|
Llosa, G. (2019). SiPM-based Compton cameras. Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A, 926, 148–152.
Abstract: Compton cameras have been developed for almost fifty years in various fields (astronomy, medical imaging, safety and industrial inspections, etc.), employing different types of detectors. Their potential use has gained renewed interest with the emergence of high light yield scintillator crystals and silicon photomultipliers (SiPMs). This combination provides good performance and operation simplicity at an affordable cost, raising again the interest in this type of systems. SiPM-based Compton cameras are being assessed for diverse applications with promising results.
|
|
|
BRIKEN Collaboration(Tolosa-Delgado, A. et al), Agramunt, J., Tain, J. L., Algora, A., Domingo-Pardo, C., Morales, A. I., et al. (2019). Commissioning of the BRIKEN detector for the measurement of very exotic beta-delayed neutron emitters. Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A, 925, 133–147.
Abstract: A new detection system has been installed at the RIKEN Nishina Center (Japan) to investigate decay properties of very neutron-rich nuclei. The setup consists of three main parts: a moderated neutron counter, a detection system sensitive to the implantation and decay of radioactive ions, and gamma-ray detectors. We describe here the setup, the commissioning experiment and some selected results demonstrating its performance for the measurement of half-lives and beta-delayed neutron emission probabilities. The methodology followed in the analysis of the data is described in detail. Particular emphasis is placed on the correction of the accidental neutron background.
|
|
|
Del Debbio, L., & Ramos, A. (2021). Lattice determinations of the strong coupling. Phys. Rep.-Rev. Sec. Phys. Lett., 920, 1–71.
Abstract: Lattice QCD has reached a mature status. State of the art lattice computations include u, d, s (and even the c) sea quark effects, together with an estimate of electromagnetic and isospin breaking corrections for hadronic observables. This precise and first principles description of the standard model at low energies allows the determination of multiple quantities that are essential inputs for phenomenology and not accessible to perturbation theory. One of the fundamental parameters that are determined from simulations of lattice QCD is the strong coupling constant, which plays a central role in the quest for precision at the LHC. Lattice calculations currently provide its best determinations, and will play a central role in future phenomenological studies. For this reason we believe that it is timely to provide a pedagogical introduction to the lattice determinations of the strong coupling. Rather than analysing individual studies, the emphasis will be on the methodologies and the systematic errors that arise in these determinations. We hope that these notes will help lattice practitioners, and QCD phenomenologists at large, by providing a self-contained introduction to the methodology and the possible sources of systematic error. The limiting factors in the determination of the strong coupling turn out to be different from the ones that limit other lattice precision observables. We hope to collect enough information here to allow the reader to appreciate the challenges that arise in order to improve further our knowledge of a quantity that is crucial for LHC phenomenology. Crown Copyright & nbsp;(c) 2021 Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
|
|
|
ANTARES Collaboration(Albert, A. et al), Alves, S., Carretero, V., Colomer, M., Hernandez-Rey, J. J., Khan-Chowdhury, N. R., et al. (2021). Search for Neutrinos from the Tidal Disruption Events AT2019dsg and AT2019fdr with the ANTARES Telescope. Astrophys. J., 920(1), 50–6pp.
Abstract: On 2019 October 1, the IceCube Collaboration detected a muon track neutrino with a high probability of being of astrophysical origin, IC191001A. After a few hours, the tidal disruption event (TDE) AT2019dsg, observed by the Zwicky Transient Facility (ZTF), was indicated as the most likely counterpart of the IceCube track. More recently, the follow-up campaign of the IceCube alerts by ZTF suggested a second TDE, AT2019fdr, as a promising counterpart of another IceCube muon track candidate, IC200530A, detected on 2020 May 30. Here, these intriguing associations are followed-up by searching for neutrinos in the ANTARES detector from the directions of AT2019dsg and AT2019fdr using a time-integrated approach. As no significant evidence for space clustering is found in the ANTARES data, upper limits on the one-flavor neutrino flux and fluence are set.
|
|
|
HAWC and HESS Collaborations(Abdalla, H. et al), & Salesa Greus, F. (2021). TeV Emission of Galactic Plane Sources with HAWC and HESS. Astrophys. J., 917(1), 6–16pp.
Abstract: The High Altitude Water Cherenkov (HAWC) observatory and the High Energy Stereoscopic System (H.E.S.S.) are two leading instruments in the ground-based very-high-energy gamma-ray domain. HAWC employs the water Cherenkov detection (WCD) technique, while H.E.S.S. is an array of Imaging Atmospheric Cherenkov Telescopes (IACTs). The two facilities therefore differ in multiple aspects, including their observation strategy, the size of their field of view, and their angular resolution, leading to different analysis approaches. Until now, it has been unclear if the results of observations by both types of instruments are consistent: several of the recently discovered HAWC sources have been followed up by IACTs, resulting in a confirmed detection only in a minority of cases. With this paper, we go further and try to resolve the tensions between previous results by performing a new analysis of the H.E.S.S. Galactic plane survey data, applying an analysis technique comparable between H.E.S.S. and HAWC. Events above 1 TeV are selected for both data sets, the point-spread function of H.E.S.S. is broadened to approach that of HAWC, and a similar background estimation method is used. This is the first detailed comparison of the Galactic plane observed by both instruments. H.E.S.S. can confirm the gamma-ray emission of four HAWC sources among seven previously undetected by IACTs, while the three others have measured fluxes below the sensitivity of the H.E.S.S. data set. Remaining differences in the overall gamma-ray flux can be explained by the systematic uncertainties. Therefore, we confirm a consistent view of the gamma-ray sky between WCD and IACT techniques.
|
|