Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 104 references

Opportunities and challenges to study solar neutrinos with a Q-Pix pixel readout

T0 review · 2 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper argues that a kiloton-scale underground liquid-argon detector with a Q-Pix pixel readout could study boron-8 and hep solar neutrinos above 5 MeV, but only if its two dominant unmeasured gamma backgrounds fall near the low end…

desk verdict A careful, honest feasibility study: the Q-Pix data-rate advantage is solid, and the solar-neutrino sensitivity claim is explicitly hostage to two under-measured backgrounds, so treat the >100 improvement as conditional. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.15459 v1 pith:LWO4YMGP submitted 2025-07-21 hep-ex astro-ph.IMastro-ph.SRhep-phphysics.ins-det

M. Á. García-Peris , G. Ruiz , S. Kubota , A. Navrer-Agasson , G. V. Stenico , E. Gramellini , R. Guenette , J. Asaadi
show 19 more authors
J.B.R. Battat V. A. Chirayath E. Church Z. Djurcic A. C. Ezeribe J. N. Gainer G. Gansle K. Keefe N. Lane C. Mauger Y. Mei F.M. Newcomer D.R. Nygren M. Rooks P. Sau O. Seidel S. Söldner-Rembold I. Tzoka R. Van Berg
This is my paper
classification hep-exastro-ph.IMastro-ph.SRhep-phphysics.ins-det
keywords solarneutrinosliquidargontimeprojectionchamberQ-Pixreadoutboron-8hepbackgroundmodelingpulse-shapediscriminationcontinuous
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper asks whether a kiloton-scale underground liquid-argon detector read out by Q-Pix pixels could see solar neutrinos, and it argues that the answer is conditionally yes. For events below 5 MeV, internal radioactivity swamps the signal so badly that the paper concludes solar neutrino detection there is effectively impossible. Above 5 MeV, the paper shows that combining a low-background detector design, 4 m of liquid argon as passive shielding, and a delayed-light coincidence tag improves sensitivity to boron-8 and hep neutrinos by more than a factor of 100 in reconstructed energy. The gain is conditional: it holds only if the unmeasured flux of cavern gamma rays above 5 MeV and the yield of alpha-capture gamma rays fall within the assumed order of magnitude. Independent of that condition, the paper establishes a separate practical claim: Q-Pix continuous readout stores the entire above-3-MeV data stream at about 1 TB per year, making offline solar-neutrino analysis feasible where triggered wire readouts would drown in data.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the Q-Pix pixel readout, in which each pixel integrates charge on a feedback capacitor until a Schmitt trigger fires, records an 8-bit timestamp, resets, and repeats; the current profile is reconstructed from the times between resets rather than from recorded waveforms. That scheme is what lets the detector run continuously with no trigger and store about 1 TB per year of all events above 3 MeV. The second mechanism is the delayed-flash coincidence: charged-current events produce an excited 40K* nucleus whose 1.64 MeV de-excitation gamma arrives roughly 336 ns later, and a light-detection system covering the anode can tag that flash and reject the dominant backgrounds. Clustering, fiducialization, directionality, and pulse-shape discrimination are supporting tools that the paper layers on top of this readout.

What would settle it

Measure the gamma-ray energy spectrum at a candidate underground site between 5 and 20 MeV and measure $\alpha$-capture gamma production on argon with a tagged $\alpha$ source; if the fraction of gammas above 5 MeV approaches the top of the observed $10^{-8}$ to $10^{-5}$ range, or if the $\alpha$-capture rate matches the simulation's apparent two-order-of-magnitude overestimate of existing data, the claimed factor-of-100 sensitivity gain in the boron-8 and hep window does not survive.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that solar neutrino physics in a liquid-argon TPC is not closed off by the Q-Pix readout's low thresholds; rather, the readout's continuous, self-triggered nature is what makes the study possible. The paper shows that below 5 MeV, beta and gamma backgrounds exceed the solar signal by many orders of magnitude in both a conventional detector and a low-background one, so that region is abandoned. In the low-background scenario with the outer 4 m of argon used as shielding, the two dominant residual backgrounds above 5 MeV are cavern gamma rays and gamma rays from alpha capture on argon; the paper's reconstruction-level tools, including clustering, electron directionality for elastic-scattering events, pulse-shape discrimination, and a delayed 40K* gamma flash following charged-current events, push the sensitivity to boron-8 and hep neutrinos up by more than a factor of 100 in the 5 to 15 MeV range. The paper states the result as conditional: if future measurements confirm the assumed magnitude of gamma rates and alpha-capture processes, offline tools significantly enhance solar-neutrino potential in a pixelated LArTPC with effective light detection.

Load-bearing premise

The positive sensitivity result rests on an unmeasured background assumption: the true flux of cavern gamma rays above 5 MeV and the true yield of alpha-capture gamma rays must sit near the low end of the plausible range for the 6 to 12 MeV signal window to survive.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Below 5 MeV, solar neutrinos are not detectable in a kiloton-scale LArTPC even with a low-background design, because radioactivity outnumbers signal by roughly eight to eleven orders of magnitude.
  • Above 5 MeV, in the low-background, 4 m-fiducialized configuration, the delayed-flash tag raises sensitivity by more than a factor of 100, enough for a large boron-8 sample and possibly a first look at hep neutrinos.
  • Pulse-shape discrimination can reject about 99% of alpha-capture gamma events while keeping 99% of electron events, provided the alpha ionization model is correct.
  • A Q-Pix detector can continuously store every event above 3 MeV at about 1 TB per year, a data volume that triggered wire- or CRP-based LArTPC readouts cannot match for solar analyses.
  • A definite statement about hep neutrinos requires new measurements of both cavern gamma emission above 5 MeV and alpha-capture cross sections on argon.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the high-end gamma tail is real, the paper's own background model implies the 6 to 12 MeV window closes; that makes in-situ cavern gamma spectroscopy the single highest-value measurement before building such a detector.
  • The delayed 40K* flash is an exclusive tag for charged-current events, so the same coincidence technique could help a future LArTPC isolate solar neutrinos from other physics backgrounds, or identify neutrino bursts, without requiring track reconstruction.
  • The data-rate argument suggests that a Q-Pix-style continuous readout could be valuable beyond solar physics, for any low-energy rare-event search where the background rate is too high to trigger on but the storage cost of full readout is acceptable.
  • The paper itself flags in its background section that the external gamma spectrum above 5 MeV is an arbitrary exponential extrapolation and that its alpha-capture simulation seems to overestimate existing measurements by about two orders of magnitude; those two caveats anchor the whole conditional result.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 6 minor

Summary. This paper presents a Geant4/GENIE/MARLEY-based simulation study of solar neutrino detection (8B and hep CC and ES) in a kiloton-scale liquid argon TPC instrumented with Q-Pix continuous pixel readout. Two detector scenarios are considered: a high-background atmospheric-argon module and a low-background underground-argon SLoMo-like design. The authors construct a conservative background model including argon radioactivity, radon decay chains with alpha-capture and (alpha,n) processes, external neutrons and gamma rays, and then evaluate clustering thresholds, 4 m liquid-argon fiducialization, directionality, pulse-shape discrimination, and a delayed-flash coincidence tag on the 40K* de-excitation. The main quantitative claim is that in the low-background scenario with 4 m of shielding and the delayed-flash tag, sensitivity to 8B CC and hep neutrinos is improved by more than a factor of 100 in reconstructed energy between about 5 and 15 MeV (Fig. 14). The authors explicitly caveat that this conclusion depends on the poorly constrained external gamma tail and alpha-capture rates, and identify these as critical measurements for future detectors. They also stress that Q-Pix continuous readout can store all above-3-MeV data at about 1 TB/year, avoiding wire-trigger data volumes.

Significance. If the central conditional claim holds, this is a useful feasibility study for future large LArTPCs (DUNE, SOLAIRE) and for the Q-Pix collaboration. Its strengths are the unusually explicit treatment of uncertainties: the arbitrary gamma-tail extrapolation, the Geant4 overestimate of alpha-capture rates, and the 60% zero-ionization fraction in alpha transport are all stated in the text, and the main positive result is explicitly conditional on future measurements. The paper also identifies specific measurements (cavern gamma flux above 5 MeV and alpha-capture cross sections) that are currently the bottleneck, which is a valuable community contribution. The robust, background-model-independent result is the data-rate comparison: about 1 TB/year above 3 MeV with Q-Pix versus roughly 10^5 PB/year for continuous wire readout. The significance of the sensitivity claims is moderate because the quantitative improvement factor is computed from a nominally extrapolated background model rather than from a bracketed range.

major comments (2)
  1. [V.B.2, Fig. 14] The quantitative headline of the paper, the >100 sensitivity improvement in Figure 14, is computed from the nominal external-gamma spectrum. That spectrum is obtained by an exponential extrapolation from about 11 MeV to 20 MeV described in Section V.B.2 as 'arbitrarily' chosen, while the fraction of gamma rays above 5 MeV measured in underground facilities spans 10^-8 to 10^-5. Since 4 m of liquid argon attenuates gammas exponentially and the delayed-flash tag removes only a fixed fraction of the surviving background, the surviving rate in the 6-12 MeV window is exponentially sensitive to the tail normalization. I request an explicit sensitivity scan of the Figure 14 improvement factor as the high-energy tail is renormalized across the quoted range (or at least at the endpoints), so that the conditional claim in Section VII can be evaluated against the stated uncertainty band.
  2. [V.A.2, VI.D.1] The alpha-capture gamma background is one of the two backgrounds identified as critical above 5 MeV, yet the rate used in the simulation (about 10^6 per 10 kton-year) is stated to overestimate the cross-section-based estimate from Ref. [64] by about two orders of magnitude, and the PSD rejection study relies on Geant4 alpha transport that reports zero ionization for more than 60% of alpha-capture events. The authors should quantify how the Figure 14 improvement changes if the alpha-capture rate is instead normalized to the analytic estimate, and how the PSD rejection efficiency changes if the zero-ionization events are conservatively treated as not separable by pulse shape. Without this, the PSD-based component of the central claim is tied to a simulation effect the paper itself flags as unreliable.
minor comments (6)
  1. [V.A.1] The word 'idotopes' should be 'isotopes' in the sentence describing atmospheric argon composition.
  2. [V] 'Site-specific essays' should presumably read 'site-specific assays'; as written it is confusing.
  3. [Fig. 7] The legend entry 'Extraprolated Gammas' is misspelled, and the caption phrase 'Conservative G4 only' is unclear about which component it applies to.
  4. [Fig. 14 caption] 'The improvements is calculated' should be 'The improvement is calculated'.
  5. [VI.C] The claim that directionality expands sensitivity in the 6-12 MeV region is not accompanied by any quantitative sensitivity metric; please add a number or explicitly label the statement as qualitative.
  6. [VI.D.2] The random-coincidence probabilities are quoted without the per-source mu values used in the Poisson product; including a small table or listing would make the calculation reproducible.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the solar-neutrino sensitivity and data-rate claims are conditional simulation outputs; the few self-citations are methodological, not load-bearing.

full rationale

The derivation chain runs from externally measured inputs (SSM neutrino fluxes [49], argon activities from WARP/GERDA/DEAP/DBA and DarkSide, neutron-argon cross sections, and gamma spectra from LZ plus other underground laboratories) through Geant4/MARLEY/GENIE simulation to sensitivity ratios and reset-count data rates. The central positive claim is explicitly conditional: 'If future measurements confirm that γ rates and α-capture processes fall within the assumed order of magnitude...' The two dominant high-energy backgrounds are flagged as underconstrained: the external gamma spectrum above 5 MeV is 'arbitrarily' extrapolated exponentially to 20 MeV, and the simulated α-capture rate 'seems to overestimate the measurements presented in Ref. [64]' with new measurements called 'paramount.' These are uncertainties in external inputs, not a case of the output being equivalent to the input by construction. The Q-Pix-specific results are arithmetic or simulation-derived: the 1 TB/year data rate is a count of resets using stated 8-byte timestamps and threshold parameters, and the sensitivity improvement in Fig. 14 is a ratio of s/√b values from simulated signal and background spectra. The paper cites the authors' earlier work for the Q-Pix readout concept [29,35], the QPixG4/QPixRTD simulation packages, and the clustering/directionality recipe from the supernova study [36], but these are methodological self-citations supplying reconstruction parameters rather than the solar-neutrino sensitivity being claimed. No conclusion is defined in terms of, or fitted to, a prior result of the same authors, so no circular step can be exhibited.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim's quantitative reach depends on roughly five hand-chosen or under-measured inputs: the high-energy gamma tail, the alpha-capture normalization, the low-background reduction factors, the light-system parameters, and the clustering threshold. None are fitted to make the conclusion succeed; the authors flag most of them explicitly, but the sensitivity numbers in Section VI are conditional on them.

free parameters (5)
  • External gamma spectrum high-energy tail = exponential extrapolation to 20 MeV
    Section V.B.2 states the authors 'arbitrarily choose to extrapolate' the measured underground gamma spectrum above about 11 MeV; the fraction of gammas above 5 MeV varies by 10^-8 to 10^-5 across sites, and this tail dominates the B8/hep background window.
  • Alpha-capture gamma rate normalization = Geant4 rate ~10^6 captures per 10 kt yr
    Section V.A.2: the simulation 'seems to overestimate the measurements presented in Ref. [64]' (which imply ~10^4), yet the Geant4 value is adopted as the conservative background in all following plots.
  • Low-background reduction factors = 10^4 for neutrons, 10^3 for radon
    Section II.A: assumed from the SLoMo proposal [30] for the low-background scenario; no in-situ validation is provided.
  • Light system coverage and efficiency = 37% coverage, 15% quantum efficiency
    Section II.A: the text calls the light detection system 'very ambitious'; these parameters feed the PSD and delayed-flash coincidence results.
  • Cluster threshold and coincidence window = 12 resets (3 MeV), 1500 ns
    Section VI.A and VI.D.2: analysis choices that set the effective energy threshold and the false-coincidence probability; results are not shown as a function of these choices.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Geant4 with FTFP_BERT_HP, MARLEY and GENIE faithfully model low-energy neutrino and electron interactions in liquid argon.
    Section III.A: the entire event simulation chain rests on this; the paper itself finds a counterexample for alpha transport (Section VI.D.1 reports zero ionization in >60% of alpha-capture events).
  • domain assumption Radon decay chains are in secular equilibrium within the one-year exposure window.
    Section V.A.2: 'The number of expected events for each decay of the chain is computed considering secular equilibrium'; long-lived 210Pb accumulation is noted but not modeled.
  • domain assumption Detector component radioactivity is negligible.
    Section V.A.3: support structures are assumed simple and lightweight, so component decays are neglected; not verified with a materials assay.
  • domain assumption Single 2.3x6.0 m2 anode sheet simulation scales linearly to the full 12.0x14.0x58.2 m3 fiducial volume.
    Section III.A: 'Results from this sample were then scaled to the entire fiducial volume'; external backgrounds scale with surface and internal with mass, so a single sheet may misrepresent 3D leakage.
  • domain assumption Assumed argon activities (39Ar 1 Bq/kg, 42Ar 100 uBq/kg, 85Kr 0.1 Bq/kg) represent atmospheric argon batches.
    Section V.A.1: values taken from WARP, GERDA, DEAP, DBA; the text notes 85Kr varies by up to a factor of three between batches.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Opportunities and challenges to study solar neutrinos with a Q-Pix pixel readout." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/LWO4YMGP

@misc{pith2026250715459,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Opportunities and challenges to study solar neutrinos with a Q-Pix pixel readout},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/LWO4YMGP}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.15459}
}
read the original abstract

The study of solar neutrinos presents significant opportunities in astrophysics, nuclear physics, and particle physics. However, the low-energy nature of these neutrinos introduces considerable challenges to isolate them from background events, requiring detectors with low-energy threshold, high spatial and energy resolutions, and low data rate. We present the study of solar neutrinos with a kiloton-scale liquid argon detector located underground, instrumented with a pixel readout using the Q-Pix technology. We explore the potential of using volume fiducialization, directional topological information, light signal coincidence and pulse-shape discrimination to enhance solar neutrino sensitivity. We find that discriminating neutrino signals below 5 MeV is very difficult. However, we show that these methods are useful for the detection of solar neutrinos when external backgrounds are sufficiently understood and when the detector is built using low-background techniques. When building a workable background model for this study, we identify {\gamma} background from the cavern walls and from capture of {\alpha} particles in radon decay chains as both critical to solar neutrino sensitivity and significantly underconstrained by existing measurements. Finally, we highlight that the main advantage of the use of Q-Pix for solar neutrino studies lies in its ability to enable the continuous readout of all low-energy events with minimal data rates and manageable storage for further offline analyses.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.15459 by the authors.

Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Illustration of the Q-Pix readout principle. When the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Energy spectra of the total expected B8 and hep [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. FIG. 4. Simulated energy spectrum of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (11 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Energy spectrum for the simulated neutrons pro [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. True energy spectrum of the external [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Energy spectra of all signal and background sources [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. External [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Deposited energy spectrum of signal and background [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. Signal (red), background (blue) and total event [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. Distribution of the the ratio of fast and slow scin [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_11.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: shows the number of detected photons arriving at our assumed light detection system placed on the an￾ode plane for 1.64 MeV γ rays isotropically distributed inside the detector. Even for delayed flashes emitted 3.5 meters away from the anode, which is the drift distan…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12. Fraction of CC events generating a delayed [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_12.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: FIG. 14. Improvement of background rejection for a solar [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_14.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: FIG. 15. Expected data rates with Q-Pix readout per [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_15.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

104 extracted references · 58 canonical work pages

  1. [64]

    Measurement of the specific activity of Ar-39 in natural argon

    P. Benetti et al. (W ARP Collaboration), Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 574, 83 (2007), arXiv:astro-ph/0603131

    work page Pith review arXiv 2007

  2. [1]

    QPixG4: This software relies on Geant4 v4.11 [37] with the physics library FTFP BERT HP, com- bined with the low energy event generator MAR- LEY [38] and the neutrino interaction generator GENIE [39] that models neutrino interactions in 4 the detector environment

  3. [2]

    modified box model

    QPixRTD: This standalone code transforms the Geant4 output hits into Q-Pix resets, simulating the detector response. For simulating solar neutrinos, we use the MARLEY event generator [38], which generates low-energy CC or ES neutrino events from a given neutrino spectrum. The events are then run with the QPixG4 package. In this study, the detector dimensi...

  4. [3]

    The only requirement is that the “spatial” resets must be contiguous

    The resets are clustered on the pixel plane. The only requirement is that the “spatial” resets must be contiguous

  5. [4]

    At this stage, ϵ and CT are varied so that we may choose optimal parameters for each study

    The resets are clustered along their temporal coor- dinates. At this stage, ϵ and CT are varied so that we may choose optimal parameters for each study. The maximum temporal separation between resets is fixed at 3 µs, equivalent to 5 mm. This interval is optimal for depositions in the MeV energy range [36]

  6. [5]

    bulk argon radioactivity

    Energy reconstruction With the Q-Pix readout, the charge collected on the anode plane can be directly reconstructed from the num- ber N of resets produced, i.e., Qrec = N × ∆Q, where ∆Q is the pixel charge threshold. However, since ∆ Q is not infinitesimally small, some deposited charge Qdep may not be recorded in the correct event when Qdep is not an int...

  7. [6]

    Argon radioactivity Commercially available argon commonly used in LArT- PCs is obtained by liquefying argon from the atmosphere. In its natural isotopic composition, atmospheric argon consists of the stable 40Ar isotope and trace amounts of the radioactive idotopes 37Ar (T1/2 = 35 d, Qβ = 0.813 MeV), 39Ar (T1/2 = 268 y, Qβ = 0.565 MeV), and 42Ar 6 (T1/2 =...

  8. [7]

    giant resonances

    Radon decay chains Radon emanates from any material that contains Ura- nium and Thorium isotopes, such as detector compo- nents and surrounding materials like rocks, concrete and shotcrete, and can diffuse inside the detector. Here, we treat radon isotopes and their daughters as an internal background since their activity will primarily occur in- side the...

Show all 104 references
  1. [8]

    The different detector parts contain radiocontaminants such as 238U, 235U, 232Th, 60Co or 40K that can produce background events

    Radioactivity from detector components The last sources of internal background we consider are the detector components. The different detector parts contain radiocontaminants such as 238U, 235U, 232Th, 60Co or 40K that can produce background events. However, since it is expect...

  2. [9]

    To estimate the neutron energy spectrum from the cavern, we use the material compositions in Ref

    Neutrons Neutrons are emitted in fission processes and (α, n) reac- tions created by α decays resulting from the 232Th and 238U chains. To estimate the neutron energy spectrum from the cavern, we use the material compositions in Ref. [34]. The (α, n) components of the neutron ...

  3. [10]

    external γ rays

    γ rays The interactions of γ rays in the liquid argon are an ir- reducible background as they result in the production of single electrons via Compton scattering or pair produc- tion. It is therefore crucial to estimate the rates of γ rays produced in the detector surroundings...

  4. [11]

    Pulse-shape discrimination Fig. 7 highlights the background contributions from the poorly-constrained α-capture process reaching up to 17 MeV in energy and thus interfering with the major portions of 8B and hep solar neutrino spectra. The γ rays produced by ionizing α particle...

  5. [12]

    Light coincidence from solar neutrino CC interactions Charge current interactions from solar neutrinos on argon (1) could be isolated from background via the detection of a delayed light flash emitted by the de-excitation of the 40K∗ [88]. Fig. 12 shows the fraction of CC inte...

    2020

  6. [13]

    D. B. Guenther, P. Demarque, Y. C. Kim, and M. H. Pinsonneault, Astrophys. J. 387, 372 (1992)

    1992

  7. [14]

    J. N. Bahcall, M. H. Pinsonneault, and S. Basu, Astro- phys. J. 555, 990 (2001), arXiv:astro-ph/0010346

    2001 arXiv

  8. [15]

    J. W. Harvey et al. , Science 272, 1284 (1996)

    1996

  9. [16]

    Basu and H

    S. Basu and H. M. Antia, apjl 606, L85 (2004), arXiv:astro-ph/0403485 [astro-ph]

    2004 arXiv

  10. [17]

    Montalb´ an, A

    J. Montalb´ an, A. Miglio, A. Noels, N. Grevesse, and M. P. di Mauro, in SOHO 14 Helio- and Asteroseismol- ogy: Towards a Golden Future , ESA Special Publication, Vol. 559, edited by D. Danesy (2004) p. 574, arXiv:astro- ph/0408055 [astro-ph]

    2004

  11. [18]

    Basilico et al

    D. Basilico et al. (Borexino Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 108, 102005 (2023)

    2023

  12. [19]

    Fischer, G

    T. Fischer, G. Guo, K. Langanke, G. Martinez-Pinedo, Y.-Z. Qian, and M.-R. Wu, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 137, 104107 (2024), arXiv:2308.03962 [astro-ph.HE]

    2024 arXiv

  13. [20]

    Q. R. Ahmad et al. (SNO Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 011301 (2002)

    2002

  14. [21]

    Aardsma et al

    G. Aardsma et al. , Physics Letters B 194, 321 (1987)

    1987

  15. [22]

    Abdurashitov et al., Physics Letters B328, 234 (1994)

    J. Abdurashitov et al., Physics Letters B328, 234 (1994)

    1994

  16. [23]

    Wolfenstein, Phys

    L. Wolfenstein, Phys. Rev. D 17, 2369 (1978)

    1978

  17. [24]

    Maltoni and A

    M. Maltoni and A. Y. Smirnov, Eur. Phys. J. A 52, 87 (2016), arXiv:1507.05287 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  18. [25]

    Gando et al

    A. Gando et al. (KamLAND Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 88, 033001 (2013), arXiv:1303.4667 [hep-ex]

    2013 arXiv

  19. [26]

    Hajjar, S

    R. Hajjar, S. Palomares-Ruiz, and O. Mena, Phys. Lett. B 854, 138719 (2024), arXiv:2307.09509 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  20. [27]

    J. N. Bahcall, Phys. Scripta T 121, 46 (2005), arXiv:hep- ph/0412068

    2005

  21. [28]

    H¨ udepohl, B

    L. H¨ udepohl, B. M¨ uller, H. T. Janka, A. Marek, and G. G. Raffelt, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 251101 (2010), arXiv:0912.0260 [astro-ph.SR]

    2010 arXiv

  22. [29]

    Antonello et al

    M. Antonello et al. , J. Instrum. 10 (12), P12004, arXiv:1504.01556 [physics.ins-det]

    arXiv

  23. [30]

    Acciarri et al

    R. Acciarri et al. (MicroBooNE Collaboration), J. In- strum. 12 (02), P02017, arXiv:1612.05824 [physics.ins- det]

    arXiv

  24. [31]

    Acciarri et al

    R. Acciarri et al. (LArIAT Collaboration), J. Instrum. 15 (04), P04026, arXiv:1911.10379 [physics.ins-det]

    1911 arXiv

  25. [32]

    Anderson et al

    C. Anderson et al. , J. Instrum. 7, P10019, arXiv:1205.6747 [physics.ins-det]

    arXiv

  26. [33]

    Tufanli (SBND Collaboration), PoS HQL2016, 070 (2017)

    S. Tufanli (SBND Collaboration), PoS HQL2016, 070 (2017)

    2017

  27. [34]

    Adams, M

    C. Adams, M. Del Tutto, J. Asaadi, M. Bernstein, E. Church, R. Guenette, J. M. Rojas, H. Sulli- van, and A. Tripathi, J. Instrum. 15 (04), P04009, arXiv:1912.10133 [physics.ins-det]

    1912 arXiv

  28. [35]

    Acciarri et al

    R. Acciarri et al. (MicroBooNE Collaboration), J. In- strum. 12 (08), P08003, arXiv:1705.07341 [physics.ins- det]

    arXiv

  29. [36]

    B. Abi, R. Acciarri, M. A. Acero, G. Adamov, D. Adams, M. Adinolfi, et al. (DUNE Collaboration), J. Instrum. 15 (08), T08010, arXiv:2002.03010 [physics.ins-det]

    2002

  30. [37]

    Abed Abud et al

    A. Abed Abud et al. (DUNE Collaboration), J. Instrum. 19 (08), T08004, arXiv:2312.03130 [hep-ex]

  31. [38]

    D. A. Dwyer et al. , J. Instrum. 13 (10), P10007, arXiv:1808.02969 [physics.ins-det]. 16

    arXiv

  32. [39]

    Abed Abud et al

    A. Abed Abud et al. (DUNE Collaboration), J. Instrum. 18 (04), P04034, arXiv:2212.09807 [physics.comp-ph]

  33. [40]

    Anfimov et al

    N. Anfimov et al. (SoLAr), JINST 19 (11), P11010, arXiv:2406.14121 [physics.ins-det]

    arXiv

  34. [41]

    Nygren and Y

    D. Nygren and Y. Mei, (2018), arXiv:1809.10213 [physics.ins-det]

    2018 arXiv

  35. [42]

    Bezerra et al., Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Par- ticle Physics 50, 060502 (2023)

    T. Bezerra et al., Journal of Physics G: Nuclear and Par- ticle Physics 50, 060502 (2023)

    2023

  36. [43]

    A. A. Abud et al. (DUNE Collaboration), J. Instrum. 17 (01), P01005, arXiv:2108.01902 [physics.ins-det]

  37. [44]

    Hamamatsu Photonics K.K., https://hamamatsu.su/ files/uploads/pdf/3 mppc/s13370 vuv4- mppc b (1).pdf

  38. [45]

    Rooks, S

    M. Rooks, S. Abbaszadeh, J. Asaadi, M. Febbraro, R. Gladen, E. Gramellini, K. Hellier, F. M. Blaszczyk, and A. McDonald, J. Instrum 18, P01029 (2023)

    2023

  39. [46]

    Capozzi, S

    F. Capozzi, S. W. Li, G. Zhu, and J. F. Beacom, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 131803 (2019), arXiv:1808.08232 [hep- ph]

    2019 arXiv

  40. [47]

    P. Miao, J. Asaadi, J. B. R. Battat, M. Han, K. Keefe, S. Kohani, A. D. McDonald, D. Nygren, O. Seidel, and Y. Mei, (2023), arXiv:2311.09568 [physics.ins-det]

    2023 arXiv

  41. [48]

    Kubota et al

    S. Kubota et al. (Q-Pix), Phys. Rev. D 106, 032011 (2022), arXiv:2203.12109 [hep-ex]

    2022 arXiv

  42. [49]

    Agostinelli et al., Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment 506, 250 (2003)

    S. Agostinelli et al., Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment 506, 250 (2003)

    2003

  43. [50]

    Gardiner, Computer Physics Communications 269, 108123 (2021)

    S. Gardiner, Computer Physics Communications 269, 108123 (2021)

    2021

  44. [51]

    Andreopoulos et al

    C. Andreopoulos et al. , Nuclear Instruments and Meth- ods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spec- trometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment 614, 87 (2010)

    2010

  45. [52]

    Acciarri et al

    R. Acciarri et al. (ArgoNeuT Collaboration), J. Instrum. 8, P08005, arXiv:1306.1712 [physics.ins-det]

    arXiv

  46. [53]

    Y. Li, T. Tsang, C. Thorn, X. Qian, M. Diwan, J. Joshi, S. Kettell, W. Morse, T. Rao, J. Stewart, W. Tang, and B. Viren, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detec- tors and Associated Equipment 816, 160 (2016)

    2016

  47. [54]

    Meddage (MicroBooNE Collaboration), in Meeting of the APS Division of Particles and Fields (2017) arXiv:1710.00396 [physics.ins-det]

    V. Meddage (MicroBooNE Collaboration), in Meeting of the APS Division of Particles and Fields (2017) arXiv:1710.00396 [physics.ins-det]

    2017 arXiv

  48. [55]

    Antonello et al

    M. Antonello et al. , J. Instrum. 9 (12), P12006, arXiv:1409.5592 [physics.ins-det]

    arXiv

  49. [56]

    D. L. Adams et al. , J. Instrum. 15 (03), P03035, arXiv:1912.08739 [physics.ins-det]

    1912 arXiv

  50. [57]

    Ester, H.-P

    M. Ester, H.-P. Kriegel, J. Sander, and X. Xu, inProceed- ings of the Second International Conference on Knowl- edge Discovery and Data Mining , KDD’96 (AAAI Press,

  51. [58]

    Takahashi, M

    T. Takahashi, M. Miyajima, S. Konno, T. Hamada, S. Kubota, H. Shibamura, and T. Doke, Physics Letters A 44, 123 (1973)

    1973

  52. [59]

    Aharmim et al

    B. Aharmim et al. (SNO Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 102, 062006 (2020), arXiv:2007.08018 [hep-ex]

    2020 arXiv

  53. [60]

    Agostini et al

    M. Agostini et al. (Borexino), Phys. Rev. D 101, 062001 (2020), arXiv:1709.00756 [hep-ex]

    2020 arXiv

  54. [61]

    J. N. Bahcall, A. M. Serenelli, and S. Basu, The Astro- physical Journal 621, L85 (2005)

    2005

  55. [62]

    Anderson et al

    M. Anderson et al. (SNO+ Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 99, 012012 (2019), arXiv:1812.03355 [hep-ex]

    2019 arXiv

  56. [63]

    Basilico et al

    D. Basilico et al. (BOREXINO Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 108, 102005 (2023), arXiv:2307.14636 [hep-ex]

    2023 arXiv

  57. [65]

    Agostini et al

    M. Agostini et al. (GERDA Collaboration), Eur. Phys. J. C 74, 2764 (2014), arXiv:1306.5084 [physics.ins-det]

    2014 arXiv

  58. [66]

    A. S. Barabash, R. R. Saakyan, and V. I. Umatov, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 839, 39 (2016), arXiv:1609.08890 [nucl-ex]

    2016 arXiv

  59. [67]

    Ajaj et al

    R. Ajaj et al. (DEAP Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 100, 072009 (2019), arXiv:1905.05811 [nucl-ex]

    2019 arXiv

  60. [68]

    Caratelli et al., (2022), arXiv:2203.00740 [physics.ins- det]

    D. Caratelli et al., (2022), arXiv:2203.00740 [physics.ins- det]

    2022

  61. [69]

    Agnes et al

    P. Agnes et al. (DarkSide Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 93, 081101 (2016), [Addendum: Phys.Rev.D 95, 069901 (2017)], arXiv:1510.00702 [astro-ph.CO]

    2016 arXiv

  62. [70]

    Agnes et al

    P. Agnes et al. (DarkSide-20k Collaboration), Eur. Phys. J. C 81, 359 (2021), arXiv:2101.08686 [physics.ins-det]

    2021 arXiv

  63. [71]

    S. S. Poudel, B. Loer, R. Saldanha, H. O. Back, and B. R. Hackett, AIP Conference Proceedings 2908, 100004 (2023), https://pubs.aip.org/aip/acp/article- pdf/doi/10.1063/5.0161208/18110420/100004 1 5.0161208.pdf

    2023 doi

  64. [72]

    K. T. Lesko et al. , (2011), arXiv:1108.0959 [hep-ex]

    2011 arXiv

  65. [73]

    Heise, J

    J. Heise, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 606, 012015 (2015), arXiv:1503.01112 [physics.ins-det]

    2015 arXiv

  66. [74]

    Chan et al

    Y. Chan et al. , https://sanfordlab.org/news/low- background-construction-laboratories-4850-ft- level-davis-campus

  67. [75]

    International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), https: //www.iaea.org/topics/spent-fuel-management/ depleted-uranium

  68. [76]

    Foote, D

    G. Foote, D. Branford, D. Weisser, N. Shikazono, R. Bell, and F. Huang, Nuclear Physics A 263, 349 (1976)

    1976

  69. [77]

    C. W. Nahm and T. T. Thwaites, Nucl. Phys. A 103, 503 (1967)

    1967

  70. [78]

    N. G. Alenius et al. , Il Nuovo Cimento A (1965-1970) 8, 10.1007/BF02728760 (1972)

    1972 doi

  71. [79]

    Singh and J

    B. Singh and J. Chen, Nuclear Data Sheets 126, 1 (2015)

    2015

  72. [80]

    J. B. Albert et al. (EXO-200 Collaboration), Phys. Rev. C 92, 045504 (2015), arXiv:1506.00317 [nucl-ex]

    2015 arXiv

  73. [81]

    A. E. Monte, Alpha Radiation Studies and Related Back- grounds in the DarkSide-50 Detector , Ph.D. thesis, Mas- sachusetts U., Amherst, Massachusetts U., Amherst (2018)

    2018

  74. [82]

    C. E. Aalseth et al. (DarkSide-20k Collaboration), Eur. Phys. J. Plus 133, 131 (2018), arXiv:1707.08145 [physics.ins-det]

    2018 arXiv

  75. [83]

    Ajaj et al

    R. Ajaj et al. (DEAP Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 100, 022004 (2019), arXiv:1902.04048 [astro-ph.CO]

    2019 arXiv

  76. [84]

    Westerdale, https://github.com/shawest/neucbot

    S. Westerdale, https://github.com/shawest/neucbot

  77. [85]

    Chen, Nuclear Data Sheets 140, 1 (2017)

    J. Chen, Nuclear Data Sheets 140, 1 (2017)

    2017

  78. [86]

    S. P. MacMullin, Elastic and Inelastic Scattering of Neu- trons from Neon and Argon: Impact on Neutrinoless Double-Beta Decay and Dark Matter Experimental Pro- grams, Ph.D. thesis, North Carolina U. (2013)

    2013

  79. [87]

    C. D. Nesaraja and E. A. McCutchan, Nucl. Data Sheets 133, 1 (2016)

    2016

  80. [88]

    Cameron, J

    J. Cameron, J. Chen, B. Singh, and N. Nica, Nucl. Data Sheets 113, 365 (2012)

    2012

  81. [89]

    E. T. Jurney, J. W. Starner, J. E. Lynn, and S. Raman, Phys. Rev. C 56, 118 (1997)

    1997

  82. [90]

    S. F. Mughabghab, Atlas of Neutron Resonances: Res- onance Parameters and Thermal Cross Sections. Z=1- 100; 5th ed. (Elsevier, San Diego, CA, 2006)

    2006

  83. [91]

    International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Ther- mal neutron capture γs (capgam) (2008), https://www- 17 nds.iaea.org/capgam/index.htmlx

    2008

  84. [92]

    Meyer-Sch¨ utzmeister, Z

    L. Meyer-Sch¨ utzmeister, Z. Vager, R. Segel, and P. Singh, Nuclear Physics A 108, 180 (1968)

    1968

  85. [93]

    Akerib et al

    D. Akerib et al. , Astroparticle Physics 116, 102391 (2020)

    2020

  86. [94]

    Haffke, L

    M. Haffke, L. Baudis, T. Bruch, A. Ferella, T. M. Undagoitia, M. Schumann, Y.-F. Te, and A. van der Schaaf, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Re- search Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment 643, 36 (2011)

    2011

  87. [95]

    High Energy Gamma-Rays measurements in the SNO cavity, https://sno.phy.queensu.ca/str/SNO-STR-97- 009.pdf

  88. [96]

    Agrawal et al

    A. Agrawal et al. (AMoRE Collaboration), Astropart. Phys. 162, 102991 (2024), arXiv:2401.07476 [nucl-ex]

    2024 arXiv

  89. [97]

    Y. Shen, J. Su, W. Liu, G. Lian, L. Gan, L. Qiao, S. Yan, Y. Zhou, Q. Yue, Z. Zeng, Q. Hu, Y. Mi, and W. Zhao, Science China Physics, Mechanics & Astronomy60, 1869 (2017)

    2017

  90. [98]

    Fukuda et al

    S. Fukuda et al. , Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment 501, 418 (2003)

    2003

  91. [99]

    Kubota, M

    S. Kubota, M. Hishida, and A. Nohara, Nuclear Instru- ments and Methods 150, 561 (1978)

    1978

  92. [100]

    R. S. Raghavan, Phys. Rev. D 34, 2088 (1986)

    1986

  93. [101]

    Abi et al

    B. Abi et al. (DUNE Collaboration), J. Instrum. 15 (08), T08008, arXiv:2002.02967 [physics.ins-det]

    2002

  94. [102]

    Abi et al

    B. Abi et al. (DUNE Collaboration), (2018), arXiv:1807.10334 [physics.ins-det]

    2018

  95. [103]

    D. Price, Solaire: A near-future vision for a direct dark matter and neutrino fog science experiment at the Boulby Underground Laboratory, https: //indico.global/event/5610/contributions/44727/ (2024), presented at the Dark Matter UK (DMUK) Meeting, May 13, 2024

    2024

  96. [104]

    Baudis, Nuclear Physics B 1003, 116473 (2024), spe- cial Issue of Nobel Symposium 182 on Dark Matter

    L. Baudis, Nuclear Physics B 1003, 116473 (2024), spe- cial Issue of Nobel Symposium 182 on Dark Matter

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.