Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Phys Rev Lett. 2016 Feb 12;116(6):061801. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.061801. Epub 2016 Feb 12.

Measurement of the Reactor Antineutrino Flux and Spectrum at Daya Bay.

An FP1, Balantekin AB2, Band HR3, Bishai M4, Blyth S5,6, Butorov I7, Cao D8, Cao GF9, Cao J9, Cen WR9, Chan YL10, Chang JF9, Chang LC11, Chang Y6, Chen HS9, Chen QY12, Chen SM13, Chen YX14, Chen Y15, Cheng JH11, Cheng J12, Cheng YP9, Cherwinka JJ2, Chu MC10, Cummings JP16, de Arcos J17, Deng ZY9, Ding XF9, Ding YY9, Diwan MV4, Dove J18, Draeger E17, Dwyer DA19, Edwards WR19, Ely SR18, Gill R4, Gonchar M7, Gong GH13, Gong H13, Grassi M9, Gu WQ20, Guan MY9, Guo L13, Guo XH21, Hackenburg RW4, Han R14, Hans S4, He M9, Heeger KM3, Heng YK9, Higuera A22, Hor YK23, Hsiung YB5, Hu BZ5, Hu LM4, Hu LJ21, Hu T9, Hu W9, Huang EC18, Huang HX24, Huang XT12, Huber P23, Hussain G13, Jaffe DE4, Jaffke P23, Jen KL11, Jetter S9, Ji XP13,25, Ji XL9, Jiao JB12, Johnson RA26, Kang L27, Kettell SH4, Kohn S28, Kramer M19,28, Kwan KK10, Kwok MW10, Kwok T29, Langford TJ3, Lau K22, Lebanowski L13, Lee J19, Lei RT27, Leitner R30, Leung KY29, Leung JK29, Lewis CA2, Li DJ31, Li F9, Li GS20, Li QJ9, Li SC29, Li WD9, Li XN9, Li XQ25, Li YF9, Li ZB32, Liang H31, Lin CJ19, Lin GL11, Lin PY11, Lin SK22, Ling JJ4,18,32, Link JM23, Littenberg L4, Littlejohn BR17,26, Liu DW22, Liu H22, Liu JL20, Liu JC9, Liu SS29, Lu C33, Lu HQ9, Lu JS9, Luk KB19,28, Ma QM9, Ma XY9, Ma XB14, Ma YQ9, Martinez Caicedo DA17, McDonald KT33, McKeown RD34,35, Meng Y23, Mitchell I22, Monari Kebwaro J36, Nakajima Y19, Napolitano J37, Naumov D7, Naumova E7, Ngai HY29, Ning Z9, Ochoa-Ricoux JP38, Olshevski A7, Pan HR5, Park J23, Patton S19, Pec V30, Peng JC18, Piilonen LE23, Pinsky L22, Pun CS29, Qi FZ9, Qi M8, Qian X4, Raper N39, Ren B27, Ren J24, Rosero R4, Roskovec B30, Ruan XC24, Shao BB13, Steiner H19,28, Sun GX9, Sun JL40, Tang W4, Taychenachev D7, Tsang KV19, Tull CE19, Tung YC5, Viaux N38, Viren B4, Vorobel V30, Wang CH6, Wang M12, Wang NY21, Wang RG9, Wang W32,35, Wang WW8, Wang X41, Wang YF9, Wang Z13, Wang Z9, Wang ZM9, Wei HY13, Wen LJ9, Whisnant K42, White CG17, Whitehead L22, Wise T2, Wong HL19,28, Wong SC10,32, Worcester E4, Wu Q12, Xia DM9,43, Xia JK9, Xia X12, Xing ZZ9, Xu JY10, Xu JL9, Xu J21, Xu Y25, Xue T13, Yan J36, Yang CG9, Yang L27, Yang MS9, Yang MT12, Ye M9, Yeh M4, Young BL42, Yu GY8, Yu ZY9, Zang SL8, Zhan L9, Zhang C4, Zhang HH32, Zhang JW9, Zhang QM36, Zhang YM13, Zhang YX40, Zhang YM32, Zhang ZJ27, Zhang ZY9, Zhang ZP31, Zhao J9, Zhao QW9, Zhao YF14, Zhao YB9, Zheng L31, Zhong WL9, Zhou L9, Zhou N31, Zhuang HL9, Zou JH9; Daya Bay Collaboration.

Author information

1
Institute of Modern Physics, East China University of Science and Technology, Shanghai, China.
2
University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, USA.
3
Department of Physics, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.
4
Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, New York, USA.
5
Department of Physics, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan.
6
National United University, Miao-Li, Taiwan.
7
Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Moscow Region, Russia.
8
Nanjing University, Nanjing, China.
9
Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing, China.
10
Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
11
Institute of Physics, National Chiao-Tung University, Hsinchu, Taiwan.
12
Shandong University, Jinan, China.
13
Department of Engineering Physics, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China.
14
North China Electric Power University, Beijing, China.
15
Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, China.
16
Siena College, Loudonville, New York, USA.
17
Department of Physics, Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
18
Department of Physics, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, Illinois, USA.
19
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California, USA.
20
Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China.
21
Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China.
22
Department of Physics, University of Houston, Houston, Texas, USA.
23
Center for Neutrino Physics, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA.
24
China Institute of Atomic Energy, Beijing, China.
25
School of Physics, Nankai University, Tianjin, China.
26
Department of Physics, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA.
27
Dongguan University of Technology, Dongguan, China.
28
Department of Physics, University of California, Berkeley, California, USA.
29
Department of Physics, The University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam, Hong Kong, China.
30
Charles University, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Prague, Czech Republic.
31
University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, China.
32
Sun Yat-Sen (Zhongshan) University, Guangzhou, China.
33
Joseph Henry Laboratories, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey, USA.
34
California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California, USA.
35
College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, Virginia, USA.
36
Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, China.
37
Department of Physics, College of Science and Technology, Temple University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
38
Instituto de Física, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile.
39
Department of Physics, Applied Physics, and Astronomy, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, New York, USA.
40
China General Nuclear Power Group, China.
41
College of Electronic Science and Engineering, National University of Defense Technology, Changsha, China.
42
Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa, USA.
43
Chongqing University, Chongqing, China.

Abstract

This Letter reports a measurement of the flux and energy spectrum of electron antineutrinos from six 2.9 GWth nuclear reactors with six detectors deployed in two near (effective baselines 512 and 561 m) and one far (1579 m) underground experimental halls in the Daya Bay experiment. Using 217 days of data, 296 721 and 41 589 inverse β decay (IBD) candidates were detected in the near and far halls, respectively. The measured IBD yield is (1.55±0.04) ×10(-18)  cm(2) GW(-1) day(-1) or (5.92±0.14) ×10(-43)  cm(2) fission(-1). This flux measurement is consistent with previous short-baseline reactor antineutrino experiments and is 0.946±0.022 (0.991±0.023) relative to the flux predicted with the Huber-Mueller (ILL-Vogel) fissile antineutrino model. The measured IBD positron energy spectrum deviates from both spectral predictions by more than 2σ over the full energy range with a local significance of up to ∼4σ between 4-6 MeV. A reactor antineutrino spectrum of IBD reactions is extracted from the measured positron energy spectrum for model-independent predictions.

PMID:
26918980
DOI:
10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.061801
Free full text

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for American Physical Society Icon for eScholarship, California Digital Library, University of California
Loading ...
Support Center