pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.27007 · v1 · pith:SBN3MTHXnew · submitted 2026-06-25 · ✦ hep-ex

Study of Supernova Neutrinos at ESSnuSB

ESSnuSB: J. Aguilar , M. Anastasopoulos , D. Bar\v{c}ot , E. Baussan , A.K. Bhattacharyya , A. Bignami , M. Blennow , M. Bogomilov
show 89 more authors
B. Bolling E. Bouquerel F. Bramati A. Branca G. Brunetti I. Bustinduy C.J. Carlile J. Cederkall T. W. Choi S. Choubey P. Christiansen E. Cristaldo Morales P. Cupia\l D. D'Ago H. Danared J. P. A. M. de Andr\'e M. Dracos I. Efthymiopoulos T. Ekel\"of M. Eshraqi G. Fanourakis A. Farricker E. Fasoula T. Fukuda S. Gago N. Gazis Th. Geralis M. Ghosh A. Giarnetti G. Gokbulut C. Hagner L. Hali\'c M. Hooft K. E. Iversen N. Jachowicz M. Jakkapu M. Jensen I. Karakoulias E. Kasimi A. Kayis Topaksu B. Kli\v{c}ek K. Kordas B. Kova\v{c} A. Leisos A. Longhin M. L\'opez C. Maiano S. Marangoni J. G. Marcos C. Marrelli D. Meloni M. Mezzetto N. Milas R. Mohanta J.L. Mu\~noz K. Niewczas M. Oglakci T. Ohlsson M. Olveg{\aa}rd P. Panda M. Pari D. Patrzalek G. Petkov Ch. Petridou P. Poussot A. Psallidas F. Pupilli D. Saiang D. Sampsonidis A. Scanu C. Schwab F. Sordo G. Stavropoulos M. Stip\v{c}evi\'c R. Tarkeshian F. Terranova T. Tolba M. Topp-Mugglestone E. Trachanas R. Tsenov A. Tsirigotis S. E. Tzamarias M. Vanderpoorten G. Vankova-Kirilova N. Vassilopoulos S. Vihonen J. Wurtz V. Zeter O. Zormpa
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-26 01:46 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ex
keywords supernova neutrinosESSnuSBwater Cherenkov detectorneutrino flux modelsevent ratessystematic errorsdetector efficiency
0
0 comments X

The pith

The ESSnuSB far detector can distinguish supernova neutrino flux models via event rates that vary significantly by model.

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

This paper calculates expected neutrino event rates at the planned 538 kt ESSnuSB water Cherenkov detector for three different supernova emission models. The authors find that the detected event numbers differ substantially across the models. They then assess how well the detector could separate the models, incorporating the effects of the supernova's distance, systematic uncertainties, and overall detector efficiency. A reader would care because the experiment's large volume, built for oscillation studies, could double as a tool for astrophysical neutrino measurements if a supernova occurs during operations.

Core claim

The paper states that the expected number of events detected at Earth varies significantly depending on the model of the supernova neutrinos, and that the ESSnuSB far detector may have excellent potential in distinguishing these flux models depending upon the distance of the supernova explosion, systematic errors and detector efficiency.

What carries the argument

Event rate calculations in the 538 kt water Cherenkov detector for three supernova flux models, including systematic errors and detector efficiency.

If this is right

  • Expected event numbers at the detector vary significantly across the three supernova flux models.
  • The ability to distinguish flux models depends on the distance to the supernova explosion.
  • Systematic errors and detector efficiency directly affect the power to separate the models.
  • The large detector volume enables supernova neutrino detection during the experiment's run time.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • This capability would let ESSnuSB contribute data to multi-messenger supernova observations alongside other telescopes.
  • Large water Cherenkov detectors built for oscillations can also test astrophysical emission models without dedicated hardware.
  • If a supernova occurs nearby during operations, the data could constrain which emission physics best matches reality.

Load-bearing premise

The three supernova flux models accurately represent possible emissions and the detector efficiency and systematic uncertainties are correctly estimated without major unmodeled backgrounds.

What would settle it

A real supernova at known distance produces an observed event count at the detector that either matches one model's prediction distinctly or shows overlap due to systematics that prevents clear model separation.

read the original abstract

In this paper, we have studied the sensitivity of the ESSnuSB far detector to supernova neutrinos. ESSnuSB is a proposed long-baseline neutrino experiment in Sweden, which will use a 538 kt water Cherenkov detector to probe the leptonic phase $\delta_{\rm CP}$ by studying the second oscillation maximum. However, given the very large detector volume, it will have an excellent sensitivity to supernova neutrinos if a supernova explosion occurs during the run-time of ESSnuSB. Motivated by this, we first estimate the expected event rates at the ESSnuSB far detector for three different supernova flux models and then we probe its capability to distinguish these flux models. Additionally, we also investigate the impact of systematic errors and detector efficiency. Our results show that depending on the model of the supernova neutrinos, the expected number of events detected at Earth varies significantly. Our results also show that the ESSnuSB far detector may have excellent potential in distinguishing these flux models depending upon the distance of the supernova explosion, systematic errors and detector efficiency.

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 / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript studies the sensitivity of the proposed ESSnuSB far detector (538 kt water Cherenkov) to supernova neutrinos. It estimates expected event rates for three supernova flux models, assesses the detector's ability to distinguish the models, and examines the dependence of this capability on supernova distance, systematic uncertainties, and detector efficiency. The central claim is that the detector has excellent potential to distinguish the flux models under appropriate conditions on these parameters.

Significance. If the underlying calculations prove robust, the work would illustrate a useful secondary science case for the ESSnuSB detector beyond its primary long-baseline oscillation goals, leveraging its large fiducial volume for high-statistics supernova neutrino detection. The paper correctly identifies that event-rate differences across flux models form the basis for discrimination, but the absence of any quantitative outputs or validation steps limits the immediate impact on the field.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the assertion of 'excellent potential' in distinguishing the three flux models is presented without any reported event rates, statistical separation metrics, or figures; this leaves the central claim unsupported and unverifiable.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: the three supernova flux models, the propagation and interaction calculations, and the treatment of efficiency and systematics are not described or referenced; without these details it is impossible to confirm that model-to-model differences survive realistic uncertainties and backgrounds.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract repeatedly states 'our results show' yet contains no numerical results, tables, or figure references, which is inconsistent with standard practice for conveying even preliminary findings.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their comments on our manuscript. We respond point-by-point to the major comments below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the assertion of 'excellent potential' in distinguishing the three flux models is presented without any reported event rates, statistical separation metrics, or figures; this leaves the central claim unsupported and unverifiable.

    Authors: The abstract is a concise summary of the paper's main results. The quantitative event rates for each supernova model, the statistical metrics used to assess distinguishability (including chi-squared differences and significance levels), and the supporting figures are all presented in detail in Sections 4 and 5 of the manuscript. These sections explicitly report the expected event numbers, their variation with distance, and the impact of systematics and efficiency on model separation. The abstract claim is therefore directly supported by the calculations and results in the body of the paper. revision: no

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the three supernova flux models, the propagation and interaction calculations, and the treatment of efficiency and systematics are not described or referenced; without these details it is impossible to confirm that model-to-model differences survive realistic uncertainties and backgrounds.

    Authors: As is standard for abstracts, detailed descriptions are reserved for the main text. Section 2 introduces the three supernova flux models with full references to the original literature. Sections 3 and 4 describe the neutrino propagation, charged-current and neutral-current interactions in water, detector efficiency parametrization, and the treatment of systematic uncertainties (including normalization and shape uncertainties). Section 5 then quantifies how the model-to-model differences persist after these effects are included, with explicit variation over distance, efficiency, and systematic magnitudes. revision: no

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: standard sensitivity study using external inputs

full rationale

The paper estimates expected event rates for three external supernova flux models at the ESSnuSB far detector and assesses distinguishability as a function of distance, efficiency, and systematics. No equations or steps are shown that define a quantity in terms of itself, rename a fit as a prediction, or rely on load-bearing self-citations whose validity reduces to the present work. The analysis is a forward simulation whose outputs are independent of any internal redefinition of the input models or detector parameters. This is the expected outcome for a phenomenological detector-sensitivity study.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract provides no explicit parameters, axioms, or entities; ledger is empty due to lack of technical content.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 6282 in / 889 out tokens · 14327 ms · 2026-06-26T01:46:25.551811+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

37 extracted references · 28 canonical work pages · 15 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Supernova explosions in the universe

    Burrows, A.: Supernova explosions in the universe. Nature403, 727–733 (2000) https://doi.org/10.1038/35001501

    work page doi:10.1038/35001501 2000

  2. [2]

    Horiuchi, S., Sumiyoshi, K., Nakamura, K., Fischer, T., Summa, A., Taki- waki, T., Janka, H.-T., Kotake, K.: Diffuse supernova neutrino background from 12 extensive core-collapse simulations of8-100M ⊙ progenitors. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.475(1), 1363–1374 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/stx3271 arXiv:1709.06567 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1093/mnras/stx3271 2018

  3. [3]

    Bethe, H.A.: Supernova mechanisms. Rev. Mod. Phys.62, 801–866 (1990) https: //doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.62.801

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.62.801 1990

  4. [4]

    Scholberg, K.: Supernova Neutrino Detection. Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.62, 81–103 (2012) https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-nucl-102711-095006 arXiv:1205.6003 [astro-ph.IM]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1146/annurev-nucl-102711-095006 2012

  5. [5]

    Giunti and C

    Giunti, C., Kim, C.W.: Fundamentals of Neutrino Physics and Astrophysics, (2007). https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198508717.001.0001

    work page doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198508717.001.0001 2007

  6. [6]

    Deng, S., Bian, L.: Constraints on new physics around the MeV scale with cos- mological observations. Phys. Rev. D108(6), 063516 (2023) https://doi.org/10. 1103/PhysRevD.108.063516 arXiv:2304.06576 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2023

  7. [7]

    Halzen, F., Raffelt, G.G.: Reconstructing the supernova bounce time with neu- trinos in IceCube. Phys. Rev. D80, 087301 (2009) https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevD.80.087301 arXiv:0908.2317 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  8. [8]

    Panda, P., Mohanta, R.: Probing neutrino mass ordering with supernova neutri- nos at NOνA including the effect of sterile neutrinos. Nucl. Phys. B1018, 117002 (2025) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2025.117002 arXiv:2412.05213 [hep- ph]

    work page doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2025.117002 2025

  9. [9]

    Alekou, A.,et al.: The European Spallation Source neutrino super-beam con- ceptual design report. Eur. Phys. J. ST231(21), 3779–3955 (2022) https:// doi.org/10.1140/epjs/s11734-022-00664-w arXiv:2206.01208 [hep-ex]. [Erratum: Eur.Phys.J.ST 232, 15–16 (2023)]

    work page doi:10.1140/epjs/s11734-022-00664-w 2022

  10. [10]

    Dedin Neto, P., Santos, M.V.d., Holanda, P.C., Kemp, E.: SN1987A neutrino burst: limits on flavor conversion. Eur. Phys. J. C83(6), 459 (2023) https://doi. org/10.1140/epjc/s10052-023-11597-6 arXiv:2301.11407 [hep-ph]

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-023-11597-6 2023

  11. [11]

    Lagage, P.O., Cribier, M., Rich, J., Vignaud, D.: MSW Effect and (Anti)- neutrinos From Sn1987a. Phys. Lett. B193, 127 (1987) https://doi.org/10.1016/ 0370-2693(87)90469-2

    1987

  12. [12]

    Hirata, K.,et al.: Observation of a Neutrino Burst from the Supernova SN 1987a. Phys. Rev. Lett.58, 1490–1493 (1987) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.58. 1490

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.58 1987

  13. [13]

    Haines, T.,et al.: Neutrinos From SN1987A in the IMB Detector. Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A264, 28–31 (1988) https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-9002(88)91097-2 13

    work page doi:10.1016/0168-9002(88)91097-2 1988

  14. [14]

    Novoseltseva, R.V., et al.: Search for neutrino bursts from core collapse super- novae at the Baksan Underground Scintillation Telescope (2009) arXiv:0910.0738 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  15. [15]

    Future Detection of Supernova Neutrino Burst and Explosion Mechanism

    Totani, T., Sato, K., Dalhed, H.E., Wilson, J.R.: Future detection of supernova neutrino burst and explosion mechanism. Astrophys. J.496, 216–225 (1998) https://doi.org/10.1086/305364 arXiv:astro-ph/9710203

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1086/305364 1998

  16. [16]

    Gava, J., Kneller, J., Volpe, C., McLaughlin, G.C.: A Dynamical collective cal- culation of supernova neutrino signals. Phys. Rev. Lett.103, 071101 (2009) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.103.071101 arXiv:0902.0317 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.103.071101 2009

  17. [17]

    Hudepohl, L., Muller, B., Janka, H.-T., Marek, A., Raffelt, G.G.: Neutrino Signal of Electron-Capture Supernovae from Core Collapse to Cooling. Phys. Rev. Lett.104, 251101 (2010) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.104.251101 arXiv:0912.0260 [astro-ph.SR]. [Erratum: Phys.Rev.Lett. 105, 249901 (2010)]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.104.251101 2010

  18. [18]

    Astrophys

    Keil, M.T., Raffelt, G.G., Janka, H.-T.: Monte Carlo study of supernova neutrino spectra formation. Astrophys. J.590, 971–991 (2003) https://doi.org/10.1086/ 375130 arXiv:astro-ph/0208035

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  19. [19]

    Dasgupta, B., Dighe, A., Mirizzi, A.: Identifying neutrino mass hierarchy at extremely smallθ 13 through Earth matter effects in a supernova signal. Phys. Rev. Lett.101, 171801 (2008) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.101.171801 arXiv:0802.1481 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.101.171801 2008

  20. [20]

    Dighe, A.S., Smirnov, A.Y.: Identifying the neutrino mass spectrum from the neutrino burst from a supernova. Phys. Rev. D62, 033007 (2000) https://doi. org/10.1103/PhysRevD.62.033007 arXiv:hep-ph/9907423

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.62.033007 2000

  21. [21]

    JCAP10, 033 (2023) https: //doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2023/10/033 arXiv:2304.13303 [hep-ph]

    Panda, P., Ghosh, M., Mohanta, R.: Determination of neutrino mass ordering from Supernova neutrinos with T2HK and DUNE. JCAP10, 033 (2023) https: //doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2023/10/033 arXiv:2304.13303 [hep-ph]

    work page doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2023/10/033 2023

  22. [22]

    Seadrow, S., Burrows, A., Vartanyan, D., Radice, D., Skinner, M.A.: Neutrino Signals of Core-Collapse Supernovae in Underground Detectors. Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.480(4), 4710–4731 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1093/mnras/sty2164 arXiv:1804.00689 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1093/mnras/sty2164 2018

  23. [23]

    NuFit-6.0: Updated global analysis of three-flavor neutrino oscillations

    Esteban, I., Gonzalez-Garcia, M.C., Maltoni, M., Martinez-Soler, I., Pinheiro, J.P., Schwetz, T.: NuFit-6.0: updated global analysis of three-flavor neutrino oscillations. JHEP12, 216 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP12(2024)216 arXiv:2410.05380 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/jhep12(2024)216 2024

  24. [24]

    Mirizzi, A., Tamborra, I., Janka, H.-T., Saviano, N., Scholberg, K., Bollig, R., Hudepohl, L., Chakraborty, S.: Supernova Neutrinos: Production, Oscillations and Detection. Riv. Nuovo Cim.39(1-2), 1–112 (2016) https://doi.org/10.1393/ 14 ncr/i2016-10120-8 arXiv:1508.00785 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  25. [25]

    Chakraborty, S., Hansen, R., Izaguirre, I., Raffelt, G.: Collective neutrino flavor conversion: Recent developments. Nucl. Phys. B908, 366–381 (2016) https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2016.02.012 arXiv:1602.02766 [hep-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2016.02.012 2016

  26. [26]

    Horiuchi, S., Kneller, J.P.: What can be learned from a future supernova neutrino detection? J. Phys. G45(4), 043002 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6471/ aaa90a arXiv:1709.01515 [astro-ph.HE]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1361-6471/ 2018

  27. [27]

    Tamborra, I., Shalgar, S.: New Developments in Flavor Evolution of a Dense Neutrino Gas. Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.71, 165–188 (2021) https://doi.org/10. 1146/annurev-nucl-102920-050505 arXiv:2011.01948 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv 2021

  28. [28]

    Diffuse supernova neutrinos: oscillation effects, stellar cooling and progenitor mass dependence

    Lunardini, C., Tamborra, I.: Diffuse supernova neutrinos: oscillation effects, stellar cooling and progenitor mass dependence. JCAP07, 012 (2012) https: //doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2012/07/012 arXiv:1205.6292 [astro-ph.SR]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2012/07/012 2012

  29. [29]

    Hajjar, R., Mena, O., Palomares-Ruiz, S.: Earth tomography with supernova neutrinos at future neutrino detectors. Phys. Rev. D108(8), 083011 (2023) https: //doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.108.083011 arXiv:2303.09369 [hep-ph]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.108.083011 2023

  30. [30]

    Tomography of the Earth's Core Using Supernova Neutrinos

    Lindner, M., Ohlsson, T., Tomas, R., Winter, W.: Tomography of the earth’s core using supernova neutrinos. Astropart. Phys.19, 755–770 (2003) https://doi.org/ 10.1016/S0927-6505(03)00120-8 arXiv:hep-ph/0207238

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/s0927-6505(03)00120-8 2003

  31. [31]

    Gaba,R.,Mukherjee,M.,Bhatnagar,V.:Sensitivitystudyofsupernovaneutrinos for mass hierarchy. Int. J. Mod. Phys. E35(01), 2550055 (2026) https://doi.org/ 10.1142/S0218301325500557 arXiv:2411.07716 [hep-ph]

    work page doi:10.1142/s0218301325500557 2026

  32. [32]

    AbedAbud,A.,et al.:Impactofcross-sectionuncertaintiesonsupernovaneutrino spectral parameter fitting in the Deep Underground Neutrino Experiment. Phys. Rev. D107(11), 112012 (2023) https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.107.112012 arXiv:2303.17007 [hep-ex]

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.107.112012 2023

  33. [33]

    Astrophys

    Abe, K.,et al.: Supernova Model Discrimination with Hyper-Kamiokande. Astrophys. J.916(1), 15 (2021) https://doi.org/10.3847/1538-4357/abf7c4 arXiv:2101.05269 [astro-ph.IM]

    work page doi:10.3847/1538-4357/abf7c4 2021

  34. [34]

    schol/snowglobes: GitHub (2021)

    2021

  35. [35]

    Huber, P., Lindner, M., Winter, W.: Simulation of long-baseline neutrino oscilla- tion experiments with GLoBES (General Long Baseline Experiment Simulator). Comput. Phys. Commun.167, 195 (2005) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpc.2005.01. 003 arXiv:hep-ph/0407333

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2005.01 2005

  36. [36]

    Huber, P., Kopp, J., Lindner, M., Rolinec, M., Winter, W.: New features in the 15 simulation of neutrino oscillation experiments with GLoBES 3.0: General Long Baseline Experiment Simulator. Comput. Phys. Commun.177, 432–438 (2007) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpc.2007.05.004 arXiv:hep-ph/0701187

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2007.05.004 2007

  37. [37]

    https://github.com/ SNEWS2/snewpy 16

    https://github.com/SNEWS2/snewpy: GitHub (2021). https://github.com/ SNEWS2/snewpy 16

    2021