite garnet films

## I Introduction

It is well known that bismuth-substituted ferrite garnets (Bi:FGs) have a giant magnetooptical response. For this reason, they have found widespread use as optical switchers, optical isolators and magnetic field sensors. Some years ago it was realized that Bi:FG films with in-plane magnetization allow effective visualization and detection of magnetic fields. This discovery triggered a large number of quantitative studies of magnetic fields from superconductors, domain formation in magnetic materials, currents in microelectronic circuits and recorded patterns in magnetic storage media. However, no systematic studies have been carried out to characterise the magnetooptic properties of these films. Of particular interest here is the Faraday rotation, since this parameter determines the usefulness of the indicator.

Bi:FG films grown on (100) oriented substrates have been shown to have a number of unique properties which make them excellent candidates for magnetooptic imaging. First, these films exihibit very little domain activity, and respond to an increasing external field by a continous rotation of the magnetization vector. Second, the sensitivity of the films is easily tuned by altering the chemical composition. The sensitivity of the Faraday rotation to an external field is of major importance in magnetooptic imaging and detection, in particular when the external field is weak. To date several studies have been done to determine the sensitivity of bulk-samples and (111) oriented Bi:FG films. However, no studies have been carried out to characterise and understand the sensitivity of (100) orientated films.

In a previous paper we presented an experimental and theoretical study of the Faraday rotation at saturation. In that study a very simple model based on two electric dipole transitions, one tetrahedral and one octahedral, was used to explain the experimental data. Here we extend the work in that paper, and also introduce several new features. We have grown a series of gallium-substituted Bi:FG films using the liquid phase epitaxy (LPE) technique, and characterised their chemical composition. The Faraday rotation spectra have been measured for photon energies between $`1.7`$ and $`2.6`$ eV, corresponding to wavelengths between $`730`$ and $`480`$ nm. It is shown that the Faraday rotation changes significantly with the amount of substituted gallium and bismuth. Furthermore, the comparison of experimental and theoretical data confirms that the magnetooptic response increases linearly with the bismuth substitution and decreases almost linearly with the gallium substitution. We also report experimental data for the sensitivity of these materials, and find that the sensitivity depends nonlinearly on the gallium substitution, in good agreement with the theoretical model.

## II Sample preparation

Single crystal films of Bi:FG were grown by isothermal LPE from $`Bi_2O_3/PbO/B_2O_3`$ flux onto (100) oriented gadolinium gallium garnet (GGG) substrates. The growth takes place while the substrate is dipped into the melt contained in a Pt crucible. During the growth, the parameters could be controlled to create low magnetic coercivity and in-plane magnetization in the garnet films. The thickness of the films was measured using a Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) and confirmed with optical techniques, while their composition were determined with an Electron MicroProbe (EMP). Thicknesses and compositions of the selected samples are listed in Table 1.

From Table I one sees that the films can be represented by the following general formula: $`\{Re_{3x}Bi_x\}[Fe_{2z_a}Ga_{z_a}](Fe_{3z_d}Ga_{z_d})O_{12}`$, where $`\{\}`$ indicates the dodecahedral site, \[ \] the octahedral site, and () the tetrahedral site. Note that only the total gallium content $`z=z_a+z_d`$ can be extracted from the EMP, and to determine $`z_a`$ and $`z_d`$ separately other techniques such as neutron spectroscopy must be applied. The distribution of gallium on tetrahedral and octahedral sites have been examined in a number of studies on garnets with and without bismuth. These results indicate that around $`90\%`$ of the gallium occupies the tetrahedral site. This fact will be used later in this paper.

The films also contain small amounts of $`Pb`$, typically of the order of $`0.05`$, but this will neglected here, since it does not influence the Faraday rotation significantly.

## III Faraday rotation spectra

We have measured the Faraday spectra (at room temperature) of the films presented in Table I. Shown in Figs. 1 and 2 is the observed Faraday rotation as a function of wavelength for samples 7 and 8, respectively. Note that both films have maximum rotation near 2.45 eV, a feature characteristic of all the films considered in this study. In fact, all the films exhibit the same spectral shape, with only minor deviations from that seen in Figs. 1 and 2.

In order to understand the behaviour of the spectra, we have adopted the theory developed in Refs.. Here the expression for the Faraday rotation is given by

$`\mathrm{\Theta }_F^{sat}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\pi e^2\omega ^2}{nmc}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=a,d}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{Nf_i}{\omega _i}}`$ (2)
$`\times \left\{{\displaystyle \frac{(\omega _i+\mathrm{\Delta }_i)^2\omega ^2\mathrm{\Gamma }_i^2}{\left[(\omega _i+\mathrm{\Delta }_i)^2\omega ^2+\mathrm{\Gamma }_i^2\right]^2+4\omega ^2\mathrm{\Gamma }_i^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{(\omega _i\mathrm{\Delta }_i)^2\omega ^2\mathrm{\Gamma }_i^2}{\left[(\omega _i\mathrm{\Delta }_i)^2\omega ^2+\mathrm{\Gamma }_i^2\right]^2+4\omega ^2\mathrm{\Gamma }_i^2}}\right\},`$
where $`\omega _i`$ represent the resonance energy, $`f_i`$ the oscillator strength, while $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_i`$ is the half-linewidth of the transition. Furthermore, $`e`$ and $`m`$ are the electron charge and mass, respectively, whereas $`N`$ is the active ion density.

For $`x<2`$ it is reasonable to assume that $`N`$ is directly proportional to the bismuth content $`x`$. Furthermore, it is known that the strong enhancement of Faraday rotation is caused by iron-pair transitions, involving both octahedral and tetrahedral transitions simultaneously. Therefore, iron dilution of either sublattice results in a reduction of the active ion density. For these reasons we assume that the active ion density can be written as

$$N=N_0(1z_d/3)(1z_a/2)x.$$
(3)
$`N_0`$ is a constant, and may expected to be 1/3 of the density of rare-earth ions on the dodecahedral site, i.e. $`1.3\times 10^{22}`$ $`cm^3/3`$. When $`x=3`$, this interpretation implies that the dodecahedral site is fully occupied by bismuth.

To fit theoretical curves to the experimental data, the product $`N_0f_i`$ was chosen as free parameter. The parameters $`\mathrm{\Delta }_i`$, $`\omega _i`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_i`$ were chosen as sample independent, and the values suggested in Ref.  were used as a starting point in the fitting. Table II presents the paremeters found to give the best fit between the theoretical curves and experimental data. Note that our values for $`\mathrm{\Delta }_i`$, $`\omega _i`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_i`$ differs slightly from those used in Ref. . This is due to the fact that in that paper we focused on obtaining a very good fit for energies less than 2.3 eV. However, this resulted in some deviations between experiment and theory near the maximum Faraday rotation. Here we have chosen parameters which give the best agreement within the whole range of experimental data.

The solid line shown in Fig. 1 is the Faraday rotation calculated from Eq. (2) using the values in Table II. The dashed and dash-dotted lines show the contribution to the total Faraday rotation from the octahedral and tetrahedral sites, respectively. Note that below 2.2 eV, the main contribution to $`\mathrm{\Theta }_F`$ comes from the octahedral site.

The solid line in Fig. 2 shows the calculated Faraday rotation of sample 8. Again, we note that the theoretical curve is in good agreement with the experimental data. Also shown is the theoretical predictions when the bismuth content is x=1.5 (dashed line). In this case one may expect almost 7 $`deg/\mu m`$ at 2.3 eV.

It is useful to find out how bismuth and gallium influences the Faraday rotation. To this end, we define the following parameters

$$\mathrm{\Theta }_F^{Bi}=\frac{\mathrm{\Theta }_F^{sat}}{(1z_d/3)(1z_a/2)},$$
(4)
and

$$\mathrm{\Theta }_F^{Ga}=\frac{\mathrm{\Theta }_F^{sat}}{x}.$$
(5)
Here $`\mathrm{\Theta }_F^{Bi}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Theta }_F^{Ga}`$ are the Faraday rotations associated with the bismuth and gallium content, respectively. The experimental data and theoretical curves for these two parameters are plotted in Figs. 3 and 4, respectively. The good agreement between experimental data and theoretical predictions confirm the validity of the model used here.

## IV Sensitivity

If a light beam propagates along the z-axis through the magnetic film, then the polar Faraday rotation of the film is given by (neglecting the Voigt-effect and multiple reflections)

$$\mathrm{\Theta }_F=\mathrm{\Theta }_F^{sat}\frac{H_z}{H_a},H_zH_a,$$
(6)
where the anisotropy field is defined by

$$H_a=M_s\frac{2K_u^{tot}}{\mu _0M_s}.$$
(7)
Eq. (6) is only valid as long as the cubic anisotropy can be neglected. When $`H_zH_a`$, the Faraday rotation is at its maximum value. As an example, the Faraday rotation as a function of $`H_z`$ for sample 4 is shown in Fig. 5. Note that the Faraday rotation is accurately described by Eq. (6) as long as $`H_z<H_a`$. In Fig. 6 the experimental values for $`H_a`$ is displayed as a function of gallium substitition. The dashed line shows the best fit to $`H_a`$ for films with composition $`Lu_{3x}Bi_xFe_{5z}Ga_zO_{12}`$

$$H_a210000(10.7z).$$
(8)
Also shown is the value for $`M_s`$ found in the litterature

$$M_s160000(10.75z).$$
(9)
The experimental values for $`H_a`$ are quite close to Eq. (9), which indicates that the uniaxial anisotropy plays a minor role here. Since the films of composition $`Lu_{3x}Bi_xFe_{5z}Ga_zO_{12}`$ are well described by Eq. (8), we will use this in the further modelling. Film 7, 8 and 12 are not well described by Eq. (8), which is most probably due to their chemical composition.

The Faraday rotation sensitivity is given by

$$S=\frac{d\mathrm{\Theta }_F}{dH_z}=\frac{\mathrm{\Theta }_F^{sat}}{H_a}.$$
(10)
It is useful to separate the contributions from bismuth and gallium. The contribution from bismuth can be written as

$$S^{Bi}=\frac{S(10.7z)}{(1z_d/3)(1z_a/2)}.$$
(11)
The experimental data at 2.3 eV (wavelength 540 nm) are shown in Fig. 7 together with the theoretical prediction based on Eq. (11). A reasonably good agreement is obtained for all samples of composition $`Lu_{3x}Bi_xFe_{5z}Ga_zO_{12}`$, except sample 11, which shows a minor deviation from the theoretical curve. We do not know the reason for this deviation. It is interesting to observe that the sensitivity depends linearly on the bismuth content. The experimental data for samples 7, 8 and 12 (diamond, circle and cross) are located far from the straight line, since they do not follow Eq. (8).

It is also of interest to see how gallium influences the sensitivity of the material. To that end, we define

$$S^{Ga}=\frac{S}{x}.$$
(12)
In Fig. 8 the experimental data are shown together with the theoretical prediction based on Eq. (12). Again we note that there is good agreement between the experimental data and the theoretical curve for samples of composition $`Lu_{3x}Bi_xFe_{5z}Ga_zO_{12}`$ (except for sample 11, which shows a minor deviation from the theoretical curve). Now the sensitivity has a strong nonlinear dependence on the gallium content. Thus, one may think that it should be possible to increase the sensitivity even further by adding more gallium. However, this is not the case. If we add more gallium (above z=1.2), the film approaches its compensation point ($`M_s=0`$) where the coercivity of the material is rather high. On the other hand, it would be of interest to investigate the sensitivity above the compensation point, which is outside the scope of this paper.

## V Conclusion

We have investigated the Faraday rotation of in-plane magnetized bismuth - substituted ferrite garnet films grown by liquid phase epitaxy on (100) oriented gadolinium gallium garnet substrates. The Faraday spectra were measured for photon energies between 1.7 - 2.6 eV. To interprete the spectra, we use a simple model based on two electric dipole transitions, and find excellent agreement with the experimental data. Furthermore, the Faraday rotation sensitivity was measured at 2.3 eV, and found to be in good agreement with the theoretical predicitions. In particular, we find that the sensitivity increases linearly with the bismuth content and nonlinearly with the gallium content.

###### Acknowledgements.

The authors are grateful to E.I. Il’yashenko for supplying the GGG substrates and for helpful discussions. This work was financially supported by The Norwegian Research Council and Tandberg Data ASA.

$`\mathrm{𝐓𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐞}`$ $`𝐈`$: The thickness and chemical composition of the samples.
Sample nr. Lu Y Tm Bi Fe Ga t ($`\mu m`$)    1 2.5 0 0 0.5 4.9 0.1 4.0  2 2.4 0 0 0.6 4.8 0.2 3.5  3 2.3 0 0 0.7 4.7 0.3 3.5  4 2.3 0 0 0.7 4.4 0.6 4.0  5 2.3 0 0 0.7 4.2 0.8 4.0  6 2.4 0 0 0.6 4.1 0.9 3.3  7 0 0 2.3 0.7 4.1 0.9 3.5  8 1.4 1 0 0.6 4.1 0.9 4.0  9 2.2 0 0 0.8 3.8 1.2 2.6  10 2.2 0 0 0.8 3.9 1.1 4.0  11 2.1 0 0 0.9 3 1 4.0  12 1.4 0.7 0 0.7 3.8 1.2 7.5

$`\mathrm{𝐓𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐞}`$ $`\mathrm{𝐈𝐈}`$: The parameters found to give the best fit between Eq. (2) and the experimental data. Note that the tetrahedral and octahedral sites are given different signs, since they contribute oppositely to the Faraday rotation.

| site | $`N_0f_i`$ ($`cm^3`$) | $`\mathrm{\Delta }_i`$ ($`eV`$) | $`\omega _i`$ ($`eV`$) | $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_i`$ ($`eV`$) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| a | $`2.210^{23}`$ | $`0.4`$ | $`3.10`$ | $`0.5`$ |
| d | $`6.410^{22}`$ | $`0.1`$ | $`2.47`$ | $`0.3`$ |

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5

Figure 6

Figure 7

Figure 8


text:
# References

hep-ph/0202074

RAL-TR-2002-002

7 Feb 2002

Tri-Bimaximal Mixing and the Neutrino Oscillation Data.

P. F. Harrison

Physics Department, Queen Mary University of London,

Mile End Rd. London E1 4NS. UK 111E-mail:p.f.harrison@qmul.ac.uk

and

D. H. Perkins

Nuclear Physics Laboratory, University of Oxford

Keble Road, Oxford OX1 3RH. UK 222E-mail:d.perkins1@physics.oxford.ac.uk

and

W. G. Scott

Rutherford Appleton Laboratory

Chilton, Didcot, Oxon OX11 0QX. UK 333E-mail:w.g.scott@rl.ac.uk

## Abstract

Following recent results from the SNO solar neutrino experiment and the K2K long-baseline neutrino experiment, the combined existing data on neutrino oscillations now point strongly to a specific form for the lepton mixing matrix, with effective bimaximal mixing of $`\nu _\mu `$ and $`\nu _\tau `$ at the atmospheric scale and effective trimaximal mixing for $`\nu _e`$ with $`\nu _\mu `$ and $`\nu _\tau `$ at the solar scale (hence ‘tri-bimaximal’ mixing). We give simple mass-matrices leading to tri-bimaximal mixing, and discuss its relation to the Fritzsch-Xing democratic ansatz.

To be published in Physics Letters B

1. Motivation

The first data from the Sudbury solar neutrino experiment (SNO)  have dramatically confirmed the long-standing HOMESTAKE  solar neutrino result with regard to the high-energy charged-current $`\nu _e`$-rate (SNO/BP2001 $`=0.347\pm 0.029`$, HOME-STAKE/BP2001$`=0.337\pm 0.030`$). At the same time, the comparison with the existing rather precise SUPER-K (SK) result for solar-neutrino electron elastic scattering (SK/BP2001 $`=0.459\pm 0.007`$ ) (which includes a neutral-current contribution) has provided a significant first cross-check of the Bahcall-Pinsonneault (BP2001)  standard solar model calculation of the 8B flux in these experiments, so that it now seems reasonable to conclude that the suppression for 8B neutrinos is probably close to $`1/3`$. In detail, the SNO, HOMESTAKE and SUPER-K experiments have different thresholds and response functions (eg. HOMESTAKE is expected to include a $`15`$% contribution from 7Be neutrinos) but such effects are readily taken into account .

By comparison, the low energy charged-current $`\nu _e`$ rate as sampled in the gallium-based experiments SAGE , GALLEX  and GNO  is known to be less suppressed (SAGE/BP2001 $`=0.59\pm 0.07`$, $``$GALLEX GNO$``$/BP2001 $`=0.58\pm 0.07`$). The gallium experiments are sensitive to neutrinos from the pp chain and are only marginally affected by 8B neutrinos (with expected signal contributions of $`60\%`$ pp, $`30\%`$ 7Be and $`10\%`$ 8B in the standard model ). We have previously emphasised, within the context of the original trimaximal mixing scenario , the consistency of the gallium suppression with $`5/90.56`$ (this consistency survives today at the $`1.2\sigma `$ level, even allowing for the reduced 8B contribution in gallium in the LMA solution, see below).

Thus energy-dependence of the solar suppression is implicit, with the latest general fits  to the solar data favouring the so-called large-angle (LMA) MSW  solution. The long-standing small-angle (SMA) MSW solution is now essentially ruled out, while the so-called LOW and VO solutions are of marginal significance only . The LMA solution is illustrated in Fig. 1 for several possible mixing angles. In the LMA solution the base of the MSW ‘bathtub’ is arranged to account for the strong suppression at high-energy where matter effects dominate. At lower energies (for the same solar core density) the suppression reverts to its vacuum level outside the bathtub, accounting for the gallium data (the far high-energy end of the bathtub plays no role in the LMA solution). No significant day-night asymmetry is observed  so that the latest LMA fits  now prefer a mass-squared difference towards the higher end of the range $`10^510^4`$ eV2 (the curves of Fig. 1 are for a representative $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2=5\times 10^5`$ eV2).

Interestingly, the trimaximal model  is known  to predict a ‘$`5/91/35/9`$’ LMA bathtub (see Fig. 3 of Ref. ) which could certainly be exploited to fit the current solar data in isolation. However, within the trimaximal model, the associated mass-squared difference would then necessarily be the larger mass-squared difference (compare Figs. 2 and 3 of Ref. ) and would thus be inconsistent with the data on atmospheric neutrinos, which seem to require a mass-squared difference some two orders of magnitude greater $`10^310^2`$ eV2 .

Indeed, the other important new experimental input motivating the present analysis, is the currently emerging data from the K2K long-baseline experiment , tending to confirm  the mass-squared difference from the atmospheric neutrino experiments $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^23\times 10^3`$ eV2, clearly well above the solar mass-squared difference defined by the LMA solar fits and, in particular, subject to the CHOOZ  and PALO-VERDE  reactor limits on $`\overline{\nu }_e`$-mixing, which imply $`|U_{e3}|^2`$ $`\stackrel{<}{}`$ $`0.03`$, for $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ $`\stackrel{>}{}`$ $`10^3`$ eV2. ($`U`$ denotes the lepton mixing or MNS matrix, ). Note that, in this last respect, the new K2K results strongly disfavour the original trimaximal model.

An obvious solution is to sacrifice the economy of the original trimaximal model and acknowledge (in line with most other phenomenological analyses) the existence of two distinct mass-squared difference scales, $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2>>\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$, controlling respectively the behaviour of atmospheric and of solar neutrinos Within this context, the totality of the data clearly point to a particuluar form for the lepton mixing matrix, which turns out to be closely related to the trimaximal hypothesis, and which is given below.

2. The Trend of the Data

The atmospheric neutrino results are known to point strongly to twofold maximal $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ mixing (or at least to effective twofold maximal $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ mixing at the atmospheric scale). In particular the SUPER-K zenith angle distribution for multi-GeV ‘$`\mu `$-like’ events (Fig. 2a) clearly indicates a suppression of upward $`\nu _\mu `$ with respect to downward $`\nu _\mu `$ by a factor of $`1/2`$ (from Fig. 2 the up-to-down ratio for multiGeV muons is $`(U/D)_\mu 0.53\pm 0.05`$ for zenith angles $`|\mathrm{cos}\theta |>0.20`$). By contrast, the corresponding distribution for ‘e-like’ events (Fig. 2b) appears to be completely unaffected, $`(U/D)_e1.09\pm 0.12`$. In Fig. 2a the solid curve is the full oscillation curve for twofold maximal $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ mixing for $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2=3\times 10^3`$ eV2 for a representative neutrino energy, $`E=3`$ GeV. The dashed curve incorporates energy averaging and muon angular smearing (with respect to the neutrino direction) and clearly fits the data.

More generally, the (locally averaged) survival probability $`<P_\mu >`$ for $`\nu _\mu `$ at intermediate $`L/E`$ scales, $`(\mathrm{\Delta }m^2)^1`$ $`\stackrel{<}{}`$ $`L/E`$ $`\stackrel{<}{}`$ $`(\mathrm{\Delta }m^2)^1`$ (where $`L`$ is the neutrino flight path length) is given by the magnitude-squared $`|U_{\mu 3}|^2`$ of the MNS matrix element $`U_{\mu 3}`$ via $`<P_\mu >`$ $`=(1|U_{\mu 3}|^2)^2+|U_{\mu 3}|^4`$, whereby $`|U_{\mu 3}|^2=[1\pm \sqrt{12(1<P_\mu >)}]/2`$ (clearly $`<P_\mu >=1/2`$ implies $`|U_{\mu 3}|^2=1/2`$, as expected). The overall fit to the SK atmospheric data (ie. not just $`<P_\mu >`$ $`=(U/D)_\mu `$ from the multi-GeV muons above) gives $`<P_\mu >`$ $`=0.50\pm 0.04`$ whereby $`0.36`$ $`\stackrel{<}{}`$ $`|U_{\mu 3}|^2`$ $`\stackrel{<}{}`$ $`0.64`$ (68% CL), certainly consistent with $`|U_{\mu 3}|^2=1/2`$ and twofold maximal mixing. Independent evidence for strong $`\nu _\tau `$ mixing comes from the observation of a substantive charged-current $`\nu _\tau `$ appearance signal, statistically separated from the neutral-current sample in SUPER-K .

As indicated in Section 1, intermediate baseline reactor experiments, such as CHOOZ  and PALO-VERDE , in fact provide the best limits on $`\nu _e`$ (actually $`\overline{\nu }_e`$) mixing at the atmospheric scale (in terms of the vacuum mixing matrix, the interpretation of the atmospheric experiments themselves can be seriously obscured by terrestrial matter effects, which tend to suppress $`\nu _e`$-mixing and enhance $`\nu _\tau `$-mixing  in the high-energy limit). Reactor experiments, utilising very low energy (anti) neutrinos and with existing baselines much shorter than the matter-oscillation length in the Earth, turn out to be almost completely immune to matter effects . As discussed in Section 1, the best reactor limits give $`|U_{e3}|^2`$ $`\stackrel{<}{}`$ 0.03 (95% CL) for $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^23\times 10^3`$ eV2, consistent with $`U_{e3}=0`$ and thus with two-fold maximal $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ mixing.

We emphasise that the atmospheric and reactor data do not require $`U_{e3}0`$ any more than they require $`|U_{\mu 3}|^21/2`$ (small non-zero values of $`U_{\mu 3}`$, and/or somewhat different values of $`|U_{\mu 3}|^2`$, eg. $`|U_{\mu 3}|^2=2/3`$ , are more-or-less equally acceptable experimentally). It is only that $`U_{e3}=0`$ and $`|U_{\mu 3}|^2=1/2`$ provide a simple and adequate description of the current trend of the data, making twofold maximal $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ mixing (for now) the accepted ‘default option’  (at the atmospheric scale).

In a similar spirit, we turn again to the solar data displayed in Fig. 1, drawing particular attention now to the solid curve representing the ‘$`5/91/35/9`$’ bathtub (in the LMA solution the base of the bathtub essentially measures $`|U_{e2}|^2`$ directly). In Fig. 1 the data are plotted assuming BP2001 fluxes . The SNO , HOMESTAKE and SUPER-K data (after correction for the neutral-current contribution in SUPER-K) then determine the base of the bathtub, with $`|U_{e2}|^21/3`$ clearly closely preferred. In the flux-independent approach  the 8B suppression is found to be $`0.33\pm `$ 0.10 0.07 (based on the measured SK$``$SNO difference ). In Fig. 1 the two broken curves correspond roughly (in the bathtub region) to the $`\pm 1\sigma `$ errors on the flux-independent supression. Finally, note that with $`|U_{e3}|^2=0`$ (or small) the $`\nu _e`$ survival probability outside the bathtub, $`<P_e>`$, is (inversely) correlated with the value at its base in the LMA solution. For vacuum mixing $`<P_e>=(1|U_{e2}|^2)^2+|U_{e2}|^4`$, so that for $`|U_{e3}|^2=1/3`$ we have $`<P_e>=5/90.56`$. (Taking account of the 8B contribution the expected gallium suppression is actually closer to $`0.53`$, but this is still consistent with the data at the $`1.2\sigma `$ level). Thus the gallium data themselves provide an independent cross-check on the consistency of the LMA solution and on $`|U_{e2}|^21/3`$.

As above, we emphasise that the data do not require $`|U_{e2}|^21/3`$. If the (implicit) energy dependence of the solar suppression is real, certainly $`|U_{e2}|^21/2`$ , since there can be no MSW bathtub in that case . But a somewhat more pronounced (eg. a ‘$`5/81/45/8`$’) bathtub (corresponding to $`|U_{e2}|^2=1/4`$), is clearly far from excluded. As before, we regard $`|U_{e2}|^2=1/3`$ as a simple and adequate description of the data, which could usefully come to be seen as the default option at the solar scale.

3. ‘Tri-Bimaximal’ Mixing

In this section we simply take the above ‘default’ values $`U_{e3}=0`$, $`|U_{\mu 3}|^2=1/2`$ and $`|U_{e2}|^2=1/3`$ as given, and use them to evaluate the resulting lepton mixing matrix.

The lepton mixing matrix is defined with the rows labelled by the charged-lepton mass-eigenstates ($`e`$, $`\mu `$, $`\tau `$) and the columns labelled by the neutrino mass-eigenstates ($`\nu _1`$, $`\nu _2`$, $`\nu _3`$). Focussing on the last column (the $`\nu _3`$ column), we note that with $`U_{e3}=0`$ and $`|U_{\mu 3}|^2=1/2`$, we have $`|U_{\tau 3}|^2=1/2`$ from unitarity, so that the last column is just as in the original bimaximal scheme . Moving to the center column (the $`\nu _2`$ column), again as a consequence of $`U_{e3}=0`$, orthogonality requires $`|U_{\tau 2}|=|U_{\mu 2}|`$. With $`|U_{e2}|^2=1/3`$ (above) we then have $`|U_{\tau 2}|^2=|U_{\mu 2}|^2=1/3`$ from unitarity, so that the center column is just as in the original trimaximal scheme (see eg. Ref. ). Finally the first column (the $`\nu _1`$ column) follows from unitarity applied to the rows.

Indeed, it was pointed out in Ref.  (even before the SNO data first appeared) that a mixing scheme with the $`\nu _3`$ ‘bimaximally’ mixed and the $`\nu _2`$ ‘trimaximally’ mixed (hence tri-bimaximal mixing) could naturally account for the data, being also discussed in the conference literature under the name of ‘optimised’ bimaximal mixing :

$`\begin{array}{ccc}\nu _1& \nu _2& \nu _3\end{array}`$
$`(|U_{l\nu }|^2)=\begin{array}{c}e\\ \mu \\ \tau \end{array}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}2/3& 1/3& 0\\ 1/6& 1/3& 1/2\\ 1/6& 1/3& 1/2\end{array}\right)`$ (1)
(where the moduli-squared of the elements are given). The name ‘optimised’ bimaximal mixing reflected the scheme’s pedigree as a special case of the Altarelli-Feruglo generalised bimaximal form  and its close relationship to the original bimaximal form . We emphasise that the mixing Eq. 1 is entirely determined by unitarity constraints once the above three ‘corner’ elements are fixed to their default values.

We should also point out that the mixing Eq. 1 has much in common with the Fritzsch-Xing democratic ansatz  (which might in fact, see Section 4, reasonably be termed ‘bi-trimaximal’ mixing, as opposed to ‘tri-bimaximal’ mixing). Indeed the Fritzsch-Xing ansatz may be viewed as a permuted form of Eq. 1 (with, somewhat remarkably, the crucial prediction $`U_{e3}=0`$ made well before the emergence of the CHOOZ data ). It should be clear however that the phenomenologies of these two mixing shemes are quite distinct, eg. the Fritzsch-Xing ansatz predicted $`|U_{e2}|^2=1/2`$ and hence no energy dependence  of the solar suppression, which is now disfavoured by SNO . The original bimaximal scheme  is likewise now disfavoured .

Asymptotic ($`L/E\mathrm{}`$) predictions, specific to tri-bimaximal mixing, are the (vacuum) survival probabilites $`<P_\mu >=<P_\tau >=7/18`$. The corresponding $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ appearance probability is also $`7/18`$. Note that $`U_{e3}0`$ implies no Pantaleone resonance  and no CP violation in neutrino oscillations, which might be considered a disappointment experimentally. Nonetheless, it is fair to say that current data point to Eq. 1, and it is therefore of interest to try to understand what it might imply. In the next section we present simple mass-matrices leading to tri-bimaximal mixing.

4. Simple Mass Matrices

Our mass-matrices will be taken to be hermitian (ie. we will throughout be implicitly referring to hermitian-squares of mass-matrices linking left-handed fields, $`MM^{}M^2`$). Fermion mass-matrices are most naturally considered in a ‘weak’ basis (i.e. a basis which leaves the charged-current weak-interaction diagonal and universal).

Maximal mixing (whether trimaximal or bimaximal) undeniably suggests permutation symmetries . We postulate that, in a particular weak basis, the mass-matrices take the following (permuation symmetric) forms:

$$M_l^2=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}a& b& b^{}\\ b^{}& a& b\\ b& b^{}& a\end{array}\right)M_\nu ^2=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}x& 0& y\\ 0& z& 0\\ y& 0& x\end{array}\right)$$
(2)
where the real constants $`a`$, $`x`$, $`y`$, $`z`$ and the complex constants $`b`$ and $`b^{}`$ encode the charged-lepton and neutrino masses as follows:

$`a={\displaystyle \frac{m_e^2}{3}}+{\displaystyle \frac{m_\mu ^2}{3}}+{\displaystyle \frac{m_\tau ^2}{3}}x={\displaystyle \frac{m_1^2}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{m_3^2}{2}}`$
$`b={\displaystyle \frac{m_e^2}{3}}+{\displaystyle \frac{m_\mu ^2\omega }{3}}+{\displaystyle \frac{m_\tau ^2\overline{\omega }}{3}}y={\displaystyle \frac{m_1^2}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{m_3^2}{2}}`$ (3)
$`b^{}={\displaystyle \frac{m_e^2}{3}}+{\displaystyle \frac{m_\mu ^2\overline{\omega }}{3}}+{\displaystyle \frac{m_\tau ^2\omega }{3}}z=m_2^2`$
with $`\omega =\mathrm{exp}(i2\pi /3)`$ and $`\overline{\omega }=\mathrm{exp}(i2\pi /3)`$ denoting the complex cube roots of unity.

In Eq. 2 the charged-lepton mass-matrix $`M_l^2`$ takes the familiar $`3\times 3`$ circulant form , invariant under cyclic permutations of the three generation indices. The neutrino mass-matrix $`M_\nu ^2`$ is real (i.e. symmetric, since our mass-matrices are hermitian) and is a $`2\times 2`$ circulant in the $`13`$ index subset, invariant under the permutation of only two out of the three generation indices (generations $`13`$). The neutrino mass-matrix has four ‘texture zeroes’  enforcing the effective block-diagonal form. Note that both mass matrices (Eq. 2) are invariant under the interchange of generation indices $`13`$ performed simultaneously with a complex conjugation. Indeed, in this basis, it is the invariance of all the leptonic terms under this combined involution, which guarantees no CP-violation here (since Im $`det[M_l^2,M_\nu ^2]`$  changes sign).

The mass-matrices $`M_l^2`$ and $`M_\nu ^2`$ are diagonalised by a threefold maximal unitary matrix $`U_l`$ and a twofold maximal unitary matrix $`U_\nu `$, respectively:

$`\begin{array}{ccc}e& \mu & \tau \end{array}\begin{array}{ccc}\nu _1& \nu _2& \nu _3\end{array}`$
$`U_l=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}& \frac{\overline{\omega }}{\sqrt{3}}& \frac{\omega }{\sqrt{3}}\\ \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}& \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}& \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}\\ \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}& \frac{\omega }{\sqrt{3}}& \frac{\overline{\omega }}{\sqrt{3}}\end{array}\right)U_\nu =\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\sqrt{\frac{1}{2}}& 0& \sqrt{\frac{1}{2}}\\ 0& 1& 0\\ \sqrt{\frac{1}{2}}& 0& \sqrt{\frac{1}{2}}\end{array}\right)`$ (4)
i.e. $`U_l^{}M_l^2U_l`$ $`=`$ diag ($`m_e^2`$, $`m_\mu ^2`$, $`m_\tau ^2`$) and $`U_\nu ^{}M_\nu ^2U_\nu `$ $`=`$ diag ($`m_1^2`$, $`m_2^2`$, $`m_3^2`$), so that the lepton mixing matrix (or MNS matrix) $`U=U_l^{}U_\nu `$ is given by:

$`\begin{array}{ccc}\nu _1& \nu _2& \nu _3\end{array}\begin{array}{ccc}\nu _1& \nu _2& \nu _3\end{array}`$
$`\begin{array}{c}e\\ \mu \\ \tau \end{array}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}& \sqrt{\frac{1}{3}}& \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}\\ \frac{\omega }{\sqrt{3}}& \sqrt{\frac{1}{3}}& \frac{\overline{\omega }}{\sqrt{3}}\\ \frac{\overline{\omega }}{\sqrt{3}}& \sqrt{\frac{1}{3}}& \frac{\omega }{\sqrt{3}}\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\sqrt{\frac{1}{2}}& 0& \sqrt{\frac{1}{2}}\\ 0& 1& 0\\ \sqrt{\frac{1}{2}}& 0& \sqrt{\frac{1}{2}}\end{array}\right)=\begin{array}{c}e\\ \mu \\ \tau \end{array}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}& \sqrt{\frac{1}{3}}& 0\\ \sqrt{\frac{1}{6}}& \sqrt{\frac{1}{3}}& \frac{i}{\sqrt{2}}\\ \sqrt{\frac{1}{6}}& \sqrt{\frac{1}{3}}& \frac{i}{\sqrt{2}}\end{array}\right)`$ (5)
where the RHS is the tri-bimaximal form (Eq. 1) in a particular phase convention. For Dirac neutrinos, the factor of $`i`$ is readily removed by a simple rephasing of the $`\nu _3`$ mass-eigenstate, yielding tri-bimaximal mixing expressed as an orthogonal matrix:

$`\begin{array}{ccc}\nu _1& \nu _2& \nu _3\end{array}`$
$`U=\begin{array}{c}e\\ \mu \\ \tau \end{array}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}& \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}& 0\\ \frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}& \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\\ \frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}& \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\end{array}\right).`$ (6)
While this concludes our derivation of tri-bimaximal mixing starting from Eq. 2, we take this opportunity to remark that one might easily (with perhaps equal a priori justification) have interchanged the forms of $`M_l^2`$ and $`M_\nu ^2`$ in Eq. 2, taking the neutrino mass-matrix to be the $`3\times 3`$ circulant, and the charged-lepton mass-matrix to be of the $`2\times 2`$ block-diagonal circulant form. Note however that this leads to physically distinct mixing which, if the $`2\times 2`$ circulant is chosen to be in the $`12`$ index subset, is identically the Fritzsch-Xing democratic ansatz  (hence ‘bi-trimaximal’ mixing as a synonym for the Fritzsch-Xing ansatz, see Section 3 above). We emphasise once again that the phenomenologies of the above two mixing schemes are physically distinct, with the Fritzsch-Xing ansatz now essentially ruled out, along with many other schemes involving energy independent solar solutions  (including trimaximal mixing ) following the SNO results .

5. Perspective

Tri-bimaximal mixing is a specific mixing matrix (Eq. 1/Eq. 6) which encapsulates the trends of a broad range of experimental data (the LSND oscillation signal  was not considered on the grounds that it still awaits confirmation). Tri-bimaximal mixing is closely related to a number of previously suggested lepton mixing schemes, notably trimaximal mixing , bimaximal mixing , the Fritzsch-Xing democratic ansatz  and the Altarelli-Feruglio scheme  (of which tri-bimaximal mixing may be considered a special case). For the future, the couplings of the heavy neutrino, $`\nu _3`$, are expected to be measured more precisely in long-baseline experiments like MINOS  (and other projects ). In particular, the limits on $`|U_{e3}|^2`$ should continue to improve. Regarding the $`\nu _2`$ couplings, if tri-bimaximal mixing is right, the KAMLAND experiment  should confirm the LMA solution, measuring a $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ survival probability tending to $`<P_e>=5/90.56`$ at sufficiently low-energy. Corresponding predictions for $`\nu _\mu `$ disappearance and $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ appearance, see Section 3, look very hard to test (experiments with $`\nu _\mu `$ necessitate higher energies and hence longer baselines, with matter effects generally dominant over vacuum effects for $`\nu _2`$). Finally, exact tri-bimaximal mixing would imply no high-energy matter resonance and no (intrinsic) CP-violation in neutrino oscillations, which might be considered a disappointment experimentally.

Acknowledgement

It is a pleasure to thank A. Astbury for a helpful suggestion. This work was supported by the UK Particle Physics and Astronomy Research Council (PPARC).

Figure Captions

Figure 1. The solar data, including the recent SNO measurements, plotted versus neutrino energy $`E`$. The gallium points are plotted at $`<1/E>^10.5`$ MeV, the SUPER-K point at $`<1/E>^110`$ MeV and the HOMESTAKE point (which includes an $`15\%`$ contribution from the 7Be-line at $`0.9`$ MeV) is plotted (somewhat arbitrarily) at $`<1/E>^1=5`$ MeV. The solid curve is the expected energy dependence for tri-bimaximal mixing, Eq. 1, with $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2=5\times 10^5`$ eV2, which predicts a suppression of $`1/3`$ in the base of the bathtub and $`5/9`$ outside.

Figure 2. Atmospheric neutrino data. The multi-GeV zenith angle distributions for a) $`\mu `$-like and b) $`e`$-like events in SUPER-K. The solid curve is the full oscillation curve for tri-bimaximal mixing (Eq. 1/Eq. 6) with $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2=3\times 10^3`$ eV2 for a representative neutrino energy $`E=3`$ GeV, and the dashed curve shows the effect of angular smearing with respect to the neutrino direction and averaging over neutrino energies. Tri-bimaximal mixing (or indeed any mixing hypothesis which is effectively twofold maximal $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ mixing at the atmospheric scale) fits the data well.


text:
# 1 Introduction: Qualitative estimates

## 1 Introduction: Qualitative estimates

As one of the very interesting first results, RHIC experiments have established a significant suppression of moderately high $`p_{}`$ hadrons produced in central A+A collisions compared to rescaled peripheral collisions or rescaled (and extrapolated) p+p collisions . The results are a clear hint for nuclear medium effect(s) at work.

The most popular explanation is the onset of the occurrence of so called ‘jet quenching’ . It is the idea that a high energetic parton moving through a color dense (and then deconfined) medium will lose considerable energy most dominantly by gluon radiation, and so its final fragmentation will give rise to a leading hadron with considerable lower energy. A recent and much involved calculation based on the GLV formalism for a finite number of colored collisions (and including the Cronin effect as well as a slight modification of the gluon distribution due to shadowing) provide a good agreement with the data. Still, though, a phenomenological opacity parameter has to be adjusted . It has also been suggested that simple incoherent scattering in the further partonic evolution of the fireball should be of relevance . Contrary, also the proposal was made that the observed spectra for central collisions show a significant $`m_{}`$ scaling being a manifestation of a direct remnant of the initial gluons which were liberated from gluon saturated nuclear distribution functions . Here, any possible final state interactions which might or should alter the distributions are completly discarded.

A major concern, and which lead to the present study, is that it is typically assumed in all these descriptions that the partons somehow exits the collision region before finally fragmenting into a ‘jet’ of hadrons. The potential magnitude of the hadronization time (or, to be more precise, the time to build up the hadronic wavefunction) is based on a relativistic and simple quantum mechanical estimate for (a) light or (b) heavy quarks

$$(a)t_q^{hadr}ER^2(b)t_Q^{hadr}\frac{E}{m_Q}R.$$

Taking (a) with the average radius of the pion $`R_\pi 0.5`$ fm or (b) substituting $`m_Q`$ by $`m_\rho `$ for a $`\rho `$-meson and taking $`R_\rho 0.8`$ fm, one has for the formation time a crude understanding given as

$$t_F\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}1.2(E/GeV)fm/c.$$
(1)
Hence, for leading hadrons with moderately high $`p_{}10GeV`$ original point-like jet-partons have established already a complete nonperturbative, transversal wavefunction after traveling a distance in length of smaller or equal than 10 fm. Accordingly, the jets should, to a large fraction, materialize into hadrons still inside the expanding fireball, which has a transversal size of $`R8fm+0.5ct`$, where $`t`$ denotes the local proper time of the expanding system.

The state becoming the leading hadron will interact as a (pre-)meson with the surrounding low momentum mesons with a cross section of roughly $`\sigma (t)=\sigma _0(t/t_F)`$ as long as it is not completely being build up . $`\sigma _01015mb`$ denotes the total cross section of two mesons. The density of hadrons in the late fireball changes from about $`1`$ fm-3 to $`0.1`$ fm-3. The mean free path of the fast hadron is then estimated to be $`\lambda 110`$ fm, meaning a few collisions $`L/\lambda =0,1,2,3\mathrm{}`$. The system is potentially rather opaque!

Looking at the available energy for an individual collision (compare Fig. 1), even for a value of $`p_{}=10\mathrm{GeV}`$, one gets a $`\sqrt{s}<2\mathrm{GeV}`$, if the target is a pion at rest, and only with a $`\rho `$ as target, one has an invariant mass of above 2.5$`\mathrm{GeV}`$ for particles with a transverse momentum larger than 3$`\mathrm{GeV}`$.

Fig. 1: The CMS energy for three targets at rest ($`\pi ,K,\rho `$, depicted by the labels near the curves) and three types of projectiles ($`\pi ,K,n/p`$, indicated by the solid, dashed and long dashed lines) as function of the momentum of the projectile.

Hence, for the considered transverse momentum region, one has either elastic scattering, resonance scattering or also inelastic scattering resulting in a few final hadrons. In the following we treat the collision with the FRITIOF Monte-Carlo scheme with a $`\rho `$-meson as characteristic target hadron being at rest. To also stress some model dependence, we later compare with elastic scattering on either a $`\rho `$ or a $`\pi `$ as target particles, where the scattering is taken simply as isotropic .

## 2 Energy loss by (multiple) final state hadronic interactions

The energy loss for one single interaction of a leading hadron i with momentum $`p__0`$ on a low transverse momentum target (taken as $`0`$, and both hadrons being located at the same space-time rapidity and momentum rapidity in a Bjorken-type picture), going into a hadron j with (lower) momentum $`p_{}`$ can be written as

$$f_j(p_{})=\underset{i}{}𝑑p__0f_i^0(p__0)g_{ij}(p__0,p_{}),$$
(2)
while $`f_i^0(p__0)`$ is the initial distribution, $`g_{ij}(p__0,p_{})`$ is a folding matrix and $`f_j(p_{})`$ is the resulting distribution. $`i,j`$ stand for the particles $`\pi ^0`$, $`\pi ^\pm `$, $`K^0`$, $`\overline{K}^0`$, $`K^\pm `$, $`p`$, $`\overline{p}`$, $`n`$ and $`\overline{n}`$. The folding matrix $`g_{ij}`$ depends on the model employed for the collision (for further details we refer to ).

Fig. 2: Comparison of the calculations at midrapidity (for one unit in rapidity) with the (preliminary) PHENIX data  on charged hadrons for three different centralities. The thin dashed lines indicate the results from PYTHIA, scaled with a corresponding binary collision number $`N_{coll}`$. The thick solid line depicts the rate for the most central region where the particles have suffered on average one hadronic collision.

For the initial distribution $`f_i^0`$ of individual hadrons $`i`$ at moderately high $`p_{}`$ when entering the final hadronic stage we have no direct information. All various ideas, as mentioned at the beginning, might contribute and already steepen the spectrum. In order to see the possible effect of the late hadronic interactions, we use individual distributions generated by PYTHIA v6.2 . The parameters were first adjusted to UA1-results of $`p\overline{p}`$-collisions. Isospin averaged N-N-collision were then calculated (for details we refer to ). With the appropriate scaling of binary collisions ($`N_{coll}=2.4`$ for 80…92%, 12.6 for 60…80% and 945 for 0…5% centrality), the calculations are in perfect agreement with the preliminary PHENIX data for charged hadrons and for neutral pions in the case of peripheral collisions, as can be seen from Figs 2 and 3.

Moreover, one can see a dramatic effect when employing on average one single final inelastic collision modelled via the FRITIOF scheme. In case of the charged hadrons, one single collision already would slightly overestimate the suppression. On the other hand one collision is just right to perfectly explain quantitatively the modification of the momentum distribution of the $`\pi _0`$! (We have only shown the modifications for $`p_{}>2`$ GeV, as the spectrum below should be dominated by soft physics and hydrodynamical expansion.)

Fig. 3: Like Fig. 2, but now a comparison of the present calculations with the PHENIX data  on $`\pi _0`$.

Hence, any potential energy loss by final state hadronic reactions is in the same range as considered for the jets in deconfined matter. In Fig. 4 we show calculations for various number of collisions now at a $`\sqrt{s_{NN}}=200`$ GeV up to $`p_{}=10`$ GeV. The three employed models (for treating the collisions) do give more or less similar predictions. The spectrum steepens considerably for a larger effective opacity $`<L/\lambda >`$. On the other hand at some stage the complete evolution of all hadronic particles has to be incorporated to see in full detail the dynamical interplay among ‘soft’ and ‘hard’ hadrons. The spectrum can not become more steepen than exponential as then the system has thermalized also in the high $`p_{}`$ hadronic degrees of freedom.

In summary, we have motivated that (pre-)hadrons stemming from a jet should still materialize in the dense system for momenta up to 10 GeV. The late hadronic interactions have a clear and nonvanishing effect in suppressing the spectrum. On the average one single such interaction should already be enough to explain quantitatively the RHIC results. Our finding, however, signals a warning which has to be addressed in future studies very accurately. ‘Omnes viae Romam ducunt’: Various different roads at present can account for the possible explanation of the modification in the spectra for central collisions. Deductions for possible QCD effects of a deconfined QGP phase on the materializing jets have to disentangle from the here investigated final state interactions, before definite conclusions on the importance of a potential dense partonic phase, or any other effect, can quantitatively be drawn.

Fig. 4: Resulting $`p_{}`$-spectrum of charged hadrons at midrapidity for $`\sqrt{s_{NN}}=200`$ GeV and for $`<L/\lambda >0,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1},\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2},\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}`$ collisions. Hadronic collisions are treated in three different ways (compare text).