c Copyright 1998
Je rey S. George

Experimental Study of the Atmospheric =e Ratio in theMulti-GeV Energy Rangeby
Je rey S. George
A dissertation submitted in partial ful llmentof the requirements for the degree ofDoctor of Philosophy
University of Washington
1998
Approved by(Chairperson of Supervisory Committee)
Program Authorized
to O er Degree
Date

In presenting this dissertation in partial ful llment of the requirements for the Doctoral degree at the University of Washington, I agree that the Library shall makeits copies freely available for inspection. I further agree that extensive copying of
this dissertation is allowable only for scholarly purposes, consistent with \fair use"
as prescribed in the U.S. Copyright Law. Requests for copying or reproduction ofthis dissertation may be referred to University Micro lms, 1490 Eisenhower Place,
P.O. Box 975, Ann Arbor, MI 48106, to whom the author has granted \the rightto reproduce and sell (a) copies of the manuscript in microform and/or (b) printed
copies of the manuscript made from microform."
Signature
Date

University of Washington
Abstract

Experimental Study of the Atmospheric =e Ratio in the Multi-GeV
Energy Range
by Je rey S. George
Chairperson of Supervisory Committee
Research Professor R. Je rey Wilkes
Department of Physics
The atmospheric neutrino ux ratio  =e and its zenith angle dependence havebeen measured in the multi-GeV energy range using an exposure of 33.0 kilotonyears of the Super-Kamiokande detector. By comparing the data to a detailed Monte
Carlo simulation, the ratio (=e)DATA=(=e)MC = 0.650.05(stat.)0.07(syst.). In
addition, a strong distortion in the shape of the event zenith angle distribution was observed. The ratio of the number of upward to downward -like events was found to be
0.610.05(stat.)0.02(syst.) with an expected value of 0.980.03(stat.)0.02(syst.).
The same ratio for e-like events was consistent with unity. These data provide
strong evidence for  $ X neutrino avor oscillations with m2 between 3x10,2
and 3x10,4 eV2 and sin2 (2) = 1. These results are fully consistent with SuperKamiokande results obtained at sub-GeV energies and also consistent with previous
measurements.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Figuresvi

List of Tables

x

Chapter 1:
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Neutrino History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Neutrinos in the Standard Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Beyond the Standard Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Experimental Motivations for Non-Zero  Mass . . . . . . . . . . . .

Chapter 2:
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4

Cosmic Rays and Atmospheric Neutrinos

Cosmic Ray Primary Fluxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Cosmic Ray Secondaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Meson Decay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Production Height . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Chapter 3:
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5

Introduction: Neutrinos and Physics

Other Experiments

The Kamiokande Experiment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The IMB Experiment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The MACRO Experiment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The Frejus Experiment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The Soudan 2 Experiment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1
1
11
19
21
27

33
33
35
35
37

38
40
42
44
46
47

3.6 The NUSEX Experiment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.7 The Baksan Experiment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

48
49

Chapter 4:

The Super-Kamiokande Experiment51

Chapter 5:

Inner Detector Data Acquisition

64

Chapter 6:

Outer Detector Data Acquisition Electronics

72

Chapter 7:

Outer Detector Data Acquisition Software

93

Chapter 8:

Data Flow: Online to Oine

104

4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4

5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4

Neutrino Interactions in Water-Cherenkov Detectors . . . . . . . . . .
Cherenkov Radiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Cherenkov Ring Imaging . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Detector Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Front End Electronics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Data Bu ering Electronics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Online Workstations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Trigger Electronics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

6.1 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.2 Quadrant Hut Electronics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.3 Central Hut Electronics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

51
55
58
59
64
68
68
69
72
73
81

7.1 Anti-Counter Collector Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
7.2 Anti-Sorter Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
7.3 Anti-Sender Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
8.1 Run Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
8.2 Event Builder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
8.3 Super Low Energy Event Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
ii

8.4 The Reformat Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
8.5 The TQREAL and FLOW Processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107

Chapter 9:

Detector Performance108

9.1 Water Clarity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
9.2 Photo-multiplier Tubes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
9.3 Trigger Rates and Number of Events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111

Chapter 10: Calibrations

115

10.1 Laser Timing Calibration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
10.2 Linac . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
10.3 Nickel Source . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
10.4 Cosmic Ray Muons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
10.5 Michel Electrons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
10.6 0 Rest Mass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
10.7 Xenon Lamp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Chapter 11: Simulation

115
117
118
118
119
120
121

122

11.1 Atmospheric Neutrino Flux . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
11.2 Neutrino Interactions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
11.3 Particle Tracking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
11.4 Monte Carlo Event Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
11.5 Outer Detector Monte Carlo Tuning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Chapter 12: Event Selection

123
126
128
129
129

141

12.1 Initial Sample . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
12.2 Fully Contained Neutrino Data Reduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145
12.3 Partially Contained Event Reduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
iii

Chapter 13: Data Summary

157

Chapter 14: Analysis

184

Chapter 15: Other Explanations for Results

207

Chapter 16: Conclusions

214

Bibliography

218

Appendix A: Calculating Live-time

230

13.1 Flavor Double Ratio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13.2 Vertex Distributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13.3 Event Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13.4 Zenith Angle Distributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13.5 Systematic Errors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
14.1 Vacuum Oscillations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
14.2 Neutrino Flight Path . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
14.3 How Oscillations A ect the Zenith Angle Distribution . . . . . . . . .
14.4 Chi-square Oscillation Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
15.1 Backgrounds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
15.2 Sources of Neutrinos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
15.3 Detector Asymmetries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
15.4 Physics E ects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
15.5 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

157
158
162
164
170
184
187
189
190
207
209
210
212
213

16.1 Summary of Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214
16.2 Comparison with Other Analyses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215
16.3 The Future . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216

A.1 Event by Event Corrections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230
iv

A.2 Sub-run Corrections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234
A.3 Net Live-time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 239v

LIST OF FIGURES
1.1 QED photon emission and Fermi's analogous -decay model . . . . .

14

2.1 Observed uxes of cosmic ray protons, helium nuclei, and CNOs fromthe compilation of Webber and Lezniak1 . Solid lines are a parameterization [1] for solar mid, dashed lines for solar min., and dotted lines
for solar max. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

34

3.1 Relative depths of atmospheric neutrino experiments . . . . . . . . .
3.2 MACRO detector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.3 MACRO detector supermodule detail . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

39
44
45

4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6

Angular deviation of outgoing lepton in simulated CC interactions . .
Particle with v<c/n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Particle with v>c/n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Cherenkov ring from charged particle track in water . . . . . . . . . .
Super-Kamiokande detector construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Super-Kamiokande support structure (ICRR, University of Tokyo) . .

55
56
56
59
60
62

6.1 Overview of outer detector DAQ electronics . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.2 OD DAQ quadrant electronics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.3 OD DAQ central hut VME crate modules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

73
74
82

9.1 Attenuation length over time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
9.2 ID tube death . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
vi

9.3
9.4
9.5
9.6
9.7

Outer detector tube death . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Dark rate for inner detector photo-multiplier tubes . . . . . . . . . .
Live-time since detector commissioning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Integrated number of events since detector commissioning . . . . . . .
Trigger rate since detector commissioning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

111
112
113
113
114

10.1 Reconstructed 0 Mass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
11.1 Neutrino ux ratio versus E (GeV), from [2]. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
11.2 Contour map of rigidity cuto for the  arrival directions at Kamioka.
Azimuth angles of 0; 90; 180; and 270 show directions of south, east,
north, and west respectively [2] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
11.3 Atmospheric  uxes multiplied by E2 for the Kamioka site at solar
mid from [2]. The dotted line is a high energy calculation without therigidity cuto . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
11.4 Time distributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
11.5 Good hit distributions for data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
11.6 Good hit distributions for Monte Carlo and 5kHz dark noise . . . . .

124

13.1 Z vs. R2 (FC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13.2 Z vs. R2 (PC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13.3 Z Distribution (FC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13.4 Z Distribution (PC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13.5 Z Distribution (FC e-like) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13.6 Z Distribution (FC mu-like) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13.7 R2 Distribution (FC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13.8 R2 Distribution (PC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13.9 Radial Distribution (FC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

159
159
160
160
161
161
162
162
163

vii

126

127
139
140
140

13.10Radial Distribution (PC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13.11Radial Distribution (FC e-like) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13.12Radial Distribution (FC mu-like) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13.13Radial Distribution (PC ingoing) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13.14Radial Distribution (PC outgoing) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13.15Number of rings (FC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13.16Number of rings (FC e-like) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13.17Number of rings (FC mu-like) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13.18Visible energy (FC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13.19Visible energy (PC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13.20PID Likelihood for Multi-GeV 1-ring events (FC) . . . . . . . . . . .
13.21Electron-like momentum, 1-ring, multi-GeV (FC) . . . . . . . . . . .
13.22Muon-like momentum, 1-ring, multi-GeV (FC) . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13.23Zenith angle distribution, 1-ring e-like, multi-GeV (FC) . . . . . . . .
13.24Zenith angle distribution, 1-ring -like, multi-GeV (FC) . . . . . . . .
13.25Zenith angle distribution, (PC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13.26Zenith angle distribution, -like, multi-GeV (FC+PC) . . . . . . . .
13.27Compare  data to MC, multi-GeV (FC+PC) . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13.28(=e) Ratio vs. zenith angle, 1-ring, multi-GeV (FC) . . . . . . . . .
13.29R versus zenith angle, multi-GeV (FC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13.30R versus zenith angle, multi-GeV (FC+PC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13.31R versus momentum, multi-GeV (FC+PC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13.32R versus wall distance, multi-GeV (FC+PC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13.33Comparison of calibration sources with Monte Carlo. . . . . . . . . .

163
164
164
165
165
166
167
167
168
168
169
170
170
171
171
172
172
173
174
175
175
176
176
180

14.1 Neutrino Path Length Calculation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188
14.2 Neutrino ight path length vs. cos(z ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188
viii

14.3 Oscillation probability as a function of zenith angle for sin2(2)=1 andm2 =10,2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
14.4 Oscillation probability as a function of zenith angle for sin2(2)=1 andm2 =10,2. The same distribution with 20% angular smearing is superimposed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
14.5 2 = 2:7 contours . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
14.6 2 /d.o.f for sin2 (2)=1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
14.7 R vs m2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
14.8 2 = 2:7 contours . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
14.9 2 /d.o.f . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
14.102 = 7:78 contours . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
14.112 /d.o.f . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
14.12Comparison of data and Monte Carlo at best t parameters . . . . .

197

198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206

15.1 Azimuthal arrival directions for simulated events at Super-Kamiokande 212
A.1 Muon rate distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 236
A.2 Mismatched events vs. run . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 238
A.3 PC bad subruns cut by hand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240

ix

LIST OF TABLES
1.1 Current density terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.2 Atmospheric neutrino results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.3 Direct neutrino mass limits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

15
30
31

2.1 Branching ratios for , K . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

36

4.1 Fraction of simulated events from various interaction modes . . . . .

53

11.1 Fully contained multi-GeV MC sample summary . . . . . . . . . . . .
11.2 Partially contained multi-GeV MC sample summary . . . . . . . . . .
11.3 Common parameters used to tune the OD Monte Carlo Simulation .
11.4 Re ectance of Tyvek as a function of wavelength . . . . . . . . . . . .

130
130
131
135

12.1 Initial sample criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
12.2 2nd PC reduction criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
12.3 3rd PC reduction criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
12.4 4th PC reduction criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

142
150
152
155

13.1 Event summary. MC expectations are scaled to 33.0 kton-yrs. . . . .
13.2 Up/down asymmetry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13.3 Summary of systematic error . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13.4 E ect of E, uncertainty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
13.5 Di erence between eye-scan and automatic ring counting. . . . . . . .
13.6 E ects of the energy scale uncertainty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

157
168
177
178
178
180

x

13.7 Systematics due to cross-section parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182
13.8 E ect of OD cluster cuts on FC/PC separation . . . . . . . . . . . . 182
A.1 Event by event corrections to live-time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231
A.2 Reasons to cut a sub-run . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234

xi

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to rst thank my advisor, Dr. R. Je rey Wilkes. He understood
what it meant to have a family in graduate school and continually reminded me
to remember the important things. I deeply appreciated his constant supportof me as a student and a scientist. Dr. Kenneth Young pushed me to think
harder and gave valuable scienti c direction as an unocial second advisor.
Drs. Wick Haxton, George Wallerstein, and Toby Burnett rounded out mygraduate committee with valuable perspective.
The other members of the UW Particle Astrophysics Group have also bene ted me greatly. Dr. Larry Wai was a mentor to me. I appreciated his leadership in joining the on-site atmospheric neutrino analysis group. I learned
everything I know about electronics from Hans Berns. He is an extraordinarily
skilled engineer whose contributions to the DUMAND and Super-Kamiokande
experiments go far beyond what most people realize. Dr. Jere Lord could becounted on for an enthusiastic word at any time of the day or night. Linda
Vilett managed the administrative nightmares with grace and courage. Fellow
graduate students Andrew Stachyra and Ross Doyle helped carry the load ofbuilding and running a new experiment. Eric Zager and Erik Olsen shared
many a computing adventure.
I should like to thank the members of the DUMAND collaboration, especially John Learned and the University of Hawaii group. DUMAND was agreat experiment and I will always be proud to have been a part of it. The
xii

failure of the nal ATV cruise to repair the junction box was one of the mostdevastating days of my life. Thanks to Hans Berns, Je Bolesta, and Kristal
Mauritz for sharing the misery and nding ways for us to move on.
The Super-Kamiokande experiment is a joint e ort of many groups. I
joined the experiment a little too late to pay my way hanging photo-multipliertubes and I always appreciated those who did. John Flanagan deserves special
mention as one of those people who \made it happen".
I would like to express particular thanks to the leadership of the SuperKamiokande experiment, in particular Y. Totsuka, Y. Suzuki, M. Nakahata,
and T. Kajita from ICRR (U. Tokyo), and H. Sobel and J. Stone for the US
institutions. Their hard work and leadership made the detector a reality.
I have to thank T. Kajita in particular. As a leader in the atmospheric
neutrino analysis he welcomed me into the group and went to great e orts
to make it possible for me to participate from across the Paci c Ocean. He
became a surrogate advisor to me and I greatly appreciated his counsel. The
on-site atmospheric analysis group went to a lot of trouble to welcome thisEnglish speaker. In particular, Y. Hayato, M. Shiozawa, K. Okumura, and
K. Ishihara provided me with immeasurable help during construction of theouter detector data acquisition. Y. Fukuda's friendly singing to his computer
will never be forgotten. These people also gave me a lot of assistance when I
turned to the atmospheric neutrino analysis. Thank you for your friendship.
Looking farther back, I would like to thank my professors at Seattle Paci c
University who went to a lot of trouble to ensure that I had the nest undergraduate physics education they could possibly provide. I hope I can returnthe favor to my own students one day. Dr. Roger Anderson hired me for asummer for a project I never really nished (but still have the notes for!). Dr.
xiii

James Crichton was a role model for me.
Thanks to Dr. Norval Fortson and Dr. Steve Lamoreaux of the Universityof Washington for allowing me to spend nine months in their atomic physics
laboratory. Some part of me will always regret the lack of funding that sentme into neutrino astrophysics.
I am particularly grateful to Je Wilkes, Ken Young, Hank Sobel, andJordan Goodman for their strong letters of recommendation. I wish I could
have accepted all of the jobs you found for me. Your support was reallyappreciated.
My parents deserve great thanks for their support over many years. Mom,
we've come a long way from when we were learning algebra together! Bothof them listened even when I made no sense and reminded me that He who
created all this wonderful stu is also a part of my life.
Lastly I want to express my great appreciation for my wife, Gaye. She put
up with eight years of student living in the hope that \sometime soon" I would
be done and have a real job. That time stretched far beyond what she everthought possible and the \real job" isn't yet what she deserves. Thank you
for your patience, your endless work raising our children, your love, and yoursupport. Natasha and Spencer, you make my heart glad.
The experiment was made possible with the cooperation and assistance ofthe Kamioka Mining and Smelting Company and the Japanese Ministry of Education, Science, Sports, and Culture (Monbusho). This work was supportedby the United States Department of Energy (DOE) under grant numbers DEFG01-96ER40956, DE-FG02-96ER40956, and DE-FG03-96ER40956.

xiv

DEDICATIONFor Mark Roberts,
missionary, teacher, inventor, and friend.
You told a young boy in the Peruvian Andes that God is a physicist.
I never forgot.

xv

Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION: NEUTRINOS AND PHYSICS
1.1 Introduction
Since its postulation in 1933, the neutrino has played a central role in the understanding of particle physics. Its properties probe the very small; high energy particle
physics, to the very large; cosmology and the structure of the universe. Rarely does asingle particle have the opportunity to in uence thought in such a wide range of ourunderstanding of the universe.
The neutrino has become a fundamental part of physics. Its unique position as the
only neutral fundamental particle both completes the standard model and challenges
it. Its interaction properties make it an ideal probe for otherwise unobservable reachesof the universe. The sheer numbers of neutrinos in the universe make them a criticalissue for the large scale gravitational evolution of the cosmos. Exactly what neutrinos
are and precisely how they behave may provide the key to questions in many very
diverse elds. Three types are currently known, each one paired with its corresponding
charged lepton, the electron, muon, or tau particle. As far as is known they are stableagainst decay.
Neutrino Properties

Neutrinos have zero electric charge. No electric or magnetic dipole moments have yet
been measured. Astrophysically this is important because they travel in straight lines
from the point of origin without bending by galactic magnetic elds. It also means

2that they cannot be detected directly by their electric or magnetic properties.
Neutrinos interact only through the weak interaction. In the standard V-A theoryof weak interactions, the weak force only couples to negative helicity (left-handed)neutrinos and positive helicity (right-handed) anti-neutrinos. The extremely small(possibly zero) mass means neutrinos always move at essentially the speed of light.
This tends to polarize all particles with spin to left-handed states.
No evidence for the existence of right-handed neutrinos has ever been found.
Whether this is because such particles do not exist or simply because of the small
mass or the lack of coupling to the weak force remains an open question. Searches
for right-handed neutrinos or right-handed weak interactions provide stringent testsof the standard model and its possible extensions.
The neutrino interaction cross-section is extremely small. On the good side, thisallows neutrinos to escape from stellar interiors and pass through dense galactic structures, bringing us information directly from regions that could not be observed in any
other way. They easily pass through the earth, making our planet into a large lterfor everything else. The tiny cross-section makes life very dicult for the experimenters, though. Huge volumes or high luminosity are required to see any neutrino
interactions in a reasonable time. Neutrino physics has been the story of ever-larger
detection volumes and ever-higher accelerator beam luminosities.
Neutrinos are present all around us from many sources. Experiments have goneon in many energy regimes to study neutrino properties. At the lowest energies,
radioactive decay measurements put direct limits on the possible electron neutrino
mass. Atomic power reactors emit neutrinos which can be detected nearby throughlayers of shielding. The rst detection of neutrinos was done in a reactor experiment.
A rather larger nuclear reactor is our sun. Solar neutrinos have been an exciting eld ofstudy since they are a direct probe of the nuclear processes occurring in the otherwise
totally inaccessible core of the sun. Observation of fewer than the expected numberof neutrinos comprises the \solar neutrino problem" with exciting implications for3either solar models or particle physics.
At somewhat higher energies, the neutrino ux on earth is dominated by those
produced by cosmic rays striking earth's atmosphere. Early experiments measured
a ratio of muon to electron type neutrinos that was inconsistent with expectations.
Since cosmic rays are nearly isotropic one would expect to see the same e ect inall directions but one experiment observed a dependence of the ratio on the direction of observation. These observations became known as the \atmospheric neutrino
anomaly".
Neutrinos in Super-Kamiokande

The Super-Kamiokande detector is the latest entry in the atmospheric and solar
neutrino detection arena. Vastly larger than any of its predecessors, this experimenthas surpassed all previous data in both quantity and quality. The large size also allow
measurements at higher energies than ever before possible.
The majority of neutrino events detected are events whose interaction products
are fully contained within the detector. These o er the highest statistics and bestenergy measurements but tend to be at energies where the neutrino products do notwell respect the direction of the incident neutrino. As a result the bene t of large
numbers of events is partly balanced by a large uncertainty in the neutrino ightpath.
At multi-GeV energies (Evis > 1:33 GeV) a signi cant fraction of muons producedin the interaction escape from the inner detector. These \partially contained" events
have much lower statistics than the \sub-GeV" samples and only a minimum energy
estimate can be made. However, the multi-GeV neutrinos contain a much lower
uncertainty in arrival direction and re ect a much higher distribution in energy. This
gives them an analyzing power far surpassing what might be expected from statistics
alone.
This thesis describes a new measurement of the  =e ratio in atmospheric neutri-

4
nos using the recently constructed Super-Kamiokande neutrino detector at multi-GeV
energies. High energy fully contained muon and electron events are extracted fromthe standard data reduction streams and a completely separate data reduction pathcreated speci cally for partially contained muons. Measurements in this energy range
serve as an important check on the lower energy results. E ects of neutrino avor
oscillations should increase with energy and be even more visible in high energy data
than in lower regimes.
Neutrinos and Me

My participation in the Super-Kamiokande experiment began in the summer of 1995,
just in the construction phase of the outer detector. The preparation for this job,however, actually began three years earlier when I joined the DUMAND (Deep Underwater Muon and Neutrino Detector) experiment [3]. It was there that I learned
about water Cherenkov detection, neutrino physics, and data acquisition, all skills
that I could later bring to Super-Kamiokande .
The DUMAND experiment was designed to study TeV and higher energy neutrinos from extra-galactic sources using deep ocean water as a Cherenkov medium. I
worked primarily with the Junction Box Environmental Module designed to control
the array sonar systems that would determine the photo-multiplier tube positions [4].
I designed the power distribution system and mechanical chassis for this module andassembled the subsystems into a complete sonar system with continuous monitoringof the ocean environment. I wrote the underwater operating software that gave control over a number of oceanographic instruments and sonar channels. My experiencein digital electronics culminated in the redesign of a four channel signal processing
board capable of timing sonar signal transit times and recording raw hydrophonesignals from the ocean environment.
My original thesis topic was an attempt to connect my data acquisition experience
to high energy neutrino astrophysics. I planned to use the signal processing board I

5
had redesigned to search for acoustic signals from high energy neutrino interactions[5]. The ability to do this could vastly increase the e ective volume of the detector.
The cancellation of the DUMAND experiment ended this hope and after presenting apaper on acoustic neutrino detection at the 24th International Cosmic Ray Conferencein Rome [6], I joined the rest of University of Washington particle astrophysics groupin working on Super-Kamiokande .
The University of Washington was a relative late-comer to the Super-Kamiokande
experiment, and I was the last of the group to make an ocial switch from the
DUMAND experiment. Other members of the group, especially Dr. Ken Young andfellow graduate student Andrew Stachyra, had been exploring various options for theouter detector data acquisition system for some time [7]. I came in just at the time
when construction funds were nally beginning to appear and hardware could bepurchased. It was time to ll in the data acquisition system ow chart boxes withreal electronics.
My experience with system integration and low level control software made it
natural for me to assume responsibility for the outer detector data acquisition system.
My primary job was to write an interface to allow a SUN workstation to accesselectronics modules in the VME crate that would bu er the entire data stream. This
interface eventually became the control program ("collector") for the entire front end
data acquisition system [8]. I also wrote the initial version of the program to take data
blocks gathered from the four quadrants of the detector and repack them into event
blocks ready to merge with inner detector data ("sorter"). Larry Wai, a postdoctoral
researcher, joined the group soon after and eventually took responsibility for the sorter
program.
I worked closely with Hans Berns, a University of Washington electronics engineer,
to de ne the requirements for custom electronics boards which he designed for latching
auxiliary event information such as the detector event number, and a relative timestamp. I devised a scheme to latch the UTC time obtained from a GPS satellite

6
receiver to provide absolute event timing [9, 10]. We added a variety of digital control
signals to improve the "collector" program's ability to monitor and control all aspectsof the front end data acquisition hardware.
One of my duties at this time was to integrate work done by the University of Maryland group into the framework of the control software that I was writing. Drs. Mei-li
Chen and Jordan Goodman had written programs to drive the FSCC crate controller
modules for the FASTBUS electronics crates in the quadrant electronics huts. The
FSCCs bu er digitized photo-multiplier data into dual-port memories through theDC-2 VME auxiliary bus controller, for which they also provided a control program.
I worked with them to learn how to control their code from my VME-workstationinterface. We added new features to help the "collector" program better monitor the
status of the FASTBUS crates and to automatically recover from occasional glitches.
We also managed to diagnose several data acquisition problems using these programs.
Construction became frantic as the April 1996 detector commissioning deadline
drew near. I went to Japan to help complete the installation of the outer detector
electronics and cabling. This was the rst time that we had access to more than
one quadrant worth of data acquisition modules. It was also the rst time that mycontrol software had to be integrated into the main detector run control. I made thesechanges while at the same time diagnosing hardware and software faults with the helpof Larry Wai and expert guidance of Hans Berns. In some cases we rebuilt the custom
electronics cards on the spot. The outer detector became functional just before theApril 1 deadline and I was privileged to be part of the commissioning ceremony witha fully operational experiment.
Data acquisition problems continued to plague the outer detector, as might be
expected from any brand new system. I spent much of the next year at the detector
improving the control program and diagnosing data acquisition problems that would
periodically stop data taking or cause problems when restarting. I helped to identify
several major problem areas which were addressed by Hans Berns in an upgrade

7of the custom electronics. Larry Wai and I corrected innumerable small errors inboth the "collector" and "sorter" programs. Within a few months after the detector
commissioning, the data acquisition system was stable. I worked then to improve themonitoring of the detector status and to solve a few nagging problems which were nota serious threat to the integrity of the data stream.
With the detector running smoothly, I had time to begin analysis work. The SuperKamiokande collaboration initially created two independent atmospheric neutrino
analysis teams which happened to split largely along national lines. Larry Wai andI made the pioneering step of asking to join the "on-site" analysis team in order to
get immediate access to data and to tap the experience of the Kamiokande members.
Dr. Ken Young followed us shortly afterwards. In addition to general analysis duties
we were given the responsibility for developing a reduction algorithm for "partiallycontained" neutrino events, those whose interaction products escape the detector.
Larry developed fast clustering algorithms and worked to remove stopping and cornerclipping muons from the raw data. I developed a cut based on outer detector activity
near the projected entrance point. Real neutrino events should have not have lightat the entrance to the detector. This turned out to be a powerful way to separate
entering contamination from exiting neutrino events.
As part of the development of the partially contained reduction stream I spentsome time working to improve the tuning of the outer detector Monte Carlo simulation. This was important because estimates of the eciency of the reduction
algorithms depended on this simulation. I adjusted the values of previous tuning
parameters and added new ones to allow the re ectivity of the outer detector liner tobe set separately for the top, bottom, and wall sections of the detector. I was able tobring the simulated hit and charge distributions for a sample of events to within about
10% of the real data distributions for all regions of the detector. This was enough to
produce reasonable estimates of the partially contained reduction performance.
I managed the processing of the partially contained neutrino data reduction for

8
the rst 414 live-days of exposure. This involved running each data le through all the
reduction stages and creating a nal sample of events. I managed the groups of humanscanners that were initially a part of the reduction process and were later reduced
to quality control. For much of the sample I served as \ nal" scanner, arbitrating
previous scan results. The reduction process entails a lot of bookkeeping also, to be
sure that the entire sample is processed and that the detector exposure is correctly
calculated. My re-calculation of the partially contained live-time corrected signi canterrors in previous results presented by other members. Ross Doyle assisted with the
bookkeeping after the rst 414 days and Dr. Kate Scholberg brought the nal sample
up to 535 days of exposure with new reduction monitoring tools.
The partially contained events comprise my contribution to the atmospheric neutrino analysis. These sample the highest energies of neutrinos which interact in thedetector volume. I prepared a summary of these events for various collaboration
meetings and showed that they exhibit a strong zenith angle dependence. The "onsite" and "o -site" independent analysis groups have now merged after demonstrating
consistency between their respective results for fully contained neutrino events. My
data currently remain the only set of partially contained events available from SuperKamiokande .
I combined the partially contained event sample with the multi-GeV fully contained events provided by other members of the analysis group to make a complete
multi-GeV neutrino data set. This dissertation presents an analysis of that data inthe context of mu $  neutrino avor oscillations. The results are consistent withother analyses performed with lower energy data and provide good con rmation forevidence supporting the existence of a neutrino mass.
Outline of the dissertation

The rest of the introductory chapter will provide a background to the history andrelevance of neutrino physics. A theoretical basis for the role of neutrinos in the stan-

9
dard model and the framework for neutrino masses is provided. Current experimental
limits on neutrino masses are also reviewed.
Chapter 2 describes the cosmic rays interactions that produce atmospheric neutrinos. The physics of these interactions form the basis for the expected neutrino avor
ratios. The exciting aspect of current neutrino results is a deviation from these expectations. Chapter 3 discusses previous experimental measurements of atmospheric
neutrinos.
The structure of the new Super-Kamiokande experiment is described in Chapter
4. The principle of operation of a water Cherenkov detector is described, including neutrino interactions in water and the detector's response to those interactions.
Following chapters will describe the Super-Kamiokande detector operation in greater
detail.
Building such a large experiment is very much a collaborative e ort. Construction of the inner detector and associated data acquisition electronics was primarilya responsibility of the Japanese collaborators. However, the actual event data arerecorded by the inner detector. A description is included in Chapter 5. The outerdetector is a much simpler, but vitally important component supplied by the US
institutions. The University of Washington group led the work of designing and constructing the outer detector data acquisition system, an e ort in which I was heavily
engaged. Electronics for the outer detector system are described in Chapter 6.
The \collector" program, for which I was completely responsible, handles thecontrol and readout of the entire outer detector electronics system. I also contributed
to the online event sorting and repackaging routines, all of which are described in
Chapter 7. Chapter 8 discusses the means by which the raw data are handled before
nally being delivered to analysis groups.
The detector performance and calibrations are discussed in Chapters 9 and 10.
These are vitally important monitors of the operation of the detector. Regular energy
and timing calibrations ensure that the experiment stays healthy and form the basis

10of our knowledge of the accuracy of our energy estimates.
Chapter 11 describes the atmospheric neutrino detector simulation. This simulation (along with an independent calculation) forms the basis of the collaboration's
claim that the measured data do not agree with expectations. My work in tuning theouter detector simulation to more closely match reality is also described.
Chapter 12 nally describes the process by which atmospheric neutrino events are
selected from the hundreds of thousands of raw triggers recorded every day. Two
separate reduction streams are presented. The fully contained event selection is thehigh energy extension of the same analysis used to produce atmospheric results in the
sub-GeV energy range. A second data reduction stream was built to nd partiallycontained neutrino interactions. The author and Larry Wai, then a post-doctoral
researcher in the University of Washington group had complete responsibility for thepartially contained event reduction. The creation of the data reduction algorithms
was shared roughly equally and I was responsible for processing the raw data. A
summary of the data from both analysis streams in the multi-GeV energy range ispresented in Chapter 13.
Chapter 14 presents the author's analysis of the neutrino data based on an assumption of  !  avor oscillations. Allowed regions of oscillation parameter
space are calculated.
Chapter 15 summarizes what other e ects could cause the observed results. Various backgrounds and detector systematic e ects are discussed. Studies of these backgrounds have shown that it is very unlikely that they could be responsible for what
is measured.
The Super-Kamiokande data are opening up an exciting new window on neutrino
physics. Data from the sub-GeV event sample have already provided very strong
evidence for the existence of a neutrino mass. The present study of higher energy
events con rms that data and its interpretation in terms of neutrino avor oscillations.
It is hoped that this work, along with the e orts of the entire Super-Kamiokande

11collaboration, will contribute to our continuing understanding of the neutrino and its
properties.

1.2 Neutrino History
1.2.1 Probing the nucleus: 1896-1930

The story of the neutrino really begins in 1896 with the discovery of radioactivity[11]. At the suggestion of Poincare, Henri Becquerel was investigating the properties ofvarious uranium salts. To his amazement, tightly wrapped photographic plates nearby
were found to have been exposed. Pierre and Marie Curie continued investigations
into the phenomenon of radioactivity, chemically separating isotopes which caused
the e ect. In 1898 they succeeded in isolating polonium and radium. By 1899,
Rutherford had shown that there were several di erent types of radiation which had
di erent de ections in a magnetic eld. He called dubbed the types alpha, beta, andgamma. J.J. Thompson had discovered the electron as \cathode rays" in 1897. By
1902 the Curie's had shown that beta radiation consisted of these electrons. The 1903
Nobel prize in physics would be shared by Becquerel and the Curie's for their workin radioactivity.
Excited work by many people led to the conclusion by 1904 that all three typesof radiation emitted from the nucleus. Alpha radiation had been shown to be a 4 He
nucleus; gamma radiation a very energetic photon; and beta radiation an electron.
The view at this time and through the 1920's was that nature consisted of only two
fundamental particles; the electron and proton. The nucleus was considered to be a
combination of the two.
Beta radiation quickly presented a problem. Since the electron was the only observed particle emitted, it should have had a well-de ned, xed energy corresponding
to a two body decay. The kinetic energy was shared only between the recoiling nucleus
and the electron. Moreover, the kinetic energy available, or Q value, is simply the12mass loss of the nucleus. All of the initial nuclei started with the same mass so the Q
value should be identical. Alpha and gamma radiation showed narrow spectral peaks,
clearly showing excitation of discrete nuclear states. Beta radiation was drasticallydi erent.
It was clear by 1914 from studies by Lise Meitner, Otto Hahn, Wilson and von
Baeyer, James Chadwick and others, that the electron energy spectrum was in fact
continuous. Conservation of energy appeared to fail. In addition, there was a problem
in accounting for the spin-statistics of 14 N and 6Li which did not appear to obey theexclusion principle for spin-1=2 objects.
1.2.2 Postulating the neutrino: 1930-1934

On December 4, 1930, Wolfgang Pauli made a \desperate remedy" to save the ideaof conservation of energy as well as the statistics problem. In a letter to Meitner andHans Geiger who were attending a conference at Tubingen [12] [13], he proposed thatan undetected third particle is emitted which shares the energy with the electron. This
\neutron" had to be neutral, have a mass comparable to or less than the electron mass,
carry spin-1/2 statistics and have a high penetrating power. He expressed little hopethat his solution could work since particles with the properties he imagined shouldhave been detected already. \However," he wrote, \ only those who gamble can win"
and urged the attenders to consider his idea. Supported by Meitner and Geiger, theidea was discussed favorably. Pauli did not attend the conference personally, declaring
himself \indispensable" at a ball to be held in Zurich at the same time.
In 1932, James Chadwick discovered a neutral particle inside the nucleus and took
the name \neutron" to match the proton. The charge and statistics t Pauli's idea,
but the mass was comparable to the proton mass. This large mass was much too highto explain the beta-decay spectrum.
By 1933, the impasse began to break. Pauli nally became bold enough to publish
something of his idea as a footnote to Heisenberg's report at the Seventh Solvay

13
Conference in Brussels. The concept was already well known to most physicists.
It appears, though unclear, that Pauli still thought of the of the electron and theneutrino as constituents of the nucleus. F. Perrin, who attended the conference,
showed soon after that a massless neutrino could be created at the time of emission.
He also attempted to extract an upper mass limit from experimental -decay spectra
and concluded that the mass was e ectively zero [14].
Enrico Fermi also had attended the conference in Brussels. Shortly afterward, hepublished his theory of beta-decay which assumed that a neutrino always accompanies
the decay electron and that both are created at the moment of emission [15]. This
took care of the problems of explaining numerous spin-1/2 particles coexisting as
nuclear constituents. He coined the term \neutrino" at this time, Italian for \little
neutral one".
Fermi's model was fashioned in close analogy to Dirac's relativistic quantum theory
for electromagnetism. QED described the radiation of a photon by an electron as athree pronged vertex carrying coupling strength ,e. Following the presentation by
Commins [16], the e ective Lagrangian density takes the form:

LEM (x; t) = ,ej (x; t)A (x; t)(1.1)

where j is the electromagnetic current density and A is the four-vector potential
for the electromagnetic eld. The current density is writtenj (x; t) = e(x; t)e (x; t)(1.2)

Here e represents the electron eld. In Fermi's prescription for beta decay, theelectron and anti-neutrino together play the role of the emitted photon, see Figure
1.2.2. Terms in the interaction are replaced in a straightforward way by analogy with
QED.

14

_
e
_
ν

p

e
k
e

n

Figure 1.1: QED photon emission and Fermi's analogous -decay model

j !
A !

p

n

e



(1.3)
(1.4)

,e ! pG(1.5)

2

The new coupling constant G at this point was a free parameter that remained to
be determined by experiment. Fermi's beta decay Lagrangian became:

L = pG2 pn e

 + h:c:(1.6)

The hermitian conjugate term accounts for positron emission and e, capture.
Fermi's theory broke down at high energies, but gave a very good explanation of thebeta decay electron spectrum. It became the prototype for modern eld theories.
It was shortly afterward pointed out by Gamow and Teller [17] that this is not
the only form of the interaction which could be written. Fermi chose the vector formin analogy to QED. Actually, ve di erent types of matrices can sandwiched into theweak current term, classi ed by their transformation properties. These are listed inTable 1.1. Gamow and Teller showed that the S and V type occur only for transitions
with angular momentum J = 0 while A or T are required for J = 1. Afterthe discovery of parity violation intense work showed that the weak interaction has
a vector axial-vector form which violates parity maximally. At low energies the only
substantive modi cation to the Fermi model is to replace by (1 , 5).

15
Table 1.1: Current density terms

1

scalarvector
 tensor
 5 axial-vector
pseudo-scalar
5

S
V
T
A
P

Also in 1933, Anderson discovered the positron and at the end of the year Frederic
Joliot-Curie demonstrated beta-plus radioactivity with emission of a positron insteadof an electron. These begin to provide crucial evidence for P.A.M. Dirac's relativistic
quantum theory and Fermi's weak interaction model.
Circumstantial evidence was mounting but the quest itself was still a dicult one.
By 1934 it was becoming clear that the neutrino cross-section must be extremely
small, less than 10,44 cm2 [18]. This fact would thwart the hopes of would be neutrino
hunters for the next twenty two years. The discovery of the neutrino would require ahuge source of neutrinos, a huge detector, or both.
1.2.3 Con rmation and Consequences: 1934-1983

The largest man made sources of neutrinos were on the way. In 1942 at the University of Chicago, Enrico Fermi successfully operated the world's rst atomic pile. The
chain reaction released neutrons and neutrinos. The success of the test launched the
Manhattan Project, centered at Los Alamos, New Mexico, culminating in the explosion of the rst atomic bomb in 1945. Frederick Reines was working on the project.
With the bomb program largely behind him, he was searching for an \important butimpossible problem". He proposed putting a detector near an atomic blast to takeadvantage of the vast quantities of neutrinos expected. A rough calculation led him
to believe the experiment was possible with a one cubic meter sized detector. Reines16
broached the idea to Fermi in 1951 in a timid chat. Fermi agreed the bomb was agood source of neutrinos, but also could not see how to build the detector [19]. Feelingthat if Fermi didn't know how to do it, it couldn't be done, Reines put the idea aside
for some months.
In 1952 a chance conversation with Clyde Cowan while grounded at the Kansas
City airport changed all that. The two began talking about interesting physics problems to work on and quickly found themselves partnering to study neutrinos. The
initial plan was still to use the bomb as a source of neutrinos and was actually approved by the Los Alamos Laboratory management.
The Reines/Cowan experiment relied on detecting the photons from interaction
products of anti-neutrinos in the reaction  + p ! e+ + n. 400 liters of an aqueous
cadmium chloride solution provided a target. The positron annihilates with an atomic
electron to make two simultaneous gamma ray photons. The neutron is capturedby the cadmium nucleus with more photon emission at a characteristic time of 15
microseconds later.
As an example of how ideas are formed, Reines and Cowan gave a talk at Los
Alamos in which they described their proposed detector. They discussed the coincidence between the positron and neutron pulses as a label for the reaction withouteven thinking that the same signal could be used to reduce background. Asked in
the seminar if a ssion reactor might not be as suitable a source as the bomb, thepair argued persuasively against the idea. That very night, both realized how the coincidence could be used, thereby making the reactor a much more attractive option.
Plans were changed the next day and the Hanford experiment was born [20].
In an amazingly short time by today's standards, the plan was put into action. The
experiment was proposed in February 1953 [21], constructed at Hanford, Washington
by the spring, and results were published by the summer [22]. A strong hint ofa signal was observed, but not enough to claim unambiguous detection. In 1956
the experiment was upgraded and moved to the brand new Savannah River plant in

17South Carolina. This plant, in addition to having more ux than the Hanford reactor,
also had a room that could house the detector 12 meters underground. The addedlevel of shielding from background cosmic rays made the di erence and this time theneutrino signal was clear. Thirty six years after its proposal by Pauli, the existenceof the neutrino was experimentally con rmed [23]. This landmark experiment would
lead many years later to a long-awaited Nobel prize in Physics for Reines in 1995.
Now that the neutrino had been experimentally veri ed, new ideas and projects
owed quickly. A discussion between T. D. Lee and Mel Schwartz in a Columbia
University cafeteria in 1959 led the latter to realize that an intense beam of neutrinos
was possible from pion decay. Lee and C.N. Yang tackled the theoretical calculations
while Schwartz went to Leon Lederman, Jack Steinberger, and Jean Marc Gaillard todesign the experiment. They found a detector to suit their needs in a spark chamber
built by Jim Cronin at Princeton. Cronin went on to share the 1980 Nobel Prize withVal Fitch for symmetry violations in K 0 decays.
Construction proceeded over the next several years at Brookhaven while Lee andYang became more and more convinced that if , ! e, + was not observed thenthere must exist two types of neutrinos [24].
In 1962 the question was nally settled. Out of the millions of neutrinos producedby the Brookhaven accelerator, 40 interacted in the detector. 34 of those produced
a muon, a clear signal. Only six produced electrons, consistent with background.
There was no signi cant electron component and the issue was settled. There were
two distinct types of neutrinos [25]. Schwartz, Lederman, and Steinberger would
share the 1988 Nobel prize for discovery of the muon neutrino and their work withneutrino beams.
1.2.4 A uni ed approach: 1983-present

The next twenty years were fruitful ones for particle physics. The quark model developed and many new particles were discovered. The neutrino was hardly forgotten.

18
Much of the new data on nuclear structure and quark content came from studies of
the weak interaction for which neutrinos are the prototype.
Parallels between the quarks and leptons were hard to ignore. In 1970, Glashow,
Illiopoulos, and Maiani proposed the existence of a second quark family [26]. Similarities between quark and lepton families were more and more suggestive.
A uni ed eld theory for the weak interactions proposed by Weinberg and Glashow[27] and Salam [28] had been gaining ground. Some of the predictions of the theory
were the existence of three intermediate vector bosons mediating the weak interaction.
Two of these were charged and reactions that could involve them were well known.
The third, however, was neutral. No known reaction went by way of a weak neutral
current. The existence of such reactions would provide a decisive test of the newtheory. In 1973, after a furious race, neutral current reactions were discovered at
CERN's Gargamelle bubble chamber [29]. Fermilab con rmed the result later thesame year [30].
In 1977, Leon Lederman with the Stanford team discovered the b quark, part ofa new third quark family [31]. About the same time Martin Perl discovered the tau
lepton, pointing to a third lepton family [32]. The tau neutrino is expected to also
exist, but as of now (early 1998) it has not been detected experimentally.
The 1980's brought the pieces of the story together into the picture we see today.
The gauge theory based on SU (3)color  SU (2)flavor  U (1)EM by Weinberg, Glashow,
and Salam was generating excitement. For the rst time a gauge theory appeared tocompletely unify the weak and electromagnetic forces at only the cost of a few extra
gauge bosons whose masses, by invoking the Higgs mechanism, could be predicted.
Discovery of the predicted weak neutral currents was already a triumph of the theory.
All that remained was direct detection of the actual gauge particles.
Discovery of the W in 1983 and later the Z at CERN at almost precisely thepredicted masses brought a Nobel Prize to Carlo Rubbia and great acclaim to the newtheory. In little more time the new \electroweak" theory became the basis for what

19
is now considered the Standard Model. At the same time it became the prototype forall subsequent e orts at uni cation of forces.
A side bonus of the discovery of the Z 0 is that its decays limit the number oflight neutrino avors. Since Z 0 ! qq; ll one can measure the partial decay width
into \invisible", presumably neutrino, channels. The limit applies to so called sterile
neutrinos as well as the known active ones as long as the mass is less than half therest mass of the Z 0. By this time in 1998, millions of Z decays have been recorded
and the measurement of the number of channels is now 2.991  0.016 [33].
In the current version of the Standard Model, neutrinos occupy a prominent placeas the only leptons interacting solely via the weak interaction. With their lack ofelectric charge they are a unique probe into reactions that would be inapproachable
with any other particle.

1.3 Neutrinos in the Standard Model
The weak interaction has been modi ed somewhat from Fermi's four fermion pointlike interaction. Analogous to QED's exchange of photons, the weak interaction ismediated by the exchange of massive vector bosons, W  and Z 0, accounting for the
short range of the force. Following discovery of CP violation in the kaon system[34] the interaction was given a vector-axial vector (V-A) form which violates parity
maximally. The weak Lagrangian takes the form of (1 , 5 )(1.7)

and the (1 , 5) serves as a projection operator for the left handed chirality statesin .
The presence of the left handed projection in the weak Lagrangian means thatright-handed neutrinos do not enter into the theory at all. This mirrors the state of
the experimental reality in which a right handed neutrino has never been observed.

20
On the other hand, it means that the theory has no opinion about the existence ofsuch particles.
The left handed leptons enter into the theory as SU(2) doublets, coupling theelectron with its neutrino, the muon with its neutrino, and the tau with its as yet
undiscovered neutrino. The right handed electron, muon, and tau enter as SU(2)singlets without an associated neutrino.

0 1
@eA
e

eRH

0 1
@A

LH



RH

0 1
@ A

LH



LH

(1.8)

RH

Lepton number conservation by avor is assumed by the Standard Model becauseof nuclear beta decay studies and the absence of reactions like  ! e . It has becomea near article of faith for most physicists. This faith may be misplaced. Lepton avor
number conservation is not demanded by a fundamental symmetry in the same way
that, for example, electron charge conservation is. Many grand uni ed theories andextensions to the standard model naturally allow violation of lepton number.
The assumption of lepton number conservation along with the lack of right handed
neutrinos leads to a massless neutrino. Typical Dirac mass terms analogous to thecharged leptons are excluded because there are no right handed elds in the theory.
The Majorana terms which could generate a mass explicitly violate lepton number
conservation and furthermore make the theory non-renormalizable. These terms are
discussed in more detail in section 1.4.2.

21

1.4 Beyond the Standard Model
1.4.1 Neutrino Masses

One of the most immediate extensions one might make to the standard model is the
addition of a neutrino mass term. There are several reasons why this is a very natural
thing to do. Neutrinos in the standard model lack a mass analogous to that of thecharged leptons because there are no right-handed neutrino elds. The other possible
type of mass term (Majorana) is excluded because of an a priori assumption of lepton
number conservation. Furthermore, the neutrino belongs to a lepton multiplet whichcontains a massive charged lepton. Most grand uni ed theories place the leptons andquarks together in the same multiplet. A massless neutrino in a multiplet where all
the other members are massive would be exceptional indeed.
The motivations for investigating non-zero neutrino masses are also compelling.
Fermion masses are not well understood in the standard model anyway. Better understanding of neutrino masses may help our understanding of the rest. Most granduni ed theories and standard model extensions include massive neutrinos. Experiments probing neutrino masses also probe the predictions of these theories. If theuniverse contains hot dark matter, massive neutrinos could be an important part ofthat and have a signi cant role in cosmology. Further, the experimentally observed
solar and atmospheric neutrino anomalies are suggestive of neutrino avor oscillations. Many indications tell us that neutrino masses are not only a natural extension
to present theories, but that nature may well have chosen to use them.
We are led, then, to some very deep questions which center around the propertiesof the neutrino. Do neutrinos have mass? If not, why don't they? If yes, why is themass so small? Is the neutrino equivalent to the anti-neutrino? How many species ofneutrinos are there?
The rst question is obviously a key one. If neutrinos are massive, it implies
that there could be a leptonic mixing matrix analogous to the Cabibbo-Kobayashi-

22
Maskaya (CKM) quark mixing matrix. This could lead to neutrino avor oscillations.
Massive neutrinos could constitute a signi cant fraction of the mass of the universe.
If neutrinos do not have mass, one has to ask why that should be so. A precisely
massless neutrino should require some fundamental reason that is not at all obvious
at this point.
The rst question begs the second. If neutrinos are indeed massive, why is themass so small? Limits on the electron neutrino mass have fallen from Pauli's guess ofa mass comparable to that of the electron to under 5 eV. The neutrino mass scale isa factor of 105 lower than the corresponding charged leptons and a de nite mass has
still not been measured. Why should the scales be so di erent?
Another profound question is whether the neutrino is a two-component or a fourcomponent object. In the general case where both Dirac and Majorana masses exist
the natural basis is a two-component Majorana one. In the limit where the Majorana
masses disappear, as is the case with the charged leptons, the mass eigenstates become
pairwise degenerate and can be patched together to form a Dirac four-component particle. A Dirac four-component neutrino has a nice analogy with the other leptons but
makes the small mass of the neutrino dicult to explain. A Majorana two component
neutrino provides a \natural" way of explaining the small masses by the introductionof a higher mass scale and the seesaw mechanism. This approach also requires use ofa Higgs triplet and causes explicit lepton number violation.
Finally, we might ask how many neutrino species exist. One might imagine continuing to add generations ad in nitum. LEP data on the Z 0 line shape now limit
the number of light (< 12 MZ 0 ) active neutrino species to 2:991  0:016 [33]. Big bang
nucleosynthesis limits the number of sterile species. Sterile species could be SU(2)singlets and thus ignored by the weak interaction.
Big bang nucleosynthesis provides a limit on the number of neutrino species in
the following way. In nucleosynthesis models, a gas of baryons is followed as theuniverse cools. The input physics is well determined. The weak interaction drops

23
out of equilibrium around a temperature of 1 MeV. At this point, the neutron to
proton ratio is determined entirely by the thermodynamic equilibrium. It is assumed
that at the time of nucleosynthesis, photons, electrons, and several neutrino species
are present along with the nucleons. The number of species of neutrinos a ects theequilibrium and hence the abundance of the light elements. Observation of lightelement abundances can restrict the allowed number of species. Data on 4He strictly
limit N to 4 or less, with 4 being only marginally allowed [35]. Here \light" means
up to around 10 MeV.
Supernova 1987A also provided a somewhat looser limit on the number of speciesof neutrinos. In the collapse of a neutron star, the binding energy is radiated as
neutrinos. About 10% of the energy comes away in the initial neutronization burst
while the rest comes out in thermal pairs from e+ e, !  for all species of neutrinos
with masses less than around 10 MeV. Assuming some form of equipartition of energy
among species, the number of e or e events detected depends on the number ofneutrino species. Data from Kamiokande and IMB limit N to 6.7 or less [35].
1.4.2 Theory of Neutrino Mass

There are a limited number of ways that one can add a neutrino mass term to thestandard model. The following discussion is based on that of Haxton and Stephenson[36]. Neutrinos may have the same Dirac mass terms as the charged leptons, but in
addition, because of their neutral charge, they may include Majorana terms which
are forbidden for other particles.
As mentioned above, the Dirac four component particle is a special instance of themore general case of two Majorana elds. In the limit where the Majorana masses
vanish, as is required for any particle but the neutrino, the two mass eigenstates
become pairwise degenerate and can be patched together into a single four component
particle. Given this, a natural way to understand the Majorana terms is to begin with
the Dirac mass term and generalize it to the case of n particles with distinct left and24right elds, each with their own couplings. The Dirac mass term for n elds is:ij

LDm = , m2D i j + h:c:

(1.9)

If we introduce left and right handed elds de ned according to L = 12 (1 , 5)
and R = 21 (1 + 5) , the term can be rewritten asij

LDm = , m2D

iL jR + iR jL + h:c:

(1.10)

Now allow the left and right elds to be distinct and to have distinct couplings.

LDm

ij
ij
m
m
~
0
D
! , 2 iL jR , 2D iR0 jL + h:c:
= , L MDy R0 , R0 MD L

(1.11)(1.12)

where L MD R0 = MDij iL jR is a matrix product over the n elds and 2MDij =m~ ijD + (mijD ).
Take further that
( L )c( R0 )c =R L

(1.13)( R0 )c( L )c =L R

(1.14)

00

so the Lagrangian density nally becomes

LDm = , 21hy 0 + 0M

c
T 0 c
LM
D L + ( 0 )cM ( L ) + ( L )c M ( )
D R

R

R

D

D

R

i

(1.15)

25
In matrix form,

2
32 c 3T0
00
MD 7 6 ( L) 766
i 66 0 0 MD 0 777 666 R0 777
h c 0
1
D
0
c
Lm = , 2 ( L) ; R ; L; ( R ) 6
64 0 MDy 0 0 775 664 L 775
MD

0

0

(1.16)( R0 )c0This is the most general Dirac mass term. However, it is not the most general
possible mass term for neutrinos. It is possible to add Majorana terms of the form

LMm = , 21h( L)cML L + ( R0 )cMR R0i+ h:c:(1.17)

These terms are not invariant under the gauge transformation ! ei and do
not conserve lepton avor number. They explicitly transform a particle into its antiparticle. An equivalent interpretation is that it creates or annihilates two neutrinos,
an important prescription for neutrino-less double beta decay. Such terms would
also violate the conservation of electric charge for charged particles, hence only Diracterms are allowed in that case. The neutrino is unique in allowing the possibility ofincluding the extra Majorana terms.
One can take ML and MR to be symmetric and write the general mass term forthe neutrino as the sum of the Dirac and Majorana contributions Lm = LDm + LMm .
Again in matrix form,

32 c 3
2
T
0
0
M
M
L
D 7 6 ( L) 766
h c 0
i 66 0 0 MD MRy 777 666 R0 777
10c
Lm = , 2 ( L) ; R ; L; ( R ) 6 y y
64 ML MD 0 0 775 664 L 775
MD MR00(1.18)( R0 )c

The middle array is a 4n x 4n matrix. It is sucient to work with the upper corneras all the information is contained there. In general the \mass matrix" (here only

26
the upper quarter is actually used) is complex and symmetric, but if CP is conserved
then M will be real. The mass eigenvalues can be found by diagonalizing M.

0
1
T
M M
M = @ L Dy A
MD MR

(1.19)A particularly interesting limit happens when the right hand mass coupling MR isdominant. This occurs naturally in left-right symmetric models. In these models, theneutrino Dirac mass term comes from the same spontaneous symmetry breaking thatgenerates the quark and lepton masses. One expects then that the neutrino Diracmass MD should be on the scale of the quark or charged lepton masses.
For the Majorana masses in these models, the left handed coupling ML is related
to neutral current neutrino scattering parameters which have been measured. These
results indicate that ML would be very small. MR is related to the scale of spontaneous
symmetry breaking and is very large, much larger than the quark or charged lepton
masses.
To summarize, in the right hand dominant model we can take ML = 0, MD  Mq
or Ml , and MR  MD . This limit provides for the famous \seesaw" mechanism which
gives a natural explanation for the lightness of the neutrinos.
Diagonalizing the mass matrix

01@ 0 MD A
MD MR(1.20)

in this limit yields two mass eigenvalues:

m1  MD2 =MRm2  MR(1.21)

27
There is one very light and one very heavy neutrino arising naturally. Precisely
what the scales should be is another question, but it is clear that this mechanism
easily explains the lightness of the neutrino as a result of an e ective interaction at ahigher scale.
The Dirac mass scale mD is typically taken to be on the order of the corresponding
charged lepton mass. Some grand uni ed theories suggest it should be related to thelower mass quark in each family. The Majorana scale, MR , can be almost anythingfrom a few TeV to the Planck mass (1019 GeV). An intermediate choice between 1012 ,1016 GeV gives neutrino masses in around the right range for solar and atmospheric
neutrino oscillations and is also relevant to hot dark matter calculations.
2)  2eVm1  (:5MeV
15
10(1.22)

This estimate of the lower mass eigenvalue is easily consistent with experimental
limits on the mass of the electron neutrino. It is assumed here that the electron
neutrino mass comes \mostly" from m1 and that the mass eigenvalues for the three
avors have roughly the same hierarchy as the charged lepton masses.

1.5 Experimental Motivations for Non-Zero  Mass
The lack of a fundamental symmetry preventing neutrinos from having a non-zeromass is hardly proof that God in fact gave it one. In spite of the philosophicallycompelling implications of a neutrino mass, all of it is wishful thinking without experimental support. Fortunately, there are experimental anomalies that might wellindicate that the neutrino has a de nite mass. All use some form of neutrino avor
oscillations to explain the discrepancy between theory and experiment.

28
1.5.1 The Solar Neutrino Problem

The \solar neutrino problem" came out of an experiment started by R. Davis in1966 to measure the solar neutrino ux. For about twenty years this was the only
neutrino detector observing the sun. It produced the surprising result that around one
third as many neutrinos were observed as were expected from standard solar model
calculations [37].
The Davis experiment consisted of a tank of 615 tons of perchloroethylene (C2Cl4).
The liquid happens to be manufactured in pure form with large quantities as a fabriccleaning uid. The tank is located 4850 feet underground in the Homestake Gold
Mine near Lead, South Dakota. Neutrino capture on the 37 Cl atoms produces 37Ar
and an electron with a threshold energy of 0.8 MeV. The argon, roughly 15 atoms, isextracted every few months in an incredible feat of chemical separation.
The solar neutrino problem was initially the simple fact that only half as many
neutrinos as expected were actually observed. Later experiments con rmed this witha variety of methods. Kamiokande and IMB were water-Cherenkov experiments,
GALLEX [38] and SAGE [39] use a chemical method similar to Homestake, butwith pure gallium metal. Because the di erent methods and detectors have di erent
energy thresholds, they test di erent parts of the solar neutrino spectrum. Fitting
their results yielded the second part of the solar neutrino problem, that the 7Be arehighly suppressed relative to the 8 B neutrinos even though the latter is a branch of the
7 Be decay chain. Attempts to reproduce this behavior by changing the solar models
have largely been unsatisfactory, even when introducing highly non-standard models.
The failure of these attempts is not a conclusive victory for solar model a cionados,
see for example Haxton and Cummings [40], but it is enough to push current thinking
toward a particle physics solution.
Nearly all particle physics solutions require a massive neutrino. If the neutrino hasa magnetic moment it could interact with the magnetic elds at the surface of the sun.

29This could ip a normal left-handed electron neutrino into a right handed neutrino.
The weak interaction does not involve right handed particles so it would be e ectively
sterile and not detected. A magnetic moment on the order of 10,10B or so would be
required to ip a neutrino in typical elds at the solar surface. This is barely withincurrent experimental limits [41], but it is far higher than conventional electroweakmodels. Credence for this idea came largely from an apparent anti-correlation of ratewith the solar sunspot cycle. Data taken during the most recent solar cycle do notsupport such a correlation [42].
The other particle physics solution is that massive electron neutrinos oscillate into
other avors which are not detected. The water Cherenkov detectors could detectmuon neutrinos, but only at much higher energies. For example, a 15 MeV e thatturns into a  is far below the threshold for producing a muon. A variation on
this scenario is the MSW e ect which allows for greatly enhanced oscillations in thepresence of matter.
1.5.2 Atmospheric Neutrino Anomaly

Solar neutrinos are not the only indicator of neutrino oscillations. Atmospheric neutrinos exhibit a similar discrepancy. Atmospheric neutrinos are decay products of and K mesons created in interactions of primary cosmic rays in the atmosphere. The
dominant decay is!  +  ( ) ! e + e (e) + ( )(1.23)(1.24)

From this one expects the ratio of ( +  )=(e + e) to be around two. Instead,
it is found to be close to one. This apparent de cit of muon neutrinos has beencalled the atmospheric anomaly. Typically, the ratio from the data is divided by the
expected ratio from detailed simulations as shown in Equation 1.25. This is done to30cancel uncertainties in the cross-sections and absolute uxes.
)DATA
R  (=e(=e)(1.25)

MC

Not all experiments measured this de cit, especially in smaller data samples, but
by now the anomaly is fairly well established. Table 1.2 summarizes the world results
on atmospheric neutrinos.
Table 1.2: Atmospheric neutrino results
Kamiokande
IMB
Soudan 2
FrejusBaksanNUSEX

R=0.600.07(stat.)0.05(syst.)
R=0.540.05(stat.)0.07(syst.)
R=0.610.14(stat.)0.07(syst.)
R=0.990.13(stat.)0.08(syst.)
R=0.950.22(stat.)
R=1.00.3(stat.)4.92 ktonyr
7.7 ktonyr
1.52 ktonyr
2.0 ktonyr
0.74 ktonyr

The suggestion of a neutrino oscillation explanation became very compelling in
1994 when Kamiokande reported a dependence of R on the zenith angle [43]. Zenith
angle translates directly into neutrino path length.
Comparison of the mixing parameters from solar and atmospheric neutrinos makeit clear that they do not come from the same solution. Both could be explainedby some form of oscillation if e ! ; X at solar energies and  !  ; X at
atmospheric neutrino energies. Reactor data from CHOOZ [44] nearly rule out theparameter space for  ! e explanations of the atmospheric neutrinos.
1.5.3 Short Baseline { LSND

A third glimpse of possible neutrino oscillations comes from a short baseline experiment known as the Liquid Scintillator Neutrino Detector (LSND) at the Los Alamos
Meson Physics Facility (LAMPF). The experiment is illuminated with muon neutrinos

31from + in- ight decays. The appearance of e is detected through e + p ! e + n in
167 tons of liquid scintillator viewed by photo-multiplier tubes. Cosmic rays produce
a large background, especially in regions of the detector which are not well shielded.
The results are at best low-statistics with large backgrounds.
The rst positive results were published in 1995 [45]. The analysis was not convincing and a dissenting interpretation was published simultaneously in the same
volume [46]. Since that time the experiment has continued to run and the signal has
grown while remaining relatively consistent with the rst hints [47].
1.5.4 Direct Experimental Mass Limits

No experiment has yet directly measured a neutrino mass. Upper limits have been
established by various kinematic methods. Table 1.3 lists the current mass limits
for the three species of neutrino. The experiments are dicult and the limits getcorrespondingly worse as the mass of the associated lepton goes up and its lifetime
goes down.
Table 1.3: Direct neutrino mass limits
Flavor
Me
M
M

Limit
< 5:1eV< 160keV< 24MeV

Method3 H -decay !  + 
 !  + 5(0)The best limits for the electron neutrino mass come from 3 H beta decay experiments. The spectrum of the ejected electrons in the region near the energy endpointshould be qualitatively di erent if the neutrino has mass. Tritium is chosen as it has
the lowest Q value, imparting only 18.6 keV in total kinetic energy to the electron
and neutrino. This enhances the number of decays in the endpoint region and lowers the required energy resolution of the electron spectrometer used to measure the32electron energy. Further, the initial and nal nuclear states are easier to calculate
than in heavier nuclei. The Los Alamos group used a gaseous 3H source that avoided
many remaining diculties with calculating the nuclear matrix elements. Their result
became mainly statistics limited. The one disturbing trend among all of the tritium
experiments was that they pointed to a negative value for m2 . This suggested a common systematic error in the technique which was not taken into account. Present
indications are that this error has been found and the experiments will give a positive
upper limit.
The best limits on the muon neutrino mass come from careful studies of stopped
pion decays: + ! + [48]. Measurement of the momentum of the muon andknowledge of the rest masses of the muon and pion provide limits on the possible
neutrino mass. Advances in the magnetic spectrometers used to measure the muon
momentum have improved this result greatly.
The limit on the tau neutrino mass is even more dicult. The current upper limit
is set by the ALEPH collaboration at CERN's Large Electron Positron (LEP) collider[49]. The limit is set by tting the invariant mass and energy in 27  ! 5(0)
decays. The two dimensional likelihood t provides a substantial gain in sensitivity
over previous limits set by ARGUS ( ! 5 ) and CLEO II [50] ( ! 5 , ! 320 ) using only the invariant mass.
Clearly neutrinos are deep in the middle of fundamental questions about the standard model and extensions to it. In presenting new data from Super-Kamiokande itis hoped that this thesis can add a little bit to the answers.

Chapter 2

COSMIC RAYS AND ATMOSPHERIC NEUTRINOS
2.1 Cosmic Ray Primary Fluxes
Cosmic rays are high energy particles lling the interstellar void. They are madeup largely of protons (90 % by number), alpha particles (9%) and heavier elements,
but nuclei from all known elements as well as photons and electrons are also present.
Given the gyro-magnetic radius of these charged particles in the galactic magnetic
elds, it appears they are contained in the galaxy but are not local to our solar system.
The very highest energy particles may be extra-galactic. When cosmic rays collidewith Earth's atmosphere they produce interactions nearly isotropically in the upper
regions. These can lead to showers and hadronic cascades detected many di erent
ways at ground level.
There are various techniques for detecting cosmic ray interactions. Gamma ray
telescopes observe the gamma rays produced by decays of the neutral mesons in theshower. These typically reach a maximum in the middle atmosphere. Air Cherenkov
telescopes detect Cherenkov radiation from the charged mesons and electrons in thehigh upper atmosphere. Ground air shower arrays detect the pions and K 's that reachthe ground in scintillator or Cherenkov detector arrays. Some of these experiments
include underground muon detectors to measure the muon component after the lightmesons have been ltered out by a layer of earth. Much deeper, underground neutrino
detectors study the neutrino component by either observing the neutrino reactions
themselves or upward coming muons induced by neutrinos passing through the earth.
The true origin of the cosmic rays remains largely a mystery. Events have been34
observed with primary energies over 1020 eV. The acceleration mechanisms to get
protons to these energies are widely debated.
Most of the components of cosmic rays are well described with a power law spectrum of E ,2:710:05 [51]. Figure 2.1 shows a compilation of cosmic ray spectra due
to Webber and Lezniak [52] for hydrogen, helium, and CNO nuclei. The power law
behavior and dominance of the proton ux is clearly evident.
10

10

3

H

2

10

-1

-1

-1

Flux ( m sec sr GeV )

10

4

He

0

CNO

-2

10

1

10

10

10

10

-1

-2

-3

-4

10

-1

0

1

2

10
10
10
10
Kinetic Energy per Nucleon (GeV)

3

Figure 2.1: Observed uxes of cosmic ray protons, helium nuclei, and CNOs from thecompilation of Webber and Lezniak1 . Solid lines are a parameterization [1] for solar
mid, dashed lines for solar min., and dotted lines for solar max.
The level of solar activity changes the expected cosmic ray spectrum. Solar ares
pump large quantities of low energy protons into earth's atmosphere. Figure 2.1 shows
predictions for various points in the solar cycle. The e ect persists up to a few GeV
per nucleon for the primary particles. Neutrinos from these particles will only carrya fraction of that energy, so this is not a concern for the current analysis.

35

2.2 Cosmic Ray Secondaries
Cosmic rays hitting the atmosphere produce a wide array of hadronic and electromagnetic debris. The impact of a highly relativistic proton or higher mass on the oxygenand nitrogen nuclei in the top of the atmosphere results in nuclear fragmentation andthe release of huge amounts of energy into hadronic showers. The lightest mesons,'s and K 's, are produced in copious numbers.
Charged mesons undergo bremsstrahlung and ionization losses, shaking o highly
energetic photons which convert to electron pairs. This gives an electromagnetic component to the shower. The K 's and 's undergo similar decays ending in electrons andneutrinos. The neutral pion component goes to gamma rays which initiate electromagnetic showers. Neutral kaons contain a mixture of KL0 and KS0 which can produce
+, pairs.
Of the hadronic interaction products leading to atmospheric neutrinos, pions are
by far the most dominant. In one atmospheric neutrino ux simulation [1], the K=
ratio is taken as 7% at 10 GeV, 11% at 100 GeV, and 14% at 1 TeV for proton-nucleus
collisions in the lab frame. Accelerator studies of charged particle multiplicities inproton-proton collisions bear this out, nding a K= ratio of roughly 10% in therelevant energy regions [53].
Charmed particles such as D and D can also produce neutrinos. Their contribution to the total ux, however, is extremely small at energies detectable inSuper-Kamiokande . Charmed particle neutrino production becomes signi cant toatmospheric neutrinos only above 100 TeV.

2.3 Meson Decay
Atmospheric neutrinos are actually produced in the decays of the cosmic ray secondaries. Branching ratios for these decays are given in Equation 2.1 [54].
Virtually all charged pions wind up as an electron and neutrinos after muon decay.

36
Table 2.1: Branching ratios for , K

 !  () ! ee(e) ( )K  !  ()! 0! +,! 0 ( )! 0e e(e)! 00(100 %)(100 %)(63:5 %)
(21:2 %)
(5:6 %)(3:2 %) (K3 )(4:8 %) (K3e )(1:73 %)

KS0 ! +,

(68:6 %)

KL0 ! +,0!  ()! ee(e)(12:37 %)(27 %) (K3 )(38:6 %) (K3e )(2.1)

Over half of the kaons decay through this same channel, most of the rest go to charged
pions rst. Only 4.8% of all charged K decays (the K3e mode) result in a nal lepton
con guration other than the familiar ee  pattern. The neutral kaons are a mixtureof KL0 and KS0 . Again, only the K3e mode breaks the dominant trend. These decays
represent only a very small fraction of the total ux of neutrinos from the cosmic ray
interactions.
From these branching ratios one expects that the ux ratio ( +  )=(e + e)should be very close to 2. The presence of the \anomalous" K decays should havevery little e ect as the overall ratio is dominated by the pions. In practice there are a
few corrections to these expectations which are included in detailed simulations. Thee ects of non-decaying muons, polarization, and the geomagnetic eld are describedin Chapter 11.

37

2.4 Production Height
Cosmic rays that produce atmospheric neutrinos interact at a characteristic height in
the atmosphere. The speci c production altitude has some dependence on the angle
of incidence of the neutrino, particles with a lower slant angle will encounter more
atmosphere while still at relatively high altitudes. This is usually described in termsof the zenith angle of the particle direction at the experiment location. Gaisser andStanev have made a calculation of production altitude as a function of zenith angle
which was used in this analysis to determine the length of the neutrino ight path.
[55].

Chapter 3

OTHER EXPERIMENTS
Super-Kamiokande is by no means the rst experiment to study the atmospheric
neutrino anomaly. Serious hints that neutrino avor oscillations might be possible
came rst in the pioneering solar neutrino experiment of Ray Davis in the Homestake
gold mine near Lead, South Dakota. Subsequent solar experiments were the water
Cherenkov detectors IMB and Kamiokande as well as the gallium radiochemical experiments GALLEX and SAGE. These experiments observed fewer neutrinos fromthe sun than expected from the standard solar models of nuclear burning.
Several of these experiments were also sensitive to atmospheric neutrinos. Data
from Kamiokande showed a de cit in the ratio of muon to electron type neutrinos
originating from atmospheric primaries. This was later con rmed in low energy databy the IMB collaboration, but IMB did not see the e ect at higher energies. The ironcalorimeter experiments, Frejus, NUSEX and Soudan 2, originally built for nucleon
decay, did not see this e ect at all. The Soudan group later added data that did begin
to support the de cit.
For a long time there was some concern that the e ect was simply due to either
particle identi cation problems in Kamiokande, or some badly understood feature of
the water Cherenkov type detectors. To address these questions, the Kamiokandegroup duplicated their detector (in smaller scale) at the KEK accelerator facility to
study the particle identi cation question. Tests with controlled beams con rmed thatthe identi cation algorithms were in fact very accurate and robust.
The MACRO experiment came online and in 1995 reported an up-going muon
result that is consistent with Kamiokande (though large uncertainties made it also

39consistent with no oscillation at all). This helps to address the question of the detection medium. The depth of the experiment did not seem to bear on the observationof the de cit. Figure 3 shows the relative depths of the main experiments in metersof water equivalent shielding.

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

Figure 3.1: Relative depths of atmospheric neutrino experiments

The Soudan experiment is an iron calorimeter detector that began taking data in
1989 in Minnesota. The initial results were consistent with no e ect. More recent
data from a longer exposure are still not decisive, but the central value of the avor
ratio now lands very close to the Kamiokande and IMB results. This is especially
important because of the di erent detection technique. It is now very unlikely thatthe atmospheric neutrino anomaly is an artifact of water Cherenkov detectors.

40

3.1 The Kamiokande Experiment
The Kamiokande experiment is the immediate predecessor to the Super-Kamiokande
detector. Located just one quarter of a mile down the tunnel in the same Kamioka
mine in central Japan, it contains 3000 tons of pure water. The tank is cylindrical,
15.5 meters in diameter and 16 meters in height [56]. Over 1000 photo-multipliertubes view the detector volume, giving a photo-cathode coverage of nearly 20%. The
detector uses 20" photo-multiplier tubes developed by the Hamamatsu Photonics
Corporation for the experiment[57]. Construction of the primary detector began in1982 as a nucleon decay experiment [58]. Data became available in July 1983 and therst proton decay candidate was recorded two months later. None of the candidates
has survived closer scrutiny.
Soon after construction, studies of stopping cosmic ray muons and low energy
background showed that there was a window in which 8B solar neutrinos might beobservable if sucient care in rejecting background could be taken. Several physicists
from the United States, including A. Mann, E.W. Beier, R. Van Berg (U.Penn),
B.Cortez (Caltech), and D.H.White (Brookhaven) expressed interest in joining the
project. They helped to design new discriminators and timing electronics suitable
for solar neutrino searches. In July 1984 the detector was upgraded. A 1.5 meterwater shield was added on all sides, viewed by 123 of the same photo-multipliertubes. After delays due to an inability to seal the rock outer surface of the anti
region, a high pressure pump was installed to simply keep the area full of water.
Construction of Kamiokande-II was completed in March, 1985. A water puri cation
system was also installed at this point to remove 222 Rn from the natural mine water.
The Pennsylvania electronics were completed in November, 1985 and allowed charge
and timing measurements with far higher resolution, greatly improving the vertex
reconstruction.
The solar neutrino peak became visible during this phase. Constant improvements

41
to the detector led to the reduction in the radon background, eventually pushing theanalysis threshold down to 7 MeV [59] [60].
Fortune smiled on the group on February 25, 1987 when supernova 1987A explodedin the Large Magellanic Cloud. The detector recorded 11 events within 13 seconds,
some of them pointing back to the LMC. The detection was fortuitous. The group
had intended to shut down the experiment while a steel roof was constructed overthe detector. The construction company had met with diculty in arranging workers
and had delayed the job. The IMB collaboration in the United States also observed
neutrinos from SN 1987A. This was the birth of extra-solar neutrino astronomy [61].
Kamiokande also made important measurements of the atmospheric neutrino ux.
This ux was a background to the solar neutrino measurements, but became an
important measurement on its own. The group rst con rmed the existence of theso-called \atmospheric neutrino anomaly" [62] [63] and later found a strong zenith
angle dependence [43]. This provided strong hints that neutrino oscillation might beoccurring and gave great motivation to continue work toward the completion of theSuper-Kamiokande detector [64].
In April, 1990, the detector was shut down again for improvements. 110 deadphoto-multiplier tubes were replaced with a newer design being prototyped for the
proposed Super-Kamiokande detector. Aluminized re ectors were installed aroundeach photo-cathode to increase the photo-cathode coverage to 25%. The data acquisition electronics were also replaced with prototype Super-Kamiokande electronics.
In November 1990 the detector resumed data taking as \Kamiokande-III". The nal
solar neutrino results [42] came from this con guration and covered the end of thesolar cycle. No anti-correlation with sunspot activity had been seen.
Kamiokande is still running in a largely automatic mode as a supernova watch detector. All other physics activities have now shifted to the newer Super-Kamiokande. Kamiokande-III's life is expected to end at the end of 1998 when it is to be removed
from its cavity. The world's largest (1000 tons) liquid scintillation detector will be42installed in its place by a group from Japan's Tohoku University. The KAMLAND
detector, as it is known, hopes to detect low energy anti-neutrinos from nuclear reactors. It is also very sensitive for relic neutrino searches and studies of double beta
decay.

3.2 The IMB Experiment
The \Irvine-Michigan-Brookhaven" (IMB) neutrino detector began taking data in
September 1982. It, like Kamiokande, was a direct response to the prediction of theminimal SU(5) grand uni ed theory that the proton lifetime should be on the order of1029 years [65]. The detector was located in the Fairport salt mine operated by Morton
International, formerly Morton Thiokol, about 65 kilometers east of Cleveland, Ohio.
The experiment sat at 1570 meters water equivalent depth and consisted of a nearly
cubical tank 22.5 meters by 17 meters by 18 meters tall, holding 8 kilotons of purewater.
The original IMB-1 detector was designed speci cally for the p ! e+0 mode, only
about 1% photo-cathode coverage was required [66]. 2048 13 centimeter hemispherical
EMI photo-multiplier tubes were used. Data was taken between October 1982 andMay 1984 in this con guration. These results, among others, refuted minimal SU(5),but the new supersymmetry was beginning to favor modes like p ! +K 0 and p !
K +. More massive secondaries mean less radiated (and visible) energy in the tank.
In order to enhance the light collection eciency, the number of photo-multipliertubes was to be doubled by adding 2048 new 20 centimeter tubes, and coupling eachto a large wavelength shifting plate.
IMB-2 was a short-lived mode between September 1984 and June 1985. The lightcollection upgrade was to have been done at this time, but a high number of photomultiplier tube failures in a \ ashing" mode made the detector insensitive to theinteresting physics. Wavelength shifter plates had been added to the 13 centimeter43
tubes, but no new tubes were installed. After June 1985, operation became impossible
due to the failure rate.
IMB-3 began operation in May 1986. It was not the upgrade that had been
hoped for, but was greatly improved over the original IMB-1 detector. The new 20
centimeter tubes replaced the old 13 cm tubes and the wavelength shifter plates weremodi ed to t the new tubes. New photo-multiplier tube bases were constructed tolower the stress on the tube pins, correcting the failure problems. This mode ran
through March 1991. A water leak which could not be repaired without draining thetank ended this phase and eventually, the experiment. The story of IMB does not
end there, however. In 1995 the photo-multiplier tubes were tted with new bases
and shipped to Japan where they now serve as the an active veto counter for theSuper-Kamiokande experiment.
IMB had its share of physics. The group con rmed the solar neutrino de cit foundby Ray Davis [37], and supported by Kamiokande [60]. In 1987 it observed neutrinos
from SN1987A [67]. The diculties with operation shortened the live-time exposure,but its larger ducial mass made up for this in setting new limits on proton decay
lifetimes [68].
IMB made observations of the atmospheric neutrino ux as well. The ratio of muon
to electron neutrinos compared to expectation R = (=e)DATA=(=e)MC was measured to be 0:71  0:04  0:08 [69]. This is consistent with the Kamiokande and Soudan
2 measurements of an atmospheric neutrino anomaly. More recently, additional data
was analyzed with special attention to the events with energies above 1 GeV for a 2.1
kton-yr exposure [70]. This study measured R to be 1.10.12(stat.)0.11(syst.). The
zenith angle distribution is consistent with being at, unlike the Kamiokande resultwith higher exposure [43].

44

3.3 The MACRO Experiment
The MACRO (Monopole, Astrophysics, and Cosmic Ray Observatory) experiment is
a massive underground detector located in Hall B of the Laboratori Nazionali del Gran
Sasso (LNGS) near L'Aquila, Italy. The laboratory houses several large experiments
and is part of the Istituto Nazionale Fisica Nucleare (INFN). The experiment was
built with the intention of searching for magnetic monopoles, but it is also sensitive
to cosmic ray muons and neutrinos from cosmic rays and supernova explosions. The
Gran Sasso infrastructure is particularly useful because of the presence of surface array
detectors on top of the mountain (GRACE and EAS-TOP) which can be placed incoincidence with MACRO.

Figure 3.2: MACRO detector
The MACRO detector uses three di erent detection systems[71]. The full detector
consists of six \supermodules" 3.2. Each supermodule is about 12m square by 9
meters high and consists of ten streamer tube planes sandwiching layers of crushedrock absorber on the inside. All outside faces are covered with scintillator tanks

45
similarly sandwiched between streamer tube planes. The scintillator tanks are viewed
from both ends by photo-multiplier tubes. A horizontal plane of CR39 track-etch
material is placed at the center of the stack. One side and one end of the full detector
are also covered with CR39. Figure 3.3 illustrates the layout of one supermodule.

Figure 3.3: MACRO detector supermodule detail
The MACRO detector is sensitive to atmospheric neutrinos by studying up-going
muons in the detector. These muons should have come from neutrino interactions in
the rock below the detector. There is a known background from down-going muons
which scatter at large angle and \bounce" back up into the detector. This background46
has been simulated and is now well understood.
An analysis of the up-going muons was published in [72]. The ratio of the numberof muons seen to that expected was 0:73  0:09 (stat) 0:06 (sys) 0:12 (theor.) using
the Bartol (1993) ux. The zenith angle distribution is consistent with the Monte
Carlo simulation. The result was that the data to that point was consistent with boththe previous Kamiokande suggested oscillation parameters and with no oscillations at
all.

3.4 The Frejus Experiment
Another contributor to data on the atmospheric neutrino anomaly is the Frejus experiment. The experiment sits in the L.S.M. (Laboratoire Souterrain de Modane) orFrejus Underground Laboratory. The laboratory is in a highway tunnel under the
French-Italian border linking Modane to Bardonnechia in the Alps. The high mountains provide a rock overburden of 4800 meters water equivalent (m.w.e.). Detector
construction began in 1983 by a French and German collaboration. Data taking began in February 1984 with 240 tons of detector mass, the full 900 ton detector wascompleted in June 1985. The experiment is nominally a proton decay detector , butatmospheric neutrinos form a background worthy of study.
The detector consists of a 900 ton sandwich of iron plates and plastic ash chambers [73]. The iron plates are 3 mm thick, the chambers are 5 mm thick. The detector
is triggered by planes of Geiger tubes every few layers of plates and ash chambers.
When a trigger is formed by adding the Geiger tube outputs, a high voltage is applied
to aluminized sheets on either side of the ash chambers. If an ionizing particle has
passed through the gas mixture in the chamber, the sudden high voltage will cause
a discharge in the chamber which can be read out by pickup strips across the top ofeach cell. The Frejus detector contains almost one million channels of ash chamber
signals to process.

47
The collaboration has published results on the detection of atmospheric neutrinos[74] and interpreted them in terms of a neutrino avor oscillation hypothesis [75].
With an exposure of 1.56 kton-yr, they nd no disagreement between the measured
=e avor ratio and the expected one. The zenith angle distribution of atmospheric
neutrino events is at. Frejus hence rules out neutrino oscillations (albeit with low
signi cance) in the parameter region allowed by Kamiokande and IMB.

3.5 The Soudan 2 Experiment
The Soudan 2 experiment is an iron tracking calorimeter located 710 meters (2090
m.w.e.) underneath Soudan Underground Mine State Park in Minnesota. The main
detector consists of sheets of corrugated steel stacked to form a honeycomb [76].
Plastic drift tubes with a gas mixture are run through the spaces of the honeycomband placed in a longitudinal electric eld. Charged particles passing through thedetector ionize the gas in the tubes. The ionization drifts to the end of the tube
where it is read out by sense wires. This technique allows the position of the particle
track along the drift tube to be measured using time projection. The experiment also
contains an active shield of aluminum proportional tubes to help to veto incoming
cosmic ray muons or other background.
The Soudan collaboration has also investigated the atmospheric neutrino anomaly[77]. Data was taken from April 1989 to December 1993 while the detector was underconstruction, starting with 275 tons of detector mass and ending with the full 963
tons. The total exposure is calculated to be 1.52 kton-yr. It is coincidental that thedetector mass and exposure for this sample is roughly the same as that used for theFrejus results. The di erences in detector technique, geometry, and the active shield
make the two experiments quite di erent from each other.
The result of the Soudan measurement was not decisive on its own, but addressed several questions with the other detectors. After 1.52 kton-yrs of expo-

48sure, the collaboration measured the avor double ratio R = (=e)DATA=(=e)MC
to be 0.720.190.06. While on its own the measurement does not deviate signi cantly from one, the central value is reasonably close to that measured by the water
Cherenkov detectors with smaller reported errors.
The Soudan measurement is important for two more reasons. First, it provides
corroborative evidence that the atmospheric neutrino anomaly exists using completely
di erent experimental techniques. The fact that the main proponents of the muonde cit were water Cherenkov experiments while the dissenter (Frejus) was an ironcalorimeter raised concerns about the experimental techniques. Secondly, Soudan
was able to measure the track to shower ratio (showering versus non-showering) for
neutron produced events. One proposed explanation of the Kamiokande result heldthat neutron contamination with an anomalous track to shower ratio might be toblame (see [78] for further details). The Soudan results do not support this hypothesis.
The Soudan detector continues to take data at this time while being prepared forparticipation in a new long baseline experiment, Fermilab E875, or MINOS (Main
Injector Neutrino Oscillation Search). In this project now under construction, aneutrino beam from Fermilab will be aimed at the Soudan detector in a muon disappearance experiment designed to study neutrino oscillations starting with a known
beam composition. A possible twist to this experiment is being considered in whichphotographic emulsion would be used to detect  appearance.

3.6 The NUSEX Experiment
NUSEX (NUcleon Stability EXperiment) is a proton decay detector located in a
highway tunnel under Mont Blanc in the French Alps. The mountains provide 4800
m.w.e. of shielding. The detector is an iron calorimeter consisting of a 3.5 meter cube
made of layered iron slabs and plastic streamer tubes. Orthogonal rows of pickup
strips determine the track coordinate in the plane of the streamer tubes. The total

49
mass is 150 tons, 130 of which is used as a ducial mass for contained event data [79].
The NUSEX group has studied atmospheric neutrinos [80]. The small size of thedetector means that the data taken between June 1982 to June 1988 amount to only
0.74 kton-yr of exposure. The detector is similar in concept and granularity to theFrejus detector, but the geometry is di erent. The NUSEX iron planes are horizontal,
in Frejus vertical. Triggering is also handled di erently.
The NUSEX detector was calibrated in a test beam at CERN. This test showedthat the experiment is able to distinguish avors with good eciency and is able todetect charged leptons well.
The reported atmospheric neutrino sample consists of only 50 events. 32 ofthese are muon-like, 18 electron-like. The avor can be determined with fairly
good eciency by looking at the hit distributions in the planes. These numbers
are all in good agreement with Monte Carlo studies and the avor double ratio
R = (=e)DATA=(=e)MC is quoted as R=0.960.30. The data therefore do notsupport a muon de cit or evidence for neutrino oscillations. Measurements of upward
going muons give similar results [81].

3.7 The Baksan Experiment
The Baksan Underground Scintillation Telescope is located in an underground laboratory underneath Anderchi Mountain in the Baksan Valley of the North Caucasus
in Russia. It is operated by the Institute for Nuclear Research and was built before
1979.
The detector consists of a roughly cubic array [16x16x11m] of 3132 liquid scintillator cells [82]. Charged particles passing the array cause the scintillator to uoresce,
in turn creating a signal in a 15 cm photo-multiplier tube viewing each cell.
The Baksan group reported results on data taken over a period of more than ten
years for both up-going muons and neutrinos [83]. A search for neutrino point sources

50
and analysis of neutrino oscillation parameters was also done [84]. Using up-going
muon data, the group nds a ratio of Nexp=NMC for muons to be 0:93  0:15.

Chapter 4

THE SUPER-KAMIOKANDE EXPERIMENTThe Super-Kamiokande neutrino detector is a new astrophysical neutrino detector
located on the western coast of the main Japanese island of Honshu not far from thecoastal city of Toyama. It is similar in construction to its predecessor KamiokandeIII experiment, but a factor of ten larger in scale. The two detectors are locatedroughly one quarter of a mile apart in the Kamioka mine owned and operated by the
Kamioka Mining and Smelting Company. The mine contains lead and zinc ore, but
had been largely unused due to the market conditions and costs of extraction. Mining
operations recently resumed in March 1998. The mine entrances are at the base of
Mt. Ikeno and feature a 2 km horizontal access tunnel to the detector cavity. The
overburden consists of over 1000 meters of rock, about 2800 m.w.e. (meters of waterequivalent).
Super-Kamiokande is a water-Cherenkov detector. Before detailing the construction of the experiment it will be helpful to brie y discuss some general principles ofoperation for these types of detectors. Many of the design considerations for SuperKamiokande depend critically on various aspects of the Cherenkov e ect and neutrino
interactions in pure water.

4.1 Neutrino Interactions in Water-Cherenkov Detectors
There is no known experimental technique by which the neutrino can be directly
observed. Its neutral charge eliminates all detection methods which rely on electricor magnetic eld e ects. The only way to observe a neutrino is to look for a neutrino

52
interaction and show that the parent was invisible.
Neutrinos interact in the tank via the weak interaction in one of only a few generalmodes. These include neutrino electron scattering and neutrino-nucleon interactions.
The interaction can proceed in either a charged current mode, producing a nal statecharged lepton, or a neutral current mode in which the neutrino still exists in the
nal state.
The simplest interaction is neutrino scattering o the atomic electrons. This modeis dominant at lower energies where other processes are not accessible.
All three avors of neutrinos can produce a recoil electron via the neutral current
interaction by exchanging a Z0. This reaction is avor-blind and each species has essentially the same cross-section of about 0:1  10,43(E =10MeV ). Muon and electron
neutrinos are produced in abundance from the cosmic rays but tau neutrinos are notexpected to appear from any source. Tau neutrinos could be produced from muon
neutrinos through oscillation e ects but since the neutral current reaction does notdistinguish between the avors of the incident neutrinos, the total number of recoil
electrons from this process would remain unchanged.
In addition the electron neutrino can also interact with atomic electrons via the
charged current mode by exchanging a W boson. The charged current  -e cross-section
is somewhat higher than the neutral current cross-section due to the presence of a second tree-level scattering diagram. The total  -e cross-section is 9  10,44(E =10MeV )cm2, or about 10,41cm2 at 1 GeV [56].
The nucleon is the major target in the Super-Kamiokande detector. Neutrinonucleon scattering can be either \quasi-elastic" producing only a single charged lepton
and an excited nuclear state, or \inelastic" where quarks are popped out of the nucleonand extra particles appear in the nal state.
The  -N quasi-elastic cross-section is quite analogous to the  -e elastic scatteringand can be calculated the same way. The results are essentially the same but the -N cross-sections are higher by roughly mp=me, the ratio of the proton mass to53
the electron mass. This can be seen by the simple replacement of the electron with anucleon in the diagrams for  -e scattering. This means that at 1 GeV and above where
the data for this analysis are taken, neutrino-nucleon scattering completely dominates
over  -e interactions. Scattering from electrons can be completely disregarded for thisanalysis.
Neutrino-nucleon elastic scattering is not a perfect analogy to  -e scattering because the targets now have structure. Nuclear form factors have to be taken into
account as measured from neutrino accelerator experiments.
As the energy of the neutrino increases, inelastic processes such as excitationof baryon resonances and pion (or multi-pion) production become more relevant.
Analytic calculations of the total cross-section are dicult due to the large numberof nal states. Careful simulations of the neutrino interactions can be done. These
are used as input to the detector simulations to predict what the detector will see.
From these Monte Carlo simulations one nds that in the multi-GeV energy range
the charged-current (CC) quasi-elastic and inelastic processes occur at about equal
rates, and far dominate the neutral current (NC) reactions for energies above 1 GeV.
Table 4.1 gives a breakdown of the fraction of simulated events from each mode in
the energy range relevant to this analysis.
Table 4.1: Fraction of simulated events from various interaction modes
e,e CC QE
17%
non-QE21%
, CC QE
30%
non-QE
28%
NC
4%
Total
100.00%For the partially contained events (see Section 4.3) which sample a higher distribution in energy, the fraction of inelastic interactions rises to over 80% with less than

54
1% contribution from the avor blind neutral current mode.
It is clear that the great majority of neutrino interactions in the detector at thesehigh energies are of the charged current type. These produce a charged lepton, possibly along with other particles, which can be used to identify the avor of the incoming
neutrino. This is an important conclusion. If the neutrino interaction cross-section
were dominated by the neutral current mode then use of Super-Kamiokande to investigate the  =e ratio in atmospheric neutrinos would be impossible.
There is one further key point in regard to neutrino interactions. The success ofa water Cherenkov detector depends not only on its ability to identify the avor ofincoming neutrinos, but also to reconstruct their direction. However, what is detected
is not the neutrino but rather the charged lepton that comes out of the interaction.
The extent to which the lepton respects the direction of the neutrino determines how
well the source of the neutrino can be determined.
In neutrino-electron scattering at anything over a few MeV the recoil electron
direction in the lab frame is highly peaked in the direction of the neutrino. This
happens because the center of momentum frame is essentially that of the incoming
neutrino. Unfortunately, this does not hold true when the target becomes much
more massive as for neutrino-nucleon scattering. Neutrino direction is not as wellpreserved in the interaction, but it does improve with energy. Figure 4.1 shows theangular deviation between the incoming neutrino and outgoing lepton as a function ofenergy from the Monte Carlo simulation. It is clear that below 1 GeV, reconstructionof the direction is dicult if not impossible. Higher energies mean better direction
reconstruction. This point is the key reason for using the high energy data to study
the atmospheric neutrinos.

55

180

160

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

0

2.5

5

7.5

10

12.5

15

17.5

20

22.5

25

Figure 4.1: Angular deviation of outgoing lepton in simulated CC interactions

4.2 Cherenkov Radiation
When a charged particle passes through a dielectric material at a velocity higher than
the speed of light in that material, a \shock wave" of light is produced in the material.
The expanding cone of light is known as Cherenkov radiation after its discoverer who
observed the e ect in 1934. Super-Kamiokande uses an enormous tank of pure water
as both target and detection medium. Water has the nice properties of being bothcheap and transparent, allowing the radiated photons to pass through the detector to
the wall where they are collected by sensitive photo-multiplier tubes.
The electric eld of a moving particle can be thought of as expanding in spherical
wavelets about the point of emission on the particle's track. Figure 4.2 shows thefamiliar wavefronts for a particle with velocity v less than c/n, the velocity of light ina medium with index of refraction n. The motion of the particle causes the wavefronts
to be closer together in the direction of motion and farther apart in the opposing
direction. This is the well known Doppler shift e ect in the arrival frequency of the

56
wavefronts.

θFigure 4.2: Particle with v<c/nFigure 4.3: Particle with v>c/n

If the velocity of the particle exceeds the velocity of light in the medium (i.e.
the expansion velocity of the wavefronts), then the picture is qualitatively di erent.
The wavefronts pile up to form a coherent \shock front" analogous to the acousticpressure waves in a sonic boom or the bow wake left by a fast speedboat [85]. Figure
4.3 illustrates how this happens.
From the gure it is clear that in the time it takes for the particle to travel a
distance v  t, the spherical wavefront has traveled a distance nc  t. All of the di erent
wavelets are now adding coherently to form a shock front expanding with an angle

ct = c = 1
cos(c) = nvt
nv
n

(4.1)

with respect to the charged particle's direction of travel.
To summarize, the passage of the charged particle generates a coherent responseby the medium. This coherent radiation is observed as an outwardly expanding coneof radiated photons with cone angle c = 1n and centered on the particle track.

57
In pure water, the index of refraction is n = 1.33 so for extremely relativistic
particles (  1) the Cherenkov photons are radiated with a characteristic angle ofabout 42. Since the opening angle does depend on the velocity of the particle, thiscan be used as additional information for particle identi cation algorithms. Once theparticle is identi ed, the opening angle then becomes an extra handle for tting theenergy of the charged particle.
A more detailed analysis is required to extract the frequency dependence andnumber density of the radiated photons [85]. The total energy content radiated perunit track length for a particle with charge z is:

dE = 42z2 e2 Z 1 , 1 d
2 n2
dx
c2

(4.2)

It is important to remember that the radiation is a response by the medium andso is constant for all positions along the particle track to the extent that remains
close to 1.
The total energy deposited into a given frequency interval Erad ( ) is proportional
to the integrand. That energy is divided among a number of photons with energy
Ephot( ) = h . This means that the number of photons radiated at a given energy is
proportional to d , or more transparently, to d=2. Dominant numbers of photons
appear at short wavelengths, limited by the dispersion characteristics of the medium.
These are described by the frequency dependence of n( ). In water, blue-green lightis the dominant component.
The index of refraction in water is roughly constant in the small visible band
between 400 and 700 nanometers. In this range, a singly charged particle with 
1 will produce about 400 eV/cm or 200 photons/cm. This is very small compared tothe total energy loss due to ionization of the particle of about 2 MeV/cm.
As an aside, it is interesting to note that this e ect is the same as that responsible
for the famous blue glow around submerged fuel cells in the core of a nuclear reactor.

58
In that case it is caused by large numbers of alpha particles being kicked out of theradioactive uranium and plutonium materials that generate the Cherenkov radiation
with enough photons to be easily seen with the naked eye. Super-Kamiokande detects
the passage of single particles and relies on sensitive light detection techniques toobserve the same phenomenon.

4.3 Cherenkov Ring Imaging
A ring imaging Cherenkov detector relies on the cone shape of the emitted light pattern to reconstruct the direction and energy of the charged particles. This information
is used to infer the properties of the incident neutrino.
The wavefront of the light emitted from a given point on a particle's track forms
a cone around the track. For fully contained events, those which start and stop inside
the volume of the detector, the intersection of the cone with the detector walls is ahollow ring. Figure 4.3 illustrates the light cone lighting up photo-multiplier tubes
with intensity depending on the number of photons reaching the tube. The width of
the ring is directly proportional to the length of the charged particle track. The shapeof the ring can be used to reconstruct the relative orientation of the cone with respect
to the cylindrical walls. The overall size of the outer edge of the ring determines the
position of the interaction vertex.
The photo-multiplier tubes lining the walls measure the relative arrival times andthe numbers of photons which strike them. A track which passes near a wall willproduce photons which strike the nearby wall more quickly than photons which mustcross the detector before being collected. The number of photons per unit track length
is constant, but attenuation and scattering in the water reduce the number measured
far away from the production point. Cone ts to reconstruct the direction of theparticles can use both these pieces of information to get very precise reconstructions.
A second class of events is also used in this analysis. These are the so-called59ν

leptonFigure 4.4: Cherenkov ring from charged particle track in water\partially contained" events. This type has an interaction vertex inside the ducial
volume of the detector but the charged particle escapes, exiting the inner volume
through one of the inner walls. In this case the Cherenkov ring is lled in to form adisk as the particle continues to generate photons all the way up to the wall. Typicallya high amount of charge is left in the tubes near the exit point. The total number ofphotons per track length is not changing, but as the particle nears the wall the area
in a di erential ring section decreases, concentrating the same number of photons ina smaller number of photo-multiplier tubes.

4.4 Detector Description
The detector consists of a cylindrical stainless steel tank 39 meters in diameter by 42
meters in height (see Figure 4.5). The tank is self-supporting with concrete back lledagainst the rough-hewn walls to counteract the water pressure when the tank is lled.

60
The capacity of the tank exceeds 50,000 tons of ultra-pure water. The tank is built
into a cavity 2 kilometers horizontally inside Mt. Ikeno.

Electronics Huts
Linac Cave
Control Room

Inner Detector
Outer Detector
Water System
Mt. Ikeno

Figure 4.5: Super-Kamiokande detector construction
A cylindrical photo-multiplier tube support structure nearly as large as the tankitself (see Figure 4.6) divides the tank into two distinct volumes. The inner volumecontains 32 kilo-tons of pure water and is viewed by 11,146 50 cm photo-multipliertubes. The tubes are set nearly touching each other and provide a 40% photo-cathodecoverage for the walls. Two meters of water remain on all sides outside the support
structure. This outer volume serves as an active veto counter against incoming particles. It is instrumented with 1885 20 cm photo-multiplier tubes recycled from the
IMB experiment. The two detector volumes are optically isolated from each other by
a lightproof black sheet on the photo-multiplier tube support structure. The 55 cen-61
timeter thick support structure comprises a 3rd distinct volume, a dead space in whichlight can in principle not be collected. Because the inner detector photo-multipliertubes are not covered in back, some light is still detected from this region.
To protect against low energy background from radon decay products in the air,
the roof of the cavity and the access tunnels were sealed with a spray-on coating.
Double doors in the access tunnels restrict air ow from the mine into the detector
cavern. An overpressure of \radon-free" air is piped in from the outside to further
hold back contaminated mine air. The outside air contains relatively little radon
when taken from an area away from the mine entrances.
The average geomagnetic eld is about 450 milli-gauss and is nearly horizontal
at the detector site. This presents a problem for the very sensitive photo-multipliertubes which prefer a much lower ambient eld. The strength and uniform directionof the geomagnetic eld could systematically bias the photo-electron trajectories andtiming in the photo-multiplier tubes. To counteract this, 26 sets of Helmholtz coils
are arranged around the outside of the tank. With these in operation the average
eld in the detector is reduced to 50 milli-gauss.
The inner volume of the Super-Kamiokande experiment is close to the ultimate
practical limit in large volume water Cherenkov detectors. The inner tank is a cylinder
33.8 meters in diameter by 36.2 meters in height. The long diagonal length of about
70 meters is approaching the typical values of water attenuation length and scatteringparameters. Absorption lengths in pure water tend to be on the order of 40-80 meters.
Without adding instrumentation at the center of the volume in some way it is notreally practical to simply scale the size any larger, even if one could a ord to dig thehole to build such a tank in.
The inner volume contains 32,000 metric tons of water inside the photo-multipliertube plane. About 22.5 ktons is inside the ducial volume, de ned somewhat arbitrarily as the volume inside of a cylinder drawn 2.00 meters from the the innerdetector wall. This de nition provides a further passive shield against entering events

62

20 cm Outer Photomultiplier Tube

Tyvek Reflective Liner
Opaque Light Barrier

50 cm Inner Photomultiplier Tube

Figure 4.6: Super-Kamiokande support structure (ICRR, University of Tokyo)

63
and restricts event reconstruction to a region of minimum tter bias.
The outer volume is lined with a re ective material known as Tyvek manufactured
by DuPont. This is the same material often seen used as house wrap in new homeconstruction. Express mailing envelopes are also made of the same substance. The
purpose of the liner is to maximize light collection eciency. The smaller size andnumber of photo-multiplier tubes in the outer detector make each one especially
important. Failure of a tube has the potential to open a gap in the coverage of theveto counter. The re ective surface helps to spread light to many tubes and reduce
the signi cance of individual tubes.

Chapter 5

INNER DETECTOR DATA ACQUISITION
The inner detector data acquisition system is necessarily very complicated. The
immense number of channels and fast timing requirements as well as the large physicalsize of the detector dictates a data acquisition system that is modular, well-bu ered,and fast.
The size of the detector presents the rst challenge to the design of the dataacquisition system. The more cables that are bundled, the larger the opportunity
for electrical cross-talk. Photo-multiplier signals degrade over long cable distances.
Mechanical considerations alone have a major impact. Digitizing and other recording
equipment for nearly twelve thousand channels requires a huge amount of physicalspace. Simply getting that many cables out of the tank with relatively equal cable
lengths is a challenge.
The solution for Super-Kamiokande was to divide the detector into four quadrants.
Data are collected separately in one of four quadrant electronics \huts" on top of thetank. Trigger and event timing information is distributed to all quadrants from a fth\central" hut.

5.1 Front End Electronics
Data acquisition begins at the photo-multiplier tubes. Cables molded to the tube
bases provide high voltage and return the input signal. Charge and timing information
are held for each channel and if the signals are above an internal threshold, theinformation is digitized and stored. All of this must be fast, to avoid dead-time, and65
local, at the cable ends in the quadrant huts.
5.1.1 ID Photo-multiplier Tubes

Super-Kamiokande uses 50 cm Hamamatsu R3600 photo-multiplier tubes that were
specially constructed for the experiment [86]. These tubes were designed with verylarge photo-cathode area and fast time response. The basic design was used in theearlier Kamiokande experiment and improved for Super-Kamiokande . Typically they
are run at a gain of 107 with 2000 volts of applied high voltage. Quantum eciency
is 22 percent with a typical transit time jitter of 2.5 nanoseconds. Dark noise rates
at this gain setting are about 3 kHz per tube.
5.1.2 ID Front End Electronics Overview

Initial acquisition of the photo-multiplier tube signals is done using the TKO (TristanKEK-Online) system developed by the University of Tokyo and Toshiba for use inprevious experiments. This system combines in one electronics crate twenty Analog
Timing Modules (ATMs) to digitize the tube signals, a Go/NoGo (GONG) trigger
module, and a Super-Controller Header bus interface module. The result is a complete
front end data acquisition package for 240 photo-multiplier channels. Twelve suchcrates are built into each quadrant hut [87].
5.1.3 ID ATM Modules

Each ATM module has twelve input channels for photo-multiplier tube signals. Eachchannel has a pair of switching time-to-analog converters and charge-to-analog converters to measure the time and size of the input pulses. The ability to switch between\A" and \B" bu ers on a single channel assures nearly dead-time-free operation of
the front end. It also allows recording of both muon and electron signals from muon
decays in separate triggers with high eciency.

66
Each input channel in the ATM has an ampli er with a gain of 100 and a discriminator. Signals crossing the discriminator level (set by the run control panel)cause a standard 15 mV, 200 nanosecond hit pulse and a 400 nanosecond gate pulse
to be generated. The 12 hit pulses from each module are summed and made available
on the front panel HITSUM output. This is used by the TRG module to generate
detector triggers. The gate signal is used to provide a standard time window for the
charge integration.
The time-to-analog converters work by integrating a constant current from thearrival of the rst hits on the channel until receipt of a global trigger from the TRG
module (see section 5.4). This gives a relative time measurement with 0.3 nanosecond
resolution. The full range of the time-to-analog converters is 1.2 microseconds, farmore than necessary by any causal e ect related to a single event in the detector.
The charge-to-analog converters measure the total charge in the photo-multipliertube signal. They do this by integrating the signal input during the standard gate
pulse generated by the initial ATM channel discriminator. Charge resolution is 0.2
pC (0.1 photo-electron) with 550 pC full range.
Both the charge and timing information are stored in capacitors until arrival of
the global trigger. At that point each channel in the module is digitized sequentially,
rst the \A" bu ers, then the \B" bu ers. The 12 bit data are stored with thelower 8 bits of the the global event number supplied by the GONG module in a 1
Kword FIFO memory. The FIFO can be read out asynchronously with data taking
so readout introduces no dead time.
The sequential readout of the ATM channels causes an electronics e ect whichmust be corrected for. Because the \B" channels are always read out second if the \A"channels contain data, the signals are held for a longer time. Leakage currents fromthe storage capacitors systematically reduce the measured charge in the B channels.
In addition, the presence of large numbers of hits in the A channels was found to draw
down the ATM supply voltages, a ecting the reference levels used for digitization.

67
Both e ects are more pronounced when the A channel records a high charge eventand the B channel takes a second event immediately afterwards, as in muon decay. In
this case, the electron energy is systematically reduced, distorting the Michel electron
spectrum and throwing o the energy calibration that should be possible based onthese events. The e ect was explicitly demonstrated and a correction calculated byusing special \decay-electron" data runs. In these runs the ATM was adjusted so the
A channel would trigger on a stopping cosmic ray muon but not record hits, leaving
the B channel free to catch the decay electron without bias from hits in the A channel.
5.1.4 GONG

The Go/NoGo (GONG) trigger distribution module resides in each TKO crate alongwith the ATMs. It latches the lower 16 bits of the detector event number. This
full number is read out along with the ATM data for use in repacking the hits into
event blocks. The lowest 8 bits of the event number are converted to TTL levels
and distributed to the ATM modules by a small ribbon cable. The board also serves
as a convenient point for level conversion of the trigger signals and fan out to the
ATM modules. The GONG module also has the ability to generate pulses with
programmable delays to calibrate the ATMs.
5.1.5 SCH

The Super-Controller Header (SCH) module also resides in each TKO crate. It servesto control the crate and handle the data readout of the ATMs. On command, data
are transferred from the ATM module bu ers along with the 16-bit event numbers
from the GONG module to a Super Memory Partner (SMP) module located in oneof two VME crates per quadrant hut. The SCH modules controls the TKO crate bus
under instructions from the SMP.

68

5.2 Data Bu ering Electronics
The 1 Kword bu er in each ATM module is capable of storing several events worth ofdata. In practice, a \LIME" limiter module is used as a prescaler to initiate readoutof the TKO crates once every 16 events. This module ensures that the the TRG
module does not re faster than the ATMs are able to be read out. Readout andcontrol of the TKO system is handled by the SMP modules.
5.2.1 SMP Modules

The Super Memory Partner (SMP) modules reside in 6U VME crates in the quadrant
huts. Each TKO system crate is connected to its own SMP module, 6 in each of 2
crates per hut. Upon receipt of a prescaled trigger signal from the LIME trigger
limiter module, the SMP initiates a sparse data scan of the modules in the TKO
crate, beginning with the GONG module.
The SMP modules contain two 1 Mbyte memory bu ers. Data from the TKO
crate are stored in one of the bu ers until either a programmed data size has beenread or a speci ed number of scans have been made. This allows the online software
to quickly adjust to a sudden jump in trigger rate. One might expect such a spikein the rate to happen if a nearby supernova were detected. More typically spikes areseen from ashing photo-multiplier tubes. In any case, one does not want the detector
to be shut down from this condition. When either of these conditions are met the
SMP switches to the opposite bu er. Data in the original bu er are then available forread by the online workstation. Switching of the bu er generates an interrupt signal
to the online workstation.

5.3 Online Workstations
Each of the 2 VME crates in each quadrant hut is connected to a SPARClassic S4/Cl
workstation (recently upgraded to Sun UltraSPARC workstations). The connection

69
is made via a Bit3 Computer Corporation model 467-1 Sbus to VME adaptor[88], justas with the outer detector. This adaptor allows the workstation to map the VME
crate into an Sbus slot and treat the crate as a extension of its own bus. Interrupt
lines are also provided for. Block transfer is supported, allowing for fast, ecienttransfer of data from the SMPs into shared RAM memory space.
Readout of the 6 SMP modules assigned to the workstation occurs on receipt of
the interrupt signal generated when the SMP switches bu ers. Completion of theread frees the SMP bu er for use by the SMP during the next switch.

5.4 Trigger Electronics
The trigger electronics determine when the detector is to be read out. Mostly residingin the central hut, their function is to determine if an event has happened, and if so,
distribute trigger signals to the front end workstations and at the same time record
the event time and trigger type information.
Each ATM channel supplies a HITSUM output. These are added together toproduce trigger logic signals. The size of these signals is proportional to the numberof hit photo-multiplier tubes (15 mV/hit) within a 200 nanosecond time window. If
the summed signal exceeds one of several thresholds a global trigger is generated andtime and trigger ID information are stored in several FIFO modules in the TRG VME
crate in the central hut.
There are four main self-generated triggers in Super-Kamiokande as well as several
external trigger types. Depending on the size of the summed HITSUM pulse, it mightpass any of three discriminator levels. These levels are labeled Super Low Energy(SLE), Low Energy (LE), and High Energy (HE). In practice these thresholds are
not so di erent, that is, the HE threshold is not much higher than the low energy
threshold. Additionally, an Outer Detector (OD) trigger is possible, triggering thedetector without any corresponding inner activity. Typically events produce some70
combination of these triggers. High energy events will also have an LE trigger bit set,for example.
The HE trigger is used mainly to quickly identify cosmic ray muons, atmospheric
neutrino, and proton decay candidates. It requires a coincidence of 31 hits within 200
nanoseconds. LE triggers select events in the solar neutrino analysis range beginningat about 5.7 MeV. Attempts to push the solar neutrino analysis threshold to 5 MeV
or lower requires a much lower trigger threshold to get good eciency at the analysis
threshold. Unfortunately, as the trigger threshold is reduced the radon backgrounddrastically increases the event rate. A computer and network upgrade in early 1998
has improved the performance of the online data handling. Until then, a prescalingarrangement was used in which only a small fraction of the very low energy events(corresponding to a short time window) were saved for analysis. This allowed thelow energy analysis groups to see unbiased data at a very low trigger threshold (4.6
MeV), albeit with much reduced exposure compared to the higher energies. This is
the reason for the existence of a separate SLE trigger rather than simply lowering the
LE threshold.
The fourth type of trigger is an outer detector (OD) trigger. This type is determined by a coincidence of 19 hits within 200 nanoseconds in the outer detector. The
trigger is formed by adding the HITSUM output of the QTC modules in the central
hut. If an outer detector trigger is formed, the trigger signal is presented to the TRG
module input. The TRG waits for 100 nanoseconds to see if the inner detector will
also trigger. If not, a global detector trigger is generated anyway based on the theouter detector trigger alone.
In addition to the four self-generated triggers, various external triggers are possible. Clock triggers provide a prescaled unbiased sample of everything to checkdetector performance. LINAC or FISSION triggers are used to identify time periods
when events should be expected from certain calibration runs.
All of the trigger types involved in a particular event are stored in one of the TRG

71
FIFO modules as an 8 bit trigger ID word. This word stays with the event data foruse in analysis streams for event classi cation.
Global timing for events is provided by a 48 bit counter driven by a 50 MHz clock.
This corresponds to 20 nanoseconds accuracy for the least signi cant bit (LSB). The
48 bit counter is reset to 0 at the start of each run and at 50 MHz could run forover 65 days before rolling over. Runs in Super-Kamiokande are stopped every 24
hours for convenience in handling the data so there is no danger of over-running theclock and having ambiguous times. Absolute timing comes from the UTC timestamp
supplied by the anti-counter electronics.

Chapter 6

OUTER DETECTOR DATA ACQUISITION
ELECTRONICS
The outer detector data acquisition electronics were provided by the American
institutions. Because of budget constraints it was impossible to instrument the outerdetector in the same manner as the inner. In any case the requirements for the outerdetector do not demand the same level of photo-multiplier coverage and timing resolution. It became clear during the design phase that the outer detector only needed
to tag incoming events, it did not need to reconstruct them with great accuracy.
With this in mind the collaboration designed for maximum light collection ability.
This served to enhance the performance of the outer detector as a veto counter andminimize the danger of \holes" opening up around failed photo-multiplier tubes.

6.1 Overview
The large size of the tank and the many channels involved made it quite useful tomodularize the outer detector data acquisition electronics. Figure 6.1 shows thegeneral layout of the hardware. Signals collected in the outer detector photo-multipliertubes are digitized in each of each of four quadrant electronics huts. Local hitsum
signals are created for use as an outer detector trigger. When a detector trigger fromany source occurs, data are passed out of the quadrant huts to the central hut for
further processing.
In the central hut, data from each of the four quadrant huts are bu ered and thenmatched together. Local time stamps from a 50 MHz clock counter are added to73

Quadrant Hut

Quadrant Hut

PMTs
Digitization
OD Hitsum

PMTs
Digitization
OD HitsumCentral HutControl RoomOD Event Building
OD Trigger
Time Stamp

Ethernet
FDDI

Event Builder
Merge ID/OD
Run Control

Out of mine

Ethernet
Ribbon cable

PMTs
Digitization
OD Hitsum

PMTs
Digitization
OD Hitsum

Quadrant Hut

Quadrant Hut

Figure 6.1: Overview of outer detector DAQ electronics

each event, as well as a global UTC time. The detector event number is also folded
in. Finally the completed outer detector events are passed o to the event builder
program running in the control room which matches up inner and outer detector
information to form a completed full detector event.

6.2 Quadrant Hut Electronics
The front end digitizing happens in each of four quadrant electronics huts. The photomultiplier cables are fed into these huts. From here the signals are picked o , digitizedand stored. Local hit-sum pulses are formed and sent to the central hut to form anouter detector trigger signal. Figure 6.2 illustrates the data ow in the quadrant huts.

74
Local Hitsum

QTC
Modulex40/quadx10/quad

TDC
x5
4 LSBsHigh Voltage

16 bit event #TDC

FASTBUSPMT

Paddle Card

StruckSupply~470/quadrant

FSCC

AUX

84 pin data ribbon cables

Ethernet FSCC Control

Figure 6.2: OD DAQ quadrant electronics
6.2.1 Outer Detector Photo-multiplier Tubes

The outer detector uses 20 centimeter diameter Hamamatsu R1408 photo-multipliertubes augmented by wavelength shifter plates [68]. The tubes and wave-shifter plates
were recovered from the Irvine-Michigan-Brookhaven (IMB) neutrino detector after
a major water leak prevented further operation in March 1991.
The photo-multiplier tubes are hemispherical in shape. New watertight (andopaque) housings were built to protect the PMT bases for the Super-Kamiokande
experiment. A total of 1885 are used in the outer detector, mounted 2 per supermodule. (Each supermodule is a structural block containing 12 inner detector
photo-multiplier tubes in a 3 x 4 arrangement). The tubes themselves have a timing
resolution of about 11 nanoseconds for single photoelectrons. This cannot begin tocompete with the roughly 2 nanosecond resolution of the inner tubes, but is quite
adequate for the purpose of tagging entering events.
The wavelength shifter plates are square acrylic panels, 60 cm on each side and 1.3
cm thick, doped with 50 mg/l of bis-MSB. The point of this is that the additive absorbs
light in the blue-green where the water transmits the most light and re-radiates in theultraviolet where the photo-multiplier tubes are most sensitive. Timing resolution isnecessarily degraded, but the light collection eciency improves dramatically. The

75
PMT is mounted into a machined hole at the center of the plate so the optical coupling
is a simple physical contact near the sides of the tube glass. Aluminized mylar tapeon the plate edges helps re ect photons back toward the photo-multiplier tube.
The use of the wavelength shifter plates degrades the timing resolution to morethan 15 nanoseconds (FWHM), but the overall photon collection eciency increases
by 60%[68]. Since the design of the outer detector is optimized for use as a calorimeter
rather than a particle tracker the extra photons are important and the lower timing
resolution is of little importance.
The photo-multiplier signals are AC coupled and placed on top of the high voltage
line. This avoids the need for a separate set of cables to carry the signals from thetube base.

6.2.2 Outer Detector High Voltage System

The photo-multiplier tubes are operated nominally at 1800V. High voltage is distributed by a set of four LeCroy 1454 High Voltage Mainframes, one in each of thefour quadrant huts. These mainframes each control 48 channels of high voltage. Eachchannel is connected to a paddle card which fans out the voltage to 12 tubes. The
mainframes are connected to an ARCNET network with a node in a VME crate in
the central hut. This allows the high voltage to be set and monitored under controlof the slow control computer \sukslc".
A monitoring program maintains tables of the nominal settings for each channel
and monitors the voltage and current for each channel. Bad tubes are often found thisway, and shift workers can be alerted to the problem. An alert system is necessary
because a single tripped channel a ects 12 adjacent photo-multiplier tubes. This
leaves the potential for a large hole opening up in the veto counter so the health ofthe outer tubes and high voltage supplies are watched closely.

76
6.2.3 Paddle Cards

The paddle cards fan out high voltage from one of the mainframe channels into 12
photo-multiplier tube outputs. The cards also pick o the photo-multiplier tube
signals through a high voltage capacitor and feed them to a coaxial ribbon cableleading to the discriminators. Each of the 12 outputs has a jumper allowing thechannel to be disconnected.
6.2.4 QTC Modules

Once the photo-multiplier tube signals have been picked o from the paddle cards,
cables take them into the custom charge-to-time conversion modules designed andconstructed by the Boston University group. The purpose of these modules is tomeasure the hit time and charge of the photo-multiplier pulse and convert it to aform which can be easily read and stored by the time-to-digital converters (TDCs).
The output of the QTC modules is a logic pulse (ECL level) whose leading edge isthe hit arrival time and whose width represents the \time over threshold". Time overthreshold is proportional to the natural logarithm of the charge.
The QTC modules also provide a hitsum output from each module. The output
is the sum of a 200 nanosecond, 20 mV pulse generated for each hit in the module.
In other words, it is proportional to the number of tubes hit in a 200 nanosecond
coincidence window. These outputs are summed in each quadrant hut. The four
quadrant sums are added together in the central hut. If the global hitsum crosses
the OD triggering threshold corresponding to a coincidence of 19 tubes, a signal ispresented to the detector triggering module as an OD trigger. If the inner detector
does not trigger on its own within 100 nanoseconds, the outer detector hitsum pulse
will go ahead and trigger the detector. In any case the OD trigger ag is latched in
the trigger type data word in each event.

77
6.2.5 Time-to-Digital Converters

Super-Kamiokande uses twenty LeCroy 1877 Time-to-Digital Converters to record
signals from the QTC modules. Five of these modules sit in a FASTBUS crate ineach of the four quadrant huts. Each module can take up to 96 ECL level inputs.
The 1877 TDC modules are operated in \Common Stop" mode. Each module
serves as a pipeline bu er that can be up to 32 microseconds long. When a stop
signal is received by the module, it goes into \bu ering mode" in which the locationof up to 16 of the most recent edges in the pipeline is digitized and stored in memory
bu ers. Each photo-multiplier tube hit requires 2 edges to latch the width of thepulse. Eight memory bu ers are available for storing data from di erent stops before
the module becomes busy and stops acquisition. Readout of a bu er releases it tostore new information.
The least count accuracy of the TDC modules is 0.5 nanoseconds. The bu ering(digitization) time is a function of the number of edges in the pipeline. The LeCroy
speci cation [89] states the conversion time is 750 ns + 50 ns/edge with a 1.6 microsecond minimum. This quantity was also measured from the Super-Kamiokande
data and found to be 1339 nanoseconds + 49.91 nanoseconds/edge [90].
The window length is programmable and can be shifted around by delaying thestop signal relative to the detector trigger. In the early part of detector operations
the window was set at the full 32 microseconds, centered around the trigger time.
In September 1996 (starting at run 2800), this was cut to 16 microseconds with thetrigger coming 10 microseconds into the window. This was done to reduce the amountof data coming from the outer detector and to help the bu er saturation problem.
There was a problem with the 1877 TDC's in early detector operation. This has
to do with the fact that the 1877 can record at most 16 edges in its pipeline. Laterhits push earlier ones out of the pipeline so only the last 16 edges are recorded. Thismeans that when the TDC digitization window is set very wide, many pulses can

78
arrive after the trigger. In the event of afterpulsing after an energetic muon, forexample, a photo-multiplier tube might receive ten to twenty additional hits after the
initial triggered event. Since the TDC can only store the most recent edges, hits fromthe original trigger are lost, creating \holes" in an otherwise clearly recorded event.
This problem is solved by shortening the TDC window size after the initial trigger toless than the minimum trigger time for 8 events.
6.2.6 Struck Latch

To help keep track of which hits in the TDC pipeline go with which events, anothermodule is provide to latch the detector event number along with the TDC data. The
STR137-ECL Multi-Event Input Latch is manufactured by the Struck Corporation[91]. The hope, and the promise of the Struck Corporation, was that the latch could
be read out in an identical fashion with the LeCroy 1877 TDC modules so that each
TDC bu er could be associated with its own unique detector event number. In reality,
several things made this more dicult.
Contrary to expectations, the Struck module latches only once for each stop signal
received. In contrast, the TDC pipeline can latch up to 8 events in each window
ending with the stop signal. This means that the Struck only latches one detector
event number per window, not per event.
A second problem is that only the lowest 16 bits of the 32 bit detector event
number are provided outside the central hut trigger module itself. This means thatwhile the trigger module records the full 32 bit event number as a tag for the innerdetector data, only the lower 16 are accessible by any other module. At normal
detector trigger rates this event number rolls over many times a day and the upper
bits must be tracked in software.
In order to resolve ambiguity concerning the event numbers when there are multiple events in the TDC window, the lowest 4 bits of the detector event numbers are fed
into spare TDC channels. These four bits are recorded in the TDC's for every event.

79This uniquely tags events within each TDC bu er. The Struck latch provides the full
16 bit event number for one event in each TDC bu er at the common stop. This
allows every event to be uniquely identi ed and matched with hits in other modules
for the same event. The TDC pipeline records edges only so the lower bits had to be
chopped by logic AND'ing them with the trigger signal (see section 6.3.7. The trigger(TRG) signal itself was also fed into a spare TDC channel. This allows precise timingof the trigger (including o sets to each quadrant hut), and also uniquely identi es theevent number of the hits in each TDC bu er.
6.2.7 Fastbus Interface Board

There is one additional board in the FASTBUS electronics crate. This is a custom
built module by Hans Berns which interfaces the signals from the central hut VME
crate with the modules in the FASTBUS crate. There are several functions.
Due to the long distance between the quadrant huts and the central hut, control
and calibration signals are converted to di erential ECL levels on twisted pair cables.
These signals must be converted back to appropriate levels for use in the FASTBUS
crate.
In addition, this board delivers the stop signals (BIP and STROBE) to the FASTBUS modules. It also handles the \chopping" of the event number to allow the event
number data to be recorded as edges by spare TDC channels.
6.2.8 FSCC FASTBUS Crate Controller

The LeCroy TDC modules and the Struck latch module in each quadrant hut sit
in a FASTBUS electronics crate. All modules in this crate are controlled and readout by a FASTBUS Smart Crate Controller (FSCC) [92] designed at Fermilab andmanufactured by BiRa for use in high energy physics detector data acquisition. The
FSCC is built around a Motorola 68020 processor and has serial and thin-wire ethernet

80
connections to allow it to boot an operating system and run code from an external
workstation.
On receipt of an external stop signal (suitably delayed from the trigger pulse to
set the TDC window appropriately), the FSCC reads out all modules on the FASTBUS backplane and bu ers the data in a FIFO memory. A leading word count is
added, then the entire block is pushed out a 32-bit port onto the FASTBUS auxiliary
connector. An FSCC-DARTAC auxiliary \personality card" [92] translates the 32-bit
parallel TTL data into RS-485 with line drivers to get the data over the 30 meterribbon cables to the central hut. This connection actually consists of two ribbon
cables, a 50 pin cable for the lower 16 bits of di erential data and control signals, anda second 34 pin cable for the upper 16 bits of di erential data.
An annoying problem related to the FSCC word count persists to this day. The
FSCC was designed in an era of single-bu er FASTBUS modules and was nevermodi ed to deal with the large data sizes provided by today's multi-bu er TDCs.
As a result, if the amount of data to be read is larger than the FSCC's data FIFO,
the leading word count is incorrect and some data can be lost. Fortunately, an
accurate byte count is made by the central hut electronics of the received data and acomparison of the transmitted and received counts can detect this possible corruptionof data. Shortening the TDC window to 16 microseconds in September 1996 helped
this problem greatly and it now occurs very seldom. Fermilab claims to be working
on a solution, but because they have little direct participation in Super-Kamiokande
there is little motivation for them to work on the problem. A solution is not yet
forthcoming.
The FSCC code is written under the VxWorks realtime operating system madeby Wind River Systems. It is largely written by Mei-Li Chen and the group at
University of Maryland. Object code is compiled by them or another group member
having access to a VxWorks site license. These licenses are extremely expensive andhence severely limit participation by other collaboration members in the FSCC coding

81e ort. The code is then transferred to speci c directories on the outer detector online
workstation \sukant". The FSCCs boot their operating system and program code via
FTP from sukant on power-up or when they receive a \reset" signal on their front
panel inputs.
The ethernet connection to sukant provides an additional means of communication
which has only begun to be exploited. Maintaining a socket connection with the
FSCC allows the online workstation to query the FSCC for its status, trigger rate,
last event processed, and other information. The main diculties for this have to
do with getting the connections established at the beginning of a run with limited
network awareness on the part of the FSCC.

6.3 Central Hut Electronics
The data taken in the quadrant huts are fed into the central electronics hut for further
processing. The decision was made early on to feed the outer detector data to themain host event builder in a fully packaged way, rather than sending data from the 4huts individually. We also want to add timestamps and other auxiliary information
to the events for diagnostic purposes.
All outer detector data are nally merged in the central hut OD-DAQ VME electronics crate. Various modules bu er the data until it can be read out and sorted by
the outer detector online workstation \sukant". Figure 6.3 shows the layout of thecentral hut VME crate.
6.3.1 Bu ering of quadrant PMT information

At each detector trigger, any photo-multiplier tube data stored in the quadrant hut
TDC modules is read out by the quadrant FASTBUS FSCC controller and piped into
an RS-485 ribbon cable through the FSCC auxiliary port. The other end of theseribbon cables is a two module combination called the (DM115/DC2) attached to the82
Bit 3 Sbus-VME Adaptor
GPS receiver
GPS fiber interface
Local Time Clock
V533 Latch (TRG time)
V533 Latch (BIP time)
VME-Fastbus Interface
V533 Latch (Event number and status bits)

DM115/DC-2
DM115/DC-2
DM115/DC-2
DM115/DC-2

VSB VSB VSB VSB

Event Number Translator
Fan in/out Calibration Module
Dual Port Memory
Dual Port Memory
Dual Port Memory
Dual Port Memory
Dual Port Memory
Dual Port Memory
Dual Port Memory
Dual Port Memory

Figure 6.3: OD DAQ central hut VME crate modules
auxiliary (VSB) bus side of the VME crate backplane. This unit translates and bu ers
the incoming RS-485 data and stores it into dual-port memories for processing by the
online data acquisition software.
DM-115/DC-2 Modules

The DM-115 RS-485 Input Module [93] is manufactured by Access Dynamics. It
serves as an asynchronous data acquisition module. It can receive 32 bit di erential
RS-485 data at rates up to 40 megabytes per second. It also supports incoming control
signals such as END-OF-RECORD, DATA-STROBE, DATA-SIZE, etc. It provides
outgoing signals to the data source to wait if the bu er is full. This ensures reliable83
communication over the long ribbon cable between the FSCC in the quadrant hut,and the VME electronics in the central hut.
The DC-2 VSB Input Controller [94] is also manufactured by Access Dynamics
to work in conjunction with the DM-115 Input Module. The two units are actuallymounted together into a single module. The DC-2 is a bus controller in its own rightand contains a Motorola 68340 microprocessor which can be programmed through apair of EPROM chips or through a pair of standard RS-232 serial ports. The DC-2
module has the ability to address the VME crate's auxiliary (VSB) bus from the rearof the backplane, thereby taking up no additional slots in the front of the VME crate.
One DM-115/DC2 module is provided for each of the four quadrants.
The DC-2 accepts data from the plug-in input board (DM-115) and bu ers it inan 8Kx32 bit FIFO bu er. As de ned by the DC-2 program, these data are thenwritten into one of a pair of dual port memories for each quadrant in the VME crate.
Upon receipt of a full event from the FSCC through the DM-115 input module, theDC-2 program adds a two word header to the event consisting rst of the number ofwords actually read by the DM-115 for the event including the added header words,
and a status word unused by the Super-Kamiokande data acquisition code. This
allows the integrity of the data transfer to the central hut to be veri ed by comparing
this count word with the FSCC count word. The DC-2 count (in bytes) should
correspond to exactly 2 4-byte words more than the FSCC count since it includes the
new additional header words. This has proved important in view of the FSCC data
fo over ow problem. It is also extremely useful to have a count of the entire amountof data corresponding to the event so that the data can be later read out as a blockfor each event.
The DC-2 program is burned into a set of EPROMs and is also provided by the
University of Maryland group. It handles the transfer of data from the DM-115 input
module to the dual port memories. It allows for external control by the online outerdetector data acquisition workstation. A portion of the lowest memory of each dual

84
port memory module is set aside as a \mailbox". DC-2 status, heartbeat, and current
addresses are updated here by the DC-2, and various addresses are also monitored for
new commands from outside. By writing speci c command words into this memory
region, the online workstation is able to command the DC-2 program without a direct
serial connection to each module.
The DC-2 module is physically connected to a VSB bus module. The VME backplane, according to standard, has auxiliary bus connections for each slot available on
the rear of the backplane, but these connections are made separately for each slot.
The auxiliary \bus" is a misnomer, connections between slots must be made externally via a VSB bus module. This module is a simple passive device that busses
two (or more) slots together with another device to be mounted in the rear of the
backplane. Proper termination is provided for reliable bus operation. The use of thismodule means that only slots connected by a bus module can see each other on the
VSB auxiliary bus. More precisely, we use four separate auxiliary VSB buses, one foreach quadrant, each connecting one DM-115/DC-2 module with two VSB-VME dual
port memories.
One of the most common commands issued to the DC-2 program is the \pingpong" command. In order to avoid dead-time due to full dual port memory modules
or long readout times, two dual port memory modules are used for each quadrant.
After a speci ed number of events, typically 256, the DC-2 is commanded to nishwriting the current event, and with the start of the next event, to ll the second
dual port memory. This leaves the rst free to be read out on the VME side at theconvenience of the online data collection program \collector". Several handshaking
ags are set on both sides to be certain that the switch is handled smoothly and thatboth ends are ready.

85
6.3.2 VME Crate

The VME electronics crate in use in the OD-DAQ central hut electronics is a standard
6U, 21 slot VME backplane and chassis manufactured by Dawn VME, Inc. Thiscrate, and a spare which serves as a test stand crate also in the central hut, have beenmodi ed by the addition of support rails in the rear of the chassis for the DC2/DM115
cards, and by the addition of an auxiliary power supply also in the rear of the chassis.
This additional supply provides -5.2V to slots 7 (VME-FASTBUS Interface), 9 (Event
Number Translator), and 12 (Fan In/Out and Calibration Module). This voltage isused by these boards to power the ECL and NIM level circuits for signal transfer
between boards and the quadrant huts.
The boards in the VME crate serve to bu er the data and to latch additional
information which can be added to the data stream. Dual-port memory modules
bu er TDC data from each quadrant. Two FIFO latch modules store a local counter
for relative timing between events and measurement of the TDC dead-time. A third
module latches the detector event number and various status bits to assist in matchingup event data from the four quadrants. A GPS (Global Positioning Satellite) interface
allows storage of absolute universal time. In addition, several custom boards were
designed and built by University of Washington engineer Hans Berns. These simplify
the communications and data transfer between modules and between the central andquadrant huts. Another provides high resolution timing for the outer detector events.
6.3.3 Bit3

The crate controller for the VME crate also serves as a link to the online workstation.
We use the Bit3 Computer Corporation's Model 467-1 SBus-VME Adaptor [88]. This
device consists of two boards, one located in the VME crate and one in the Sun
SPARCStation 20 online workstation \sukant". The 6U VME card serves as thecrate controller and bus master. A special cable connects this module to the SBus

86interface card. This allows the SUN to map the VME address space to its own SBus
memory address space and in this way directly address cards in the VME crate. The
adaptor includes a provision to provide up to four VME crate interrupts to the SBus
as Sbus interrupts as well.
There are a few tradeo s with this system. The cable connecting the interface
cards is only 16 bits wide, so data transfer speeds are somewhat limited. It is enoughfor our requirements, though. Secondly, the adaptor can address cards in only one
address mode (A16,A24,A32) at a time. Up to 6 logical devices may be de ned(pending memory considerations) so that the addressing mode for each space canbe prede ned [95]. Software locking must then be used consistently to ensure thatmultiple processes do not attempt to access the adaptor in di erent address modes(i.e., di erent VME cards) at the same time. These details were dealt with andovercome, but present a challenge to the programmer attempting to service multiple
cards in close to real time conditions.
6.3.4 Dual Port Memory Modules

The data stream from each quadrant ends in a pair of Micro Memory Inc. MM6390/32
dual port memory modules. These modules contain a 32 megabyte memory block
which can be addressed by either the VSB bus or the VME bus, hence the term
\dual port memory". Data are written into the memory by the DC-2 module on the
VSB bus and extracted by the online workstation via the VME bus. The modules
are addressable in either the VME A24 or A32 addressing modes. This presents a
con ict with the A24 read CAEN V533 FIFO latches so the A24 mode was disabledin the dual port memory modules. 1
The lowest 256 words of each DPM module are reserved for the \mailbox". Thisis a region of memory reserved for use as communication and status registers to allow
1

Disabling of the A24 mode is easily done with jumper E7 on each dual port memory card.

87
commands and responses to be sent back and forth from the online workstation to
the DC-2 without maintaining multiple serial connections to each one.
6.3.5 V533 FIFO Latches

The anti-counter VME crate uses 3 CAEN V533 FIFO Latch Modules. These areused to latch the 32 bit 50MHz Local Time Clock, the 16 bit Event Number, andvarious ags and status bits.
Each CAEN V533 module [96] contains a 32 bit di erential TTL pipeline clocked
by the external 50MHz signal from the Local Time Clock. At an external trigger
signal, data words can be removed from the circular bu er and stored in a separate
fo without stopping the acquisition of data into the pipeline. Occasional problems
with the data fo over owing before it could be read out were corrected by replacing
the original 256 word FIFO chips with 4096 word versions. With the minimum of 3
latched data words per trigger, we can now store data from over 1300 triggers without
danger.
Two of the FIFO modules are used to latch the 32 bit Local Time Clock counter.
One triggers on the global detector trigger to latch this high resolution time-stampfor each event. The second triggers on a globally OR'd version of the end-of-bu ering
pulse from the TDC modules. The purpose is to determine when the last TDC nishes
digitizing and is ready to take data again. With a little sorting in the data, this canserve as a measure of the TDC dead-time of the outer detector. In practice this has
been very dicult to make reliable and analysis imposed dead-time cuts make themeasurement unnecessary.
The third V533 module is used to latch the 16 bit detector event number. Thisis used to as a reference to match the auxiliary data with the TDC data from eachquadrant for each event. The upper 16 bits of this module are used for various status
bits. These include the FSCC busy signals showing whether a FASTBUS crate wasavailable during any given trigger.

88
6.3.6 GPS Interface

For several reasons, it is important to be able to tag events with the absolute time thatthey occured. This is necessary to point neutrino tracks in the detector back to theirsources in the sky, such as for muon astronomy and nding the neutrino peak fromthe sun. The absolute time is also needed for coordination with other laboratories
and telescopes in the event of a supernova occurrence, or for long baseline neutrino
oscillation experiments. For astronomy the precision demands are not high. The
angular resolution is large enough that very precise timing is unnecessary. Supernova
time structure scales, however, are on the order of milliseconds. Pending long baseline
experiments will need microsecond or better timing to gate the accelerator beam.
The Super-Kamiokande experiment uses a TrueTime Model XL-DC-602 Global
Positioning Satellite (GPS) receiver to provide the absolute time [97]. The system
begins with a satellite antenna mounted on a 5 foot pole on the roof of the radon hut
located near the mouth of the Atotsu car tunnel entrance. The antenna is connected
via a grounded lightning arrestor to the XL-DC receiver unit mounted inside the hut.
This receiver was set to position mode for some time before the experiment began.
After several days of sampling, very high statistics were acquired and the position
was very well known. Given this known position, the universal time can now be
determined accurately using only a single satellite.
The XL-DC receiver module outputs a time code on a ber optic cable which runs
approximately 2km down the Atotsu mine tunnel and terminates in the central hut
anti-counter VME crate. There it connects to a simple VME board which receives
the laser signal on the ber optic input connector and converts it to RS-485 in anindustry standard DC-shifted IRIG-B format. The converted signal is passed througha connector on the back side of the VME backplane to a TrueTime VME-SG Timing
Card [98].
The VME-SG Timing Card contains its own clock which is conditioned by the

89
input signal from the XL-DC receiver. The time code on the ber optic cable istransferred at 100 bits per second (1 kHz resolution) but with a precise starting point(<200 nanoseconds) for each IRIG-B \frame". By itself it is not capable of providing
the high accuracy inherent in the GPS system. Instead, the card uses a phase locked
loop to lock onto the input signal and uses this to correct the internal clock. The useof phase locking allows the clock to remain relatively stable even during short periodsof a noisy or missing input signal. The status of the phase error is reported with thedata during readout so the online control software can warn the shift worker about
any failure of the UTC input signal.
The Timing Card in the Super-Kamiokande con guration is triggered by the risingedge of bit 29 of the Local Time Clock which is fed into the VME-SG's External Event
input. This freezes the UTC time at precise intervals 21.475 seconds apart. A VME
interrupt is generated and carried to the Sun workstation as an SBus interrupt by the
Bit 3 adaptor. This informs the online data acquisition software program \collector"
that UTC information is available to be read out when convenient.
The UTC time collected in this way is in principle accurate to 1 microsecond(modulo delays in the receivers and ber optic line that have not yet been measured).
The limiting factor is the width of the clock pulses in the VME card. When thetriggering pulse from the Local Time Clock arrives, the \current" UTC value is frozen.
On the other hand, the leading edge of the VME-SG 1 pps signal output is accurate to
100 nanoseconds. If this were used to latch the Local Time clock (with 20 nanosecond
resolution) instead of the other way around, the UTC could in principle be latched toits full 100 nanosecond resolution. A circuit to do this was included in the Universityof Washington custom VME boards and could be used when needed. The pending
long baseline experiments will require this accuracy or better to gate the beam spills.

906.3.7 Event Number Translator

The Event Number Translator board deals with the problem that many modules which
latch the detector event number require signals at di erent levels. It receives the 16
bit detector event number from the main event count driver module, traditionallypart of the inner detector electronics. The board provides level translation to RS485 for latching by one of the V533 FIFO modules. The global trigger signal isconverted to NIM and RS-485 levels and fanned out to the quadrant huts. Test
trigger logic is included to feed trigger pulses through the OD-DAQ system to help
diagnose problems.
6.3.8 Fan In/Out and Calibration Module

The Fan In/Out and Calibration Module (FCM) provides fan out of trigger and TDC
test/calibration signals to the Fastbus Interface Modules located in the quadrant huts
FASTBUS crates. These signals proceed over the \CAL" group of cables to each hut.
The FCM also takes a fan in of manual test trigger pulses activated by pushbuttons
on the Fastbus interface modules in the quadrant huts. The logic-OR'd result is thenprovided to the the Event Number Translator for further distribution.
The FCM also has a VME-programmable 16-bit test pattern. This is useful forverifying the addressing capability of the Bit 3 controller when diagnosing errors. It
also provides a convenient general purpose set of digital outputs controllable by the
online workstation. In addition, there are 3 auxiliary output also programmable overthe VME bus. These can be set to either NIM or TTL output with an on-board
jumper setting.
6.3.9 VME-Fastbus Interface

The VME-FASTBUS Interface board is the main trigger interface between the VME
electronics and the Fastbus electronics in the outer huts. It provides the common

91stop trigger for the TDCs, the common clock (stop trigger) for the Struck latches, aremote FSCC reset signal, and returns the Busy-In-Progress (BIP) signals from theTDCs.
The common stop trigger is made by digitally delaying the global trigger signal.
Dip switches allow programming the delay in 20 nanosecond steps from 0 to 19.5
microseconds. The clock for the digital delay is taken from the 50 MHz Local Time
Clock board.
The TDC common stop and struck latch stop trigger are vetoed if any TDC isbusy (BIP is logic high), while the digital delay is busy (during the TDC digitization
window), if the online workstation sets a VME veto command, or if there is an optional
manual veto signal provided on the front panel.
The TDC BIP signals are also level converted to RS-485 and provided to one of
the V533 inputs for recording at each trigger. On request by the online workstation,a remote FSCC reset pulse can be generated for any hut. This is used to recover fromoccasional problems with the FSCCs. Typically, all four quadrants are reset at thesame time to maintain synchronization of data across the detector.
The VFI board also serves as a driver for the very useful LED display box. This
small box with several labeled LEDs provides information to shift workers about OD
triggers, TDC busy status, and the trigger vetos. It has been so useful in monitoring
the status of the outer detector that the central hut monitoring camera has been
largely dedicated to a close-up view of this box. Live video of its LEDs ashing isavailable in the experiment control room and the main experiment oces in the townof Mozumi.
6.3.10 Local Time Clock

The nal custom board in the OD-DAQ VME crate is the Local Time Clock board.
This board provides a 50 MHz reference clock for the V533 FIFO modules as wellas the VFI board for use in the TDC Common stop digital delay. It incorporates a

92
32 bit clock counter that provides a local time stamp for outer detector events to 20
nanosecond resolution.
For reasons which are now lost to the mists of time, we chose a 32 bit counter forthe local time stamp. This decision was probably made because the V533 modules
which latch the counter are 32 bits wide. The inner detector electronics uses a similar
timestamp with a 48 bit counter. The longer counter eliminates the possibility ofcounter roll-over. Future upgrades to this board may wish to use a longer counteras dealing with the 80 second rollover of the 32 bit counter proved to be a largely
unnecessary inconvenience.

Chapter 7

OUTER DETECTOR DATA ACQUISITION SOFTWARE
7.1 Anti-Counter Collector Program
7.1.1 Collector Introduction

The \front end" of the anti-counter data acquisition software consists of a program
called \anticollector". The anticollector (or simply \collector") program has the taskof reading out all the data which are stored in various modules in the central hut
VME crate by the front end electronics. Photo-multiplier tube data are stored indual port memory modules, the UTC time is stored in registers on the VME-SG GPS
receiver board, and the local time clock, the event number, and various other status
bits are latched into 3 CAEN V533 fo modules.
All of these data must be read out of the VME crate in a timely fashion andpacked together to be handed o to the next program in the chain. The tasks of thecollector are to get the data out of the VME crate as quickly as possible, then to get
rid of that batch of data so it is free to read some more.
7.1.2 VME Bus Addressing

The VME bus has some special features that make addressing VME modules slightly
di erent than other buses. Under the VME speci cation [99], the 16, 24, and 32
bit address spaces are actually independent to avoid having smaller addresses repeat
themselves up through the address space of modules which use longer addresses. The
address space is selected by use of an address modi er code which is placed on 7
additional address lines on the VME bus. Accessing a VME address is a two-step94
process, rst the correct address modi er code is written to the bus, then the address
may be accessed.
The data transfer may also be con gured. This is usually done by a hardware
jumper setting on the VME module. The data width may be con gured to 8, 16, or
32 bit words. A burst mode is also allowed under the VME speci cation.
7.1.3 Collector Program Flow

In order to readout all the data from the front end electronics modules in a timely
manner, the collector program must follow a strict procedure. The main parts ofthe program are initialization, run control, V533 reading loop, DPM reading, NOVA
memory management, and data quality monitoring.
7.1.4 Collector Startup Initialization

The rst step in the initialization of collector is to setup the logical devices to be
used for accessing the VME crate using the Bit3 adaptor. Each type of module in the
VME crate must be accessed using di erent address and data width parameters. In
order to simply access to the VME modules and to avoid con icts, the Bit3 adaptor
supports the creation of up to 6 \logical devices", each with its own unique address
con guration [95]. This allows a user to maintain open device descriptors to each typeof module without having to completely recon gure the adaptor each time a di erent
module is being accessed.
Following the Bit 3 Adaptor initialization, the network shared memory is set up.
This rst initializes the message server that handles messages sent from the collector tothe main host computer. Then a region of shared memory is allocated and structured
according to de nitions known to all networked online workstations.
The VME-SG GPS board is also initialized at this point. The board must be
instructed to look at the DC-shifted IRIG-B input signal. Putting this initialization
here allows the board to phase-lock to the input signal before the run is actually95
activated. This avoids the problem of having the rst several hundred events of a run
having false GPS time while the unit attempts to lock to the reference signal.
7.1.5 Network Run Control

The detector operation is controlled by a set of ags in the network shared memoryareas that are shared by all of the detector online workstations. There are 3 mainstages of detector operation that are controlled by these ags. The beginning of eachrun starts with the INIT stage. This stage checks that the online processes on each
workstation are in fact alive and running, and does the preliminary initialization offront end hardware. When all processes are alive and ready, they each respond to themain host by setting an INIT OK ag in their respective shared memory regions, andsignalling the main host to note the change in status.
The SETUP stage is for initializing front end hardware. At the end of the SETUP
stage the entire detector must be completely ready to take data. For the anti-counter,
this involves reinitializing the DC2 modules which write into the Dual Port Memories, opening run log les, and initializing the VME modules. The FSCC modules
have already been rebooted. The V533 modules must be programmed to the correct
pipeline length and transfer size. The GPS module must be programmed to use theDC-shifted IRIG-B pulse and an interrupt generated on the workstation when it istriggered.
It turns out to be important that the DC2 modules are initialized after the FSCCs
are completely rebooted. This is because when the DC2s are initialized rst, the
FSCC reboot can cause a fake \event" to be latched into the DPMs. This appears asa corruption of the data in the rst NOVA bu er to be sorted.
Only after all workstation report SETUP OK via their shared memory ags will
the main host computer allow the shift worker to start the actual run. When heor she presses the start button, an ACTIVATE ag is ashed to all workstations.
The trigger host begins delivering triggers and all workstations are expected to begin

96
gathering data and feeding them to the main host event builder.
Two other shared memory ags are commonly used for run control. The STOP
ag instructs each process to end normal data taking and revert to the INIT state inpreparation for the start of a new run. The ABORT ag is a special cue that causes
each online process to die abruptly.
7.1.6 The NOVA Bu er System

The NOVA system is a method of managing blocks of shared memory in an organizedand ecient way [100]. The system was originally developed under the OS-9 operating
system for use in balloon ight experiments. The main feature of the system used in
the Super-Kamiokande experiment is its ability to pass control of varying sized blocksof shared memory between di erent processes and to reuse the blocks of memory inan ecient manner. Di erent processes may be assigned varying levels of priority todetermine in which order they have access to the memory segments, or if they in fact
get access to all of the bu ers at all.
Processes connect to the NOVA daemon using the nova open() call. This registers
the process with a priority. The nova get() and nova put() calls are used to request
access to a shared memory block and then to release control of it when the process isnished. The rst time a block is requested, a large default size is allocated. When the
rst process is nished, it may snip the bu er to the actual length used. Subsequent
processes receive only the smaller block. Processes may always shorten the length of
the bu er they put out, but can never expand the bu er size once it has been snipped.
The unused memory after a snip is returned to the shared memory pool to be reusedin the next available bu er.
The choice of default size for the allocated blocks must be made carefully. In
the OD software, it was found that the collector was unable to read out the front
end electronics for periods on the order of tens of seconds because it had to wait
excessively long for too large a default block of memory.

97
Processes are assigned priorities, bu ers are given signi cance. The priority determines the order in which a bu er is delivered to various processes. The signi cancedetermines whether a bu er is delivered to all processes. If the priority plus the significance is greater than a given threshold, the bu er is always delivered to the process.
If not, the bu er may skip the process.
7.1.7 The FIFO Reading Loop

The FIFO reading loop is the heart of the collector program. It actually consists of
two nested loops, creatively called \inner" and \outer". The outer loop continues
until the number of events read exceeds 256. Data are actually read in inner loop,
which exits only when there is no more to be read from the FIFO Multievent Bu ers.
This structure causes the fo data to be read in bursts. Events pile up in the fos,then the inner loop reads continuously until they are empty. This allows the collector
to spend less cpu time polling the status of the fos, and ensures that when it switches
to other tasks, such as reading out the dual port memory modules, the fo bu ers
are completely empty and available for storing new events.
While the number of events has not yet exceeded 256, collector uses periods during
which the fo bu ers are empty to either read the GPS time if a new timestamp has
been signaled, or to simply sleep, allowing other running programs to share the cpu.
FIFO 1 and 2 store the time stamp from the 50 MHz Local Time Clock counterand the event number and status bits for each trigger. They are triggered together
by the TRG trigger signal from the inner detector electronics. FIFO 1 is polled fordata availability and if there are data are available in the Multievent bu ers, collector
enters the \inner loop" and reads 3 words from each module. This corresponds to theminimum number of 32-bit words copied from the pipeline into the Multievent bu er
at each trigger. All 3 modules are programmed to use this minimum number. The
middle word is the one that will eventually be put into the data stream, determinedby programming the fo pipeline length.

98
Once all events are read from FIFOs 1 and 2, then FIFO 3 is checked for data.
FIFO 3 is triggered separately by a signal that marks the end of the veto for TDC
bu ering (BIP). It is e ectively a measure of the dead-time of the outer detector andlatches a time stamp from the Local Time Clock. The fact that FIFO 3 is read out
after FIFOs 1 and 2 means that events are no longer guaranteed to be sequential. It
is possible that we could read out several global triggers from fos 1 and 2, followed
by several BIP trigger events from fo 3. The time stamps are simply loaded into thecurrent header for later sorting.
The \inner loop" exits when no further global trigger data are available in fos 1
and 2. This prevents multiple triggers from being split across NOVA bu ers. Also,
the number of events must be greater than 256 and the last read LTCBIP must belater than any previous LTCTRG. This assures that the last event has its dead-time
properly accounted for.
7.1.8 Finishing the NOVA bu er

After at least 256 events have been latched into the fo modules, collector shifts
tasks to completing the data in the NOVA bu er and then disposing of it. First, thearray containing the header information for each event is copied to the NOVA bu ermemory. Then, data from the dual port memory modules are copied into the NOVAbu er.
Reading out the dual port memory modules involves telling the DC2s to nishwriting the current event and to switch to the second DPM of the pair for eachquadrant.
The data are simply copied out of the modules into the NOVA bu er in block
copy mode. Collector never sees anything related to the individual events in thesedata.
A quick check is then made for a ag le. If the le exists, collector will do anotherreboot of the FSCCs and reinitialize the DC2s. This is the so-called \manual" or99\pushbutton" reboot that allows the shift worker to cause a reboot on demand using
a single command from the main host.
Various diagnostics are printed out about the bu er. Several more checks are
made of the header data at this point. GPS times are tested to see if they are in
range and other parts of the header are checked for sanity.
When all this is complete, the NOVA bu er is \put" out to the sorter and a newbu er is retrieved so the entire process can start all over again.

7.2 Anti-Sorter Program
The second program in the online outer detector software trio is the antisorter. The
main purpose of this program is to serve as an event builder for outer detector eventsand prepare complete events for transfer to the main detector host workstation [101].
Data are received by the sorter program through the NOVA memory bu ers after
they are lled by the collector program. The sorter must take the blocks of data fromeach hut and match pieces of individual events from one quadrant with those fromanother quadrant. The data are repackaged as a complete event with data from all
four quadrants along with the header and auxiliary timing information for that event.
The sorter's main components are a matching algorithm and numerous error checking
routines to detect problems in the data and to avoid improperly matched quadrant
data. The skeleton program was originally laid out by J. George, and was made fully
functional by L. Wai. It is now under the care of H. G. Berns who added a lot ofgood status logging to diagnose possible detector problems.
Sorter has a similar run control structure to the collector program. On startup it
sets up a network shared memory segment to monitor ags from the main workstation
host. It also connects to the local NOVA memory manager daemon so that it will
have access to the data bu ers coming from collector. On receipt of the INIT ag
from the main host run control, internal arrays are initialized. When the ACTIVATE

100
ag is set, sorter initializes the internal event counters and waits for data to become
available from the collector.
When a NOVA bu er is available from collector, the data must be unpacked before
repacking it in the desired output format. The rst step is to copy the event headers
into a local array where they can be easily called for. As each event header is copied
to the structured array, the event numbers recorded in the central hut FIFO module
for each event are expanded to 32 bits. Recall that only the lower 16 bits are actually
latched in the VME crate FIFO. The upper 16 bits are added by hand by monitoring
the event numbers to keep track of how many times the 16 bit word has rolled over.
The problem of event number rollover created a situation which is humorous tolook back on, but created a great deal of strife at the time. At the commissioning of
the detector on April 1, 1996 a small ceremony was held to celebrate the start of theexperiment. The outer detector functioned perfectly through this ceremony until thelast distinguished guest left the mine. At that moment the detector data acquisition
system crashed and had to be restarted every two hours for several weeks until the
problem was solved. It turned out that the event rates were such that the 16 bit
event number was rolling over two hours into each run. The rollover was not properly
handled by the OD software and hence no outer detector data could be fully matchedwith inner data after that point even though the data were being recorded.
With the event headers stored, the next step is to break out the TDC data fromeach quadrant hut. These data are stored in blocks from each quadrant with datafrom the 5 TDC modules in each crate coming sequentially for each event. Each blockof TDC data for each event contains the word lengths written by the FSCC and DC2
modules so these can be checked to monitor the integrity of the data stream. If data
are corrupted and the lengths do not check correctly the sorter is able to scan throughthe data block to nd the next uncorrupted event. Only a few events are lost in thisway and data taking can continue without crashing the data stream. As each event's
data are copied out to the corresponding internal array for that quadrant, the event

101
numbers latched in the Struck Latch (corrected by TDC bits) are also expanded to
32 bits in the same way as for the FIFO data. The TDC data are repacked into theinternal arrays, dropping the crate header words. The entire process is repeated using
a new internal array for each quadrant.
With all of the data now copied into internal arrays, the NOVA bu er can bereused in a new format. The sorter program proceeds down the array of event headers
and attempts to match up TDC data from each quadrant array that corresponds tothe same event number. When found, the event header and its corresponding photomultiplier tube data are repacked together into the now empty NOVA bu er. Various
lters are applied to the TDC hits with the result stored to speci c bits in the upper
part of the hit channel word. No data are discarded at this point but the result canbe used downstream to quickly accept or reject hits with certain criteria, such as
nearness to the trigger time or clustering parameters.
Any event headers, or TDC event blocks from any quadrant, which could not bematched in one NOVA bu er are saved in temporary arrays for the next NOVA bu er.
Since the DC2 modules do not receive the signal to switch pages simultaneously, it ispossible for data from one quadrant to appear in a di erent bu er than the equivalentdata from a di erent quadrant. Unmatched blocks nearly always nd their partners
and can enter the data stream when the next batch of events is processed.
With all of the matched data in place, a nal outer detector data acquisition
check happens. Various algorithms are used to check for dead or excessively active
photo-multiplier tubes, mismatched data, and other possible problems.
Finally, the now repacked NOVA memory bu er is returned to the control of the
NOVA daemon for transfer to the sender process. If the data quality checks turned
up more than the allowed number of mismatched events, a signal is sent to the FSCC
modules to reset themselves to get back into synchronization. Statistics regarding
the number of matched events, unmatched events, and other data are updated andthe sorter returns to waiting for another NOVA bu er of raw data from the collector

102
program.
If the NOVA bu er received from collector contains only four bytes, having nodata at all, this is interpreted as a signal that a run is ending. The sorter does notmonitor the network shared memory segment for this ag directly as we wanted it
to process any remaining data available in collector before re-initializing. When thissignal is received, the sorter updates the nal event number and run statistics, writes
out these gures to a performance le, and returns to the INIT state in preparation
for a new ACTIVATE signal from the main host run control. A new run is ready tostart.

7.3 Anti-Sender Program
The third program in the online outer detector suite is the \antisender", or simply,\sender". This program manages the transfer of event blocks to the main host computer for integration with the inner detector data. The sender program was rst
constructed by A. Stachyra, based heavily on the corresponding program written by
Y. Hayato for the inner detector workstations. This program, as with the other online
software, is now under the care of H. G. Berns who has added good logging to help
diagnose problems.
Sender uses the same run control structure as the other online programs. On
startup it sets up a network shared memory segment to monitor ags from the main
workstation host. It also connects to the local NOVA memory manager daemon sothat it will have access to the data bu ers coming from the collector. On receiptof the INIT ag from the main host, internal variables are initialized. When the
ACTIVATE ag is set, the sender initializes the internal event counters and waits fordata to become available from the sorter.
The sender does not do any repackaging of the data. Rather, its main function is
to monitor the data request ags in the network shared memory region for updated

103
requests from the main host event builder. When the event builder requests a rangeof events (speci ed by their event numbers), the sender responds by putting as manyof these as are available in an output NOVA bu er and making this region of memory
accessible via the network by the main host. The main host can copy these events
directly from memory and informs the sender when the operation is complete bymeans of the ags in the network shared memory tables.
This kind of transfer is naturally more complicated in practice. The sender is thelast program in the NOVA bu er chain and is responsible for returning the nished
NOVA bu ers to the memory pool for reassignment by the NOVA manager daemon. If
some events are not passed to the event builder for some reason, the sender must takecare that the bu ers are still recycled. Often the range of event numbers requested by
the main host event builder will span several NOVA bu ers of data from the sender.
In this case the sender must be able to keep track of what has been delivered andwhat is still pending. When a run is ended, sender attempts to deliver any data stillin the pipeline.

Chapter 8

DATA FLOW: ONLINE TO OFFLINE
8.1 Run Control
The overall operation of the detector is managed from a single point on the main hostcomputer. The shift worker can sit in front of this display and start or stop runs with asingle interface. All of the data acquisition programs on all of the online workstations
are started automatically by the run control scripts and controlled through network
shared memory.
Each data acquisition program that will communicate with the main hosts establishes a pointer to a shared region of memory that will be reserved as a table ofags. The region contains tables for all of the online workstations and the main hostso each program has access to all of the control ags for all other data acquisition
programs. Communication is done by setting a ag in the network shared memory
region and sending a request via socket to the main host to update and refresh that
section of memory on all workstations. Responses from the main host are found bysimply checking the appropriate memory locations when the data are required. The
use of network shared memory run control is described further in Section 7.1.5.
A graphical interface is provided for the convenience of the shift worker. The X
Windows display program presents a control panel with buttons for initializing andstarting the data acquisition system. Only buttons for the next step are made available to guide inexperienced workers through the correct startup procedure. Additional
windows provide information on current events being processed by each workstation,
the status of each data acquisition program on each workstation, and warning mes-

105
sages in the event of a problem. Other menus allow con guration of the detector
trigger, setting of the ATM and trigger thresholds, and run type setting. A form interface allows workers to log in for their shift and make comments about the operationof the detector for a given run.

8.2 Event Builder
Data taken by the 8 online workstations (sukon1-8), the trigger workstation (sukon9),
the anti workstation (sukant), and the slow control workstation (sukslc) are merged
together in the main host. These data are all fed into the event builder program.
The purpose of the event builder is to match up event sections from all parts ofthe detector, add in latched trigger information and package the events for storage.
Data from each workstation are repacked so that all the header pedestal, trigger, andslow control information is together followed by the photo-multiplier tube data in a
logical order. The event number is used to match up each data section.
Events packed by the event builder are stored together in subrun groups. A subrun
is de ned as the amount of data that can be stored in a data le of about 100 Mbytes.
Before the SLE trigger this corresponded to about 10 minutes of data. These les
are stored on a local disk drive connected to the main host (sukonh). Enough storage
capacity is available to bu er data for approximately 15 hours in the mine. This
allows operation to continue in case of temporary failure of the network connection
out of the mine.

8.3 Super Low Energy Event Processing
Starting in April 1997, a new \super low energy" trigger was introduced to allow
the solar neutrino threshold to be pushed down to 5 MeV. Lowering of the trigger
threshold means an exponential increase in trigger rate due to radon and other low
energy background. At that time the online computing power was insucient to106process so much data. The solution was to include a very fast point tter in the
online stream to reject events very near the walls.
SLE triggers are agged with a particular bit in the trigger word. In the event
builder, a table is made of all event numbers and a mask prepared for the super low
energy events. A very fast point tter is applied to the SLE events in each subrun
and the mask updated for those events which t away from the walls. Only these arepassed along to the reformat program with the usual (higher threshold) low energy,
high energy, and outer detector triggers. The procedure was arranged in a very niceway so that if anything went wrong with the tter, SLE data would be simply dropped
and the normal operation of the detector would continue normally.

8.4 The Reformat Process
The reformat process checks the status and content of each event. Trigger information
is extracted for use in fast ltering by the analysis groups. Inner time and charge
data are extracted and compressed. Anti time and charge data are copied. Inner
pedestal data are extracted and used to update the current pedestal tables. It has
not yet been subtracted from the charge data. Other run, slow control, camac ADC,
information is also extracted and used to update monitoring tables. The reformat
process can process one subrun le in about 4.5 minutes, roughly twice as fast as they
are produced.
Reformatted events leaving the main host are sent via a ber optic network outof the mine and down a nearby highway about 10km to the experiment's computing
facilities in the town of Mozumi. Permanent tape storage and the collaboration's
main computing power is located here. Comfortable oces, a library, and conference
facilities are also provided for good working conditions without the diculties ofaccess and working inside the mine.

107

8.5 The TQREAL and FLOW Processes
The path for reformatted data splits at this point. The subrun les are fed into newles of about 150 MBytes each corresponding to a particular run. These are placedon a large storage disk where a background process moves them to magnetic tapestorage.
In addition, the reformatted data go directly to the TQREAL process for recalibration. In the TQREAL process, the pedestal tables updated by the reformat process
are used to subtract out the pedestal bases from the photo-multiplier tube signals.
Pulse arrival times are corrected for known delays based on the laser calibration studies. Data are also repacked into ZEBRA banks at this point and is in the nal data
format which will be used by the analysis groups.
The output of the TQREAL process is the ow process. This consists of a large
ring bu er in memory which holds events. Basic trigger information, numbers of hits,
total charge, etc. is made available in a small table with each event. A large numberof reduction processes may connect to this ring bu er and look at this table to maketheir event selection. If an event is desired, the data for the event are copied to anoine FDDI network and made available to the reduction process. Major reduction
processes which connect to the ow process include the low energy neutrino, up-going
muon, atmospheric neutrino and proton decay, and supernova analysis groups. A
special process lters data to the US tape machines for making DSTs to be mailed to
the United States.

Chapter 9

DETECTOR PERFORMANCE
The performance of the Super-Kamiokande detector depends on several factors.
The operational live time limits the number of events that can be collected. The
water transparency limits how much light can be collected, its stability a ects thegain corrections. Tube failures a ect the ability of the inner detector to gather light,
in the outer detector it can mean low eciency gaps in the veto counter.

9.1 Water Clarity
The attenuation length of the light increased dramatically during the period afterlling the tank. As the water was recirculated through the ltering systems it became
more and more clean. By June 1996 it had settled and has remained relatively stable.
Some variations have happened due to injection of new water to replace water lost
through small leaks in the tank. Cleaning of the ne lters also improves the clarity.
Xenon lamp calibrations are taken every few weeks to track the gain changes. Laser
attenuation length measurements are taken on an even more frequent basis to makesure the analysis programs can reconstruct the energy accurately. Figure 9.1 shows
the change in the attenuation length over time.

9.2 Photo-multiplier Tubes
The number of bad channels has increased over time. Photo-multiplier tubes failoccasionally for several reasons. Some tubes fail mechanically when stress on a joint
allows water to ood the tube or short electrical connections. Some tubes have a109

Figure 9.1: Attenuation length over time
failure in the dynode structure that causes internal discharge, the so-called \ ashing"tubes. Tube death rates for inner and outer photo-multiplier tubes are roughly thesame in terms of numbers. This is more serious for the outer detector which has far
fewer tubes to begin with. Figures 9.2 and 9.3 illustrate the tube failures over time.
Tube failures are distributed fairly evenly over the tank, with a few more toward thebottom in the outer detector tubes. The outer detector tubes are older, having beensalvaged from the IMB experiment. A large fraction of the inner dead tubes are ones
which were moved to KEK to be used in the beam test experiment.
The failure of the outer detector tube death to level o is a cause for concern. At
this point dead channels are widely scattered and no areas are signi cantly at risk
for allowing entering particles to get through unnoticed. This will change as tubes
continue to die. The rate of death at this time is one tube about every 8 days. The
reason for the deaths is not clearly understood. If some mechanical stress is to blame,

110
it is hoped that the problem can be detected and identi ed during the upcoming
maintenance period. In the summer of 1999, the tank will be drained and access willbe allowed to replace and repair the photo-multiplier tubes.

Figure 9.2: ID tube death
The dark rate of the tubes a ects the trigger rates and can be a sign of detector
problems. A high rate might indicate a ashing tube or other. Normal dark rates forthese tubes are 3 kHz for the inner tubes and 5 kHz for the outer ones. This is quite
good as photo-multiplier tubes go and is one of the excellent qualities of both sets oftubes. Figure 9.4 shows the stability of the average inner detector photo-multipliertube dark rate over time.
Live-time is an important issue. The number of neutrinos collected depends directly on the time spent taking data. Super-Kamiokande has achieved an amazing
89% overall up-time, with over 95% in recent months. One of the biggest causes ofdetector down-time is actually calibration studies, not equipment failures. Figure 9.5

111

Figure 9.3: Outer detector tube deathshows the integrated live-time since the start of detector operations.

9.3 Trigger Rates and Number of Events
Closely related is the number of events. Figure 9.6 gives the integrated number ofrecorded events over time. Note the increase in number of events recorded when the
super low energy trigger was installed.
The trigger rate is another important factor to watch. Higher trigger rates indicate
ashing or noisy photo-multiplier tubes, lower rates might indicate that the water isgetting less clear. Figure 9.7 shows the change in trigger rates over time.
High energy triggers have remained relatively stable. The main source of these112

Figure 9.4: Dark rate for inner detector photo-multiplier tubes
events is cosmic ray muons which are relatively constant in time. The detectioneciency is also quite good for almost all of these events. The low energy triggerrate, however, has a much closer association with the water clarity. Purer watermeans it is more likely that light from a very weak event will reach the walls andtrigger the detector.
For both triggers, a few isolated runs show very high trigger rates. These indicate a
detector problem such as a ashing photo-multiplier tube or oscillating discriminator
channel. Often the trigger rate is one of the rst clues to this type of problem.

113

Figure 9.5: Live-time since detector commissioning

Figure 9.6: Integrated number of events since detector commissioning

114

Figure 9.7: Trigger rate since detector commissioningChapter 10

CALIBRATIONSThe high rate of neutrino interactions in the Super-Kamiokande detector would
do researchers little good if the energy deposited could not be well measured. Fits
would not be accurate if the relative timing were not well understood. Both the solar
neutrino problem and the atmospheric neutrino anomaly could be written o to a shift
in energy scale in this case. It is important to determine the energy scale and relative
timing as precisely as possible. To this end, the Super-Kamiokande collaboration has
used a variety of methods to ensure that the energy measured by the detector is bothprecise and accurate. These methods span a wide range of applicability in energy andserve to fully determine the energy response of the detector in ranges covering boththe solar and atmospheric neutrino spectra.

10.1 Laser Timing Calibration
The relative timing of the photo-multiplier tube signals is critical to our ability toreconstruct events. The actual digitization time of signals from each channel varies
according to the cable length and relative delays in the QTC (charge to time converter,
see section 6.2.4) modules. The pulse height can a ect when the leading edge crosses
the discriminator threshold. Since event reconstruction depends on knowledge of therelative photon arrival times, relative acquisition delays must be measured precisely
and corrected for.
Calibrating the timing is done by ring laser light into the detector, calculating thelight travel time to each photo-multiplier tube, and measuring the time the tube pulse

116
is digitized. In this way the time delay for the photo-multiplier tube to digitization
chain can be extracted [102].
The laser is a tunable dye laser (Laser Science VSL-V337ND-S pulsed nitrogenlaser pumping a Laser Science DLMS-220 dye module). The dye chosen was an
Exalite 384 dye, which at 384 nm nearly matches the peak Cherenkov light in water.
The laser pulse is monitored by a photo-multiplier tube. A lter wheel adjusts theintensity of the light which is then fed into optical bers for transmission to the tank.
The laser is red by a trigger signal which also triggers the detector.
In the inner detector, a single di user is sucient to illuminate all the tubes. The
ber with di user is lowered into the tank at the start of calibration runs and can beinserted into any of the calibration ports in the top of the tank. This allows a wide
variety in the desired distribution of light in the inner tank. The outer tank photomultiplier tubes cannot be seen from a single light source. For the outer detector, anetwork of 52 optical bers is permanently installed to illuminate the tubes. Thesebers can be selected at will using an optical switch.
The end of the ber which rests in the tank must have some sort of di user so thelight gets out into the tank. By simply dabbing a mixture of TiO2 powder and opticalcement onto the ends of the bers, the collimated laser light was made nearly isotropic
with the added bene t that the ends of the bers were sealed against moisture. This
low tech solution worked well.
The inner detector calibration light has a much higher isotropy requirement. The
simple TiO2 mixture was not isotropic enough. A small sphere (known as the \laserball") was lled with a mixture of silica spheres suspended in water, sold under thename of \Ludox" by DuPont. A double mirror assembly was used inside the ball to
improve isotropy even in the backward direction.

117

10.2 Linac
Super-Kamiokande was constructed with its own linear accelerator built in-situ. It
resides in a short tunnel just above and next to the main tank cavern. A beam pipe
extends into the main cavern and can be inserted into the tank at various locations
and depths through access ports constructed for the purpose.
The electron linac is a Mitsubishi ML-15MIII medical linac formerly used in a
hospital at Miyazaki Medical University [103]. It has been modi ed by the removal of
the original bending magnets used to direct the beam around the hospital operatingroom. The electron gun was also changed to produce less than one electron per bunchat the exit window of the beam pipe.
The operating principle of the linac is simple. The electron gun consists of ane hairpin tungsten lament from which electrons are boiled o due to an appliedcurrent less than 200 A. These electrons are injected into the accelerating tube fed
by microwaves produced by a klystron. The microwaves are bunched at up to 66 Hz.
The intensity of the output beam is controlled by the current applied to the electron
gun and the energy is determined by the frequency and input power of the microwave
source. Adjusting these parameters allows the linac to produce electrons from 5 to
16 MeV.
After the linac, the beam is bent 15 degrees down into a beam pipe built throughthe rock oor to reduce beam induced background. The pipe exits the rock into themain cavern dome just above the tank lid and is taken horizontally to a 90 degree
bending magnet that sends the beam straight down into the tank at whatever location
is desired. A plastic scintillator just above the end of the vertical beam pipe triggers
the detector when a calibration electron is injected into the tank.
The beam energy is measured with a Germanium detector. This detector has itself
been calibrated using various radioactive gamma ray sources, and with electrons at
the air-core beta spectrometer at KEK (Tanashi branch).

118
Calibration data in the Super-Kamiokande detector were processed with the solar
neutrino analysis reduction path. The result is that in the energy range of 5 to
16 MeV, the detector absolute energy scale is known to 5%. The response of thedetector is reproduced by the Monte Carlo simulation within 2%.

10.3 Nickel Source
An additional calibration source for the low end of the energy spectrum is a radioactive source. A compound Cf-Ni source was made to produce gamma rays at 7 and 9
MeV. The source consists of a small sphere of Californium in a water lled bucket.
The Cf source is a source of neutrons from spontaneous decays. The neutrons thermalize in the water surrounding the source and are captured by coils of nickel wireat the outside walls of the bucket. These captures release gamma rays at several
energies, the dominant ones being 9.0 MeV from 58 Ni and 7.8 MeV from 60 Ni. The
gamma rays convert to electrons via Compton scattering or pair production in thetank. One of the diculties with a nickel calibration is that the calibration depends
on a simulation of the gamma ray interactions. Also, since the source is quite extended the interaction vertices for the gamma conversion must be t. This introducessome additional uncertainty. The nickel source is now used to check the stability ofthe energy calibration over time and to provide a bridge to the energy scale of the
Kamiokande experimental data.

10.4 Cosmic Ray Muons
The highest energy calibration is done using a natural source, cosmic ray muons. The
idea is that since most of the muons tend to be minimum ionizing particles, then if
the track length is known, one can calculate the amount of energy that should be
deposited in the tank as Cherenkov radiation. This can be simulated and comparedto the amount of light actually collected. The study does depend on the simulation

119
of the detector, but for similar types of events the comparison gives us a statementof our knowledge of the measured energy. This is a straightforward systematic e ect.
It can be used to further tune the simulation and the tting routines in order tominimize systematic e ects.
Of course, not all cosmic ray muons are minimum ionizing, and not all have thesame track length. Strict cuts are applied to get a clean sample for calibration. Only
muons passing vertically downward near the center of the tank are considered. They
must be single ring events, with a good t to a long track muon tter. A poor t
or extra rings suggests the presence of additional pions, gammas, or electron pairs
produced by bremsstrahlung.

10.5 Michel Electrons
Michel electrons are decay electrons from stopping muons. The spectrum of electrons
from muon decay is well known and should provide a good calibration source. In
practice, a known electronics e ect makes this more dicult.
The ATM modules which digitize hits from the photo-multiplier tubes have bu er
capacity for several events. This allows the electrons from muon decay to trigger thedetector separately from the initial muon. Hits from various channels are bu eredand digitized in sequence. It was found that channels which have to wait longer tobe digitized have a di erent conversion constant when they are.
The idea is that the presence of a large number of hits waiting in the bu ers draws
down the main voltage level, a ecting the reference voltage used for the digitizing. In
addition, slight leakage currents in the storage capacitors used to bu er the hits before
digitization lets some of the signals charge leak out while waiting to be sampled. The
combination of these two e ects made calibration results di erent for events with anenergetic muon just preceding that would ll the bu ers with large numbers of hits.
These ATM e ects have been carefully investigated and parameterized. The e ect

120
can now be corrected for to good accuracy.
For calibration purposes, it is better to avoid the issue entirely. Because of this,a number of special \decay-electron" calibration runs have been performed. In thismode, the ATMs are set so that for muon decays, they do not record hits from theinitial muon, but rather only for the decay electron. This removes the problem of theextra hits delaying the digitization of the electron signals. Accurate calibrations havebeen possible with this modi cation.

10.6 0 Rest Mass
A clever way of checking the energy scale around 135 MeV is to look for the rare eventsin which a neutrino interaction results in a single 0 essentially at rest in the tank.
The  decays into two back to back gamma rays, providing a fairly distinct signature
for the event. Searches can be made for events with exactly two opposing rings forwhich are both identi ed as a gamma ray in a particle identi cation algorithm. Figure10.6 shows a plot of the reconstructed mass of such events made by T. Hayakawa.
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0

0

50

100

150

200

250

mass (MeV)

Figure 10.1: Reconstructed 0 Mass

300

121

10.7 Xenon Lamp
The relative gain calibration is done using a Xe lamp. Relative gain is important toensure that the response of the detector is uniform. This information was used in theearly operation of the detector to trim the high voltage settings of the photo-multipliertubes to make their response as similar as possible. The gain of the photo-multipliertube, that is, the number of photoelectrons out of the dynode chain for each input
photon, depends largely on the applied voltage. This voltage can only be adjusted indiscrete steps within a reasonable range, however, so it is not in general possible totrim all tubes to exactly the same gain by setting the high voltage. The relative gain
can change over time as well, as tubes age, dust settles, and so on.
Once the tubes have been trimmed as closely as possible to similar gains, the Xedata are then used to recalibrate the pulse heights. A table is made of the variationsin the tube-to-tube gain. During regular taking, all signals in each of the 11,200 innerphoto-multiplier tubes are corrected by this table. Xe calibration is carried out every
few weeks to keep the detector well tuned against time-dependent e ects.
The xenon lamp system is quite similar to the inner detector laser system. The
Xe light goes into a ber optic cable which is put into the tank at various positions.
A di user ball similar to the laser ball spreads the light into the tank as isotropicallyas possible. The xenon ball mount includes a small vane which extends horizontallyin one direction above the ball. The shadow of this vane can be seen n the data andis used to correct for any residual azimuthal asymmetries.
Xe relative gain calibration is done by ashing the lamp from various positions in
the tank, usually along the center line. In this way, concentric rings on the top andbottom, and layers on the sides all receive uniform illumination. Tubes in each ringor layer are adjusted relative to each other. Data from various positions allow studies
of dependence on light level, and takes out e ects due to anisotropy of the di userball.

Chapter 11

SIMULATION
What Super-Kamiokande actually measures are pulse shapes and times from alarge array of photo-multiplier tubes. The uxes and directions of the actual particles
are deduced from this information. The detector is complicated, and moreover, thephysics is complicated. Results might be skewed not only by detector ineciencies
but also by failure to account properly for some type of particle interaction. The
usual thing for an experiment in this circumstance is to create a simulation.
Atmospheric neutrino events are simulated in Super-Kamiokande using two independent simulations. The two agree well. One of these, based on the \on-site"method, is used in this analysis. The purpose of the simulation is to model the interactions of atmospheric neutrinos in a simulated detector. The neutrino ux is basedon models of the primary ux of cosmic rays and their interactions in the upper atmosphere. Once a neutrino interacts in the detector, Cherenkov photons are produced
and tracked for those products that require them. The detector response to these incident photons is further simulated to account for e ects of the data acquisition chain.
The hope is to reproduce the response of the detector to the simulated neutrino ux
as accurately as possible. Any variation between the data and the simulation must
be due to either a aw in the simulation (hopefully a small e ect) or to an interesting
physics result.

123

11.1 Atmospheric Neutrino Flux
The Super-Kamiokande simulation is based on Honda's 1995 atmospheric neutrinoux calculation[2]. That work starts with the best measured cosmic ray primary
spectra and proceeds to calculate all known interactions that might ultimately produce
a neutrino.
Cosmic rays colliding with oxygen and nitrogen nuclei in the atmosphere produce
large numbers of  and K mesons. These decay into muons and neutrinos. The
muons decay as well, ultimately leading to a  =e ratio equal to 2. The productionof atmospheric neutrinos is described more fully in Chapter 2.
Several factors can a ect the expectations for neutrino production from cosmic
rays in the atmosphere. Non-decaying muons, polarization e ects, and the geomagnetic eld all change the expected neutrino spectra.

Non-decaying muons

When the energy of muons exceeds about 5 GeV, relativistic e ects allow a signi cantfraction of the particles to reach the surface of the earth before decaying. Ionizationand other losses rob most of the energy so the muons decay nearly at rest or at least
at a much lower energy. Electron neutrinos are produced almost solely from muon
decay. This means that ux of e is depleted at energies above where these muons
actually decay. The ux ratio ( +  )=(e + e) is correspondingly increased. Figure11.1 illustrates this e ect based on several atmospheric neutrino simulations. It is
worthwhile noting that while the overall normalization of the cosmic ray spectrum is
not known better than about 20%, the ux ratio ( +  )=(e + e) agrees to better
than 5% for various models.

124

30

(νe + νe )20

(νµ + νµ )This work

10

Volkova
Mitsui et al
Butkevich et al
Lipari
Near
Vertical

Near
Horizontal

0.
10

0

10

1

10

2

10

3

Figure 11.1: Neutrino ux ratio versus E (GeV), from [2].
Polarization e ects and solar activity

Polarization e ects can also a ect the ratio. In the pion rest frame, the decay muon
is fully polarized. This is because the only other product is a neutrino(anti-neutrino)
which has a xed left(right)-handedness. In the subsequent decay of the muon, theelectron neutrino is preferentially emitted in the forward direction to conserve helicity.
This results in a higher energy on average for the electron neutrino than for the muon
neutrino. Since the initial pions decay in ight instead of at rest, the polarization
is not complete, but it is a signi cant e ect that must be taken into account by
simulations.
Low energy cosmic rays are a ected by solar activity since increased solar wind
tends to drive o the incident galactic cosmic rays. Models of the primary ux aredone for a particular level of solar activity, usually a mid point of the solar cycle.
Figure 2.1 illustrates the size of the solar modulation on the cosmic ray primary
spectrum. Considering that the average 1 GeV atmospheric comes from a 20 GeV

125
primary parent, the solar cycle has a negligible e ect on the multi-GeV neutrino
sample.
Geomagnetic cuto

The e ect of the earth's magnetic eld changes the spectrum of neutrinos that canbe detected. The geomagnetic eld tends to shield ground-based detectors from low
energy cosmic rays. In order to arrive at the earth, a particle must have more thana minimum rigidity (momentum/charge). The rigidity cuto varies as a function of
the entering position on the earth and the arrival direction. Rigidity cuto contours
for the Kamioka site are shown in Figure 11.1. Units are in GV (GeV/charge) for theincident cosmic ray particle. For comparison, neutrinos of energy around 1 GeV are
produced from a parent population of primary nucleons with energy about 20 GeV[51]. Only the peak in cuto rigidity to the east has any e ect on neutrino analyses
above 1 GeV.
Honda [2] has examined the e ect of the geomagnetic e ect at the Kamioka site
in detail. Figure 11.1 shows a comparison of low energy atmospheric neutrino ux
simulations. 1 Above about 3 GeV the low energy calculation is spliced smoothly
into a high energy calculation which neglects the geomagnetic cuto . The di erence
between the dotted line and the solid line in the range between 1.3 GeV and 3 GeV
gives the size of the e ect. In the lower part of the range it is still signi cant, but istaken into account by the simulation. The geomagnetic eld a ects the ux of both and e in the same direction so the total e ect on the ratio is still small even at 1
GeV.
The ux of atmospheric neutrinos has been calculated by a number of authors[104] [2]. These calculations agree well in shape, but have about a 20% uncertainty in
BGS refers to Barr, Gaisser and Stanev [104]. BN is from Bugaev and Naumov [105]. LK refers
to Lee and Koh [106].
1

126

Zenith angle of arrival direction

0
10

10

20

90

50
10

5

20

10
5
5

180
0.0
S

60

120

180

240

300

360

Azimuth angle of arrival direction

Figure 11.2: Contour map of rigidity cuto for the  arrival directions at Kamioka.
Azimuth angles of 0 ; 90; 180; and 270 show directions of south, east, north, andwest respectively [2]absolute ux. This comes largely from uncertainties in the primary cosmic ray ux.
Typically analyses use the ux ratios ( + )=(e +e) in order to cancel uncertainties
in the overall normalization. Such ratios are typically good to about 5% [107]. This
analysis uses Honda's 1995 ux calculation which includes the geomagnetic e ects for
the Super-Kamiokande site and covers the energy range from 30 MeV to 1 TeV[2].

11.2 Neutrino Interactions
The atmospheric ux calculations provide the spectrum, direction, and rate of muonand electron neutrinos arriving at the Super-Kamiokande detector. Once in the detector they are allowed to interact through charged-current (CC) and neutral-current(NC) interactions with nucleons in the water tank. Neutrino-electron scattering withelectrons in the water molecules is neglected. The interaction simulation is summa-

127

3

This Work

-1

BN
10

LK

2

2

-1

νµ + νµ

BGS-1

Flux x E ν ( m sec sr GeV )10

νe + νe

10

1

10

-2

10

-1

10

0

10

1

Neutrino Energy (GeV)

Figure 11.3: Atmospheric  uxes multiplied by E2 for the Kamioka site at solar mid
from [2]. The dotted line is a high energy calculation without the rigidity cuto .
rized here, details can be found in [87].
Neutrinos interact via quasi-elastic (elastic) scattering, single pion production,
multiple pion production, and coherent scattering o oxygen nuclei. Each of thesecan occur in either a charged-current or a neutral-current mode.
Charged current quasi-elastic scattering is calculated with the standard V-A crosssection. The Fermi motion of the target nucleon is included, as is Pauli blocking for ,16 O scattering. Neutral current events will only be seen if the recoil nucleon emits
Cherenkov light or interacts to produce pions.
Single pion production is modeled by the Rein-Sehgal method [108] [109]. This
process happens when the neutrino scattering excites a nucleon into a baryon resonance which decays with production of a pion. This process is simulated only forinvariant masses under 1.4 GeV. 18 resonances under 2 GeV are simulated, (1232)
being the most prominent. The angular distribution from (1232) production is accounted for, all other resonances are assumed to emit pions isotropically. Multiple
pion production is handled by Bjorken scaling for invariant masses greater than 1.4
GeV.
The last piece involves particle interactions in 16 O. Neutrino scattering o the128
oxygen nucleus can have a coherent interaction in which pions are produced withvery little momentum transfer. This results in a sharp peak in the forward direction.
The Rein-Sehgal method is again used in this simulation. Pions produced inside theoxygen nucleus can interact before they escape. Inelastic scattering, charge exchange,
and absorption are taken into account.

11.3 Particle Tracking
Secondary particles are tracked through the detector using the GEANT [110] package
developed at CERN. This package simulates the detector structure and manages
the particles in the event. GEANT provides a convenient means of describing thestructure and materials of the detector. Tracking and interactions of the particles inthe di erent detector regions take into account the environment the particles are in.
This package is very commonly used by high energy physics experiments to simulate
their detectors. Hadronic interactions in the water are simulated with the CALOR
package, JETSET [111] is used for high energy interactions.
Cherenkov photons are generated at each tracking step according to the formulas:cos()= 1=
2
d N = 2 1 , 1 
c
n2 2
dxd

(11.1)(11.2)

Each photon is tracked until it hits a photo-multiplier tube or is absorbed. Scattering in the water is taken into account. Rayleigh scattering is dominates the lightattenuation at short wavelengths. This scattering involves the interaction of photons
with water molecules and has a 1/4 wavelength dependence. At long wavelengths,
absorption becomes dominant. In addition there is scattering by particles in the water, the so-called Mie scattering, that is assumed to have no wavelength dependence.
The total simulated attenuation curve agrees well with measurements made with alaser.

129
Photons which strike the black sheet liner of the inner detector or the re ective
Tyvek liner of the outer detector are re ected or absorbed based on the measured
re ectivity of the material. A tuning parameter that is often used to adjust the lighttracking is an overall scaling of the Tyvek re ectivity. This can simulate a layer ofdust or blocking by opaque cables.
If a photon strikes a photo-multiplier tube it generates a signal taking into account the quantum eciency of the tube, (and of the wavelength shifter in the outerdetector). The response is taken from the measured 1 p.e. distributions. For the
inner detector these are taken from Ni and laser calibrations, for the outer detector
they are taken from random trigger events (periodically the detector is triggered by aclock whether or not there is any activity. this is known as a NULL or Clock trigger).
Random noise hits are added to improve realism.

11.4 Monte Carlo Event Summary
Ten years worth of detector live-time was simulated to determine the expected distributions of neutrino events in the Super-Kamiokande detector. Table 11.4 summarizes
the number of events from various interaction types after applying the same reduction
algorithms used on the data. The distributions drawn from these events are scaled by
the live-time of the data to make comparison plots with the nal data samples. Table
11.4 makes a similar plot for the simulated events passing the partially contained
reduction criteria.

11.5 Outer Detector Monte Carlo Tuning
11.5.1 Purpose of the Simulation

The simulation of the outer detector is based on the \on-site" Monte Carlo simulation
written for modeling the inner detector [112]. The important task of the outer detector
simulation is to model the tracks of incoming particles. This directly a ects the130
Table 11.1: Fully contained multi-GeV MC sample summary
e-like-likee,e CC QE
616 38.24%
2 0.10%non-QE 743 46.12%
9 0.45% , CC QE
15 0.93% 1093 54.14%
non-QE
99 6.15% 907 44.92%
NC
138 8.57%
8 0.40%Total
1611 100.0% 2019 100.00%
Table 11.2: Partially contained multi-GeV MC sample summary
e-likee,e CC QE
non-QE , CC QE
non-QENC
Total-

-like7 0.28%32 1.26%- 455 17.93%- 2026 79.86%
17 0.67%- 2537 100.00%

determination of the eciency of the Anti Counter for rejecting these events whenvarious tters and reduction steps are tested on simulated data. The more closely thesimulation can be made to reproduce real events in the detector, the more reliable it
will be for estimating accurate eciencies.
The author made some e orts to bring the outer detector simulation to about
10% agreement with real data. This was a necessary step to allow testing of the data
reduction algorithms. The partially contained event reduction, for which the author
was also partly responsible, depended the ability to simulate outer detector activity
in order to estimate rejection of both background and neutrino events.
One of the main backgrounds for high energy neutrinos is incoming cosmic raymuons. The response of the outer detector was tuned by examining the hit and charge
distributions for down-going vertical and horizontal through muons generated by the

131simulation. These were compared to a sample of similar muons from actual data.
Distributions of the total number of photoelectrons and hit tubes were checked forthe top, bottom, and walls separately. Vertical muons were used for the top andbottom. For the walls, distributions for a 10 meter circle around the horizontal muon
entry and exit point were examined separately.
There are several parameters built into the simulation program which allow thedetector response to be tuned. Table 11.5.1 lists some common ones with their typicalvalues.
Table 11.3: Common parameters used to tune the OD Monte Carlo Simulation
TDC Window Size
16.00 microseconds
T0 O set
8990 nanoseconds
Dark Rate
5 kHz (parameter value)
Tyvek Re ection Ratio
0.7 (top), 0.9 (elsewhere)
PMT Collection Eciency
22%
Wavelength Shifter Eciency 0.7% (parameter value)
Discriminator Threshold
0.25 p.e.
PMT Dynamic Range
50 p.e.
Q Scale3.5 nanoseconds/p.e.

11.5.2 TDC Window Size

The TDC window size parameter re ects the actual LeCroy 1877 TDC digitization
window[113]. For the early data, the TDC window was set at 32 microseconds, centered on the trigger. On September 17, 1996, starting with Run 2802, this value waschanged to 16 microseconds and shifted so that only 6 microseconds come after thetrigger in order to solve a TDC bu er saturation problem[114]. The bu er saturation
problem is described further in Section 6.2.5.
In practice the reduction algorithms use only about 500 nanoseconds around each

132
trigger. Simulating the entire 16 or 32 microsecond TDC window is functionallyunnecessary.
11.5.3 T0 O set

The Trigger O set parameter determines where to place the simulated trigger inthe simulated TDC window. In the real electronics the TDC window was originallyadjusted so that the trigger (also called T-zero) was centered in the 32 microsecond
window. After the September changes the new 16 microsecond window was adjusted
so that 10 microseconds came before, and 6 microseconds came after the nominal
trigger time.
For the Monte Carlo, the adjustment is made by o setting the start of the TDC
window by some xed time. The time scale in the data has its own o set so thatthat the trigger actually occurs at about 1000 nanoseconds. This has to do with thegeneration of the trigger by the inner detector electronics. This feature is reproducedin the Monte Carlo. So, to get a total of 10 microseconds of of the Anti Counter
TDC window before the trigger, it is necessary to shift the start to about -9000
nanoseconds. With the actual trigger at 1000 nanoseconds, this gives 10 microseconds
before the trigger and 6 microseconds after. Again, this does not appear to correspondto the time hits arrive but rather to the TRG pulse. These numbers do correspondreasonably well to actual data.
When Monte Carlo events simulated this was were compared to data it was foundthat this o set was slightly o . The Monte Carlo events were consistently about 10
nanoseconds later relative to the inner detector data for both entry and exit. Figure11.5.3 compares the time distributions near the trigger for the inner detector andthe anti counter. Note that the inner detector trigger is the same, as expected. The
anti-counter distribution is shifted late by about 1 bin, or 10 nanoseconds. This wascorrected by changing the T0 o set by 10 nanoseconds, ending with a nal value of8990 nanoseconds.

133
Since the time of this tuning the trigger cabling between the inner and outerdetectors was changed slightly to accommodate the new super low energy trigger.
There is now a 30 nanosecond o set between the data and Monte Carlo event trigger
arrival times. No adverse e ect is expected from this.
11.5.4 Dark Rate

Photo-multiplier tubes at nite temperatures are not perfect two-state devices. Thereis always some probability that an electron can be ejected from the photo-cathodeand be accelerated into the dynode structure mimicking a photon hit. Ions left on the
inner surfaces from the imperfect vacuum can also nd their way into the dynodes.
These e ects are collectively known as \dark noise". It means that there is a uniform
probability of a tube ring at any given time. The e ect is well known and is combated by requiring coincidences between tubes to form triggers. It does constitute a
background however and must be modeled if the expected numbers of hits are to becorrect.
Y. Hayato made a short study of the Anti Counter dark noise using the NULL
(Clock) triggers in the detector. These are triggers generated periodically by a clock
rather than a tube hitsum. The result is that one ends up looking only at backgroundnoise rather than real events. His result was that the Monte Carlo parameter setting for dark noise should be a rate of 5 KHz per tube. This parameter does not
represent the actual dark noise rate in the tubes. Instead it is used to generate hits
at 5KHz which are then subjected to the discriminator threshold. Since the hits are
generated with a random charge distribution based on the known response of thephoto-multiplier tubes, some of the hits do not survive the threshold. About 80% do,corresponding to a real detected dark noise rate of about 3.5-4KHz per tube. Thists well with back of the envelope calculations. For many low energy events which
do not enter the outer detector, there are still about 80 hits in the outer detector ina 16 microsecond window. This corresponds to about 3KHz. So the number is not134
unreasonable.
For my study I looked at samples of fully contained neutrino data. \Fully contained" is a bit arbitrary as this sample could still contain events which graze theAnti Counter. To be sure I did not count those hits, I examined hits in various time
windows before and well away from the trigger time. I then generated Monte Carloevents with no track in the Anti Counter, but varying dark noise rates. I compared
the distributions of the numbers of hits in the various windows and found that themodel with 5KHz as the Monte Carlo dark noise parameter t the data quite well.
Figure 11.5.4 shows the number of good hits counted in a 500 nanosecond and a
3 microsecond window away from the trigger. Figure 11.5.4 shows the equivalent
distributions for Monte Carlo events using 5KHz for the dark noise parameter.
11.5.5 Re ection

A big part of any simulation of the Anti Counter has to be the treatment of lightre ection from the Tyvek lining. This lining was chosen speci cally for its highre ectivity in order to boost the total amount of light collected by the Anti Counter.
The amount of re ection can be a ected several factors. Dark cables and structure
lying on the lining are not modeled separately and are treated as a reduction in theoverall re ection of the Tyvek. Dirt from the diesel fumes of machinery during tankconstruction could not be easily cleaned. The re ectance of the Tyvek as a functionof wavelength was measured by the manufacture and is listed in Table 11.42.
The Monte Carlo simulation takes this table of re ectivity versus wavelength andapplies a constant scale factor to it to account for a change in the actual re ectivity.
The original version allowed only one value of this scale factor for the entire detector.
I changed it to allow the top, bottom and sides to be tuned separately.
One way to get a handle on the expected re ection amount is to look at the tail2

Re ectances are as listed in \tyvksg.F" in the on-site ATMPD apdetsim simulation module.

135
Table 11.4: Re ectance of Tyvek as a function of wavelength
300 325 350 375 400 425 450 500 550 575 600
0.691 0.710 0.839 0.879 0.888 0.895 0.899 0.897 0.894 0.893 0.892
of the time distributions for entering and exiting muons. Light collected too late to
be direct, (or any light for exiting particles), must have been re ected by the Tyvek.
The amount of re ection will directly a ect how much light remains after successive
bounces. This gives a value of the scale factor of about 0.7 for the top, and about 0.9
or more for the bottom and walls. The numbers are then adjusted further to get the
total photo-electron and hit distributions more correctly aligned with data.
11.5.6 PMT Collection Eciency

The actual collection eciency of the photo-multiplier tube is modeled by a single
number which lumps together the re ection of the glass and the quantum eciency
for a photon to eject an electron from the photo-cathode. The parameter had been
set at 0.22 which roughly corresponds to about 80% transmission through the glass
followed a 28% quantum eciency averaged over wavelengths. These numbers areroughly correct. After careful study, I left the same value of 0.22.
11.5.7 Wavelength Shifter Plates

The wavelength shifter plates are sheets of acrylic doped with bis-MSB. The doping
agent absorbs photons in the ultraviolet where the Cherenkov spectrum is highest
and re-emits them in the green where the photo-multiplier tube sensitivity is highest.
The sheet is a 60cm by 60cm square with a hole cut out of the center to accommodate
the photo-multiplier tube. The e ect is to increase the e ective area of the tube at
the cost of smearing the time resolution. Since the design of the Anti Counter reliedon collection of photons over precise timing, this was an acceptable choice.

136
There are several di erent claims about what the e ect of the wave-shifter plates
should be. In the rst Super-Kamiokande International Collaboration Meeting notes
Bob Svoboda showed a simple model he was putting into an early Monte Carlo [115].
In this model he uses 100% absorption by the plate, 45% re-emission of photons inside
the wave-shifter plate, and an unspeci ed eciency for the interface between the plate
and the photo-multiplier tube. He asserts without explanation in the notes that there
is a 2.8% collection eciency by the tube for photons incident on the wave-shifter
plate. This is then multiplied by the quantum eciency of the tube (lower near theedges of the tube) to get the overall eciency of about 0.007. This is the value thatwas used in the on-site Monte Carlo and I am assuming that the choice of it camefrom these meeting notes.
Clark McGrew asserts a di erent view in his thesis [68]. In it he says that the
wavelength shifter plates added 60% to the total number of photoelectrons collectedby the bare tubes alone. Taking the e ective areas of the photo-multiplier tube andthe wavelength shifter plate into account, this suggests an overall eciency for theplates closer to 0.023.
A third number can be found in the US Proposal for participation in the SuperKamiokande experiment [116]. The description of the outer detector includes gures
showing that the plates add 39% more photoelectrons. This would suggest an overall
eciency around 0.015.
It is clear that even given some confusion in what the number should be, theMonte Carlo is probably not modeling this e ect correctly. This was not changedin this round of improvements. One reason is that the Monte Carlo already had
more than enough direct photons without increasing the e ectiveness of the simulated
wavelength shifter plates. Doing this correctly would then mean readjusting thecollection eciency of the bare photo-multiplier tubes as well. That value was alreadythought to be in a reasonable range. Making all this work out really would haverequired a much longer time tuning and probably a much more detailed simulation

137
of the collection of photons in the tubes. The outer detector MC tuning is accurateenough at present that this e ect is not worth pursuing.
11.5.8 Discriminator Threshold

Hits in the photo-multiplier tube are subjected to a discriminator with an adjustable
threshold before being recorded in the LeCroy 1877 TDC modules. This prevents
small noise uctuations from being recorded as true hits. The same e ect is modeledin the Monte Carlo. Before a hit is put into the hit list for a given event, a charge is
generated for the hit based on a standard 1 photo-electron distribution. If the chargechosen is below the discriminator threshold, the hit is not recorded.
In the Super-Kamiokande Anti Counter, the discriminators are set to a thresholdof 25mV in the QTC modules. What this corresponds to in terms of photoelectrons is a bit harder to extract. Most of the photo-multiplier tubes used in the AntiCounter simply do not have a one photo-electron peak. Generalizing those that do,
and looking at other factors, it is expected that this threshold corresponds to about
0.5 photoelectrons. Another issue is that the gain varies quite a bit from tube to tube.
Monte Carlo samples were generated using both 0.5 p.e. and 0.25 p.e. thresholds.
The higher threshold actually seemed to improve the bottom and wall distributions,but the top was best with the lower threshold. In the end I decided that the top
was most important to get right since the major background comes from there. The
bottom and walls are still not badly modeled with the lower threshold. In reality thehigher threshold might actually be better if the issues of gain and collection eciency
were modeled more carefully. For now the choice of parameters worked as closely as it
needed to and lack of further time prevented a more detailed investigation. It seems
that even more careful fussing of the current parameters is probably not worthwhile
anyway without doing the more careful model. The value of the threshold parameterused in the tuning was 0.25 photoelectrons.

138
11.5.9 PMT dynamic range

The dynamic range of the photo-multiplier tubes determines the saturation value ofthe tubes. At some point increasing the number of incident photoelectrons does notincrease the size of the signal further. Again, this is a rough thing to model as theAnti Counter tubes are not so similar in characteristics. The Monte Carlo was using
a value of 50 p.e. as the point at which the tube saturates. Examination of the
maximum charge in a few tubes supported the view that this roll-o happens around50 p.e. so the value was left as it was.
11.5.10 Q-scale

After working with the Monte Carlo for a while I discovered that the scale which
relates charge to electronics counts was the same as is used in the inner detector. In
the inner detector, 5.5 counts corresponds to 1 photo-electron. In the outer detector,
the charge is latched into the TDC modules by the QTC modules. For those, 7 TDC
counts or 3.5 nanoseconds corresponds roughly to 1 photo-electron. At the point of thedata stream where this conversion takes place, the charge is reported in nanoseconds
as the time over threshold. So the 3.5 ns/p.e. value should be used. It turned outthat this 36% decrease in the scale was almost precisely what was needed to accountfor a discrepancy in the total number of photoelectrons for all parts of the detector.
With the change to the correct value, both photoelectrons and hits could be made tocome to much closer agreement.

139

200
267453
826.4
1852.

ID
Entries
Mean
RMS

14000
12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0

800

900

1000

1100

1200

1300

1400

1500

vertical mus DATA

500

200
7233
779.9
1627.

ID
Entries
Mean
RMS

400
300
200
100
0

800

900

1000

1100

1200

1300

vertical mus MC

Figure 11.4: Time distributions

1400

1500

140
ID
Entries
Mean
RMS
UDFLW
OVFLW
ALLCHAN100
500Constant
Mean
Sigma

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

302
542
3.672
1.873
0.
0.
542.0
12.71 / 8
112.0
3.469
1.956

90

100

Hits in -500ns to 0.ns
ID
Entries
Mean
RMS
UDFLW
OVFLW
ALLCHAN

40
20
0

27.17
Constant
Mean
Sigma

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

303
542
19.50
4.851
0.
0.
542.0
/ 24
43.45
19.53
4.752

100

Hits in -3000ns to 0.ns

Figure 11.5: Good hit distributions for data
ID
Entries
Mean
RMS
UDFLW
OVFLW
ALLCHAN

30
20
10
0

Constant
Mean
Sigma

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

302
130
3.746
1.827
0.
0.
130.0
8.001 / 7
27.71
3.546
1.808

90

100

Hits in -500ns to 0.ns
ID
Entries
Mean
RMS
UDFLW
OVFLW
ALLCHAN

10
5
0

17.30
Constant
Mean
Sigma

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

303
130
18.52
5.377
0.
0.
130.0
/ 20
7.976
18.14
6.196

100

Hits in -3000ns to 0.ns

Figure 11.6: Good hit distributions for Monte Carlo and 5kHz dark noiseChapter 12

EVENT SELECTION
The Super-Kamiokande experiment has been operating nearly continuously since
it was commissioned in April 1996. A little less than 10% of the live-time on averagegoes to detector down time, including maintenance of electronics and detector studies
and calibrations. These data never reach the analysis chains. Of the roughly 800,000
events above 5.5 MeV recorded every day, only about 14,000 are considered useful for ahigh energy analysis. The majority of the rejected events are low energy background
events such as radon chain decays, entering gamma rays from the rock, spallation
products from stopping cosmic ray muons, and a few solar neutrinos.

12.1 Initial Sample
The initial sample of high energy data are de ned by rst selecting only \normal"
data taking runs and then removing low energy events. The sample is further re nedby removing periods calibration (pedestal) events and making loose cuts on cosmic
ray muon contamination. Using only \normal" runs rejects periods of detector studies
or known electronics abnormalities. Occasionally the detector is run during repairs
on one component to provide at least partial coverage in case of a supernova. Thevery low energy events are rejected by requiring more than 1000 photoelectrons in
the inner detector. This corresponds to a threshold of roughly 120 MeV. Table 12.1
lists the major criteria used to further re ne the initial data sample.

142

Table 12.1: Initial sample criteria
Remove pedestal events
Merge sub-events within 30 sRemove events with no anti-counter data
Total ID charge must be > 1000 p.e. (120 MeV)
Impose 100 s dead-time for -decay rejection
OD TDC sliding window cut
OD cluster cuts,  1 OD cluster allowed

Pedestal Events\Pedestal events" are taken every hour to provide a running calibration of the frontend digitizing electronics. One by one, each online workstation (controlling one-eighthof the detector), is told to switch o the signal inputs to its digitizers and record datawith open channels for 100 triggers. This records the base value of the digitizer, orthe \pedestal". The pedestal can be di erent for each channel due to vagaries of theboard construction and layout. It must be subtracted from any measurement madeby that channel in order to retrieve the true signal size. Periodic measurements areimportant since the pedestals can be a ected by small temperature changes in theambient environment. Super-Kamiokande 's extensive air-conditioning systems anddeep location provide substantial thermal inertia so the pedestal changes are usuallysmall and easily compensated. Pedestal events are tagged in the data record andeasily ltered by the analysis streams.
Cosmic ray muons

Muon decays are a concern when attempting to distinguish electrons and muons.
Stopping cosmic ray muons can decay to an electron and two neutrinos. If the muon
drops below Cherenkov threshold while still in the tank it is possible that the decay

143
will not happen immediately after the last recorded light from the muon track. Thereis little directional or positional information to tie the electron to the previous muon so
the decay electron could easily be taken as a separate electron neutrino interaction. To
combat this problem, if an event is selected (it passes the rst reduction step) then all
subsequent events within 30 microseconds are recorded and merged into the original
data record as \sub-events". This time corresponds to roughly 15 muon lifetimes.
Virtually all decays should occur in that time.
To further combat the chance that muon decays might skew the muon to electron
ratio, a software imposed dead-time of 100 microseconds is imposed between primary
triggers. This cut also conveniently makes any concern about the e ect of outerdetector dead-time moot as the maximum OD dead-time is less than this analysis
imposed cut. The dead-time corresponds to about 45 muon lifetimes.
No outer detector data

About 5 percent of all data have no anti-counter photo-multiplier tube information.
This happens because the outer detector TDC modules are dead during readout. This
dead-time can range from 2 to 78 microseconds long depending on the number of hits
recorded. During this time, triggers are vetoed to the OD TDC modules. The event
number and trigger time are still latched by the OD central hut VME crate but there
will be no data from photo-multiplier tubes to go with the event. Virtually all of thetriggers arriving during this period are due to \ringing" e ects and after-pulsing of
the photo-multiplier tubes.
During the early stages of the detector operation the outer detector had some problems that kept it from functioning continuously. Hardware problems in the FASTBUS
crates and software problems in the online data acquisition code kept some events frombeing matched up with data from all ve electronics huts. Data which could not becompletely matched were considered unreliable and thrown away. This meant that
there were periods (as well as isolated events) in which there was no outer detector

144
data available for the events. In some cases a header was provided, in some cases
there was no information whatsoever from the outer detector. Many hardware improvements and code xes improved the situation and the detector was operating
fairly smoothly by the time the water clarity stabilized in June 1996. Data withoutouter detector information were treated as detector dead-time.
Low energy events

By far the largest fraction of triggers in Super-Kamiokande comes from low energy
events (5-100 MeV). These are largely due to radioactive decay of radon products inthe water, entering gamma rays from radioactive decays in the surrounding rock, andspallation of nuclei by cosmic ray muons. Nearly all of these processes are limited inenergy to a few tens of MeV. Furthermore, the e ect of the geomagnetic eld tends
to sweep away cosmic rays lower than a few hundred MeV before they can interact
in the atmosphere and produce neutrinos. For atmospheric neutrino analysis, eventswith less than 1000 p.e. (120 MeV) in the inner detector are rejected.
Junk events

Several types of junk noise events can be found in the raw data. Ringing andafter-pulsing can produce secondary events after an especially energetic muon passes
through. Another common problem comes from cross-talk in the photo-multipliertube cables. Each photo-multiplier tube is connected to the front end electronics by
a 70 meter watertight but unshielded cable. Most of the length is in water which
provides plenty of shielding. At the top of the detector the cables are laid into trays
and bundled together to the nearest electronics hut. At this point large pulses on one
cable may induce a signal in an adjacent cable. The e ect on an event display is large
rectangular regions of hits with little total charge.

145
Through-going muons

Much of the remaining sample consists of through-going particles. A cut to reject someof these long-track events is made by histogramming the outer detector hit times foreach event [117]. The beginning and end of the distribution is determined by sliding
a 100 nanosecond window across the hit times and looking for more and then lessthan 15 hits in the window. The event is rejected if the di erence between leading
and trailing edges is greater than 240 nanoseconds. The light crossing time of thedetector is about 210 nanoseconds on a long diagonal. A particle punching throughthe outer detector in two separated places might be expected to have entry and exit
points widely separated in time while a fully contained particle or one penetrating
the outer detector at only one point will have a shorter time distribution for outerdetector hits. Stopping muons entering at only one point pass this cut as easily as
exiting neutrino products.
The attack on through-going particles is re ned with a fast nearest neighbor chargeclustering algorithm. Clusters are de ned by eliminating isolated hits and grouping
remaining hits around the highest charge neighboring photo-multiplier tube. Hit tubes
are required to have at least 3 hit neighbors to be part of a cluster. The completed
cluster must contain at least 8 hit tubes to remain in consideration. Clusters whosecharge density peaks within 8 meters of that of another cluster are removed. This cut
is intended to nd somewhat widely separated clusters that would indicate throughgoing muon events. Events with 2 or more remaining clusters after all this are rejected.

12.2 Fully Contained Neutrino Data Reduction
Fully contained events are the \golden" sample of neutrino events from the detector.
These are events in which the neutrino interaction occurs within the ducial volumeof the detector and all of the interaction products also stop inside the ducial volume.
Essentially all of the neutrino energy is deposited in the inner detector. These events

146
tend to be lower in energy. The track length limitation places an absolute maximumof about 21m, or about 8.5 GeV, depending on the track geometry. The actual meanenergy of the fully contained events is around 800 MeV. Since the neutrino energy
spectrum drops steeply with energy, the fully contained sample also comprises thebulk of the neutrino events detected. In Super-Kamiokande there are about 15 fully
contained events for each partially contained event. The utility of the fully contained
sample lies both in its large statistical weight and in our ability to well determine
the total energy of the primary particle. A disadvantage is that at these energies theinitial neutrino direction is not so well known, due both to scattering considerations
and the workings of the interaction.
12.2.1 FC 1st Reduction

The fully contained event rst reduction contains the initial cuts to de ne the standard
data sample by rejection of bad runs, pedestal events, and low energy events. These
initial cuts are needed to reduce the total amount of raw triggers quickly to a rate
which can be processed easily by the more sophisticated analysis programs.
The additional function of the rst reduction is to further re ne the data sample
by eliminating events with activity in the anti counter. By de nition, a fully contained
event should have no component entering or exiting the detector. As a fast rst cut
on anti counter activity, events with more than 50 hits in the anti counter are also
rejected. The data are reduced to about 4000 events per day.
12.2.2 FC 2nd reduction

Once the valid runs are cleanly de ned by the rst reduction, the second reduction
makes the rst cut on possible fully contained neutrino candidates.
First, the outer detector activity cut is tightened to a maximum of 25 hits. Of
these, no more than 10 are allowed in a spatial cluster. The cluster is the same nearest
neighbor clustering used in the initial sample de nition. The cut is made loosely at

147
rst to allow the initial sample to be used for both fully and partially contained
events. Once that was done, the additional constraints for fully contained events may
be applied.
Further cuts are made to remove spurious events, such as from ashing photomultiplier tubes. One such cut is to reject events for which more than 0.5 of the total
charge in the event occurs in a single tube. Such high charge concentrated in a small
area is quite unusual for light from a Cherenkov cone. It is a good indicator that theevent is not valid. This reduction reduces the total sample to about 500 per day.
12.2.3 FC 3rd reduction

The nal stage removes remaining background and irregular events. If an event hasexactly zero hits in the entire 16 second outer detector TDC window, the event isrejected. We cannot assume an event did not enter the detector from the outside
if the outer detector information is not present. One can estimate the e ect of thiscut on the nal neutrino sample. After all, no activity in the outer detector is thede ning characteristic of a neutrino event. In practice, the outer detector photomultiplier tubes have a dark noise rate of 5kHz. For the 1885 tubes, one expects a
total hit rate of about 9.4MHz from the detector. This corresponds to one hit every
106 nanoseconds on average. On average, 160 hits are expected from dark noise inthis window. Poisson statistics shows the probability of nding exactly zero hits in
16 seconds will be so small that there is little worry of rejecting true neutrino eventswith a properly working anti-counter.



ns = x e,  3  10,7
P x = 0;  = 1600
106ns
x!

(12.1)

Other tests check for entering muons. There are several classi cations of enteringmuons. The hard muon check looks for events with more than 8 sub-events (events
following within 30 seconds. Events of this type are known to have saturated the148outer detector electronics before upgrades eliminated this possibility in October 1996.
Events in the outer detector are stored in a pipelined TDC capable of latching up
to 16 edges (8 hits) in a single digitization window. The length of the window was
set to 32 seconds in early running. If an OD channel received more than 8 hits it
would keep only the most recent 8. Early hits were lost from the pipeline, leaving\holes" in the hottest parts of these big events. The length of the TDC window was
shortened to 16 seconds. This made it nearly impossible for the trigger electronics
with its 800 nanosecond veto to saturate the TDC channels. A less stringent muontter is applied if the event has a large total charge and a saturated photo-multipliertube at the entrance point. A stopping muon tter searches for hot entrance points
consistent with a shorter track muon in the detector.
Remaining low energy events are often dicult to distinguish from ashers. In
practice neither is desirable, but they are handled separately. If the total numberof inner detector hits is less than 500, a low energy event tter is applied. If the t
succeeds and the timing is extremely short, the event is rejected as very low energy.
Several asher cuts eliminate the various ways these events can show themselves.
The simplest histograms hits in 100 nanosecond windows around the trigger. The idea
is that many ashers exhibit a rather continuous time distribution so if the minimum
number of hits in any window around the trigger is greater than 15 (10 if inner charge> 800 p.e.), the event is called a asher. Other cuts remove ashers discovered inroutine monitoring of hitmaps or reduction output. These ashers are identi ed byrepeated appearances of nearly identical events and are removed by using speci cfeatures such as the charge pro le and cable numbers involved. These cuts are also
used in the third partially contained reduction described in section 12.3.3.
12.2.4 Final Sample Selection

The remaining sample is about 30 events per day. These events are hand scanned by
two independent scanners to identify remaining background, usually ashers. Scan-

149
ners guide tting algorithms and other tools to check on the data quality. A nal
scanner arbitrates the result and makes the actual cut to about 16 events per day.
Vertices and directions are reconstructed with an automated tting algorithm.
Once rings are identi ed, a particle identi cation program is applied to each ring andthe vertex reconstruction is repeated correcting for track information.
The nal step is to cut out events interacting outside the ducial volume de ned
to be 2 meters from the inner detector walls. This leaves about 8.4 per day, or 3,462
events for the 414 day exposure.

12.3 Partially Contained Event Reduction
Partially contained neutrino events are those which interact inside the detector ducial
volume, but whose interaction products escape the detector. These tend to be higher
energy events, but only a lower limit on the energy can be established as the products
carry an unknown amount of energy away with them. As the energy increases the
sample becomes almost purely muon-like. These events can be used as a rather
sensitive probe of oscillations at higher energies than could ever be achieved with the
fully contained events.
The size of the detector and the exponential drop of the atmospheric neutrino
ux with energy conspire to give very few partially contained events. Less than 1 per
day is expected. This is in stark contrast to the situation in the older Kamiokande
experiment where a large fraction of events exited the detector. The large size ofSuper-Kamiokande means that much higher energy events will be fully contained.
The data reduction is literally a search for one event in a million. The job is donewith 5 distinct data processing stages, or \reductions", with a nal check by humanscanners. The partially contained reduction stream is actually designed to lter bothfully and partially contained events as an extra check on both analyses. Partiallycontained events are separated from the sample only at the very end. The author

150
shared responsibility for the creation of the partially contained reduction stream with
Larry Wai. Processing of PC data was done by the author.
12.3.1 1st PC Reduction

The rst partially contained event reduction consists only of the initial sample cuts
already described in section 12.1. Unlike the fully contained reduction, no tight cuts
can be made on total outer hits since the type of event being sought is required to
produce hits in the outer detector. Use of the outer detector as a veto shield must be
done in a much more subtle manner. Without this additional constraint, the outputof the rst PC reduction is around 14,000 events per day, nearly 3.5 times as large as
the corresponding fully contained reduction stage.
12.3.2 2nd PC Reduction

The second partially contained data reduction step involves a charge-gradient clustering algorithm written by Larry Wai [117]. It also brings inner detector information
into play and requires correlation between inner and out hit clusters. The intention
is to reject stopping muons by geometrical arguments and further reduce remaining
stopping muons. Table 12.3.2 lists the criteria used to accomplish this task.
The charge-gradient technique works by binning the detector into angular bins andlooking to see how much charge lands in each bin. Clusters are formed by examining
the charge gradients between bins. The bin sizes are roughly 5 meters by 5 meters
for the inner detector and roughly 10 meters by 10 meters in the outer detector.
Table 12.2: 2nd PC reduction criteria
Require  1 OD cluster
OD cluster must not wrap around corners
If there is an OD cluster, require a nearby ID cluster

151
The rst criterion repeats the earlier requirement that the outer detector have amaximum of one cluster. Now the cluster nding method is much ner. Repeating
this cut removes additional through-going muons whose exit clusters may have been
too weak to be rejected by the earlier nearest neighbor technique. Since the chargegradient technique may nd additional clusters, the exact cut is a requirement of lessthan 7 hits for the outer detector cluster with the second highest charge. This ensuresthat there is minimal activity outside the main cluster.
Comparing the charge in a cluster that lands on the top or bottom is a way of
eliminating corner clipping muons. An incoming particle can cross near enough to theedge that the outer detector entry and exit clusters can merge together. An exiting
particle will leave only an exit cluster on either the top, bottom, or wall, but not morethan one except for light which has leaked around the corner. Particles aimed exactly
at the corner might be cut, but such a case is very rare. It has been suggested thatlightproof, re ective material such as the DuPont Tyvek be placed around the top
and bottom anti-regions to isolate the top, bottom, and wall sections. This would
make the corner clipping cuts even more ecient. If the collaboration agreed, such achange could be made during planned maintenance upgrades in the next year or two.
The ID cluster requirement is a way of looking at the geometry of the event. If
the highest charge outer detector cluster is an exit cluster, as for partially contained
events, then there should be a relatively high charge inner exit cluster nearby. If
the outer cluster is really an entrance, the inner entrance cluster may not be so
pronounced if it exists at all. The cut is made by requiring more than 1000 p.e. in
the inner detector within 200 centimeters of the highest charge OD photo-multipliertube. If there are less than 7 hits in the OD cluster this cut is not applied so that the
fully contained events can be preserved in this analysis stream.
Of the 14,000 events per day which pass the 1st reduction, about 2000 events per
day survive the 2nd reduction.

152
12.3.3 3rd PC Reduction

After passing through the rst two stages of data reduction, the data have been cut
down to roughly 2000 events per day. This was considered low enough to be able
to run an automatic tting algorithm. For historical reasons a asher algorithm wasinserted here as well. Table 12.3.3 lists the criteria for this stage of processing.
Table 12.3: 3rd PC reduction criteria
Test for asher eventsNo OD cluster near projected entrance
One source of spurious events is ashing photo-multiplier tubes. One failure modeis for the high voltage electrodes in the dynode chain to discharge with a spark. The
light from the photo-multiplier tube exits the front of the tube, knocking electrons oof the photo-cathode and generating a real hit pulse. Escaping light can be collected
in nearby tubes. Enough light can be generated to trigger the detector. With thebrightest ashes the entire detector can light up. Often one can see the shadows of
the dynodes in the detector hit pattern. This can happen repeatedly at high rates andthe detector operation must be suspended until the o ending tubes are disconnected.
Flasher events can also occur at fairly low light levels, repeating only occasionally.
These are the hardest to nd.
Flashers do tend to have some common characteristics which are used to reject
them. First, they tend to repeat. Detector hitmaps are monitored for cables thatare hit unusually often. Second, ashers tend to have fairly long time distributions
compared to Cherenkov light. Finally,, since the light is coming isotropically froma point source it will not t well to a track/cone hypothesis. Point ts will nd avertex at the wall so if the asher has not been removed by any other means it will
eventually fall far outside the ducial volume.

153
The asher test is written by T. Hayakawa 1. This routine looks at hits within a
500 nanosecond window after the trigger time (1200 to 1700 nanoseconds, the trigger
is at roughly 1000 nanoseconds). The minimum number of hits in a sliding 100
nanosecond window from 1200 to 1700 nanoseconds is determined. If this minimum
number is greater than 15, (or greater than 10 if the total inner charge is under
800 photoelectrons), then the event is rejected as a asher. The idea is that asher
events tend to have rather long time distributions. Since the light crossing time ofthe detector is about 210 nanoseconds maximum, looking at hits beyond this is a wayof separating ashers.
The main cut in the third reduction step uses a point tter to locate a vertex andthen nds a charge weighted direction for the event. The direction is then projectedback into the anti-counter where an entering particle would have entered if this had
been an entering event. If there are more than 10 hits within 8 meters of the projected
entrance then the event is rejected. A danger comes near the walls where the tdirection can be reversed and projecting back nds the actual exit cluster. This
results in low eciency very near the walls. About 100 events per day survive thethird reduction.
12.3.4 Used Run Cuts for PC Reduction

Not every run is completely perfect. Sometimes trouble starting the detector leads
to short \junk runs". Occasionally a photo-multiplier tube will \ ash" sporadically.
Sometimes a high voltage crate will trip o and data continue to be taken while
the shift operators work to identify and get the run stopped or the problem xed.
Whatever the reason, there are some portions of some runs in which the detector is
not operating at peak performance. Nearly all of these cases are known and logged.
Even though the cause is determined, there is no reason to throw away an entire day's
1

sukai:/home/atmpd/src/reduc/pat3rd/ ash test.F

154
data because of a known short glitch. This is why we have run or sub-run cuts. Dataleaving the detector are grouped in blocks of approximately 10 minutes worth of data
called \subruns". This is the smallest block that can easily be removed from the data
set due to a known detector irregularity.
The bad run cuts are made on the basis of the analysis reduction steps. After the
major data reduction is complete in both the fully contained and partially contained
streams, the reduction logs are examined for irregularities. Any sub-run which yields
an excess of event candidates is rejected. For the partially contained stream, any
sub-run yielding 10 or more candidates after the 3rd reduction is rejected. This cuts
about 0.2% of the live-time. In addition, the used run cuts from the fully contained
analysis are also applied. In practice the partially contained cuts are almost completely contained in the fully contained analysis cuts. Only a few events are removed
on the basis of the partially contained reduction alone and these are nearly always insubruns adjacent to groups already cut.
12.3.5 4th PC Reduction

The fourth reduction is an attempt to cut those events which pass the 3rd reduction
due to ineciency in the outer detector. It uses the inner detector to re ne thecriteria used in the 3rd reduction. Entering events may pass the 3rd reduction evenwhen the rough direction t is accurate if the outer cluster is weakened. This canhappen from known insensitivities due to cable bundles, support structure, low photomultiplier tube coverage in corners, and dead photo-multiplier tubes. Some cornerclipping muons also remain due to the reversal of the t direction near the walls.
The 4th reduction uses the inner detector as an additional veto counter. Table 12.3.5
summarizes the criteria that do this.
The earliest photo-multiplier tube in the inner detector is determined by sliding
a window in time across the inner hits. The rst tube for which the sliding window
contains several hits is de ned as the \early" or \entrance" tube. If the projected

155

Table 12.4: 4th PC reduction criteria
Early ID hits must be away from projected entrance
Apply long track muon tter
Require the vertex to be away from the cornerentrance point based on the charge-weighted direction is close to the \entrance" tube,
the event is rejected.
Now that the sample has been reduced there is time to run a long track muontter. This serves to reject remaining muons with weak or non-existent outer detector
clusters. Some of these still have survived the above cuts because the rough direction
t is not accurate enough.
12.3.6 5th PC Reduction and Final Sample Selection

After the 4th reduction the data rate is down to 20 events per day. It is now feasible
to run a precise but time consuming tting algorithm on the data. This algorithm,
developed by K. Ishihara, makes a true track t to the inner detector hits. Vertex
position, track direction, Cherenkov angle and track length are all varied to minimize
the timing and charge residuals for the t.
With the precise t in hand, the search for a back-extrapolated entrance cluster isrepeated. The new t completely eliminates the remaining peak near the walls frompoor direction reconstruction in the charge-weighted rough t.
Only 2 events remain in the sample after the 5th reduction. A nal check of
the sample is made by human scanners. As in the fully contained event analysis,
two independent scanners examine the events and tag background. Essentially all
remaining contamination is now entering events which t very near the walls. These
must have very weak outer detector clusters to have survived this far. A nal scanner
arbitrates the identi cation of the rst scanners and reduces the candidates to 0.8

156
per day in the full detector volume. Virtually all of the rejected events are alreadyoutside the inner ducial volume to be used for analysis.
A nal cut on the ducial volume (2 meters from the nearest inner detector wall)
reduces the nished sample to 0.6 events per day.

Chapter 13

DATA SUMMARY
The nal sample of atmospheric neutrino events contains 394 fully contained and230 partially contained events in the ducial volume. Table 13.1 shows the breakdownof these events as electron-like or muon-like. Partially contained events are assumed
to be entirely muon-like.
Table 13.1: Event summary. MC expectations are scaled to 33.0 kton-yrs.
e-like-likeData MC Data MC
FC 290 236 230 296
301 372
It is important to study the sample to be certain that it is pure and free ofbackground contamination. If background cannot be avoided, then it is at leastnecessary to determine where the background is coming in and in what regions of thedetector it will most a ect the results.

13.1 Flavor Double Ratio
The avor double ratio R=(=e)DATA=(=e)MC can be immediately read o from
Table 13.1. Taking the partially contained and fully contained muons together, theresult is:

R = 0:65  0:05(stat:)  0:07(syst:)(13.1)

158
The statistical errors are determined from the number of events according to:

s



1
LDATA
1 + 1
stat: =1++
R
Ne(Data) N (Data) LMC Ne(MC ) N(MC )(13.2)LDATA and LMC are the exposures of the data and Monte Carlo samples, 33.0 kton-yrs
and 225.0 kton-yrs, respectively. The total systematic error is estimated in Section
13.5.

13.2 Vertex Distributions
One important check on the integrity of the data is the distribution of event vertices.
Neutrinos are equally likely to interact anywhere in the tank. If there is an excess of
events in one section of the detector, especially near the walls, this could be a signof contamination from non-neutrino events. Statistical and data selection e ects cancause the distributions to not be at but the data should correspond to the simulated
events which have passed through the same ltering process.
A common way to plot the event vertices is to project them onto the R-Z coordinate plane. Typically, the vertical coordinate is plotted against the square of theradial coordinate to preserve the usual sense of directions in the tank, and to keep the
expected distribution uniform. Figures 13.1 and 13.2 give these distributions for the
fully contained multi-GeV sample and for the partially contained events, respectively.
Some remaining entering muon background excess exists near the top of the tankin the fully contained sample, but this is removed by the ducial volume cut. The
partially contained distribution does not display an obvious excess in this region.
Figures 13.3 and 13.4 show the distribution of vertices as a function of verticalheight in the detector. Data for these plots are taken only from a cylindrical region
with radius 14.9 meters (i.e., the wall ducial cut), and the full height of the detector. This helps to separate the radial and vertical contributions. A simple K-S test

159
2000

2000

1500

1500

1000

1000

500

500

0

0

-500

-500

-1000

-1000

-1500

-1500

-2000

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Z VS R**2(Multi-GeV)

Figure 13.1: Z vs. R2 (FC)

3000
3
x 10

-2000

ENTRIES

0

500

1000

1500

2000

442

2500

3000
3
x 10

Z VS R**2(PC)Figure 13.2: Z vs. R2 (PC)results in a 17% (83%) probability that the FC (PC) data came from the same parent
distribution as the corresponding Monte Carlo sample for events inside the ducial
volume.
The arrows show the ducial volume cut in the vertical direction. The histogram
represents 10 years of Monte Carlo simulation ltered through the same data reduction
algorithms and scaled to the same live-time as the data. Figures 13.5 and 13.6 separate
the fully contained sample into e-like and -like events. Partially contained events are
assumed to be mu-like. The K-S test comparing the data to the Monte Carlo insidethe ducial volume yields a 47% probability for the electron-like events, and 38% for
the muon-like events.
Figures 13.7 and 13.8 give the vertex distribution as a function of the square of
the radial coordinate. The radial distribution is typically plotted this way so that thebins contain equal volume and the expected distribution should be at. In practice,the multi-GeV sample is of high enough energy that one can see the edge e ects wheretracks move out of the fully contained sample into the partially contained events.
It is also interesting to look at the radial distribution of events on a linear scale. In

160
Entries

45

442

60

40

35

50

30
40

25
30

20

15
20

10
10

5

0

-1500

-1000

-500

0

500

1000

1500

Z VS R**2(Multi-GeV)

Figure 13.3: Z Distribution (FC)

0

-1500

-1000

-500

0

500

1000

1500

Z(R≤14.9m,PC)

Figure 13.4: Z Distribution (PC)this case the volume of water in each bin increases toward the outside so the expecteddistribution is not at. However, if anomalies are present it is much easier to reado the location in the tank where they are happening. Figures 13.9 and 13.10 show
the vertex distributions as a function of the radial coordinate for the fully contained
multi-GeV sample and for the partially contained events.
The e-like and mu-like events are broken out for the fully contained sample in
Figures 13.11 and 13.12. Aside from the previously noted excess of entering muons
outside the ducial volume, no particular problems are evident for either the electronsor the muons.
Figure 13.10 shows a clear excess of partially contained events near the edge ofthe ducial volume. This is of some concern as it may indicate contamination fromentering cosmic ray muons. Such a case would a ect the overall  to e ratio in thispart of the detector. The eciency of the data ltering routines would have to be
improved to remove these events.
The K-S test was run for the radial distributions as well. Inside the ducial
volume, the fully contained events had a 94% probability for having the same radial

161
Entries
Entries

324

288

50

30

25

40

20

30

15
20

10
10

5
0
0

-1500

-1000

-500

0

500

1000

1500

Z(R≤14.9m,Multi-GeV e-like)

Figure 13.5: Z Distribution (FC e-like)

-1500

-1000

-500

0

500

1000

1500

Z(R≤14.9m,Multi-GeV µ-like)

Figure 13.6: Z Distribution (FC mulike)

distribution as the simulation. Probabilities for e-like and -like were also high; 88%
and 79% respectively.
The radial distribution for the partially contained events does not give a good K-S
probability when compared to expectations. The value is only 5%. This has a lot to dowith the excess of events near the edge of the ducial volume in the partially contained
sample noted earlier. If the ducial volume is reduced to a region 5 meters from any
wall, the K-S probability for the partially contained radial distribution increases to80%.
Figures 13.13 and 13.14 divide the data into \ingoing" and \outgoing" tracks.
This division is not exact. \Outgoing" tracks are de ned such that the dot productof the track direction and the position vector is positive. (The origin of position is at
the center of the tank.) The excess is clearly only in the \outgoing" tracks.
As one might expect from looking at the histograms, the K-S probability for theoutgoing events is only 13% while the ingoing events have a nearly 50% probabilityof being drawn from the same distribution as the Monte Carlo. If the ducial volume

162
ID
Entries
Mean
RMS

60

10
648
0.1329E+07
0.8386E+06

ID
Entries
Mean
RMS

45

40

10
394
0.1563E+07
0.7920E+06

35

50

30
40
25

30

20

15
20
10
10
5

0

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000
3
x 10

FC DataFigure 13.7: R2 Distribution (FC)

0

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000
3
x 10

PC DataFigure 13.8: R2 Distribution (PC)cut is increased to 5 meters from the wall, these numbers jump to 90% and 86% for
outgoing and ingoing distributions. This con rms that while there does appear to besome contamination problem, it is restricted to a region near the edge of the ducial
volume.

13.3 Event Properties
Number of Rings

Another useful check of the data sample is the number of rings. This helps to verify
the ring nding algorithms as well as the Monte Carlo simulation of the physics.
Barring ineciencies in detecting particles, the number of rings should correspond to
the number of charged particles in the interaction and hence point to the underlying
physics. Figure 13.15 compares the number of rings found to the simulation for the
fully-contained (FC) sample. Only data with interaction vertices inside the ducial
volume are included. The partially contained sample does not use ring counting as aselection criteria.

163
90

ID
Entries
Mean
RMS

80

10
648
1076.
412.5

ID
Entries
Mean
RMS

60

10
394
1191.
374.7

70
50
60
40
50

30

40

30
20
20
10
10

0

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

FC DataFigure 13.9: Radial Distribution (FC)

0

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

FC DataFigure 13.10: Radial Distribution (PC)

Figures 13.16 and 13.17 show the e-like and mu-like fully contained data separately.
The distribution of ring numbers found in the data matches the simulation well forboth electron and muon events. This lends con dence that the ring nding technique
is robust and that the simulation is reproducing the necessary physics.
Visible Energy

The visible energy is an estimate of the energy of the neutrino based on the total
amount of Cherenkov radiation collected in the detector. For partially-contained
events this is only a lower bound on the total energy of the neutrino since the escaping
particles carry some energy out of the detector. Figures 13.18 and 13.19 compare thevisible energy from events in the data to the simulation.
Particle Identi cation

For the fully contained data, a particle identi cation algorithm is applied to the single
ring events. Figure 13.20 shows the distribution of the likelihood parameter compared

164
50

ID
Entries
Mean
RMS

45

10
361
1087.
409.6

40

45

ID
Entries
Mean
RMS

40

10
287
1061.
415.6

35

35
30
30
25
25
20
20
15
15
10

10

5

5

0

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

FC DataFigure 13.11: Radial Distribution (FCe-like)

0

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

FC DataFigure 13.12: Radial Distribution (FCmu-like)

to simulation for the \Multi-GeV" sample. Partially-contained events are assumed to
be all muons. Simulations of the partially-contained tracks show less than 2% of thesample are electrons (see Table 11.4).
MomentumThe momentum of the detected particles can also be calculated and can often be abetter measure of the particle's energy. This result depends on the PID algorithm to
rst identify the particle, then the momentum is calculated from the visible energy
and cone angle, taking into account the light scattering e ects. Figures 13.21 and13.22 give the momentum distribution for e-like and -like multi-GeV events.

13.4 Zenith Angle Distributions
One of the most important results of the Super-Kamiokande atmospheric neutrino
analysis is a study of the zenith angle dependence of the zenith angle distributions.

165
ID
Entries
Mean
RMS

35

10
132
1231.
403.0

ID
Entries
Mean
RMS

45

10
262
1171.
358.0

40

30

35
25
30
20
25

20

15

15
10
10
5
5

0

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

FC DataFigure 13.13: Radial Distribution (PCingoing)

0

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

FC DataFigure 13.14: Radial Distribution (PCoutgoing)

Since the source of the neutrinos is the upper atmosphere, the arrival direction corresponds to ight path. A dependence of any de cit or excess on the ight path would
be very suggestive of some kind of oscillation phenomenon. Figure 13.23 gives thezenith angle dependence for single ring electron-like events in the multi-GeV regimes.
Figure 13.24 shows the same for muon-like events.
With the exception of one point, the electron data correspond well to the expected
zenith angle distribution. The muon data, however, exhibit a clear systematic de cit
for events coming up through the earth. Figure 13.25 shows that the same e ect
persists in the typically higher energy partially contained data. The combined highenergy muon sample (fully + partially contained) is given in Figure 13.26.
Figure 13.4 anticipates the nal result by taking the ratio of the muon data andthe expected Monte Carlo muon events as a function of the zenith angle. The sameclear zenith angle dependence is observed. Some caution must be used with this typeof plot however. The atmospheric neutrino models are only good to about 20% in
absolute ux. It is only the ratio of muon to electron ux that is stable at the 5%

166
ID
Entries
Mean
RMS

800

10
1053
2.027
0.7397

700

600

500

400

300

200

100

0

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

FC DataFigure 13.15: Number of rings (FC)level due to the cancellation of similar uncertainties.
The ratio of muons to electrons is what started the atmospheric neutrino anomaly.
Figure 13.28 shows the dependence of this ratio on the zenith angle. Like the earlier
Kamiokande results, the Super-Kamiokande data show a clear dependence of the like to e-like ratio on the zenith angle. Note that this plot contains only data and is
not yet the usual \double ratio" form in which the results are usually presented.
There are a number of ways to parameterize the slope of the zenith angle distribution. The simplest is to simply t a straight line. Given the current statistics, thisis perfectly reasonable. In a neutrino oscillation hypothesis, however, one would not
expect the distribution to have a constant slope. The neutrino path length changes
rather slowly for angles near straight up or straight down. It changes quite rapidly
near the horizon.
One convenient method of describing the slope of the zenith angle distribution isby de ning an asymmetry [118]167
ID
Entries
Mean
RMS

450

10
655
2.107
0.7698ID
Entries
Mean
RMS

350

10
398
1.896
0.6676

400
300
350
250
300

200

250

200

150

150
100
100
50
50

0

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

0

5

1

1.5

2

FC Data

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

FC DataFigure 13.16: Number of rings (FC elike)

Figure 13.17: Number of rings (FC mulike)down , Nup
A= N
N +N
down

(13.3)

up

where Ndown and Nup are the numbers of down-going or up-going particles. The
asymmetry is typically de ned for muons and electrons separately. In this case \up"and \down" are separated only by whether the third component of direction is positiveor negative. No cut near the horizon is applied. The uncertainty in the asymmetry
can be calculated by applying standard propagation of errors and assuming only
statistical errors in the measurements of up and down.



A2 =
1
1 + 12
2
A Ndown + Nup
A(13.4)

If there is no zenith angle dependence, the asymmetry should be equal to zero.
If all events were coming from one hemisphere, A would be 1. Table 13.4 gives the

168
Entries

3030

10 3

Entries

301

10 2

10 2
10

10

1

0.01

0.1

1

10

Evis(FC 1-ring events)

100

1000
GeV

Figure 13.18: Visible energy (FC)

0.01

0.1

1

10

Evis(PC)

100

1000
GeV

Figure 13.19: Visible energy (PC)asymmetries for muon and electron data in the multi-GeV neutrino data sample.
Table 13.2: Up/down asymmetry
Up Down Asymmetry
-like (FC)86 144 0.30.07
-like MC (FC)1015 1004 -0.010.02
-like (PC)
115 186 0.20.06
-like MC (PC)1283 1254 -0.010.02
-like (FC+PC)
201 330 0.20.04
-like MC (FC+PC) 2298 2258 -0.010.01
e-like144 146 -0.010.06
e-like MC
809 802 0.00.02

Flavor Double Ratio

It is common to calculate the avor double ratio R  (=e)DATA=(=e)MC . This
comparison of the muon to electron ratio to the expected value allows the cancellation

169
100

80

60

40

20

0

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

PID likelihood, Multi-GeV, 1-ring event

Figure 13.20: PID Likelihood for Multi-GeV 1-ring events (FC)of the uncertainties in the absolute uxes and can be found to greater accuracy thanthe uxes themselves.
Figure 13.29 shows the dependence of the avor double ratio on the zenith angle.
Like Kamiokande, a clear zenith angle dependence can be seen. Figure 13.30 adds
in the partially contained muon data. The double ratio cannot be calculated for thepartially contained events alone, of course, as they consist only of muons. The partially contained events simply ll in the missing muon events from the fully contained
sample at high energy.
The ratio can also be studied with respect to momentum to look for unexpectedsources of the anomaly. Figure 13.31 shows that the e ect is essentially independentof momentum. The highest momentum bin simply re ects the great diculty inreconstructing the very high energy events which saturate large numbers of photomultiplier tubes.
Lastly, a check can be made to look for e ects near the walls. A dependence
on wall distance would suggest contamination from entering particles. Figure 13.32

170
Entries

290

160

Entries

230

100
140

80

120

100
60

Honda

80
Gaisser

40

60

Honda

Gaisser

40
20
20

0

1

10

momentum, Multi-GeV e-like 1ring

100
GeV

Figure 13.21: Electron-like momentum,
1-ring, multi-GeV (FC)

0

1

10

momentum, Multi-GeV µ-like 1ring

100
GeV

Figure 13.22: Muon-like momentum, 1ring, multi-GeV (FC)shows that there is essentially no such e ect. There is one bin just inside the ducial
volume in the multi-GeV sample with an anomalously high R value. This corresponds
to a small excess of muons in the PC sample as well as a slight de cit of electrons in
the FC multi-GeV sample. The anomalous region corresponds exactly to the locationof the partially contained muon excess noted earlier (see section 13.2.

13.5 Systematic Errors
A study of systematic errors is essential to a nal result. Super-Kamiokande is a verylarge and complex detector with very involved data analysis streams. Care must be
taken to be certain that the operation of the detector is well understood and thatthe analysis is not biasing the nal result. Table 13.5 summarizes the estimatedsystematic error from the known sources in our detector and data analysis streams.

171
Entries

290

Entries

100

100

80

80

60

60

40

40

20

20

0

-1

-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

0

-1

-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0

0.2

0.4

230

0.6

0.8

1

zenith angle, Multi-GeV e-like 1ring

zenith angle, Multi-GeV µ-like 1ring

Figure 13.23: Zenith angle distribution,
1-ring e-like, multi-GeV (FC)

Figure 13.24: Zenith angle distribution,
1-ring -like, multi-GeV (FC)

13.5.1 Data reduction

One source of systematic error lies in the knowledge of the reduction eciencies. For
the fully contained data, event selection is very clean and the inner detector simulationis very precisely tuned. Systematic errors in the FC reduction are expected to be
extremely small (< 0:1%) [119].
For the PC reduction, the eciency is less well known. This is partly an inherent
part of using partially contained events. Since there are many more shorter tracks
than longer due to the steeply falling neutrino spectrum, the requirement that the
track exit the detector means many tracks begin not far inside the ducial volume
and point outward. These events are more dicult to t. The lever arm of the track
length in the inner volume may not be so long and since the cone is lled in, the inneredge of the ring is not available as an additional constraint. Furthermore, photomultiplier tubes near the exit point can often run out of dynamic range and saturate,
e ectively losing additional charge weighting information.
The Monte Carlo simulation is not tuned to the level of the inner detector simu-

172
Entries

301

Entries

250

531

140

120

200

100
150
80

60

100

40
50
20

0

-1

-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

0

-1

-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

zenith angle, Multi-GeV PC

zenith angle, Multi-GeV FC+PC

Figure 13.25: Zenith angle distribution,(PC)

Figure 13.26: Zenith angle distribution,
-like, multi-GeV (FC+PC)

lation either. This is not a real problem, the outer detector is not used to reconstruct
tracks and does not require the level of precision needed for the inner detector. However, the outer detector Monte Carlo is used to estimate the partially contained event
reduction eciency.
Systematic uncertainty in the partially contained reduction eciency is estimatedby changing the tuning of the outer detector simulation parameters. Several parameters were adjusted to see the e ect on the reduction eciency [117].
The overall gain of the simulated photo-multiplier tubes was adjusted by 20%and 40%. In another test, similar variations were applied randomly on a tube bytube basis to study relative gain changes. Within the statistics of the Monte Carlo(3%) there was no change in the measured reduction eciency.
A second source of systematic uncertainty in the outer detector simulation comesfrom the re ectivity of the Tyvek re ective liner. Dirt from construction settled on
the liner which proved extremely dicult to clean. This degrades the re ectivity
by an unknown amount. In the simulation, the re ectivity was adjusted by -20%

173
3

Entries

5087

2.5

2

1.5

1

0.5

0

-1

-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

µDATA/µMC zenith angle Multi-GeV FCµ + PC

Figure 13.27: Compare  data to MC, multi-GeV (FC+PC)

and +5%. These amounts were very generous changes based on the outer detector
simulation tuning. An additional increase would have put the re ectivity over thatmeasured by the manufacturer DuPont in clean controlled conditions. Common sense
deems this unlikely and the tuning studies bear this out. With these changes, theoverall reduction eciency changed by 4%.
Human scanning is done at one point in the event selection. Scanning eciency
was estimated by mixing simulated events into the data. Scanners rejected less than
1% of valid neutrino events.
Adding the data reduction contributions in quadrature gives a total partially contained reduction systematic of 5%. However, partially contained muons contributeonly about half of the muons in the multi-GeV sample. The other half come fromthe fully contained reduction stream with essentially no systematic error in reductioneciency. Therefore the systematic reduction uncertainty in R(/e) is conservatively
estimated to be 3%.

174
Entries

821

4.5

4

3.5

3

2.5

2

1.5

1

0.5

0

-1

-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

(µ/e), zenith angle, Multi-GeV FC+PC

Figure 13.28: (=e) Ratio vs. zenith angle, 1-ring, multi-GeV (FC)
13.5.2 =e MC ratio

The theoretical uncertainty in the ratio ( +  )=(e + e) has been calculated recently
by several authors. In spite of the nearly 20% overall uncertainty in the absolute ux
of muon or electron neutrinos, the ratio of the muon neutrino ux to the electron
neutrino ux is known to within 5% [2]. This is because a major source of uncertainty
in the absolute neutrino ux comes from a lack of knowledge of the absolute cosmic
ray primary proton ux. This uncertainty is common to both muon and electron
neutrino ux estimates and largely cancels when the ratio is taken.
13.5.3 E,

The spectrum of primary cosmic rays is well t to a power law E, with spectral index= 2.71  0.05. The neutrino spectrum is directly related to the primary spectrum,
albeit adjusted by further energy dependent factors from the meson production crosssections and decay probabilities. Systematic uncertainty in the primary spectrum is

175

1.4

1.4

1.2

1.2

1

1

0.8

0.8

0.6

0.6

0.4

0.4

0.2

0.2

0

-1

-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

0

-1

-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

(µ/e)DATA/(µ/e)MC, zenith angle, Multi-GeV 1ring(µ/e)DATA/(µ/e)MC, zenith angle, Multi-GeV FC+PC

Figure 13.29: R versus zenith angle,
multi-GeV (FC)

Figure 13.30: R versus zenith angle,
multi-GeV (FC+PC)

also present in the neutrino spectrum.
To estimate the systematic e ects of this uncertainty, the neutrino spectral index
was changed by  0.05. In practice this was done by weighting each Monte Carloneutrino event that would pass appropriate cuts for the multi-GeV sample by a factorof (E /9 GeV)0:05. The divisor of 9 GeV is included to x the absolute ux at themean energy of the multi-GeV muon sample. This is a somewhat arbitrary choice as
the factors will cancel when the =e ratio is taken. Table 13.5.3 shows the e ect on
the expected numbers of events. Relative changes in the numbers of events are given
in parentheses. The systematic uncertainty due to uncertainty in the spectral index
is taken to be 1.7%.
13.5.4 Separation of  and e

Another source of systematic error comes from the particle identi cation used to
distinguish fully contained muons and electrons. This e ect can be estimated fromthe charged current quasi-elastic  and e lines in Table 11.4. Out of 618 total e; e

176
4

Entries

4150

2.5

2.25

3.5

2
3
1.75
2.5
1.5

2

1.25

1

1.5

0.75
1
0.5
0.5

0

0.25

1

10

100

0

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

(µ/e)DATA/(µ/e)MC v.s. momentum, Multi-GeV 1ring(µ/e)DATA/(µ/e)MC Multi-GeV 1ring + PC

Figure 13.31: R versus momentum,
multi-GeV (FC+PC)

Figure 13.32: R versus wall distance,
multi-GeV (FC+PC)

events, 2 (0.3%) were mis-identi ed as -like. From the 1108  ;  events, 15 (1.4%)
were falsely identi ed as e-like.
Because of the low statistics for the mis-identi ed events it is more reasonable toptake the 1-sigma upper limit. In this case, 2 + 2 = 3:4 out of 618 (0.5%) electronsp
are mis-identi ed as -like, and 15 + 15 = 18:9 out of 1108 (1.7%) muons are
mis-identi ed as e-like.
The uncertainty in the =e ratio where the fully and partially contained samples have di erent systematics can be calculated using standard error propagation
formulas. The relative error in R can be readily found to follow:+ PC
R = FCFCe(13.5)

 FC 2  2 2  PC 2  2 2 2
R2 =
FC
PC
e
+
+
2
R
FC + PCFCFC + PCPC
FCe2 (13.6)

177
Table 13.3: Summary of systematic error
reduction3%( +  )=(e + e)
<5%
E,
1.7%
/e separation3%
1/2 ring separation
5%
vertex position
2.4%
energy calibration
3.8%
non-neutrino background
asher
0.5%
cosmic ray 
1%e-like background<0.2%
CC cross-section
4.3%
NC cross-section
4%
hadron simulator
1%
PC/FC separation
0.4%
Total systematic error
11.3%
MC statistics
2.9%
There is no particle identi cation algorithm applied to the partially contained
events. There is some electron contamination in the PC sample, but it is expected tobe the same amount and in the same direction for both data and Monte Carlo. The
PC separation systematic is expected to be negligible and dropped.
p
The fully contained errors contribute a (0:44)2  (0:017)2 + (0:005)2 = 0:9% tothe =e ratio. However, this is not quite correct because the number electrons increases by the same number as the muon number decreases, and vice versa. Thismeans the actual systematic change is twice as large as expected from the variationsin the individual event counts. The nal uncertainty in R is taken to be 1.8%.
13.5.5 Single/Multi- ring separation

The number of rings observed in each fully contained neutrino event is determined bya ring counting algorithm as part of the automatic tting process. Only single ring,178

Table 13.4: E ect of E, uncertainty=-2.71=-2.66=-2.76FC 
2019 2144 (6.9%) 1902 (-5.8%)
PC 
2537 2522 (-0.6%) 2560 (0.9%)
FC+PC  4556 4666 (2.4%) 4462 (-2.0%)
FC e1611 1679 (4.2%) 1549 (-3.8%)
R(=e)
2.83 2.78 (-1.7%) 2.88 (+1.6%)
quasi-elastic events from the fully contained sample are included in the multi-GeV
data. A systematic error can arise if the ring counting algorithm performs di erently
for the data as it does for the Monte Carlo simulated events.
The systematic uncertainty for the ring separation is estimated by comparing theresults of human eye scanning with the automatic ring counting program. This wasdone for a subset of the data and Monte Carlo events in order to estimate the accuracyof the algorithm but is not done now on a regular basis due to the tremendous work
load it places on the human scanners. Table 13.5.5 shows the di erences between thetwo methods for the data and the Monte Carlo samples that were checked.
Table 13.5: Di erence between eye-scan and automatic ring counting.
FCe,likeFC,like

Data
MC
Data/MC
12/105=11.4% 27/182=14.8% -4.4%
15/82=18.3% 27/212=12.7% +5.6%

The systematic uncertainty is the net shift between data and Monte Carlo and is-4.4% for e-like events and +5.6% for -like. Partially contained events do not have a
cut on ring number and so do not contribute to this systematic. Using Equation 13.6
again, the systematic uncertainty in R for the single/multi-ring separation is taken
to be 5%.

179
13.5.6 Vertex Position

Uncertainty in the vertex position t can cause a systematic shift in R if the electrons
are t di erently from the muons. This can cause one avor to be preferentially pulled
in or out of the ducial volume. Only events near the edge of the ducial volume area ected. Figure 13.32 shows that away from the edge of the ducial volume the avor
double ratio is constant.
The systematic uncertainty due to the vertex position is estimated by calculating
R for data which were t both by hand and by the automatic tting routine. The
value of R changed by 2.4% and this was taken as the systematic error.
13.5.7 Energy Scale

Shifts in the energy calibration between electrons and muons can a ect the valueof R. Super-Kamiokande uses several means to calibrate the energy scale used in theanalysis. Figure 13.5.7 shows a comparison of measured data to simulation for various
calibration sources.
From the gure it can be seen that high energy stopping muons are shifted systematically higher by 2.1% in the data and decay electrons are shifted lower by thesame amount. The systematic uncertainty in R can be estimated by shifting the electron energy scale by -2.1% and the muon energy scale by +2.1%. The e ect of thisis to change the number of events which pass the Evis > 1.33 GeV cut for the fully
contained events. Partially contained events do not explicitly make this cut and do
not contribute to this systematic error. Table 13.5.7 shows how the number of Monte
Carlo events changes when the 1.33 GeV cut is shifted. Compare these numbers to1611 FC e-like, 2019 FC -like, and 4556 FC+PC -like for the unshifted case. The
maximal systematic due to the energy scale is obtained by adding the absolute valueof the relative changes and is taken to be 3.8%.

∆(M.C./DATA) (%)

180

10
8
6
4
2
0
-2

LINAC
decay-e0πlow stop µhigh stop µ

-4
-6
-8
-10
10

3

10

5

Momentum(MeV/c)

Figure 13.33: Comparison of calibration sources with Monte Carlo.
13.5.8 Non-neutrino background

The main concern with backgrounds at multi-GeV energies comes from entering cosmic ray muons. These could be left in the neutrino sample if the automatic tting
algorithms t the interaction vertex inside the ducial volume instead of at the wall.
To check this, 500 stopping muons were selected from the raw data and the tter wasapplied. Of these, only 1 event was t inside the ducial volume. The 90% (2) upper

Table 13.6: E ects of the energy scale uncertainty
FC e-like, Evis > 1:302GeV 1653 +2.6%
FC -like, Evis > 1:358GeV 1964
FC -like+PC
4501 -1.2%
R
3.8%

181
limit is estimated roughly at 2.5 events by scaling the result to 2/1000. The fractionof entering events which could be t in the ducial volume is 2.5/500=0.5%. The
number of excess events outside the ducial volume are 121 for the fully contained
-like, and 14 for the partially contained data. Therefore a maximum of 0.6 and0.07 entering events are expected to contaminate the multi-GeV FC and PC samples,
respectively. This corresponds to a 0.4% and 0.04% change in the numbers of events.
A much more conservative approach is taken and the cosmic ray systematic is simply
considered to be 1%.
Flashing photo-multiplier tubes might cause some contamination, mostly likely inthe electron events. In practice the timing characteristics of light from a ashing tube
do not t a cone hypothesis well and the reduction algorithms reject known ashing
events with very good eciency.
Other e-like background can come from radioactive decays in the rock or fromneutron contamination leaking in from the walls. Very little contamination existsthat could produce an electron at multi-GeV energies. Contamination from the walls
is essentially ruled out by the distribution of e-like events in the tank. Any systematicfrom this e ect is expected to be extremely small.
13.5.9 Cross-sections

In order to estimate systematic uncertainties in R due to the neutrino interaction
cross-sections, K. Okumura changed several parameters in the interaction simulation.
Table 13.5.9 shows the results of these e orts.
In the table, Ma is the axial vector mass used in the quasi-elastic cross-section
calculation. Pfermi is the Fermi momentum. The nuclear potential Vnuclear was notincluded in the quasi-elastic cross-section so it was turned on to determine its e ect.
The absolute charged current non quasi-elastic cross-sections were varied individually
as well. The total systematic error in R due to the cross-sections is taken to be 4.3%
for charged current, and 4% for neutral current.

182

Table 13.7: Systematics due to cross-section parameters
FCe
FC R(=e)CC quasi-elastic
Ma  10%
3.5% 3.1% 3.3%
Pfermi (250 MeV/c !180 MeV/c) +2.3% +2.1% -0.2%
Vnuclear (o ! on)-0.4% -0.4% +0.1%
CC non-q.e. cross-sections
1- 30%, multi- 20%
12.5% 14.7% 2.2%
5% only in e2.3% 0.1% 2.3%
5% only in 
0.3% 3.2% 2.9%
CC total
4.3%
NC  50%
4.3% 0.3% 4.0%
The hadron simulation program was GCALOR. This package was replaced by
FLUKA as a comparison. The resulting systematic di erence in R was 1%.
13.5.10 FC/PC separation

Because the fully contained and partially contained events are handled di erently, asystematic error in R can result from the separation between the two samples. The
de nition of partially contained events required 10 or more hits in the outer detector
cluster. Table 13.5.10 shows the e ect on the Monte Carlo samples when the required
number of outer detector cluster hits is varied by  20%.
Table 13.8: E ect of OD cluster cuts on FC/PC separation
10 hits
8 hits
12 hits
FCe 1611 1610 (-0.06%) 1613 (0.1%)
FC 2019 2014 (-0.2%) 2024 (0.2%)
PC 2537 2537 (0.0%) 2521 (-0.6%)

183
The systematic uncertainty in R due to the fully versus partially contained event
separation is estimated using Equation 13.6 as before. With this, the largest systematic error is taken to be 0.4%.

Chapter 14

ANALYSIS
The atmospheric neutrino data recorded in the Super-Kamiokande detector conrm both the overall de cit of muon neutrinos and the zenith angle dependence ofthe e ect observed by the Kamiokande collaboration. Careful estimates of the systematic errors and possible detector biases are insucient to explain this deviationfrom predicted results.
One possible (and popular) explanation of the atmospheric neutrino anomaly involves neutrino avor oscillations. This could happen if lepton number is not exactly
conserved and if the neutrinos have some small but non-zero mass. There is no compelling reason why lepton number must be conserved.
There is also no compelling reason for the neutrinos to be massless. Indeed, there
are some hints that the masses might be non-zero. The astrophysical dark matterproblem is one, the solar and atmospheric neutrino anomalies are others. Neutrino
avor oscillations resulting from a tiny non-zero mass would be pleasing solutions to
all these problems.

14.1 Vacuum Oscillations
How can such oscillations arise? It is easiest to begin with the simplest case, that of
only two types of neutrinos propagating through a vacuum. The following discussion
follows that of Perkins [120].
In the simplest case, oscillations can arise if the weak interaction ( avor) eigenstates fe; ;  g are not mass eigenstates themselves, but rather linear combinations

185
of the mass eigenstates f1; 2 ; 3g. For simplicity only mixing between two types ofneutrinos,  and  is described here.
The avor eigenstates are related to the mass eigenstates through a unitary transformation:

0 1 0
10 1

cos
sin
@ A = @A @1A,sin cos2

(14.1)

where  is an arbitrary mixing angle.
The avor wavefunctions produced in a weak interaction are actually linear combinations of the mass eigenstates = 1 cos + 2sin = ,1 sin + 2 cos

(14.2)(14.3)

The avor state is determined by the interaction but the propagation throughfree space is determined by the mass eigenstates. The f1 and 2 g states propagate
at di erent rates because of the di ering masses so the avor content of the originalstates will change as a function of time.

1 (t) = 1(0)e,iE1t
2 (t) = 2(0)e,iE2t(14.4)(14.5)The probability that an initial  state will be found as a  at some later time isgiven by:P ( (t) j (0)) =j<  (0) j  (t) >j2
where j  (t) >=j 1 (0) > e,iE1t cos+ j 2 (0) > e,iE2 tsin.

(14.6)

186

P ((t) j  (0)) = j cos2e,iE1 t + sin2 e,iE2t j2= cos4 + sin4  + 2sin2 cos2 cos[(E1 , E2 )t](14.7)(14.8)

Using the trigonometric relations,

cos2
sin2

=
=

cos2 , sin2
2sin cos(14.9)(14.10)1 = cos2 + sin2
one can rewrite the probability as:

P ( (t) j  (0)) = 1 , sin2 2sin2


(14.11)

 (E , E )t 
1

2

2

(14.12)

Note that momentum conservation requires that ~p1 = ~p2. Assuming that mi  Eias it is for neutrinos, one can easily nd the familiar form of the oscillation formula: m2L 
22
P ( (t) j  (0)) = 1 , sin 2sin 1:27


E

(14.13)where m2  m1 2 , m2 2 in (eV=c2)2, L  ct in (m), E  neutrino beam energyin (MeV). Clearly the probability of nding the  as a  at some later time is an
oscillating function of the initial beam energy and the distance traveled.
If there is  $  oscillation we expect not only a disappearance of  but
an appearance of  . However, the tau neutrinos will not be directly detectable inSuper-Kamiokande . Because of the steeply falling neutrino spectrum, only a fractionof the muon neutrinos will have enough energy to create a real  after oscillation. To
be detectable, the  must not only be produced but carry enough kinetic energy to
get over the threshold for Cherenkov light production. This greatly suppresses the

187charged current mode.
Even if a  is produced it will decay immediately with no good way to identify
that the observed products came from an intermediate  . Neutral current interactions
are possible for the  , but again this is not helpful for demonstrating the appearanceof  's. Muon and tau neutrinos have essentially the same neutral current interactions
and the total number of  +  neutrinos does not change due to avor mixing
between the two.
The new data from Super-Kamiokande can be used to limit the available parameter space under the hypothesis of oscillations. The apparent de cit of muon neutrinos
and zenith angle dependence strongly supports some type of muon neutrino oscillations. This is discussed further in Section 14.3. Electron neutrinos do not show
any signi cant de cit or angular dependence. For the purpose of this analysis theelectrons are assumed not to participate in oscillations at all. Only  $  mixing
will be considered here.
In principle a sterile neutrino could take the place of the  . This would a ect
the ratios of neutral current events but at the present level of statistics we cannot
distinguish this case. The avor ratio and the zenith angle distribution give two
essentially independent constraints on the oscillation parameters m2 and sin2(2).

14.2 Neutrino Flight Path
Given a production altitude for an atmospheric neutrino, we often need to calculate
the length of the ight path from the interaction point to the detector. This quantity
is very relevant in the case of neutrino oscillations since the probability of oscillation
will depend on the length of the ight path and the energy. These quantities determine
the proper time seen by the neutrino during the ight. The path length calculation
is a geometrical problem illustrated in Figure 14.2.

Path length (km)

188

10 4

10 3

θ

L

Production AltitudehSK

Earth Surface

10

2

R
α
10
-1

-0.75

-0.5

-0.25

0

0.25

0.5

0.75

1
cos(θz)Figure 14.1: Neutrino Path Length
Calculation

Figure 14.2: Neutrino ight path length
vs. cos(z )The Law of Cosines gives:

L2 = R2 + (R + h)2 , 2R(R + h)cos(14.14)

where cos = R+RLcos
+h . Rearranging terms and completing the square in L gives
the expression:p

L = R[ cos2 + (1 + h=R)2 , 1 , cos](14.15)where cos is the zenith angle at Super-Kamiokande , h is the production altitude
provided by Gaisser and Stanev[55], and L is the neutrino ight path length from theinteraction point to the Super-Kamiokande detector. Figure 14.2 shows the variationof the neutrino ight path with the zenith arrival direction assuming an average
production altitude of 17 kilometers.
The path length shows the most rapid change near the horizon. A small change
in angle near vertically up or down does not change the total path very much. A

189
small change in angle near horizontal has a very large impact on the ight path.
Figure 14.2 also illustrates the fact that the muon decay path in air is greatest forhorizontal angles. At any given energy muons at shallow angles have a longer time todecay before reaching the surface of the earth than similar muons at steeper incident
angles.

14.3 How Oscillations A ect the Zenith Angle Distribution
Cosmic rays interact with the atmosphere nearly isotropically. In the absence ofneutrino oscillations, the neutrino ux should be nearly independent of direction.
The earth is almost completely transparent to neutrinos at these energies.
If neutrinos oscillate between avors, the probability of oscillation depends on theproper time in the frame of the neutrino. For a given mass di erence and mixing
angle, this translates into a dependence on L/E , the length of the ight path andthe energy of the neutrino.
Figure 14.3 shows the probability of detecting a muon neutrino as a muon neutrino
as a function of the zenith angle arrival direction for various neutrino energies. The
zenith angle corresponds directly to neutrino ight path. When the energy is xed
the ight path can be compared directly with the oscillation length.
It is clear from the gure that for all energies of interest the down-going particles
travel a distance much smaller than the oscillation length. The probability thatthe neutrino has remained a muon type is high. As the zenith angle crosses thehorizon the ight path rapidly becomes much larger than the oscillation length. The
neutrinos oscillate many times before reading the detector. The probability of seeing
the particle as a  is now a rapidly varying function of the ight path or zenith angle.
In a detector with perfect resolution and very high statistics one could see these rapidchanges as a function of energy.
In reality we do not have a perfect detector. The nite angular and energy res-

190
olution mean that rapid oscillations in zenith angle tend to wash out. Averaging
over energy contributes to this since the wiggles contribute to each angular bin withdi erent phases for di erent energies. Figure 14.3 shows the e ect of the resolution
smearing for 20% angular resolution.
The general features of the expected zenith angle distribution are easy to see.
For down-going neutrinos where the path length is short compared to the oscillation
length for all energies under consideration, the probability of detecting all of theinitial neutrinos is high. Assuming only  $  oscillations, the avor double ratio
R=(=e)DATA=(=e)MC should remain near one.
Up-going neutrinos will go through many oscillations and the resolution and energy
averaging make the probability of detecting  's average to about 0.5 for maximal
mixing. In this region R should be about 0.5 as well. Figure 13.30 shows that thisis almost exactly what is seen in the real data. This is one of the prime pieces ofevidence that neutrino avor oscillations are in fact occurring.

14.4 Chi-square Oscillation Analysis
One traditional method of comparing the data with predictions from various oscillation parameters is to use a chi-squared analysis. This provides a statistically soundmeans of comparing the data results with predictions of an oscillation hypothesis witha large set of oscillation parameters. Those regions of parameter space with a goodchi-squared are considered allowed regions, areas with poorer agreement are excluded.
A sample of Monte Carlo events corresponding to a 10 year live-time (225 kilotonyears) was generated and ltered through the same reduction algorithms as the data.
This created a sample of events corresponding to no oscillations that is large comparedto the data sample. The Monte Carlo sample was then weighted on an event by event
basis to produce event distributions corresponding to di erent  ! X oscillation
parameters. Here X is any species we do not detect, either  or a sterile species.

191
Each muon neutrino in the Monte Carlo sample receives a weight of 1 - P(L,E),
where P = sin2 ()sin2 (1:27L=E ) is the probability of oscillation. The neutrino path
length L is determined by the Gaisser and Stanev production heights [55] and thegenerated vector arrival direction. The energy is also the generated vector quantity.
These are used because the oscillation probability depends on the properties of theneutrino and not on the detector resolution. All muon neutrinos (in this case) are
weighted regardless of their interaction mode in the detector (NC or CC) for the same
reason.
The degree to which the oscillated Monte Carlo sample distribution matches thedata can be described by de ning a chi-squared amplitude. This can be done separately for the avor ratio and for the zenith angle shape. Only the multi-GeV (E <1.33 GeV, FC + PC) data are used in this analysis. For the zenith angle studies thedata are additionally subdivided into 5 bins in zenith angle.

14.4.1 Double Ratio Constraint

The chi-squared test statistic for the ratio R = (=e)data =(=e)MC is de ned in Equation 14.16. The entire data set is treated together in a single bin. The model valuesof R for each set of oscillation parameters are not normalized to the data since thenormalization is exactly what is being tested. Therefore the number of degrees of
freedom is the same as the number of bins. 2ratio has a single degree of freedom.

2

ratio

j
R
obs , Rpredj2
=
2
pred

(14.16)

Robs is the observed double ratio from the data and Rpred is the ratio predicted by
the oscillated Monte Carlo sample for a particular set of oscillation parameters. The
error here is strictly statistical and is taken to be the statistical error of the expected

192(predicted) number of events.

 1

2
pred
1
1
L
1
data
2
=
+
+
+
+ sys2
RNosc Neosc LMC NMC NeMC

(14.17)

The rst terms in Nosc and Neosc are simply the statistical error in the oscillated
Monte Carlo. The terms scaled by the live-time ratio Ldata =LMC are the statisticaluncertainties in the expected number of events if there are no oscillations. This isused rather than the statistical error in the data bins since if oscillations are reallyoccuring then the numbers of data events will be reduced and not be the correct
number to determine the statistical error.
Regions of the oscillation parameter space may be \excluded" at the 90% condence level if there is less than a 10% probability that a 2 distribution of thespeci ed number of degrees of freedom would exceed the calculated 2 using the data
and Monte Carlo samples. Using a standard 2 table, this means that a parameterset (sin2 (2),m2) is excluded at the 90% con dence level if 2 (sin2 (2); m2) >2min + 2:7 for one degree of freedom. Figure 14.5 shows the excluded region obtainedby this method.
The region excluded at the 90% level is relatively small. The allowed region covers
most of the parameter space of interest and does not have much analyzing power for
selecting what the oscillation parameters should be. The reason for this is the low
statistics for the multi-GeV sample. The ratio test is simply a comparison of two
numbers where the overall uncertainty depends entirely on the knowledge of those
two numbers. With few events in the sample, the multi-GeV data will never have theanalyzing power in the ratio test that can be achieved with the lower energy sample
containing roughly ten times as much data. As will be seen below, the power of themulti-GeV data comes not in the ratio, but rather in the shape test.
A useful check on these distributions can be made by taking a slice through theprobability map at sin2(2) = 1 to see how the 2 values and the probabilities depend

193
on m2 . Figure 14.6 shows the reduced 2 as a function of m2 at sin2 (2) = 1. The
cut lines point out the 2 = 2:7 contours to give an allowed range of m2 .
One last useful way of estimating the allowed region for the parameter space is toplot how the expected double ratio changes as a function of m2 for sin2(2) = 1.
Assuming maximal mixing, the allowed range ofm2 can be simply read o the plotby incorporating the total uncertainty in the overall ratio. Figure 14.4.1 shows how
this result obtains a range of ,2:5  log10 (m2 )  ,1.
There is a particular reason for selecting sin2(2) near unity rather than somethingsmall in order to estimate the range of m2 . If oscillations are occurring the discussion
in Section 14.3 showed that up-going neutrinos go through many oscillations. Aftertaking into account the angular resolution the probability (and hence R) averaged toabout 0.5 with maximal mixing. If sin2(2) were much less than one, this averagevalue would remain rather higher even for up-going events. The fact that R is very
close to 0.5 for the lowest zenith angle bins in the data indicates that sin2(2) must
be close to one.

14.4.2 Zenith Angle Shape Constraint

The second constraint on the possible oscillation parameters is the shape of the zenith
angle distribution of events. The chi-squared test statistic for the shape constraint isde ned in Equation 14.18. The multi-GeV data set is divided into ve equal bins incos(zen). The number of events in the oscillated Monte Carlo sample are normalized
to number of events in the data. This uses one degree of freedom, so from the veavailable data bins, 2shape has four remaining degrees of freedom.

iobs
X nobs , nipred NNpred2
shape =obs
nipred NNpredi2(14.18)

194
Here niobs and nipred are the numbers of events observed in each zenith angle bin.
The ratio Nobs /Npred normalizes the overall number of events to be the same as theobserved number. This takes out any e ect of the overall ratio and makes the shape
test a completely independent constraint.
In the same way as with the ratio test, oscillation parameter space may be excluded
by drawing the 10% relative probability contour. For four degrees of freedom thiscorresponds to excluding regions for which the calculated 2 < 2min + 7:78. Figure
14.8 shows the excluded region obtained by this method. The point of lowest 2
occurs at sin2 (2) = 0.94, log10(m2 ) = -2.30.
It is still useful to take a slice through the contours at large mixing angle. Figure
14.9 gives the reduced chi-square as a function of m2 for sin2(2) = 1. The cut lines
give the range of allowed m2 for the 2 = 7.78 contour.
14.4.3 Combining Probabilities

In the Super-Kamiokande data there are two separate constraints on the possible oscillation parameters. The overall normalization of R, and its zenith angle distribution
each put limits on the allowed parameters, generally with di erent results. One would
like to combine the results of the two tests in order further improve the constraints.
Eadie, et al., describe the correct procedure for combining independent tests [121].
The rst question is whether the two tests are actually independent. Two tests are
independent if their test statistics are independent random variables. In other words,
the probability of B is irrelevant to the probability of A. Analytically, the conditional
probability of A given B factorizes into the product of the probability of A and theprobability of B.

P (A AND B ) = P (A)  P (B )(14.19)Without writing down an analytic function, it is clear that the ratio test and the195zenith angle test of neutrino data are independent tests. The ratio test uses only asingle number, the number of muon events divided by the number of electron events,
without regard to energy or direction. The zenith angle test uses the additional
information of direction and explicitly removes the overall normalization from consideration in the de nition of the chi-squared test statistic. This being the case, theprobability of an event falling into a particular zenith angle bin has no relation to theprobability of obtaining a particular overall ratio.
The signi cance of the combination of the two tests is not simply the product ofthe probabilities from each test separately. That is, if p1 = a1 and p2 = a2 then theprobability a that

p1p2 < a1a2

(14.20)is just a = a1 a2 . Unfortunately, this assumption is incorrect. It assumes that both
p1 < a1 and p2 < a2 . Of course this is not necessary, the condition is only that the
product of the probabilities be less than the a1 a2. By integrating under the curvede ned in equation 14.20, the correct probability is found to bea = a1 a2 [1 , ln(a1 a2 )](14.21)Furthermore, for N independent tests, a variable transformation can be madeas in equation 14.22. When this is done, the new variable a0 is distributed as a
2(2N ). For the Super-Kamiokande data, with two independent tests, this means thatprobabilities for the data matching expectations for various oscillation parameters
may be calculated separately for each of the two constraints. The probabilities may be
combined after the fact and treated in the standard way for a chi-squared distribution

196
with two degrees of freedom to determine the con dence regions.

Ya0 = ,2ln aii=1
N(14.22)14.4.4 Combined R and Shape Constraints

The combined e ect of the ratio and shape constraints is found by following theprescription of Eadie, et al, in Section 14.4.3. The combined probability a = -2 ln(Pratio  Pshape) is distributed as a 2 with four degrees of freedom (2  2 independent
tests). This means that the 90% exclusion regions can be calculated by nding thecontour where a = amin + 7.78. Figure 14.10 illustrates this region. The analysis was
carried into the unphysical region of sin2(2) > 1 to avoid arti cial boundary e ects
and to be sure the preferred solution naturally chose the physical region.
A slice can be taken at sin2(2) to check the dependence on m2 . Figure 14.11 andshows this as before, overlaying the previous results from the individual constraints
for comparison.
The best t point for the combined constraints is at sin2(2) = 1.00 and log10(m2 )= -2.00. These parameters represent a particular hypothesis, that a Monte Carlosample weighted with this type of oscillation will produce a double ratio consistent
with that of the data, and a zenith angle distribution that is drawn from the same
parent distribution as that of the data. Figure 14.4.4 shows the comparison of thezenith angle distribution for muon and electron events for the no-oscillation case andfor the case of the best- t oscillation parameters. The best- t distribution agrees wellwith the data. Both are very clearly inconsistent with the no-oscillations case.
The dashed line corresponds to the expected distribution in the case of no oscillations. The solid histogram represents the data, and the solid crosses show the
expected Monte Carlo result weighted by the best t oscillation parameters.

P(νµ → νµ)

P(νµ → νµ)

197

1
0.8

1
0.8

0.6

0.6

0.4

0.4

0.2

0.2

0

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

0

1

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

cos(θz)P(νµ → νµ)

P(νµ → νµ)cos(θz)

1
0.8

1
0.8

0.6

0.6

0.4

0.4

0.2

0.2

0

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

1
cos(θz)

1

0

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

1
cos(θz)Figure 14.3: Oscillation probability as a function of zenith angle for sin2(2)=1 andm2 =10,2.

P(νµ → νµ)

P(νµ → νµ)

198

1
0.8

1
0.8

0.6

0.6

0.4

0.4

0.2

0.2

0

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

0

1

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

cos(θz)P(νµ → νµ)

P(νµ → νµ)cos(θz)

1
0.8

1
0.8

0.6

0.6

0.4

0.4

0.2

0.2

0

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

1
cos(θz)

1

0

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

1
cos(θz)Figure 14.4: Oscillation probability as a function of zenith angle for sin2(2)=1 andm2 =10,2. The same distribution with 20% angular smearing is superimposed.

199

P(χ ;ν)=0.10 contours from ratio test
2

0
-0.5
-1
-1.5
-2
-2.5
-3
-3.5
-4
-4.5
-5

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

Figure 14.5: 2 = 2:7 contours

1.4

200

R Constraint

5

4

3

2

1

0

-5

-4.5

-4

-3.5

-3

-2.5

-2

-1.5

-1

Figure 14.6: 2 /d.o.f for sin2 (2)=1

-0.5

0

201

Energy dependence of (µ/e)OSC/(µ/e)MC
1

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0

-5

-4.5

-4

-3.5

-3

-2.5

-2

-1.5

Figure 14.7: R vs m2

-1

-0.5

0

202

P(χ ;ν)=0.10 contours from shape test
2

0
-0.5
-1
-1.5
-2
-2.5
-3
-3.5
-4
-4.5
-5

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

Figure 14.8: 2 = 2:7 contours

1.4

203

Shape Constraint
10

8

6

4

2

0

-2

-5

-4.5

-4

-3.5

-3

-2.5

-2

-1.5

Figure 14.9: 2 /d.o.f

-1

-0.5

0

204

P(χ ;ν)=0.10 contours
2

0
-0.5
-1
-1.5
-2
-2.5
-3
-3.5
-4
-4.5
-5

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

Figure 14.10: 2 = 7:78 contours

1.4

205

Combined shape and normalization constraints
10

8

6

4

2

0

-2

-5

-4.5

-4

-3.5

-3

-2.5

-2

-1.5

Figure 14.11: 2 /d.o.f

-1

-0.5

0

206

Best fit: ∆m µx = .01 eV , sin 2Θµx = 1.00
2

250

2

-1

-0.5

250

225

225

200

200

175

175

150

150

125

125

100

100

75

75

50

50

25

25

0

2

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

1

0

0

0.5

1

Figure 14.12: Comparison of data and Monte Carlo at best t parametersChapter 15

OTHER EXPLANATIONS FOR RESULTS
The most popular (and certainly the most exciting) explanation of the SuperKamiokande results is that neutrinos are in fact oscillating. The implications of thisare important enough that it is essential to examine the alternatives before leaping
to this conclusion. Some detector e ect or even some ignored physics e ect could be
responsible.
There are several means of obtaining the atmospheric neutrino results without requiring oscillations. Background events masquerading as neutrinos, additional sourcesof high energy neutrinos, and detector systematics can all skew the /e ratio and thezenith angle distribution. Attenuation of the atmospheric neutrino by the earth might
do the same.

15.1 Backgrounds
There are very few kinds of real background events that can fake atmospheric neutrinos in Super-Kamiokande . The energies involved are too high for most processes
occuring locally in the tank such as spallation processes or radioactive decay. The
good resolution in reconstruction also helps to eliminate fake events.
The one source of background that is a serious concern comes from misidenti ed
cosmic ray muons. Entering muons which are not vetoed by the outer detector standsome chance of having a vertex reconstructed inside the ducial volume of the detector. This e ect is largest for the partially contained sample which has a much
lower eciency close to the walls. Indeed, there is a small excess of muon events near

208
the edge of the ducial volume which may indicate a small contamination of enteringcosmic ray muons.
In general, evidence for entering events comes from examining the vertex distributions in the tank. Since such events begin radiating Cherenkov light as soon as they
hit the water, the vertex should reconstruct near the wall. The dominant muon ux isfrom above, so contamination should appear as an excess of muon-like events near thewalls, and largely down-going compared to other parts of the detector. The author
applied a standard one-dimensional Kolmogorov-Smirnov (K-S) statistical test to the
distributions of the data and Monte Carlo event vertices in the Z and R coordinates.
The K-S test is an integral test that gives a probability that two distributions camefrom the same parent distribution (see Section 13.2). The K-S probability is high forfully contained events, and for the Z coordinate distribution for partially contained
events. The R distribution has a much lower probability, but increases as the ducial
cut is moved in.
The conclusion is that for the fully contained events there is no indication forany kind of contamination from entering particles. In the PC sample, the Z vertex
distribution shows that there is no excess of events on the top of the detector as might
be expected from cosmic rays. There is some indication that the radial distribution of
events does not match the Monte Carlo near the edge of the ducial boundary. This
could be a sign of contamination from events entering the sides, but visual scanningof events in these radial bins showed no sign a problem with the event selection.
Furthermore, entering events which survive the ducial volume cut must have beenmis- t by the auto- tting routines and the probability of this has been shown to be
extremely small by testing on a sample of stopping muons (see Section 13.5.8).
Since there is no excess of events near the top of the detector and no sign ofcontamination from visual scanning, there must be another reason for the low K-S
probability for partially contained events near the edge of the ducial volume. It isbelieved instead that the small excess in those bins is related to small di erences in209
where the vertices are reconstructed. The vertex resolution for partially contained
events is estimated to be 104 centimeters, compared to 23 cm for the fully contained
-like events and 42 cm for the fully contained e-like events. This makes it more
likely that e ects of the ducial cut will cause deviations farther into the volume forpartially contained than for fully contained events. This is also the reason for the
anomalously high value of the avor double ratio near the edge of the ducial volume
in Figure 13.32.
Nucleon decay, if it were to happen, would be a background to the atmospheric
neutrino ux. However, the rates are so low (we haven't seen one yet) that this is not
an area of great concern.
Spallation and radioactive decay processes occur at much too low an energy to
be of concern for the multi-GeV (Evis > 1:33 GeV) sample. Neutron contaminationfrom radioactive decays in the surrounding rock had been suggested as a possible
explanation for the Kamiokande results. This would appear as an exponential increaseof low energy electron-like events near the walls. There is essentially no evidence forthis type of background even in the lower energy sample, and none at all in themulti-GeV data.

15.2 Sources of Neutrinos
If neutrinos were being produced at high energies from sources other than the atmosphere, the results would naturally be a ected. Only a few possible sources exist andit is relatively easy to test for them.
Some astrophysical sources could exist in our galaxy or in other galaxies. Active
galactic nuclei, black holes, and neutron stars all have environments which could conceivably be producing high energy neutrinos. Several people, J. Learned, K. Young,and R. Doyle, among others have looked for an excess of events from the galactic
center or other galactic sources [122] with no clear success. A di use background210
from many weak point sources is possible and might account for the slight overall
excess of electron neutrinos compared to expectations, but at present this e ect is indistinguishable from the large uncertainty in the overall ux of neutrinos from cosmic
rays.
Dark matter anhilation in the sun might be a neutrino source. Tests for an excess
of events in the direction of the sun by R. Doyle gave negative results at the level ofthe current statistics [123].

15.3 Detector Asymmetries
By far the most plausible cause of misinterpretation of the atmospheric neutrino
results might be simply that they are a detector e ect. If Super-Kamiokande is forsome reason far more sensitive to down-going events than to up-going events thenthe results are meaningless. Several studies have investigated this possibility. In one,decay electrons from stopping muons were studied to examine the detector gain forchecking whether the up-going events are suppressed [87]. Other studies on energy
scale and eciency systematics [124] con rm that the up/down detector asymmetry
is correctly represented by the stated systematic error.
The data also go through a very complicated analysis process before becoming anal data sample. Anisotropy in the reduction criteria might also bias the sample
by selecting some events with relatively higher eciency than others. Of course, thesame reduction process is applied to the simulated events. Studies of what kinds ofanalysis errors would have to be made in order to reproduce the atmospheric results
have been made in detail [124]. They conclude that only huge errors could exlain the
results, and in most cases is even then inconsistent with part of what is observed.
The question of particle identi cation is always an issue. After the Kamiokande
experiment was plagued by questions about its ability to resolve the particle type,a miniature detector was assembled at the KEK accelerator lab to test the particle

211
identi cation algorithms [125]. The Kamiokande codes were well validated in thisbeam test experiment and the same codes are now in use in Super-Kamiokande .
A relative shift in the energy reconstruction for muons and electrons might a ect
the double ratio. Calibration studies of the energy resolution rules out a large enoughshift to explain the results (see Section 13.5.7. Furthermore, such a shift a ects only
the double ratio, but cannot explain the zenith angle result.
Another possible distortion of the data could come from azimuthal e ects such as
the geomagnetic cuto . As with many other e ects, the geomagnetic e ect is small
for the multi-GeV data. The ux of individual species is still a ected but the =eratio is not changed very much even at 1 GeV. These e ects are taken into accountin the atmospheric neutrino simulation and are described in more detail in Section
11.1.
The Kamioka site has a prominent peak in the geomagnetic rigidity cuto contour
map toward the southeast (see Figure 11.1). This produces an asymmetry in the
expected azimuthal neutrino distribution. As the primary cosmic ray energy (andhence neutrino energy) increases, it is more likely to be above the rigidity cutoin all directions. Figure 15.3 shows the azimuthal arrival directions for simulated
Monte Carlo events with energies below and above 1.3 GeV. The multi-GeV data are
included with statistical error bars for each azimuthal bin. The lower energy Monte
Carlo events clearly show the east-west e ect matching the shielding from the rigidity
cuto . Actual data from the lower energy sample match the simulation very well.
The fact that an east-west e ect exists and can be predicted at lower energies is a
powerful argument that the source of these neutrinos is in fact in the atmosphere[126]. At the higher energies relevant to this analysis no signi cant e ect remains.

212

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

Azimuthal direction (degrees)

Figure 15.1: Azimuthal arrival directions for simulated events at Super-Kamiokande

15.4 Physics E ects
One ordinary physics e ect that is generally not taken into account is absorption ofneutrinos in the earth. The neutrino cross-section is small, but there are a lot ofprotons in the earth. Such an e ect at least has the right properties to mimic thezenith angle distribution. A rough estimate is enough to convince one that at SuperKamiokande energies the absorption is not strong enough to account for the results.
Taking the diameter of the earth to be 13x108 cm and the mean rock density to be
4.5 g/cm3, there are about 3x1033 protons/cm2 along the ight path of an upcoming
neutrino. The cross-section for neutrino-proton interactions at a few GeV is about
10,38cm2. This gives only 10,5 interactions for every up-going neutrino, not nearlyenough to explain the factor of two di erence in the Super-Kamiokande atmospheric
neutrino results.

213

15.5 Summary
Collaborators in Super-Kamiokande have looked for biases in the detector, the analysis, and the physics to explain the atmospheric neutrino results. No evidence forbackground contamination, outside neutrino sources, detector systematics, or ordinary physics e ects has been found that could produce the measured double ratio
and zenith angle distribution. With no plausible ordinary explanation availble, we
are forced to consider something new to explain what is seen.

Chapter 16

CONCLUSIONS
16.1 Summary of Results
The ux of atmospheric neutrinos has been measured during a 25.5 kiloton-year exposure in the Super-Kamiokande detector. A total of 218 electron-like and 176 muon-likefully contained single ring events with visible energy Evis > 1.33 GeV were recordedin the 22.5 kiloton ducial volume. In addition, 230 partially contained events wererecorded. These are assumed to be muon-like.
The data are compared with a detailed Monte Carlo simulation based on a modelof the atmospheric neutrino ux [2]. This gives a value of the avor double ratio of:)DATA = 0:65  0:05(stat:)  0:07(syst:)
R = (=e(=e)MC(16.1)

This result con rms previous measurements in the Kamiokande, IMB, and Soudan-2
experiments. It is consistent with results from those detectors.
The Super-Kamiokande data also con rm a zenith angle dependence of the double
ratio. The value of R is signi cantly lower for events coming up through the earth
than for events coming down from above. The degree to which R depends on thezenith angle can be parameterized by the asymmetry
down , Nup
A= N
N +N
down

up

(16.2)For the combined fully and partially contained multi-GeV sample, A = 0.20  0.04
and Ae = 0.01  0.01 assuming statistical errors only. The muon asymmetry is

215
inconsistent with zero by 5 standard deviations. The electron data are consistent
with having no zenith angle dependence.
The anomalously small value of R combined with the observed zenith angle dependence is suggestive of neutrino avor oscillations. A chi-squared t to a two avor
mixing hypothesis was done in which  ! X where X is either a  neutrino or somenew sterile species. After combining the independent constraints of R and the shapeof the zenith angle distribution, the allowed region of parameter space lies in the range
4x10,4 eV2  m2  5x10,2 eV2 with sin2(2)  0.55 at the 90% con dence level.
The best t point is at m2 =10,2 eV2 and sin2 (2) = 1.

16.2 Comparison with Other Analyses
The results presented in this thesis are one analysis of Super-Kamiokande multi-GeV
data. The Super-Kamiokande collaboration has presented an analysis incorporating
both sub-GeV and multi-GeV data which nds a best t point at sin2(2)=1.0 andm2 =2.2x10,3 eV2 [127]. This mass di erence is somewhat lower than that foundby the present analysis. A few comments are needed to explain why this occurs.
The di erence between the present analysis and the \ocial" Super-Kamiokande
results for all energies lies largely in the method used to combine the independent ratio
and zenith angle distribution (\shape") constraints. The ratio test favors somewhat
higher values of m2 than the shape test (see Figure 14.11). These two constraints
are used together in some way to achieve a complete result.
In the present analysis, the ratio and shape results are combined on an equal footing. The method for doing this is described in Section 14.4.3. This gives substantial
weight to the ratio constraint which favors a larger mass di erence. The combined
result is pulled toward higher m2 .
The Super-Kamiokande results presented by the collaboration for all energies use
a di erent approach toward combining the two constraints. In this method, a single

216

2 is de ned with 70 bins (5 zenith angle bins, 7 momentum bins, 2 lepton avors).
A single overall parameter determines the normalization of the data relative to theMonte Carlo, e ectively a ratio test. In this method the ratio test receives a muchsmaller weight compared to the zenith angle constraint than in the \equal footing"method. The combined result is then pulled much less strongly to higher m2 , thebest t falls to a smaller mass di erence.
If one looks only at the shape constraint in the present analysis, the best t point
is at m2 =5x10,3 eV2 . This is quite close to the collaboration result. It is a good
indication of how strongly that result depends on the zenith angle shape compared tothe overall (=e) ratio. The present analysis uses the ratio much more heavily, eventhough it is known that the low statistics make it a much less powerful constraint.
The zenith angle distribution has a very good analyzing power in the multi-GeV
region because the charged leptons more accurately re ect the neutrino direction.
The combination of the two gives a much larger allowed region of parameter spacethan could be obtained by using only the zenith angle information.

16.3 The Future
The Super-Kamiokande detector is continuing to take data with very high eciency.
Normal operation is expected to continue until the summer of 1999, when the watertank will be drained and some maintenance work will occur. By that time the data set
will have grown to nearly double the number of events used in this analysis. It is hopedthat the systematic error can be brought down, however two of the largest sources of
uncertainty have to do with knowledge of the expected atmospheric neutrino ux andthe charged current neutrino cross-sections. New data from di erent experiments,
and possibly new theoretical calculations will be required to improve the accuracy ofthese numbers.
Following the maintenance shutdown, Super-Kamiokande is expected to continue

217
to take data for many years. A long baseline neutrino oscillation experiment known
as K2K (KEK E362) will send a muon neutrino beam from the KEK accelerator
laboratory to the Super-Kamiokande detector. The pathlength is about 250 km andcan be measured precisely. The energy of the beam can be adjusted to sweep out aregion in L/E space to look for a characteristic oscillation signal.
This work is only one contribution to the growing body of experimental evidence
supporting the idea of neutrino avor oscillation. The implications of this on neutrino
masses are profound. If, as the data would indicate, neutrinos do have mass, it will
impact our understanding from the very deepest levels of fundamental interactions
to the farthest ung reaches of observational astrophysics. It is an exciting time forneutrino physics!

BIBLIOGRAPHY[1] M. Honda et al. Atmospheric neutrinos. Prog. Theor. Phys. Suppl., 123:483{
490, 1996. Proceedings of YKIS '95, From the Standard Model to Grand Uni ed
Theories. (hep-ph/9511223).
[2] M. Honda and T. Kajita. Calculation of the ux of atmospheric neutrinos.
Phys. Rev. D, 52(9):4985{5005, 1995.
[3] P. Grieder. DUMAND-II: String 1 deployment, initial operation, results andsystem retrieval. Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.), 43:145{148, 1995.
[4] H. Berns et al. Acoustical locating system for DUMAND-II. In Proceedings ofthe 23rd International Cosmic Ray Conference, pages 542{545, 1993.
[5] J. Learned and R. J. Wilkes. Acoustical detection of cascades in DUMAND. In
Proceedings of the 23rd International Cosmic Ray Conference, volume 4, pages
538{541, 1993.
[6] J. George. Estimated ux limits for high energy particle cascades using acoustical detection techniques. In Proceedings of the 24th International Cosmic Ray
Conference, volume 1, page 812, 1995.
[7] R. J. Wilkes et al. Super-Kamiokande outer DAQ system. In Proceedings of the24th International Cosmic Ray Conference, volume 1, pages 1019{1022, 1995.
[8] J. George. OD event builder data format (preliminary). Technical report,
University of Washington, 1995. UW internal note: UWA-SUPERK 95-05.
[9] J. George. Coordinating UTC and local time in SuperK. Technical report,
University of Washington, 1995. UW internal note: UWA-SUPERK 95-07.
[10] J. George, J. Wilkes, and H. Berns. The Super-Kamiokande UTC clock system.
Technical report, University of Washington, 1998. UW internal note: UWASUPERK 98-01.
[11] H. Becquerel. On the invisible radiation emitted by phosphorescent substances.
Compt. Rend., 122:501, 1896.

219[12] L. Brown. The idea of the neutrino. Physics Today, 31(9):23{28, September
1978.
[13] R. Kronig and V.F. Weisskopf, editors. Collected Scienti c Papers by Wolfgang
Pauli, volume II. Wiley-Interscience, 1964.
[14] F. Perrin. Natural particles of intrinsic mass 0. Compt. Rend., 197:1625{1627,
1933.
[15] E. Fermi. An attempt of a theory of beta radiation. Z. Phys., 88:161{177, Jan1934. Translated in The Development of Weak Interaction Theory (P.K.Kabir,ed.), Gordon & Breach, New York, 1963.
[16] E. Commins. Weak Interactions, chapter 1. McGraw-Hill, 1973.
[17] G. Gamow and E. Teller. Selection rules for the -disintegration. Phys. Rev.,
49:895, 1936.
[18] H. A. Bethe and R. Peierls. Nature, 133:532, 1934.
[19] F. Reines. 40 years of neutrino physics. Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys., 32:1{12, 1994.
[20] F. Reines. The early days of experimental neutrino physics.
203(4375):11{16, 1979.

Science,[21] F. Reines and C. Cowan, Jr. A proposed experiment to detect the free neutrino.
Phys. Rev., 90:492{3, 1953.
[22] F. Reines and C. Cowan, Jr. Detection of the free neutrino. Phys. Rev., 92:830{
1, 1953.
[23] C. Cowan, Jr. et al. Detection of the free neutrino: a con rmation. Science,
124(3212):103{4, 1956.
[24] T. Lee and C. Yang. Parity nonconservation and a two-component theory of
the neutrino. Phys. Rev., 105:1671{1675, 1957.
[25] G. Danby et al. Observation of high-energy neutrino reactions and the existenceof two kinds of neutrinos. Phys. Rev. Lett., 9:36{44, 1962.
[26] S. Glashow et al. Weak interactions with lepton-hadron symmetry. Phys. Rev.
D, 2:1285{1292, 1970.

220[27] S. Glashow and S. Weinberg. Breaking chiral symmetry. Phys. Rev. Lett.,
20:224{227, 1968.
[28] A. Salam. On symmetries of weak interactions. Nucl. Phys., 5:447{454, 1958.
[29] F. Hasert et al. Observation of neutrino-like interactions without muon orelectron in the Gargamelle neutrino experiment. Phys. Lett., 46B:138, 1973.
[30] A. Benvenuti et al. Observation of muonless neutrino induced inelastic neutrino
interactions. Phys. Rev. Lett., 32:800, 1974.
[31] S. W. Herb et al. Observation of a dimuon resonance at 9.5 GeV in 400 GeV
proton - nucleus collisions. Phys. Rev. Lett., 39:252, 1977.
[32] M. Perl et al. Evidence for anomolous lepton production in e+e, annihilation.
Phys. Rev. Lett., 35:1489, 1975.
[33] D. Karlen. The number of light neutrino types from collider experiments. Phys.
Rev. D, 54:286, 1996.
[34] J. Christenson et al. Evidence for the 2 pion decay of the KL meson. Phys. Rev.
Lett., 13:138, 1964.
[35] E. Kolb, D. Schramm, and M. Turner. Astrophysical and cosmological constraints to neutrino production. In K. Winter, editor, Neutrino Physics. Cambridge University Press, 1991.
[36] W. Haxton and G. Stephenson, Jr. Double beta decay. Prog.Part.Nucl.Phys.,
12:409{479, 1984.
[37] B. Cleveland et al. Update on the measurement of the solar neutrino ux with
the Homestake chlorine detector. Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.), 38:47{53, 1995.
[38] W. Hampel et al. GALLEX solar neutrino observations: Results for GALLEX
III. Phys. Lett. B, 388:384{396, 1996.
[39] J. Abdurashitov et al. The Russian-American Gallium Experiment (SAGE) Cr
neutrino source measurement. Phys. Rev. Lett., 77:4708{4711, 1996.
[40] A. Cummings and W. Haxton. 3 He transport in the sun and the solar neutrino
problem. Phys. Rev. Lett., 77:4286, 1996.

221[41] R. Barnett et al. Lepton particle listings. Phys. Rev. D, 54:275{302, 1996.
Review of Particle Properties.
[42] Y. Fukuda et al. Solar neutrino data covering solar cycle 22. Phys. Rev. Lett.,
77:1683, 1996.
[43] Y. Fukuda et al. Atmospheric  /e ratio in the multi-GeV energy range. Phys.
Lett. B, 335:237{245, 1994.
[44] M. Apollonio et al. Initial results from the CHOOZ long baseline reactor neutrino oscillation experiment. Phys. Lett. B, 420:397{404, 1998.
[45] C. Athanassopoulos et al. Candidate events in a search for  ! e oscillations.
Phys. Rev. Lett., 75:2650{2653, 1995.
[46] J. Hill. An alternative analysis of the LSND neutrino oscillation search data on
 ! e. Phys. Rev. Lett., 75:2654{2657, 1995.
[47] C. Athanassapoulos et al. Evidence for  ! e oscillations from the LSND experiment at the Los Alamos Meson Physics Facility. Phys. Rev. Lett., 77:3082{
3085, 1996.
[48] K. Assamagan et al. Measurement of the muon momentum in pion decay atrest using a surface muon beam. Phys. Lett. B, 335:231{236, 1994.
[49] D. Buskulic et al. An upper limit for the  neutrino mass from  ! 5(0)
decays. Phys. Lett. B, 349:585{596, 1995.
[50] D. Cinabro et al. Limit on the tau neutrino mass. Phys. Rev. Lett., 70:3700{
3704, 1993.
[51] T. Gaisser. Cosmic Rays and Particle Physics. Cambridge University Press,
1990.
[52] W. Webber and J. Lezniak. Astrophys. Space Sci., 30:361, 1974.
[53] P. Capiluppi et al. Charged particle production in proton-proton inclusive reactions at very high energies. Nucl. Phys. B, 79:189{258, 1974.
[54] R. Barnett et al. Review of particle properties. Phys. Rev. D, 54(1), 1996.
[55] T. Gaisser and T. Stanev. Pathlength distributions of atmospheric neutrinos.
Phys. Rev. D, 57:1977{1982, 1998.

222[56] K. Nakamura et al. Kamiokande. In M. Fukugita and A. Suzuki, editors, Physics
and Astrophysics of Neutrinos. Springer-Verlag, 1994.
[57] H. Kume et al. 20 inch diameter photo-multiplier tube. NIM, pages 443{449,1983.
[58] A. Suzuki. Kamiokande: A historical account. In M. Fukugita and A. Suzuki,
editors, Physics and Astrophysics of Neutrinos. Springer-Verlag, 1994.
[59] K. Hirata et al. Results from one thousand days of real-time, directional solarneutrino data. Phys. Rev. Lett., 65:1297, 1990.
[60] K. Hirata et al. Real-time, directional measurement of 8 B solar neutrinos in the
Kamiokande II detector. Phys. Rev. D, 44:2241, 1991.
[61] K. Hirata et al. Observation of a neutrino burst from the supernova SN1987A.
Phys. Rev. Lett., 58:1490{1493, 1987.
[62] K. Hirata et al. Experimental study of the atmospheric neutrino ux. Phys.
Lett. B, 205:416, 1988.
[63] K. Hirata et al. Observation of a small atmospheric /e ratio in Kamiokande.
Phys. Lett. B, 280:146{152, 1992.
[64] E. Beier et al. Survey of atmospheric neutrino data and implications for neutrinomass and mixing. Phys. Lett. B, 283:446{453, 1992.
[65] H. Georgi and S. Glashow. Unity of all elementary-particle forces. Phys. Rev.
Lett., 32:438, 1974.
[66] R. Becker-Szendy et al. IMB-3: a large water Cherenkov detector for nucleon
decay and neutrino interactions. NIM, A324:363{382, 1993.
[67] J. Van Der Velde et al. Neutrinos from SN1987A in the IMB detector. NIM,
A264:28{31, 1988.
[68] C. McGrew. A Search for Baryon Non-Conservation using the IMB-3 Detector.
PhD thesis, University of California at Irvine, 1994.
[69] R. Becker-Szendy et al. Electron- and muon-neutrino content of the atmosphericux. Phys. Rev. D, 46:3720, 1992.

223[70] R. Clark et al. The atmospheric muon neutrino fraction above 1 GeV. Phys.
Rev. Lett., 79:345, 1997.
[71] S. Ahlen et al. First supermodule of the MACRO detector at Gran Sasso. NIM,
A324:337{362, 1993.
[72] S. Ahlen et al. Atmospheric neutrino ux measurement using upgoing muons.
Phys. Lett. B, 357:481{486, 1995.
[73] C. Berger et al. The Frejus nucleon decay detector. NIM, A262:463{495, 1987.
[74] C. Berger et al. Study of atmospheric neutrino interactions with the Frejus
detector. Phys. Lett. B, 227:489{494, 1989.
[75] C. Berger et al. A study of atmospheric neutrino oscillations in the Frejus
experiment. Phys. Lett. B, 245:305{310, 1990.
[76] W. Allison et al. The Soudan 2 detector: The design and construction of the
tracking calorimeter modules. NIM, A376:36{48, 1996.
[77] W. Allison et al. Measurement of the atmospheric neutrino avor composition
in Soudan 2. Phys. Lett. B, 391:491{500, 1997.
[78] O. Ryazhskaya. Is there an excess of electron neutrinos in the ux in theatmosphere? JETP Lett., 60:617, 1994.
[79] G. Battistoni et al. The NUSEX detector. NIM, A245:277{290, 1986.
[80] M. Aglietta et al. Experimental study of atmospheric neutrino ux in the
NUSEX experiment. Europhys. Lett., 8(7):611{614, 1989.
[81] M. Aglietta et al. Experimental study of upward stopping muons in NUSEX.
Europhys. Lett., 15(5):559{564, 1991.
[82] E. Alekseyev et al. Baksan underground scintillation telescope. In Proceedingsof the 16th International Cosmic Ray Conference, volume 10, pages 276{281,1979.
[83] M. Boliev et al. Measurements of the upward-going muon ux with the Baksan
underground telescope. In Proceedings of the 24th International Cosmic Ray
Conference, volume 1, pages 686{689, 1995.

224[84] M. Boliev et al. Search for astrophysical sources of neutrinos and neutrino
oscillations using the Baksan data. In Proceedings of the 24th International
Cosmic Ray Conference, volume 1, pages 722{725, 1995.
[85] J. Jackson. Classical Electrodynamics. John Wiley & Sons, second edition, 1975.
[86] A. Suzuki et al. Improvement of 20 in. diameter photomultiplier tubes. NIM,
A329:299, 1993.
[87] S. Kasuga. Observation of a Small  =e Ratio of Atmospheric Neutrinos inSuper-Kamiokande by the Method of Particle Identi cation. PhD thesis, University of Tokyo, 1998.
[88] Bit 3 Computer Corporation, 8120 Penn Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN
55431-1393. Model 467-1 Adaptor Hardware Manual, revision 1.0 edition, March
1995.
[89] LeCroy 1877 Multihit Time-to-Digital Converter. Technical report, LeCroy
Corp., 700 Chestnut Ridge Road, Chestnut Ridge, New York, 10977-6499, 1996.
[90] H. Berns. private communication.
[91] M. Kirsch. Struck STR137-ECL Multi-Event Input Latch. Technical report,
Struck Corp., 1996.
[92] Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory. FASTBUS Smart Crate Controller(FSCC) Hardware Manual, PC4b edition, November 1995.
[93] Access Dynamics, Inc. DM-115 RS-485 Input Module User Manual. M2115B.
[94] Access Dynamics, Inc. DC-2 VSB Input Controller. M2002B.
[95] Bit 3 Computer Corporation, 8120 Penn Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN
55431-1393. Model 944 Software Support Manual, revision 2.0 edition, January
1995.
[96] C.A.E.N., Costruzioni Apparecchiature Elettroniche Nucleari S.p.A., Via Vetraia, 11-55049 VIAREGGIO, Italy. Technical Information Manual, Model
V533, Jan 1994.
[97] TrueTime, 2835 Duke Ct., Santa Rosa, CA 95407. TrueTime Model XL-DC
Time and Frequency Receiver Manual, N/C edition, June 1995.

225[98] TrueTime, 2835 Duke Ct., Santa Rosa, CA 95407. TrueTime Model VME-SG
Timing Card Manual, NC edition, May 1993.
[99] W. Peterson. The VMEbus Handbook. VFEA International Trade Association,
10229 N. Scottsdale Rd, Suite B, Scottsdale, AZ 85253, 3rd edition, 1993.
[100] M. Nomachi and Y. Takeuchi. NOVA bu er manager for SDC portable DAQ {users manual. Technical report, National Laboratory for High Energy Physics[KEK] (Nomachi), Tokyo Institute of Technology (Takeuchi).
[101] L. Wai and H. Berns. Super-Kamiokande anti-detector event building. Technicalreport, University of Washington, 1997.
[102] Z. Conner. A Study of Solar Neutrinos Using the Super-Kamiokande Detector.
PhD thesis, University of Maryland, 1997.
[103] M. Nakahata et al. Calibration of Super-Kamiokande using an electron LINAC.
Submitted to NIM, 7/98.
[104] G. Barr, T. Gaisser, and T. Stanev. Flux of atmospheric neutrinos. Phys. Rev.
D (Rapid Comm.), 39(3):3532{3534, 1989.
[105] E. Bugaev and V. Naumov. On the interpretation of the Kamiokande experiment. Phys. Lett. B, 232:391, 1989.
[106] H. Lee and Y. Koh. A new calculation of atmospheric neutrino ux. Nuovo
Cimento B, 105:884, 1990.
[107] T. Gaisser et al. Comparison of atmospheric neutrino ux calculations at low
energies. Phys. Rev. D, 54:5578{5584, 1996.
[108] D. Rein. Angular distribution in neutrino-induced single pion production processes. Z. Phys., C35:43, 1987.
[109] D. Rein and L. Sehgal. Neutrino-excitation of baryon resonances and single
pion production. Ann. of Phys., 133:79, 1981.
[110] GEANT Detector Description and Simulation Tool, 1993. CERN Program Library W5013.
[111] PYTHIA and JETSET - Physics and Manual. CERN Program Library
W5035/W5044.

226[112] M. Nakahata. Monte Carlo status. In Nakamura and Takita [128], pages 333{
353.
[113] LeCroy Corp., 700 Chestnut Ridge Road, Chestnut Ridge, New York, 109776499. Model 1877 96 Channel FASTBUS TDC, March 1995.
[114] L. Wai. Three major DAQ improvements by U. Wash. In 10/96 [131].
[115] R. Svoboda. Outer detector Monte Carlo. In Nakamura and Takita [128], pages
107{130.
[116] Proposal to participate in the Super-Kamiokande project, December 1992.
[117] L. Wai. Partially contained atmospheric neutrino data reduction and analysis.
Technical report, University of Washington, 1997. Super-Kamiokande Internal
Note 97-02.
[118] J. Flanagan et al. Up-down asymmetry: A diagnostic for neutrino oscillations.
Phys.Rev. D, 57:2649{2652, 1998.
[119] Y. Fukuda et al. Measurement of the atmospheric neutrino ux ratio  =e in
the multi-GeV energy range. Accepted by Phys. Lett. B, 7/98.
[120] D. Perkins. Introduction to High Energy Physics. Addison-Wesley Publishing
Company, 3rd edition, 1987.
[121] W. Eadie et al. Statistical Methods in Experimental Physics, chapter 11. North
Holland Publishing Company, 1971.
[122] J. Learned, K. Young, and R. Doyle. private communication, 1988.
[123] R. Doyle. private communication, 1998.
[124] C. McGrew. Systematic error in shape and reduction. In 11/97 [133].
[125] S. Kasuga et al. A study on the e/ identi cation capability of a water Cerenkov
detector and the atmospheric neutrino problem. Phys. Lett. B, 374:238{242,1996.
[126] T. Futagami et al. Observation of the east-west e ect in the atmospheric neutrinos. Manuscript in preparation for publication, July 1998.

227[127] Y. Fukuda et al. Evidence for oscillation of atmospheric neutrinos. Submitted
to Phys. Rev. Lett, 7/98.
[128] K. Nakamura and M. Takita, editors. First Super-Kamiokande International
Collaboration Meeting, KEK, Japan, February 1994.
[129] Super-Kamiokande Collaboration Meeting Minutes, Osawano, Japan, April
1996.
[130] Super-Kamiokande Collaboration Meeting Minutes, Kamioka, Japan, July 1996.
[131] Super-Kamiokande U.S. Collaboration Meeting Plenary Sessions, Los Alamos,
New Mexico, USA, October 1996.
[132] Super-Kamiokande Collaboration Meeting Minutes, Kamioka, Japan, November
1995.
[133] Super-Kamiokande Collaboration Meeting Minutes, Kamioka, Japan, November
1997.
[134] S. Kim. Real Time, Directional Measurement of 8B Solar Neutrinos in the
Kamiokande-II Detector and Search for Short-Time Variation. PhD thesis,
University of Pennsylvania, 1989.
[135] Y. Takeuchi. Measurement of Solar Neutrinos from One Thousand Days of
Data at Kamiokande-III. PhD thesis, Tokyo Institute of Technology, January
1995.
[136] S. Ohara. Background study on 8B solar neutrinos. Master's thesis, Universityof Tokyo, 1989.
[137] K. Kihara. An Experimental Study on the 8B Solar Neutrino Flux in the
Kamiokande-II Detector. PhD thesis, University of Tokyo, 1992.
[138] M. Nakahata. Search for 8B Solar Neutrinos at Kamiokande-II. PhD thesis,
University of Tokyo, 1988.
[139] K. Hirata. Search for Supernova Neutrinos at Kamiokande-II. PhD thesis,
University of Tokyo, 1991.
[140] P. Langacker. Neutrino physics. In J. Gunion et al., editors, Beyond the Standard Model IV. World Scienti c, 1995.

228[141] M. Wolfke. Acad. Polonaise Sci. et Lettres, Bull., 3-4A:107{109, March-April
1935.
[142] A combination of preliminary electroweak measurements and constraints on thestandard model. CERN-PPE/96-183, Dec. 1996.
[143] C. De Marzo et al. MACRO: A large area detector at the Gran Sasso Laboratory.
Nuovo Cimento 9C, 9C:281{292, 1986.
[144] M. Calicchio et al. The MACRO detector at the Gran Sasso Laboratory. NIM,
A264:18{23, 1988.
[145] R. Bellotti et al. Simultaneous observation of extensive air showers and deepunderground muons at the Gran Sasso Laboratory. Phys. Rev. D, 42:1396{1403,
1990.
[146] S. Ahlen et al. Study of penetrating cosmic ray muons and search for large scaleanisotropies at the Gran Sasso Laboratory. Phys. Lett. B, 249:149{156, 1990.
[147] S. Ahlen et al. Arrival time distributions of very high energy cosmic ray muonsin MACRO. Nucl. Phys. B, 370:432{444, 1992.
[148] S. Ahlen et al. Study of the ultrahigh energy cosmic ray composition with the
MACRO experiment. Phys. Rev. D, 46:895{902, 1992.
[149] S. Ahlen et al. Measurement of the decoherence function with the MACRO
detector at Gran Sasso. Phys. Rev. D, 46:4836{4845, 1992.
[150] S. Ahlen et al. Search for neutrino bursts from collapsing stars with the MACRO
detector. Astroparticle Phys., 1:11{25, 1992.
[151] S. Ahlen et al. Search for nuclearites using the MACRO detector. Phys. Rev.
Lett., 69:1860{1863, 1992.
[152] S. Ahlen et al. Muon astronomy with the MACRO detector. AstrophysicalJournal, 412:301, 1993.
[153] S. Ahlen et al. Search for slowly moving monopoles with the MACRO detector.
Phys. Rev. Lett., 72:608{612, 1994.
[154] M. Ambrosio et al. Coincident observation of air Cerenkov light by a surface array and muon bundles by a deep underground detector. Phys. Rev. D,
50:3046{3058, 1994.

229[155] M. Aglietta et al. Study of the primary cosmic ray composition around the kneeof the energy spectrum. Phys. Lett. B, 337:376{382, 1994.

Appendix A

CALCULATING LIVE-TIME
One of the most important questions to get right is also one of the simplest. Howlong was the detector on? All of the measured and expected rates are pinned to theexact length of exposure that the detector has. Getting this quantity right turns out
to be a complicated process.
Live-time in this analysis is calculated on an event by event basis, one sub-run ata time. Each sub-run contains approximately 10 minutes of data for easier handling.
From the outset only runs identi ed as normal data taking runs are considered.
For each sub-run, the total run time is simply the time between the rst and last
good events as measured by the central 48 bit 50 MHz clock counter. This would
be the live-time if all events were recorded perfectly with full detector sensitivity
at all times. In reality, several e ects such as regular pedestal calibration, ATM
module dead time, outer detector dead time, etc., all conspire to reduce the detector
sensitivity for a small fraction of the actual run time. The reported live-time musttake this reduced sensitivity into account.

A.1 Event by Event Corrections
Table A.1 lists the six categories of event by event corrections to the total live-time.
The time an event takes is de ned as the time between that event and the one justprevious. This is an arbitrary and convenient de nition which allows us to remove
problem events in a systematic way. Each of the cuts is taken in order and are
exclusive. For example, pedestal dead time is not double counted as inner workstation

A.1. EVENT BY EVENT CORRECTIONS

231

Table A.1: Event by event corrections to live-timepedestalused to calibrate signal inputs
trigger vetoags dead time of digitizing modules
ID WS dead inner DAQ workstation is down or o
OD WS dead outer DAQ workstation is down or oTdi
analysis imposed minimum dead timeno ODTDC outer detector has no datadead time.
A.1.1 Pedestal Events

Pedestal events occur when one inner detector workstation turns o the inputs to the
ATM modules under its control. Each inner detector workstation controls one eighthof the detector. The inputs are left o for one hundred events at a time. Each of theworkstations takes a turn operating in this mode once each hour. Since an eighth ofthe detector is not taking data during this time these events are simply rejected for
purposes of analysis. By digitizing the signal inputs with no signal present we canmeasure the base value, or \pedestal value" of each channel. The actual signal size
during normal operation must have this base value subtracted o . The size of thepedestal can be a ected by mean temperature variations and so is closely monitored.
A.1.2 Trigger Veto

Trigger veto events re ect the slight dead time of the inner detector data acquisition
electronics. The ATM modules contain two channels to provide dead time-free operation in theory. In practice the modules are more limited. The ATM modules have
only an 8-bit internal event counter. If more than 256 events are recorded in a shorttime there would be ambiguity about which events the hits belonged to. To avoid

232
this possibility the LIME modules puts a veto on the trigger signal if the rate goes
too high.
In addition to this dead time, events in which both outer and inner detectors had
a workstation turned o are considered in this category. Events with only one inner
workstation dead, or only the outer workstation dead are counted separately.
In a few cases a data acquisition workstation can crash or simply be turned o .
This might be due to a hardware fault or simply by choice. During some types ofcalibration runs for instance the outer detector workstation is switched o . The outerdetector data are not needed and takes up disk and tape storage space unnecessarily.
An inner workstation might be switched o momentarily to correct a high voltage
problem or ashing tube. In many of these cases the run is allowed to continue sothat at least some coverage is provided in case of a supernova. A missing workstation
is simply tagged in the data and these events are removed during analysis.
A.1.3 Tdi Requirement

One of the big concerns in doing atmospheric neutrino analysis is that one mightsomehow skew the ratio of muon-like to electron-like events. The ratio of these is oneof the primary results. The number of electron events can be a ected by muon decay.
A stopping muon can decay in the tank and produce an electron. If the muon decays
well above threshold then the electron is detected in the tail of the muon light. If themuon drops under the Cherenkov threshold, however, it can slow enough to remainin the tank for several lifetimes before decaying. In this case the electron would be
detected as a new separate event with its own trigger. It would look exactly likethe product of an electron neutrino interaction but it actually came from cosmic ray
muon decay. We cannot a ord to have this kind of ambiguity.
The solution to this problem is to require that events be many muon lifetimes
apart. This imposes a minimum dead time for each event on the detector and shortens the overall time the detector is available to detect neutrinos should one chooseA.1. EVENT BY EVENT CORRECTIONS

233

to interact. The requirement for this analysis is that events be more than 100 microseconds apart. This corresponds to forty- ve average muon lifetimes. This shouldmake it virtually impossible for a muon decay product to be misinterpreted as anelectron neutrino. The Tdi correction is calculated by counting 100 microseconds
for every event which is greater than 100 microseconds from the previous event. If an
event is closer than this to the previous event, only the time to the previous event iscounted. This makes the counts come out right for handling several events happening
in a very short time. It ensures that only events which have no previous event within
100 microseconds are included in the live-time.
The \Tdi " self-imposed veto of 100 microseconds also sidesteps a second issue
which has confused previous attempts to calculate the correct live-time. The outerdetector data acquisition has its own dead time due to FASTBUS TDC digitizing.
This dead time is measured and stored in the event header that the outer detector
provides to the event builder along with the outer detector data. The problem is that
this value is unreliable over the course of the detector operation. For most of the
rst year the value was \mostly" right, but with occasional wild results. When the
problems were nally identi ed and solved, a broken lead [???] kept the value frombeing recorded at all. Furthermore, the exact value is irrelevant for this analysis. The
TDC dead time has a known maximum of 78 microseconds. It will always be shorter
than our imposed veto of 100 microseconds to avoid muon decay products. We cansimply ignore the outer detector TDC dead time.
A.1.4 No OD TDC Data

The last category deals with outer detector problems. Throughout the rst year of
running, but primarily at the beginning, there have been short periods where theouter detector failed to provide TDC information. Without this information thereis e ectively no anti-counter. The risk of contaminating our result with cosmic raymuons or their products is too high to allow analysis of data without this anti-counter234

Table A.2: Reasons to cut a sub-run
Failed FC reduction Could not complete FC reduction
Failed PC reduction Could not complete PC reduction
High \muon" rate Measures detector performance
Mismatches
OD data matched with wrong ID event
Cut by hand
Cuts based on FC and PC reduction histograms
in operation. Any event with zero outer detector hits is rejected. Since commencementof \split-trigger" operation the outer detector does not receive a trigger for all events.
This condition was modi ed to require non-zero hits in the outer detector for any
event that has one of two trigger bits set meaning that the outer detector should haverecorded something.

A.2 Sub-run Corrections
When the event by event checks are completed for each sub-run, the totals for eachcategory are recorded. The sub-run is then subject to further review based on theoutcome of the reduction steps. The idea is to watch for any possible change in theperformance of the detector and eliminate data from a ected times. Table A.2 lists
some reasons that a sub-run might be cut from the analysis.
Occasionally the automated reduction processes will fail. Where possible these
are restarted and the data are recovered. In a few cases this cannot be done and thea ected subruns must simply be dropped. This can happen because of disk or tapewriting errors, computer crashes, or other similar problems. The Super-Kamiokande
experiment has provided such a ood of data that it is simply not worth the e ort
for our already thin-spread work force to try to save every last second of live-time.
When data cannot be recovered without tremendous e ort we will simply throw it
out. This is a very happy and unusual circumstance.

A.2. SUB-RUN CORRECTIONS

235

At the time of this writing the FC and PC failed reduction cuts are taken separately. This is expected to change in a few days. Runs which do not pass both
reductions will be removed from both samples to keep the data sets as alike as possible. At present the partially contained reduction analysis is about 20 days behindthe fully contained analysis. Around 17 days of this are runs that were simply notprocessed by the partially contained reduction and these are being made up now.
The remaining three days correspond to runs for which the PC reduction steps failed,largely due to disk copy problems. We will attempt to recover as much of these as
possible. The remaining live-time discrepancy between the analyses will probably be
simply dropped from the fully contained sample.
For most runs the automated reduction works just ne. We still would like tocharacterize the performance of the detector. We cannot risk a detector glitch allowing
background events to fake neutrino events. While calculating live-time for each subrun we also keep running checks on two other quantities to ensure that the data wekeep for analysis is from a perfectly operating detector. These quantities are theaverage muon rate and a measure of inner and outer detector mismatch events.
A.2.1 Muon Rate

The cosmic ray muon rate serves an ever present control for our data. The averagerate is essentially constant for our purposes. Any signi cant variations in the detected
rate then are a prime signal that something has changed with the detector operation.
Failure to detect the expected number is a sign that part of the detector is inoperativeor has reduced eciency. A large increase in rate is a sign of extra background,possibly a ashing tube, high voltage or other gain changes, or some type of electronics
noise.
At this stage of the analysis one is not of course tting the events as muon candidates. This would take far too long for the kind of quick characterization that weare after. In each sub-run the number of events are counted such that inner charge

236
exceeds 500 photoelectrons and the number of outer hits exceeds 100. Any event witha pedestal, trigger veto, or ID/OD workstation o tag is not included. This number isdivided by the net live-time for the sub-run to obtain the \muon rate". Any sub-run
with less than 1.8 Hz for this rate is rejected. Subruns with a substantially higher
rate are checked for a reason as part of the usual reduction process. Some of thesemight be rejected by hand once the reason is known. Figure A.1 shows how the cut
is determined.
Muon Rate from FC Reduction
9000

ID
Entries
Mean
RMS

8000

10
50566
1.958
0.3742

7000

6000

5000

4000

3000

2000

1000

0

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

Figure A.1: Muon rate distribution
This de nition is sensitive to ashing photo-multiplier tubes and electronics noise.
Inner tubes are not light-proofed in back and can pump quite a lot of light into thedead region of the photo-multiplier tube support structure. The light-proof barrierA.2. SUB-RUN CORRECTIONS

237

on this structure is \leaky", especially when the light is produced in the middle. Highsignals in the cables can also be picked up by nearby cables in the trays leading to
the quadrant huts. It is really not hard for many outer hits to be generated by highcharge signals in the inner detector. Also, since Super-Kamiokande 's location, albeit
a mile inside a mountain, is above the horizon, most of the detector gets exposure tocosmic ray muons. A drop in performance almost anywhere in the detector will beseen as a drop in the expected muon ux.
A.2.2 OD/ID Mismatch Events

Another worry for our analysis is the performance of the outer detector as a vetocounter. At the beginning of detector operation it was known that the outer detector
data would sometimes become shifted and matched to the wrong event number. The
event builder would then assemble events which do not have the correct outer detector
information. If a through going muon in the inner detector is matched with a low
energy event in the outer detector this would be disastrous. The event could beinterpreted as a neutrino since the veto counter is quiet. Special measures were taken
to identify and reject these events early on, as well as making sure that the outerdetector got \back on track". Hardware and software problems causing this wereidenti ed and solved within a few months. In the meantime we had to identify such
events and even now we are on guard against this kind of error. Figure A.2 shows thedecline of mismatch events over time.
Mismatch events are detected by searching for events that trigger the outer detector yet do not have sucient hits to justify the trigger. The exact requirement isthat a \mismatch" event must have both outer detector and high energy trigger ags
set, but have less than fty outer hits. The number of outer hits must be non-zero
to avoid counting a simply dead outer detector. If any sub-run has more than ve of
these events the sub-run is rejected.
Mismatch events were somewhat common in the rst days of operation. The

238

Mismatch Rate from FC Reduction
1000

800

600

400

200

0
1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

Figure A.2: Mismatched events vs. run
problems had been largely xed at the point that serious data analysis began. Only
brief intermittent occurrences showed up after that and now this problem is completely
solved. The only recent cases of mismatched events happened during known problem(\junk") runs which would not have been analyzed in any case.
A.2.3 Hand Sub-run Cuts

Most subruns rejected from data analysis fall into one of the above categories. A few
remaining subruns are simply cut by hand. The reduction processes are monitored
very closely. Each member of the analysis group is expected to take rotating weeklong \reduction shifts". The sole duty of the reduction shift person is to monitor

A.3. NET LIVE-TIME

239

and log all available information about each and every run. This includes log bookinformation, shift worker comments, numerous reduction and data quality histograms,
and any other known activity around the detector. Any variation from \standard"
operating conditions or detector performance is carefully checked.
The simplest indicator of detector problems is the rate of candidate events fromeach of the reduction stages. Flashing photo-multiplier tubes will cause high numbersof fully contained neutrino candidates. These can be quickly detected by scanningthe candidate les. The rate can also tell us which subruns are a ected. This lets
us keep as much valid data as we can. While we are not wasteful of data we are in
the enviable position of being able to sacri ce live-time for data purity. The rejected
data comprises such a small fraction of the total sample that we are happy to drop a
few subruns in favor of a more reliable result.
The hand cuts are largely taken on the basis of the fully contained reduction steps.
The partially contained reduction is also monitored. A few additional cuts are madebased on the output rate of the partially contained result. This is particularly useful
because a high rate of partially contained candidates can mean that the outer detector
is not functioning as well as a veto counter. If many of those are nearly contained it
could be an indicator of concern for the fully contained sample as well. Any sub-run
with 10 or more partially contained candidates after the PC 3rd reduction is rejected.
This cuts only about 0.7% of the live-time, nearly all of which corresponds to runs
already excluded by the fully contained reduction cuts. Figure A.3 shows how thiscut is made.

A.3 Net Live-time
All of this calculating generates a list of subruns with the total live-time and totals forthe sub-run of the pedestal time, trigger veto, dead workstation, muon and mismatch
rates, etc. Subruns that fail one of the sub-run cuts including the hand cut list are240

PC Subrun Reduction Rate
10

4

10

3

10

2

ID
Entries
Mean
RMS

10
28794
2.057
12.40

10

1
0

25

50

75

100

125

150

175

200

225

250

Figure A.3: PC bad subruns cut by handremoved. What remains is only good subruns. The net live-time for each of these
subruns is then calculated by Equation A.1. The sum of the net livetimes for each
sub-run is the total net live-time for a group of runs.

A.3. NET LIVE-TIME

Net Livetime = Total Livetime, Pedestal, V eto, ID Workstation dead
, OD Workstation dead, Tdiff, No OD TDC Data

241

(A.1)

VITA
Je rey S. George
Personal Data
3022 NE 87th St.
Seattle, WA 98115(206) 527-0846 (Home)(206) 543-9584 (Oce)(206) 685-9242 (FAX)

Box 351560
Department of Physics
University of Washington
Seattle, WA 98195-1560
georgej@phys.washington.edu

Education
June 1994
June 1992
June 1990

Ph.D. Candidate in Physics,
Advisor, Dr. R. Je rey Wilkes,
University of Washington.
M.S. in Physics,
University of Washington.
B.S. in Physics, summa cum laude,
Seattle Paci c University.

Professional Experience
August 1995 - present

Super-Kamiokande Solar Neutrino Experiment
Department of Physics, University of Washington
Research Assistant

October 1997 - December 1997

Department of Physics, University of Washington
Teaching Assistant { Phy 110

243

April 1992 - August 1995

The DUMAND Astrophysical Neutrino Telescope
Department of Physics, University of Washington
Research Assistant

October 1990 - September 1992

Department of Physics, University of Washington
Teaching Assistant { Phy 131

Responsibilities
Super-Kamiokande
Had primary responsibility for online data acquisition software for the SuperKamiokande detector Veto Counter. I also contributed to software to reformat
online data for delivery to the main host computer via Ethernet and FDDI
ber optic network. Software was written in C on Sun SPARCstation 20 UNIX
workstations.
Designed data analysis and data reduction strategies. I have primary responsibility for organizing the data reduction and reporting nal results for theMulti-GeV partially contained atmospheric neutrino event sample. I wrote data
analysis software in C and FORTRAN using the CERN physics packages.
Wrote hardware interface software for fast data acquisition electronics. Modules
included FASTBUS time-to-digital converters, VME-based dual-port memories,
pipelined latches, and a GPS satellite receiver. Software also used a hardwareinterface between a Sun SPARCstation 20 SBus card and the VME crate controller.
Participated in the design and construction of custom front end electronics forthe data acquisition system. Also participated in the nal phase of detector
construction leading to the on-schedule commissioning of the fully operational
detector in April 1996.
System administrator for the working group. I directly manage 3 Sun SPARCstations and 3 PCs. Operating systems include SunOS, Solaris, Windows 3.11,
Windows 95, and Linux.

244

DUMAND
Worked on all phases of the design and construction of the environmental sensors
and acoustic positioning subsystems of the DUMAND Deep Undersea Muon and
Neutrino Detector.
Designed and constructed the power distribution system for underwater environmental sensor packages.
Coordinated the integration of all environmental electronics and sensors in
preparation for deployment at ocean bottom.
Participated in deployment of detector on ocean bottom and laying of ber
optic/power cable to a shore laboratory.
Participated in data analysis of system test data as well as sound and video
recordings from ocean bottom.
Worked on feasibility of acoustic detection of high energy particles in ocean
water.

Phy 110
Responsible for four twice-a-week tutorial sessions for a liberal arts undergraduate physics course. I chose and prepared demonstrations and activities, provided
help with assigned problems, and graded midterm exams. I also supervised anundergraduate assistant.

Phy 131
Responsible for teaching of physics concepts in freshman physics laboratory
courses. I was entirely responsible for all grading for these laboratory sections.
The three hour sessions began with an explanation of physics concepts followedby assisting and encouraging students as they completed the laboratory exercise.

Journal Publications
 \Measurement of the Atmospheric Neutrino Flux Ratio  =e," Y. Fukuda, etal. Accepted by Phys. Lett. B, 4/98.

245

 \Measurement of the Atmospheric Neutrino Flux Ratio  =e in the Multi-GeV
Energy Range," Y. Fukuda, et al. Accepted by Phys. Lett. B, 5/98.
 \Evidence for oscillation of atmospheric neutrinos," Y. Fukuda, et al. Submitted to Phys. Rev. Lett., 7/98.
 \Measurements of the Solar Neutrino Flux from Super-Kamiokande's First 300
days," Y. Fukuda, et al. Accepted by Phys. Rev. Lett., 6/98.
 \Search for proton decay via p ! e+ 0 in a large water Cherenkov detector,"
M. Shiozawa, et al. Submitted to Phys. Rev. Lett., 5/98.
 \Calibration of Super-Kamiokande using an electron LINAC," M. Nakahata, etal. Submitted to NIM A, 7/98.

Conference Presentations
 \Estimated Flux Limits for High Energy Particle Cascades Using Acoustical
Detection Techniques." J. George, for the DUMAND Collaboration. Proc. 24th
International Cosmic Ray Conference. Rome, 1995. 1:812.

 \High Precision Underwater Positioning System for the DUMAND-II Astro-

physical Neutrino Detector." J. George, for the DUMAND Collaboration. Presented at the General Meeting of the American Physical Society. Seattle, 1993.

Conference Proceedings
 \Solar Neutrino Results from Super-Kamiokande ," Z. Conner, for the Super-

Kamiokande Collaboration. Proc. 25th International Cosmic Ray Conference.
Durban, 1997. 7:69.

 \Underground Muons in Super-Kamiokande ," J. G. Learned, for the Super-

Kamiokande Collaboration. Proc. 25th International Cosmic Ray Conference.
Durban, 1997. 7:73.

 \Mapping the Earth's Interior with Astrophysical Neutrinos," H. J. Crawford,
et. al., for the DUMAND Collaboration. Proc. 24th International Cosmic Ray
Conference. Rome, 1995. 1:804-807.

246

 \Monte Carlo Study of DUMAND Three-String Array," A. Okada, for the DUMAND Collaboration. Proc. 24th International Cosmic Ray Conference. Rome,
1995. 1:766-769.

 \Update on the Status of DUMAND-II," C. M. Alexander, et. al., for the DU-

MAND Collaboration. Proc. 23rd International Cosmic Ray Conference. Calgary, 1993. 4:515-518.

 \Estimate of Down-going Atmospheric Muon Background Events in DUMANDII," A. Okada and K. Mauritz O'Brien, for the DUMAND Collaboration. Proc.
23rd International Cosmic Ray Conference. Calgary, 1993. 4:523-526.

 \Capabilities of the DUMAND-II Phase I 3-String Array," V. Stenger, for the

DUMAND Collaboration. Proc. 23rd International Cosmic Ray Conference.
Calgary, 1993. 4:527-530.

 \Trigger Strategies and Processing for DUMAND," U. Camerini, et. al., for the

DUMAND Collaboration. Proc. 23rd International Cosmic Ray Conference.
Calgary, 1993. 4:530-533.

 \An Optical Sensor for DUMAND-II { European Version," P. C. Bosetti, for

the DUMAND Collaboration. Proc. 23rd International Cosmic Ray Conference.
Calgary, 1993. 4:534-537.

 \Acoustical Detection of Cascades in DUMAND," J. Learned and R. J. Wilkes,

for the DUMAND Collaboration. Proc. 23rd International Cosmic Ray Conference. Calgary, 1993. 4:538-541.

 \Acoustical Locating System for DUMAND-II," H. G. Berns, et. al., for the

DUMAND Collaboration. Proc. 23rd International Cosmic Ray Conference.
Calgary, 1993. 4:542-545.

 \The DUMAND-II Digitizer," , E. Hazen, for the DUMAND Collaboration.
Proc. 23rd International Cosmic Ray Conference. Calgary, 1993. 4:768-771.
 \On the Detection of UHE Cascade Showers with DUMAND-II," A. Okada

and J. Hauptman, for the DUMAND Collaboration. Proc. 23rd International
Cosmic Ray Conference. Calgary, 1993. 4:772-775.

247

Seminar Presentations
 \Experimental Study of the Atmospheric  =e Ratio in the Multi-GeV Energy
Range." Ph.D. Final Examination. University of Washington. July 1998.

 \Atmospheric Neutrinos in Super-Kamiokande," Particle Astrophysics Seminar.
University of Washington. May 1998.

 \Super-Kamiokande Results and Analysis." Space Radiation Laboratory Seminar. California Institute of Technology. May 1998.

 \Super-Kamiokande Results and Analysis." TRIUMF Accelerator Facility, Vancouver B.C. April 1998.

 \Super-Kamiokande Results and Analysis." New York University. March 1998
 \Calibration of Super-Kamiokande," Particle Astrophysics Seminar. Universityof Washington. February 1998.

 \Atmospheric Neutrinos in Super-Kamiokande," Guest Lecture for Nuclear andParticle Physics students. Seattle Paci c University. May 1997.

 \Summary of 24th Intl. Cosmic Ray Conference," Cosmic Ray Seminar. University of Washington. October 1995.

 \Acoustic Detection of High Energy Cascades in DUMAND," Cosmic Ray Seminar. University of Washington. April 1995.

 \DUMAND Test Cruise Preparations," Cosmic Ray Seminar. University ofWashington. August 1994.

 \Correlation of Acoustic and Optical Signals from Neutrino-Induced HE Cascades in DUMAND," General Exam. University of Washington. April 1994.

 \Acoustic Data from DUMAND," Cosmic Ray Seminar. University of Washington. March 1994.

248

 Dr. R. Je rey Wilkes

Box 351560
Department of Physics
University of Washington
Seattle, WA 98195-1560(206) 543-4232(206) 685-9242 FAX
wilkes@phys.washington.edu

References Dr. Takaaki Kajita

 Dr. Kenneth YoungBox 351560
Department of Physics
University of Washington
Seattle, WA 98195-1560(206) 543-4186(206) 685-9242 FAX
young@phys.washington.edu

 Dr. Henry Sobel

Physics Department
University of California at Irvine
Irvine, CA 92717(714) 824-6431(714) 824-7478 FAX
sobel@master.ps.uci.edu

 Dr. Jordan Goodman

University of MarylandCollege Park, MD 20742(301) 405-6033(301) 699-9195 FAX
goodcos@umdhep.umd.edu

Kamioka Observatory
Inst. for Cosmic Ray Research
Higashi-mozumi, Kamioka-cho
Yoshiki-gun, Gifu 506-12, JAPANkajita@suketto.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp

 Dr. Yoichiro Suzuki

Kamioka Observatory
Inst. for Cosmic Ray Research
Higashi-mozumi, Kamioka-cho
Yoshiki-gun, Gifu 506-12, JAPANsuzuki@icrkm4.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp

 Dr. Y. Totsuka

Kamioka Observatory
Inst. for Cosmic Ray Research
Higashi-mozumi, Kamioka-cho
Yoshiki-gun, Gifu 506-12, JAPANtotsuka@icrkm4.icrr.u-tokyo.ac.jp

 Dr. James Crichton

Department of Physics
Seattle Paci c University
3307 3rd Avenue West
Seattle, WA 98119(206) 281-2149(205) 281-2882 FAX
crichton@spu.edu