4.8 Article

Severe Constraints on New Physics Explanations of the MiniBooNE Excess

Journal

PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS
Volume 122, Issue 8, Pages -

Publisher

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.122.081801

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. U.S. Department of Energy [DE-AC02-07CH11359]
  2. National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship [DGE-1256260]
  3. Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics at the University of Chicago through an endowment from the Kavli Foundation
  4. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science [DE-SC0007859]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The MiniBooNE experiment has recently reported an anomalous 4.5 sigma excess of electronlike events consistent with nu(e) appearance from a nu(mu) beam at short baseline. Given the lack of corresponding nu(mu) disappearance observations, required in the case of oscillations involving a sterile flavor, there is strong motivation for alternative explanations of this anomaly. We consider the possibility that the observed electronlike signal may actually be initiated by particles produced in the MiniBooNE target, without involving new sources of neutrino production or any neutrino oscillations. We find that the electronlike event energy and angular distributions in the full MiniBooNE dataset, including neutrino, antineutrino, and beam dump modes, severely limit and, in some cases, rule out new physics scenarios as an explanation for the observed neutrino and antineutrino mode excesses. Specifically, scenarios in which the particle produced in the target either decays (visibly or semivisibly) or scatters elastically in the detector are strongly disfavored. Using generic kinematic arguments, we extend the existing MiniBooNE results and interpretations to exhaustively constrain previously unconsidered new physics signatures and emphasize the power of the MiniBooNE beam dump search to further limit models for the excess.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available