Paper detail

Benchmarking intra-nuclear cascade models for neutrino scattering with relativistic optical potentials

The description of final-state interactions (FSI) in the large phase space probed in neutrino experiments poses a great challenge. In neutrino experiments, which operate under semi-inclusive conditions, cascade models are commonly used for this task, while under exclusive conditions FSI can be treated with relativistic optical potentials (ROP). We formulate conditions under which the ROP approach and cascade model can be directly compared. We feed the NEUT cascade with events from a relativistic distorted-wave impulse approximation calculation that uses the real part of an optical potential. Cuts on the missing energy of the resulting events are applied to define a set of events that can be directly compared to RDWIA calculations with the full optical potential. The NEUT cascade and ROP agree for proton kinetic energies $T_p > 150$ MeV for carbon, oxygen and calcium nuclei when a realistic nuclear density is used to introduce events in the cascade. For $T_p < 100$ MeV the ROP and NEUT cross sections differ in shape and differences in magnitude are larger than 50 \%. Single transverse variables allow to distinguish different approaches to FSI, but due to a large non-QE contribution the comparison to T2K data does not give an unambiguous view of FSI. We discuss electron scattering and argue that with a cut in missing energy FSI can be studied with minimal confounding factors in e.g. $e4ν$. The agreement of the ROP and NEUT for T2K conditions lends confidence to these models as a tool in oscillation analyses for sufficiently large nucleon kinetic energies. These results urge for caution when a cascade model is applied for small nucleon energies. The assessment of model assumptions relevant to this region are strongly encouraged. This paper provides novel constraints on cascade models from proton-nucleus scattering that can be easily applied to other neutrino event generators.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.