From: Jonathan Link <link@fnal.gov>

Date: Wed Sep 08 2004 - 00:59:21 CDT

Received on Wed Sep 8 01:00:37 2004

Date: Wed Sep 08 2004 - 00:59:21 CDT

Hi All,

Here are the new numbers for the sensitivity of the baseline

experimental setup. I'm also attaching ps files showing the sensitivity

as a function of delta m^2 and sin^2 2 theta_13. Sensitivities are shown

at the 90% CL.

1) Assuming 0.6% relative normalization error (i.e. no sensitivity gain

from movable detectors). This is the official baseline scenario. The

corresponding ps file is sense_0.6.ps.

Delta m^2 (eV^2)

0.0015 0.0020 0.0025 0.0030

---------------------------------------------------------------

Counting Only 0.0175 0.0124 0.0106 0.0104

Shape Only 0.0155 0.0133 0.0124 0.0098

Counting+Shape 0.0112 0.0087 0.0078 0.0070

2) Assuming cross calibration with movable detectors for 8% of the run

(0.26% relative normalization error). The corresponding ps file is

sense_md.ps.

Delta m^2 (eV^2)

0.0015 0.0020 0.0025 0.0030

---------------------------------------------------------------

Counting Only 0.0113 0.0080 0.0069 0.0068

Shape Only 0.0158 0.0136 0.0126 0.0101

Counting+Shape 0.0086 0.0064 0.0056 0.0053

A few comments... The shape analyses still make optimistic assumptions

about our knowledge of the background spectra shapes. This does not

affect the Counting analysis. Therefore we should use the sensitivity

of the Counting analysis as the upper limit of sensitivity and the

Counting+Shape analysis as the lower limit on sensitivity. We know that

we can do better than the counting analysis but the Counting+Shape

sensitivity is perhaps too optimistic.

Enjoy,

Jon

- application/postscript attachment: sense_0.6.ps

- application/postscript attachment: sense_md.ps

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8
: Fri Sep 10 2004 - 03:28:24 CDT
*