Coherent Neutrino S

attering∗
M. Valverde
arXiv:0906.1516v1 [nucl-th] 8 Jun 2009

Resear h Center for Nu lear Physi s (RCNP), Osaka University,

Ibaraki 567-0047, Japan
and

J. E. Amaro

Dpto. Físi a Atómi a, Mole ular y Nu lear, Univ. de Granada,

E-18071 Granada, Spain
and

E. Hernandez

Grupo de Físi a Nu lear, Dpto. de Físi a Fundamental e IUFFyM,

Fa ultad de Cien ias, E-37008 Salaman a, Spain
and

J. Nieves

Instituto de Físi a Corpus ular (IFIC), Centro Mixto CSIC-Univ. de Valen ia,
Institutos de Investiga ión de Paterna, Aptd. 22085, E-46071 Valen ia, Spain

We present a mi ros opi model for oherent pion produ tion o nu-
lei indu ed by neutrinos. This model is built upon a model for single
nu leon pro esses that goes beyond the usual ∆ dominan e by in luding
non resonant ba kground ontributions. We in lude nu lear medium ef-
fe ts: medium orre tions to ∆ properties and outgoing pion absortion via
an opti al potential. This results in major modi ations to ross se tions
for low energy experiments when ompared with phenomenologi al models
like ReinSehgal's.

PACS numbers: 25.30.Pt,13.15.+g,12.15.-y,12.39.Fe

∗
Presented by M. Valverde at the 45th Winter S hool in Theoreti al Physi s Neu-
trino Intera tions: from Theory to Monte Carlo Simulations, L¡dek-Zdrój, Poland,
February 211, 2009.

(1)
2 valverde printed on June 8, 2009

A proper understanding of neutrino-indu ed pion produ tion o nu lei

is very important in the analysis of neutrino os illation experiments. For
instan e, π 0 produ tion by neutral urrents (NC) is the most important νµ -
indu ed ba kground to νµ → νe os illation experiments, [1℄. Similarly, π +
produ tion by harged urrents (CC) is an important sour e of ba kground
in νµ → νx disappearan e sear hes [2℄. We will follow [3℄ to des ribe the
oherent CC pion produ tion rea tion indu ed by neutrinos
νl (k) + AZ |gs (pA ) → l− (k′ ) + AZ |gs (p′A ) + π + (kπ ) , (1)
where the nu leus is left in its ground state, in ontrast to in oherent rea -
tions where the nu leus is broken or left on an ex ited state.
We build upon a mi ros opi model for the single nu leon pro ess (νN →
l− N π + ). We sum oherently the ontribution of all nu leons on the initial
nu lei, whi h is modeled after a Fermi gas in Lo al Density Approximation.
Coherent π produ tion is most sensitive to the Fourier transform of the
nu lear density for momentum ~ q − ~kπ , whi h gets its maximum value when
~q and ~kπ are parallel. For this parti ular kinemati s the ve tor ontribution
to the single nu leon (W + N → N π ) urrents, whi h is purely transverse
~kπ × ~ q , vanishes unlike the axial ontribution. This dominan e of the axial
ontributions is exploited through the PCAC hypothesis by the ReinSehgal
(RS) model [4, 5℄, to relate the neutrino oherent pion produ tion ross
se tion with the pion-nu leus elasti dierential one.
For the elementary pro ess we use the model derived in
Ref. [6℄, see Fig. 1. In addition to the
∆(1232) pole (∆P ) (rst row) me h- W + π W+ π
anism the model in ludes ba kground 00
11
00
11
∆
N 0
1
0
1
N’
terms required by hiral symmetry: nu- N N’ ∆

leon (se ond row) pole terms (N P , W + W+

π π
CN P ) onta t (CT ) and pion pole 0
1 N 00
11 N’
0
1 00
11
(P P ) ontribution (third row) and pion- N
0
1
N N’ N
00
11

in-ight (P F ) term. Ba kground terms W+

turn out to be very important and be- W+ π 0
1
0
1
π
ause of them, the ux-averaged νµ p → 00
11
00
11
00
11 N π N’
µ− pπ + ANL ross se tion [10, 11℄ is de- N N’
W+
s ribed with an axial form fa tor where 1
0
π
π 0
1
the dominant C5A nu leon-to-∆ axial
N N’
form fa tor was t to data resulting in
C5A (0) = 0.867 and MA∆ = 0.985 GeV. Fig. 1. Model for the W N → N π re-
+ ′

This value for C5A (0) is signi antly a tion. The ir le in the diagrams stands
smaller than the value of about 1.2 de- for the weak vertex.
du ed from the Golberger-Treiman re-
lation (GTR) used in PCAC-based approa hes like RS.
 valverde printed on June 8, 2009 3

When applied to a oherent pro ess in nite nu lei we nd that the N P
and CN P nu leon pole term ontributions partially an el ea h other, that
the P F term does not ontribute to the oherent ross se tion
and the CT and P P terms van-
ish for isospin symmetri nu lei. 0.35
All diagrams; Full model
As seen in Fig. 2 the ee t of

dσ/dkπ (10−38 cm2 /GeV)

0.3 Only ∆; Full model
All diagrams; PWIA
the ba kground terms, both in the 0.25
Only ∆; PWIA
plane wave impulse approximation 0.2

(PWIA) and in the full model al-

12 − 12 +
0.15 ν C→µ Cπ µ

ulation, is very small. Thus, we 0.1 E = 500 MeV ν

predi t ross se tions around a fa - 0.05

tor of (1.2/0.9) ∼ 2 smaller than

2 0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4

approa hes assuming GTR. In the k (GeV) π

following we will always use the full Fig. 2. Pion momentum dierential LAB
model of Ref. [6℄ with C5A (0) = ross se tion, with and without ba kground
0.867 and MA∆ = 0.985 GeV. terms.

Nu lear medium orre tions to

the dominant ∆ diagram are onsidered by in luding the self-energy of the
∆ in the medium, Ref. [7℄. Another major nu lear medium ee t is pion dis-
tortion, whi h is taken this into a ount by repla ing the plane wave with a
pion wave fun tion in oming solution of a Klein-Gordon equation with a mi-
ros opi opti al potential, Ref. [8℄. In left panel of Fig. 3 we show the pion
momentum distribution (LAB) for CC oherent pion produ tion, in the peak
energy region of the T2K experiment. In luding ∆ in-medium self-energy
(long-dashed line) redu es the PWIA results (short-dashed line). Further
in lusion of pion distortion (full model, solid line) redu es the ross se tion,
and the peak is shifted towards lower energies. The total ross se tion re-
du tion is around 60%. Medium and pion distortion ee ts in oherent pion
produ tion were already evaluated in Refs. [9℄. However, the authors of these
referen es negle ted the nu leon momenta in the Dira spinors. The ee t
of this approximation (nu leons at rest, dotted line) results in a ∼ 15% de-
rease of the total ross se tion. In the right panel of Fig. 3 we show the pion
angular LAB distribution with respe t to the in oming neutrino dire tion.
The rea tion is very forward peaked, as expe ted due to the nu leus form
fa tor. The angular distribution prole keeps its forward peaked behavior
after introdu tion of nu lear medium ee ts.
We examine in Fig. 4 the NC dierential ross se tion with respe t to the
variable Eπ (1 − cos θπ ), proposed by MiniBooNE. Our predi tion is appre-
iably narrower than that displayed in Fig. 3b of Ref. [1℄. The MiniBooNE
analysis relies on the RS model, so we try to understand the dieren es
between this and our model. RS's expression for the oherent π 0 produ -
tion ross se tion was dedu ed in the parallel onguration, for whi h the
4 valverde printed on June 8, 2009

0.7
Full Model
0.6 ∆ in medium
0.6

dσ/d cos θµ (10−38 cm2 )

Full Model PWIA
0.5
dσ/dkπ (10−38 cm2 /GeV)

0.5 ∆ in medium
Nucleons at rest
PWIA
0.4 0.4
Nucleons at rest

0.3 νµ 16 O → µ− 16 O π + 0.3 νµ 12 C → µ− 12 C π +

0.2 Eν = 600 MeV 0.2 Eν = 650 MeV

0.1 0.1

0 0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
kπ (GeV) cos θµ

Fig. 3. Right panel: Pion momentum dierential ross se tion in the LAB frame. Left

panel: Pion angular dierential ross se tion.

kµ and kµ′ four momenta are proportional (q 2 = 0) and ~kπ ≈ ~q is assumed

everywhere ex ept in the nu lear form fa tor. Thus, the RS dierential ross
se tion depends on cos θπ or t only through the nu lear form fa tor and any
further cos θπ or t behaviour indu ed by the dependen e of the amplitudes
on kπ is totally negle ted. This is a good approximation at neutrino ener-
gies above 2 GeV. However, at the energies relevant in the MiniBooNE and
T2K experiments non parallel ongurations be ome important, and the RS
model less reliable. We have re-derived RS's expression within our model by
12 12 0
1.0 νµ C → νµ Cπ
dσ/dEπ(1−cosθπ) (10 cm /GeV)

0.9 A
Eν = 1300 MeV PWIA, only ∆P with only C5 .
cm /GeV)

2.0
0.8 Eν = 800 MeV MiniBooNE flux convoluted
A
PWIA, only ∆P with only C5 .
2

Eν = 550 MeV
kπ= q in the pion emission vertex. MiniBooNE flux convoluted
2

0.7 Eν = 300 MeV

MiniBooNE Coll. analysis (rescaled)
-38

νµ MiniBoone flux convoluted 1.5 MiniBooNE Coll. analysis no FSI (rescaled)

−38

0.6
νµ MiniBoone Coll. analysis (rescaled)
dσ/dEπ (1−cosθπ) (10

0.5
12 12 0
ν C→ν C π 1.0
0.4

0.3

0.2 0.5

0.1

0
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.2 0
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.20
Eπ(1-cosθπ) (GeV) Eπ (1−cosθπ) (GeV)

Fig. 4. Laboratory Eπ (1 − cos θπ ), at MiniBooNE energies. In the left panel we use

our full model in luding full nu lear orre tions. In the right panel, we show results
A
from the C5 axial ontribution of the ∆P me hanism, negle ting pion distortion and ∆

in medium ee ts. We display the MiniBooNE published histogram (solid), onveniently

s aled down, from Ref. [1℄ and MiniBooNE results (dashed histogram) obtained by turning

o the NUANCE FSI of the outgoing pion (G. Zeller, private ommuni ation).
 valverde printed on June 8, 2009 5

onsidering only the dominant axial part of the ∆P pro ess (∼ C5A ), negle t-
ing nu lear medium orre tions and repla ing kπ by q in the pion emission
vertex. In the right panel of Fig. 4 we see that the new Eπ (1 − cos θπ ) distri-
bution is signi antly wider than that obtained without implementing this
repla ement and that it reasonably des ribes the MiniBooNE published dis-
tribution (solid histogram). The agreement is mu h better when ompared
with some preliminary MiniBooNE results (dashed histogram) obtained with
a dierent treatment of the outgoing pion distortion. This al ulation shows
the un ertainties asso iated to the t = 0 approximation at low energies.
Pion distortion indu es some additional dis repan ies. MiniBooNE im-
plement this ee ts through a Monte Carlo as ade model for the π prop-
agation in medium. However, oherent ross se tions annot be al ulated
from a Monte Carlo as ade algorithm, be ause the oherent produ tion is
a one step pro ess and by using a Monte Carlo algorithm we break the o-
heren e of the pro ess. Nevertheless, one ould still reasonably estimate the
total oherent ross se tion from the NUANCE FSI as ade if it is used to
eliminate from the ux not only those pions whi h get absorbed or suer
inelasti pro esses but also those that undergo QE steps. To our knowledge,
these latter events are a ounted for in the MiniBooNE analysis, despite not
being oherent. In our al ulation the imaginary part of the pion-nu leus
potential removes from the ux of the outgoing pions those that are absorbed
or undergo QE intera tions. We try to estimate this ee t by swit hing o
the QE ontribution to the pion-nu leus opti al potential indu ed by elasti
pion-nu leon ollisions, and using an opti al potential with an imaginary
part due to absorption and inelasti hannels alone. For the MiniBooNE
ux averaged ross se tion we nd a 20% enhan ement (see NC* entry in
Table 1) in good agreement with the ee ts observed by turning o the NU-
ANCE FSI. We on lude that the RS model is not as reliable for MiniBooNE
and T2K experiments as for ν energies above 2 GeV. Our model provides an
Eπ (1 − cos θπ ) distribution mu h more peaked, and thus it might improve
the des ription of the rst bin value in Fig. 3b of Ref. [1℄. Moreover, the
drasti hange in the Eπ (1 − cos θπ ) distribution shape might produ e some
mismat h between the absolute normalization of the ba kground, oherent
and in oherent yields in the MiniBooNE analysis.
In Table 1 we show our predi tions for the MiniBooNE, K2K and T2K [14℄
ux averaged ross se tions. Sin e our model negle ts all resonan es above
the ∆, our predi tions be ome less reliable when the energy in reases, so we
set up a maximum neutrino energy in the ux onvolution Emax , negle ting
the long tail of the ν ux. Up to these energies, one an assume ∆ domi-
nan e and still over about 90% of the total ux (65% for T2K antineutrino
ux). We expe t orre tions (higher ross se tions) of around 2030% to
our results for MiniBooNE and T2K (larger for K2K). Our predi tion lies
6 valverde printed on June 8, 2009

Rea tion Exp. σ̄ [10−40 m2 ℄ σexp [10−40 m2 ℄ Emax [MeV℄

CC νµ +12 C K2K 4.68 < 7.7 [13℄ 1.80
CC νµ +12 C MiniBooNE 2.99 1.45
CC νµ +12 C T2K 2.57 1.45
CC νµ +16 O T2K 3.03 1.45
NC νµ +12 C MiniBooNE 1.97 7.7 ± 1.6 ± 3.6 [12℄ 1.34
NC* νµ +12 C MiniBooNE 2.38 7.7 ± 1.6 ± 3.6 [12℄ 1.34
NC νµ +12 C T2K 1.82 1.34
NC νµ +16 O T2K 2.27 1.35
CC ν̄µ +12 C T2K 2.12 1.45
NC ν̄µ +12 C T2K 1.50 1.34

Table 1. Coherent pion produ tion total ross se tions.

well below the K2K upper bound, while being notably smaller than that
given in [12℄ for NC MiniBooNE. However, noti e the previous dis ussion on
RS model, whi h is being used in the MiniBoone analysis. The K2K ross
se tion and the value quoted in Ref. [12℄ seems somehow in ompatible with
the approximate relation σCC ≈ 2σNC , expe ted from ∆−dominan e and
negle ting nite muon mass ee ts.

REFERENCES

[1℄ A. A. Aguilar-Arevalo et al. [MiniBooNE℄, Phys. Lett. B 664, 41 (2008).

[2℄ K. Hiraide et al. [S iBooNE Collab.℄, Phys. Rev. D 78, 112004 (2008).
[3℄ J. E. Amaro et al. Phys. Rev. D 79, 013002 (2009).
[4℄ D. Rein and L. M. Sehgal, Nu l. Phys. B 223, 29 (1983); Phys. Lett. B
657, 207 (2007).
[5℄ E. Hernandez et al.arXiv:0903.5285 [hep-ph℄.
[6℄ E. Hernandez, J. Nieves and M. Valverde, Phys. Rev. D 76 033005 (2007).
[7℄ E. Oset and L. L. Sal edo, Nu l. Phys. A 468, 631 (1987).
[8℄ J. Nieves, E. Oset and C. Gar ia-Re io, Nu l. Phys. A 554, 554 (1993).
[9℄ L. Alvarez-Ruso et al. Phys. Rev. C 75, 055501 (2007); Phys. Rev. C 76,
068501 (2007).
[10℄ S. J. Barish et al., Phys. Rev. D 19 (1979) 2521.
[11℄ G. M. Rade ky et al., Phys. Rev. D 25 (1982) 1161.
[12℄ J. L. Raaf, PhD thesis, Univ. of Cin innati, (2005).
[13℄ M. Hasegawa et al. [K2K Collab.℄, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 252301 (2005).
[14℄ I. Kato [K2K and T2K Collab.℄, Nu l. Phys. Pro . Suppl. 168, 199 (2007).