1: \section{Analysis}
2:
3: \subsection{Calculating $Q^2$ and $E_\nu$}
4:
5: The kinematics of the muon candidate, the longest track in our events,
6: are sufficient to estimate the energy of the neutrino $E_{\nu}^{rec}$
7: and the square of the momentum transfer $Q^2_{rec}$,
8: if the interaction is quasi-elastic.
9:
10: \begin{eqnarray}
11: E_{\nu}^{rec} & = & \frac{(m_N + \epsilon_B)E_\mu -
12: (2m_N \epsilon_B + \epsilon_B^2 + m^2_\mu)/2}
13: {m_N + \epsilon_B - E_\mu + p_\mu \cos \theta_\mu} , \\
14: \nonumber & & \\
15: Q^2_{rec} & = & -q^2 = -2E_\nu(E_\mu - p_\mu \cos \theta_\mu) + m_\mu^2.
16: \label{Eq.Q2}
17: \end{eqnarray}
18:
19: Here, $E_\mu$ and $p_\mu$ are the energy and momentum of the muon
20: determined from the range, $\theta_\mu$ is the angle relative to the
21: beam direction, determined from the hits in the SciFi detector.
22: Note that $E_\nu$ appears in the expression for $Q^2_{rec}$,
23: and here we use $E_\nu^{rec}$.
24: The quantity $\epsilon_B$ = -27 MeV for oxygen is the
25: effective binding energy parameter from the Fermi gas model.
26: The masses $m_N$ and $m_\mu$ are for the nucleon and the muon.
27: The resolution for $E_\mu$ is 0.12 GeV, due mainly to the
28: MRD segmentation.
29: %, though the mean of the distribution is precise to better than 1\%.
30: The resolution for $\theta_\mu$ is about 1 degree, but there is a
31: tail to this distribution.
32: The resulting value for $E_\nu$ resolution (for QE events) is 0.16 GeV and the
33: resolution for $Q^2$ is 0.05 (GeV/c)$^2$ also with a tail coming
34: from the measured angle.
35: Finally, this formula assumes that the target neutron inside the nucleus
36: is at rest, ignoring the nucleon momentum distribution for the event
37: reconstruction. Fluctuations due to Fermi motion are about half the size of those
38: due to detector and reconstruction effects, and contribute only a small
39: amount to the reconstructed energy resolution.
40:
41: It is important to note that these formulas are used for all events
42: even though half the interactions are not quasi-elastic, because we
43: do not identify the interaction mode on an event-by-event basis, nor
44: is our beam at a fixed energy.
45: The reconstructed $E_\nu$ and $Q^2$ are systematically off for these
46: non quasi-elastic events:
47: $E_\nu^{rec}$ is low by $\sim$0.4 GeV
48: and $Q^2_{rec}$ is low by $\sim$0.05 (GeV/c)$^2$.
49: However, all events are treated the same way, both data and
50: Monte Carlo events. Thus, the comparison of data and MC in the fit is valid,
51: but the distributions of the reconstructed values are affected by the
52: non quasi-elastic fraction.
53:
54:
55: \subsection{Fit procedure}
56:
57: After calculating $E_\nu^{rec}$ and $Q^2_{rec}$ for each event,
58: the data are binned
59: in five $E_\nu^{rec}$ bins: 0.5 to 1.0, 1.0 to 1.5, 1.5 to 2.0, 2.0 to 2.5,
60: and greater than 2.5 GeV. The data are divided into $Q^2$ bins each of
61: width 0.1 (GeV/c)$^2$. To ensure there are at least five events in
62: each bin, the smaller number of events at higher $Q^2$ are combined into
63: a single bin.
64:
65: The expectation for the number of the events in each bin is computed
66: from the Monte Carlo simulation
67: for different values of the axial-vector mass and some systematic error parameters.
68: %Four free parameters describe the relative flux of incident neutrinos
69: %in the different energy bins common to both the K2K-I and K2K-IIa data sets. There is also
70: %one parameter for the absolute normalization which is common to both data sets.
71: %This parameter is relative to the data/MC normalization calculated using the
72: %nominal parameters and $M_A$ = 1.1 GeV.
73: %There is a scaling factor for the number of non-QE events to account for the
74: %uncertainty in the cross section relative to QE interactions.
75: %Two parameters describe a combination of interaction model and detector effects:
76: %a migration from two-track to one-track events accounts
77: %for errors in tracking efficiency and final state interactions,
78: %another parameter models the amount of proton rescattering which has the primary
79: %effect of increasing the number of events in the two-track QE enhanced sample.
80: %
81: We perform a maximum likelihood fit to the data by minimizing the
82: negative of the logarithm of the likelihood which is based on Poisson
83: statistics for each bin. In our case we use the modified form given
84: in the Review of Particle Physics \cite{RPPstat:2004}
85: \begin{eqnarray}
86: -2 \ln \lambda(\theta) = 2 \sum^N_{i=1} [ \nu_i(\theta) - n_i
87: + n_i \ln (n_i / \nu_i(\theta))]
88: \end{eqnarray}
89: in which $\nu_i(\theta)$ and $n_i$ are the predicted and observed values
90: in the {\em i}-th bin for some values of the parameters $\theta$.
91: The minimum of this function follows a chi-square distribution and can be used
92: to estimate the goodness of the fit.
93:
94: The expectation for each reconstructed
95: $E_\nu$ and $Q^2$ bin is computed as follows:
96: \begin{eqnarray}
97: \nonumber
98: N_{total}(n_{track},E_\nu^{rec},Q^2_{rec}) = A \; \Big[
99: N_{QE}(n_{track},E_\nu^{rec},Q^2_{rec}) \\
100: + \; B \times N_{nonQE}(n_{track},E_\nu^{rec},Q^2_{rec}) \Big]
101: %\times \Phi(E_{true}).
102: \; \; \;
103: \label{Eq.expectedevents}
104: \end{eqnarray}
105: where $N_{QE}$ and $N_{nonQE}$ are the separate contributions
106: of quasi-elastic and non quasi-elastic events.
107:
108: The free parameter A is the overall normalization. Five parameters $\Phi(E_\nu^{true})$,
109: not included in the above expression,
110: are used rescale the neutrino flux in each energy region,
111: four of which are unconstrained in the fit, while the relative flux for energies
112: from 1.0 GeV to 1.5 GeV is fixed at 1.0. The flux is reweighted based on the
113: true energy of the MC events, and applies to both QE and nonQE events.
114: The nonQE background is reweighted
115: using the unconstrained parameter B, which is referred in the rest of this paper
116: as the ratio nonQE/QE: the relative reweighting of our default MC calculation.
117: Because of the separation of the two-track QE and non-QE samples,
118: the nonQE/QE ratio will be constrained by the background and allow
119: a fit for the QE axial-vector form factor.
120: The parameters A and B are relative to the data/MC normalization
121: calculated using all other parameters at their nominal values,
122: including $M_A$ = 1.1 GeV. Importantly, changing the value
123: for $M_A^{QE}$ changes the absolute cross-section for QE, which will in turn
124: affect the fit value for the free nonQE/QE parameter and the overall normalization.
125:
126:
127:
128: In this expression, $N_{QE}$ is based on a calculation of the quasi-elastic
129: cross section with the free parameter $M_A$. This cross section is
130: computed using the true energy and $Q^2$ and convoluted with the
131: detailed shape of neutrino energy spectrum, flux(E), from
132: the beam MC calculations and the hadron production parameterization
133: used in \cite{K2K:2001}.
134: \begin{eqnarray}
135: \nonumber N_{QE}(n_{track},E_\nu^{rec},Q^2_{rec})
136: = \!\!\!\!\!\! \sum^{\mathrm{all \; bins}}_{Etrue,Q^2true} \!\!\!\!\!\!
137: \Big[
138: \; \; \mathrm{flux}(E_\nu^{true}) \\
139: \nonumber \times \; d\sigma/dQ^2(E_\nu^{true},Q^2_{true},M_A)
140: \; \times \; R(E_\nu^{true},Q^2_{true}) \\
141: \times \; M(E_\nu^{true},Q^2_{true} \rightarrow n_{track},E_\nu^{rec},Q^2_{rec})\Big].
142: \end{eqnarray}
143: Nuclear effects that modify the cross section, especially Pauli blocking
144: and and other effects of the nucleon momentum distribution, are included using the
145: factor R, and are discussed in Sec. V.
146:
147: Because the cross section is calculated using true kinematics, it must
148: be modified to account for detector acceptance and resolution, as well
149: as nuclear final state interactions, in order to obtain the expectation
150: in different reconstructed $E_\nu$ and $Q^2$ bins.
151: This is done with a migration matrix M in the above equation
152: where $n_{track}$ refers to the one-track, two-track QE, and two-track
153: non-QE samples. This matrix is computed directly from the Monte Carlo simulation.
154: This result is then applied to the calculated cross section to determine
155: the number of QE events in each reconstructed $E_\nu$ and $Q^2$ bin.
156: In contrast, the shape of the non-QE background is taken directly from
157: the Monte Carlo simulation and already includes these effects.
158:
159: The combination of four flux reweighting
160: factors $\Phi(E_\nu)$ and the overall normalization are unconstrained.
161: The parameter $M_A$ itself affects
162: the total cross-section as a function of energy.
163: In this way, we are fitting the shape
164: of the $Q^2_{rec}$ distribution separately {\em in each energy region}.
165: This ensures that the axial mass measurement is not significantly biased
166: by the normalization in any one energy bin.
167:
168: Finally, the lowest $Q^2_{rec}$ bins, events below 0.2 (GeV/c)$^2$, are not
169: included in the fit. The low $Q^2$ region is where there is the largest uncertainty
170: due to the model for nuclear effects, especially Pauli blocking.
171: This eliminates almost half the data, and the total number of events actually included
172: in the fit is shown in the second column for each data set in Tab.~\ref{Tab.Events}.
173: Low $Q^2_{rec}$ events are also events at low angle, shown by the cos($\theta$)
174: term in parenthesis in Eq. \ref{Eq.Q2}, and corresponds to the right-most two bins in the
175: cos($\theta$) histograms in Fig.~\ref{Fig.lowQ2} for neutrino energies around 1.0 GeV.
176:
177: \subsection{Fit Parameters}
178:
179: We fit a large collection of $E_\nu^{rec}$ and $Q^2_{rec}$ distributions:
180: two data sets K2K-I and K2K-IIa, each with one-track, two-track QE,
181: and two-track non-QE subsamples, a total of 242 bins.
182: The Monte Carlo predictions for these data sets are computed separately
183: using MC samples that are more than 15 times larger than the data.
184: The free parameters $\Phi$ for the flux at each energy are common to both
185: data sets, as is the overall normalization factor,
186: the non-QE/QE ratio and proton rescattering.
187: There are separate 2-track to 1-track
188: migration parameters for each data set, ten parameters in total.
189:
190: These last three parameters are constrained by adding a term to the chisquare.
191: A reweighting or migration is computed and a systematic error for each of these,
192: assumed to be approximately Gaussian, is estimated from studies of the detector
193: and interaction Monte Carlo simulations. As the fit is performed, a chisquare
194: is evaluated, assuming this Gaussian shape and error, and is added to the total
195: chisquare. The total degrees of freedom is thus (242 + 3) chisquare terms - 10
196: parameters = 235 degrees of freedom.
197:
198: Proton rescattering
199: is taken to be uncertain by $\pm$ 20\% from the nominal value used in the NEUT
200: Monte Carlo simulation. A reweighting of events is calculated from a second
201: full-detector Monte Carlo simulation using 80\% of the proton reinteraction cross sections,
202: and the systematic error parameter is used to interpolate between these data samples.
203: This reweighting has the primary effect
204: of increasing or decreasing the number of QE events in the two-track sample, by up to
205: +4.5\% for the 80\% case. The actual
206: effect on the fit is to increase or decrease the number of events in the QE enhanced sample
207: because only that part of the two-track sample has high QE purity.
208:
209: %this figure does not belong here. Putting it here forces it to be on a sensible page.
210:
211: \begin{figure*}[htbp!]
212: \begin{center}
213: \includegraphics[width=5.6cm]{root-k2k1-1tk.eps}
214: \includegraphics[width=5.6cm]{root-k2k1-2tk.eps}
215: \includegraphics[width=5.6cm]{root-k2k1-3tk.eps}
216: \includegraphics[width=5.6cm]{root-k2k2a-1tk.eps}
217: \includegraphics[width=5.6cm]{root-k2k2a-2tk.eps}
218: \includegraphics[width=5.6cm]{root-k2k2a-3tk.eps}
219:
220: \caption{The data and the best fit $Q^2_{rec}$ distributions for K2K-1 data (top)
221: and K2K-IIa data (bottom) for the 1-track, 2-track QE enhanced, and 2-track
222: non-QE enhanced samples. The shaded region shows the QE fraction of each
223: sample, estimated from the MC. The contribution from each energy region is summed for each plot.
224: The lowest two data points in each plot are not included in the fit, due to the large
225: uncertainty in the effects of the nucleus.}
226: \label{Fig.results}
227: \end{center}
228: \end{figure*}
229:
230:
231: The 2-track to 1-track migration is assigned a $\pm$ 5\% error.
232: This error is based on the estimated error in the track-finding efficiency
233: for short, second tracks.
234: Because the detector response and tracking is tuned separately
235: for the K2K-I and K2K-IIa data samples, we include separate parameters for each sample
236: in our fit.
237: This migration is applied to all events in the MC, not just the QE events
238: as for proton rescattering.
239: This parameter is also
240: correlated with neutrino interaction effects such as proton and pion rescattering.
241: