text:
# KEK-CP-144 UT-CCP-P140 UTHEP-474 Light hadron spectrum in three-flavor QCD with 𝑂(𝑎)-improved Wilson quark action Talk presented by T. Kaneko

## 1 Introduction

As a joint collaboration of CP-PACS and JLQCD, we have initiated a project for the precise measurement of the light hadron spectrum and the quark mass with three-flavor full QCD. The systematic deviation of the quenched lattice spectrum from experiment found in  is significantly reduced with the inclusion of dynamical up and down quarks . We now extend the work to three flavors.

We adopt the renormalization-group improved gauge action and the $`O(a)`$-improved Wilson quark action with the non-perturbatively improved clover coefficient $`c_{\mathrm{SW}}`$ obtained in . Simulations are carried out at $`\beta =1.9`$, at the scale $`a^1=2.05(5)`$ GeV, on a $`16^3\times 32`$ lattice using a Polynomial Hybrid Monte Carlo algorithm developed in . Six values of the $`ud`$ quark mass, corresponding to $`m_{\mathrm{PS},\mathrm{LL}}/m_{\mathrm{V},\mathrm{LL}}0.64`$ – 0.77111 In this report, subscripts LL, LS and SS represent the light-light, light-strange and strange-strange mesons, respectively. , are used to extrapolate to the physical value $`m_\pi /m_\rho 0.18`$. Two values are taken for the $`s`$ quark mass, corresponding to $`m_{\mathrm{PS},\mathrm{SS}}/m_{\mathrm{V},\mathrm{SS}}0.72`$ and 0.77. They are close to the semi-empirical value $`m_{\eta _s}/m_\varphi =0.68`$ from chiral perturbation theory, so that a short extrapolation is enough to get to the physical value. 3000 HMC trajectories are accumulated at each simulation parameter.

## 2 meson masses

We focus on the meson spectrum since our lattice size of $`La1.6`$ fm is too small for baryons .

Fig. 1 shows the $`J`$ parameter  defined by

$`J=m_{\mathrm{V},\mathrm{LS}}{\displaystyle \frac{m_{V,LS}m_{V,LL}}{m_{PS,LS}^2m_{PS,LL}^2}}.`$ (1)
This is compared with the previous results in two-flavor and quenched QCD , which are evaluated for the physical kaons $`m_{\mathrm{PS}}/m_\mathrm{V}=m_K/m_K^{}`$ as $`J=m_\mathrm{V}(dm_\mathrm{V}/dm_{\mathrm{PS}}^2)`$ after taking the chiral limit for sea quarks222 We now prefer the definition of $`J`$ by Eq. (1), as it is more straightforward, using the hadron masses measured in the simulation without resorting to any extrapolation procedures.. We see that $`J`$ in three-flavor QCD stays at values systematically higher than in quenched and two-flavor QCD, and is consistent with experiment.

Our lattice size $`La1.6`$ fm is significantly smaller than that used in quenched or two-flavor QCD. Because finite-size effects generally lower the $`J`$ parameter , we conclude that the consistency of $`J`$ between three-flavor QCD and experiment is not an artifact of finite-size effects.

Chiral extrapolations are carried out using polynomial forms. We fix the lattice spacing and the $`ud`$ quark mass with $`m_\pi `$ and $`m_\rho `$. The strange quark mass is fixed with either $`m_K`$ ($`K`$-input) or $`m_\varphi `$ ($`\varphi `$-input).

In Fig. 2, $`m_K^{}`$ is plotted as a function of the lattice spacing. The three-flavor result is higher than that in two-flavor QCD at comparable lattice spacings. The consistency of the three-flavor value with experiment seen already at a finite lattice spacing lends us hope that scaling violation with the use of the non-perturbatively $`O(a)`$-improved action is indeed small and the consistency with experiment holds in the continuum limit. This should be verified in a future study.

Similar consistency with experiment can also be seen in other meson masses as shown in Fig. 3, where deviations from experiment are plotted. Improvement over the quenched results of  is evident, as anticipated from the agreement of the $`J`$ with experiment.

## 3 Quark masses

The physical quark masses, $`m_{ud}`$ and $`m_s`$, are calculated through the axial-vector Ward identity (AWI): $`m_q=\mathrm{\Delta }_4A_4P/(2PP)`$. The matching to the $`\overline{\mathrm{MS}}`$ scheme is carried out at $`\mu =a^1`$ using the one-loop $`Z`$ factor  with the tadpole improvement. The renormalized mass is evolved to $`\mu =2`$ GeV using the 4-loop $`\beta `$ function.

The vector Ward identity (VWI) may offer an independent determination of $`m_{ud}`$ and $`m_s`$. The critical hopping parameter $`K_c`$ for $`ud`$ quarks, defined where the light-light PS meson mass vanishes, depends on $`m_s`$ due to the lack of chiral symmetry. The two natural choices, $`K_c(m_s=0)`$, i.e., $`K_c`$ in degenerate three-flavor QCD, and $`K_c(m_s=m_s^{\mathrm{phys}})`$ with the physical $`m_s`$, however, lead to $`m_{ud}`$ with the sign opposite to each other, indicating a large uncertainty from chiral symmetry breaking at $`a^12`$ GeV. The determination of the VWI $`m_{ud}`$ requires a careful study of scaling violation; we focus on the AWI quark mass in this report.

Fig. 4 compares $`m_{ud}`$ and $`m_s`$ in three-flavor QCD with our previous results in two-flavor and quenched QCD . The discrepancy in $`m_s`$ between $`K`$\- and $`\varphi `$-inputs in quenched QCD disappears in two- and three-flavor QCD. Note that $`m_{ud}`$ and $`m_s`$ decrease with an increasing number of flavors of dynamical quarks.

Taking the AWI mass with the $`K`$-input as the central value and including the deviation between the $`K`$\- and $`\varphi `$-inputs into the error, we obtain

$`m_{ud}^{\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}`$ $`=`$ $`2.89(6)\text{MeV},`$ (2)
$`m_s^{\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}`$ $`=`$ $`75.6(3.4)\text{MeV},`$ (3)
$`m_s/m_{ud}`$ $`=`$ $`26.2(1.0)`$ (4)
in three-flavor QCD. Dynamical strange quarks decrease both $`m_{ud}`$ and $`m_s`$ by about 15%. The ratio $`m_s/m_{ud}`$ is consistent with the one-loop estimate of chiral perturbation theory 24.4(1.5) .

## 4 Conclusion

Our simulation for three-flavor QCD shows that the inclusion of dynamical strange quarks brings the lattice QCD meson spectrum to good agreement with experiment. A non-negligible reduction is also found for quark masses. These preliminary results are sufficiently encouraging to warrant further detailed and careful investigations with time-consuming three-flavor full QCD.

This work is supported by Large Scale Simulation Program No. 98 (FY2003) of High Energy Accelerator Research Organization (KEK), and also in part by the Grants-in-Aid of the Ministry of Education (Nos. 12740133, 13135204, 13640259, 13640260, 14046202, 14540289, 14740173, 15204015, 15540251, 15540279). NT is supported by JSPS.


format: text

text:
# Implementing the fanout gate by a Hamiltonian

## 1 Introduction

Let $``$ be the Hilbert space of $`n+1`$ qubits. The *fanout operator* $`F_{n+1}:`$, depicted in Figure 1,

copies the (classical) value of a single qubit to $`n`$ other qubits.

Fanout gates have been recently shown to be very powerful primitives for making shallow quantum circuits . It has been shown that in the quantum realm, fanout, parity (see below), and $`\mathrm{Mod}_q`$ gates (for any $`q2`$) are all equivalent up to constant depth and polynomial size . That is, each gate above can be simulated exactly by a constant-depth, polynomial-size quantum circuit using any of the other gates above, together with standard one- and two-qubit gates (e.g., $`\mathrm{CNOT}`$, $`H`$, and $`T`$). This is not true in the classical case. Furthermore, using fanout gates, in constant depth and polynomial size one can approximate $`n`$-qubit threshold gates, unbounded AND (generalized Toffoli) gates and OR gates, sorting, arithmetical operations, phase estimation, and the quantum Fourier transform . Since long quantum computations may be difficult to maintain due to decoherence, shallow quantum circuits may prove much more realistic, at least in the short term.

On the negative side, fanout gates so far appear hard to implement. There is recent theoretical evidence that fanout gates cannot be simulated in small depth and small width, even if unbounded AND gates are allowed .111Any circuit of depth $`d`$ using AND and single-qubit gates to compute $`n`$-qubit fanout provably needs at least $`n/2^d`$ ancillæ. All these results underscore how crucial fanout gates are to providing powerful, small-depth quantum computation.

Rather than trying to implement fanout with a traditional small-depth quantum circuit, we can perhaps take another promising approach: evolve an $`n`$-qubit system according to a (hopefully implementable) Hamiltonian. We show that a simple Hamiltonian, similar to one suggested recently by Chuang , does exactly this.

Let $`\mathrm{\Sigma }Z`$ be the $`n`$-qubit operator $`\frac{1}{2}_{i=1}^nZ_i`$, where $`Z_i`$ is the $`Z`$-gate acting on the $`i`$th qubit. If, for instance, each qubit is represented by a spin-$`\frac{1}{2}`$ particle, then $`\mathrm{\Sigma }Z`$ is the observable representing the total spin angular momentum in the $`z`$-direction. Let $`J>0`$ be some constant in units of energy. We will show that for even $`n`$, the $`(n+1)`$-qubit fanout gate arises naturally by evolving the first $`n`$ qubits through the Hamiltonian

$$H_n:=J(\mathrm{\Sigma }Z)^2$$

twice—first for time $`\frac{\pi \mathrm{}}{2J}`$ then for time $`\frac{3\pi \mathrm{}}{2J}`$—together with a modest amount of additional processing. We also show that evolving the $`3`$-qubit Hamiltonian $`J(\mathrm{\Sigma }Z)^2`$ results (modulo a global phase factor) in a $`3`$-qubit “inversion on equality” gate $`I_=`$, which maps $`|abc`$ to $`(1)^{\delta _{ab}\delta _{ac}}|abc`$. Applying $`I_=`$ with one of the three qubits set to $`|1`$ results in a controlled $`Z`$-gate on the other two qubits, which is easily converted to a $`\mathrm{CNOT}`$ gate.

Chuang’s proposed Hamiltonian is closely related to $`H_n`$. It is

$$K_n:=\underset{1i<jn}{}J_{i,j}Z_iZ_j,$$

where the $`J_{i,j}`$ are energy coefficients, and may be potentially realizable for certain combinations of the $`J_{i,j}`$, depending on the physical arrangement of the qubits . $`K_n`$ is the sum of pairwise interactions between the particles. In the special case where all the $`J_{i,j}`$ are equal to $`J/2`$, we see that $`K_n`$ differs from $`H_n`$ by a multiple of the identity, and so evolving through $`H_n`$ and evolving through $`K_n`$ are equivalent up to an overall phase factor.

We will show the $`I_=`$-gate in Section 2.2. In Section 2.3 we show the implementation of $`F_{n+1}`$ for even $`n`$. In the sequel, we will assume for convenience that $`\mathrm{}=J/2=1`$. If $`X`$ and $`Y`$ are vectors or operators, we say, “$`XY`$” to mean that $`X=e^{i\theta }Y`$ for some real $`\theta `$, that is, $`X=Y`$ up to an overall phase factor. We use the same notation with individual components of $`X`$ and $`Y`$, meaning that the phase factor is independent of which component we choose. If $`A`$ is a set, we let $`A`$ denote the cardinality of $`A`$.

## 2 Main Results

### 2.1 Evolving $`𝑯_𝒏`$

Since $`H_n`$ is represented in the computational basis by a diagonal matrix, it is particularly easy to see how it evolves in time. We only need to find the value of each diagonal element. Let $`\stackrel{}{x}=x_1\mathrm{}x_n`$ be a vector of $`n`$ bits. For $`1i,jn`$, we see that $`Z_iZ_j|\stackrel{}{x}=(1)^{x_ix_j}|\stackrel{}{x}`$, and thus $`Z_iZ_j`$ flips the sign iff $`x_ix_j`$. Suppose $`k`$ of the $`x_i`$ are $`1`$ and the rest ($`nk`$) are $`0`$. Then,

$`\stackrel{}{x}|H_n|\stackrel{}{x}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}}(1)^{x_ix_j}`$
$`=`$ $`(1/2)\left(\left\{(i,j):x_i=x_j\right\}\left\{(i,j):x_ix_j\right\}\right)`$
$`=`$ $`(1/2)(k^2+(nk)^22k(nk))`$
$`=`$ $`(1/2)(n^2+4k^24nk)`$
$`=`$ $`n^2/22k(nk).`$
The $`n^2/2`$ term is independent of $`\stackrel{}{x}`$, so up to addition of a multiple of $`I`$, the diagonal term is effectively $`2k(nk)`$. We evolve $`H_n`$ for time $`t=\pi /4`$. Let $`U_n:=e^{iH_nt}`$ where $`t=\pi /4`$. We get

$$\stackrel{}{x}|U_n|\stackrel{}{x}e^{i\pi k(nk)/2}=i^{k(nk)}.$$
(1)
All the off-diagonal matrix elements of $`U_n`$ are zero.

### 2.2 Implementing the $`𝑰_\mathbf{=}`$-Gate

For the $`n=3`$ case, (1) yields

$$U_3\mathrm{diag}\left[\begin{array}{cccccccc}\hfill 1& \hfill 1& \hfill 1& \hfill 1& \hfill 1& \hfill 1& \hfill 1& \hfill 1\end{array}\right]I_=.$$

No further gates are required.

### 2.3 Implementing the $`𝑭_{𝒏\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟏}}`$-Gate

Let $`n`$ be even. $`U_n`$ is actually more closely related to the $`(n+1)`$-qubit (classical) *parity gate*, shown in Figure 2.

We will show how to implement parity with $`U_n`$. This suffices, because the equality given in Figure 3

was observed in , where $`H`$ is the Hadamard gate.

Suppose for now that $`n2(mod4)`$, and that $`\stackrel{}{x}`$ has $`k`$ ones and $`nk`$ zeros. If $`k`$ is even, then so is $`nk`$, and thus $`k(nk)0(mod4)`$. If $`k`$ is odd, then clearly, $`k(nk)1(mod4)`$. Thus we have, by (1),

$$\stackrel{}{x}|U_n|\stackrel{}{x}\{\begin{array}{cc}1\hfill & \text{if }\stackrel{}{x}\text{ has even parity,}\hfill \\ i\hfill & \text{if }\stackrel{}{x}\text{ has odd parity.}\hfill \end{array}$$
(2)
We start with the $`(n+1)`$-qubit basis state $`|x_1\mathrm{}x_{n1}rb`$, where $`x_1,\mathrm{},x_{n1},r,b\{0,1\}`$. We prepare the $`n`$th qubit in the state

$$H|r=(|0+(1)^r|1)/\sqrt{2},$$

so that the current state of the first $`n`$ qubits is $`|x_1\mathrm{}x_{n1}(|0+(1)^r|1)/\sqrt{2}`$. If we run this state through $`U_n`$, then by (2) the result is

$$\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}|x_1\mathrm{}x_{n1}(i^p|0+i^{1p}(1)^r|1),$$

where $`p=(x_1+\mathrm{}+x_{n1})mod2`$. The two states of the $`n`$th qubit corresponding to the two values of $`p`$ are orthogonal, so we just need to rotate the $`n`$th qubit back to the computational basis. The $`n`$th qubit state is either $`+y`$ or $`y`$ on the Bloch sphere, depending on $`p`$ and $`r`$, so we can use $`HS^{}`$, where S is the phase gate $`\mathrm{diag}\left[\begin{array}{cc}\hfill 1& \hfill i\end{array}\right]`$, to rotate the $`y`$-axis to the $`z`$-axis. The final circuit is shown in Figure 4.

When the $`\mathrm{CNOT}`$ gate is applied, its control qubit can be seen to be in the state $`i^p|pr`$, unentangled with the other qubits. The rest of the circuit is then needed to uncompute the conditional phase factor $`i^p`$. We can implement $`U_{n}^{}{}_{}{}^{}`$ by evolving $`H_n`$ for time $`\pi /4`$, or equivalently, by evolving $`H_n`$ for time $`3\pi /4`$, since $`U_n^4=I`$. Of course, if we are willing to keep the phase factor, we can get by without this part of the circuit. In fact, we can get the parity-like gate of Figure 5

with only one use of $`U_n`$.

As we mentioned before, one gets a fanout gate by applying Hadamards on each qubit on both sides of a parity gate. So starting with the circuit in Figure 4, after some simplification we get the circuit shown in Figure 6.

If $`n0(mod4)`$, then we get a similar analysis of $`U_n`$, except that (2) becomes

$$\stackrel{}{x}|U_n|\stackrel{}{x}\{\begin{array}{cc}1\hfill & \text{if }\stackrel{}{x}\text{ has even parity,}\hfill \\ i\hfill & \text{if }\stackrel{}{x}\text{ has odd parity.}\hfill \end{array}$$

It follows that we can swap $`U_n`$ with $`U_{n}^{}{}_{}{}^{}`$ in Figures 4, 5, and 6 above to maintain the equalities.

## 3 Conclusions and Further Research

A key point in our implementation is that the number of terms in the Hamiltonian $`H_n`$ is quadratic in $`n`$, which gives a quadratic term in the phase shift. We suspect there is also some way to get parity from the more general $`K_n`$ when the $`J_{i,j}`$ are not all equal, provided there are still quadratically many terms. We also suspect that this will not work where there are fewer than quadratically many terms, for example, in the case where we just consider interactions between adjacent paricles in a ring, i.e., $`J_{i,j}=J>0`$ if $`ji+1(modn)`$, and $`J_{i,j}=0`$ otherwise. In this case, there are only linearly many terms in the Hamiltonian.

A second Hamiltonian described by Chuang as potentially realizable in the lab  is

$$L_n=\underset{1i<jn}{}J_{i,j}(X_iX_j+Y_iY_j+Z_iZ_j),$$

which, when all the $`J_{i,j}=2`$, differs from the squared total spin $`L^2:=(\mathrm{\Sigma }X)^2+(\mathrm{\Sigma }Y)^2+(\mathrm{\Sigma }Z)^2`$ by a multiple of $`I`$. We conjecture that $`L^2`$ can also be used to implement parity.


text:
# The Neutrino mass matrix after Kamland and SNO salt enhanced results

## 1 Introduction

The Sudbury Neutrino Observatory (SNO) collaboration has recently presented data relative to the NaCl phase of the experiment . The addition of NaCl to a pure D2O detection medium increases the detector’s sensitivity to the neutral-current (NC) reactions within its fiducial volume, enhancing the NC detection efficiency of about a factor three with respect to the previous ‘no-salt’ phase. This new result adds to a list of successive, compatible, ever more accurate results. The year 2002 was fundamental for neutrino physics and many long standing puzzles found their final solution. The data published in springtime by SuperKamiokande  and SNO  and the first results from the reactor experiment KamLAND  in December, confirmed the evidence accumulated in about 30 years of solar neutrino experiments, proved in a crystal clear way that neutrinos are massive and oscillating particles and selected the so-called Large Mixing Angle (LMA) between the different possible solutions of the Solar Neutrino Problem (SNP).

After the publication of the first KamLAND data a new era has started, in which the main issue is no longer to prove the validity of the oscillation hypothesis, but rather to determine with the best possible accuracy the oscillation parameters entering the PMNS mixing matrix. As it has been pointed out in previous papers (see for instance ), the accurate knowledge of the ”solar mixing parameters” ($`\theta _{12}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ in the case of normal hierarchy) is essential not only for a better comprehension of this sector of neutrino physics, but also for the future study of the other mixing parameters.

In fact the neutrino parameters drive the subdominant effects in the long baseline and neutrino factory experiments and a lack of information about their exact values could seriously reduce the accuracy in the determination of the other elements of the mixing matrix and eventually of the CP violation parameter $`\delta `$. Hence, improving the present accuracy in the determination of the solar mixing parameters is mandatory not only to understand the physical potential of future experiments but also in order to optimize their set-up in the best possible way.

From this point of view, the situation was still quite unsatisfactory after the publication of the first KamLAND data. The many different analysis of these data  agree on the fact that these results, together with all the solar neutrino experiments, essentially select two distinct regions in the solar mixing parameter plan, both corresponding to the LMA solution. These two regions are usually denoted as “low LMA” and “high LMA”. The mixing angle was not maximal, even if it was large and it was constrained in the interval $`0.27\mathrm{tan}^2\theta _{12}0.88`$ at the 3$`\sigma `$ level. One can see that the uncertainty on the value of the mixing angle was still quite significant. Moreover it was not possible to discriminate between the two different possibilities for the mass difference. It is clear that a step further in the direction of pinning down more accurately the mixing parameters was needed.

The $`SNO`$ experiment measures the 8Solar neutrinos via the reactions : 1) Charged Current (CC): $`\nu _e+d2p+e^{}`$, 2) Elastic Scattering (ES): $`\nu _x+e^{}\nu _x+e^{}`$. 3) Neutral Current(NC): $`\nu _x+dp+n+\nu _x`$. The first reaction is sensitive exclusively to electron neutrinos. The second, the same used in SuperKamiokande (SK), is instead sensitive, with different efficiencies, to all flavors. Finally the NC reaction is equally sensitive to all active neutrino species. Hence SNO can measure simultaneously the electron and active non-electron neutrino component of the solar flux at high energies ($`>`$$``$5 MeV). The novelty of the ‘salt phase’ is that it is now possible to distinguish clearly the NC events from the ES and CC ones and therefore to analyse the data without making use of the no-spectrum-distortion hypothesis .

The non-electron component is found to be $`5\sigma `$ greater than zero, the standard prediction, thus providing the strongest evidence so far for flavour oscillation in the neutral lepton sector: the agreement of the total flux, provided by the NC measurement with the expectations implies as a by-product the confirmation of the validity of the SSM .

In this work we present an up-to-date analysis of all available Solar neutrino evidence, including the latest global SNO results  (together with the data of previous SNO phases  and of the other experiments , and of the KamLAND data . A similar analysis using in addition the NaCl enhanced SNO spectrum will be presented elsewhere . As a result, the new SNO data make the discrimination between the two different $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ regions possible. In particular the secondary region at larger mass differences secondary region at larger mass differences (LMAII or high LMA) is now excluded at 95% CL. The combined analysis of solar and KamLAND data continues to conclude that maximal mixing is not favored at an even larger significance level as before. Finally, we show that the achieved resolution in neutrino parameter space is good enough for an estimation of the individual elements of two neutrino mass matrix and their errors. As it will be shown below we obtain a square mass matrix:

$$M_0^2=10^5eV^2\left(\begin{array}{cc}2.06_{0.31}^{+0.29}& 3.15_{0.35}^{+0.29}\\ 3.15_{0.35}^{+0.29}& 4.60_{0.44}^{+0.56}\end{array}\right).$$

This result can be sharpened and a mass matrix can already be given if a concrete value for the absolute neutrino mass scale is assumed.

The structure of the present work is the following. First (section 2) we update some model independent results which put in a quantitative basis the extent of the deviations with respect to the standard non-oscillating case and the relative importance of active/sterile oscillations. After Section 3 dedicated to general description of methods, we determine (Section 4) the allowed areas in parameter space in the framework of active two neutrino oscillations from a standard statistical analysis. Individual values for $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ and $`\mathrm{tan}^2\theta `$ with error estimation are obtained from the analysis of marginal likelihoods.

## 2 Some Model Independent Results

Different quantities can be defined in order to make the evidence for disappearance and appearance of the neutrino flavours explicit. From the three fluxes measured by SNO is possible to define two useful ratios, deviations of these ratios with respect to their standard value are powerful tests for occurrence of new physics. Here we update the computations of Ref. for the values for $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{CC}/\mathrm{\Phi }_{ES}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{CC}/\mathrm{\Phi }_{NC}`$ being extremely careful with the treatment of the correlations on the incertitudes. The inclusion or not of these correlations can affect significantly the results for these ratios (see table II in Ref. for a complete list of systematical errors). The results we obtain from the new SNO data are similar to the old ones except for a strong decrease in the error bars in some cases. From the value from SNO rates we obtain

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Phi }_{CC}}{\mathrm{\Phi }_{ES}}=0.691_{0.096}^{+0.150},$$

a value which is $``$ 2.1 $`\sigma `$ away from the no-oscillation expectation value of one. The ratio of CC and NC fluxes gives the fraction of electron neutrinos remaining in the solar neutrino beam at detection point. We obtain

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Phi }_{CC}}{\mathrm{\Phi }_{NC}}=0.305_{0.024}^{+0.030},$$

this value is nominally many standard deviations ($`20\sigma `$) away from the standard model case .

Finally, if in addition to SNO data we consider the flux predicted by the solar standard model one can obtain $`\mathrm{sin}^2\alpha `$, the fraction of active oscillating neutrinos, again using the SNO data and fully applying systematic correlations, we find:

$`\mathrm{sin}^2\alpha `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Phi }_{NC}\mathrm{\Phi }_{CC}}{\mathrm{\Phi }_{SSM}\mathrm{\Phi }_{CC}}}=0.940_{0.060}^{+0.065}`$ (1)
$`\mathrm{cos}^2\alpha `$ $`<`$$``$ $`0.12(1\sigma ),`$ (2)
where the fraction of oscillating sterile neutrinos $`\mathrm{cos}^2\alpha 1\mathrm{sin}^2\alpha `$. The SSM flux is taken as the $`{}_{}{}^{8}\mathrm{B}`$ flux predicted in the revised Ref.. Although slightly increasing, the central value is still clearly below one (only-active oscillations case). Although electron neutrinos are still allowed to oscillate into sterile neutrinos the hypothesis of transitions to only sterile neutrinos is rejected at nearly $`15\sigma `$. On the other hand, as a consequence of the reduced error bars, this data can be taken as a mildly positive hint in favour of a small sterile component: the pure active case is now one sigma away from the central value (pure active oscillations are “excluded” at one sigma).

## 3 Methods and statistical procedures

The computation of the neutrino oscillation probabilities in Solar and Earth matter and of the expected signal in each experiment follows the standard methods found in the literature . We solve numerically , the neutrino evolution equations for all the oscillation parameter space. The survival probabilities for an electron neutrino, produced in the Sun, to arrive at the Earth are calculated in three steps. The propagation from the production point to sun’s surface is computed numerically in all the parameter range using the electron number density $`n_e`$ given by the BPB2001 model  averaging over the production point. The propagation in vacuum from the Sun surface to the Earth is computed analytically. The averaging over the annual variation of the orbit is also exactly performed using simple Bessel functions. To take the Earth matter effects into account, we adopt a spherical model of the Earth density and chemical composition. In this model, the Earth is divided in eleven radial density zones , in each of which a polynomial interpolation is used to obtain the electron density. The composition of the neutrino propagation in the three different regions is performed exactly using an evolution operator formalism . The final survival probabilities are obtained from the corresponding (non-pure) density matrices built from the evolution operators in each of these three regions. The night quantities are obtained using appropriate weights which depend on the neutrino impact parameter and the sagitta distance from neutrino trajectory to the Earth center, for each detector’s geographical location. In this analysis in addition to night probabilities we will need the partial night probabilities corresponding to the 6 zenith angle bin data presented by SK . They are obtained using appropriate weights which depend on the neutrino impact parameter and the sagitta distance from neutrino trajectory to the Earth’s center, for each detector’s geographical location.

The expected signal in each detector is obtained by convoluting neutrino fluxes, oscillation probabilities, neutrino cross sections and detector energy response functions. We have used neutrino-electron elastic cross sections which include radiative corrections . Neutrino cross sections on deuterium needed for the computation of the SNO measurements are taken from . Detector effects are summarized by the respective response functions, obtained by taking into account both the energy resolution and the detector efficiency. We obtained the energy resolution function for SK using the data presented in . The effective threshold efficiencies, which take into account the live time for each experimental period, are incorporated into our simulation program. They are obtained from . The resolution function and other characteristics for SNO used here are those given in Refs..

The two principal ingredients in the calculation of the expected signal in KamLAND are the reactor flux and the antineutrino cross section on protons. We refer to Ref. for a detailed account of the methods used here. In summary, in order to obtain the expected number of events at KamLAND, we sum the expectations for all the relevant reactor sources weighting each source by its power and distance to the detector (table II in Ref.  ), assuming the same spectrum originated from each reactor. We sum over the nearby power reactors, we neglect farther Japanese and Korean reactors and even farther rest-of-the-world reactors which give only a minor additional contribution. The average expected signal in each energy bin is given by the convolution of the oscillation probability averaged over the distance and power of the different reactors. Expressions for the antineutrino capture cross section are taken from the literature . The matrix element for this cross section can be written in terms of the neutron half-life, we have used the latest published value $`t_{1/2}=613.9\pm 0.55`$ . The antineutrino flux spectrum, the relative reactor-reactor power normalization which is included in the definition of the effective probability and the energy resolution of KamLAND are used in addition. The energy resolution in the prompt positron detection is obtained by us from the raw calibration data presented in Ref.. Moreover, we assume a 408 ton fiducial mass and standard nuclear plant power and fuel schedule, we take an averaged, time-independent, fuel composition equal for each detector. Detection efficiency is taken close 100% and independent of the energy .

### 3.1 Statistical Analysis

The statistical significance of the neutrino oscillation hypothesis is tested with a standard $`\chi ^2`$ method which is explained in detail in Ref.. Our present analysis is based on the consideration of a $`\chi ^2`$ sum of two distinct contributions, one coming from SNO global rates and all the rest of solar neutrino data and the contribution of the KamLAND experiment $`\chi ^2=\chi _{}^2+\chi _{KL}^2`$. The contribution from KamLAND includes the binned signal (See table 2 in Ref.) as is explained in detail in Ref.. In summary, the KamLAND contribution is made of two parts, one with $`\chi _{gl,KL}^2=(R^{exp}R^{th})^2/\sigma ^2`$. The experimental signal $`R^{exp}`$ and statistical and systematic errors are shown in Table 1. The contribution of the KamLAND spectrum is as follows:

$`\chi _{\mathrm{spec},\mathrm{KL}}^2`$ $`=`$ $`(\alpha 𝑹^{\mathrm{th}}𝑹^{\mathrm{exp}})^t\left(\sigma _{unc}^2+\sigma _{corr}^2\right)^1(\alpha 𝑹^{\mathrm{th}}𝑹^{\mathrm{exp}})`$ (3)
The total error matrix $`\sigma `$ is computed as a sum of assumed systematic deviations, $`\sigma _{sys}/S6.5\%`$, mainly coming from flux uncertainty ($`3\%`$), energy calibration and threshold (see table II of Ref. . for a total systematic error $`6.4\%`$), see also Ref.) and statistical errors. The parameter $`\alpha `$ is a free normalization parameter. The effect of systematic sources on individual bin deviations has been computed by us studying the influence on the response function, furtherly we have assumed full correlation among bins.

The solar neutrino contribution can be written in the following way:

$`\chi _{}^2`$ $`=`$ $`\chi _{\mathrm{glob}}^2+\chi _{\mathrm{SK}}^2+\chi _{\mathrm{SNO}}^2.`$ (4)
The function $`\chi _{\mathrm{glob}}^2`$ correspond to the total event rates measured at the Homestake experiment  and at the gallium experiments SAGE , GNO  and GALLEX . We follow closely the definition used in previous works (see Ref. for definitions and Table (1) in Ref. for an explicit list of results and other references). The contribution to the $`\chi ^2`$ from the SuperKamiokande data ($`\chi _{\mathrm{SK}}^2`$) has been obtained by using double-binned data in energy and zenith angle (see table 2 in Ref. and also Ref.): 8 energy bins of variable width and 7 zenith angle bins which include the day bin and 6 night ones (see Ref.).

The contribution of SNO to the $`\chi ^2`$ is given by $`\chi _{SNO}^2=\chi _{gl,SNO}^2+\chi _{spec,SNO}^2`$ where $`\chi _{spec,SNO}^2`$ is the spectrum contribution made up by the day and night values of the total (NC+CC+ES) SNO signal for the different values of the spectrum . The new component corresponding to the individual global signals is given by

$`\chi _{\mathrm{gl},\mathrm{SNO}}^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=ES,CC,NC}{}}(\alpha 𝑹^{\mathrm{th}}𝑹^{\mathrm{exp}})^t\left(\sigma _{\mathrm{stat}}^2+\sigma _{\mathrm{syst}}^2\right)^1(\alpha 𝑹^{\mathrm{th}}𝑹^{\mathrm{exp}}),`$ (5)
where the signal $`𝑹`$ vectors of dimension 3 are made up by the values of the total ES, CC, NC SNO signals. The statistical contribution to the covariance matrix, $`\sigma _{\mathrm{stat}}`$ is non-diagonal since the different fluxes are derived from a fit to a single data sample . The part of the matrix related to the systematical errors includes contributions from neutron capture efficiency and other geometrical inefficiencies appearing in the statistical separation of ES, CC and NC events as presented in Ref..

## 4 Results and Discussion

To test a particular oscillation hypothesis against the parameters of the best fit and obtain allowed regions in parameter space we perform a minimisation of the three dimensional function $`\chi ^2(\mathrm{\Delta }m^2,\mathrm{tan}^2\theta ,\alpha )`$. For $`\alpha =\alpha _{\mathrm{min}}`$, a given point in the oscillation parameter space is allowed if the globally subtracted quantity fulfills the condition $`\mathrm{\Delta }\chi ^2=\chi ^2(\mathrm{\Delta }m^2,\theta )\chi _{\mathrm{min}}^2<\chi _n^2(CL)`$. Where $`\chi _{n=3}^2(90\%,95\%,\mathrm{})`$ are the quantiles for three degrees of freedom.

The results are shown in Figs.1 where we have generated acceptance contours in the $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$-$`\mathrm{tan}^2\theta `$ plane. In Fig.2 we present the same results as in Fig.1 but using linear scales. The resolution in the neutrino parameter space has become good enough for this to become useful. With the actual experimental precision we can assert that the mixing parameters are now known much better than as order of magnitude only. In Table (2) we present the best fit parameters or local minimum obtained from the minimisation of the full $`\chi ^2`$ function.

The main difference with previous analysis is a better resolution in parameter space. The previously two well separated solutions LMAI,LMAII have now disappeared. In particular the secondary region at larger mass differences (LMAII) is now excluded at 95% CL.

The introduction of the new solar data in general strongly diminishes the favored value for the mixing angle with respect to the KamLAND result alone . The final value is more near to those values favored by the solar data alone than to the KamLAND ones. As an important consequence, the combined analysis of solar and KamLAND data concludes that maximal mixing is not favored at $`45\sigma `$. This conclusion is not supported by the antineutrino, earth-controlled, conceptually simpler KamLAND results alone. As we already pointed out in Ref., this effect could be simply due to the present low KamLAND statistics or, more worrying, to some statistical artifact derived from the complexity of the analysis and of the heterogeneity of binned data involved.

Additionally, we perform a second kind of analysis in order to obtain concrete values for the individual oscillation parameters and estimates for their uncertainties. We study the marginalised parameter constraints where the $`\chi ^2`$ quantity is converted into likelihood using the expression $`/_0=e^{(\chi ^2\chi _{min}^2)/2}`$. This normalized marginal likelihood, obtained from the integration of $``$ for each of the variables, is plotted in Figs. (3) for each of the oscillation parameters $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ and $`\mathrm{tan}^2\theta `$. Concrete values for the parameters are extracted by fitting one- or two-sided Gaussian distributions to any of the peaks (fits not showed in the plots). In both cases, for angle and the mass difference distributions the goodness of fit of the Gaussian fit to each individual peak is excellent (g.o.f $`100\%`$). The values for the parameters obtained in this way appear in Table 2. The errors obtained from this method are assigned to the $`\chi ^2`$ minimisation values. The central values are fully consistent and very similar to the values obtained from simple $`\chi ^2`$ minimisation. In particular, the maximal mixing solution is again excluded at the $`45\sigma `$ level. A common feature to previous analysis presented by us  is that, although both are mutually compatible, the slight difference of the value obtained for the mixing angle is well explained by the shape of the allowed regions in Fig 1 (right): the right elongation of these shift the value of the integral which defines the marginal distribution for $`\mathrm{tan}^2\theta `$. Additional variability can be easily introduced if would have used different prior information or mixing parameterizations.

We will again use the technique of marginal distributions in the next paragraphs to obtain an estimation of the individual elements of the neutrino mass matrix and their errors.

### 4.1 An estimation of the neutrino mass matrix

The square of the neutrino mass matrix can be written in the flavour basis as $`M^2=UM_D^2U^{}`$ where $`M_D`$ is diagonal and $`U`$ is an unitary (purely active oscillations are assumed) mixing matrix. Subtracting one of the diagonal entries we have

$$M^2=m_1^2I+M_0^2=m_1^2I+UM_D^2U^{},$$

where $`I`$ is the identity matrix. In this way we distinguish in the mass matrix a part, $`M_0^2`$, which affects and can be determined by oscillation experiments and another one, $`m_1^2I`$, which does not. Evidently, the off-diagonal elements of the mass matrix are fully measurable by oscillation experiments.

Restricting ourselves for the sake of simplicity to two neutrino oscillations, we have

$`M^2=m_1^2I+M_0^2`$ $`=`$ $`m_1^2I+\mathrm{\Delta }m^2\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{sin}^2\theta & \mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{cos}\theta \\ \mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{cos}\theta & \mathrm{cos}^2\theta \end{array}\right)`$ (6)
with $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2=m_2^2m_1^2`$. The individual elements of the matrix $`M_0`$ can simply be estimated from the oscillation parameters obtained before. For example for $`\mathrm{tan}^2\theta 0.40`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^27\times 10^5eV^2`$ we would obtain $`(M_0^2)_{22}5\times 10^5eV^2`$.

Our objective is however to estimate how well the individual errors of the mass matrix can be extracted already at present by the existing experimental evidence. For this purpose we have applied similar arguments as those used before to obtain marginal distributions and errors for individual parameters from them. Using again as likelihood function the quantity $`/_0(\mathrm{\Delta }m^2,\mathrm{tan}^2\theta )=e^{(\chi ^2\chi _{min}^2)/2}`$ we obtained the individual probability distributions for any of the elements of the matrix $`M_0`$. Average values and $`1\sigma `$ errors are obtained from two-sided Gaussian fits to these distributions.

From this procedure we obtain:

$`M_0^2`$ $`=`$ $`10^5eV^2\left(\begin{array}{cc}2.06_{0.31}^{+0.29}& 3.15_{0.35}^{+0.29}\\ 3.15_{0.35}^{+0.29}& 4.60_{0.44}^{+0.56}\end{array}\right).`$ (7)
One can go further supposing a concrete value for $`m_1^2`$ from elsewhere. If we take $`m_1^2>>\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ then we can directly write the mass matrix

$`M`$ $`=`$ $`m_1I+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2m_1}}M_0^2.`$ (8)
Supposing for example $`m_1=1eV`$,

$`M`$ $`=`$ $`eV\left(\begin{array}{cc}1.00+1.03_{0.15}^{+0.15}10^5& 1.60_{0.17}^{+0.15}10^5\\ 1.60_{0.17}^{+0.15}10^5& 1.00+4.60_{0.44}^{+0.56}10^5\end{array}\right).`$ (9)
this is the final two neutrino mass matrix which can be obtained from present oscillation evidence coming from solar and reactor neutrinos.

## 5 Summary and Conclusions

In this work we have presented an up-to-date analysis of all available Solar neutrino evidence including latest SNO results with NaCl enhanced efficiency in the most simple framework. The increasingly accurate direct measurement via the $`NC`$ reaction on deuterium of $`{}_{}{}^{8}\mathrm{B}`$ neutrinos combined with the $`CC`$ results have largely confirmed the neutrino oscillation hypothesis.

In a model independent basis, We obtain the following values for the ratios: $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{CC}/\mathrm{\Phi }_{NC}=0.305_{0.024}^{+0.030}`$, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{CC}/\mathrm{\Phi }_{ES}=0.691_{0.096}^{+0.150}.`$ The fraction a of oscillating neutrinos into active and sterile ones are computed to be:

$`\mathrm{sin}^2\alpha `$ $`=`$ $`0.940_{0.060}^{+0.065},\mathrm{cos}^2\alpha <0.12(1\sigma ),`$ (10)
where the fraction of oscillating sterile neutrinos $`\mathrm{cos}^2\alpha 1\mathrm{sin}^2\alpha `$. Although slightly increasing, the central value is still clearly below one, the only-active oscillations case. The hypothesis of transitions to only sterile neutrinos is well rejected but, as a consequence of the reduced error bars, this data can be taken as a mildly positive hint in favour of a small sterile component: the pure active case is now one sigma away from the central value.

We have obtained the allowed area in parameter space and individual values for $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ and $`\mathrm{tan}^2\theta `$ with error estimation from the analysis of marginal likelihoods. We have shown that it is already possible to determine at present active two neutrino oscillation parameters with relatively good accuracy. In the framework of two active neutrino oscillations we obtain

$$\mathrm{\Delta }m^2=7.01\pm 0.08\times 10^5\text{eV}^2,\mathrm{tan}^2\theta =0.42_{0.07}^{+0.12}.$$

The combined analysis of solar and KamLAND data concludes that maximal mixing is not favored at $`45\sigma `$. This conclusion is not supported by the antineutrino, earth-controlled, conceptually simpler KamLAND results alone.

We estimate the individual elements of the two neutrino mass matrix, we show that individual elements of this matrix can be determined with an error $`10\%`$ from present experimental evidence.

### Acknowledgments

It is a pleasure to thank R. Ferrari for many enlightening discussions and for his encouraging and material support. We acknowledge the financial support of the Italian MIUR, the Spanish CYCIT funding agencies and the CERN Theoretical Division. P.A. acknowledges funding from the Inter-University Attraction Pole (IUAP) ”fundamental interactions”. The numerical calculations have been performed in the computer farm of the Milano University theoretical group.


text:
# On the Measurement of Solar Neutrino Oscillation Parameters with KamLAND

## I Introduction

There has been a significant progress in the studies of neutrino oscillations in the last two years. The evidences for solar neutrino oscillations/transitions, obtained in the solar neutrino experiments Homestake, Kamiokande, SAGE, GALLEX/GNO, Super-Kamiokande (SK) Cl98 ; SKsol  were reinforced by the first data of the SNO experiment SNO1  on the charged current (CC) reaction induced by solar neutrinos, $`\nu _e+De^{}+p+p`$. When combined with the data from the Super-Kamiokande experiment SKsol , the SNO results clearly demonstrate the presence of $`\nu _{\mu ,\tau }`$ and/or $`\overline{\nu }_{\mu ,\tau }`$ component in the flux of solar neutrinos reaching the Earth. This compelling evidence for oscillations and/or transitions of the solar neutrinos was further strengthened in 2002 by the SNO results SNO2 , including the data on the neutral current (NC) reaction $`\nu +D\nu +n+p`$ due to solar neutrinos. In 2002 the first data from the KamLAND experiment were published KamLAND . The KamLAND results represent the first strong evidence (more then 3$`\sigma `$ effect) for neutrino oscillations obtained in an experiment with terrestrial neutrinos. Under the assumption of CPT-invariance, the KamLAND data practically establish KamLAND  the large mixing angle (LMA) MSW solution as unique solution of the solar neutrino problem. All other mechanisms which could cause transitions of the solar $`\nu _e`$ into $`\nu _{\mu ,\tau }`$ and/or $`\overline{\nu }_{\mu ,\tau }`$ and which were considered as possible solutions of the solar neutrino “puzzle”, such as VO, SMA MSW, QVO, LOW (see, e.g., STPSchlad97 ), RSFP RSFP , FCNC FCNC , WEPV and LIV VWEPVLI , if not completely ruled out, are constrained by the KamLAND data to play at most a sub-dominant secondary role in the physics of the solar neutrino transitions. This result brings us, after more than 30 years of research, initiated by the pioneering works of B. Pontecorvo Pont4667  and the experiment of R. Davis et al. Davis68 , very close to a complete understanding of the true cause of the solar neutrino problem.

The combined two-neutrino oscillation analyses of the available solar neutrino and KamLAND data identified two distinct solution sub-regions within the LMA solution region (see, e.g., solfit1 ; solfit2 ). The best fit values of the two-neutrino oscillation parameters - the solar neutrino mixing angle $`\theta _{}`$ and the neutrino mass squared difference $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2`$, in the two sub-regions - low-LMA and high-LMA, were given respectively by solfit1 : $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2=7.2\times 10^5\mathrm{eV}^2`$, $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{}=0.3`$ $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2=1.5\times 10^4\mathrm{eV}^2`$, $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{}=0.3`$ The low-LMA solution was statistically preferred by the data. At 99.73% C.L. the two solutions merged and the allowed ranges were solfit1 :

$$\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2(5.020.0)\times 10^5\mathrm{eV}^2,\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{}(0.210.47).$$
(1)
Very recently the SNO collaboration published the data from the salt phase of the experiment SNO3 . Addition of NaCl in the heavy water increases the efficiency of capture for the final state neutrons of the NC reaction resulting in a gamma ray cascade with a peak around 8 MeV. This, apart from increasing the statistics of the NC data allowed the SNO collaboration to report the CC and NC total event rates with a higher precision and without the assumption of an undistorted energy spectrum. For the ratio of the CC and NC event rates, in particular, the collaboration finds: $`R_{CC/NC}=0.306\pm 0.026\pm 0.024`$. Adding the statistical and the systematic errors in quadratures one gets at 99.73% C.L.: $`R_{CC/NC}0.41`$. As was shown in Maris:2002cv , an upper limit of $`R_{CC/NC}<0.5`$ implies a significant upper limit on $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2`$ smaller than $`2\times 10^4\mathrm{eV}^2`$. Thus, the new SNO data on $`R_{CC/NC}`$ implies stringent constraints on the high-LMA solution. A combined analysis of the data from the solar neutrino and KamLAND experiments, including the latest SNO results, shows SNO3ADSSS ; others  that the high-LMA solution is allowed only at 99.73% C.L. and restricts the 3$`\sigma `$ allowed upper limit of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2`$ to $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2<1.7\times 10^4`$ eV2.

There exists also very strong evidences for oscillations of the atmospheric $`\nu _\mu `$ ($`\overline{\nu }_\mu `$) from the observed Zenith angle dependence of the multi-GeV $`\mu `$like events in the SK experiment SKatm9802 . The Super-Kamiokande (SK) atmospheric neutrino data is best described in terms of dominant $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ ($`\overline{\nu }_\mu \overline{\nu }_\tau `$) oscillations with maximal mixing and $`1.3\times 10^3\text{eV}^2<|\mathrm{\Delta }m_\mathrm{A}^2\text{ }|<3.1\times 10^3\text{eV}^2`$ ($`90\%`$ C.L.), where we have quoted the preliminary results of an improved analysis of the SK atmospheric neutrino data, performed recently by the SK collaboration SKatmo03 .

After these remarkable developments in the field of neutrino oscillations, further progress in the studies of neutrino mixing requires the realization of large and challenging program of research in neutrino physics (see, e.g., SPNDM03 ). As one of its main goals we see higher precision determination of the neutrino mass and mixing parameters which control the solar neutrino oscillations, $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2`$ and $`\theta _{}`$. With the future data from SNO on the day-night effect and the spectrum of $`e^{}`$ from the CC reaction, and the future high statistics data from KamLAND, one can look forward, in particular, to resolving completely the low-LMA - high-LMA solution ambiguity, and at the same time constraining the solar neutrino mixing angle Maris:2002cv ; solfit1 ; Maris:2000DN ; prekl ; preklall .

In general, the solar neutrino oscillations parameters $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2`$ and $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{}`$ can be measured either in solar neutrino experiments, or in long baseline reactor antineutrino experiments. The potential of the current and future solar neutrino experiments for precision measurements of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2`$ and $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{}`$ was studied in detail recently in th12 ; Bahcall:2003ce . The just published high statistics NC data from SNO together with the earlier SNO data constrain the mixing angle $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{}`$ from above: the case of maximal mixing is excluded by these data at more than 5 s.d. The data from the proposed low energy experiments sensitive to the $`pp`$ neutrinos could help constrain $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{}`$ from below, provided the total error in these experiments could be reduced to $`<1\%`$ th12 ; Bahcall:2003ce . The recent SNO salt data has also disfavoured higher values of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ and the high-LMA region is shown to be allowed only at 3$`\sigma `$ SNO3ADSSS ; others . In SNO3ADSSS  it is shown that with 1 kTy statistics the KamLAND data can further narrow down the high-LMA allowed zone if the true KamLAND spectrum corresponds to values of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ in the low-LMA region. However, if the observed KamLAND spectrum corresponds to high-LMA solution, the low-LMA/high-LMA ambiguity would increase as a result of conflicting trends of solar and KamLAND data.

Precision measurements of the solar neutrino oscillation parameters can be performed in reactor $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ experiments sensitive to the modulation of the antineutrino spectrum caused by the $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2`$driven oscillations in vacuum. The possibility to observe such a modulation depends crucially on the chosen baseline. When the baseline corresponds to $`\mathrm{sin}^2(\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2L/E)1`$, the neutrinos undergo maximum flavor transition and in this case the survival probability $`P_{ee}1\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{}`$ is in its minimum. We will use the term Survival Probability MINima (SPMIN) to denote such a case. If the baseline corresponds to $`\mathrm{sin}^2(\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2L/E)0`$, one has $`P_{ee}1`$ and we will refer to this case as Survival Probability MAXima (SPMAX). While for a given reactor experiment both conditions depend crucially on $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2`$, in the case of the SPMAX condition there is no $`\theta _{}`$dependence. Thus, while $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2`$ can be determined with a relatively good precision in an experiment sensitive to either SPMAX or SPMIN, for achieving a relatively precise measurement of the mixing angle $`\theta _{}`$ the baseline should be tuned to SPMIN.

All studies of the potential of KamLAND to measure the solar neutrino oscillation parameters solfit1 ; prekl ; preklall ; th12 , have shown that the KamLAND experiment has a remarkable sensitivity to $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2`$. Its expected sensitivity to $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{}`$ was not found to be equally good th12 . Even with 3 kTy statistics and extremely optimistic systematic error of only 3%, the constraints on $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{}`$ were found to be not much better than that obtained using the solar neutrino data (see th12  for a detailed discussion). The reason for this can be traced to the fact that effectively the baseline relevant in the KamLAND experiment corresponds to SPMAX for both the low-LMA and high-LMA solutions.

In th12  a 70 km baseline reactor $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ experiment was proposed, to measure with high precision the solar neutrino oscillation parameters in the case of the low-LMA solution. If high-LMA happens to be the true solution – a possibility which is strongly disfavored by the current data – an intermediate baseline reactor experiment with $`L=20÷30`$ km would be needed for the purpose Petcov:2001sy ; th12hlma . Such an experiment would not only allow measurement of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2`$ and $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{}`$ with high precision, but could also constrain $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta `$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_\mathrm{A}^2`$  th12hlma . Under rather demanding conditions, the same experiment could provide information on the neutrino mass hierarchy Petcov:2001sy ; th12hlma .

Both proposals for new reactor experiments discussed briefly above were made after detailed studies of the KamLAND physics potential in which prolonged periods of data taking were assumed. However, there are new upcoming reactor power plants relatively close to KamLAND . Their presence may affect the conclusions reached in these studies. More concretely, there are plans to build a new reactor, Shika-2, very close to the site of the existing rector Shika-1, which is located at about 88 km from KamLAND shika2 . The new reactor is expected to have a power of approximately 3.926 GW and is due to start operations in March of 2006. In this paper we study the impact the flux of $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ from the new Shika-2 reactor can have on the sensitivity of the KamLAND experiment to the solar neutrino oscillation parameters. We present our results for the KamLAND detector before and after the starting of the new reactor power plant. Finally we do a global analysis of solar and KamLAND data in our analysis including the effect of the Shika-2 contribution to the KamLAND signal and the just published salt data from the SNO experiment.

## II The $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ Survival Probability at KamLAND

The $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ flux at KamLAND detector receives contributions from a large number of nuclear power plants located in different parts of Japan and in South Korea. The most powerful is the Kashiwazaki reactor complex, which has a total thermal power of 24.6 GW and is situated at a distance of about 160 km from KamLAND. A new reactor power plant, Shika-2, is being built a few hundred meters from the site of the existing Shika-1 reactor, which is located at about 87.7 km from KamLAND. The thermal power of the new Shika-2 reactor is about 3.926 GW. We take the distance from Shika-2 to KamLAND to be 87.7 km. It it expected that the Shika-2 plant will start commercial operation in March of 2006. Test operation will start several months before the commercial operation. In this Section we take into account the flux from the new Shika-2 reactor and find its impact on the sensitivity of KamLAND experiment to the solar neutrino oscillation parameters $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2`$.

The $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ flux from the various reactors in Japan (and South Korea) are detected in the KamLAND experiment through the inverse beta decay process $`\overline{\nu }_e+pe^++n`$. The number of events observed in the KamLAND detector is given by

$$N_{KL}=N_p𝑑E_{vis}𝑑E_\nu \sigma (E_\nu )R(E_{vis},E_\nu )\underset{i}{}\frac{S_i(E_\nu )}{4\pi L_i^2}P_i(\overline{\nu }_e\overline{\nu }_e)$$
(2)
where $`E_{vis}`$ is the measured visible energy of the emitted positron, when the true visible energy, $`E_{vis}^TE_\nu 0.80`$ MeV, $`E_\nu `$ being the energy of the incoming $`\overline{\nu }_e`$, $`\sigma (E_\nu )`$ is the $`\overline{\nu }_e+pe^++n`$ reaction cross-section, $`S_i(E_\nu )`$ denotes the $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ flux from the $`i`$th reactor, $`L_i`$ is the distance between the $`i`$th reactor and KamLAND , $`R(E_{vis},E_\nu )`$ is the energy resolution function of the detector, $`N_P`$ are the number of protons in the target, and $`P_i(\overline{\nu }_e\overline{\nu }_e)`$ is the survival probability of the $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ coming from the reactor $`i`$. For the energy resolution we use $`\sigma (E)/E=7.5\%/\sqrt{E}`$, as reported by the KamLAND collaboration KamLAND . We have used for $`N_P`$ the number provided in KamLAND . The fiducial mass of the detector was given as 408 tons. Since this may change in the future and the total statistics of the experiment depends on the mass of detector material (in ktons) and the time of exposure (years), we choose the unit kton-year (kTy) to characterize the KamLAND statistics.

Apart from the solar neutrino oscillation parameters, the $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ survival probability $`P_i(\overline{\nu }_e\overline{\nu }_e)`$ depends on the energy of the antineutrinos and the distance $`L_i`$ between the the $`i`$th reactor and KamLAND :

$$P_i(\overline{\nu }_e\overline{\nu }_e)=1\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{}\mathrm{sin}^2\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2L_i}{4E}\right)$$
(3)
where it is assumed that $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ take part in two-neutrino oscillations. The KamLAND collaboration presented their data in 13 $`E_{vis}`$ bins of width of 0.425 MeV. To get the events in each of the KamLAND bins, we integrate Eq. (2) between $`E_{vis}0.425/2`$ to $`E_{vis}+0.425/2`$.

In Figure 1 we show the effects of the survival probability $`P_i(\overline{\nu }_e\overline{\nu }_e)`$ on the KamLAND event rate as a function of distance. The left-hand panel shows the probability averaged over the entire visible energy spectrum, while the right-hand panel illustrates the depletion the KamLAND detector would observe in the bin with central energy $`E_{vis}=4.1`$ MeV. Thus, while the left-hand panel shows the predicted suppression of the event rate as a function of the reactor distance, the right-hand panel gives an idea of the behavior of the observed spectral shape with distance. The effects of $`P_i(\overline{\nu }_e\overline{\nu }_e)`$ are shown both for the now strongly preferred low-LMA ($`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2=7.2\times 10^5`$ eV2, $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{}=0.3`$) and for the high-LMA ($`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2=1.5\times 10^4`$ eV2, $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{}=0.3`$) solutions. Marked on the figure are also the approximate distances of the Kashiwazaki and the Shika reactor power plants from KamLAND. From the left-hand panel we note that the signal due to the $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ flux from Kashiwazaki complex is suppressed due to the oscillations by a factor of $`0.75(0.54)`$ for the low-LMA (high-LMA) solution. The signal due to $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ from the Shika reactor is reduced by a factor of $`0.26(0.64)`$ in the case of the the low-LMA (high-LMA) solution. The event rate observed in KamLAND with 162 ton-yr of data corresponds to 0.61 of the rate predicted in the absence of oscillations. This is the rate observed in the detector taking into account the contributions from all reactors.

As the right-hand panel in Figure 1 indicates, the flux of $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ from the Kashiwazaki complex, producing $`e^+`$ with $`E_{vis}4.1`$ MeV, “falls” in the region of maximum of the survival probability (SPMAX), $`P_i(\overline{\nu }_e\overline{\nu }_e)1`$, for both the low-LMA and high-LMA solutions. In contrast, the $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ with the same energy ($`E3.3`$ MeV) from the Shika complex located at $`88`$ km from KamLAND, are affected by a minimum of the survival probability (SPMIN) in the case of the low-LMA solution, and by a maximum (SPMAX) if the true solution is the high-LMA one. This feature is further illustrated in Figure 2, where we show the positron energy spectrum observed in KamLAND for the two distances of interest - 160 km (Kashiwazaki) and 88 km (Shika). We have plotted the averaged survival probability in each bin for the two solutions. We note that for $`L=160`$ km, the spectral shape in the statistically important part of the energy spectrum is almost the same for both low-LMA and high-LMA solutions, with SPMAX at about 4 MeV. Since KamLAND receives most of the $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ flux from the Kashiwazaki complex, this results in the appearance of the two allowed solutions: low-LMA and high-LMA. For a distance of $``$88 km and $`E_{vis}`$ of about 4.5 MeV, however, the survival probability of interest exhibits a minimum (SPMIN) for the low-LMA solution and a maximum (SPMAX) for the high-LMA one. One could naively expect that a new reactor at the Shika site with a large enough thermal power should make it easier to discriminate between the currently allowed two solutions using the KamLAND data. The presence of the SPMIN for the $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ flux from Shika in the case of the low-LMA solution might also be expected to improve the precision of the $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{}`$ determination from the KamLAND data 111In th12  it was argued that a baseline of 70 km was ideal for the $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{}`$ sensitivity. The Shika distance is close to this best baseline.. Since $`P_i(\overline{\nu }_e\overline{\nu }_e)`$ has a maximum in the case of the high-LMA solution, one does not expect any improvement in the precision of the $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{}`$ measurement for this solution.

Our preceding discussion was concerned with the signals in KamLAND due to the Kashiwazaki or Shika-2 reactors alone. However, in a realistic evaluation of the physics potential of the KamLAND detector one has to take into account the contributions to the KamLAND signal from all relevant reactors.

## III Measurement of the Solar Neutrino Oscillation Parameters

In this section we generate the prospective KamLAND data with and without the new reactor Shika-2 and study the impact of Shika-2 on the determination of the solar neutrino oscillation parameters using a $`\chi ^2`$ analysis. For the errors we assume a Gaussian distribution and define our $`\chi ^2`$ as

$`\chi ^2={\displaystyle \underset{i,j}{}}(N_i^{data}N_i^{theory})(\sigma _{ij}^2)^1(N_j^{data}N_j^{theory}),`$ (4)
where $`N_i^\alpha `$ $`(\alpha =data,theory)`$ is the number of events in the $`i^{\mathrm{th}}`$ bin and the sum is over all bins. We assume that KamLAND will continue to present their data in 13 bins of width 0.425 MeV with an energy threshold of 2.6 MeV. The error correlation matrix $`\sigma _{ij}^2`$ contains the statistical and systematic errors. While in their first paper the KamLAND collaboration quote a very conservative 6.42% for their systematic error, the latter is expected to diminish with time. The most important contribution to the KamLAND systematic error comes from the uncertainty in the knowledge of the fiducial volume of the detector, which is expected to be reduced. The understanding of the other systematics would reduce the error further. In our analysis we will assume a future KamLAND plausible systematic error of 5%.

In Figure 3 we present the allowed regions in the $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{}`$ plane, obtained when the spectrum measured by KamLAND is simulated at the low-LMA solution best-fit point (upper panels) and a high-LMA solution point (lower panels). The left panels show the allowed regions obtained with the current set-up of reactors in Japan, with data foreseen to be collected roughly up to March 2006. This corresponds to a statistics of 1.296 kTy. The right panels give the corresponding allowed regions obtained for identical statistics but with the contribution from the future Shika-2 reactor included. We see that with the current reactor set-up in Japan, even the KamLAND data corresponding to 1.296 kTy would still allow the high-LMA (low-LMA) solution at 99% C.L. if the low-LMA (high-LMA) is the true solution. Moreover, if the high-LMA is the correct solution, there would be additional multiple allowed regions at higher values of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2`$. Including the contribution from the Shika-2 reactor along with that from the other reactors, makes the ambiguity worse. With the low-LMA (high-LMA) as the true solution, the spurious high-LMA (low-LMA) regions get allowed even at 90% C.L.. There also appears an additional high-LMA solution at $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^22.6\times 10^4`$ eV2. Figure 4 shows the corresponding allowed regions with KamLAND data of 3 kTy. While with 3 kTy of data the KamLAND experiment could determine the correct solution unambiguously with the current set-up of contributing reactors, the presence of the signal from the Shika-2 reactor would make both the low-LMA and high-LMA solutions allowed at 90% C.L. and thus would not permit to resolve the solution ambiguity.

In Figure 5 we show the ratio of the total number of events expected in KamLAND in the case of $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ oscillations to the corresponding number predicted in absence of oscillations. In this figure we take into account the contributions to the KamLAND event rate from all reactors. This is to be compared with Figure 2 which shows the survival probability expected for the Kashiwazaki and Shika-2 power plants alone. The left panel of Figure 5 shows the ratios for the case with (17 reactors) and without (16 reactors) the contribution of Shika-2 reactor, for the spectrum generated at the low-LMA solution best fit point. The right panel show the corresponding ratio for the data generated at the high-LMA solution best-fit point.

For the low-LMA solution, we had seen from Figure 2 that the signal due to the Kashiwazaki $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ flux is affected by a SPMAX, while the event rate due to the $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ from Shika-2 rector is affected by a SPMIN. The KamLAND detector measures the power weighted cumulative $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ flux from all reactors. If we consider the effective flux at KamLAND from the $`i^{th}`$ reactor plant without taking into account the $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ oscillations,

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_{KL}^i=\frac{P_i}{4\pi L_i}$$
(5)
we find that for the Kashiwazaki complex it corresponds to $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{KL}7.3\mu W/cm^2`$, while for the Shika-2 reactor it is substantially smaller, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{KL}4.1\mu W/cm^2`$. Thus, the impact on the KamLAND observed signal due to the Kashiwazaki $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ flux will be considerably larger than that due to the Shika-2 flux, when the contributions from all the reactors are combined. Hence, for the low-LMA solution, the result of adding of the Shika-2 signal on the observed to expected events ratio, is only to decrease it somewhat from that obtained without Shika-2. In other words, even though the oscillations generate big spectral distortions in the spectra of $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ produced at Kashiwazaki and at Shika-2 reactors, which are reflected in the corresponding $`e^+`$ spectra measured by the KamLAND experiment, since the distortion thus produced have opposite effects (corresponding to SPMAX and SPMIN respectively), the net spectral distortion observed in KamLAND would be smaller than in the case of no Shika-2 contribution. This results in increased ambiguity in the determination of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2`$, which depends strongly on the magnitude of the distortion in the measured resultant spectrum. This can be seen in the left panel of Figure 5. For the high-LMA solution, both Kashiwazaki and Shika-2 contributions to the spectrum measured at KamLAND are affected by a SPMAX. This results in a mild increase of the spectral distortion for the high-LMA solution with the introduction of Shika-2 signal. Most importantly, as this Figure indicates, after turning on the Shika-2 reactor, the differences between the predicted spectral shapes in the cases of the low-LMA and the high-LMA solution diminish. This explains the increase in the degeneracy between the two solutions, as observed in Figure 3. This degeneracy is not lifted even when statistics is increased to 3 kTy, as seen in Figure 4.

Up to now we have been discussing a scenario where we either have 16 reactors without Shika-2 or we have 17 reactors with Shika-2. The more realistic scenario will be the one where KamLAND collects data with the present 16 reactors until Shika-2 starts operation and thereafter KamLAND will observe the flux from all 17 reactors. It is expected that Shika-2 would begin to operate in March 2006. This implies that KamLAND would have already collected 4 years of data corresponding to 1.296 kTy statistics with the current fiducial volume. In Figure 6 we present the allowed regions of values of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2`$ and $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{}`$ in this more realistic scenario. We consider an aggregate KamLAND statistics of 1.296 kTy with the current 16 reactors and a further 1.296 kTy data with 17 reactors including Shika-2. We assume the same systematic uncertainty of 5% for both the data sets. The Figure shows that with such a combined data set the ambiguity between the low-LMA and high-LMA solutions appears only at 99% C.L., as in the case with just the 16 reactors. It should be noted, however, that even with a total of $`2\times 1.2962.6`$ kTy data, KamLAND still would not be able to resolve the ambiguity between the two solutions. This should be compared with the 3 kTy results for the 16 reactor set-up given in Figure 4, which show that the ambiguity between the two solutions could be resolved even at the $`3\sigma `$ level. Thus, contrary to what one might naively expect, the advent on Shika-2 will reduce the sensitivity of KamLAND to $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2`$.

Next we focus on the impact of the new Shika-2 reactor on the precision of the measurement of $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{}`$. From the Figures 3, 4 and 6 we find that there is hardly any improvement in the precision of $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{}`$ determination with the inclusion of Shika-2 contribution, contrary to what might be expected. In Table 1 we present the 99% C.L. allowed ranges of values of $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{}`$. The allowed range of $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{}`$ for the low-LMA solution diminishes only marginally with the inclusion of the Shika-2 contribution, owing to the effect of the SPMIN, as discussed in th12 . Only the case with 17 reactors and 3 kTy statistics shows some improvement over the 16 reactor case. The improvement here is much less than that obtained in th12  for two major reasons. Firstly, Shika-2 has a thermal power of only 3.926 GW while the reactor considered in th12  had power of 24.3 GW, a la Kashiwazaki. Secondly, in th12  the effect of the presence of other more powerful reactors apart from the reactor producing the SPMIN, was not taken into account. The presence of the other powerful reactors at different baselines (Kashiwazaki, in particular) changes the shape of the resultant positron spectrum at KamLAND from one corresponding to a SPMIN to one corresponding to a SPMAX, as can be seen in Figure 5.

We consider next the hypothetical case of the Kashiwazaki complex operating with reduced power, which would make the SPMIN associated with the Shika-2 contribution more pronounced. The corresponding results are presented in Figure 7. This figure is obtained supposing that KamLAND receives flux from the current 16 reactors, including the Kashiwazaki reactors running at full power up to March 2006 and that thereafter it receives flux from Shika-2 power plant as well for another period of 4 years, giving a total statistics of $`1.296+1.296`$ kTy for the two phases combined. For the second phase, however, we assume that the power of the Kashiwazaki reactor complex is reduced by (i) 50%, and (ii) 100%, i.e., a total shut-down of the Kashiwazaki reactors. The impact on the determination of the solar neutrino oscillation parameters in the former case is shown in the upper panels of Figure 7, while the results for the latter case are displayed in the lower panels of Figure 7. We note that in neither case one can discriminate between the low- and high- LMA solutions and/or can obtain better constraints on $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{}`$. In fact, the precision gets worse, owing mainly to the fact that the statistics of the KamLAND experiment decreases significantly if the $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ flux from the Kashiwazaki complex is cut down.

Finally, we present the constraints obtained on $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2`$ and $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{}`$ when the data from the KamLAND experiment is combined with the global solar neutrino data. In Figure 8 we show the allowed regions derived by combining the global solar neutrino data (including the latest salt phase data from SNO) with the combined 1.296 kTy KamLAND data collected with 16 reactors and 1.296 kTy KamLAND data obtained with 17 reactors, including the Shika-2 flux. A comparison of Figure 6 with Figure 8 shows that the inclusion of the solar neutrino data rules out the spurious high-LMA solution if low-LMA is the correct one. However, if the positron spectrum measured at KamLAND would correspond to a $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2`$ in the high-LMA region, the solar neutrino data would further increase the degeneracy and make the low-LMA solution allowed at 90% C.L.. In fact, the best-fit $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2`$ and $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{}`$ for the combined analysis come in the low-LMA zone. The reason for this behavior can be traced to the fact that the solar neutrino data in general, and the SNO data in particular, favor the low-LMA solution over the high-LMA one.

## IV Conclusions

In the present article we have studied the impact of the $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ flux from a new reactor, Shika-2, on the sensitivity of the KamLAND experiment to the solar neutrino oscillation parameters, $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2`$ and $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{}`$. This upcoming reactor is proposed to have a thermal power of 3.926 GW and would be located at a distance of about 88 km from the KamLAND detector. Since the distance of 88 km corresponds to a minimum (SPMIN) in the resultant positron spectrum at KamLAND , it was expected that the introduction of this detector may improve the precision with which the mixing angle $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{}`$ can be determined. However, it follows from our study that the precision of the measurement of the solar neutrino mixing angle, $`\theta _{}`$, is unlikely to be improved by the addition of this new reactor because of the averaging effect of fluxes from the other reactors. In fact, once the contribution of Shika-2 to the KamLAND event rate is taken into account, the precision to $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2`$ from the KamLAND experiment worsens, increasing the ambiguity between the low-LMA and high-LMA solutions. For the most realistic case where we include the effect of Shika-2 after March 2006 and consider about 2.6 kTy statistics in the simulated KamLAND spectrum, we find that the degeneracy between the two solutions remain at 99% C.L. from the KamLAND data alone, irrespective of whether the KamLAND spectral data is simulated in the low-LMA or high-LMA solution region. We have also presented results on prospective determination of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2`$ and $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{}`$ from the combined KamLAND and the solar neutrino data, including the just published salt phase data from the SNO experiment. Since the SNO salt data disfavours the higher $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{}^2`$ regions, the high-LMA solution is found to be absent if the KamLAND spectrum is simulated in the low-LMA zone. However, if the observed KamLAND spectrum corresponds to oscillation parameters in the high-LMA zone, the ambiguity between the low-LMA and high-LMA solutions would remain as a result of the conflicting trends of the KamLAND and the current solar neutrino data.

Acknowledgements.

We would like to thank F. Suekane for useful correspondence. S.T.P. acknowledges informative discussions with K. Heeger. This work was supported in part by the Italian MIUR and INFN under the programs “Fenomenologia delle Interazioni Fondamentali” (S.T.P. and S.G.) and “Fisica Astroparticellare” (S.C.).


text:
# Search for anomalous single production of the fourth SM family quark decaying into a light scalar

## Abstract

Superjet events observed by the CDF Collaboration are interpreted as anomalous single production of the fourth SM family $`u_4`$ quark, decaying into a new light scalar particle. The specific predictions of the proposed mechanism are discussed.

Recently, CDF Collaboration has reported 1  the observation of an excess of events in $`W+2,3`$ jet topologies, the so called “superjet” events, in which a single jet has both a soft lepton and a secondary vertex. These events are interpreted in 2  as scalar quark $`\stackrel{~}{b}`$ with a mass of $`3.6`$ GeV and a lifetime of $`1`$ ps, decaying into $`cl\stackrel{~}{\nu }`$ where scalar neutrino is assumed to be massless. In our opinion, this interpretation favors the MSSM scenario with superpartner of the right-handed neutrino as the LSP 3 , because LEP experiments put the limit $`m_{\stackrel{~}{\nu }}>44`$ GeV on the mass of superpartners of the left-handed neutrinos 4 . As mentioned in 5 , at least some of these events could be explained as anomalous single production of the fourth SM family (see saleh  and the references therein) quarks via the process $`u_4tgWbg`$. The superjet is associated with the normal $`b`$ quark decay. However, this interpretation leads to an essential excess in single tag events, which is several times larger than CDF observations 1 .

In this letter, we give another interpretation to superjet events. Following our previous study 5 , we still assume that the production is due to anomalous $`q_4qg`$ interaction but the decay chain is changed to $`u_4tx^0Wb\tau ^+\tau ^{}`$. The new proposed particle $`x^0`$ must have a mass around $`45`$ GeV. In this mechanism, superjet is formed by the decay of one $`\tau `$ leptonically and the other one hadronically. There are two possible identifications of $`x^0`$. One possibility is the lightest neutral Higgs boson in SM with extended Higgs sector. The other one is a light neutral dilepton which is expected in preonic models.

The effective Lagrangian for the anomalous interactions between the fourth family quarks, ordinary quarks and the gauge bosons $`V`$ ($`V=\gamma ,Z,g`$) can be written as follows:

$`L={\displaystyle \frac{\kappa _\gamma ^{q_i}}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}e_qg_e\overline{q}_4\sigma _{\mu \nu }(A_\gamma ^{q_i}+B_\gamma ^{q_i}\gamma _5)q_iF^{\mu \nu }+{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa _Z^{q_i}}{2\mathrm{\Lambda }}}g_Z\overline{q}_4\sigma _{\mu \nu }(A_Z^{q_i}+B_Z^{q_i}\gamma _5)q_iZ^{\mu \nu }`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa _g^{q_i}}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}g_s\overline{q}_4\sigma _{\mu \nu }(A_g^{q_i}+B_g^{q_i}\gamma _5)T^aq_iG_a^{\mu \nu }+h.c.`$ (1)
where $`F^{\mu \nu },Z^{\mu \nu }`$, and $`G^{\mu \nu }`$ are the field strength tensors of the photon, $`Z`$ boson and gluons, respectively; $`T^a`$ are Gell-Mann matrices; $`e_q`$ is the charge of the quark; $`g_e,g_Z`$, and $`g_s`$ are the electroweak, and the strong coupling constants respectively. $`g_Z=g_e/\mathrm{cos}\theta _W\mathrm{sin}\theta _W`$ where $`\theta _W`$ is the Weinberg angle. $`A_{\gamma ,Z,g}^q`$ and $`B_{\gamma ,Z,g}^q`$ are the magnitudes of the neutral currents; $`\kappa _{\gamma ,Z,g}`$ define the strength of the anomalous couplings for the neutral currents with a photon, a $`Z`$ boson and a gluon, respectively; $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is the cutoff scale for the new physics. We assume all the neutral current magnitudes in Eq. (1) to be equal, satisfying the constraint $`|A|^2+|B|^2=1`$ and take all anomalous couplings as $`\kappa _\gamma ^{q_i}=\kappa _Z^{q_i}=\kappa _g^{q_i}=1`$. We have implemented the new interaction vertices into the CALCHEP calchep  package to calculate the cross sections and branching ratios. We use the parton distribution function CTEQ5M 7\_1  and the scale $`Q=m_{u_4}`$.

$`x^0`$ as a light Higgs. We require $`u_4tx^0`$ coupling to be sufficiently large in order to provide significant BR($`u_4tx^0`$). On the other hand, the interaction of $`x^0`$ with the intermediate vector bosons should be suppressed in order to avoid contradiction with the LEP data. So, we will denote this particle as a light Higgs boson $`h^0`$. Naturally, the main decay mode of $`h^0`$ should be into kinematically allowed heaviest fermions, namely $`\tau ^+\tau ^{}`$ and $`c\overline{c}`$. In the case of $`h^0\tau ^+\tau ^{}`$, the branching ratios into possible final states are 0.44 for superjet, 0.12 for all lepton mode, 0.43 for all hadron mode. Similar numbers are valid for $`h^0c\overline{c}`$. In order to have the lifetime of $`h^0`$ to be less than $`1`$ ps, the coupling constant $`a_\tau `$ in the interaction term $`a_\tau h^0\overline{\tau }\tau `$ should be larger than $`5\times 10^7`$.

The number of superjet events can be estimated as

$`N_s`$ $`=`$ $`\sigma (gqu_4)BR(u_4th^0)BR(tbW)`$ (2)
$`BR(h^0superjet)BR(We\nu +\mu \nu )ϵL_{int}`$
where $`ϵ`$ stands for detection efficiency. In Table 1, we present production cross section, branching ratios and total decay width for $`u_4`$ at different mass values, assuming BR($`u_4th^0`$) $`=10\%`$. This assumption corresponds to $`b_{tu_4}0.1`$ where $`b_{tu_4}`$ is the coupling in the interaction term $`b_{tu_4}h^0\overline{t}u_4`$. By taking $`ϵ=0.25`$, BR($`tbW`$) $`=1`$ and BR($`We\nu +\mu \nu `$) $`=0.21`$, we obtain from Eq. (2) number of superjet events $`N_s=6`$ for $`m_{u_4}=300`$ GeV and the integrated luminosity $`L_{int}=106`$ pb-1.

$`x^0`$ as a light dilepton. Second candidate for the identification of $`x^0`$ is a neutral dilepton with zero lepton number 7 . So, we denote this particle as $`D_\tau ^0`$. The difference between $`D_\tau ^0`$ and $`h^0`$ decay modes is that $`D_\tau ^0`$ decays into $`\tau ^+\tau ^{}`$ only. $`D_\tau ^0`$ can be produced in $`u_4`$ decays via the mixing with a diquark $`D_q^0`$, interacting with $`u_4`$ and $`t`$ (for classification of diquarks see 8 ):

$`D_1^0=D_\tau ^0\mathrm{cos}\theta +D_q^0\mathrm{sin}\theta `$ (3)
$`D_2^0=D_\tau ^0\mathrm{sin}\theta +D_q^0\mathrm{cos}\theta `$ (4)
where $`\theta `$ is the mixing angle. Therefore, $`u_4`$ decay chain becomes $`u_4tD_1^0Wb\tau ^+\tau ^{}`$, where we identify $`x^0`$ as $`D_1^0`$, and $`D_2^0`$ is assumed to be heavy. In order to obtain BR($`u_4tD_1^0`$)$`=10\%`$, one needs $`b\mathrm{sin}\theta =0.1`$ where $`b`$ is the coupling constant of the $`D_q^0u_4t`$ interaction.

To test the proposed mechanism, we have reconstructed the invariant mass of the $`W+j`$ system where $`j`$ denotes the ordinary jet accompanying the superjet, using the W + 2 jet events in Table XVI of 1 . The resulting mass values are $`159,175,600,159,178,228,172,`$ $`149`$ GeV. The third and the sixth events do not reproduce the expected top quark mass value and probably they are due to SM background.

Another prediction of our mechanism is the occurrence of spectacular events with collinear $`e\mu `$ tracks originating from $`x^0`$ when both $`\tau `$ leptons decay leptonically. Ratio of the number of events of this type to the number of superjet events should be $`1:15`$ for $`h^0`$ and $`1:8`$ for $`D_\tau ^0`$. Therefore, we expect the observation of a number of collinear $`e\mu `$ tracks at the upgraded Tevatron with integral luminosity $`1`$ fb-1.

In conclusion, CDF superjet events seem to indicate very exciting physics at TeV scale. Namely, existence of the fourth SM family, anomalous interactions, extended SM Higgs sector etc. The scale $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=2`$ TeV can be a hint of relatively low scale compositeness which will lead to a rich zoo of new particles at the LHC.

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to P. Giromini for his illuminating remarks on CDF data. This work is partially supported by Turkish State Planning Organization under the Grant No 2002K120250.