4.2 Article

Light Relative Efficiency Factors for ions in BGO and Al2O3 at 20 mK

Journal

ASTROPARTICLE PHYSICS
Volume 50-52, Issue -, Pages 11-17

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.astropartphys.2013.09.002

Keywords

Bolometers; Scintillators; Dark matter; Quenching factor

Funding

  1. Spanish Ministerio de Economia y Competitividad
  2. European Regional Development Fund (MINECO-FEDER) [FPA2011-23749]
  3. French CNRS/INSU
  4. EU project ILIAS [RII3CT-2004-506222]
  5. Gobierno de Aragon
  6. Consolider-Ingenio Programme [CSD2009-00064]
  7. PI2 program
  8. Universite Paris Sud
  9. MICINN project [EUI2009-03957]
  10. MICINN

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Dark matter direct search experiments with scintillators need an accurate knowledge of Light Relative Efficiency Factors (REF) between electron and nuclear recoils to estimate the energy of the recoiling nuclei from the scintillation signal (if the light signal is used with this purpose) or to implement an effective background rejection based on the comparison of the scintillation with ionization or heat signals (if the light signal is used for particle discrimination). The Light REF between alpha and gamma particles is required in some nuclear physics applications of scintillators like rare alpha decay searches, internal radiopurity assessment and some double beta decay searches. Two scintillating bolometers of BGO and Al2O3 were operated at 20 mK and exposed to fast neutrons, gamma rays, alpha particles and heavy nuclei. We measured their Light REF between gamma and alpha particles and between electron and neutron induced nuclear recoils as a function of the deposited energy. We also measured the Light REF for 0 and Np ions in BGO. Results obtained for the different Light REFs were unsuccessfully compared with calculations based on a simple semi-empirical approach (with only one fitting parameter) proposed by Tretyak. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available