View source for Daya Bay's Sterile Neutrino Results in 2016

== Data Release == 

<p>1. Daya Bay 621 days sterile neutrino result &chi;<sup>2</sup> map: [https://wiki.bnl.gov/dayabay/index.php?title=File:Chi2map_DayaBay_621day.tar Daya Bay Chi2 Map data ]. The Gaussian CL<sub>s</sub> method is used to set the exclusion contour <sup>[0]</sup>, and here is a short note on how to use the &chi;<sup>2</sup> map to calculate CL<sub>s</sub>  values: [https://wiki.bnl.gov/dayabay/index.php?title=File:Gauss_CLs_readme.pdf  Gaussian CLs ReadMe ] </p>

<p>2. Daya Bay/Bugey-3 and MINOS  sterile neutrino combined results data is here: [https://wiki.bnl.gov/dayabay/index.php?title=File:DYB_MINOS.tar  MINOS, Daya Bay + Bugey-3, and the combination CLs surfaces] </p>  

<p>The results are also shown on the [http://www-numi.fnal.gov/PublicInfo/forscientists.html  MINOS website]  </p>

== Daya Bay/Bugey-3 and MINOS Combined Sterile Neutrino Result (October 2016) == 

<p> Daya Bay/Bugey-3 and MINOS combined 90% CL<sub>s</sub> limit on sin<sup>2</sup>2&theta;<sub>&#956;</sub><sub>e</sub> compared to the LSND and MiniBooNE 90% CL allowed regions. Regions of parameter space to the right of the red contour are excluded. The regions excluded at 90% CL by the KARMEN2 Collaboration <sup>[1]</sup> and the NOMAD Collaboration<sup>[2]</sup> are also shown. We note that the excursion to small mixing in the exclusion contour at around  &#916;m<sup>2</sup><sub>41</sub> &#8764; 5 &#215; 10<sup>-3</sup> eV<sup>2</sup> is due to the degenerate island in the MINOS exclusion limit. </p> 

[[File:ComboLimit90a.png|500px]] <br>

The PRL paper describing the details of this joint analysis can be found here: [http://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.151801 Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 151801 (2016)] <br>

The arXiv paper can be found here: [https://arxiv.org/abs/1607.01177  arXiv:1607.01177] <br>

The results are also shown in [http://www-numi.fnal.gov/PublicInfo/forscientists.html  MINOS Official Website] <br>

== Daya Bay and Bugey-3 Combined Sterile Neutrino Result (October 2016) == 
<p> Excluded regions for the original Bugey-3 Raster scan
(RS) result<sup>[3]</sup>, for the reproduced Bugey-3 result with adjusted
fluxes, for the Daya Bay result<sup>[4]</sup>, and for the combined Daya
Bay and reproduced Bugey-3 results. The region to the right of
the curve is excluded at the 90% CL<sub>s</sub>. </p> 

[[File:Dayabay bugey v2a.png|500px]] <br>

The PRL paper describing the details of this joint analysis can be found here: [http://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.151801 Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 151801 (2016) ]<br>

The arXiv paper can be found here: [https://arxiv.org/abs/1607.01177 arXiv:1607.01177 ]<br>

The results are also shown in [http://www-numi.fnal.gov/PublicInfo/forscientists.html  MINOS Official Website] <br>

== Reproduced Bugey-3 Result (October 2016) ==
<p> Comparison of the Bugey-3 90% CL (blue) and the reproduced 90% CL (red)  </p> 

[[File:Bugey rs contoura.png|500px]] <br>
  
More information related to Bugey-3 result reproduction can be found here: [https://indico.bnl.gov/conferenceDisplay.py?confId=2202 Presentation: Sterile Neutrino Search at Daya Bay]



== Daya Bay Sterile Neutrino Result with 8 anti-neutrino detectors configuration (October 2016) ==

<p> Exclusion contours in the (sin<sup>2</sup>2&#952;<sub>14</sub>,  &#916;m<sup>2</sup><sub>41</sub>) plane under the assumption of  &#916;m<sup>2</sup><sub>32</sub> > 0 and  &#916;m<sup>2</sup><sub>41</sub> > 0. The red longdashed curve represents the 95% CL exclusion contour with the Feldman-Cousins method<sup>[5]</sup>. The black solid curve represents the 95% CL<sub>s</sub> exclusion contour<sup>[6]</sup>. The expected 95% CL 1 &#963; band in yellow is centered around the sensitivity curve, shown as a thin blue line. The region of parameter space to the right side of the contours is excluded. For comparison, Bugey-3 90% CL limit<sup>[3]</sup> is also shown as the green dashed curve.  </p> 

[[File:Data contours v2a.png|500px]] <br>

The PRL paper describing the details of this analysis can be found here: [http://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.151802  Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 151802 (2016)]<br>

The arXiv paper can be found here: [https://arxiv.org/abs/1607.01177  arXiv:1607.01174 ] <br>

== Reference ==
[0] X. Qian et al. [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016890021630314X Nucl. Instr. Meth. A, 827 11 (2016)]. <br>
[1] B. Armbruster et al. (KARMEN Collaboration), [http://journals.aps.org/prd/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevD.65.112001 Phys. Rev.D 65, 112001 (2002)]. <br>
[2] P. Astier et al. (NOMAD Collaboration), [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0370269303010505 Phys. Lett. B 570, 19 (2003)].<br>
[3] B. Achkar et al., [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/055032139400513E Nucl. Phys. B434, 503 (1995)]. <br>
[4] F. P. An et al. (Daya Bay Collaboration), [http://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.151802 Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 151802 (2016)]. <br>
[5] G. J. Feldman and R. D. Cousins, [http://journals.aps.org/prd/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevD.57.3873 Phys. Rev. D 57, 3873 (1998)]. <br>
[6] A. L. Read, [http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0954-3899/28/10/313/meta;jsessionid=FCFA0D597C434C56859FF5E55C19D7E5.c3.iopscience.cld.iop.org J. Phys. G 28, 2693 (2002)].<br>