pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.00745 · v1 · pith:PT3BMWKQnew · submitted 2026-05-30 · ✦ hep-ex

Comparisons of triple-differential cross sections for quasielastic-like ν_μ-hydrocarbon interactions using langle E_νrangle sim 3~GeV versus sim 6~GeV beams in MINERvA

D. Ruterbories , S. Akhter , Z. Ahmad Dar , M. Sajjad Athar , M. Betancourt , S. Boyd , H. da Motta , J. Felix
show 35 more authors
L. Fields R. Fine A.M. Gago H. Gallagher P.K.Gaur S.M. Gilligan R. Gran E.Granados D.A. Harris A.L. Hart A. Klustov\'a M. Kordosky D. Last Z. Lin A. Lozano S. Manly W.A. Mann C. Mauger K.S. McFarland M. Mehmood O. Moreno J.G. Morf\'in J.K. Nelson C. Nguyen V. Paolone G.N. Perdue C. Pernas M.A. Ram\'irez R.D. Ransome N. Roy H. Schellman C.J. Solano Salinas N.H. Vaughan A.V. Waldron L. Zazueta (the MINERvA collaboration)
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-28 18:09 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ex
keywords neutrino interactionsquasielastic scatteringfinal state interactionscross sectionsnuclear effectsMINERvAmuon neutrinohydrocarbon target
0
0 comments X

The pith

Data from two neutrino beam energies in MINERvA indicate models overestimate final state interactions of protons and charged pions in quasielastic-like events.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper compares triple-differential cross sections for quasielastic-like muon neutrino scattering on hydrocarbon targets using two MINERvA exposures with different average neutrino energies, one near 3 GeV and one near 6 GeV. This comparison is designed to isolate deviations from free-nucleon scattering that come from nuclear medium effects, multinucleon processes, and final state interactions. By examining the same observables in muon and proton kinematics across both datasets, the analysis tests how well current models describe these effects and support energy reconstruction in oscillation experiments. Observed mismatches between data and predictions point specifically to overestimates of final state interactions for protons and charged pions.

Core claim

Comparisons of differential cross sections in muon and proton kinematics for these two exposures probe deviations from free-neutron scattering that arise from the processes involving the nuclear medium, and provide a test of neutrino interaction models used to infer neutrino energies in oscillation experiments. Discrepancies are observed between the data and predictions that point to overestimates of the final state interactions of both protons and charged pions in quasielastic-like events.

What carries the argument

Triple-differential cross sections in muon and proton kinematics compared across two neutrino beam spectra with different peak energies.

If this is right

  • Nuclear medium processes produce measurable deviations from free-nucleon kinematics in quasielastic-like events at few-GeV energies.
  • Neutrino interaction models require reduced final state interaction strengths for protons and pions to match the observed cross sections.
  • Energy reconstruction methods in oscillation experiments that rely on these models will carry systematic biases from the overestimated interactions.
  • The energy dependence between the 3 GeV and 6 GeV exposures constrains how nuclear effects scale with neutrino energy.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If final state interactions are overestimated across models, similar discrepancies may appear in other nuclei or at higher energies where pion production grows.
  • The two-energy comparison provides a lever arm that could be used to separate initial-state nuclear effects from final-state rescattering in future analyses.
  • Adjusting interaction models based on these data would alter predicted event rates and backgrounds in long-baseline oscillation detectors.

Load-bearing premise

Differences observed between the two beam exposures arise primarily from nuclear medium effects and final state interactions rather than from unaccounted differences in beam flux, detector response, or analysis selections between the two data sets.

What would settle it

A measurement showing that proton and charged pion absorption or rescattering rates in the nucleus match model predictions exactly, without needing adjustment, would contradict the claim of overestimates.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.00745 by A. Klustov\'a, A.L. Hart, A. Lozano, A.M. Gago, A.V. Waldron, C.J. Solano Salinas, C. Mauger, C. Nguyen, C. Pernas, D.A. Harris, D. Last, D. Ruterbories, E.Granados, G.N. Perdue, H. da Motta, H. Gallagher, H. Schellman, J. Felix, J.G. Morf\'in, J.K. Nelson, K.S. McFarland, L. Fields, L. Zazueta (The MINERvA Collaboration), M.A. Ram\'irez, M. Betancourt, M. Kordosky, M. Mehmood, M. Sajjad Athar, N.H. Vaughan, N. Roy, O. Moreno, P.K.Gaur, R.D. Ransome, R. Fine, R. Gran, S. Akhter, S. Boyd, S. Manly, S.M. Gilligan, V. Paolone, W.A. Mann, Z. Ahmad Dar, Z. Lin.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Medium and Low Energy fluxes in the neutrino fo [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Event distributions in data and prediction after [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Fractional uncertainty on the cross section in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Cross section in the Low (top) and Medium (bottom) Energy beam as a function of the sum of proton kinetic energies, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Average recoil for the events after background sub [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Cross Sections (top) and Ratios between the cross sections and MINERvA’s Tune to GENIE (bottom) as a function [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Cross Sections as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Ratios of both MINERvA data and alternate gen [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Ratio of LE/ME cross section ratio to the simulation’s ratio as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. Ratio of LE/ME cross section ratio in the data to GENIE3’s ratio as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 110
Figure 110. Figure 110: FIG. 110. Cross Sections as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_110.png] view at source ↗
Figure 111
Figure 111. Figure 111: FIG. 111. Cross Sections as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_111.png] view at source ↗
Figure 112
Figure 112. Figure 112: FIG. 112. Cross Sections as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_112.png] view at source ↗
Figure 113
Figure 113. Figure 113: FIG. 113. Cross Sections as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_113.png] view at source ↗
Figure 114
Figure 114. Figure 114: FIG. 114. Cross Sections as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_114.png] view at source ↗
Figure 115
Figure 115. Figure 115: FIG. 115. Cross Sections as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_115.png] view at source ↗
Figure 116
Figure 116. Figure 116: FIG. 116. Cross Sections as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_116.png] view at source ↗
Figure 117
Figure 117. Figure 117: FIG. 117. Cross Sections as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_117.png] view at source ↗
Figure 118
Figure 118. Figure 118: FIG. 118. Cross Sections as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_118.png] view at source ↗
Figure 119
Figure 119. Figure 119: FIG. 119. Cross Sections as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_119.png] view at source ↗
Figure 120
Figure 120. Figure 120: FIG. 120. Double ratio of ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_120.png] view at source ↗
Figure 121
Figure 121. Figure 121: FIG. 121. Double ratio of ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_121.png] view at source ↗
Figure 122
Figure 122. Figure 122: FIG. 122. Double ratio of ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_122.png] view at source ↗
Figure 123
Figure 123. Figure 123: FIG. 123. Double ratio of ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_123.png] view at source ↗
Figure 124
Figure 124. Figure 124: FIG. 124. Double ratio of ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p030_124.png] view at source ↗
Figure 125
Figure 125. Figure 125: FIG. 125. Data to simulation ratio as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p031_125.png] view at source ↗
Figure 126
Figure 126. Figure 126: FIG. 126. Data to simulation ratio as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p032_126.png] view at source ↗
Figure 127
Figure 127. Figure 127: FIG. 127. Data to simulation ratio as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p033_127.png] view at source ↗
Figure 128
Figure 128. Figure 128: FIG. 128. Data to simulation ratio as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p034_128.png] view at source ↗
Figure 129
Figure 129. Figure 129: FIG. 129. Data to simulation ratio as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p035_129.png] view at source ↗
Figure 130
Figure 130. Figure 130: FIG. 130. Top (Low Energy), Middle (Medium Energy): Measured cross sections divided by the MINERvA tune, and other [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p036_130.png] view at source ↗
Figure 131
Figure 131. Figure 131: FIG. 131. Top (Low Energy), Middle (Medium Energy): Measured cross sections divided by the MINERvA tune, and other [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p037_131.png] view at source ↗
Figure 132
Figure 132. Figure 132: FIG. 132. Top (Low Energy), Middle (Medium Energy): Measured cross sections divided by the MINERvA tune, and other [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p038_132.png] view at source ↗
Figure 133
Figure 133. Figure 133: FIG. 133. Top (Low Energy), Middle (Medium Energy): Measured cross sections divided by the MINERvA tune, and other [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p039_133.png] view at source ↗
Figure 134
Figure 134. Figure 134: FIG. 134. Top (Low Energy), Middle (Medium Energy): Measured cross sections divided by the MINERvA tune, and other [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p040_134.png] view at source ↗
Figure 149
Figure 149. Figure 149: FIG. 149. Pz bins 1 (top), 2(middle) and 3 (bottom) comparing NuWro SF against GENIE 10a. The double ratios are also [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p056_149.png] view at source ↗
Figure 150
Figure 150. Figure 150: FIG. 150. Pz bins 4 (top) and 5(bottom) comparing NuWro SF against GENIE 10a. The double ratios are also shown for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p057_150.png] view at source ↗
Figure 151
Figure 151. Figure 151: FIG. 151. Event distributions in data and prediction after the background fits described in the text, for both the Low (top) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p058_151.png] view at source ↗
Figure 152
Figure 152. Figure 152: FIG. 152. Event distributions in data and prediction after the background fits described in the text, for both the Low (top) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p058_152.png] view at source ↗
Figure 153
Figure 153. Figure 153: FIG. 153. Event distributions in data and prediction after the background fits described in the text, for both the Low (top) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p058_153.png] view at source ↗
Figure 154
Figure 154. Figure 154: FIG. 154. Event distributions in data and prediction after the background fits described in the text, for both the Low (top) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p059_154.png] view at source ↗
Figure 155
Figure 155. Figure 155: FIG. 155. Event distributions in data and prediction after the background fits described in the text, for both the Low (top) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p059_155.png] view at source ↗
Figure 156
Figure 156. Figure 156: FIG. 156. Ratios of measured to predicted event distributions after the background fits described in the text, for both the Low [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p060_156.png] view at source ↗
Figure 157
Figure 157. Figure 157: FIG. 157. Ratios of measured to predicted event distributions after the background fits described in the text, for both the Low [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p060_157.png] view at source ↗
Figure 158
Figure 158. Figure 158: FIG. 158. Ratios of measured to predicted event distributions after the background fits described in the text, for both the Low [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p060_158.png] view at source ↗
Figure 159
Figure 159. Figure 159: FIG. 159. Ratios of measured to predicted event distributions after the background fits described in the text, for both the Low [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p061_159.png] view at source ↗
Figure 160
Figure 160. Figure 160: FIG. 160. Ratios of measured to predicted event distributions after the background fits described in the text, for both the Low [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p061_160.png] view at source ↗
Figure 161
Figure 161. Figure 161: FIG. 161. Double Ratios to GENIE 02a for all momentum bins [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p062_161.png] view at source ↗
Figure 162
Figure 162. Figure 162: FIG. 162. Double Ratios to GENIE 02b for all momentum bins [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p063_162.png] view at source ↗
Figure 163
Figure 163. Figure 163: FIG. 163. Double Ratios to NEUT with a Spectral Function Model for all momentum bins [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p064_163.png] view at source ↗
Figure 164
Figure 164. Figure 164: FIG. 164. Double Ratios to NuWro with a Spectral Function Model for all momentum bins [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p065_164.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Neutrino charged-current quasielastic-like scattering, a reaction category extensively used in neutrino oscillation measurements, receives contributions from single nucleon knockout processes, multinucleon processes, and inelastic scattering with subsequent rescattering or absorption in the nucleus to produce only nucleons in the final state. In this article, comparisons are presented of the same measurement in two different wideband neutrino beams: one beam peaks near 3 GeV with few neutrinos above 6 GeV; the other peaks near 6 GeV with few neutrinos above 10 GeV. Comparisons of differential cross sections in muon and proton kinematics for these two exposures probe deviations from free-neutron scattering that arise from the processes involving the nuclear medium, and provide a test of neutrino interaction models used to infer neutrino energies in oscillation experiments. Discrepancies are observed between the data and predictions that point to overestimates of the final state interactions of both protons and charged pions in quasielastic-like events.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript compares triple-differential cross sections for quasielastic-like charged-current ν_μ interactions on hydrocarbon targets in MINERvA, using two wideband beams with ⟨E_ν⟩ ≈ 3 GeV and ≈ 6 GeV. It reports discrepancies between data and model predictions that are interpreted as evidence for overestimates of final-state interactions (FSI) involving protons and charged pions.

Significance. If the attribution of discrepancies to energy-dependent nuclear effects holds after accounting for experimental differences, the result supplies useful constraints on neutrino interaction models employed in oscillation analyses. The dual-beam-energy design is a strength for isolating nuclear-medium contributions from free-nucleon scattering.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract and results sections: the central claim that observed data-prediction mismatches arise from FSI overestimates (rather than residual differences between exposures) requires explicit demonstration that beam-flux modeling, detector-response corrections, and analysis selections are consistent between the two datasets at a level smaller than the reported discrepancies. No such quantification is described.
  2. [Abstract] The manuscript provides no information on how systematic uncertainties, background subtraction, or efficiency corrections are evaluated or compared across the two beam exposures; without these details the strength of the FSI interpretation cannot be assessed.
minor comments (2)
  1. Clarify the precise kinematic ranges and binning choices used for the triple-differential cross sections to allow direct comparison with other experiments.
  2. Ensure all model implementations (including specific FSI treatments) are referenced with version numbers or parameter settings in the text.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the detailed review and constructive comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment below and describe the revisions that will be incorporated in the next version of the paper.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract and results sections: the central claim that observed data-prediction mismatches arise from FSI overestimates (rather than residual differences between exposures) requires explicit demonstration that beam-flux modeling, detector-response corrections, and analysis selections are consistent between the two datasets at a level smaller than the reported discrepancies. No such quantification is described.

    Authors: The referee correctly identifies that the manuscript does not include an explicit quantitative comparison demonstrating that differences in beam-flux modeling, detector-response corrections, and analysis selections between the two exposures are smaller than the reported discrepancies. We will add a new subsection to the results section that provides this side-by-side quantification, including estimates of the residual differences in each category and a direct comparison to the size of the observed data-model discrepancies. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] The manuscript provides no information on how systematic uncertainties, background subtraction, or efficiency corrections are evaluated or compared across the two beam exposures; without these details the strength of the FSI interpretation cannot be assessed.

    Authors: We agree that the current manuscript lacks an explicit comparison of how systematic uncertainties, background subtraction, and efficiency corrections are evaluated and compared between the two beam exposures. We will revise the methods and results sections to include this information, with a focus on any differences in the treatment of these elements across the datasets and their potential impact on the FSI interpretation. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: pure experimental measurement

full rationale

This is a direct experimental measurement of triple-differential cross sections in two neutrino beam exposures, with results compared to external model predictions. No derivation, ansatz, fitted parameter renamed as prediction, or self-citation chain reduces any central claim to the paper's own inputs by construction. The analysis stands on measured data and independent models.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Only the abstract is available, so the ledger is limited to standard assumptions of neutrino-nucleus scattering; no free parameters or invented entities are identifiable from the given text.

axioms (1)
  • standard math Standard assumptions of the Standard Model and nuclear physics models for neutrino-nucleus interactions
    The paper compares data to predictions from established models without detailing deviations from those assumptions.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5955 in / 1124 out tokens · 32205 ms · 2026-06-28T18:09:23.097334+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

269 extracted references · 225 canonical work pages · 133 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    A Next-to-Leading Order QCD Analysis of Neutrino - Iron Structure Functions at the Tevatron

    Seligman, William Glenn. A Next-to-Leading Order QCD Analysis of Neutrino - Iron Structure Functions at the Tevatron. 1997. doi:10.2172/1421736

    work page doi:10.2172/1421736 1997

  2. [2]

    Neutrino and Antineutrino Inclusive Charged-current Cross Section Measurements with the MINOS Near Detector

    Adamson, P. and others. Neutrino and Antineutrino Inclusive Charged-current Cross Section Measurements with the MINOS Near Detector. Phys. Rev. D. 2010. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.81.072002. arXiv:0910.2201

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.81.072002 2010

  3. [3]

    A Precise Measurement of the Muon Neutrino-Nucleon Inclusive Charged Current Cross-Section off an Isoscalar Target in the Energy Range 2.5 < E_\nu < 40 GeV by NOMAD

    Wu, Q. and others. A Precise measurement of the muon neutrino-nucleon inclusive charged current cross-section off an isoscalar target in the energy range 2.5 < E(nu) < 40-GeV by NOMAD. Phys. Lett. B. 2008. doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2007.12.027. arXiv:0711.1183

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2007.12.027 2008

  4. [4]

    Measurement of the antineutrino to neutrino charged-current interaction cross section ratio in MINERvA

    Ren, L. and others. Measurement of the antineutrino to neutrino charged-current interaction cross section ratio in MINERvA. Phys. Rev. D. 2017. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.97.019902, 10.1103/PhysRevD.95.072009. arXiv:1701.04857

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.97.019902 2017

  5. [5]

    Measurements of the Inclusive Neutrino and Antineutrino Charged Current Cross Sections in MINERvA Using the Low-$\nu$ Flux Method

    Devan, J. and others. Measurements of the Inclusive Neutrino and Antineutrino Charged Current Cross Sections in MINERvA Using the Low- Flux Method. Phys. Rev. D. 2016. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.94.112007. arXiv:1610.04746

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.94.112007 2016

  6. [6]

    Measurement of inclusive double-differential $\nu_\mu$ charged-current cross section with improved acceptance in the T2K off-axis near detector

    Abe, K. and others. Measurement of inclusive double-differential _ charged-current cross section with improved acceptance in the T2K off-axis near detector. Phys. Rev. D. 2018. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.98.012004. arXiv:1801.05148

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.98.012004 2018

  7. [7]

    and others

    Abratenko, P. and others. First Measurement of Inclusive Muon Neutrino Charged Current Differential Cross Sections on Argon at E_ 0.8 GeV with the MicroBooNE Detector. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2019. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.123.131801. arXiv:1905.09694

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.123.131801 2019

  8. [8]

    Measurement of Neutrino Flux from Neutrino-Electron Elastic Scattering

    Park, J. and others. Measurement of Neutrino Flux from Neutrino-Electron Elastic Scattering. Phys. Rev. D. 2016. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.112007. arXiv:1512.07699

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.93.112007 2016

  9. [9]

    and others

    Valencia, E. and others. Constraint of the MINER A medium energy neutrino flux using neutrino-electron elastic scattering. Phys. Rev. D. 2019. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.100.092001. arXiv:1906.00111

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.100.092001 2019

  10. [10]

    Harewood, L. A. and Gran, R. Elastic hadron-nucleus scattering in neutrino-nucleus reactions and transverse kinematics measurements. 2019. arXiv:1906.10576

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  11. [11]

    and others

    Stowell, P. and others. Tuning the GENIE Pion Production Model with MINER A Data. Phys. Rev. D. 2019. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.100.072005. arXiv:1903.01558

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.100.072005 2019

  12. [12]

    Simulations from a new neutrino event generator

    Juszczak, Cezary and Nowak, Jaroslaw A. and Sobczyk, Jan T. Simulations from a new neutrino event generator. Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl. 2006. doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysbps.2006.08.069. arXiv:hep-ph/0512365

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysbps.2006.08.069 2006

  13. [13]

    and others

    Bercellie, A. and others. Simultaneous Measurement of Muon Neutrino Charged-Current Single + Production in CH, C, H2O, Fe, and Pb Targets in MINERvA. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2023. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.131.011801. arXiv:2209.07852

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.131.011801 2023

  14. [14]

    Peele's Pertinent Puzzle

    Peelle, R.W. Peele's Pertinent Puzzle. informal Oak Ridge National Lab memorandum. 1987

    1987

  15. [15]

    and Cox, D.R

    Box, G.E.P. and Cox, D.R. An analysis of transformations. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, series B (Methodological). 1964

    1964

  16. [17]

    Neutrino event generators, Proceedings of Hadronic Shower Simulation Workshop: Batavia, IL, September 6-8, 2006

    Dytman, Steven. Neutrino event generators, Proceedings of Hadronic Shower Simulation Workshop: Batavia, IL, September 6-8, 2006. AIP Conf. Proc. 2007. doi:10.1063/1.2720468

    work page doi:10.1063/1.2720468 2006

  17. [19]

    and others

    Altinok, O. and others. Measurement of _ charged-current single ^ 0 production on hydrocarbon in the few-GeV region using MINERvA. Phys. Rev. D. 2017. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.96.072003. arXiv:1708.03723

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.96.072003 2017

  18. [20]

    and others

    Le, T. and others. Measurement of _ Charged-Current Single ^ - Production on Hydrocarbon in the Few-GeV Region using MINERvA. Phys. Rev. D. 2019. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.100.052008. arXiv:1906.08300

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.100.052008 2019

  19. [21]

    McGivern, C. L. and others. Cross sections for _ and _ induced pion production on hydrocarbon in the few-GeV region using MINERvA. Phys. Rev. D. 2016. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.94.052005. arXiv:1606.07127

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.94.052005 2016

  20. [22]

    Direct Measurement of Nuclear Dependence of Charged Current Quasielastic-like Neutrino Interactions using MINERvA

    Betancourt, M. and others. Direct Measurement of Nuclear Dependence of Charged Current Quasielasticlike Neutrino Interactions Using MINER A. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2017. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.082001. arXiv:1705.03791

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.119.082001 2017

  21. [23]

    Rodrigues, P. A. and others. Identification of nuclear effects in neutrino-carbon interactions at low three-momentum transfer. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2016. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.071802. arXiv:1511.05944

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.116.071802 2016

  22. [24]

    Deuterium target data for precision neutrino-nucleus cross sections

    Meyer, Aaron S. and Betancourt, Minerba and Gran, Richard and Hill, Richard J. Deuterium target data for precision neutrino-nucleus cross sections. Phys. Rev. D. 2016. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.113015. arXiv:1603.03048

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.93.113015 2016

  23. [25]

    Reanalysis of bubble chamber measurements of muon-neutrino induced single pion production

    Wilkinson, Callum and others. Reanalysis of bubble chamber measurements of muon-neutrino induced single pion production. Phys. Rev. D. 2014. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.90.112017. arXiv:1411.4482

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.90.112017 2014

  24. [26]

    Constraining the GENIE model of neutrino-induced single pion production using reanalyzed bubble chamber data

    Rodrigues, Philip and Wilkinson, Callum and McFarland, Kevin. Constraining the GENIE model of neutrino-induced single pion production using reanalyzed bubble chamber data. Eur. Phys. J. C. 2016. doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-016-4314-3. arXiv:1601.01888

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-016-4314-3 2016

  25. [27]

    Progress and open questions in the physics of neutrino cross sections

    Alvarez-Ruso, L. and Hayato, Y. and Nieves, J. Progress and open questions in the physics of neutrino cross sections at intermediate energies. New J. Phys. 2014. doi:10.1088/1367-2630/16/7/075015. arXiv:1403.2673

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1367-2630/16/7/075015 2014

  26. [28]

    Formaggio, J. A. and Zeller, G. P. From eV to EeV: Neutrino Cross Sections Across Energy Scales. Rev. Mod. Phys. 2012. doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.84.1307. arXiv:1305.7513

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/revmodphys.84.1307 2012

  27. [29]

    and Garvey, G

    Gallagher, H. and Garvey, G. and Zeller, G. P. Neutrino-nucleus interactions. Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 2011. doi:10.1146/annurev-nucl-102010-130255

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-nucl-102010-130255 2011

  28. [31]

    Mishra, S. R. Talk presented at Workshop on Hadron Structure Functions and Parton Distributions. Proceedings of the Workshop on Hadron Structure Functions and Parton Distributions. 1990

    1990

  29. [32]

    Seligman , title = "

    W. Seligman , title = "

  30. [33]

    Methods to Determine Neutrino Flux at Low Energies:Investigation of the Low $\nu$ Method

    Bodek, A. and Sarica, U. and Naples, D. and Ren, L. Methods to Determine Neutrino Flux at Low Energies:Investigation of the Low Method. Eur. Phys. J. C. 2012. doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-1973-6. arXiv:1201.3025

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-1973-6 2012

  31. [34]

    Measurement of Neutrino and Antineutrino Charged-Current Inclusive Cross Sections with the MINERvA Detector

    Devan, Joshua D. Measurement of Neutrino and Antineutrino Charged-Current Inclusive Cross Sections with the MINERvA Detector. 2015. doi:10.2172/1248217

    work page doi:10.2172/1248217 2015

  32. [35]

    J. Devan. Measurement of Neutrino and Antineutrino Charged-Current Inclusive Cross Sections with the MINERvA Detector. 2016

    2016

  33. [36]

    Low-energy excitations and quasielastic contribution to electron-nucleus and neutrino-nucleus scattering in the continuum random phase approximation

    Pandey, V. and Jachowicz, N. and Van Cuyck, T. and Ryckebusch, J. and Martini, M. Low-energy excitations and quasielastic contribution to electron-nucleus and neutrino-nucleus scattering in the continuum random-phase approximation. Phys. Rev. C. 2015. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.92.024606. arXiv:1412.4624

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevc.92.024606 2015

  34. [37]

    Neutrino versus antineutrino cross sections and CP violation

    Ericson, M. and Martini, M. Neutrino versus antineutrino cross sections and CP violation. Phys. Rev. C. 2015. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.91.035501. arXiv:1501.02442

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevc.91.035501 2015

  35. [38]

    Neutrino-nucleus interaction models and their impact on oscillation analyses

    Coloma, Pilar and Huber, Patrick and Jen, Chun-Min and Mariani, Camillo. Neutrino-nucleus interaction models and their impact on oscillation analyses. Phys. Rev. D. 2014. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.89.073015. arXiv:1311.4506

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.89.073015 2014

  36. [41]

    Measurement of Ratios of $\nu_{\mu}$ Charged-Current Cross Sections on C, Fe, and Pb to CH at Neutrino Energies 2-20 GeV

    Tice, B.G. and Datta, M. and Mousseau, J. and others. Measurement Ratios of _ Charged-Current Cross Sections on C, Fe, and Pb to CH at Neutrino Energies 2-20 GeV. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2014. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.231801. arXiv:1403.2103

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.112.231801 2014

  37. [42]

    Measurement of muon plus proton final states in $\nu_{\mu}$ Interactions on Hydrocarbon at $\langle$$E_{\nu}$$\rangle$ = 4.2 GeV

    Walton, T. and others. Measurement of muon plus proton final states in _ interactions on hydrocarbon at < E_ > = 4.2 GeV. Phys. Rev. D. 2015. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.91.071301. arXiv:1409.4497

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.91.071301 2015

  38. [43]

    Charged Pion Production in $\nu_\mu$ Interactions on Hydrocarbon at $\langle E_{\nu}\rangle$= 4.0 GeV

    Eberly, B. and others. Charged pion production in _ interactions on hydrocarbon at E_ = 4.0 GeV. Phys. Rev. D. 2015. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.92.092008. arXiv:1406.6415

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.92.092008 2015

  39. [44]

    Measurement of Total and Differential Cross Sections of Neutrino and Antineutrino Coherent $\pi^\pm$ Production on Carbon

    Mislivec, A. and others. Measurement of total and differential cross sections of neutrino and antineutrino coherent ^ production on carbon. Phys. Rev. D. 2018. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.97.032014. arXiv:1711.01178

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.97.032014 2018

  40. [45]

    Measurement of Coherent Production of $\pi^\pm$ in Neutrino and Anti-Neutrino Beams on Carbon from $E_\nu$ of $1.5$ to $20$ GeV

    Higuera, A. and others. Measurement of Coherent Production of ^ in Neutrino and Antineutrino Beams on Carbon from E_ of 1.5 to 20 GeV. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2014. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.261802. arXiv:1409.3835

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.113.261802 2014

  41. [46]

    Design, Calibration, and Performance of the MINERvA Detector

    Aliaga, L. and others. Design, Calibration, and Performance of the MINERvA Detector. Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A. 2014. doi:10.1016/j.nima.2013.12.053. arXiv:1305.5199

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.nima.2013.12.053 2014

  42. [47]

    A study of quasi-elastic muon neutrino and antineutrino scattering in the NOMAD experiment

    Lyubushkin, V and others. A Study of quasi-elastic muon neutrino and antineutrino scattering in the NOMAD experiment. Eur. Phys. J. C. 2009. doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-009-1113-0. arXiv:0812.4543

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-009-1113-0 2009

  43. [49]

    and others

    Abe, K. and others. Measurement of the muon neutrino charged-current single ^+ production on hydrocarbon using the T2K off-axis near detector ND280. Phys. Rev. D. 2020. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.101.012007. arXiv:1909.03936

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.101.012007 2020

  44. [50]

    Measurement of the quasi-elastic axial vector mass in neutrino-oxygen interactions

    Gran, R. and others. Measurement of the quasi-elastic axial vector mass in neutrino-oxygen interactions. Phys. Rev. D. 2006. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.74.052002. arXiv:hep-ex/0603034

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.74.052002 2006

  45. [51]

    Measurement of the axial vector mass in neutrino-carbon interactions at K2K

    Espinal, X and Sanchez, F. Measurement of the axial vector mass in neutrino-carbon interactions at K2K. AIP Conf. Proc. 2007

    2007

  46. [54]

    GENIE implementation of IFIC Valencia model for QE-like 2p2h neutrino-nucleus cross section

    Schwehr, Jackie and Cherdack, Dan and Gran, Rik. GENIE implementation of IFIC Valencia model for QE-like 2p2h neutrino-nucleus cross section. 2016. arXiv:1601.02038

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  47. [55]

    Neutrino-nucleus quasi-elastic and 2p2h interactions up to 10 GeV

    Gran, R. and Nieves, J. and Sanchez, F. and Vicente Vacas, M.J. Neutrino-nucleus quasi-elastic and 2p2h interactions up to 10 GeV. Phys. Rev. D. 2013. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.88.113007. arXiv:1307.8105

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.88.113007 2013

  48. [56]

    Inclusive Charged--Current Neutrino--Nucleus Reactions

    Nieves, J. and Ruiz Simo, I. and Vicente Vacas, M.J. Inclusive Charged--Current Neutrino--Nucleus Reactions. Phys. Rev. C. 2011. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.83.045501. arXiv:1102.2777

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevc.83.045501 2011

  49. [57]

    The nucleon axial mass and the MiniBooNE Quasielastic Neutrino-Nucleus Scattering problem

    Nieves, J. and Ruiz Simo, I. and Vicente Vacas, M.J. The nucleon axial mass and the MiniBooNE Quasielastic Neutrino-Nucleus Scattering problem. Phys. Lett. B. 2012. doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2011.11.061. arXiv:1106.5374

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2011.11.061 2012

  50. [58]

    Seagull and pion-in-flight currents in neutrino-induced $1N$ and $2N$ knockout

    Van Cuyck, T. and Jachowicz, N. and González-Jiménez, R. and Ryckebusch, J. and Van Dessel, N. Seagull and pion-in-flight currents in neutrino-induced 1N and 2N knockout. Phys. Rev. C. 2017. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.95.054611. arXiv:1702.06402

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevc.95.054611 2017

  51. [59]

    Extensions of Superscaling from Relativistic Mean Field Theory: the SuSAv2 Model

    Gonzaléz-Jiménez, R. and Megias, G. D. and Barbaro, M. B. and Caballero, J. A. and Donnelly, T. W. Extensions of Superscaling from Relativistic Mean Field Theory: the SuSAv2 Model. Phys. Rev. C. 2014. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.90.035501. arXiv:1407.8346

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevc.90.035501 2014

  52. [60]

    Amaro, Jose Enrique and Barbaro, M. B. and Caballero, J. A. and Donnelly, T. W. and Molinari, A. and Sick, I. Using electron scattering superscaling to predict charge-changing neutrino cross sections in nuclei. Phys. Rev. C. 2005. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.71.015501. arXiv:nucl-th/0409078

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevc.71.015501 2005

  53. [61]

    Inclusive Quasi-Elastic Charged-Current Neutrino-Nucleus Reactions

    Nieves, J. and Amaro, Jose Enrique and Valverde, M. Inclusive quasi-elastic neutrino reactions. Phys. Rev. C. 2004. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.70.055503, 10.1103/PhysRevC.72.019902. arXiv:nucl-th/0408005

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevc.70.055503 2004

  54. [62]

    A unified approach for nucleon knock-out, coherent and incoherent pion production in neutrino interactions with nuclei

    Martini, M. and Ericson, M. and Chanfray, G. and Marteau, J. A Unified approach for nucleon knock-out, coherent and incoherent pion production in neutrino interactions with nuclei. Phys. Rev. C. 2009. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.80.065501. arXiv:0910.2622

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevc.80.065501 2009

  55. [63]

    In medium dispersion relation effects in nuclear inclusive reactions at intermediate and low energies

    Nieves, Juan and Sobczyk, Joanna Ewa. In medium dispersion relation effects in nuclear inclusive reactions at intermediate and low energies. 2017. arXiv:1701.03628

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  56. [64]

    Theoretical uncertainties on quasielastic charged-current neutrino-nucleus cross sections

    Valverde, M. and Amaro, Jose Enrique and Nieves, J. Theoretical uncertainties on quasielastic charged-current neutrino-nucleus cross sections. Phys. Lett. B. 2006. doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2006.05.053. arXiv:hep-ph/0604042

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2006.05.053 2006

  57. [65]

    Model Uncertainties for Valencia RPA Effect for MINERvA

    Gran, Richard. Model Uncertainties for Valencia RPA Effect for MINERvA. 2017. arXiv:1705.02932

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  58. [66]

    Neutrino-Induced Reactions on Nuclei

    Gallmeister, K. and Mosel, U. and Weil, J. Neutrino-Induced Reactions on Nuclei. Phys. Rev. C. 2016. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.94.035502. arXiv:1605.09391

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevc.94.035502 2016

  59. [67]

    and Sobczyk, J.T

    Golan, T. and Sobczyk, J.T. and Zmuda, J. NuWro: the Wroclaw Monte Carlo Generator of Neutrino Interactions. Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 2012. doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysbps.2012.09.136

    work page doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysbps.2012.09.136 2012

  60. [68]

    Final State Interactions Effects in Neutrino-Nucleus Interactions

    Golan, Tomasz and Juszczak, Cezary and Sobczyk, Jan T. Final State Interactions Effects in Neutrino-Nucleus Interactions. Phys. Rev. C. 2012. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.86.015505. arXiv:1202.4197

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevc.86.015505 2012

  61. [70]

    Multinucleon ejection model for Meson Exchange Current neutrino interactions

    Sobczyk, Jan T. Multinucleon ejection model for Meson Exchange Current neutrino interactions. Phys. Rev. C. 2012. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.86.015504. arXiv:1201.3673

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevc.86.015504 2012

  62. [71]

    Modeling nuclear effects in neutrino interactions in 1-GeV region

    Sobczyk, Jan T. Modeling nuclear effects in neutrino interactions in 1-GeV region. 2003. arXiv:nucl-th/0307047

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  63. [72]

    Neutrino Energy Reconstruction and the Shape of the CCQE-like Total Cross Section

    Nieves, J. and Sanchez, F. and Ruiz Simo, I. and Vicente Vacas, M.J. Neutrino Energy Reconstruction and the Shape of the CCQE-like Total Cross Section. Phys. Rev. D. 2012. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.85.113008. arXiv:1204.5404

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.85.113008 2012

  64. [73]

    Electron-neutrino scattering off nuclei from two different theoretical perspectives

    Martini, M. and Jachowicz, N. and Ericson, M. and Pandey, V. and Van Cuyck, T. and Van Dessel, N. Electron-neutrino scattering off nuclei from two different theoretical perspectives. Phys. Rev. C. 2016. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.94.015501. arXiv:1602.00230

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevc.94.015501 2016

  65. [74]

    Energy reconstruction effects in neutrino oscillation experiments and implications for the analysis

    Martini, M. and Ericson, M. and Chanfray, G. Energy reconstruction effects in neutrino oscillation experiments and implications for the analysis. Phys. Rev. D. 2013. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.87.013009. arXiv:1211.1523

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.87.013009 2013

  66. [75]

    and Gran, R

    Nieves, J. and Gran, R. and Simo, I. Ruiz and Sanchez, F and Vacas, M. J. Vicente. Neutrino-nucleus CCQE-like scattering. proceedings of the International Conference on High Energy Physics 2014 (ICHEP 2014) Valencia, Spain, July 2-9, 2014. 2014. arXiv:1411.7821

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  67. [76]

    Single pion production in neutrino-nucleon Interactions

    Kabirnezhad, Monireh. Single pion production in neutrino-nucleon Interactions. Phys. Rev. D. 2018. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.97.013002. arXiv:1711.02403

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.97.013002 2018

  68. [77]

    Energy reconstruction in the Long-Baseline Neutrino Experiment

    Mosel, Ulrich and Lalakulich, Olga and Gallmeister, Kai. Energy reconstruction in the Long-Baseline Neutrino Experiment. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2014. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.151802. arXiv:1311.7288

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.112.151802 2014

  69. [78]

    Meson Exchange Current (MEC) Models in Neutrino Interaction Generators

    Katori, Teppei. Meson Exchange Current (MEC) Models in Neutrino Interaction Generators, proceedings of NuInt12 Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. AIP Conf.Proc. 2015. doi:10.1063/1.4919465. arXiv:1304.6014

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1063/1.4919465 2015

  70. [79]

    Lightbody, J. W. and O'Connell, J. S. Modeling single arm electron scattering and nucleon production from nuclei by GeV electrons. Computers in Physics. 1988

    1988

  71. [80]

    The 2p-2h electromagnetic response in the quasielastic peak and beyond

    De Pace, A. and Nardi, M. and Alberico, W. M. and Donnelly, T. W. and Molinari, A. The 2p - 2h electromagnetic response in the quasielastic peak and beyond. Nucl. Phys. A. 2003. doi:10.1016/S0375-9474(03)01625-7. arXiv:nucl-th/0304084

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/s0375-9474(03)01625-7 2003

  72. [81]

    Relativistic effects in two-particle emission for electron and neutrino reactions

    Ruiz Simo, I. and Albertus, C. and Amaro, J. E. and Barbaro, M. B. and Caballero, J. A. and Donnelly, T. W. Relativistic effects in two-particle emission for electron and neutrino reactions. Phys. Rev. D. 2014. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.90.033012. arXiv:1405.4280

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.90.033012 2014

  73. [82]

    Angular distribution in two-particle emission induced by neutrinos and electrons

    Simo, I. Ruiz and Albertus, C. and Amaro, J. E. and Barbaro, M. B. and Caballero, J. A. and Donnelly, T. W. Angular distribution in two-particle emission induced by neutrinos and electrons. Phys. Rev. D. 2014. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.90.053010. arXiv:1407.7122

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.90.053010 2014

  74. [83]

    Effects of the Nuclear Correlations on the Neutrino-Oxygen Interactions

    Marteau, J. Effects of the nuclear correlations on the neutrino oxygen interactions. Eur. Phys. J. A. 1999. doi:10.1007/s100500050274. arXiv:hep-ph/9902210

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/s100500050274 1999

  75. [84]

    Neutrino Quasielastic Scattering on Nuclear Targets: Parametrizing Transverse Enhancement (Meson Exchange Currents)

    Bodek, A. and Budd, H. S. and Christy, M. E. Neutrino Quasielastic Scattering on Nuclear Targets: Parametrizing Transverse Enhancement (Meson Exchange Currents). Eur. Phys. J. C. 2011. doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1726-y. arXiv:1106.0340

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1726-y 2011

  76. [85]

    Coherent pi0 Production in Neutrino Reactions

    Rein, Dieter and Sehgal, Lalit M. Coherent pi0 Production in Neutrino Reactions. Nucl. Phys. B. 1983. doi:10.1016/0550-3213(83)90090-1

    work page doi:10.1016/0550-3213(83)90090-1 1983

  77. [86]

    PCAC and the Deficit of Forward Muons in pi^+ Production by Neutrinos

    Rein, D. and Sehgal, L.M. PCAC and the Deficit of Forward Muons in pi+ Production by Neutrinos. Phys. Lett. B. 2007. doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2007.10.025. arXiv:hep-ph/0606185

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2007.10.025 2007

  78. [87]

    Coherent Pion Production

    Paschos, E.A. and Schalla, Dario. Coherent Pion Production by Neutrinos. Phys. Rev. D. 2009. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.80.033005. arXiv:0903.0451

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.80.033005 2009

  79. [88]

    PCAC and coherent pion production by low energy neutrinos

    Berger, Ch. and Sehgal, L.M. PCAC and coherent pion production by low energy neutrinos. Phys. Rev. D. 2009. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.79.053003. arXiv:0812.2653

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.79.053003 2009

  80. [89]

    and Kopeliovich, B.Z

    Belkov, A.A. and Kopeliovich, B.Z. Adler Relation and Neutrino Production of Single Hadrons. Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 1987

    1987

Showing first 80 references.