text:
# Three-flavor solar neutrino oscillations with terrestrial neutrino constraints

## I Introduction

In this paper we present an updated three-flavor oscillation analysis of the solar neutrino data coming from the Homestake Cl98 , SAGE Ab02 , GALLEX/GNO Ha99 ; Ki02 , Super-Kamiokande (SK) Fu02 , and Sudbury Neutrino Observatory (SNO) AhNC ; AhDN  experiments. We include additional constraints coming from terrestrial neutrino oscillation searches performed at the CHOOZ reactors CHOO , at the SK atmospheric $`\nu `$ experiment Shio , and at the KEK-to-Kamioka (K2K) long baseline accelerator experiment K2Ke . Implications for upcoming or future experiments are also discussed. This work extends a previous solar $`2\nu `$ analysis Getm , to which we refer the reader for technical details.

The plan of our paper is as follows. In Sec. II and III we briefly review the theoretical and experimental input, respectively. In Sec. IV we present the results of our $`3\nu `$ oscillation analysis. In Sec. V we discuss some implications for CP violation searches at future accelerator experiments. In Sec. VI we analyze the accuracy of parameter reconstruction in the Kamioka Liquid scintillator Anti Neutrino Detector (KamLAND) experiment at reactors Shir . We draw our conclusions in Sec. VII.

## II Theoretical $`3\nu `$ framework and approximations

We consider standard $`3\nu `$ oscillations among flavor eigenstates $`\nu _\alpha =(\nu _e,\nu _\mu ,\nu _\tau )`$ and mass eigenstates $`\nu _i=(\nu _1,\nu _2,\nu _3)`$ with a squared $`\nu `$ mass spectrum defined as

$$(m_1^2,m_2^2,m_3^2)=(\frac{\delta m^2}{2},+\frac{\delta m^2}{2},\pm \mathrm{\Delta }m^2),$$
(1)
up to an irrelevant overall constant. The two squared mass gaps $`\delta m^2`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ (both $`>0`$) are usually referred to as “solar” and “atmospheric” squared mass gaps, respectively. The cases $`+\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ identify the so-called direct and inverted spectrum hierarchies Qave .111We assume direct hierarchy, unless otherwise stated. As discussed later, the case of inverse hierarchy does not appreciably change the results of our analysis.

The mixing matrix $`U_{\alpha i}`$ is parametrized according to the usual convention PDGR  as

$$U=U(\theta _{12},\theta _{13},\theta _{23}),$$
(2)
where we have dropped the (currently unobservable) CP violation phase. The mixing angles span two octants, $`\theta _{ij}[0,\pi /2]`$, and are often parametrized in terms of either $`\mathrm{tan}^2\theta _{ij}`$ (in logarithmic scale) or $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{ij}`$ (in linear scale) Scio ; Matt . We use the latter representation in this work.222The alternative representation in terms of $`\mathrm{log}\mathrm{tan}^2\theta _{ij}`$ is more useful when the allowed regions span several decades in mixing angles—a situation no longer realized in the current neutrino phenomenology.

As it is well known, solar and terrestrial neutrino data consistently favor the so-called hierarchical hypothesis

$$\delta m^2\mathrm{\Delta }m^2,$$
(3)
which can be used to simplify the calculations Hier . Even if some regions of the explored parameter space do not fulfill the above hypothesis, the a posteriori likelihood of combined solutions in such regions appears to be so low that, at present, the zeroth-order approximation (one-mass-scale dominance Scio ; Matt ; Hier ) is practically justified in the current analysis of both solar and atmospheric neutrino data.

In particular, solar neutrino oscillations are described with very good accuracy in terms of the $`3\nu `$ parameter subset $`(\delta m^2,\theta _{12},\theta _{13})`$ Matt ; Pala ; Cons . Corrections due to violations of Eq. (3) have been shown to be typically small (see Qave  and references therein), and can be safely neglected at present. Therefore, in the statistical analysis of the solar $`\nu `$ data, the $`\chi ^2`$ function takes the form:

$$\chi _{\mathrm{solar}}^2=\chi ^2(\delta m^2,\theta _{12},\theta _{13}),$$
(4)
with no dependence on $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ and thus on the mass spectrum hierarchy (direct or inverse).

Concerning atmospheric neutrinos, it has been shown in several analyses that the usual bounds on the dominant $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ oscillation parameters $`(\mathrm{\Delta }m^2,\theta _{23})`$ are rather robust under perturbations beyond the one-mass-scale dominance, induced by either $`\theta _{13}>0`$ Subd ; Shio ; Vall ; Yasu  or by $`\delta m^2>0`$ or both Cons ; Stru ; Tesh ; Marr ; Malt  (within reactor bounds).333Moreover, the estimates of the leading parameters $`(\mathrm{\Delta }m^2,\theta _{23})`$ are robust under perturbations induced by new neutrino states or interactions, see TAUP  and references therein.

Moreover, since the $`\theta _{23}`$ value is irrelevant for the analysis of both solar and reactor neutrino data, we only need to know the atmospheric $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ scale in our analysis, as derived by a combination of the (preliminary) SK and K2K bounds Shio ; K2Ke  for unconstrained $`\theta _{23}`$ (see the next section). Summarizing, we use the SK (atmospheric) and K2K bounds to derive the marginal likelihood for $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$, namely,

$$\chi _{\mathrm{SK}+\mathrm{K2K}}^2=\chi _{\mathrm{SK}+\mathrm{K2K}}^2(\mathrm{\Delta }m^2).$$
(5)
Such likelihood is practically independent of all the other $`3\nu `$ parameters (and on the $`\pm \mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ cases), as far as the hierarchical hypothesis holds phenomenologically.

In the analysis of the CHOOZ reactor constraints, however, the hierarchical approximation may not be accurate enough, and the full $`3\nu `$ oscillation probability (as reported, e.g., in Qave ) must be used in global analyses Vall ; Mont ; Marr ; Nico ; Piai ; Band , providing a $`\chi ^2`$ functional dependence of the kind

$$\chi _{\mathrm{CHOOZ}}^2=\chi _{\mathrm{CHOOZ}}^2(\delta m^2,\pm \mathrm{\Delta }m^2,\theta _{12},\theta _{13}).$$
(6)
The reason is that the CHOOZ bounds on $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ disappearance can be saturated by taking either $`\theta _{13}>0`$ or $`\delta m^2>0`$ or both Marr ; Nico ; Moci ; Malt , thus providing an anticorrelation between the CHOOZ upper limits on $`\delta m^2`$ and $`\theta _{13}`$ that must be properly taken into account. In other words, the higher $`\delta m^2`$, the lower $`\theta _{13}`$, in both cases of normal and inverted hierarchy Marr ; Nico . We will discuss some consequences of such anticorrelation in Sec. V.

Before performing the final combination of SK+K2K+CHOOZ with solar neutrinos, it is useful to project away the functional dependence of the likelihood on $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ by defining a “terrestrial” $`\chi ^2`$ as

$$\chi _{\mathrm{terr}}^2(\delta m^2,\theta _{12},\theta _{13})=\underset{\mathrm{\Delta }m^2}{\mathrm{min}}\left(\chi _{\mathrm{SK}+\mathrm{K2K}}^2+\chi _{\mathrm{CHOOZ}}^2\right),$$
(7)
which contains only a residual dependence on the hierarchy (direct or inverse) through $`\chi _{\mathrm{CHOOZ}}^2`$. Therefore, in principle, the global combination

$$\chi _{\mathrm{global}}^2(\delta m^2,\theta _{12},\theta _{13})=\chi _{\mathrm{solar}}^2+\chi _{\mathrm{terr}}^2$$
(8)
also depends on the hierarchy, although, unfortunately, in a very weak way at present.

## III Experimental input

In this section we briefly review the experimental input coming from solar and terrestrial (atmospheric, reactor, and accelerator) experiments.

For the solar neutrino analysis we use the same standard solar model input and neutrino data (81 observables) as in Getm , but with an updated winter-summer rate difference from the combination of GALLEX/GNO Ki02 444Corrected to remove eccentricity effects. and SAGE Ab02  measurements,

$$R_WR_S5\pm 7\mathrm{SNU}(\mathrm{GALLEX}/\mathrm{GNO}+\mathrm{SAGE}).$$
(9)
Concerning reactor data, we take the CHOOZ absolute spectrum from CHOO . The $`3\nu `$ analysis includes the 7+7 bin spectra as in Qave .

Concerning atmospheric neutrinos, the SK collaboration has recently presented updated (92 kton yr) bounds on the leading $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ atmospheric neutrino oscillation parameters $`(\mathrm{\Delta }m^2,\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{23})`$ Shio . Since the correlation between the two parameters appears to be negligible, the bounds on $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ for unconstrained (i.e., projected) values of $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{23}`$ are basically obtained by fixing $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{23}`$ at its the best fit value (unity). From a graphical reduction of the bounds shown in Shio , we derive then an approximate $`\mathrm{\Delta }\chi _{\mathrm{SK}}^2`$ function in terms of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$.

The K2K Collaboration has also presented preliminary bounds on the same mass-mixing parameters $`(\mathrm{\Delta }m^2,\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{23})`$ K2Ke , again with apparently negligible correlation around the best fit point (as far as $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{23}`$ is nearly maximal). The bounds on $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{23}`$ are relatively weak, but those on $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ are already competitive with those placed by SK and must be taken into account. We simply do so by a graphical reduction of the $`\mathrm{\Delta }\chi _{\mathrm{K2K}}^2`$ function presented in K2Ke  for maximal mixing, to be combined (summed) with the previous $`\mathrm{\Delta }\chi _{\mathrm{SK}}^2`$.

It turns out that the function $`\mathrm{\Delta }\chi _{\mathrm{SK}+\mathrm{K2K}}^2`$ obtained in this way is nearly parabolic in the linear variable $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$, although the separate $`\mathrm{\Delta }\chi _{\mathrm{SK}}^2`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }\chi _{\mathrm{K2K}}^2`$ components are not parabolic. The SK+K2K $`\chi ^2`$ minimum is at $`2.7\times 10^3`$ eV2, with a $`\pm 1\sigma `$ error ($`\mathrm{\Delta }\chi _{\mathrm{SK}+\mathrm{K2K}}^2=1`$ for $`N_{\mathrm{DF}}=1`$) equal to $`0.4\times 10^3`$ eV2. The estimated range for $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$, as discussed in the previous section, is known to be very stable under small perturbations induced by nonzero values of $`\theta _{13}`$ or $`\delta m^2`$. Therefore, we use the following SK+K2K combination,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }m^2(2.7\pm 0.4)\times 10^3\mathrm{eV}^2$$
(10)
with approximately linear, symmetrical and gaussian errors, for unconstrained values of the other $`3\nu `$ parameters. Notice that values of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ below $`1.5\times 10^3`$ eV2 are excluded at $`3\sigma `$, corroborating the trend of a previous SK+K2K combination OurK , and reinforcing the validity of Eq. (3). Of course, it will be desirable to confirm this nice result by undertaking a thorough and ab initio analysis and combination of the K2K and SK data. We plan to do so when such preliminary data will be published and described in more detail.555In particular, the K2K spectral shape analysis leading to the results in K2Ke  appears to involve much more (and currently unpublished) information than it was required in the simpler analysis of the total rate only OurK .

## IV Results

In this section we describe the main results of our $`3\nu `$ solar neutrino oscillation analysis with additional terrestrial constraints. We start from the subcase of $`2\nu `$ oscillations.

### IV.1 $`2\nu `$ oscillations

In the subcase of pure $`2\nu `$ oscillations ($`\theta _{13}=0`$), the information on $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ coming from SK+K2K is completely decoupled within our approximations, and the solar+CHOOZ $`\nu `$ parameter space reduces to $`(\delta m^2,\theta _{12})`$.

Figure 1 shows the constraints coming from the global solar neutrino analysis in the $`(\delta m^2,\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{12})`$ plane, with and without CHOOZ. In the case of solar $`\nu `$ data only, the solutions are almost coincident with those presented in Fig. 1 of Getm , modulo the small changes induced by the updated input from Eq. (9) and by the different abscissa. For completeness, Table I gives the local $`\chi ^2`$ minima for the so-called large mixing angle (LMA), quasivacuum oscillation (QVO) and low-$`\delta m^2`$ (LOW) solutions. These minima are not altered by the inclusion of the CHOOZ data, whose only effect is to slightly strengthen the upper bounds on $`\delta m^2`$, as shown in Figure 1. The features of such $`2\nu `$ allowed regions have been discussed in a number of papers AhDN ; Fu02 ; Ba02 ; Cr01 ; Ch02 ; Pe02 ; Ho02 ; St02  and are not repeated here.

### IV.2 $`3\nu `$ oscillations

Figure 2 shows sections of the volume allowed by solar neutrino data only in the $`3\nu `$ parameter space $`(\delta m^2,\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{12},\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{13})`$, for four representative values of $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{13}`$ (equal to 0, 0.02, 0.04, and 0.06). The best fit is reached in the same LMA point as for the $`2\nu `$ case $`(\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{13}=0)`$. The constraints are derived through Eq. (4) and $`N_{\mathrm{DF}}=3`$. It can be seen that, for increasing $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{13}`$, the upper bounds on $`\delta m^2`$ in the LMA become slightly weaker, and the LOW and QVO solutions become less unlikely. Maximal ($`\nu _1,\nu _2`$) mixing ($`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{12}=1/2`$) is also less disfavored for increasing $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{13}`$. This trend is qualitatively consistent with the recent results in Ho02  (obtained for an almost equivalent solar $`\nu `$ data set), as well as with previous $`3\nu `$ analyses of solar neutrino data Pala ; Vall ; Band ; YNir .

Looser constraints on either $`\delta m^2`$ or maximal mixing can be a desirable property from a theoretical or experimental point of view. Relatively large values of $`\delta m^2`$ are, e.g., required for the possible detection of leptonic CP violation in future (very) long baseline experiments (see, e.g., CPre ). Nearly maximal mixing can allow certain cancellations in $`0\nu 2\beta `$ decay or in $`\nu `$ model building (see, e.g., Alta ). Unfortunately, such “desirable” features in Fig. 2 are severely limited by the inclusion of current terrestrial data through Eqs. (7) and (8). This is shown in Fig. 3, where the addition of the terrestrial $`\nu `$ constraints actually strengthens the upper bounds on $`\delta m^2`$ for increasing $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{13}`$, since the CHOOZ bounds are more quickly saturated. Notice also that, in comparison with earlier analyses, the current K2K+SK bounds on $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ \[Eq. (10)\] are now sufficiently strong to prevent the occurrence of relatively low values of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ ($`1.5\times 10^3`$ eV2), where the CHOOZ bounds would become significantly weaker. Therefore, the current SK+K2K data enhance the impact of terrestrial constraints on the solar $`3\nu `$ parameters $`(\delta m^2,\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{12},\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{13})`$.

Figure 4 provides another way of looking at the results of the solar+terrestrial analysis. In this figure, the $`\mathrm{\Delta }\chi ^2`$ function is projected onto one parameter at a time, so that the $`n`$-sigma bounds on each of them (the others being unconstrained) are simply given by a $`\mathrm{\Delta }\chi ^2=n^2`$ cut. In the left panel it can be seen that the $`\chi ^2`$ difference between the LMA and the LOW or QVO solutions is slightly lowered in the $`3\nu `$ fit, as compared with the $`2\nu `$ case reported in Table I. However, such improvement for the LOW and QVO solutions for nonzero $`\theta _{13}`$ is currently marginal (less than one unit in $`\mathrm{\Delta }\chi ^2`$). Basically all data converge towards zero or low values of $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{13}`$, whose global upper bounds are reported in the right panel of Fig. 4. In particular, one gets

$$\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{13}<0.05(3\sigma ,N_{\mathrm{DF}}=1),$$
(11)
for unconstrained values of the other $`3\nu `$ parameters.

In conclusion, genuine $`3\nu `$ mixing in solar neutrinos is severely constrained by terrestrial data. For the most favored solution, increasing $`\theta _{13}`$ corresponds to lowering the upper bound on $`\delta m^2`$. For the less favored LOW and QVO solutions, the improvement of the fit for slightly nonzero values of $`\theta _{13}`$ (see also Ho02 ) is not statistically significant. Figures 3 and 4 quantify such effects.

A final remark is in order. Figures 3 and 4 refer to the case of direct neutrino spectrum hierarchy. We have verified that the changes for inverse hierarchy (not shown) are negligible. Indeed, the phenomenological difference between the two hierarchies, which vanishes for $`\theta _{13}0`$, is still too small to emerge for the nonzero values of $`\theta _{13}`$ allowed by Eq. (11).

## V Implications for future CP violation searches

The anticorrelation between the upper bounds on $`\delta m^2`$ and $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{13}`$ shown in Fig. 3 is not a particularly desirable feature for future CP violation searches at accelerators, where the difference between the $`\nu `$ and $`\overline{\nu }`$ oscillation probabilities would be enhanced for both $`\delta m^2`$ and $`\theta _{13}`$ close to their upper limits (see, e.g., the reviews in CPre ).

In order to study in more detail the maximum CP violation effects compatible with current bounds, we think it useful to focus on the following benchmark quantity, which typically appears as an overall prefactor modulating CP-violating amplitudes, and which has the useful property to be a vacuum-matter (VM) invariant Kimu :

$`I_{\mathrm{VM}}`$ $`=`$ $`(m_1^2m_2^2)(m_2^2m_3^2)(m_3^2m_1^2)\mathrm{sin}2\theta _{12}\mathrm{sin}2\theta _{13}\mathrm{cos}\theta _{13}`$ (12)
$`=`$ $`\delta m^2\left[4(\mathrm{\Delta }m^2)^2(\delta m^2)^2\right]\mathrm{sin}\theta _{12}\mathrm{cos}\theta _{12}\mathrm{sin}\theta _{13}\mathrm{cos}^2\theta _{13}.`$ (13)
More precisely, in order to eliminate the dependence on $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ and to simplify the discussion, we integrate $`I_{\mathrm{VM}}`$ over the gaussian distribution in $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$ defined in Eq. (10), obtaining the expectation value

$$\overline{I}_{\mathrm{VM}}=\delta m^2\left[4(\mathrm{\Delta }m_0^2)^2+4(\sigma _\mathrm{\Delta })^2(\delta m^2)^2\right]\mathrm{sin}\theta _{12}\mathrm{cos}\theta _{12}\mathrm{sin}\theta _{13}\mathrm{cos}^2\theta _{13},$$
(14)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_0^2=2.7\times 10^3`$ eV2 and $`\sigma _\mathrm{\Delta }=0.4\times 10^3`$ eV2 \[Eq. (10)\]. The quantity $`\overline{I}_{\mathrm{VM}}`$ is then a function of the same $`3\nu `$ parameters $`(\delta m^2,\theta _{12},\theta _{13})`$ used for the previous solar+terrestrial analysis. Notice that $`\overline{I}_{\mathrm{VM}}0`$ when any of these $`3\nu `$ parameters tends to zero, as intuitively expected for a quantity associated to CP violation Kimu .

Figure 5 shows isolines of $`\overline{I}_{\mathrm{VM}}`$ in the plane $`(\delta m^2,\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{12})`$, for the same representative values of $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{13}`$ as in Figs. 2 and 3. The $`\delta m^2`$ scale is restricted to the range relevant for the LMA solution, whose C.L. contours are superposed in each panel (as taken from Fig. 3). In the upper left panel ($`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{13}=0`$), the vacuum-matter invariant $`\overline{I}_{\mathrm{VM}}`$ is identically zero. In other panels, it can be seen that $`\overline{I}_{\mathrm{VM}}`$ achieves its maximum values, within the LMA solution, for “intermediate” values of $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{13}`$ ($`0.02`$–0.04). Indeed, for increasing values of $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{13}`$ the LMA upper bound on $`\delta m^2`$ decreases, and $`\overline{I}_{\mathrm{VM}}`$ is maximized when a compromise is reached. We conclude that the maximum allowed amplitude of possible CP violation effects (in future accelerator experiments) occurs somewhat below the upper bound placed by terrestrial experiments on $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{13}`$, due to the phenomenological anticorrelation with the $`\delta m^2`$ upper bound.

## VI Implications for KamLAND

The KamLAND experiment is currently detecting reactor $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ events, whose energy spectrum will provide soon a clear terrestrial test of the solar $`\nu `$ LMA solution Shir . If the LMA solution is disconfirmed, the BOREXINO experiment will be able to test the remaining LOW and QVO solutions by detecting time variations of the event rate BORE . Assuming that the LMA solution is confirmed, various studies have shown how well the KamLAND experiment can reconstruct the oscillation parameters for a few selected points in the $`(\delta m^2,\theta _{12})`$ parameter space Shir ; Mura ; Barg ; BaSt ; Gouv ; GoPe ; StVi ; Alia . In this section we extend these studies by performing a continuous scan in the $`\delta m^2`$ parameter, in the region of interest for the LMA solution.

In the analysis, we use standard inputs for the reactor average fuel composition Decl , $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ energy spectra Voge  and cross section Beac . We take from Prop  the reactor power and locations. The visible energy window is chosen to be $`E[1.22,7.22]`$ MeV (divided in 12 bins) as in Gouv ; GoPe , with energy resolution $`\sigma (E)/\sqrt{E}=5\%`$ ($`E`$ in MeV) Shir . We assume a “KamLAND year” corresponding to 550 events/yr for no oscillation Shir , and consider two representative exposure periods of 0.5 and 3 years, the shortest period being a tentative estimate of the detector live-time that might be used for the first official release of the KamLAND data.

Concerning the uncertainties, in addition to the statistical fluctuations in each bin, we include a $`4\%`$ overall normalization error Shir  (due to uncertainties in fiducial volume, $`\nu `$ flux, and cross section), and a 2% energy scale uncertainty Shir . The normalization and energy scale systematics (fully correlated in each bin) mainly worsen the reconstruction accuracy of $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{12}`$ and $`\delta m^2`$, respectively. Background reduction and subtraction are still in progress at KamLAND Shir , and we do not include the (unknown) associated errors in the analysis. More realistic analyses, including backgrounds and other systematics (e.g., fuel composition uncertainties Mura ), will be possible after release of the real KamLAND data and of related information.

Given the above input, for fixed true values of the parameters $`(\delta m^2,\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{12})`$ we first determine the $`\mathrm{\Delta }\chi ^24`$ region including the reconstructed oscillation parameters, and then project this region either on $`\delta m^2`$ or on $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{12}`$, in order to obtain the $`\pm 2\sigma `$ error bands on each of the two oscillation parameters separately. For simplicity, this procedure is done for fixed $`\theta _{13}=0`$. When real KamLAND data will be available, a more complete analysis procedure (not simulated here) should include a variable $`\theta _{13}`$ parameter, to be constrained by world neutrino data (as previously done for the currently available data in Figs 3 and 4). Small variations of $`\theta _{13}`$ would then basically act as an additional KamLAND normalization uncertainty GoPe .

Figure 6 shows the $`\pm 2\sigma `$ range of the reconstructed $`\delta m^2`$, as a function of the true value of $`\delta m^2`$. The true value of $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{12}`$ is fixed at 0.3 (LMA best-fit), while the reconstructed $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{12}`$ is projected away. It can be seen that, in the range most relevant for the LMA solution ($`\delta m^2\mathrm{few}\times 10^5`$ eV2) the reconstruction accuracy depends only weakly on $`\delta m^2`$. It become rapidly worse, however, outside this range. E.g., for low values of $`\delta m^2`$ (approaching the no-oscillation limit in KamLAND), the reconstructed value of $`\delta m^2`$ can be considerably higher than the true one, the variation being compensated by a lower value of the reconstructed $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{12}`$. For high values of $`\delta m^2`$ (say, $`10^4`$ eV2), degenerate solutions begin to appear, eventually leading to a tower of (merging) multiple ranges for the reconstructed $`\delta m^2`$. For a half-year exposure, an isolated, low-$`\delta m^2`$ reconstructed range also appears, since the spectrum suppression due to true values $`\delta m^210^4`$ eV2 can be confused with a similar suppression induced by lower values of both $`\delta m^2`$ and $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{12}`$. Such ambiguities can be cleared up, e.g., after 3 years of data taking, provided that $`\delta m^22\times 10^4`$ eV2. Above this range, KamLAND cannot resolve the pattern of fast oscillations in the $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ energy spectrum, which could be disentangled only by reducing the typical baseline StVi ; Piai ; HLMA .

Figure 7 zooms in on true $`\delta m^2`$ values below $`2\times 10^4`$ eV2, for three representative (true) values of $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{12}`$. For oscillation parameters close to the LMA ones, the accuracy in the $`\delta m^2`$ reconstruction can already be as good as $`\pm 10\%`$ at $`2\sigma `$ after half-year exposure, and can improve by a factor of $`2`$ after three years. The $`\delta m^2`$ reconstruction accuracy improves (worsens) slightly for increasing (decreasing) values of $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{12}`$, since this parameter governs the amplitude of the oscillation pattern, from which $`\delta m^2`$ is inferred.

Finally, Fig. 8 shows the reconstructed range of $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{12}`$ (first octant only), for the same choice of true oscillation parameters as in Fig. 7. From this figure it appears that the most accurate reconstruction of $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{12}`$ occurs for $`\delta m^2`$ values slightly below the current LMA best-fit point. The reason is that, for such relatively low values, the overall rate suppression in KamLAND is maximized, making it easier to put bounds on the oscillation amplitude and thus on $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{12}`$. The $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{12}`$ reconstruction accuracy tends to become constant for high values of $`\delta m^2`$ (regime of fast oscillations). In the lower panel, notice the appearance of a degenerate reconstructed range for the case of 0.5 year exposure, which has the same origin as the corresponding one discussed in Fig. 6.

In conclusion, KamLAND is in an extremely favorable situation to fix the most likely values of $`\delta m^2`$ in the LMA region within a few % error. The achievable accuracy in the $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _{12}`$ reconstruction is instead both lower and more uncertain, and will depend very much on how the real KamLAND data will look like.

## VII Conclusions

We have studied the $`3\nu `$ perturbations to the usual $`2\nu `$ solutions to the solar neutrino problem, including—besides the full set of current solar data—the terrestrial neutrino constraints coming from the CHOOZ (reactor), SK (atmospheric) and K2K (accelerator) experiments. The global best fit is reached in the so-called LMA solution, for the subcase of $`2\nu `$ mixing ($`\theta _{13}=0`$). The likelihood of the (less favored) LOW and QVO solutions does not improve significantly for nonzero $`\theta _{13}`$, within the severe constraints placed by terrestrial neutrino experiments on such mixing angle. The anticorrelation between the upper bounds on $`\delta m^2`$ and $`\theta _{13}`$ has been discussed, together with its implications for the maximum allowed amplitude of possible CP violation effects (expressed in terms of a representative vacuum-matter invariant). We have also discussed the expected accuracy of the mass-mixing parameter reconstruction in the (currently running) KamLAND experiments, described through a continuous scan of the $`\delta m^2`$ parameter within the LMA solution.

###### Acknowledgements.

E.L. thanks the organizers of the Summer Institute “New Dimensions in Astroparticle Physics” (Gran Sasso National Laboratory, Assergi, Italy, 2002), where preliminary results of this work were presented, for kind hospitality. This work was supported in part by INFN and in part by the Italian Ministero dell’Istruzione, Università e Ricerca through the “Astroparticle Physics” research project.


format: text

text:
# Studying Dark Energy with Galaxy Cluster Surveys

## 1 Cluster Surveys and Cosmology

Galaxy clusters have long been used to study dark matter and cosmology in general. Cluster surveys in the local universe are particularly useful for constraining a combination of the matter density parameter $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ and the normalization of the power spectrum of density fluctuations (we describe the normalization using $`\sigma _8`$, the rms fluctuations of overdensity within spheres of 8$`h^1`$ Mpc radius; i.e. henry97, ; viana99, ; reiprich02, ); surveys that probe the cluster population at higher redshift are sensitive to the growth of density fluctuations, allowing one to break the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$-$`\sigma _8`$ degeneracy that arises from local cluster abundance constraints eke96 ; bahcall98 . Wang & Steinhardt wang98  argued that a measurement of the changes of cluster abundance with redshift would provide constraints on the dark energy equation of state parameter $`wp/\rho `$.

Describing the problem in terms of cluster abundance only makes sense in the local universe , because, of course, one cannot measure the cluster abundance without knowing the survey volume; the survey volume beyond $`z0.1`$ is sensitive to cosmological parameters that affect the expansion history of the universe– namely, the matter density $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$, the dark energy density $`\mathrm{\Omega }_E`$ and the dark energy equation of state $`w`$. A cluster survey of a particular piece of the sky with appropriate followup actually delivers a list of clusters with mass estimates and redshifts– that is, the redshift distribution of galaxy clusters above some detection limit. Haiman, Mohr & Holder haiman01  showed how the redshift distribution from large X–ray or Sunyaev-Zel’dovich effect (SZE) cluster surveys allows for precise measurements of the dark energy equation of state that are competitive with constraints possible from studies of supernovae at high redshift.

A series of papers details recent work to explore the theoretical and observational obstacles to precise cosmological measurements with cluster surveys. Holder, Haiman & Mohr holder01b  introduced the Fisher matrix formalism and showed that high yield SZE cluster surveys can provide precise constraints on the geometry of the universe through simultaneous measurements of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_E`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$. Weller, Battye & Kniessl weller01  demonstrated that future SZE surveys might constrain the variation of the dark energy equation of state $`w(z)`$. Hu & Kravtsov hu02  examined the effects of cosmic variance on cluster surveys as well as including the effects of imprecise knowledge of a larger number of cosmological parameters. Levine, Schulz & White levine02  examined an X–ray cluster survey, showing that a sufficiently large survey allows one to measure cosmological parameters and constrain the all–important cluster mass–observable relation simultaneously. This raises the exciting possibility that cluster surveys are self–calibrating– that the redshift distribution contains enough energy to solve for cluster structure and cosmology simultaneously! An important caveat to this work is that the authors assumed that the evolution of cluster structure was perfectly known. In a more recent work, Majumdar & Mohr majumdar02  show that if one allows for our imprecise knowledge cluster structural evolution with redshift, the constraint on the dark energy equation of state $`w`$ evaporates. In addition, we show that if one incorporates followup measurements– perhaps from X–ray, SZE or weak lensing– into the survey one can recover the precise constraints on $`w`$. These calculations underscore the importance of incorporating information from multiple observables into future cluster surveys. Ongoing calculations by several groups will undoubtedly provide additional insights into how to optimize cluster surveys, but today it appears that high yield cluster surveys are as viable a means of studying dark energy as first suggested.

## 2 Prospecting for Clusters

Galaxy clusters are dark matter dominated objects with baryon reservoirs in the form of an intracluster medum (ICM) and a galaxy population. Clusters can be found through the light the galaxies emit, the gravitational lensing distortions the cluster mass introduces into the morphologies of background galaxies, the X–rays emitted by the energetic ICM, the distortion that the hot ICM introduces into the cosmic microwave background spectrum (SZE), and the effects that the ICM has on jet structures associated with active galaxies in the cluster. These methods are largely complementary, each having different strengths. It appears that X–ray and SZE signatures of clusters are higher contrast observables than are weak lensing or galaxy light. That is, massive galaxy clusters are more prominent relative to the jumble of lower mass halos and large scale filaments when viewed with the SZE and X-ray; projection effects are a far more serious concern when using galaxy light or weak lensing signatures. Studies of the highest redshift galaxy clusters will likely be done with the SZE, because of the redshift independence of the spectral distortion in the CMB. Further work has to be done to develop optimal means of applying each of these observables and combining them to create the highest fidelity picture of the cluster population and its evolution.

Figure 1 contains the redshift distributions for one proposed SZE survey from the South Pole (PI: Carlstrom). Redshift distributions for $`w=1`$, $`w=0.8`$ and $`w=0.6`$ are shown to demonstrate the effects of this parameter on the survey. In the lower panel the statistical “distance” between these models is shown, illustrating sensitivity near the peak in $`dN/dz`$ at $`z=1/2`$ and again at $`z=3/2`$. Figure 2 shows estimated 1$`\sigma `$, 2$`\sigma `$ and 3$`\sigma `$ confidence regions for the survey within the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_E`$$`w`$ space. Only geometrically flat models are considered, and constraints are marginalized over $`\sigma _8`$. This figure shows that this large solid angle survey can in principle deliver $``$5% constraints on the nature of dark energy!

## 3 Mass–Observable Scaling Relation

A solid theoretical foundation has emerged for understanding the formation and evolution of massive, dark matter dominated halos (i.e. galaxy clusters; jenkins01, ; evrard02, ). Using cluster surveys to study cosmology requires that we connect cluster observables to this theoretical foundation. This connection is made by using cluster mass–observable scaling relations to connect cluster observables like X-ray luminosity, SZE luminosity, weak lensing shear, and galaxy light to cluster halo mass estimates. Weak lensing offers advantages here, because weak lensing mass estimates don’t require that the cluster be in equilibrium (i.e. bartelmann01b, ); however, projection of foreground and background mass along the line of sight to a particular cluster can bias lensing mass estimates (metzler01, ). It should be possible to estimate the scale of these biases using numerical simulations.

Low redshift clusters do exhibit striking regularity (i.e. david93, ; mohr97a, ), suggesting that observables like the ICM X-ray luminosity and temperature are good mass estimators (finoguenov01, ; reiprich02, ). Cluster mass to light ratios have been studied for decades, and it may be that this body of work together with modern datasets will allow more conclusive statements about how well galaxy light traces cluster halo mass. Hydrodynamical simulations lead us to expect that the SZE luminosity (related to the total pressure within the virial region) should be the best ICM observable for predicting mass, but we await next generation SZE instruments and new observations to demonstrate this. Questions about the persistence of these mass–observable scaling relations to higher redshift where clusters are presumably experiencing more rapid merging remain, but results to date suggest that the degree of cluster regularity locally and at intermediate redshift is comparable (mushotzky97, ; mohr00a, ; vikhlinin02, ).

Annotated stars in Figure 2 show the effects of systematic mass errors at the $`\pm `$5%, 10% and 25% level on the cosmological constraints. In each case the location of the star shows the best fit cosmology, when the input cosmology is $`\mathrm{\Omega }_E=0.7`$ and $`w=1`$. This simple calculation shows the importance of controlling mass–observable relation systematics at the $``$10% level or better in order to fully realize the statistical power of the survey.

## 4 Thermal History of the ICM

The thermal history and enrichment history of the ICM is another critical issue that one can potentially address using galaxy cluster surveys. The ICM structure of low redshift galaxy clusters as revealed by scaling relations indicates a lack of low entropy gas when compared to simple heirarchical structure formation models. In addition, the ICM is highly enriched with metals. These facts suggest that the thermal history of the ICM may be more complex than simple infall models, involving sources of entropy (or preheating) or significant cooling to remove the lowest entropy gas (cavaliere97, ; bryan00b, ). From a cosmological perspective, this unknown thermal history provides a complication and a possible source of bias in using cluster surveys to measure the nature of dark energy.

Bialek, Evrard & Mohr bialek01  have examined the effects of preheating (in our case an initial entropy in the baryon gas that is introduced well before cluster formation commences) on low redshift cluster scaling relations; here we use those same simulations to address the effects that preheating could have on cluster survey cosmology. We find that an initial entropy of $``$100 kev cm2 is sufficient to match the slopes of the local X–ray luminosity temperature relation (i.e. david93, ), the ICM mass–temperature relation (mohr99, ), and the X–ray size–temperature relation (mohr97a, ). However, significant uncertainties remain, and there is an ongoing debate about the importance of radiative cooling in changing cluster structure. Thus, when using surveys to do cosmology, we must consider the initial entropy as an additional variable that could alter the observed redshift distribution.

We examine this issue by assuming a fiducial cosmology with an initial entropy of 106 kev cm2, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M=0.3`$ and $`\sigma _8=0.9`$. We then interpret an X–ray survey similar to that possible with the DUET Midex mission using different (i.e. wrong) initial entropies. Figure 3 (bottom) shows the best fit parameters that result for a range of initial entropies varying from 1/25 to 335 kev cm2. The correct cosmology is recovered when we use an initial entropy of 106 kev cm2, but $`\sigma _8`$ is biased by $``$10% and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ by $``$80% when an incorrect entropy of 335 kev cm2 is used. This shows that X-ray surveys are very sensitive to the preheating level, and provide an excellent way of studying the thermal history of the ICM. This is undoubtedly because much of the X–ray luminosity is emitted from the central cluster region that contains the lowest entropy ICM, whose distribution is most affected by entropy changes. The top panel shows the best fit $`dN/dz`$ corresponding to each of the models. These best fit models are not statistically good fits, and so it is possible to use the survey to determine the correct entropy and the correct cosmological parameters.

We have used this same approach to examine the sensitivity of SZE surveys to preheating. Even for high sensitivity SZE surveys that probe the lowest mass clusters, the sensitivity to preheating appears to be extremely low. This is because preheating introduces offsetting effects that leave the SZE luminosity (related to the total thermal energy within the virial region) almost unchanged: (i) the ICM temperature is increased somewhat and (ii) the ICM mass fraction is reduced somewhat. A figure with the same scale as Figure 3 but made for an SZE survey would have all best fit models falling indistinguishably close to the correct cosmological model. SZE surveys are unbiased by our lack of knowledge about the thermal history of the ICM. The flip side of this is that– despite some recent claims to the contrary in the literature– SZE surveys are extremely poor tools for investigating the thermal history of the ICM.


text:
# RESEARCH NEWS : DIRECT OBSERVATION OF NEUTRINO OSCILLATIONS AT THE SUDBURY NEUTRINO OBSERVATORY

## Abstract

A brief description of the path-breaking evidence for the observation of neutrino oscillations at the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory is presented and the experimental principles and theory thereof are briefly discussed.

The Sudbury Neutrino Observatory (SNO), located in Canada, has recently announced evidence for the direct observation of oscillation of neutrino flavors nc . The observations indicate that during the flight from the interior of the sun to the earth, the neutrinos produced as electron type neutrinos change their flavor. Neutrinos are fundamental particles that come in three types (flavors): electron, muon and tau denoted by $`\nu _e,\nu _\mu `$ and $`\nu _\tau `$ respectively. Electron type (anti-)neutrinos are produced, for instance, in radioactive decays of certain heavy nuclei, and are also produced copiously in stars during the process of nucleosynthesis. It may be recalled that a long standing problem, called the “solar neutrino problem”, associated with the shortfall in the number of neutrinos observed on the earth as compared to the number expected from calculations based on the standard solar model and the standard model of elementary particle physics. The solar models happen to be very stringently constrained and the flux of neutrinos produced in the sun is known to practically no uncertainty, due to extreme sensitivity of the flux to the values of the parameters going into the solar model. As a result, it has been long believed that any solution to the problem must come from the elementary particle physics sector, such as the oscillation of flavors, or the possible interaction of the neutrinos with the solar magnetic fields which might significantly scatter away the neutrinos that were directed towards the earth. A flavor oscillation necessarily implies that the neutrinos are massive particles and was first pointed out a long time ago by the Italian born Soviet scientist Bruno Pontecorvo. Whereas there are constraints on the masses of the electron, muon and tau type neutrinos ($`m_{\nu _e}2.8\mathrm{eV}/c^2`$, $`m_{\nu _\mu }170\mathrm{keV}/c^2`$ and $`m_{\nu _\tau }18.2\mathrm{MeV}/c^2`$), the oscillation can, in principle probe differences of the squares of the masses and the probability of conversion from one flavor into another depends on the path length between production and observation, and on the kinetic energy of the neutrino that is being observed. The observation from SNO definitively shows that the electron type neutrino oscillates into an admixture of the other two flavors. The SNO collaboration also reports a possible day-night effect dn , in that there seems to be some indication that the probability of conversion of the electrons depends on the path length which depends on whether the observation is made during the day or during the night.
The experiment is based on the principle of detecting interactions of neutrinos with matter in an ingenious manner, which uses heavy water as the medium in which the interactions take place and in which the reaction products are detected. This differs from earlier measurements which used normal water, at Kamiokande and the super-Kamiokande experiments, and from those based on radiochemical measurements which used interactions of the neutrinos with nuclei of chlorine in carbon tetrachloride or with gallium nuclei. For completeness, we note that the solar neutrino problem was first established by the historic chlorine experiment of Ray Davis at the Homestake Mine in South Dakota, USA, which employs the following reaction to detect neutrinos

$`{}_{}{}^{37}\mathrm{Cl}+\nu _e^{37}\mathrm{Ar}+e^{}.`$
The Gallium experiments use the reaction

$`{}_{}{}^{71}\mathrm{Ga}+\nu _e^{71}\mathrm{Ge}+e^{}`$
The neutrinos that are observed at SNO are produced in the core of the sun in the following reaction,

$`{}_{}{}^{8}\mathrm{B}^8\mathrm{Be}+e^++\nu _e.`$
The kinetic energy of the neutrinos produced in this reaction could vary from as little as a fraction of an MeV to approximately 15 MeV. These neutrinos interact with the water molecules in a variety of ways. The normal water detector detects this neutrino from its elastic scattering (ES) with the electrons in the water molecules. The ES measurements are predominantly sensitive to the electron type flavor only. The measurements of super-Kamiokande had established from the event rates they observed, a shortfall in the expected event rate, consistent with the earlier radiochemical measurements which had led to the classical solar neutrino problem. These observations were based on the charged current (CC) reactions. The full electroweak theory of Glashow, Salam and Weinberg has established that the theory also has, in addition to the conventional electromagnetic interaction, what is called the neutral current (NC) interactions. All the interactions arise from the exchange of (virtual) intermediate vector bosons, the CC interactions from $`W^\pm `$, the NC interactions arise from a neutral boson called $`Z^0`$, just as the electromagnetic interactions arise from the photon. Here we note that the main principle in both the normal and heavy water detectors for the observation of the scattered electron in the ES or the produced electron in the CC reaction is that of the detection of Čerenkov light produced by the ultra-relativistic electron during its motion with its velocity exceeding that of light in the medium (water). The Čerenkov light is detected by photomultiplier tubes at the boundary of containers. Note also that the water has to be of extraordinary purity in order to prevent attenuation of the light during it travel from the electron source to the detector. The measurements of the ES and CC reaction rates by the SNO Collaboration were reported earlier rate , which further confirmed the solar neutrino problem.
The remarkable advantage of the heavy water detector is its capability to observe the NC interactions as well, in addition to observing the CC interactions. It must be mentioned that the construction of the SNO experiment was directly inspired by an important paper by the late Herb Chen chen . The crucial property of the heavy water detector arises from the fact that the deuterium nucleus has a remarkably small binding energy of 2.225 MeV. This may be contrasted with the typical binding energies of 8-9 MeV/nucleon for most nuclei. As a result, the kinetic energy of the neutrinos is sufficiently large so as to induce the following reactions

| $`\nu _e+^2D`$ | $``$ | $`e^{}+2p`$ |  | (CC) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| $`\nu _l+^2D`$ | $``$ | $`\nu _l+p+n,`$ | $`l=\nu ,\mu ,\tau `$ | (NC) |

The reason why the CC reaction above is sensitive only to the electron-type neutrino is that kinetic energy of the neutrinos produced in the boron reaction is sufficient only to produce electrons ($`m_e=0.511\mathrm{MeV}/\mathrm{c}^2`$), in accordance with Einstein’s mass-energy equivalence, whereas the muons and the tau-leptons are too massive to be produced in this reaction ($`m_\mu =105.7\mathrm{MeV}/\mathrm{c}^2,m_\tau =1777\mathrm{MeV}/\mathrm{c}^2`$). The NC reaction does not have this kinematic constraint and is therefore sensitive to all flavors. The combination of the small binding energy of the deuterium nucleus with the NC reaction is capable of producing a characteristic signal which can be detected when the deuterium nucleus is shattered and the neutron is liberated. Nevertheless, the heavy water detector observed the CC reaction above and the ES reaction rates by 2001, but had to wait until 2002 to observe the NC. The latter required that ultra-pure common salt (NaCl) be introduced into the heavy water so that the neutrons produced in the NC reactions could be absorbed by the Cl nuclei and then produce a characteristic 8.6 MeV gamma ray signal. Otherwise neutrons were detected by characteristic 6.25 MeV gamma ray when they get absorbed by deuterium in heavy water. The neutron absorption probability in heavy water is about 25% which increased to 85% by addition of ultra-pure NaCl. This was achieved and the results subsequently reported in Ref. nc . The final numbers quoted therein translate to 2/3 of the electron-type neutrinos oscillating into muon and tau type flavors. Furthermore, the observation of a non-vanishing day night effect shows that there may be some regeneration of the electron type neutrino flux in the passage of the neutrinos from the sun through the earth. Such an effect, known as the Mikheyev-Smirnov-Wolfenstein effect, has been studied in the past and is now likely to be constrained quite effectively, or alternative vacuum oscillation scenarios are likely to be constrained as well. For a recent discussion of the impact of the SNO measurements on theoretical scenarios, we refer to ref. bahcall .
It must be mentioned again that the advantages of the heavy water also leads to the possibility of large backgrounds. In fact, the SNO experiment is located deep underground in nickel mines in Canada, and the heavy water which is stored in a large acrylic container is also surrounded by jackets containing normal water in order to absorb radiation from the surrounding rock and also from cosmic ray sources which could easily generate spurious signals which serve as a background.
In conclusion, we note that the remarkable experiment at SNO based on the deep insights of Chen has resolved the solar neutrino problem in favor of a solution arising from neutrino oscillations, rather than from unknown inadequacies of the standard solar model. The SNO collaboration is expected to improve its statistics and bring down uncertainties in their measurements and will pave the way to confirming and constraining theoretical scenarios which account for neutrino oscillations.

The article so far has been identical to Version 1.

Errata to Version 1: The published results of SNO on the evidence for neutrino oscillations relies on the observation of the gamma radiation from neutron capture on deuterium, and not from data taken after salt addition, as incorrectly stated in our article. The radiochemical measurements used tetrachloroethylene ($`C_2Cl_4`$, also called perchloroethylene), not carbon tetrachloride ($`CCl_4`$) as stated. It may also be noted that the ES reactions also involve NC and not just CC events. We thank the SNO collaboration and M. V. N. Murthy for pointing out these errors.


text:
# CERN-TH/2002-166IFT - 29/2002hep-ph/0208234July 2002 The SM Higgs-boson production in 𝛾𝛾→ℎ→𝑏𝑏̄ at the Photon Collider at TESLA

## 1 Introduction

A search of the last missing member of the Standard Model (SM) family, the Higgs boson, is among the most important tasks for the present and future colliders. Once the Higgs boson is discovered, it will be crucial to determine its properties with a high accuracy. A photon collider option of the TESLA $`e^+e^{}`$ collider  offers a unique possibility to produce the Higgs boson as an $`s`$-channel resonance. The neutral Higgs boson couples to the photons through a loop with the massive charged particles. This loop-induced $`h\gamma \gamma `$ coupling is sensitive to contributions of new particles, which appear in various extensions of the SM.

The SM Higgs boson with a mass below $`140`$ GeV is expected to decay predominantly into the $`b\overline{b}`$ final state. Here we consider the process $`\gamma \gamma hb\overline{b}`$ for a Higgs-boson mass of $`m_h=120`$ GeV at a photon collider at TESLA. Both the signal and background events are generated according to a realistic photon–photon luminosity spectrum , parametrized by a CompAZ model . Our analysis incorporates a simulation of the detector response according to the program SIMDET .

## 2 Photon–photon luminosity spectrum

The Compton backscattering of a laser light off high-energy electron beams is considered as a source of high energy, highly polarized photon beams . A simulation of the realistic $`\gamma \gamma `$ luminosity spectra for the photon collider at TESLA, taking into account non-linear corrections and higher order QED processes, has become available recently . In this simulation, according to the current design , the energy of the laser photons $`\omega _L`$ is assumed to be fixed for all considered electron-beam energies.

In the analysis we use the CompAZ parametrization  of the spectrum  to generate energies of the colliding photons. We assume that the energy of primary electrons can be adjusted in order to enhance the signal. Our signal production of a scalar particle corresponds to the case where projection of the total $`\gamma \gamma `$ angular momentum on a collision ($`z`$) axis $`J_z`$ is equal to zero. For $`\sqrt{s_{ee}}=2E_e`$ = 210 GeV, we obtain a peak of the $`J_z`$ = 0 component of the photon–photon luminosity spectra at the invariant mass of the two colliding photons $`W_{\gamma \gamma }`$ equal to the considered mass of the Higgs boson, i.e. $`m_h`$ = 120 GeV.

The luminosity spectra are shown in Fig. 1. The lowest invariant mass of the two colliding photons used in our generation of events is equal to $`W_{\gamma \gamma \mathrm{min}}=80`$ GeV. For the assumed $`\sqrt{s_{ee}}`$ value, the maximum invariant mass for the colliding photons, each produced in a single Compton scattering, is equal to $`W_{\mathrm{max}1}`$ = 131.2 GeV. However, there is also a small contribution from the events, which correspond to the interaction of an initial electron with two laser photons (higher order effect). This gives a higher maximal invariant mass of the produced energetic photon beams, namely $`W_{\mathrm{max}2}`$ = 161.5 GeV. The results presented in this paper were obtained for an integrated luminosity of the primary $`e^{}e^{}`$ beams equal to $`L_{ee}^{geom}=502\mathrm{fb}^1`$, expected for one year of the photon collider running . The resulting $`\gamma \gamma `$ luminosity is then expected to be: $`L_{\gamma \gamma }=409\mathrm{fb}^1`$, or 84 $`\mathrm{fb}^1`$ for $`W_{\gamma \gamma }>80`$ GeV .

In the earlier analyses, for instance in , the spectra that were used had been derived from the lowest order QED calculation for the Compton scattering, with a fixed parameter $`x=\frac{4E_e\omega _L}{m_e^2}`$ equal to 4.8. The realistic spectrum , parametrized by the CompAZ model, differs significantly from the spectrum of the high-energy photons used in , which is shown in Fig. 2. The comparison is made for two combinations of the helicities of two colliding photons, $`(\pm ,\pm )`$ and $`(\pm ,)`$, with the total angular momentum projected on a collision ($`z`$) axis equal to 0 and $`\pm 2`$, respectively.

## 3 Details of a simulation and the first results

We calculate the total width and branching ratios of the SM Higgs boson, using the program HDECAY , where higher order QCD corrections are included. A generation of events was done with the PYTHIA 6.205 program , with the parameters for a Higgs boson as in the HDECAY. A parton shower algorithm, implemented in PYTHIA, was used to generate the final-state particles.

The background events due to processes $`\gamma \gamma b\overline{b}(g),c\overline{c}(g)`$ were generated using the program written by G. Jikia , where a complete NLO QCD calculation for the production of massive quarks is performed within the massive-quark scheme. The program includes exact one-loop QCD corrections to the lowest order (LO) process $`\gamma \gamma b\overline{b},c\overline{c}`$ , and in addition the non-Sudakov form factor in the double-logarithmic approximation, calculated up to four loops .

For a comparison we generate also the LO background events, using the QED Born cross section for the processes $`\gamma \gamma b\overline{b}`$ and $`\gamma \gamma c\overline{c}`$, including in addition a parton shower, as implemented in PYTHIA.111For consistency with Jikia’s program, we use a fixed electromagnetic coupling constant equal to $`\alpha _{em}1/137`$.

The fragmentation into hadrons was performed using the PYTHIA program. A fast simulation for a TESLA detector, the program SIMDET version 3.01 , was used to model a detector performance. The jets were reconstructed using the Durham algorithm, with $`y_{cut}=0.02`$; the distance measure was defined as $`y_{ij}=2\mathrm{min}(E_i^2,E_j^2)(1\mathrm{cos}\theta _{ij})/E_{vis}^2`$, where $`E_{vis}`$ is defined as the total energy measured in the detector.

The double $`b`$-tag was required to select the signal $`hb\overline{b}`$ events. Since no suitable flavour-tagging package exists for the SIMDET 3.01 program222The $`b`$-tagging code adapted for the new version of SIMDET 4.01  should become available soon . , we assume, following the approach used in , a fixed efficiency for the $`b\overline{b}`$-tagging, equal to $`\epsilon _{bb}=70\%`$, and a fixed probability for a mistagging of the $`c\overline{c}`$ events, a main background to the $`b\overline{b}`$ events, equal to $`\epsilon _{cc}=3.5\%`$.

The following cuts were used to select properly reconstructed $`b\overline{b}`$ events:

1. a total visible energy $`E_{vis}`$ greater than 90 GeV,
2. since the Higgs boson is expected to be produced almost at rest, the ratio of the total longitudinal momentum of all observed particles to the total visible energy is taken to be $`|P_z|/E_{vis}<0.1`$,
3. a number of jets $`N_{jets}=2,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}`$, so that events with one additional jet due to hard-gluon emission are accepted,
4. for each jet, $`i=1,\mathrm{},N_{jets}`$, we require $`|\mathrm{cos}\theta _i|<0.75`$, where $`\mathrm{cos}\theta _i=p_{zi}/|\stackrel{}{p_i}|`$.

Using the above cuts, we obtain the distributions of the reconstructed $`\gamma \gamma `$ invariant mass $`W_{rec}`$ for a signal and for a background, shown in Fig. 3. The $`J_z=0`$ and $`J_z=\pm 2`$ contributions from the NLO background, with $`bb(g)`$ and with $`cc(g)`$ final states, are shown separately. For a comparison, the estimated LO background is presented as well (dotted line). Note that the NLO background contribution is approximately two times larger than the LO one. This is mainly due to the $`J_z=0`$ component, which is strongly suppressed in the LO case; however in the case of NLO it gives a large contribution, especially pronounced in the high-$`W_{\gamma \gamma }`$ part of the signal peak. A more detailed comparison of the LO and NLO background estimations is presented in Appendix. Other background contributions, from the resolved photon(s) interactions and the overlaying events, were found to be negligible .

## 4 Final results

Assuming that the signal for Higgs-boson production will be extracted by counting the $`b\overline{b}`$ events in the mass window around the peak, and subtracting the background events expected in this window, we can calculate the expected relative statistical error for the partial width multiplied by the branching ratio, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(h\gamma \gamma )\mathrm{Br}(hb\overline{b})`$, in the following way:

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\left[\mathrm{\Gamma }(h\gamma \gamma )\mathrm{Br}(hb\overline{b})\right]}{\left[\mathrm{\Gamma }(h\gamma \gamma )\mathrm{Br}(hb\overline{b})\right]}=\frac{\sqrt{N_{obs}}}{N_{obs}N_{bkgd}}.$$

The accuracy expected for the considered quantity $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(h\gamma \gamma )\mathrm{Br}(hb\overline{b})`$, if estimated from the reconstructed invariant-mass distribution obtained for the Higgs-boson mass of 120 GeV in the selected mass region, between 106 and 126 GeV (see Fig. 3), is equal to 1.9%. It is in agreement with the result of a previous analysis .

A long tail in the reconstructed mass $`W_{rec}`$ distribution obtained for the $`hb\overline{b}`$ events seen in Fig. 3 is due to the escaping neutrinos, which mainly originate in the semileptonic decays of the $`D`$\- and $`B`$-mesons. This tail can be effectively suppressed by applying an additional cut on $`P_T/E_T`$, where $`P_T`$ and $`E_T`$ are the absolute values of the total transverse momentum of an event $`\stackrel{}{P}_T`$ and the total transverse energy, respectively.333$`\stackrel{}{P}_T`$ ($`E_T`$) is calculated as a vector (scalar) sum of the transverse momenta $`\stackrel{}{p}_T^i=(p_x^i,p_y^i,0)`$ (the transverse energies $`E_T^i=E^i\mathrm{sin}\theta _i`$) over all particles that belong to an event. The cut relies on demanding the $`P_T/E_T`$ to be small. The $`W_{rec}`$ distributions for the $`hb\overline{b}`$ events obtained by applying various $`P_T/E_T`$ cuts are shown in Fig. 4. In this figure we use different colours to denote the different total energies of neutrinos in the event, $`E_{\nu s}`$. The effects due to the detector resolution influence a shape of the distribution for $`W_{rec}>m_h`$, whereas for a lower $`W_{rec}`$ one observes a significant effect of the escaping neutrinos in the distribution. By applying a realistic $`P_T/E_T`$ cut, e.g. $`P_T/E_T<0.04`$, we can obtain a mass resolution, derived from the Gaussian fit in the region from $`\mu \sigma `$ to $`\mu +2\sigma `$, better than 2 GeV.

Shown in Fig. 5 is the $`W_{rec}`$ distribution obtained by applying the cut $`P_T/E_T<0.04`$. The relative accuracy expected for the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(h\gamma \gamma )\mathrm{Br}(hb\overline{b})`$ measurement, calculated in the $`W_{rec}`$ mass range between 114 and 124 GeV (as indicated by arrows in the figure), is equal to 2.2%. We conclude that the $`P_T/E_T`$ cut improves a mass resolution, but worsens the statistical significance of the measurement.

We have found a method, which allows an increase of a signal-to-background ratio without reducing the event statistics. We assume that the measured missing transverse momentum is due to a single neutrino emitted perpendicularly to the beam line.444Due to a large spread of the photon beam energy, no constraints can be imposed on the longitudinal momentum. Then, we introduce the corrected, reconstructed invariant mass as:

$$W_{corr}\sqrt{W_{rec}^2+2P_T(E_{vis}+P_T)},$$
(1)
The distributions of the $`W_{corr}`$, obtained for the signal and background events, are shown in Fig. 6. The most precise measurement of the Higgs-boson production cross section is obtained using the mass window $`W_{corr}`$ between 115 and 128 GeV, as indicated by arrows. In the selected $`W_{corr}`$ region one expects, after one year of photon collider running at nominal luminosity, about 5900 reconstructed signal events and 4600 background events (i.e. $`S/B1.3`$). This corresponds to the expected relative statistical precision of the measurement:

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\left[\mathrm{\Gamma }(h\gamma \gamma )\mathrm{Br}(hb\overline{b})\right]}{\left[\mathrm{\Gamma }(h\gamma \gamma )\mathrm{Br}(hb\overline{b})\right]}=1.7\%.$$

## 5 Conclusions

Our analysis shows that, for the SM Higgs boson with a mass around 120 GeV, the two-photon width for the $`b\overline{b}`$ final state can be measured in the photon collider at TESLA with a precision better than 2%. If the reconstructed invariant mass of the event is corrected for the energy of escaping neutrinos from $`D`$\- and $`B`$-meson decays, we achieve a precision of the measurement of the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(h\gamma \gamma )\mathrm{Br}(hb\overline{b})`$ equal to 1.7%. The obtained accuracy is in an agreement with the result of a previous analysis, based on the idealistic Compton spectrum . Note, however, that the realistic photon–photon luminosity spectrum that we use is more challenging.

The measurement discussed in this paper can be used to derive the partial width $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(h\gamma \gamma )`$, taking $`\mathrm{Br}(hb\overline{b})`$ value from precise measurement at the $`e^+e^{}`$ Linear Collider. With 1.7% accuracy on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(h\gamma \gamma )\mathrm{Br}(hb\overline{b})`$, obtained in this analysis, assuming $`\mathrm{Br}(hb\overline{b})`$ will be measured to 1.5% , Higgs-boson partial width $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(h\gamma \gamma )`$ can be extracted with accuracy of 2.3%. Using in addition the result from the $`e^+e^{}`$ Linear Collider for $`\mathrm{Br}(h\gamma \gamma )`$ , one can also extract $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{tot}}`$ with precision of 10%.

The SM Higgs-boson production $`\gamma \gamma hb\overline{b}`$ can be considered for masses up to about 160 GeV . For higher masses of the SM Higgs boson one should consider other decay channels, see e.g. .

### Acknowledgements

We would like to thank S. Söldner-Rembold for valuable discussions and for giving us an access to the program written by G. Jikia, which generates the NLO background. Also fruitful discussions with I. Ginzburg and V. Telnov are acknowledged. The work was partially sponsored by the BMBF–KBN collaboration program TESLA. M.K. acknowledges partial support by the Polish Committee for Scientific Research, Grants 2 P03B 05119 (2002), 5 P03B 12120 (2002), and by the European Community’s Human Potential Programme under contract HPRN-CT-2000-00149 Physics at Colliders.

## Appendix: Comparison of the LO
and NLO background estimates

As it is well known, see e.g. , the NLO corrections for the background process $`\gamma \gamma b\overline{b}`$ are large. Whereas the LO background is strongly suppressed for a $`J_z=0`$ contribution, this suppression is removed for the higher order process with an additional gluon in the final state. As an example, we show in Fig. 7 the ratios of the corresponding NLO and LO results for the $`W_{rec}`$ distribution, for the process $`\gamma \gamma b\overline{b}(g)`$, for different values of $`N_{jets}`$ and $`J_z`$. In each case one observes large differences between the NLO and LO results, both in the shape and in the normalization. As the precise determination of the background shape is crucial for a reliable estimation of the Higgs-boson width, we conclude that a rescaling of the LO estimates cannot be recommended as a substitute of the full NLO background analysis.