Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 minor 96 references

First joint carbon-oxygen double-differential KI cross sections show neutrino-nucleus models fail to describe T2K data.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

T0 review · grok-4.5

2026-07-14 10:14 UTC pith:UWBRHQRW

load-bearing objection First joint C/O double-differential KI cross sections from T2K; solid extraction, useful model discrimination, statistics-limited but ready for generator work.

arxiv 2607.10644 v1 pith:UWBRHQRW submitted 2026-07-12 hep-ex

Signal selection and model-independent extraction of pionless charged-current muon neutrino cross section using double-differential kinematic imbalance observables on carbon and oxygen with the T2K experiment

K. Abe , S. Abe , H. Adhikary , R. Akutsu , H. Alarakia-Charles , Y.I. Alj Hakim , S. Alonso Monsalve , L. Anthony
show 397 more authors
S. Aoki K.A. Apte T. Arai T. Arihara S. Arimoto Y. Asami Y. Asaoka Y. Ashida E.T. Atkin N. Babu V. Baranov G.J. Barker G. Barr D. Barrow P. Bates L. Bathe-Peters M. Batkiewicz-Kwasniak N. Baudis V. Berardi L. Berns S. Bhattacharjee A. Blanchet A. Blondel L. B{\o}e P.M.M. Boistier S. Bolognesi S. Bordoni S.B. Boyd C. Bronner A. Bubak M. Buizza Avanzini J.A. Caballero N.F. Calabria D. Calvet S. Cao D. Carabadjac S.L. Cartwright M.P. Casado M.G. Catanesi J. Chakrani A. Chalumeau D. Cherdack A. Chvirova J. Coleman G. Collazuol F. Cormier A.A.L. Craplet A. Cudd D. D'Ago C. Dalmazzone T. Daret C. Davis Yu.I. Davydov P. de Perio G. De Rosa T. Dealtry C. Densham A. Dergacheva R. Dharmapal Banerjee F. Di Lodovico G. Diaz Lopez S. Dolan T.A. Doyle O. Drapier K.E. Duffy J. Dumarchez P. Dunne K. Dygnarowicz M. El Baz J. Elias S. Emery-Schrenk G. Erofeev A. Ershova G. Eurin M. Fani D. Fedorova S. Fedotov M. Feltre L. Feng D. Ferlewicz A.J. Finch M.D. Fitton C. Forza M. Friend Y. Fujii Y. Fukuda N. Funayama A.N. Gaci\~no Olmedo J. Garc\'ia-Marcos A.C. Germer L. Giannessi C. Giganti M. Girgus V. Glagolev M. Gonin R. Gonzalez Jimenez J. Gonz\'alez Rosa K. Gorshanov P. Govindaraj M. Grassi M. Guigue F.Y. Guo D.R. Hadley S. Han D.A. Harris R.J. Harris M. Hartz T. Hasegawa C.M. Hasnip S. Hassani N.C. Hastings K. Hayashi Y. Hayato I. Heitkamp D. Henaff Y. Hino K. Hiraide J. Holeczek A. Holin N.T. Hong Van T. Honjo M.C.F. Hooft R. Huang J. Hu A.K. Ichikawa K. Ieki M. Ikeda T.H. Ishida T. Ishida M. Ishitsuka H. Ito S. Ito A. Izmaylov N. Jachowicz B. Jargowsky S.J. Jenkins C. Jes\'us-Valls J.Y. Ji T.P. Jones P. Jonsson C.K. Jung M. Kabirnezhad A.C. Kaboth K. Kadota H. Kakuno A. Kamata J. Kameda S. Karpova V.S. Kasturi Y. Kataoka T. Katori R. Kawabe M. Kawaue E. Kearns M. Khabibullin N.V. Khomutov A. Khotjantsev T. Kikawa S. King V. Kiseeva J. Kisiel A. Klustov\'a L. Kneale H. Kobayashi S.R. Kobayashi T. Kobayashi L. Koch S. Kodama M. Kolupanova L.L. Kormos Y. Koshio K. Kowalik R. Kralik Y. Kudenko A. Kumar Jha R. Kurjata V. Kurochka T. Kutter L. Labarga M. Lachat K. Lachner J. Lagoda S.M. Lakshmi M. Lamers James A. Langella D.H. Langridge J.-F. Laporte D. Last N. Latham M. Laveder L. Lavitola M. Lawe A. Leclerc N. Lemaire D. Leon Silverio T. Leplumey S. Levorato S.V. Lewis B. Li C. Lin R.P. Litchfield W. Li A. Longhin L. Ludovici X. Lu T. Lux L.N. Machado L. Magaletti K. Mahn K.K. Mahtani S. Manly D.G.R. Martin D.A. Martinez Caicedo L. Martinez M. Martini N. Mashin T. Matsubara R. Matsumoto C. Mauger K. Mavrokoridis N. McCauley K.S. McFarland C. McGrew J. McKean A. Mefodiev G.D. Megias L. Mellet C. Metelko M. Mezzetto S. Miki V. Mikola E.W. Miller A. Minamino O. Mineev S. Mine J. Mirabito M. Miura S. Moriyama P. Morrison Th.A. Mueller D. Munford A. Mu\~noz L. Munteanu Y. Nagai T. Nakadaira K. Nakagiri M. Nakahata Y. Nakajima K.D. Nakamura A. Nakano Y. Nakano S. Nakayama T. Nakaya K. Nakayoshi C.E.R. Naseby D.T. Nguyen V.Q. Nguyen K. Niewczas S. Nishimori Y. Nishimura Y. Noguchi T. Nosek F. Nova J.C. Nugent H.M. O'Keeffe L. O'Sullivan W. Okinaga K. Okumura T. Okusawa N. Onda N. Ospina L. Osu N. Otani Y. Oyama V. Paolone J. Pasternak D. Payne T.P.D. Peacock M. Pfaff L. Pickering J.-B. Plan\c{c}on P. Podlaski B. Popov A.J. Portocarrero Yrey M. Posiadala-Zezula Y.S. Prabhu H. Prasad F. Pupilli B. Quilain P.T. Quyen E. Radicioni M.A. Ramirez Delgado R. Ramsden P.N. Ratoff M. Reh G. Reina L. Restrepo C. Riccio D.W. Riley E. Rondio D. Ross S. Roth N. Roy A. Rubbia L. Russo A. Rychter W. Saenz K. Sakashita S. Samani F. S\'anchez E.M. Sandford Y. Sato T. Schefke K. Scholberg M. Scott Y. Seiya T. Sekiguchi H. Sekiya M. Sekiyama T. Sekiya D. Seppala D. Sgalaberna A. Shaikhiev M. Shiozawa Y. Shiraishi N. Shvarev A. Shvartsman V. Siccardi N. Skrobova K. Skwarczynski D. Smyczek M. Smy J.T. Sobczyk H. Sobel F.J.P. Soler A.J. Speers R. Spina A. Srivastava P. Stowell Y. Stroke I.A. Suslov A. Suzuki M. Suzuki S.Y. Suzuki M. Tada A. Takeda Y. Takeuchi K. Takeya H.K. Tanaka H. Tanigawa A. Teklu V.V. Tereshchenko N. Thamm C. Touramanis N. Tran T. Tsukamoto M. Tzanov M. Vagins M. Varghese I. Vasilyev G. Vasseur E. Villa U. Virginet T. Vladisavljevic T. Wachala H.T. Wallace J.G. Walsh D. Wark M.O. Wascko A. Weber R. Wendell M.J. Wilking C. Wilkinson C. Winterstein C. Wret J. Xia Z. Xie K. Yamamoto T. Yamamoto T. Yamazumi C. Yanagisawa Y. Yang T. Yano N. Yershov U. Yevarouskaya M. Yokoyama Y. Yoshimoto N. Yoshimura A. Zalewska J. Zalipska G. Zarnecki J. Zhang X.Y. Zhao H. Zheng H. Zhong M. Ziembicki M. Zito
This is my paper
classification hep-ex
keywords neutrino-nucleus cross sectionkinematic imbalanceCC0πNpT2K ND280carbon oxygen targetsdouble-differential measurementnuclear effectsfinal-state interactions
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

This paper reports the first joint measurement of muon-neutrino charged-current interactions that leave no pions and at least one proton on both carbon and oxygen, expressed as double-differential cross sections in two kinematic-imbalance spaces. Those spaces are built from the transverse momentum imbalance between the muon and the leading proton and from the inferred initial nucleon momentum versus muon angle. The measurement is performed with the T2K near detector and extracts the signal with a free-template fit that is validated to be largely independent of the interaction model used as a prior. The extracted cross sections disagree with every current generator model in at least part of the phase space, while the same observables cleanly separate regions dominated by initial-state nucleon motion from regions dominated by final-state interactions and multi-nucleon currents. Because carbon and oxygen are the principal targets in long-baseline oscillation experiments, the result supplies a direct, model-independent constraint that must be satisfied by any improved nuclear model if oscillation-parameter precision is to improve.

Core claim

Current neutrino-nucleus interaction generators do not adequately describe the measured double-differential CC0πNp cross sections on carbon and oxygen in the δpT–δαT and pN–cosθμ spaces; the same kinematic-imbalance observables possess strong discriminating power among the nuclear-effect contributions that currently limit oscillation analyses.

What carries the argument

Double-differential kinematic-imbalance (KI) observables — specifically δpT–δαT and pN–cosθμ reconstructed from the muon and leading proton — which map distinct nuclear processes onto distinct regions of phase space and thereby allow a free-template, model-independent extraction of the joint carbon-oxygen signal.

Load-bearing premise

The background model constrained by control samples is flexible enough that residual tension with data (post-fit p-value ~0.008 in one space) does not bias the extracted signal cross section.

What would settle it

A future high-statistics measurement in the same KI spaces that finds a generator model simultaneously describing both the δpT peak at low δαT and the high-pN tail at large muon scattering angle within the reported uncertainties.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Generator builders must revise nuclear ground-state, multi-nucleon and final-state-interaction modelling until both carbon and oxygen KI distributions are reproduced simultaneously.
  • Oscillation analyses that rely on the same interaction models inherit a residual bias that can only be reduced by incorporating these double-differential constraints.
  • The upgraded ND280 Super-FGD, with larger active mass and better low-momentum proton acceptance, will convert the present statistics-limited result into a precision test of nuclear models.
  • Regions of intermediate δpT and pN remain under-predicted, pointing to a need for stronger multi-nucleon or continuum-random-phase-approximation contributions.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Because oxygen is the far-detector target, a model that fails oxygen KI data while fitting carbon will still bias Hyper-Kamiokande and DUNE oscillation parameters.
  • The same free-template method can be reapplied to antineutrino and electron-neutrino beams once statistics allow, testing lepton-flavor universality of nuclear effects.
  • Discrepancies that persist after reweighting final-state-interaction strength suggest that the problem is not merely cascade tuning but the treatment of two-body currents already at the primary vertex.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

0 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper reports the first joint measurement of νμ CC0πNp cross sections on carbon and oxygen with the T2K ND280 detector, presented as double-differential distributions in the kinematic-imbalance spaces δpT–δαT and pN–cosθμ. Signal selection, control samples for the dominant CC1π+ background, phase-space constraints, a full systematic covariance (detector, flux, interaction modeling, target nucleons), and a free-signal-template unfolding with GUNDAM are documented in detail. Coverage tests and extensive physics pseudo-data fits (SF→LFG/CRPA, FSI strength, GENIE reweight, etc.) support model independence of the extracted cross sections. The data are then compared with a suite of NEUT and GENIE nuclear models; several configurations are disfavored while others (NEUT SF/ED-RMF, GENIE SuSAv2+hN) describe the joint C/O data better, illustrating the discriminating power of the KI observables.

Significance. If the result holds, the measurement supplies a high-value, joint C/O double-differential data set in observables that isolate initial-state motion, multi-nucleon correlations and FSI. The free-signal-template extraction, control-sample constraints, and exhaustive pseudo-data validation (Table V, all p ≈ 1) constitute a transparent and largely model-independent procedure. The explicit demonstration that current generators fail in intermediate δpT/pN regions while still discriminating among nuclear-effect models is directly relevant to T2K, Hyper-Kamiokande and DUNE oscillation systematics. The accompanying data release further strengthens the paper’s utility for generator development.

minor comments (4)
  1. Sec. VI.A and Appendix A: the low post-fit p-value (~0.008) in the δpT–δαT fit is thoroughly investigated and shown not to bias the signal; a short cross-reference in the main text to the quantitative bound (maximum bin-wise shift < 60 % of the uncertainty) would help readers who stop at Sec. VI.
  2. Figs. 11–19: the vertical scale of the oxygen panels is sometimes compressed relative to carbon; a common scale or an explicit note would ease visual comparison of the two targets.
  3. Table I and Sec. IV.B: the residual non-C/O and OOFV fractions are small but non-zero; a one-sentence statement of how they are treated in the unfolding (subtracted via MC or absorbed into the free templates) would remove any residual ambiguity.
  4. Eq. (4) and the definition of ⟨ϵ⟩p: the numerical values 26.1 MeV (C) and 23.0 MeV (O) are taken from Ref. [29]; a brief remark that the uncertainty on these mean excitation energies is negligible compared with the reported cross-section uncertainties would be useful.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: free-signal-template extraction validated against alternate generators and nuclear models; model comparisons are external.

full rationale

This is a standard experimental cross-section measurement. Signal templates ti are left unconstrained (Eq. 10) and fitted to data in reconstructed space; the unfolded cross section (Eq. 12) is then formed from the reweighted true-signal component after background subtraction. Efficiencies and backgrounds carry residual MC dependence, but this is quantified via extensive physics pseudo-data tests (Table V: all p-values ≈1 when reweighting to LFG, CRPA, GENIE, altered FSI/SPP, etc.) and by the Appendix A study that frees background templates (raising the δpT–δαT p-value from ~0.008 to ~0.09) without shifting the extracted signal beyond a fraction of the reported uncertainty. Model comparisons in Sec. VII are against independent generator configurations (NEUT SF/ED-RMF/LFG, GENIE SuSAv2/CRPA/hA/hN/Bertini) that were not fitted to these data. No self-definitional loop, no fitted parameter renamed as a prediction of the same data, and no load-bearing uniqueness theorem imported from overlapping authors. The measurement is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 3 axioms · 0 invented entities

Experimental measurement paper. Free parameters are the unconstrained signal template normalizations and the constrained nuisance parameters for detector, flux and interaction systematics. Domain assumptions are standard: GEANT4 detector response, NEUT/GENIE interaction models used only for efficiency and background templates, and the kinematic definitions of the KI observables. No new physical entities are postulated.

free parameters (3)
  • signal template normalizations ti (per true bin, carbon and oxygen)
    Left completely free in the likelihood; they absorb the measured cross section and are the primary free parameters of the extraction.
  • detector, flux and interaction systematic nuisance parameters
    Constrained by prior covariances but allowed to float; post-fit values and correlations are used for the final uncertainty.
  • target nucleon numbers nC, nO
    Taken from measured FGD material densities with quoted uncertainties; sampled in the toy ensemble.
axioms (3)
  • domain assumption Neutrino direction can be approximated by the ND280 z-axis (max deviation <2° treated as detector systematic).
    Sec. III; required to define the transverse plane for δpT and δαT.
  • domain assumption NEUT v5.6.4.1 (and alternate generators) provide adequate efficiency and background shape templates once free signal parameters and constrained systematics are applied.
    Sec. V; validated by physics pseudo-data but remains an assumption of the unfolding.
  • standard math Standard Poisson + Barlow-Beeston likelihood and multivariate-Gaussian systematic penalty.
    Sec. V.A.1; conventional statistical framework.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-grok45 · 58176 in / 2402 out tokens · 41772 ms · 2026-07-14T10:14:59.120809+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We present the first joint measurement of muon neutrino CC$0\pi Np$ interactions on carbon and oxygen targets, in two double-differential kinematic imbalance (KI) observable spaces, $\delta p_{T}$-$\delta \alpha_{T}$ and $p_{N}$-$\cos\theta_{\mu}$. The measurement employs the ND280 detector of the T2K experiment and includes a detailed description of the event selection used to define signal and control regions, the evaluation of systematic uncertainties, and the signal extraction procedure, together with validation studies supporting a robust cross-section measurement. The results of this analysis indicate that current neutrino-nucleus interaction models do not adequately describe the data, and demonstrate the strong discriminating power of KI observables. This measurement highlights the need for improved theoretical nuclear modeling within neutrino interaction generators to achieve increased precision in neutrino oscillation measurements.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.10644 by A.A.L. Craplet, A. Blanchet, A. Blondel, A. Bubak, A.C. Germer, A. Chalumeau, A. Chvirova, A.C. Kaboth, A. Cudd, A. Dergacheva, A. Ershova, A. Holin, A. Izmaylov, A.J. Finch, A.J. Portocarrero Yrey, A.J. Speers, A. Kamata, A. Khotjantsev, A.K. Ichikawa, A. Klustov\'a, A. Kumar Jha, A. Langella, A. Leclerc, A. Longhin, A. Mefodiev, A. Minamino, A. Mu\~noz, A. Nakano, A.N. Gaci\~no Olmedo, A. Rubbia, A. Rychter, A. Shaikhiev, A. Shvartsman, A. Srivastava, A. Suzuki, A. Takeda, A. Teklu, A. Weber, A. Zalewska, B. Jargowsky, B. Li, B. Popov, B. Quilain, C. Bronner, C. Dalmazzone, C. Davis, C. Densham, C.E.R. Naseby, C. Forza, C. Giganti, C. Jes\'us-Valls, C.K. Jung, C. Lin, C. Mauger, C. McGrew, C. Metelko, C.M. Hasnip, C. Riccio, C. Touramanis, C. Wilkinson, C. Winterstein, C. Wret, C. Yanagisawa, D.A. Harris, D.A. Martinez Caicedo, D. Barrow, D. Calvet, D. Carabadjac, D. Cherdack, D. D'Ago, D. Fedorova, D. Ferlewicz, D.G.R. Martin, D. Henaff, D.H. Langridge, D. Last, D. Leon Silverio, D. Munford, D. Payne, D.R. Hadley, D. Ross, D. Seppala, D. Sgalaberna, D. Smyczek, D.T. Nguyen, D. Wark, D.W. Riley, E. Kearns, E.M. Sandford, E. Radicioni, E. Rondio, E.T. Atkin, E. Villa, E.W. Miller, F. Cormier, F. Di Lodovico, F.J.P. Soler, F. Nova, F. Pupilli, F. S\'anchez, F.Y. Guo, G. Barr, G. Collazuol, G. De Rosa, G. Diaz Lopez, G.D. Megias, G. Erofeev, G. Eurin, G.J. Barker, G. Reina, G. Vasseur, G. Zarnecki, H. Adhikary, H. Alarakia-Charles, H. Ito, H. Kakuno, H. Kobayashi, H.K. Tanaka, H.M. O'Keeffe, H. Prasad, H. Sekiya, H. Sobel, H. Tanigawa, H.T. Wallace, H. Zheng, H. Zhong, I.A. Suslov, I. Heitkamp, I. Vasilyev, J.A. Caballero, J.-B. Plan\c{c}on, J. Chakrani, J.C. Nugent, J. Coleman, J. Dumarchez, J. Elias, J.-F. Laporte, J. Garc\'ia-Marcos, J. Gonz\'alez Rosa, J.G. Walsh, J. Holeczek, J. Hu, J. Kameda, J. Kisiel, J. Lagoda, J. McKean, J. Mirabito, J. Pasternak, J.T. Sobczyk, J. Xia, J.Y. Ji, J. Zalipska, J. Zhang, K.A. Apte, K. Abe, K.D. Nakamura, K. Dygnarowicz, K.E. Duffy, K. Gorshanov, K. Hayashi, K. Hiraide, K. Ieki, K. Kadota, K.K. Mahtani, K. Kowalik, K. Lachner, K. Mahn, K. Mavrokoridis, K. Nakagiri, K. Nakayoshi, K. Niewczas, K. Okumura, K. Sakashita, K. Scholberg, K. Skwarczynski, K.S. McFarland, K. Takeya, K. Yamamoto, L. Anthony, L. Bathe-Peters, L. Berns, L. B{\o}e, L. Feng, L. Giannessi, L. Kneale, L. Koch, L. Labarga, L. Lavitola, L.L. Kormos, L. Ludovici, L. Magaletti, L. Martinez, L. Mellet, L. Munteanu, L.N. Machado, L. Osu, L. O'Sullivan, L. Pickering, L. Restrepo, L. Russo, M.A. Ramirez Delgado, M. Batkiewicz-Kwasniak, M. Buizza Avanzini, M.C.F. Hooft, M.D. Fitton, M. El Baz, M. Fani, M. Feltre, M. Friend, M.G. Catanesi, M. Girgus, M. Gonin, M. Grassi, M. Guigue, M. Hartz, M. Ikeda, M. Ishitsuka, M.J. Wilking, M. Kabirnezhad, M. Kawaue, M. Khabibullin, M. Kolupanova, M. Lachat, M. Lamers James, M. Laveder, M. Lawe, M. Martini, M. Mezzetto, M. Miura, M. Nakahata, M.O. Wascko, M.P. Casado, M. Pfaff, M. Posiadala-Zezula, M. Reh, M. Scott, M. Sekiyama, M. Shiozawa, M. Smy, M. Suzuki, M. Tada, M. Tzanov, M. Vagins, M. Varghese, M. Yokoyama, M. Ziembicki, M. Zito, N. Babu, N. Baudis, N.C. Hastings, N.F. Calabria, N. Funayama, N. Jachowicz, N. Latham, N. Lemaire, N. Mashin, N. McCauley, N. Onda, N. Ospina, N. Otani, N. Roy, N. Shvarev, N. Skrobova, N. Thamm, N.T. Hong Van, N. Tran, N.V. Khomutov, N. Yershov, N. Yoshimura, O. Drapier, O. Mineev, P. Bates, P. de Perio, P. Dunne, P. Govindaraj, P. Jonsson, P.M.M. Boistier, P. Morrison, P.N. Ratoff, P. Podlaski, P. Stowell, P.T. Quyen, R. Akutsu, R. Dharmapal Banerjee, R. Gonzalez Jimenez, R. Huang, R.J. Harris, R. Kawabe, R. Kralik, R. Kurjata, R. Matsumoto, R.P. Litchfield, R. Ramsden, R. Spina, R. Wendell, S. Abe, S. Alonso Monsalve, S. Aoki, S. Arimoto, S.B. Boyd, S. Bhattacharjee, S. Bolognesi, S. Bordoni, S. Cao, S. Dolan, S. Emery-Schrenk, S. Fedotov, S. Han, S. Hassani, S. Ito, S.J. Jenkins, S. Karpova, S. King, S. Kodama, S.L. Cartwright, S. Levorato, S. Manly, S. Miki, S. Mine, S.M. Lakshmi, S. Moriyama, S. Nakayama, S. Nishimori, S.R. Kobayashi, S. Roth, S. Samani, S.V. Lewis, S.Y. Suzuki, T.A. Doyle, T. Arai, T. Arihara, T. Daret, T. Dealtry, Th.A. Mueller, T. Hasegawa, T.H. Ishida, T. Honjo, T. Ishida, T. Katori, T. Kikawa, T. Kobayashi, T. Kutter, T. Leplumey, T. Lux, T. Matsubara, T. Nakadaira, T. Nakaya, T. Nosek, T. Okusawa, T.P.D. Peacock, T.P. Jones, T. Schefke, T. Sekiguchi, T. Sekiya, T. Tsukamoto, T. Vladisavljevic, T. Wachala, T. Yamamoto, T. Yamazumi, T. Yano, U. Virginet, U. Yevarouskaya, V. Baranov, V. Berardi, V. Glagolev, V. Kiseeva, V. Kurochka, V. Mikola, V. Paolone, V.Q. Nguyen, V. Siccardi, V.S. Kasturi, V.V. Tereshchenko, W. Li, W. Okinaga, W. Saenz, X. Lu, X.Y. Zhao, Y. Asami, Y. Asaoka, Y. Ashida, Y. Fujii, Y. Fukuda, Y. Hayato, Y. Hino, Y.I. Alj Hakim, Y. Kataoka, Y. Koshio, Y. Kudenko, Y. Nagai, Y. Nakajima, Y. Nakano, Y. Nishimura, Y. Noguchi, Y. Oyama, Y. Sato, Y. Seiya, Y. Shiraishi, Y.S. Prabhu, Y. Stroke, Y. Takeuchi, Yu.I. Davydov, Y. Yang, Y. Yoshimoto, Z. Xie.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Simulated neutrino beam spectra at ND280 in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Sketch of the ND280 detector in an exploded view. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Schematic illustration of kinematic imbalance ob [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Sketch of the FGD2X/Y sample scheme. The green [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Sketches of the FGD1 (left) and FGD2 (right) fiducial [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Selected [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Selected control sample distributions as a function of four observables ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. Post-fit [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. Measurements of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12. Measurement uncertainties for the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: FIG. 13. Post-fit correlation matrices for the fit parameters [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: FIG. 14. Measurements of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_14.png] view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: FIG. 15. Measurement uncertainties for the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_15.png] view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: FIG. 16. Measurements of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_16.png] view at source ↗
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: FIG. 17. Measurements of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_17.png] view at source ↗
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: FIG. 18. Measurements of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_18.png] view at source ↗
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: FIG. 19. Measurements of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_19.png] view at source ↗

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

96 extracted references · 4 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    We measure the differential cross section in each true observable bin i

    Cross-section Definition and Calculation The cross section is extracted as: d2σT i (dXdY) i = N T i,sig Φν ·n T ·ϵ T i · 1 (∆X∆Y) i .(12) 15 In this definition, ( dXdY )i refers to the combinations of two analysis observables (dδpT dδαT or dpN dcosθ µ) and T indicates the target (carbon or oxygen). We measure the differential cross section in each true ob...

    2000

  2. [2]

    Detector Systematic Uncertainties Detector systematic uncertainties account for poten- tial mismodeling in the simulation of particle propagation within the ND280 detector and the electronics response of the sub-detectors. These also include uncertainties arising from the event reconstruction and selection procedures, stemming from: (1) the modeling of re...

  3. [3]

    Neutrino Flux Systematic Uncertainties The neutrino flux systematic uncertainties represent the uncertainties in the predicted neutrino flux reaching the ND280 detector. Several factors limit the precision of this prediction, including the modeling of hadronic 16 interactions within the graphite target and surrounding materials, the characterization of th...

  4. [4]

    The CCRES and CCDIS com- ponents enter the signal sample only in cases where the produced pion is absorbed in the nucleus

    Neutrino Interaction Modeling Systematic Uncertainties In this measurement, the signal is defined by a νµ CC0πN p final-state topology, which receives contribu- tions primarily from CCQE, multi-nucleon (predomi- nantly 2p2h), and CCRES interactions, with a smaller contribution from CCDIS. The CCRES and CCDIS com- ponents enter the signal sample only in ca...

  5. [5]

    The dominant contributions to these uncertainties originate from the measured densi- ties of the constituent materials in the FGD detectors [24]

    Target Nucleon Number Systematic Uncertainties The systematic uncertainties associated with the num- ber of target nucleons arise from the mass estimation of the target nuclei, specifically carbon and oxygen, within the FGD1 and FGD2 FVs. The dominant contributions to these uncertainties originate from the measured densi- ties of the constituent materials...

  6. [6]

    A fit is performed for each pseudo-data set to assess the stabil- ity and performance of the extraction

    Coverage Fits The coverage validation incorporates random statisti- cal and systematic fluctuations into the input MC tem- plate to generate an ensemble of pseudo-data sets. A fit is performed for each pseudo-data set to assess the stabil- ity and performance of the extraction. Specifically, the post-fit χ2 distribution is analyzed. Ideally, this should f...

  7. [7]

    GENIE CRPA

    Physics Pseudo-data Fits The objective of the physics pseudo-data fits is to validate the model independence of the cross-section ex- traction with respect to the neutrino-nucleus interaction models employed by the MC template. Pseudo-data sets are generated by reweighting the simulation to reproduce various interaction models, accounting for variations i...

    doi:10.13039/501100011033/ 2023

  8. [8]

    Abeet al.(T2K), Phys

    K. Abeet al.(T2K), Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 261801 (2025), arXiv:2506.05889 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 2025

  9. [9]

    Abubakaret al.(NOvA), Phys

    S. Abubakaret al.(NOvA), Phys. Rev. Lett.136, 011802 (2026), arXiv:2509.04361 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 2026

  10. [10]

    Abubakaret al.(T2K, NOvA), Nature646, 818 (2025), arXiv:2510.19888 [hep-ex]

    S. Abubakaret al.(T2K, NOvA), Nature646, 818 (2025), arXiv:2510.19888 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 2025

  11. [11]

    Coloma, P

    P. Coloma, P. Huber, C.-M. Jen, and C. Mariani, Phys. Rev. D89, 073015 (2014), arXiv:1311.4506 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  12. [12]

    Mosel, Ann

    U. Mosel, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.66, 171 (2016), arXiv:1602.00696 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  13. [13]

    Alvarez-Rusoet al.(NuSTEC), Prog

    L. Alvarez-Rusoet al.(NuSTEC), Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 100, 1 (2018), arXiv:1706.03621 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  14. [14]

    Abeet al.(T2K), Nucl

    K. Abeet al.(T2K), Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A659, 106 (2011), arXiv:1106.1238 [physics.ins-det]

    arXiv 2011

  15. [15]

    Abeet al.(T2K), Eur

    K. Abeet al.(T2K), Eur. Phys. J. C83, 782 (2023), arXiv:2303.03222 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 2023

  16. [16]

    D. S. Ayreset al.(NOvA) 10.2172/935497 (2007)

    doi:10.2172/935497 2007

  17. [17]

    M. A. Aceroet al.(NOvA), Phys. Rev. D106, 032004 (2022), arXiv:2108.08219 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  18. [18]

    Abeet al.(Hyper-Kamiokande), (2018), arXiv:1805.04163 [physics.ins-det]

    K. Abeet al.(Hyper-Kamiokande), (2018), arXiv:1805.04163 [physics.ins-det]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  19. [19]

    Acciarriet al.(DUNE), (2015), arXiv:1512.06148 [physics.ins-det]

    R. Acciarriet al.(DUNE), (2015), arXiv:1512.06148 [physics.ins-det]

    arXiv 2015

  20. [20]

    X. G. Lu, L. Pickering, S. Dolan, G. Barr, D. Coplowe, Y. Uchida, D. Wark, M. O. Wascko, A. Weber, and T. Yuan, Phys. Rev. C94, 015503 (2016), arXiv:1512.05748 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  21. [21]

    Lu and J

    X. Lu and J. T. Sobczyk, Phys. Rev. C99, 055504 (2019), arXiv:1901.06411 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  22. [22]

    Abeet al., Nucl

    K. Abeet al., Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A694, 211 (2012), arXiv:1111.3119 [physics.ins-det]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  23. [23]

    Yasutome, PoS369, 10.22323/1.369.0119 (2019)

    K. Yasutome, PoS369, 10.22323/1.369.0119 (2019)

    work page doi:10.22323/1.369.0119 2019

  24. [24]

    Fukudaet al.(Super-Kamiokande), Nucl

    Y. Fukudaet al.(Super-Kamiokande), Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A501, 418 (2003)

    2003

  25. [25]

    Suzuki (T2K), Nucl

    K. Suzuki (T2K), Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl.229-232, 453 (2012)

    2012

  26. [26]

    Beaviset al.(E899) 10.2172/52878 (1995)

    D. Beaviset al.(E899) 10.2172/52878 (1995)

    work page doi:10.2172/52878 1995

  27. [27]

    Abeet al.(T2K), Phys

    K. Abeet al.(T2K), Phys. Rev. D87, 012001 (2013), [Ad- dendum: Phys.Rev.D 87, 019902 (2013)], arXiv:1211.0469 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  28. [28]

    Aokiet al., Nucl

    S. Aokiet al., Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A698, 135 (2013), arXiv:1206.3553 [physics.ins-det]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  29. [29]

    Allanet al.(T2K UK), JINST8, P10019, arXiv:1308.3445 [physics.ins-det]

    D. Allanet al.(T2K UK), JINST8, P10019, arXiv:1308.3445 [physics.ins-det]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  30. [30]

    Assylbekovet al., Nucl

    S. Assylbekovet al., Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A686, 48 (2012), arXiv:1111.5030 [physics.ins-det]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  31. [31]

    P. A. Amaudruzet al.(T2K ND280 FGD), Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A696, 1 (2012), arXiv:1204.3666 [physics.ins-det]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  32. [32]

    Abgrallet al.(T2K ND280 TPC), Nucl

    N. Abgrallet al.(T2K ND280 TPC), Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A637, 25 (2011), arXiv:1012.0865 [physics.ins-det]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  33. [33]

    Abeet al.(T2K), (2019), arXiv:1901.03750 [physics.ins-det]

    K. Abeet al.(T2K), (2019), arXiv:1901.03750 [physics.ins-det]

    arXiv 2019

  34. [34]

    Abratenkoet al.(MicroBooNE), Phys

    P. Abratenkoet al.(MicroBooNE), Phys. Rev. D109, 092007 (2024), arXiv:2310.06082 [nucl-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  35. [35]

    A. P. Furmanski and J. T. Sobczyk, Phys. Rev. C95, 065501 (2017), arXiv:1609.03530 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  36. [36]

    Bodek and T

    A. Bodek and T. Cai, Eur. Phys. J. C79, 293 (2019), arXiv:1801.07975 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  37. [37]

    Ferrari, P

    A. Ferrari, P. R. Sala, A. Fasso, and J. Ranft 10.2172/877507 (2005)

    doi:10.2172/877507 2005

  38. [38]

    T. T. B¨ ohlen, F. Cerutti, M. P. W. Chin, A. Fass` o, A. Fer- rari, P. G. Ortega, A. Mairani, P. R. Sala, G. Smirnov, and V. Vlachoudis, Nucl. Data Sheets120, 211 (2014)

    2014

  39. [39]

    Abgrallet al.(NA61/SHINE), Eur

    N. Abgrallet al.(NA61/SHINE), Eur. Phys. J. C76, 617 (2016), arXiv:1603.06774 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  40. [40]

    Abgrallet al.(NA61/SHINE), Eur

    N. Abgrallet al.(NA61/SHINE), Eur. Phys. J. C79, 100 (2019), arXiv:1808.04927 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  41. [41]

    R. Brun, F. Bruyant, F. Carminati, S. Giani, M. Maire, A. McPherson, G. Patrick, and L. Urban 10.17181/CERN.MUHF.DMJ1 (1994)

    work page doi:10.17181/cern.muhf.dmj1 1994

  42. [42]

    Zeitnitz and T

    C. Zeitnitz and T. A. Gabriel, in3rd International Confer- ence on Calorimetry in High-energy Physics (Note: dates changed from Oct 6-9)(1992)

    1992

  43. [43]

    Hayato, Acta Phys

    Y. Hayato, Acta Phys. Polon. B40, 2477 (2009)

    2009

  44. [44]

    Hayato and L

    Y. Hayato and L. Pickering, Eur. Phys. J. ST230, 4469 (2021), arXiv:2106.15809 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  45. [45]

    Benhar, A

    O. Benhar, A. Fabrocini, S. Fantoni, and I. Sick, Nucl. Phys. A579, 493 (1994)

    1994

  46. [46]

    Chakraniet al., Phys

    J. Chakraniet al., Phys. Rev. D109, 072006 (2024), arXiv:2308.01838 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  47. [47]

    Nieves, I

    J. Nieves, I. Ruiz Simo, and M. J. Vicente Vacas, Phys. Rev. C83, 045501 (2011), arXiv:1102.2777 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  48. [48]

    R. Gran, J. Nieves, F. Sanchez, and M. J. Vicente Vacas, Phys. Rev. D88, 113007 (2013), arXiv:1307.8105 [hep- 32 ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  49. [49]

    Rein and L

    D. Rein and L. M. Sehgal, Annals Phys.133, 79 (1981)

    1981

  50. [50]

    K. M. Graczyk, J. ˙Zmuda, and J. T. Sobczyk, Phys. Rev. D90, 093001 (2014), arXiv:1407.5445 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  51. [51]

    K. M. Graczyk and J. T. Sobczyk, Phys. Rev. D77, 053001 (2008), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 79, 079903 (2009)], arXiv:0707.3561 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  52. [52]

    K. S. Kuzmin, V. V. Lyubushkin, and V. A. Naumov, Mod. Phys. Lett. A19, 2815 (2004), arXiv:hep-ph/0312107

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  53. [53]

    Berger and L

    C. Berger and L. M. Sehgal, Phys. Rev. D76, 113004 (2007), arXiv:0709.4378 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  54. [54]

    K. M. Graczyk and J. T. Sobczyk, Phys. Rev. D77, 053003 (2008), arXiv:0709.4634 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  55. [55]

    Sj¨ ostrand, Computer Physics Communications246, 106910 (2020)

    T. Sj¨ ostrand, Computer Physics Communications246, 106910 (2020)

    2020

  56. [56]

    Bodek and U.-k

    A. Bodek and U.-k. Yang, AIP Conf. Proc.792, 257 (2005), arXiv:hep-ph/0508007

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  57. [57]

    Serber, Phys

    R. Serber, Phys. Rev.72, 1114 (1947)

    1947

  58. [58]

    L. L. Salcedo, E. Oset, M. J. Vicente-Vacas, and C. Garcia- Recio, Nucl. Phys. A484, 557 (1988)

    1988

  59. [59]

    Agostinelliet al.(GEANT4), Nucl

    S. Agostinelliet al.(GEANT4), Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 506, 250 (2003)

    2003

  60. [60]

    Allisonet al., IEEE Trans

    J. Allisonet al., IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci.53, 270 (2006)

    2006

  61. [61]

    Allisonet al., Nucl

    J. Allisonet al., Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A835, 186 (2016)

    2016

  62. [62]

    Abeet al.(T2K), Phys

    K. Abeet al.(T2K), Phys. Rev. D101, 112004 (2020), arXiv:2004.05434 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  63. [63]

    Abeet al.(T2K), Phys

    K. Abeet al.(T2K), Phys. Rev. D101, 112001 (2020), arXiv:2002.09323 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  64. [64]

    Abratenkoet al.(MicroBooNE), Phys

    P. Abratenkoet al.(MicroBooNE), Phys. Rev. D108, 053002 (2023), arXiv:2301.03700 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  65. [65]

    Abratenkoet al.(MicroBooNE), Phys

    P. Abratenkoet al.(MicroBooNE), Phys. Rev. D112, 112004 (2025), arXiv:2403.19574 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  66. [66]

    Abeet al.(T2K), Phys

    K. Abeet al.(T2K), Phys. Rev. D98, 032003 (2018), arXiv:1802.05078 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  67. [67]

    Abeet al.(T2K), Phys

    K. Abeet al.(T2K), Phys. Rev. D112, 072008 (2025), arXiv:2503.06843 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 2025

  68. [68]

    Abeet al.(T2K), (2025), arXiv:2509.07814 [hep-ex]

    K. Abeet al.(T2K), (2025), arXiv:2509.07814 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 2025

  69. [69]

    Abeet al.(T2K), Phys

    K. Abeet al.(T2K), Phys. Rev. D108, 112009 (2023), arXiv:2303.14228 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 2023

  70. [70]

    GUNDAM organization, GUNDAM (2024)

    2024

  71. [71]

    Barlow and C

    R. Barlow and C. Beeston, Computer Physics Communi- cations77, 219 (1993)

    1993

  72. [72]

    J. S. Conway, inPHYSTAT 2011(2011) pp. 115–120, arXiv:1103.0354 [physics.data-an]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  73. [73]

    G. H. Golub and C. F. Van Loan,Matrix computations (JHU press, 2013)

    2013

  74. [74]

    Abgrallet al.(NA61/SHINE), Eur

    N. Abgrallet al.(NA61/SHINE), Eur. Phys. J. C76, 84 (2016), arXiv:1510.02703 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  75. [75]

    Bourguille, J

    B. Bourguille, J. Nieves, and F. S´ anchez, JHEP04, 004, arXiv:2012.12653 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  76. [76]

    Kolbe, K

    E. Kolbe, K. Langanke, and P. Vogel, Nucl. Phys. A652, 91 (1999), arXiv:nucl-th/9903022

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  77. [77]

    Jachowicz, K

    N. Jachowicz, K. Heyde, J. Ryckebusch, and S. Rombouts, Phys. Rev. C65, 025501 (2002)

    2002

  78. [78]

    Stowellet al.(The MINERvA Collaboration), Phys

    P. Stowellet al.(The MINERvA Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D100, 072005 (2019), arXiv:1903.01558 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  79. [79]

    Andreopouloset al., Nucl

    C. Andreopouloset al., Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A614, 87 (2010), arXiv:0905.2517 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  80. [80]

    Alvarez-Rusoet al.(GENIE), Eur

    L. Alvarez-Rusoet al.(GENIE), Eur. Phys. J. ST230, 4449 (2021), arXiv:2106.09381 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

Showing first 80 references.