-
The CEνNS process can be expressed as
$ \begin{array}{*{20}{l}} \nu/\bar{\nu} + A \to \nu/\bar{\nu} + A, \end{array} $
(1) where
$ \nu/\bar{\nu} $ is any individual flavor of neutrinos/antineutrinos, and A represents the mass number of the target nuclei. The NR energy spans from zero to a maximum value of$E_{\max} = 2E^{2}_{\nu}/(2 E_{\nu} + m_{A}) \simeq 2E^{2}_{\nu}/m_{A}$ , where$ m_{A} $ is the mass of the target nucleus. The differential cross section of the CEνNS process can be expressed as [11, 12]$ \begin{split} \frac{{\rm d}\sigma}{{\rm d}E_{\rm NR}}(E_{\nu},E_{\rm NR}) =\; &\frac{G^{2}_{F}m_{A}}{4\pi} Q^{2}_{w} \left(1-\frac{m_{A}E_{\rm NR}}{2E^{2}_{\nu}}\right) \\ &\times F^{2}(q)\Theta(E_{\max}-E_{\rm NR}), \end{split} $
(2) where
${E_{\rm NR}}$ represents the NR energy of the target nucleus,$\Theta(E_{\max}-E_{\rm NR})$ is the step function with a value of 1 (0) for positive (negative) argument, and$ Q_{w} $ is the weak charge:$ \begin{array}{*{20}{l}} Q_{w} = N - Z(1-4\text{sin}^{2}\theta_{w}), \end{array} $
(3) where Z is the atomic number of the target nucleus,
$ \theta_{w} $ is the weak mixing or Weinberg angle with a value of${\rm sin}^{2}\theta_{w} \simeq 0.23$ [26], and$ F(q) $ is the Helm-type form factor [27], which is defined as$ F(q) = \frac{3j_{1}(qr_{0})}{qr_{0}}{\rm e}^{-\frac{1}{2}(qs)^{2}}, $
(4) where the momentum-transfer
$ q=\sqrt{2m_{A}E_{N R}} $ ,$r_{0}= \sqrt{r^2 - 5s^2}$ with a nuclear radius of$ r=1.2A^{\frac{1}{3}} $ fm and nuclear skin thickness s of about 0.5 fm, and$ j_{1}(qr_{0}) $ is the first-order spherical Bessel function [28, 29]. Figure 1 shows the differential cross section of Eq. (2) at different neutrino energies. Note that the CEνNS exhibits a much larger scattering cross section [12] than inverse beta decays and neutrino-electron elastic scatterings [13] but results in a relatively low NR energy in keV to several tens of keV. The abundance distribution of xenon isotopes is considered in the calculation. -
The SN explosion consists of three stages: the phase of the shock burst, the post-bounce accretion, and Kelvin-Helmholtz cooling [21]. The total emission energy, average energy of neutrinos, and variations in the physical process will lead to different expected fluxes and energy spectra of neutrinos in theoretical models. In this study, we utilize the Garching model as the typical model, where the neutrino energy spectrum can be characterized using Keil-Raffelt-Janka (KRJ) parametrization [30]. The differential flux at time
$ t_\mathrm{pb} $ , which is defined as the time after the SN core bounce, can be expressed as [31, 32]$ \begin{split} \frac{{\rm d}F(E_{\nu},t_\mathrm{pb})}{{\rm d}E_{\nu}} =\; &\sum\limits_{\nu = 1}^{6} L_{\nu}(t_\mathrm{pb}) \frac{ ( 1+\gamma (t_\mathrm{pb}) ) ^{1+\gamma (t_\mathrm{pb}) }}{\langle E_{\nu}(t_\mathrm{pb}) \rangle ^{2} \Gamma (1+\gamma (t_\mathrm{pb}) )} \\ & \times \left(\frac{E_{\nu}}{\langle E_{\nu} (t_\mathrm{pb}) \rangle } \right) ^{\gamma(t_\mathrm{pb})} \exp\left[-\frac{(\gamma + 1)E_{\nu}}{ \langle E_{\nu} (t_\mathrm{pb}) \rangle } \right] , \end{split} $
(5) where ν represents one of the six types of neutrinos,
$ L_{\nu}(t_\mathrm{pb}) $ is the neutrino luminosity,$ \langle E_{\nu}(t_\mathrm{pb}) \rangle $ is the mean energy of neutrinos at time$ t_\mathrm{pb} $ , and$ \Gamma(1+\gamma (t_\mathrm{pb})) $ is the Gamma function. The spectral index$ \gamma(t_\mathrm{pb}) $ can be obtained as [31]$ \frac{\langle E_{\nu}(t_\mathrm{pb}) ^{2} \rangle}{\langle E_{\nu}(t_\mathrm{pb}) \rangle ^{2}} = \frac{2 + \gamma (t_\mathrm{pb}) }{1+ \gamma (t_\mathrm{pb})}, $
(6) where
$ \langle E_{\nu}(t_\mathrm{pb}) ^{2} \rangle $ represents the mean of$ E_{\nu}(t_\mathrm{pb}) ^{2} $ . Here, we use models with two benchmark progenitor masses$ M_{p}=11.2\; M_{\odot} $ and$ M_{p}=27\; M_{\odot} $ ($ M_{\odot} $ is the solar mass), employing the LS220 nuclear equation of state (EoS) [33], to predict the neutrino fluxes and the energy spectra. In contrast, the Nakazato model with$ M_{p}=20\; M_{\odot} $ , metallicity Z=0.02, and shock revival time$t_{\rm rev}=200$ ms is also used [23]. Figure 2 depicts the time-integrated neutrino number spectrum of all types of neutrinos. For a clear visual comparison between the models, neutrino energies are shown only up to 40 MeV. Because the neutrino flux from an SN explosion is predominantly concentrated within the first few seconds after the core bounce, we have approximated the integration time for the Nakazato model to be 10 s. The fraction of neutrino flux beyond 10 s is negligible. For the Garching models, we integrate from the core bounce time to the end time of the models since the models do not extend to 10 s. -
When neutrinos interact with xenon atoms through the CEνNS process, the differential event rate can be described as
$ \begin{split} \frac{{\rm d}N_{0}}{{\rm d}E_{\rm NR}}(E_{\rm NR})=\;&\frac{m_{\rm det}N_{A}}{M_{A}(4\pi D^{2})} \int_{E^{\min}_{\nu}}^{\infty} \frac{{\rm d}\sigma}{{\rm d}E_{\rm NR}}(E_{\nu},E_{\rm NR}) \\ &\times f(E_{\nu}){\rm d}E_{\nu}, \end{split} $
(7) where
$m_{\rm det}=2.67$ t is the effective mass of LXe in this paper,$ N_{A} $ is Avogadro's constant,$ M_{A} $ is the molar mass of xenon atoms, and the expression$m_{\rm det} N_{A}/ M_{A}$ is the total number of xenon atoms in the detector. D is the distance from Earth to the SN. To produce a recoil energy above$E_{\rm NR}$ , we must have a minimum neutrino energy, which can be expressed as$E^{\min}_{\nu} = \sqrt{m_{A} E_{\rm NR}/2}$ and is the lower limit of the integral in Eq. (7).$ f(E_{\nu}) $ is the energy spectrum for the sum of all neutrino types, as depicted in Fig. 2. Practically, integrating over$E_{\nu} \in (E^{\min}_{\nu},100$ MeV) is sufficient. Considering the detection efficiency$\epsilon(E_{\rm NR})$ , the effective differential event rate is [34]$ \frac{{\rm d}N}{{\rm d}E_{\rm NR}}(E_{\rm NR})= \epsilon (E_{\rm NR}) \times \frac{{\rm d}N_{0}}{{\rm d}E_{\rm NR}}(E_{\rm NR}). $
(8) To obtain the detection efficiency, we perform a Monte Carlo (MC) simulation [35, 36]. First, the light yield (
$ L_{y} $ ) and charge yield ($ Q_{y} $ ) of NR events in LXe are studied using the Noble Element Simulation Technique (NEST) v2.3.6 parameterization [37, 38], with parameters tuned using the calibrations as described in [16, 39]. In the simulation, we have considered various detector effects, including the quantum effects of PMTs and the non-uniformity of the detector.$ 2 \times 10^{5} $ events are simulated for each mono-energetic point ranging from 0.1 to 30 keV, with a step size of 0.1 keV. Subsequently,$ L_{y} $ and$ Q_{y} $ are used as the inputs for the waveform simulation (WS) [36], which can generate complete waveforms. To mimic the detector response of the simulated events, we consider the effects of afterpulsing from PMTs and delayed electrons in the WS process.The simulated events are processed with similar procedures as in the experimental data. The total efficiency primarily consists of three parts: the signal reconstruction, data quality selection, and region-of-interest (ROI). The signal reconstruction and data quality selection were discussed in detail in a previous analysis [39]. To improve the detection efficiency, we loosen several data quality selection cuts and adjust the ROI. Two ROIs are used: one corresponds to the golden alert, which is stricter in triggering SN alarms than the silver one. The former (latter) is defined to have S1 ranging from 2.1 to 100 PEs (1.65 to 100 PEs) and S2 ranging from 80 to 3500 PEs (same). This is detailed in Sec. IV. The magenta dashed (red solid) line depicted in Fig. 3 shows the detection efficiency as a function of NR energy for the golden (silver) alarm. A decrease in efficiency occurs at energies above 15 keV, which is attributed to the diffusion cut on the drift electrons in the selection process. The total detection efficiency is 20% (23%) for the golden (silver) alarm in the Garching model with
$ M_{p}=27\; M_{\odot} $ , and other two SN models used in this paper have similar efficiencies. Note that, to maximize the detection efficiency, this study does not use the NR/ER cut based on the ratio between the number of the ionized electrons and the photons. Additionally, this can be revived in the PandaX-nT experiment owing to the much larger target mass.Figure 3. (color online) Detection efficiencies of silver trigger (red solid) and golden trigger (magenta dashed) as a function of NR energy; the expected neutrino spectrum before (gray) and after (black) the efficiency (red solid) correction. The Garching model with a progenitor mass of
$ 27\; M_{\odot} $ and the LS220 EoS is used. The distance from SN to Earth is assumed to be 10 kpc.The NR spectrum of CEνNS before (gray) and after (black) the efficiency (red solid) correction in LXe is shown in Fig. 3. The total expected number of observable neutrinos
$N_{\rm obs}$ , which is primarily from the high-energy neutrinos (approximately 15 to 30 MeV), as shown in Fig. 2, can be expressed as$ N_{\rm obs}= \int \frac{{\rm d}N}{{\rm d}E_{\rm NR}}(E_{\rm NR}) {\rm d} E_{\rm NR}, $
(9) here, we perform the integration up to 30 keV because fluxes above this value have a negligible impact on
$N_{\rm obs}$ . To increase$N_{\rm obs}$ , we desire a high detection efficiency. The numbers of SN neutrinos using the Garching and Nakazato models at two different distances of 10 kpc and 168 pc are listed in Table 1, where 10 kpc (168 pc) is approximately the distance from the center of the Milky Way (Betelgeuse) to Earth. Ref. [31] shows that an S2 only method can increase the SN signals by a factor of about 3 but would also potentially increase the backgrounds. The S1-S2 method provides similar results as ours. The background event rate, as listed in Table 2, is negligible compared with the event rate of the SN signals as listed in Table 1. Betelgeuse is considered a potential candidate for an SN explosion [40], which would provide an effective handle to distinguish between different models by observing the number and spectrum of NR events owing to the short distance. For a Betelgeuse explosion, the design of the data acquisition must address the challenge of high data rate during the explosion.SN model Golden alarm Silver alarm D = 10 kpc 168 pc 10 kpc 168 pc 20 $ M_{\odot} $ Nakazato7.2 $2.6 \times 10^{4} $ 8.3 $ 2.9\times 10^{4} $ 11.2 $ M_{\odot} $ Garching6.6 $2.3 \times 10^{4} $ 7.7 $2.7 \times 10^{4} $ 27 $ M_{\odot} $ Garching13.7 $4.9 \times 10^{4} $ 15.9 $5.7 \times 10^{4} $ Table 1. Number of expected SN neutrinos from 10 kpc and 168 pc in PandaX-4T for golden and silver alarms. Two Garching models are used with
$ M_{p}=11.2\; M_{\odot} $ and$ M_{p}=27\; M_{\odot} $ via the LS220 EoS. Nakazato model with$ M_{p}=20\; M_{\odot} $ , Z (metallicity)$ =0.02 $ , and$t_{\rm rev}$ (the shock revival time)$ =200 $ ms is used for comparison.Data type Rate/s Calendar time Observed Expected DD 3.61× $ 10^{-3} $ 3.58 days 40 38 AmBe 3.12× $ 10^{-3} $ 5.7 days 49 46 Physical 3.6× $ 10^{-4} $ 86.1 days 8 9.8 Table 2. Comparison of the observed and expected false alerts with the silver trigger mode using the DD, AmBe, and physical data as listed in the fourth and fifth columns. The second and third columns list the event rate and the calendar time of the dataset.
-
The explosion of an SN would result in a sudden increase in the event rate within a short period of several seconds in the detector, providing a unique opportunity to observe this phenomenon in the Milky Way. The software-based SN trigger can provide a method for monitoring SN explosions as soon as data files are written into the disk clusters. The trigger algorithm consists of three parts: 1) event builder, 2) selection of signal candidates, and 3) SN neutrino trigger. The event builder process involves clustering PMT hits into signal pulses and classifying these pulses into S1s and S2s, where the classified S1s and S2s are paired to build incident events. The size of each file decreases significantly after the event builder process, from 1 GB to approximately 100 MB. During the commissioning phase, the background event rate is stable. To select suitable event candidates, the basic cuts derived from the analysis of the solar
$ ^8 $ B study [39] are used to suppress background events. The events that survive the cuts are used to investigate the false alert rate, which is discussed in Sec. IV.B. For the SN neutrino trigger, when the trigger algorithm identifies the first candidate, it serves as the starting point of the search time. Subsequently, the total number of events is counted within the following ten-second time window. If the counted number exceeds the specific threshold$N_{\rm thr}$ , a prompt alert is issued. For clarity, if another candidate appears outside of the time window, it will become a new starting point of the search time, and the same process continues. When an alert is issued, the information including the start time of the alert and the total number of candidates in the time window are sent simultaneously to the experts of the PandaX-4T SN group through e-mail. The relevant data files are stored in the designated directory for further examination by the experts. The entire process takes several minutes for each individual file on average. -
We assume that the number of events observed by the detector follows a Poisson distribution. The probability for the number of events in a time window
$T_{\rm SN}$ being no less than the threshold value$N_{\rm thr}$ follows$ p(N_{\rm thr};T_{\rm SN};r_{\rm bg}) = 1 - \sum\limits_{n=0}^{N_{\rm thr} -1} \frac{1}{n!} {\rm e}^{-r_{\rm bg}T_{\rm SN}} (r_{\rm bg}T_{\rm SN})^{n}, $
(10) where
$r_{\rm bg}$ is the mean background event rate. The false alert rate per week using a fixed time window$T_{\rm SN}$ can be expressed as$ R_{\rm false} = \frac{3600 \cdot 24 \cdot 7 }{T_{\rm SN}} p(N_{\rm thr};T_{\rm SN};r_{\rm bg}). $
(11) The backgrounds are primarily composed of material radioactivity, environmental radioactivity, contamination from tritium calibration, and additional radioactive sources in xenon such as
$ ^{222} $ Rn [24]. To improve the SN detection probability while simultaneously reducing the false alert rate, we investigate various combinations of$T_{\rm SN}$ and$N_{\rm thr}$ at a certain event rate$r_{\rm bg}$ . Eventually, a suitable combination of the values is selected, with$T_{\rm SN}=10$ s and$N_{\rm thr} =2$ . Unless stated otherwise, we will use this default setting. The false alert rate is predicted with a two-step procedure. In the first step, we can calculate the number of false alert rate for a given event rate$r_{\rm bg}$ and time window using Eq. (11). Note this number is for the case of the fixed time window (i.e., the subsequent time window is seamlessly connected to the previous time window; therefore, no time gap occurs between any two time windows), and in our algorithm, we use the sliding time window (i.e., the time of the candidate is used as the start of the time window, and a time gap may occur between two neighbour time windows). A schematic of sliding and fixed time window is shown in Fig. 4. In the second step, the ratio between the numbers of false alerts with the sliding and fixed time windows is calculated based on a toy MC simulation. Hereafter, the former (latter) is referred to as the SW (FW) method. In the toy MC simulation, events are randomly sampled assuming a specific event rate, followed by the counting of the total number of false alerts with the SW and FW methods. To reduce the uncertainty of the mean ratio value, hundreds of simulations are performed for each event rate. Figure 5 shows the ratio as a function of the event rate.Figure 4. (color online) Schematic of the sliding and fixed time windows. The red dots represent SN neutrino candidates.
Figure 5. (color online) Ratio of the false alerts using sliding and fixed time windows. The parameters used are
$T_{\rm SN} =10$ s,$N_{\rm thr} =2$ , and the uncertainty results from the estimation of the mean values. The curve is connected through the data points via the linear interpolation, and the data points are calculated from the toy MC simulations.We must emphasize three characteristics in Fig. 5. First, when the rate is lower than
$ 10^{-3} $ s-1, the ratio gradually converges to 2. A mathematical explanation can be provided based on the the settings for this study. At the low rate, each alert comprises only two candidates with the parameters of$T_{\rm SN}=10$ s and$N_{\rm thr} =2$ ; this is because the probability of greater than two candidates appearing within 10 s is significantly lower than that of exact two candidates. If two candidates occur within a 10-s window in a total time length that can be divided into N intervals, with each interval being 5 s and N being sufficiently large, there are 3N/2 and N/2 scenarios for two candidates occurring in different intervals for the SW and FW methods, respectively, whereas the number of the scenarios for two candidates occurring in same intervals is N/2. Therefore, the ratio is$(3N/2+N/2)/ (N/2+N/2)=2$ . A ratio of 2 can also be explained as ($ r_{\rm bg}\times10 $ s)/($ r_{\rm bg}\times5 $ s) because the first candidate appears at the start (middle on average) of a 10-s window for the SW (FW) method. Note that the number of false alerts expected from Eq. (11) agrees with the number counted from the toy MC simulation using the FW method. In contrast to the SW method, the FW method divides the time length into uniform intervals according to the time window$ T_{\rm SN} $ and counts the false alerts within each interval. Second, the ratio reduces to a value below 1 because, with a higher rate, the possibility of more than two CEνNS events piling up in a single sliding window increases, leading to fewer triggers. Third, the ratio converges to 1 at a high event rate greater than 5 s-1 as the two methods exhibit negligible differences in these cases. -
To validate the false alert rate described above, we have used experimental data including the deuteron-deuteron (DD), AmBe neutron calibration, and commissioning physical data to test the trigger algorithm. Eq. (11) enables the inverse calculation of the corresponding background event rate for a given false alert rate. As stated in Sec. III.C, two trigger modes (golden and silver) for the commissioning physical data have been selected, which correspond to false alert rates (background event rates) of one per month (
$ \sim2.2\times10^{-4} $ s-1) and one per week ($ \sim3.6\times10^{-4} $ s-1), respectively. The ROI is essential in regulating the false alert rate, which is used as a reference to rapidly adjust the ROI in the commissioning physical data. The numbers of the expected false alerts are consistent with the observed, as listed in Table 2. For simplicity, only the results with silver trigger mode are shown. The scenario in which the two candidates fall into two separate files has been considered.
Detecting neutrinos from supernova bursts in PandaX-4T
- Received Date: 2024-03-13
- Available Online: 2024-07-15
Abstract: Neutrinos from core-collapse supernovae are essential for understanding neutrino physics and stellar evolution. Dual-phase xenon dark matter detectors can be used to track explosions of galactic supernovae by detecting neutrinos through coherent elastic neutrino-nucleus scatterings. In this study, a variation of progenitor masses and explosion models are assumed to predict neutrino fluxes and spectra, which result in the number of expected neutrino events ranging from 6.6 to 13.7 at a distance of 10 kpc over a 10-s duration with negligible backgrounds at PandaX-4T. Two specialized triggering alarms for monitoring supernova burst neutrinos are built. The efficiency of detecting supernova explosions at various distances in the Milky Way is estimated. These alarms will be implemented in the real-time supernova monitoring system at PandaX-4T in the near future, which will provide supernova early warnings for the astronomical community.