{"title":"Statistical Issues on the Neutrino Mass Hierarchy with","authors":"F. Sawy, L. Stanco","doi":"10.1155/2024/9339959","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The neutrino mass hierarchy determination (<svg height=\"6.20643pt\" style=\"vertical-align:-0.2585797pt\" version=\"1.1\" viewbox=\"-0.0498162 -5.94785 6.02377 6.20643\" width=\"6.02377pt\" xmlns=\"http://www.w3.org/2000/svg\" xmlns:xlink=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\"><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,0,0)\"></path></g></svg> MHD) is one of the main goals of the major current and future neutrino experiments. The statistical analysis usually proceeds from a standard method, a single-dimensional estimator <svg height=\"15.2296pt\" style=\"vertical-align:-3.6382pt\" version=\"1.1\" viewbox=\"-0.0498162 -11.5914 59.3592 15.2296\" width=\"59.3592pt\" xmlns=\"http://www.w3.org/2000/svg\" xmlns:xlink=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\"><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,0,0)\"></path></g><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,4.498,0)\"></path></g><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,10.738,0)\"></path></g><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,23.234,0)\"></path></g><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,33.771,0)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g113-133\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,42.098,0)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g113-244\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,49.666,-5.741)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g50-51\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,54.612,0)\"></path></g></svg> that shows some drawbacks and concerns, together with a debatable strategy. The drawbacks and considerations of the standard method will be explained through the following three main issues. The first issue corresponds to the limited power of the standard method. The <svg height=\"15.2296pt\" style=\"vertical-align:-3.6382pt\" version=\"1.1\" viewbox=\"-0.0498162 -11.5914 21.0047 15.2296\" width=\"21.0047pt\" xmlns=\"http://www.w3.org/2000/svg\" xmlns:xlink=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\"><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,0,0)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g113-133\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,8.327,0)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g113-244\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,15.895,-5.741)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g50-51\"></use></g></svg> estimator provides us with different results when different simulation procedures were used. Regarding the second issue, when <svg height=\"16.9233pt\" style=\"vertical-align:-5.3319pt\" version=\"1.1\" viewbox=\"-0.0498162 -11.5914 43.1456 16.9233\" width=\"43.1456pt\" xmlns=\"http://www.w3.org/2000/svg\" xmlns:xlink=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\"><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,0,0)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g113-244\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,7.568,-5.741)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g50-51\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,6.981,3.784)\"></path></g><g transform=\"matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,14.57,3.784)\"></path></g><g transform=\"matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,17.073,3.784)\"></path></g><g transform=\"matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,22.198,3.784)\"></path></g><g transform=\"matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,25.456,3.784)\"></path></g><g transform=\"matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,32.218,3.784)\"></path></g><g transform=\"matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,39.24,3.784)\"></path></g></svg> and <svg height=\"16.9233pt\" style=\"vertical-align:-5.3319pt\" version=\"1.1\" viewbox=\"-0.0498162 -11.5914 39.4737 16.9233\" width=\"39.4737pt\" xmlns=\"http://www.w3.org/2000/svg\" xmlns:xlink=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\"><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,0,0)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g113-244\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,7.568,-5.741)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g50-51\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,6.981,3.784)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g58-107\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,14.57,3.784)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g58-103\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,17.073,3.784)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g58-108\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,22.198,3.784)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g50-41\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,25.456,3.784)\"></path></g><g transform=\"matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,28.559,3.784)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g190-73\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,35.568,3.784)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g50-42\"></use></g></svg> are drawn in a 2D map, their strong positive correlation manifests <svg height=\"15.2296pt\" style=\"vertical-align:-3.6382pt\" version=\"1.1\" viewbox=\"-0.0498162 -11.5914 12.6404 15.2296\" width=\"12.6404pt\" xmlns=\"http://www.w3.org/2000/svg\" xmlns:xlink=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\"><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,0,0)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g113-244\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,7.568,-5.741)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g50-51\"></use></g></svg> as a bidimensional variable, instead of a single-dimensional estimator. The overlapping between the <svg height=\"15.2296pt\" style=\"vertical-align:-3.6382pt\" version=\"1.1\" viewbox=\"-0.0498162 -11.5914 12.6404 15.2296\" width=\"12.6404pt\" xmlns=\"http://www.w3.org/2000/svg\" xmlns:xlink=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\"><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,0,0)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g113-244\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,7.568,-5.741)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g50-51\"></use></g></svg> distributions of the two hypotheses leads to an experiment sensitivity reduction. The third issue corresponds to the robustness of the standard method. When the JUNO sensitivity is obtained using different procedures, either with <svg height=\"15.2296pt\" style=\"vertical-align:-3.6382pt\" version=\"1.1\" viewbox=\"-0.0498162 -11.5914 21.0047 15.2296\" width=\"21.0047pt\" xmlns=\"http://www.w3.org/2000/svg\" xmlns:xlink=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\"><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,0,0)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g113-133\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,8.327,0)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g113-244\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,15.895,-5.741)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g50-51\"></use></g></svg> as one-dimensional or <svg height=\"15.2296pt\" style=\"vertical-align:-3.6382pt\" version=\"1.1\" viewbox=\"-0.0498162 -11.5914 12.6404 15.2296\" width=\"12.6404pt\" xmlns=\"http://www.w3.org/2000/svg\" xmlns:xlink=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\"><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,0,0)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g113-244\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,7.568,-5.741)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g50-51\"></use></g></svg> as two-dimensional estimator, the experimental sensitivity varies with the different values of the atmospheric mass, the input parameter. We computed the oscillation of <svg height=\"16.9259pt\" style=\"vertical-align:-3.6382pt\" version=\"1.1\" viewbox=\"-0.0498162 -13.2877 27.8683 16.9259\" width=\"27.8683pt\" xmlns=\"http://www.w3.org/2000/svg\" xmlns:xlink=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\"><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,0,0)\"></path></g><rect height=\"0.65243\" width=\"20.905\" x=\"3.419\" y=\"-12.5855\"></rect><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,3.419,0)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g113-133\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,11.746,0)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g113-244\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,19.314,-4.176)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g50-51\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,24.324,0)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g113-9\"></use></g></svg> with the input parameter values, <span><svg height=\"16.9559pt\" style=\"vertical-align:-5.3645pt\" version=\"1.1\" viewbox=\"-0.0498162 -11.5914 50.5505 16.9559\" width=\"50.5505pt\" xmlns=\"http://www.w3.org/2000/svg\" xmlns:xlink=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\"><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,0,0)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g113-9\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,3.419,0)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g113-133\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,11.746,0)\"></path></g><g transform=\"matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,22.003,-5.741)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g50-51\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,26.95,0)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g113-9\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,30.369,3.132)\"></path></g><g transform=\"matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,32.807,3.132)\"></path></g><g transform=\"matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,37.612,3.132)\"></path></g><g transform=\"matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,42.279,3.132)\"></path></g><g transform=\"matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,47.002,3.132)\"></path></g></svg>.</span> The MH significance using the standard method, <span><svg height=\"15.2296pt\" style=\"vertical-align:-3.6382pt\" version=\"1.1\" viewbox=\"-0.0498162 -11.5914 21.0047 15.2296\" width=\"21.0047pt\" xmlns=\"http://www.w3.org/2000/svg\" xmlns:xlink=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\"><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,0,0)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g113-133\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,8.327,0)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g113-244\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,15.895,-5.741)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g50-51\"></use></g></svg>,</span> strongly depends on the values of the parameter <span><svg height=\"16.9559pt\" style=\"vertical-align:-5.3645pt\" version=\"1.1\" viewbox=\"-0.0498162 -11.5914 50.5505 16.9559\" width=\"50.5505pt\" xmlns=\"http://www.w3.org/2000/svg\" xmlns:xlink=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\"><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,0,0)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g113-9\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,3.419,0)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g113-133\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,11.746,0)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g113-110\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,22.003,-5.741)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g50-51\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,26.95,0)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g113-9\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,30.369,3.132)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g190-106\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,32.807,3.132)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g190-111\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,37.612,3.132)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g190-113\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,42.279,3.132)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g190-118\"></use></g><g transform=\"matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,47.002,3.132)\"><use xlink:href=\"#g190-117\"></use></g></svg>.</span> Consequently, the experiment sensitivity depends on the precision of the atmospheric mass. This evaluation of the standard method confirms the drawbacks.","PeriodicalId":7498,"journal":{"name":"Advances in High Energy Physics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in High Energy Physics","FirstCategoryId":"101","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2024/9339959","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"物理与天体物理","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHYSICS, PARTICLES & FIELDS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The neutrino mass hierarchy determination ( MHD) is one of the main goals of the major current and future neutrino experiments. The statistical analysis usually proceeds from a standard method, a single-dimensional estimator that shows some drawbacks and concerns, together with a debatable strategy. The drawbacks and considerations of the standard method will be explained through the following three main issues. The first issue corresponds to the limited power of the standard method. The estimator provides us with different results when different simulation procedures were used. Regarding the second issue, when and are drawn in a 2D map, their strong positive correlation manifests as a bidimensional variable, instead of a single-dimensional estimator. The overlapping between the distributions of the two hypotheses leads to an experiment sensitivity reduction. The third issue corresponds to the robustness of the standard method. When the JUNO sensitivity is obtained using different procedures, either with as one-dimensional or as two-dimensional estimator, the experimental sensitivity varies with the different values of the atmospheric mass, the input parameter. We computed the oscillation of with the input parameter values, . The MH significance using the standard method, , strongly depends on the values of the parameter . Consequently, the experiment sensitivity depends on the precision of the atmospheric mass. This evaluation of the standard method confirms the drawbacks.
期刊介绍:
Advances in High Energy Physics publishes the results of theoretical and experimental research on the nature of, and interaction between, energy and matter. Considering both original research and focussed review articles, the journal welcomes submissions from small research groups and large consortia alike.