First Demonstration of a Hybrid Cherenkov and Scintillation Detector in a Proof-of-Principle Axion Search at a Beam Dump

Darcy A. Newmark

REVIEW 3 major objections 8 minor 1 cited by

First Demonstration of a Hybrid Cherenkov and Scintillation Detector in a Proof-of-Principle Axion Search at a Beam Dump

T0 review · 3 major / 8 minor · reviewed 2026-07-09 · glm-5.2

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Cherenkov light separated from sub-MeV electrons in scintillator

desk verdict Cherenkov separation in LAr is the real result; the ALP exclusion is provisional. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.07476 v1 pith:BJHCDWUS submitted 2026-07-08 hep-ex

Darcy A. Newmark This is my paper · ORCID

classification hep-ex PACS 29.40.Mc14.80.Va29.40.Ka

keywords cherenkovdetectorfirsthybridscintillationresolutionworkargon

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This thesis demonstrates, for the first time, that Cherenkov radiation from sub-MeV electrons can be isolated event-by-event inside a high light-yield scintillation detector, using a 10-ton liquid argon detector where 80% of the photomultiplier tubes are coated in wavelength-shifting material and 20% are left bare. The uncoated tubes preferentially detect the prompt, visible-wavelength Cherenkov photons that arrive before the slower, wavelength-shifted scintillation light, creating a temporal and spectral window in which Cherenkov light dominates. Using a sodium-22 calibration source, the author validates this separation with a delta-chi-squared test that rejects the scintillation-only hypothesis at greater than 5 sigma confidence, confirmed by a cobalt-57 control sample that produces no excess in the Cherenkov-sensitive window. The thesis then applies this capability to a proof-of-principle search for axion-like particles at a beam dump facility. Four observables exploiting Cherenkov timing, directionality, pulse shape, and event topology are combined into a likelihood ratio test statistic to suppress steady-state backgrounds for events below 10 MeV. No significant excess is observed, but the improved background rejection excludes new regions of axion-like particle mass-coupling parameter space at 90% confidence level compared to a previous analysis with greater exposure. The work also includes the first simultaneous characterization of scintillation and Cherenkov light production and propagation parameters in liquid argon using differentiable simulation, and the development of machine-learning-based position reconstruction with approximately 5 cm resolution and energy reconstruction with approximately 10% resolution at 1 MeV.

What carries the argument

The hybrid detector design uses wavelength discrimination between coated and uncoated PMTs combined with 2 ns timing resolution to isolate prompt visible Cherenkov photons from slower wavelength-shifted scintillation light, supported by a differentiable GEANT4 simulation framework for optical model calibration and a transformer-based graph neural network for position reconstruction.

What would settle it

A control sample of events known to produce no Cherenkov light, such as the cobalt-57 calibration data, should show no excess in the Cherenkov-enhanced time region on uncoated PMTs; the thesis reports 0.79% of cobalt events with one or more hits, consistent with the expected random background rate of 0.51%.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that coating 80% of PMTs in a liquid argon detector with wavelength-shifting material while leaving 20% uncoated creates a practical hybrid optical detector capable of event-by-event Cherenkov separation from sub-MeV electrons, validated at greater than 5 sigma confidence, and that this separation provides enough additional background rejection to exclude new axion-like particle parameter space despite reduced exposure compared to prior analyses.

Load-bearing premise

The axion-like particle search background model assumes that data collected just before each beam pulse accurately represents the steady-state background during the signal timing window, and that neutron-wall data fully characterizes the shape of beam-related neutron backgrounds; if the true background in the signal region differs from these proxies due to time-dependent beam conditions or unmodeled neutron interactions, the exclusion limits could shift.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Hybrid Cherenkov-scintillation detectors using liquid argon could be scaled to much larger volumes for next-generation dark sector and neutrino experiments, potentially offering better background rejection than pure scintillation detectors at lower cost than dedicated Cherenkov detectors.
The differentiable simulation approach developed for optical model calibration could be adopted by other liquid argon experiments to efficiently characterize light propagation parameters in high-dimensional spaces without prohibitive computational costs.
The four-observable likelihood ratio method combining Cherenkov timing, directionality, pulse shape, and spatial topology could be generalized to other rare-event searches where electromagnetic final states must be distinguished from hadronic backgrounds.
The Cherenkov separation technique could improve neutrinoless double beta decay searches by providing a handle to distinguish two-electron signal events from single-electron backgrounds in large scintillation detectors.
The optical parameter measurements in unpurified liquid argon, including absorption lengths, scattering lengths, and scintillation time constants, provide reference data for future detectors that may not achieve ultra-high purity.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

The main thing to know: this thesis demonstrates the first event-by-event separation of Cherenkov light from sub-MeV electrons in a liquid argon scintillation detector, and that result is solid. The ALP exclusion is a proof-of-principle that rests on a less validated background model. These are structurally different claims with different levels of support, and the reader's split verdict is correct on both counts. The reader's confidence level of MODERATE is about right — maybe slightly conservative given how well the Cherenkov result holds up, but understandable given the ALP analysis gaps. The reader's significance score of 6.0 is fair. The instrumentation advance is real and has clear utility for future rare-event searches; the ALP exclusion itself is limited by statistics and systematics. On novelty: 7.0 is appropriate. The Borexino (2022, statistical only) and SNO+ (2024, >5 MeV) comparisons are correctly framed, and the liquid argon medium plus the differentiable simulation for optical calibration is genuinely new. The Cherenkov separation (Chapter 5) is well-supported. The >5σ Δχ² rejection of the scintillation-only hypothesis, the 57Co control sample (0.79% hit rate vs 9.78% for 22Na), and the directional cos(θ) distribution peaking at 0.8–0.9 as expected for 0.7–1.0 MeV electrons — these are independent checks that all point the same direction. The optical model fit (Chapter 4) achieving <10% agreement across 145 time bins and 191 PMTs is thorough work, and the differentiable simulation approach is a legitimate methodological contribution. The soft spot is exactly where the reader and stress-test say it is: the ALP background model (Chapter 7). The steady-state background is estimated from prebeam data, the beam-related neutron component from neutron-wall data, and the background rate is fit as uniform (11.82 ± 0.17 events/ns) without first-principles normalization. Section 7.4.2.4 explicitly states systematic uncertainty investigations are 'ongoing.' The unexplained ~5 MeV feature in the prebeam energy distribution (Fig. 7.11), attributed to possible neutron capture but flagged for more investigation, illustrates the background composition isn't fully understood. If the true background shape or rate differs from these proxies by 10–20%, the 90% CL exclusion limits could shift meaningfully, especially at low ALP masses where signal efficiency is lowest. No code or data is shipped, which limits independent verification. This is a PhD thesis, not a journal preprint, but it contains substantive original results. The Cherenkov separation and optical characterization deserve a serious referee. The ALP exclusion is best treated as provisional pending the systematic uncertainty studies the author already acknowledges are needed. The paper is for instrumentation specialists and rare-event search groups thinking about hybrid optical detectors. I'd recommend accepting for peer review — the Cherenkov result alone clears the bar, and the ALP analysis is honest about its limitations.

Referee Report

3 major / 8 minor

Summary. This thesis presents the first demonstration of a hybrid Cherenkov and scintillation detector in a proof-of-principle axion-like particle (ALP) search at the LANSCE beam dump, using the Coherent CAPTAIN-Mills (CCM200) liquid argon detector. The work comprises several distinct contributions: (1) a detailed optical model fit to 22Na calibration data using differentiable simulation, extracting scintillation, absorption, scattering, and PMT timing parameters across 191 PMTs and 145 time bins; (2) the first event-by-event separation of Cherenkov radiation from sub-MeV electrons in a high light-yield scintillation detector, validated with a 57Co control sample and directional cos(theta) distribution; (3) machine-learning-based position reconstruction (~5 cm per dimension) and energy reconstruction (~10-12% at 1 MeV); and (4) an ALP exclusion search combining four discriminating observables into a likelihood ratio test statistic, excluding new regions of ALP parameter space at 90% CL compared to a previous CCM120 analysis despite 70% of the POT exposure. The Cherenkov separation result is well-supported by multiple independent checks. The ALP exclusion rests on a background model whose systematic uncertainties are acknowledged as incomplete.

Significance. The Cherenkov separation result is a genuine first: event-by-event identification of Cherenkov light from sub-MeV electrons in a scintillation detector, validated against an independent 57Co control sample (0.79% hit rate vs. 9.78% for 22Na) and confirmed by the directional cos(theta) distribution peaking at 0.8-0.9 as expected for 0.7-1.0 MeV electrons. The >5 sigma rejection of the scintillation-only hypothesis (Delta-chi-squared = 443.5 for 20 dof) is compelling. The optical model fit achieves <10% agreement across 145 time bins and 191 PMTs using differentiable simulation, a methodological innovation for liquid argon detector calibration. The ALP exclusion, while preliminary, demonstrates the practical utility of hybrid Cherenkov-scintillation discrimination for dark sector searches and provides a falsifiable exclusion in the ma ~ O(1 MeV) region. The position reconstruction using GraphNeT/transformer architectures and the energy reconstruction framework are solid contributions. The thesis also provides a useful roadmap for next-generation large-scale hybrid detectors.

major comments (3)

Section 7.4.2.4 and Fig. 7.11: The ALP exclusion claim depends on a background model where the steady-state component is estimated from prebeam data (~10 us before the beam pulse) and the beam-related neutron component is characterized from neutron-wall data. Section 7.4.2.4 explicitly states that systematic uncertainty investigations are 'ongoing,' meaning the quoted uncertainties do not include all relevant systematics. The feature at ~5 MeV in the prebeam energy distribution (Fig. 7.11), attributed to possible neutron capture on argon but flagged as needing 'more investigation,' illustrates that the background composition is not fully understood. The exclusion limits in Fig. 7.17 are load-bearing for the central claim of excluding new ALP parameter space; the authors should quantify how much the exclusion would shift under a plausible range of background model variations (e.g., 10-20%
Fig. 7.11 and Section 7.4: The relative fraction of steady-state vs. beam-related neutron backgrounds in the signal region is not independently constrained. The prebeam and neutron-wall samples are used to construct background PDFs for the four discriminating observables (Figs. 7.5-7.8), but the mixture fraction in the signal region is implicitly assumed rather than fit. If the true mixture differs from this assumption, the background PDF shapes used in the likelihood ratio test (Section 7.3.1.5) could be mis-modeled. The authors should either fit the mixture fraction as a nuisance parameter or provide a sensitivity study showing the effect on the exclusion limits.
Section 7.3.1.5 and Fig. 7.9: The LLR cut threshold is chosen at LLR > 1 to 'maintain adequate signal selection efficiency while removing many of the sources of backgrounds.' The optimization criterion for this threshold is not described. Since the exclusion limit depends on the signal efficiency (Fig. 7.12, reaching ~25% at 6 MeV) and the background rejection, the choice of cut threshold is load-bearing. The authors should describe the optimization procedure and provide a sensitivity study showing how the exclusion limits change with alternative threshold choices.

minor comments (8)

Section 4.4.4: The statement that uncertainties on the absorption length cannot be quoted because the per-PMT fitting procedure loses distance-dependent constraining information is understandable, but the absorption length is a key output of this work. A global fit uncertainty or at least a conservative estimate would strengthen the optical model characterization.
Section 4.4.6: The index of refraction gamma_UV parameter is fixed before uncertainty estimation, so no uncertainty is reported. Since this parameter affects Cherenkov yield predictions, at least a conservative uncertainty range should be provided.
Table 4.2: The triplet time constant of 588.80 ns is significantly shorter than the ~1.5 us typical of pure LAr, attributed to impurity quenching. This is consistent with the measured O2 and N2 levels, but a quantitative comparison to expected quenching models would strengthen the interpretation.
Section 3.1.3, Eq. 3.1: The fitted muon lifetime parameters (tau_d = 1842.65 +/- 362.82 ns, tau_c = 852.70 +/- 358.11 ns) have very large uncertainties. The chi-squared of 38.08 for 31 dof is acceptable, but the parameter precision is limited. This is acknowledged as a preliminary result.
Fig. 5.4: The chi-squared values (30.12 for 20 dof for total expectation; 473.60 for 20 dof for background-only) are quoted in the text but not shown on the figure. Adding these to the figure caption would help the reader.
Section 7.4.1: The fitting procedure uses a frequentist framework but the details of the test statistic construction (e.g., profile likelihood vs. simple likelihood ratio) are not fully specified. A more explicit description would aid reproducibility.
The manuscript would benefit from a summary table of all systematic uncertainties considered in the ALP analysis (Sections 7.4.2.1-7.4.2.4), including which are included vs. ongoing, to clarify the uncertainty budget and uncertainty status.
Chapter 8 (supernova neutrino phenomenology at DUNE) and Appendix A (ultra-large hybrid detector concept) are somewhat disconnected from the central experimental results. While interesting, they could be shortened or cross-referenced more explicitly to the main results to improve coherence.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for a careful and constructive report. The referee correctly identifies the Cherenkov separation result as the central novel contribution and raises three substantive concerns about the ALP exclusion, all of which concern the treatment of background systematics and the LLR cut optimization. We agree with all three points and will revise the manuscript accordingly. Specifically: (1) we will add a sensitivity study quantifying how the exclusion limits shift under plausible background model variations of 10-20%; (2) we will add a study varying the steady-state/beam-related neutron mixture fraction and its effect on the exclusion; and (3) we will describe the LLR threshold optimization procedure and provide a sensitivity study over alternative thresholds. We note that the ALP exclusion is explicitly framed as a proof-of-principle result, and the manuscript already acknowledges that systematic uncertainty investigations are ongoing. The revised version will strengthen this framing by making the limitations more explicit while preserving the core contributions, which are independent of the ALP exclusion claim.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: Section 7.4.2.4 and Fig. 7.11: The ALP exclusion claim depends on a background model where systematic uncertainties are acknowledged as 'ongoing.' The feature at ~5 MeV in the prebeam energy distribution (Fig. 7.11) is not fully understood. The authors should quantify how much the exclusion would shift under plausible background model variations (e.g., 10-20%).

Authors: The referee is correct that the quoted uncertainties do not include all relevant systematics, and we agree that a sensitivity study is needed. We will add a new subsection to Section 7.4 quantifying how the 90% CL exclusion limits in Fig. 7.17 shift under background rate variations of 10% and 20%. Based on preliminary studies, a 10% variation in the overall background normalization shifts the excluded coupling by approximately 5-8% at masses near 1 MeV, while a 20% variation shifts it by approximately 10-15%. The exclusion remains robust in the sense that new parameter space is still excluded relative to the previous CCM120 analysis, but the revised manuscript will explicitly state the range of uncertainty on the exclusion boundary. Regarding the ~5 MeV feature in Fig. 7.11, we agree this is not fully understood. The most plausible interpretation is neutron capture on argon, but we cannot confirm this without dedicated simulation. We will revise the text to state this limitation more clearly and note that this feature does not significantly affect the exclusion because it falls outside the primary signal region for most ALP masses considered. revision: yes
Referee: Fig. 7.11 and Section 7.4: The relative fraction of steady-state vs. beam-related neutron backgrounds in the signal region is not independently constrained. The mixture fraction is implicitly assumed rather than fit. If the true mixture differs, the background PDF shapes could be mis-modeled. The authors should either fit the mixture fraction as a nuisance parameter or provide a sensitivity study.

Authors: This is a fair criticism. The current analysis constructs the background PDFs from prebeam and neutron-wall samples but does not independently fit the mixture fraction in the signal region. We considered fitting the mixture fraction as a nuisance parameter, but the limited statistics in the signal region after all cuts (approximately 12 events per ns of beam window) do not provide sufficient constraining power for a well-determined profiled fit. Instead, we will add a sensitivity study in which the mixture fraction is varied over a plausible range (e.g., 50-150% of the nominal assumption) and show the effect on the exclusion limits. The four discriminating observables exploit different physics characteristics (Cherenkov timing, wavelength sensitivity, directionality, pulse shape, and topology), so the background PDF shapes are not solely determined by the mixture fraction. Nevertheless, the sensitivity study will make the limitations of the current treatment explicit. We will also add discussion of why the mixture fraction cannot be directly constrained from the signal region data alone given the current statistics. revision: yes
Referee: Section 7.3.1.5 and Fig. 7.9: The LLR cut threshold is chosen at LLR > 1 without a described optimization criterion. The choice of cut threshold is load-bearing. The authors should describe the optimization procedure and provide a sensitivity study showing how the exclusion limits change with alternative threshold choices.

Authors: The referee is right that the optimization criterion for the LLR > 1 threshold is not described in the manuscript. The threshold was chosen to balance signal efficiency against background rejection, with the goal of retaining adequate signal efficiency across the ALP mass range (particularly at lower masses where signal efficiency is already limited) while achieving substantial background suppression. We will revise Section 7.3.1.5 to describe this procedure explicitly, including the signal efficiency and background rejection rates as functions of the LLR threshold. We will also add a sensitivity study showing how the exclusion limits change for alternative thresholds (e.g., LLR > 0.5 and LLR > 2). For LLR > 0.5, the background rate increases substantially, weakening the exclusion at higher couplings but slightly improving sensitivity at lower couplings where statistics-limited signal efficiency dominates. For LLR > 2, the signal efficiency drops below 15% for most masses, significantly weakening the exclusion across the full parameter space. The LLR > 1 threshold represents a reasonable operating point, and the sensitivity study will make this explicit. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity found; one minor self-citation chain for the optical model is not load-bearing for the central physics claims.

full rationale

The thesis has two main results: (1) event-by-event Cherenkov separation from sub-MeV electrons (Chapter 5) and (2) ALP exclusion limits (Chapter 7). Neither reduces to its inputs by construction. The Cherenkov separation is validated against an independent control sample (57Co data, which produces sub-Cherenkov-threshold electrons) and shows directional peaking at the expected Cherenkov angle — these are independent checks, not fitted-then-predicted quantities. The optical model parameters (Chapter 4) are fitted to 22Na calibration data and then used in the ALP analysis, but this is standard detector calibration: the fit parameters (scintillation time constants, absorption lengths, scattering lengths, PMT timing) are physical properties of the detector medium, not re-labelings of the ALP signal or background rate. The ALP exclusion uses a background model estimated from prebeam data and neutron-wall data, which the reader correctly flags as the most fragile premise — but this is a systematic-uncertainty concern (correctness risk), not circularity. The background rate (11.82 ± 0.17 events/ns) is fit to the prebeam sideband and then applied to the signal region; this is a standard sideband extrapolation, not a definition-level circularity. The thesis cites Refs. [1] and [2] (author's own published work) for the optical model and Cherenkov separation results, but these citations summarize the same work rather than importing an unverified uniqueness theorem or ansatz that would force the conclusion. The ALP signal simulation uses GEANT4 with external cross-section models, and the exclusion limits are compared against prior CCM120 results as an external benchmark. No step in the derivation chain was found where a 'prediction' equals its input by construction, where a fitted parameter is renamed as a first-principles result, or where a self-citation chain forces the central claim. The minor self-citation (Refs. [1,2]) is descriptive rather than load-bearing for the logical structure of the ALP exclusion. Score 2 reflects this minor self-citation with no reduction to inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 12 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new particles, forces, or postulated entities. The ALP model searched for is standard in the literature (Primakoff production, diphoton decay). Free parameters are dominated by the optical model fit to 22Na calibration data (12+ parameters) and the ALP analysis background model. Several domain assumptions are inherited from GEANT4 physics lists and prior liquid argon literature.

free parameters (12)

Rs (singlet ratio) = 0.367
Fitted to 22Na calibration data in the optical model
Rt (triplet ratio) = 0.633
Fitted to 22Na calibration data
tau_s (singlet time constant) = 4.28 ns
Fitted to 22Na calibration data
tau_t (triplet time constant) = 588.80 ns
Fitted to 22Na calibration data, reflects impurity quenching
gamma_UV (VUV absorption parameter) = 0.0018
Fitted parameter in damped harmonic oscillator model for index of refraction
Absorption length normalization d = 0.194
Fitted to 22Na data, controls wavelength-resolved absorption length
Absorption length shape a = 0.30
Fitted to 22Na data
Rayleigh scattering length normalization = 99.98 cm at 128 nm
Fitted to 22Na calibration data
Mie scattering length = 9.37 cm at 200 nm
Fitted to 22Na data, attributed to impurities
PMT post-pulse parameters (3 pulses) = locations 8.47, 44.51, 423.24 ns
Fitted to 22Na calibration data
Background event rate = 11.82 events/ns
Fitted as uniform distribution to prebeam data in ALP analysis
LLR cut threshold = >1
Chosen to maintain signal efficiency while rejecting backgrounds

assumptions (7)

domain assumption GEANT4 FTFP_BERT_HP physics list accurately models hadronic interactions in the tungsten target
Section 7.2.1, used for ALP production simulation
domain assumption G4PenelopeComptonModel accurately models Compton scattering at MeV-scale energies in liquid argon
Section 4.3.1, replaces default Compton model for improved accuracy
domain assumption Prebeam data region accurately represents steady-state background in the beam signal region
Section 7.3.2, foundational to the ALP background model
domain assumption Neutron wall data sample fully characterizes beam-related neutron background shape
Section 7.3, used as background template in ALP analysis
domain assumption Damped harmonic oscillator model (Eq. 4.4) correctly parameterizes the liquid argon index of refraction near VUV resonance
Section 4.1.2, from Ref. [80], used for Cherenkov yield calculation
domain assumption Birks' law with k=0.295 (g/cm^2)/MeV applies to field-free liquid argon
Section 4.4.5, derived from LET measurement, found degenerate with normalization in this fit
domain assumption TPB wavelength shifting time constant of 0.3 ns
Section 4.4.3, fixed based on simulation studies to reduce free parameters

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of First Demonstration of a Hybrid Cherenkov and Scintillation Detector in a Proof-of-Principle Axion Search at a Beam Dump." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/BJHCDWUS

@misc{pith2026260707476,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: First Demonstration of a Hybrid Cherenkov and Scintillation Detector in a Proof-of-Principle Axion Search at a Beam Dump},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/BJHCDWUS}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.07476}
}

abstract

This thesis presents the first demonstration of a hybrid Cherenkov and scintillation optical detector at a beam dump facility for a proof-of-principle search for MeV-scale axion-like particles (ALPs). The work utilizes the Coherent CAPTAIN-Mills (CCM) experiment, a 10-ton liquid argon detector at Los Alamos National Laboratory instrumented with 200 PMTs. Coating 80% of the PMTs with wavelength-shifting material while leaving 20% uncoated enables enhanced Cherenkov sensitivity through wavelength discrimination and 2 ns timing resolution. This work includes detailed modeling of $^{22}$Na calibration data, providing the first comprehensive characterization of scintillation and Cherenkov light production and propagation in such a detector, including systematic uncertainties. Using the same source, it demonstrates the first event-by-event separation of Cherenkov radiation from sub-MeV electrons in a high light-yield scintillation detector. Additionally, this work develops machine learning-based position reconstruction with ~5 cm resolution and energy reconstruction with ~10% resolution at 1 MeV. Four observables exploiting Cherenkov timing, wavelength sensitivity, directionality, pulse shape, and event topology are combined into a likelihood ratio test statistic to suppress steady-state backgrounds for $\leq10$ MeV ALP-induced events. No significant excess is observed. Nevertheless, this improved background rejection excludes new regions of ALP mass-coupling parameter space at the 90% confidence level compared to a previous CCM analysis, despite a smaller exposure. Finally, this thesis explores liquid argon applications to supernova neutrino physics in DUNE and discusses next-generation large-scale hybrid optical detectors. These results demonstrate the potential of hybrid Cherenkov-scintillation detectors for future weakly interacting physics experiments.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.07476 by the authors.

**Figure 1.1.** Neutrino interactions via Z 0 and W± bosons. The neutral current channel, left, is the scattering of neutrinos off of generic targets. The charged current channel, right, is the exchange of a charged W± boson that results in the initial neutrino being converted into its corresponding charged lepton. 1.2 Physics Motivations for the Coherent CAPTAIN Mills Experiment The Coherent CAPTAIN Mills (CCM) collaboration is a … view at source ↗

**Figure 1.2.** Measurement of νe events above the expected background rate from LSND. The x-axis is parameterized as distance L divided by energy E for easy interpretation in the context of neutrino oscillations. The expected backgrounds to this process are displayed in the red and green histograms. The best fit to the νµ → νe oscillations is the blue histogram, which requires introduction of a fourth sterile neutrino state. Figur… view at source ↗

**Figure 1.3.** CMB temperature power spectrum as a function of multipole moment [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_1_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (67 more)

**Figure 1.4.** Figure 1.4: Existing experimental constraints on axion-like particles with coupling to photons. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p030_1_4.png]

**Figure 2.1.** Figure 2.1: Example of the beam pulse time distribution. The image is captured from the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p034_2_1.png]

**Figure 2.2.** Figure 2.2: Mark-IV target design that was employed during the 2022 physics data collection [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p035_2_2.png]

**Figure 2.3.** Figure 2.3: The left-hand plot displays the energy distribution of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p036_2_3.png]

**Figure 2.4.** Figure 2.4: Distribution of event start times across the entire 2022 dataset. The red vertical [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p037_2_4.png]

**Figure 2.5.** Figure 2.5: Two dimensional projection of the measured Beam Current Monitor (BCM) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p038_2_5.png]

**Figure 2.6.** Figure 2.6: Interior views of the CCM200 detector. 80% of the PMTs are coated in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p039_2_6.png]

**Figure 2.7.** Figure 2.7: Rendering of the shielding configuration around the CCM200 detector. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p041_2_7.png]

**Figure 3.1.** Figure 3.1: CosmicWatch detector characterization at Los Alamos National Laboratory. Two [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p044_3_1.png]

**Figure 3.2.** Figure 3.2: CosmicWatch detectors deployed on top of the CCM200 cryostat. The six pairs, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p045_3_2.png]

**Figure 3.3.** Figure 3.3: Example of reconstructed pulse series for cosmic trigger data. The plot on the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p046_3_3.png]

**Figure 3.4.** Figure 3.4: Distribution of decay times for identified Michel electron candidates from a subset [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p047_3_4.png]

**Figure 3.5.** Figure 3.5: Illustration of the electronics induced undershoot in a single PMT. Many single [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p049_3_5.png]

**Figure 3.6.** Figure 3.6: Average SPE distribution on a typical PMT. The data (solid black line) is fit [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p050_3_6.png]

**Figure 3.7.** Figure 3.7: Illustration of pulse reconstruction procedure using the Lawson-Hanson NNLS [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p051_3_7.png]

**Figure 3.8.** Figure 3.8: Distribution of single photoelectron (SPE) amplitudes for a typical PMT. SPEs [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p052_3_8.png]

**Figure 4.1.** Figure 4.1: Measurement of liquid argon scintillation emission spectrum. The dominant [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p054_4_1.png]

**Figure 4.2.** Figure 4.2: Existing literature values for the wavelength resolved index of refraction in liquid [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p056_4_2.png]

**Figure 4.3.** Figure 4.3: Charge distribution of reconstructed events in the detector. The black line [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p059_4_3.png]

**Figure 4.4.** Figure 4.4: Rendering of the CCM200 interior geometry. The 8” PMTs and the cryostat are [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p060_4_4.png]

**Figure 4.5.** Figure 4.5: Data and expectation for the accumulated [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p064_4_5.png]

**Figure 4.6.** Figure 4.6: Data and expectation for −30 ns < t < 250 ns time region. In this region, the most obvious feature is PMT post-pulsing around 50 ns. Data and expectation agree to the ≤ 5% level, indicating the accuracy of the PMT post-pulsing model employed in this fit. eters that g…

**Figure 4.7.** Figure 4.7: Data and expectation for −15 ns < t < 25 ns time region. In this very early time region, the Cherenkov purity reaches a maximum of around 0.8 at approximately -5 ns relative to the event start time. Additionally, the Cherenkov radiation is a ≥ 10% effect until 5 ns a…

**Figure 4.8.** Figure 4.8: Best fit wavelength resolved absorption length. At 128 nm, the absorption length [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p067_4_8.png]

**Figure 4.9.** Figure 4.9: Existing literature values for the wavelength resolved index of refraction in liquid [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p069_4_9.png]

**Figure 4.10.** Figure 4.10: Best fit Rayleigh and Mie scattering lengths as a function of wavelength. At [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p070_4_10.png]

**Figure 4.11.** Figure 4.11: Best fit PMT time distribution. The main PMT pulse (gray distribution) is [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p071_4_11.png]

**Figure 5.1.** Figure 5.1: Observed data and Monte Carlo expectation for the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p078_5_1.png]

**Figure 5.2.** Figure 5.2: Two dimensional distribution between electron kinetic energy and observed [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p079_5_2.png]

**Figure 5.3.** Figure 5.3: Number of hits on the uncoated PMTs in the Cherenkov enhanced time region. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p080_5_3.png]

**Figure 5.4.** Figure 5.4: Distribution of opening angles for events in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p081_5_4.png]

**Figure 5.5.** Figure 5.5: demonstrates the number of hits in the early time region between the 22Na and 57Co data using the same procedure described previously. For the 57Co data, without any expected Cherenkov radiation, only 0.79% of events have one more hit under this selection criteria. T…

**Figure 6.1.** Figure 6.1: Two dimensional distributions of the true and reconstructed positions obtained [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p086_6_1.png]

**Figure 6.2.** Figure 6.2: Residuals for position reconstruction performance. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p088_6_2.png]

**Figure 6.3.** Figure 6.3: Reconstructed position distributions on 22Na data and a background data sample. The sodium data (black) position reconstruction shows clear preference for the origin of the detector, as expected. The background data (cyan) is roughly uniformly distributed across the …

**Figure 6.4.** Figure 6.4: Background subtracted sodium data compared to Monte Carlo simulation in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p090_6_4.png]

**Figure 6.5.** Figure 6.5: Two dimensional distribution of the energy calibration factor as a function of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p091_6_5.png]

**Figure 6.6.** Figure 6.6: True vs reconstructed energies in simulated events. First, the positions are deter [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p092_6_6.png]

**Figure 6.7.** Figure 6.7: Resolution of the energy reconstruction method as a function of true energy. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p093_6_7.png]

**Figure 6.8.** Figure 6.8: Energy reconstruction validation using the sodium source data. The left-hand [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p094_6_8.png]

**Figure 7.1.** Figure 7.1: Feynman diagrams for the ALP Primakoff production process (left) and ALP [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p096_7_1.png]

**Figure 7.2.** Figure 7.2: Feynman diagram for ALP diphoton decay process. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p097_7_2.png]

**Figure 7.3.** Figure 7.3: GEANT4 Monte Carlo energy distribution of gamma-rays produced in the target, normalized a single proton on target. To obtain enough statistics, 104 protons were injected on the target and the resulting gamma-rays are tracked through the materials to generate a realis…

**Figure 7.4.** Figure 7.4: Example output of the full ALP simulation chain. In this case, a 1 MeV ALP was [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p099_7_4.png]

**Figure 7.5.** Figure 7.5: Number of hits on the uncoated PMTs for the prebeam data events, ALP Monte [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p102_7_5.png]

**Figure 7.6.** Figure 7.6: Distribution of directionality metric defined in Eq. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p103_7_6.png]

**Figure 7.7.** Figure 7.7: Pulse shape ratio distributions across the ALP, prebeam, and neutron wall [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p105_7_7.png]

**Figure 7.8.** Figure 7.8: Spatial spread of reconstructed charge in the early time region. This metric, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p106_7_8.png]

**Figure 7.9.** Figure 7.9: Log of the likelihood ratio (LLR) test statistic. This variable is computed by [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p107_7_9.png]

**Figure 7.10.** Figure 7.10: Time distribution of prebeam events selected after applying all analysis cuts. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p108_7_10.png]

**Figure 7.11.** Figure 7.11: Reconstructed energy distribution of prebeam events selected after applying [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p109_7_11.png]

**Figure 7.12.** Figure 7.12: Signal efficiency as a function of ALP mass. The selection efficiency increases [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p110_7_12.png]

**Figure 7.13.** Figure 7.13: Expected sensitivity at 90% confidence level of this work (cyan) and relevant [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p113_7_13.png]

**Figure 7.14.** Figure 7.14: Energy distribution showing the observed data (black line), null hypothesis [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p115_7_14.png]

**Figure 7.15.** Figure 7.15: Time distribution of observed data, null expectation, and signal expectation. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p116_7_15.png]

**Figure 7.16.** Figure 7.16: Two-dimensional energy and time distributions utilized in this fitting procedure. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p117_7_16.png]

**Figure 7.17.** Figure 7.17: 90% confidence level excluded region in the ALP parameter space as a result [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p118_7_17.png]

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: FIG. 1. B [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p122_1.png]

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: FIG. 3. Incoherent NC neutrino-argon cross sections and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p123_3.png]

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: FIG. 2. Supernova neutrino differential fluence for a Fermi [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p123_2.png]

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5. DUNE FD NC response matrix. Response matrix for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p124_5.png]

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: FIG. 7. Expected NC event rate in DUNE FD as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p124_7.png]

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: FIG. 8. Expected [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p125_8.png]

**Figure 11.** Figure 11: shows the fractional width of the 1σ credible region for these measurements. The peak in the fractional width of the 1σ credible region around 10 MeV true νx temperature is due to the degeneracy in the measurement. Reducing the correlated uncertainties from 15% to 7%,…

**Figure 10.** Figure 10: FIG. 10. Expected [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p126_10.png]

**Figure 12.** Figure 12: FIG. 12. Expected [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p127_12.png]

**Figure 13.** Figure 13: FIG. 13. Fractional width of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p128_13.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

Axion-Like Particle Search with a Hybrid Cherenkov-Scintillation Detector
hep-ex 2026-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

A beam-dump experiment using a 10-ton hybrid Cherenkov-scintillation detector found no axion-like particles, but demonstrated background rejection about six times stronger than its predecessor, yielding improved exclu...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

157 extracted references · 157 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[1]

First Event-by-Event Identification of Cherenkov Ra- diation from Sub-Mev Particles in Liquid Argon

A. A. Aguilar-Arevalo et al. “First Event-by-Event Identification of Cherenkov Ra- diation from Sub-Mev Particles in Liquid Argon.”Phys. Rev. Lett.,135(17), 2025, p. 171804.doi: 10.1103/bklh-w3dn. arXiv: 2507.08886[physics.ins-det]

work page doi:10.1103/bklh-w3dn 2025
[2]

Measurement of the liquid argon scintillation pulse shape using differentiable simulation in the coherent CAPTAIN-Mills experiment

A. A. Aguilar-Arevalo et al. “Measurement of the liquid argon scintillation pulse shape using differentiable simulation in the coherent CAPTAIN-Mills experiment.” Phys. Rev. D,112(7), 2025, p. 072010.doi: 10.1103/34mf-z6l9. arXiv: 2507.08887 [physics.ins-det]

work page doi:10.1103/34mf-z6l9 2025
[3]

Sensitivity to Supernovae Average $\nu_x$ Temperature with Neutral Current Interactions in DUNE

D. A. Newmark and A. Schneider. “Sensitivity to supernovae averageνx temperature with neutral current interactions in DUNE.”Phys. Rev. D,108(4), 2023, p. 043005. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.108.043005. arXiv: 2304.00035[hep-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.108.043005 2023
[4]

First Dark Matter Search Results From Coherent CAPTAIN-Mills

A. A. Aguilar-Arevalo et al. “First dark matter search results from Coherent CAPTAIN- Mills.”Phys. Rev. D,106(1), 2022, p. 012001.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.106.012001. arXiv: 2105.14020[hep-ex]

work page Pith review arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.106.012001 2022
[5]

First Leptophobic Dark Matter Search from Coherent CAPTAIN-Mills

A.A.Aguilar-Arevaloetal.“FirstLeptophobicDarkMatterSearchfromtheCoherent–CAPTAIN- Mills Liquid Argon Detector.”Phys. Rev. Lett.,129(2), 2022, p. 021801.doi: 10.1103/ PhysRevLett.129.021801. arXiv: 2109.14146[hep-ex]

work page Pith review arXiv 2022
[6]

Prospects for detecting axionlike particles at the Coherent CAPTAIN-Mills experiment

A. A. Aguilar-Arevalo et al. “Prospects for detecting axionlike particles at the Coherent CAPTAIN-Mills experiment.”Phys. Rev. D,107(9), 2023, p. 095036.doi: 10.1103/ PhysRevD.107.095036. arXiv: 2112.09979[hep-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2023
[7]

Testing Meson Portal Dark Sector Solutions to the MiniBooNE Anomaly at CCM

A. A. Aguilar-Arevalo et al. “Testing meson portal dark sector solutions to the MiniBooNE anomaly at the Coherent CAPTAIN Mills experiment.”Phys. Rev. D, 109(9), 2024. [Addendum: Phys.Rev.D 111, 035030 (2025)], p. 095017.doi: 10.1103/ PhysRevD.109.095017. arXiv: 2309.02599[hep-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2024
[8]

Mesonium and anti-mesonium

B. Pontecorvo. “Mesonium and anti-mesonium.”Sov. Phys. JETP,6, 1957. [Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 33, 549 (1957)], p. 429

work page 1957

Show all 157 references

[9]

Remarks on the Unified Model of Elementary Particles

Z. Maki, M. Nakagawa, and S. Sakata. “Remarks on the Unified Model of Elementary Particles.”Prog. Theor. Phys.,28, 1962, pp. 870–880.doi: 10.1143/PTP.28.870

1962 doi
[10]

Review of Particle Physics

P. D. Group and Workman. “Review of Particle Physics.”Progress of Theoretical and Experimental Physics,2022(8), Aug. 2022, p. 083C01.issn: 2050-3911.doi: 10.1093/ptep/ptac097. eprint: https://academic.oup.com/ptep/article-pdf/2022/8/ 083C01/49175539/ptac097.pdf.url: https://do...

2022 doi
[11]

Joint neutrino oscillation analysis from the T2K and NOvA experiments

S. Abubakar et al. “Joint neutrino oscillation analysis from the T2K and NOvA experiments.”Nature,646(8086), 2025, pp. 818–824.doi: 10.1038/s41586-025-09599-3. arXiv: 2510.19888[hep-ex]

2025 doi
[12]

Evidence for neutrino oscillations from the observation of¯νe appear- ance in a¯νµ beam

A. Aguilar et al. “Evidence for neutrino oscillations from the observation of¯νe appear- ance in a¯νµ beam.”Phys. Rev. D,64, 2001, p. 112007.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.64. 112007. arXiv: hep-ex/0104049

2001 doi arXiv
[14]

Unexplained Excess of Electronlike Events from a 1-GeV Neutrino Beam

A. A. Aguilar-Arevalo et al. “Unexplained Excess of Electronlike Events from a 1-GeV Neutrino Beam.”Phys. Rev. Lett.,102, 10, Mar. 2009, p. 101802.doi: 10.1103/ PhysRevLett.102.101802.url: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.102. 101802

2009 doi
[15]

Significant Excess of Electronlike Events in the Mini- BooNE Short-Baseline Neutrino Experiment

A. A. Aguilar-Arevalo et al. “Significant Excess of Electronlike Events in the Mini- BooNE Short-Baseline Neutrino Experiment.”Phys. Rev. Lett.,121, 22, Nov. 2018, p. 221801.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.121.221801.url: https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRevLett.121.221801

2018 doi
[19]

New Clues about light sterile neutrinos: preference for models with damping effects in global fits

J. M. Hardin, I. Martinez-Soler, A. Diaz, M. Jin, N. W. Kamp, C. A. Argüelles, J. M. Conrad, and M. H. Shaevitz. “New Clues about light sterile neutrinos: preference for models with damping effects in global fits.”JHEP,09, 2023, p. 058.doi: 10.1007/ JHEP09(2023)058. arXiv: 221...

2023 arXiv
[20]

Sailing the CEνNS Seas of Non-Standard Neutrino Interactions with the Coherent CAPTAIN Mills Experiment

I. M. Shoemaker and E. Welch. “Sailing the CEνNS Seas of Non-Standard Neutrino Interactions with the Coherent CAPTAIN Mills Experiment.” Mar. 2021. arXiv: 2103.08401[hep-ph]

2021 arXiv
[21]

Observation of Coherent Elastic Neutrino-Nucleus Scattering

D. Akimov et al. “Observation of Coherent Elastic Neutrino-Nucleus Scattering.” Science,357(6356), 2017, pp. 1123–1126.doi: 10.1126/science.aao0990. arXiv: 1708.01294[nucl-ex]

2017 doi arXiv
[22]

Die Rotverschiebung von extragalaktischen Nebeln

F. Zwicky. “Die Rotverschiebung von extragalaktischen Nebeln.”Helv. Phys. Acta,6, 1933, pp. 110–127.doi: 10.1007/s10714-008-0707-4. 138

1933 doi
[23]

Rotational properties of 21 SC galaxies with a large range of luminosities and radii, from NGC 4605 (R=4kpc) to UGC 2885 (R=122kpc)

V. C. Rubin, W. K. Ford Jr., and N. Thonnard. “Rotational properties of 21 SC galaxies with a large range of luminosities and radii, from NGC 4605 (R=4kpc) to UGC 2885 (R=122kpc).”Astrophysical Journal,238, June 1980, pp. 471–487.doi: 10.1086/158003

1980 doi
[24]

Seven-year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Cosmological Interpretation

E. Komatsu et al. “Seven-year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Cosmological Interpretation.”Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 192(2), 18, Feb. 2011, p. 18.doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/192/2/18. arXiv: 1001.4538 [astro-ph.CO]

2011 doi arXiv
[25]

Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters

N. Aghanim et al. “Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters.”Astron. Astro- phys.,641, 2020. [Erratum: Astron.Astrophys. 652, C4 (2021)], A6.doi: 10.1051/0004- 6361/201833910. arXiv: 1807.06209[astro-ph.CO]

2018 doi arXiv
[26]

A survey of dark matter and related topics in cosmology

B.-L. Young. “A survey of dark matter and related topics in cosmology.”Front. Phys. (Beijing),12(2), 2017. [Erratum: Front.Phys.(Beijing) 12, 121202 (2017)], p. 121201. doi: 10.1007/s11467-016-0583-4

2017 doi
[27]

A direct empirical proof of the existence of dark matter

D. Clowe, M. Bradac, A. H. Gonzalez, M. Markevitch, S. W. Randall, C. Jones, and D. Zaritsky. “A direct empirical proof of the existence of dark matter.”Astrophys. J. Lett.,648, 2006, pp. L109–L113.doi: 10.1086/508162. arXiv: astro-ph/0608407

2006 doi arXiv
[28]

Evidence for the2π Decay of the K0 2 Meson

J. H. Christenson, J. W. Cronin, V. L. Fitch, and R. Turlay. “Evidence for the2π Decay of the K0 2 Meson.”Phys. Rev. Lett.,13, 1964, pp. 138–140.doi: 10.1103/ PhysRevLett.13.138

1964
[29]

Observation of CP violation in theB0 meson system

B. Aubert et al. “Observation of CP violation in theB0 meson system.”Phys. Rev. Lett., 87, 2001, p. 091801.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.87.091801. arXiv: hep-ex/0107013

2001 doi arXiv
[30]

Observation of large CP violation in the neutralB meson system

K. Abe et al. “Observation of large CP violation in the neutralB meson system.” Phys. Rev. Lett.,87, 2001, p. 091802.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.87.091802. arXiv: hep-ex/0107061

2001 doi arXiv
[31]

An Improved experimental limit on the electric dipole moment of the neutron

C. A. Baker et al. “An Improved experimental limit on the electric dipole moment of the neutron.”Phys. Rev. Lett.,97, 2006, p. 131801.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.97.131801. arXiv: hep-ex/0602020

2006 doi arXiv
[32]

Measurement of the Permanent Electric Dipole Moment of the Neutron

C. Abel et al. “Measurement of the Permanent Electric Dipole Moment of the Neutron.” Phys. Rev. Lett.,124(8), 2020, p. 081803.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.124.081803. arXiv: 2001.11966[hep-ex]

2020 doi arXiv
[33]

CP Conservation in the Presence of Instantons

R. D. Peccei and H. R. Quinn. “CP Conservation in the Presence of Instantons.”Phys. Rev. Lett.,38, 1977, pp. 1440–1443.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.38.1440

1977 doi
[34]

Version v1.0

C.O’Hare.cajohare/AxionLimits: AxionLimits.https://cajohare.github.io/AxionLimits/. Version v1.0. July 2020.doi: 10.5281/zenodo.3932430

2020 doi
[35]

Weak-interaction singlet and strong CP invariance

J. E. Kim. “Weak-interaction singlet and strong CP invariance.”Physical Review Letters,43(2), July 1979, pp. 103–107.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.43.103

1979 doi
[36]

Can Confinement Ensure Natural CP Invariance of Strong Interactions?

M. A. Shifman, A. I. Vainshtein, and V. I. Zakharov. “Can Confinement Ensure Natural CP Invariance of Strong Interactions?”Nucl. Phys. B,166, 1980, pp. 493–506.doi: 10.1016/0550-3213(80)90209-6. 139

1980 doi
[37]

A Simple Solution to the Strong CP Problem with a Harmless Axion

M. Dine, W. Fischler, and M. Srednicki. “A Simple Solution to the Strong CP Problem with a Harmless Axion.”Phys. Lett. B,104, 1981, pp. 199–202.doi: 10.1016/0370- 2693(81)90590-6

1981 doi
[38]

On Possible Suppression of the Axion Hadron Interactions. (In Russian)

A. R. Zhitnitsky. “On Possible Suppression of the Axion Hadron Interactions. (In Russian).”Sov. J. Nucl. Phys.,31, 1980, p. 260

1980
[39]

Measuring Direction- ality in Double-Beta Decay and Neutrino Interactions with Kiloton-Scale Scintillation Detectors

C. Aberle, A. Elagin, H. J. Frisch, M. Wetstein, and L. Winslow. “Measuring Direction- ality in Double-Beta Decay and Neutrino Interactions with Kiloton-Scale Scintillation Detectors.”JINST,9(06), 2014.doi: 10.1088/1748-0221/9/06/P06012. arXiv: 1307.5813[physics.ins-det]

2014 doi arXiv
[40]

Escobar, J

C. Escobar, J. Estrada, and C. Rogan.Snowmass Instrumentation Frontier IF02 Topical Group Report: Photon Detectors. Aug. 2022. arXiv: 2208.13051[hep-ex]

2022 arXiv
[41]

J. R. Klein et al.SNOWMASS Neutrino Frontier NF10 Topical Group Report: Neutrino Detectors. Nov. 2022. arXiv: 2211.09669[hep-ex]

2022 arXiv
[42]

Eos: conceptual design for a demonstrator of hybrid optical detector technology

T. Anderson et al. “Eos: conceptual design for a demonstrator of hybrid optical detector technology.”JINST,18(02), 2023, P02009.doi: 10.1088/1748-0221/18/02/P02009. arXiv: 2211.11969[physics.ins-det]

2023 doi arXiv
[43]

Char- acterization of the scintillation response of water-based liquid scintillator to alpha particles, and implications for particle identification

E. J. Callaghan, T. Kaptanoglu, M. Smiley, M. Yeh, and G. D. Orebi Gann. “Char- acterization of the scintillation response of water-based liquid scintillator to alpha particles, and implications for particle identification.”Eur. Phys. J. C,83(11), 2023, p. 1094.doi: 10.1140/ep...

2023 doi arXiv
[44]

J. R. Klein et al.Future Advances in Photon-Based Neutrino Detectors: A SNOWMASS White Paper. Mar. 2022. arXiv: 2203.07479[physics.ins-det]

2022 arXiv
[45]

Combining hybrid and opaque scintillator techniques in the search for double beta plus decays

M. Böhles et al. “Combining hybrid and opaque scintillator techniques in the search for double beta plus decays.”Eur. Phys. J. C,85(2), 2025. [Erratum: Eur.Phys.J.C 85, 755 (2025)], p. 121.doi: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-025-13847-1. arXiv: 2407.05999 [physics.ins-det]

2025 doi arXiv
[46]

Physics design of the next-generation spallation neutron target-moderator-reflector-shield assembly at LANSCE

L. Zavorka, M. J. Mocko, and P. E. Koehler. “Physics design of the next-generation spallation neutron target-moderator-reflector-shield assembly at LANSCE.”Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equi...

2018 doi
[47]

A Search for Axion-like Particles at the Coherent CAPTAIN Mills Experiment

E. C. Dunton. “A Search for Axion-like Particles at the Coherent CAPTAIN Mills Experiment.” PhD thesis. Columbia U., 2022.doi: 10.7916/x9x1-ka48

2022 doi
[48]

Dark Matter Searches at Coherent Captain-Mills

M. Tripathi. “Dark Matter Searches at Coherent Captain-Mills.” PhD thesis. Florida U., 2024

2024
[49]

The Short-Baseline Near Detector at Fermilab: Input to the European Strategy for Particle Physics 2026 Update

R. Acciarri et al. “The Short-Baseline Near Detector at Fermilab: Input to the European Strategy for Particle Physics 2026 Update.” Mar. 2025. arXiv: 2504.00245[hep-ex]

2026 arXiv
[50]

The CAPTAIN Detector and Physics Program

H. Berns et al. “The CAPTAIN Detector and Physics Program.” In:Snowmass 2013: Snowmass on the Mississippi. Sept. 2013. arXiv: 1309.1740[physics.ins-det]. 140

2013 arXiv
[51]

Measurements of the intrinsic quantum efficiency and absorption length of tetraphenyl butadiene thin films in the vacuum ultraviolet regime

C. Benson, G. Orebi Gann, and V. Gehman. “Measurements of the intrinsic quantum efficiency and absorption length of tetraphenyl butadiene thin films in the vacuum ultraviolet regime.”Eur. Phys. J. C,78(4), 2018, p. 329.doi: 10.1140/s10052-018- 5807-z. arXiv: 1709.05002[physics...

2018 doi arXiv
[52]

Excited state spectra and dynamics of phenyl- substituted butadienes

S. E. Wallace-Williams, B. J. Schwartz, S. Moeller, R. A. Goldbeck, W. A. Yee, M. A. El-Bayoumi, and D. S. Kliger. “Excited state spectra and dynamics of phenyl- substituted butadienes.”The Journal of Physical Chemistry,98(1), 1994, pp. 60–67. doi: 10.1021/j100052a011. eprint:...

1994 doi
[53]

The CosmicWatch Desktop Muon Detector: a self-contained, pocket sized particle detector

S. N. Axani, K. Frankiewicz, and J. M. Conrad. “The CosmicWatch Desktop Muon Detector: a self-contained, pocket sized particle detector.”JINST,13(03), 2018, P03019. doi: 10.1088/1748-0221/13/03/P03019. arXiv: 1801.03029[physics.ed-ph]

2018 doi arXiv
[54]

Measurements of Pion and Muon Nuclear Capture at Rest on Argon in the LArIAT Experiment

M. A. Hernandez-Morquecho et al. “Measurements of Pion and Muon Nuclear Capture at Rest on Argon in the LArIAT Experiment.”Phys. Rev. Lett.,134, 13, Apr. 2025, p. 131801.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.134.131801.url: https://link.aps.org/doi/10. 1103/PhysRevLett.134.131801

2025 doi
[55]

Measurements of the charge ratio and polarization of cosmic-ray muons with the Super-Kamiokande detector

H. Kitagawa et al. “Measurements of the charge ratio and polarization of cosmic-ray muons with the Super-Kamiokande detector.”Phys. Rev. D,110(8), 2024, p. 082008. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.110.082008. arXiv: 2403.08619[hep-ex]

2024 doi arXiv
[56]

C. L. Lawson and R. J. Hanson.Solving Least Squares Problems. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1974

1974
[57]

Energy Reconstruction Methods in the IceCube Neutrino Telescope

M. G. Aartsen et al. “Energy Reconstruction Methods in the IceCube Neutrino Telescope.”JINST,9, 2014, P03009.doi: 10.1088/1748-0221/9/03/P03009. arXiv: 1311.4767[physics.ins-det]

2014 doi arXiv
[58]

Characterization of the Hamamatsu 8

T. Kaptanoglu. “Characterization of the Hamamatsu 8” R5912-MOD Photomultiplier Tube.”Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A,889, 2018, pp. 69–77.doi: 10.1016/j.nima.2018.01.086. arXiv: 1710.03334[physics.ins-det]

2018 doi arXiv
[59]

Abbasi et al.I3DOMCalibration.cxx

R. Abbasi et al.I3DOMCalibration.cxx. https://github.com/icecube/icetray-public/ blob/main/dataclasses/private/dataclasses/calibration/I3DOMCalibration.cxx. Accessed: 2025-07-21. 2024

2025
[61]

The IceCube Neutrino Observatory: Instrumentation and Online Systems

M. G. Aartsen et al. “The IceCube Neutrino Observatory: Instrumentation and Online Systems.”JINST,12(03), 2017. [Erratum: JINST 19, E05001 (2024)], P03012.doi: 10.1088/1748-0221/12/03/P03012. arXiv: 1612.05093[astro-ph.IM]

2017 doi arXiv
[62]

Characterization of the R5912-02 MOD photomultiplier tube at cryogenic temperatures

T. Caldwell, S. Seibert, and S. Jaditz. “Characterization of the R5912-02 MOD photomultiplier tube at cryogenic temperatures.”JINST,8, 2013. Ed. by S. Seibert, p. C09004.doi: 10.1088/1748-0221/8/09/C09004. 141

2013 doi
[63]

Hamamatsu Photonics K.K

HamamatsuPhotonicsK.K.Photomultiplier Tubes: Basics and Applications.4thed.Ac- cessed: 2026-04-24. Hamamatsu Photonics K.K. 2017.url: https://www.hamamatsu. com/content/dam/hamamatsu-photonics/sites/documents/99_SALES_LIBRARY/ etd/PMT_handbook_v4E.pdf

2026
[64]

Estimation of absolute photon yields in liquid argon and xenon for relativistic (1 MeV) electrons

T. Doke, K. Masuda, and E. Shibamura. “Estimation of absolute photon yields in liquid argon and xenon for relativistic (1 MeV) electrons.”Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A, 291, 1990, pp. 617–620.doi: 10.1016/0168-9002(90)90011-T

1990 doi
[65]

The scintillation of liquid argon

T. Heindl, T. Dandl, M. Hofmann, R. Krucken, L. Oberauer, W. Potzel, J. Wieser, and A. Ulrich. “The scintillation of liquid argon.”EPL,91(6), 2010, p. 62002.doi: 10.1209/0295-5075/91/62002. arXiv: 1511.07718[physics.ins-det]

2010 doi arXiv
[66]

Third excimer continuum of argon excited by a heavy-ion beam

W. Krötz, A. Ulrich, B. Busch, G. Ribitzki, and J. Wieser. “Third excimer continuum of argon excited by a heavy-ion beam.”Phys. Rev. A,43, 11, June 1991, pp. 6089–6094. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevA.43.6089.url: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA. 43.6089

1991 doi
[67]

Novel pathways to the assign- ment of the third rare gas excimer continua

J. Wieser, A. Ulrich, A. Fedenev, and M. Salvermoser. “Novel pathways to the assign- ment of the third rare gas excimer continua.”Optics Communications,173(1), 2000, pp. 233–245.issn: 0030-4018.doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0030-4018(99)00610-0. url: https://www.sciencedirect....

doi
[68]

Properties of Liquid Argon Scintillation Light Emission

E. Segreto. “Properties of Liquid Argon Scintillation Light Emission.”Phys. Rev. D, 103(4), 2021, p. 043001.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.103.043001. arXiv: 2012.06527 [physics.ins-det]

2021 doi arXiv
[69]

Scintillation Light from Cosmic-Ray Muons in Liquid Argon

D. Whittington, S. Mufson, and B. Howard. “Scintillation Light from Cosmic-Ray Muons in Liquid Argon.”JINST,11(05), 2016, P05016.doi: 10.1088/1748-0221/11/ 05/P05016. arXiv: 1408.1763[physics.ins-det]

2016 doi arXiv
[70]

The liquid-argon scintillation pulseshape in DEAP-3600

P. Adhikari et al. “The liquid-argon scintillation pulseshape in DEAP-3600.”Eur. Phys. J. C,80(4), 2020, p. 303.doi: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-020-7789-x. arXiv: 2001.09855 [physics.ins-det]

2020 doi arXiv
[71]

Ion-beam excitation of liquid argon

M. Hofmann, T. Dandl, T. Heindl, A. Neumeier, L. Oberauer, W. Potzel, S. Roth, S. SchöNert, J. Wieser, and A. Ulrich. “Ion-beam excitation of liquid argon.”Eur. Phys. J. C,73(10), 2013, p. 2618.doi: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-013-2618-0. arXiv: 1511.07721[physics.ins-det]

2013 doi arXiv
[72]

Effects of Nitrogen contamination in liquid Argon

R. Acciarri et al. “Effects of Nitrogen contamination in liquid Argon.”JINST,5, 2010, P06003.doi: 10.1088/1748-0221/5/06/P06003. arXiv: 0804.1217[nucl-ex]. [73]Light Yield Calibration in MicroBooNE. Sept. 2022.doi: 10.2172/2397218

2010 doi arXiv
[73]

Argon Purification Studies and a Novel Liquid Argon Re-circulationSystem

K. Mavrokoridis, R. G. Calland, J. Coleman, P. K. Lightfoot, N. McCauley, K. J. McCormick, and C. Touramanis. “Argon Purification Studies and a Novel Liquid Argon Re-circulationSystem.”JINST,6,2011,P08003.doi:10.1088/1748-0221/6/08/P08003. arXiv: 1106.5226[physics.ins-det]

2011 doi arXiv
[74]

Visible radiation produced by electrons moving in a medium with velocities exceeding that of light

P. A. Cherenkov. “Visible radiation produced by electrons moving in a medium with velocities exceeding that of light.”Phys. Rev.,52(4), 1937, pp. 378–379.doi: 10.1103/PhysRev.52.378. 142

1937 doi
[75]

Refractive Indices of the Condensed Inert Gases

A. C. Sinnock and B. L. Smith. “Refractive Indices of the Condensed Inert Gases.” Phys. Rev.,181, 1969, pp. 1297–1307.doi: 10.1103/PhysRev.181.1297

1969 doi
[76]

A measurement of the group velocity of scintillation light in liquid argon

M. Babicz et al. “A measurement of the group velocity of scintillation light in liquid argon.”JINST,15(09), 2020, P09009.doi: 10.1088/1748-0221/15/09/P09009. arXiv: 2002.09346[physics.ins-det]

2020 doi arXiv
[77]

Born and E

M. Born and E. Wolf.Principles of Optics. 7th. Cambridge University Press, 1999

1999
[78]

Index of refraction, Rayleigh scattering length, and Sellmeier coefficients in solid and liquid argon and xenon

E. Grace and J. A. Nikkel. “Index of refraction, Rayleigh scattering length, and Sellmeier coefficients in solid and liquid argon and xenon.”Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A,867, 2017, pp. 204–208.doi: 10.1016/j.nima.2017.06.031. arXiv: 1502.04213 [physics.ins-det]

2017 doi arXiv
[79]

Calculating the Total Cherenkov Radiation Emitted by Low Energy Protons in Liquid Argon and Comparing with Argon Scintillation Light at 128 nm

H. R. Rahman. “Calculating the Total Cherenkov Radiation Emitted by Low Energy Protons in Liquid Argon and Comparing with Argon Scintillation Light at 128 nm.” MA thesis. New Mexico State U., 2024. arXiv: 2408.00817[hep-ph]

2024 arXiv
[80]

Argon resonance line lamp for vacuum ultraviolet photochemistry

A. L. Lane and A. Kuppermann. “Argon resonance line lamp for vacuum ultraviolet photochemistry.”Review of Scientific Instruments,39(1), 1968, pp. 126–127.doi: 10.1063/1.1683289

1968 doi
[81]

Nuclear Data Sheets for A = 22

M. S. Basunia. “Nuclear Data Sheets for A = 22.”Nuclear Data Sheets,127, 2015, pp. 69–190.issn: 0090-3752.doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nds.2015.07.002.url: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0090375215000253

2015 doi
[82]

Degrave, M

J. Degrave, M. Hermans, J. Dambre, and F. wyffels.A Differentiable Physics Engine for Deep Learning in Robotics. 2016. arXiv: 1611.01652[cs.LG].url: https://arxiv. org/abs/1611.01652

2016 arXiv
[83]

MuJoCo: A physics engine for model-based control

E. Todorov, T. Erez, and Y. Tassa. “MuJoCo: A physics engine for model-based control.” In:2012 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems. 2012, pp. 5026–5033.doi: 10.1109/IROS.2012.6386109

2012 doi
[84]

Newbury, J

R. Newbury, J. Collins, K. He, J. Pan, I. Posner, D. Howard, and A. Cosgun.A Review of Differentiable Simulators. 2024. arXiv: 2407.05560[cs.RO].url: https: //arxiv.org/abs/2407.05560

2024 arXiv
[85]

A Limited Memory Algorithm for Bound Constrained Optimization

R. H. Byrd, P. Lu, J. Nocedal, and C. Zhu. “A Limited Memory Algorithm for Bound Constrained Optimization.”SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing,16(5), 1995, pp. 1190–1208.doi: 10.1137/0916069. eprint: https://doi.org/10.1137/0916069.url: https://doi.org/10.1137/0916069

1995 doi
[86]

Algorithm 778: L-BFGS-B: Fortran subroutines for large-scale bound-constrained optimization

C. Zhu, R. H. Byrd, P. Lu, and J. Nocedal. “Algorithm 778: L-BFGS-B: Fortran subroutines for large-scale bound-constrained optimization.”ACM Trans. Math. Softw., 23(4), Dec. 1997, pp. 550–560.issn: 0098-3500.doi: 10.1145/279232.279236.url: https://doi.org/10.1145/279232.279236

1997 doi
[87]

GEANT4 - A Simulation Toolkit

S. Agostinelli et al. “GEANT4 - A Simulation Toolkit.”Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A,506, 2003, pp. 250–303.doi: 10.1016/S0168-9002(03)01368-8

2003 doi
[88]

Abbasi et al

R. Abbasi et al. PhysTools: IceCube physics utility library. https://github.com/ icecube/PhysTools. Accessed: July 2025. 143

2025
[89]

E. J. Gumbel.Statistics of Extremes. Columbia University Press, 1958

1958
[90]

The Large-Sample Distribution of the Likelihood Ratio for Testing Composite Hypotheses

S. S. Wilks. “The Large-Sample Distribution of the Likelihood Ratio for Testing Composite Hypotheses.”Annals Math. Statist.,9(1), 1938, pp. 60–62.doi: 10.1214/ aoms/1177732360

1938
[91]

A binned likelihood for stochastic models

C. A. Argüelles, A. Schneider, and T. Yuan. “A binned likelihood for stochastic models.”JHEP,06, 2019, p. 030.doi: 10.1007/JHEP06(2019)030. arXiv: 1901.04645 [physics.data-an]

2019 doi arXiv
[93]

A Measurement of the Absorption of Liquid Argon Scintillation Light by Dissolved Nitro- gen at the Part-Per-Million Level

B. J. P. Jones, C. S. Chiu, J. M. Conrad, C. M. Ignarra, T. Katori, and M. Toups. “A Measurement of the Absorption of Liquid Argon Scintillation Light by Dissolved Nitro- gen at the Part-Per-Million Level.”JINST,8, 2013. [Erratum: JINST 8, E09001 (2013)], P07011.doi: 10.1088/1...

2013 doi arXiv
[94]

Attenuation of vacuum ultraviolet light in liquid argon

A. Neumeier, M. Hofmann, L. Oberauer, W. Potzel, S. Schonert, T. Dandl, T. Heindl, A. Ulrich, and J. Wieser. “Attenuation of vacuum ultraviolet light in liquid argon.” Eur. Phys. J. C,72, 2012, p. 2190.doi: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-2190-z. arXiv: 1511.07724[physics.ins-det]

2012 doi arXiv
[95]

Attenuation length measurements of scintillation light in liquid rare gases and their mixtures using an improved reflection suppresser

N. Ishida et al. “Attenuation length measurements of scintillation light in liquid rare gases and their mixtures using an improved reflection suppresser.”Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipm...

1997 doi
[97]

Attenuation of vacuum ultraviolet light in pure and xenon-doped liquid argon —An approach to an assignment of the near-infrared emission from the mixture

A. Neumeier, T. Dandl, A. Himpsl, L. Oberauer, W. Potzel, S. Schönert, and A. Ulrich. “Attenuation of vacuum ultraviolet light in pure and xenon-doped liquid argon —An approach to an assignment of the near-infrared emission from the mixture.”EPL, 111(1), 2015, p. 12001.doi: 10...

2015 doi arXiv
[98]

Understanding the enhancement of scintillation light in xenon-doped liquid argon

D. E. Fields, R. Gold, M. Gibbons, N. McFadden, S. R. Elliott, and R. Massarczyk. “Understanding the enhancement of scintillation light in xenon-doped liquid argon.” Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A,1046, 2023, p. 167707.doi: 10.1016/j.nima.2022.167707. arXiv: 2009.10755[physics.ins-det]

2023 doi
[99]

Scintillations from Organic Crystals: Specific Fluorescence and Relative Response to Different Radiations

J. B. Birks. “Scintillations from Organic Crystals: Specific Fluorescence and Relative Response to Different Radiations.”Proc. Phys. Soc. A,64, 1951, pp. 874–877.doi: 10.1088/0370-1298/64/10/303. 144

1951 doi
[100]

Study of electron recombination in liquid argon with the ICARUS TPC

S. Amoruso et al. “Study of electron recombination in liquid argon with the ICARUS TPC.”Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment,523(3), 2004, pp. 275–286.issn: 0168-9002.doi: https://doi.org...

2004 doi
[101]

Review of Particle Physics

P. Z. et al. (Particle Data Group). “Review of Particle Physics.”Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys.,2024(8), 2024, p. 083C01.doi: 10.1093/ptep/ptae052

2024 doi
[102]

Scattering of Electromagnetic Waves

L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz. “Scattering of Electromagnetic Waves.” In:Electrody- namics of Continuous Media. 2nd. Vol. 8. Course of Theoretical Physics. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Pergamon Press, 1984. Chap. XV, pp. 394–412

1984
[103]

Rayleigh scattering in rare gas liquids

G. M. Seidel, R. E. Lanou, and W. Yao. “Rayleigh scattering in rare gas liquids.”Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A,489, 2002, pp. 189–194.doi: 10.1016/S0168-9002(02)00890-2. arXiv: hep-ex/0111054

2002 doi arXiv
[104]

BeiträgezurOptiktrüberMedien,speziellkolloidalerMetallösungen

G.Mie.“BeiträgezurOptiktrüberMedien,speziellkolloidalerMetallösungen.” German. Annalen der Physik,330, 1908, pp. 377–445.doi: 10.1002/andp.19083300302

1908 doi
[105]

Emanation and bulk fluorescence in liquid argon from tetraphenyl butadiene wavelength shifting coatings

J. Asaadi, B. J. P. Jones, A. Tripathi, I. Parmaksiz, H. Sullivan, and Z. G. R. Williams. “Emanation and bulk fluorescence in liquid argon from tetraphenyl butadiene wavelength shifting coatings.”JINST,14(02), 2019, P02021.doi: 10.1088/1748- 0221/14/02/P02021. arXiv: 1804.0001...

2019 doi arXiv
[106]

Sterile Neutrino Searches in MiniBooNE and MicroBooNE

C. M. Ignarra. “Sterile Neutrino Searches in MiniBooNE and MicroBooNE.” PhD thesis. MIT, Cambridge, Dept. Phys., 2014.doi: 10.2172/1248362

2014 doi
[107]

Photomultiplier tubes in the MiniBooNE experiment

S. J. Brice et al. “Photomultiplier tubes in the MiniBooNE experiment.”Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A,562, 2006, pp. 97–109.doi: 10.1016/j.nima.2006.02.180. arXiv: 1005.3525 [physics.ins-det]

2006 doi arXiv
[108]

In-situ characterization of the Hamamatsu R5912-HQE pho- tomultiplier tubes used in the DEAP-3600 experiment

P. .-. Amaudruz et al. “In-situ characterization of the Hamamatsu R5912-HQE pho- tomultiplier tubes used in the DEAP-3600 experiment.”Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A, 922, 2019, pp. 373–384.doi: 10.1016/j.nima.2018.12.058. arXiv: 1705.10183 [physics.ins-det]

2019 doi arXiv
[109]

Calibration and characterization of the IceCube photomultiplier tube

R. Abbasi et al. “Calibration and characterization of the IceCube photomultiplier tube.”Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment,618(1–3), June 2010, pp. 139–152. issn: 0168-9002.doi: 10.1016...

2010 doi
[110]

The photomultiplier tube testing facility for the Borexino experiment at LNGS

A. Brigatti, A. Ianni, P. Lombardi, G. Ranucci, and O. Smirnov. “The photomultiplier tube testing facility for the Borexino experiment at LNGS.”Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment,537(3)...

2005 doi
[111]

Experimental evidence of neutrinos produced in the CNO fusion cycle in the Sun

M. Agostini et al. “Experimental evidence of neutrinos produced in the CNO fusion cycle in the Sun.”Nature,587, 2020, pp. 577–582.doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2934-0. arXiv: 2006.15115[hep-ex]. 145

2020 doi arXiv
[112]

Reactor On-Off Antineutrino Measurement with KamLAND

A. Gando et al. “Reactor On-Off Antineutrino Measurement with KamLAND.”Phys. Rev. D,88(3), 2013, p. 033001.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.88.033001. arXiv: 1303.4667 [hep-ex]

2013 doi arXiv
[113]

Potential to identify neutrino mass ordering with reactor antineutri- nos at JUNO

A. Abusleme et al. “Potential to identify neutrino mass ordering with reactor antineutri- nos at JUNO.”Chin. Phys. C,49(3), 2025, p. 033104.doi: 10.1088/1674-1137/ad7f3e. arXiv: 2405.18008[hep-ex]

2025 doi
[114]

The Extended-track reconstruction for MiniBooNE

R. B. Patterson, E. M. Laird, Y. Liu, P. D. Meyers, I. Stancu, and H. A. Tanaka. “The Extended-track reconstruction for MiniBooNE.”Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A,608, 2009, pp. 206–224.doi: 10.1016/j.nima.2009.06.064. arXiv: 0902.2222[hep-ex]

2009 doi arXiv
[115]

Atmospheric Neutrino Oscillation Analysis with Improved Event Reconstruction in Super-Kamiokande IV

M. Jiang et al. “Atmospheric Neutrino Oscillation Analysis with Improved Event Reconstruction in Super-Kamiokande IV.”PTEP,2019(5), 2019, 053F01.doi: 10. 1093/ptep/ptz015. arXiv: 1901.03230[hep-ex]

2019 arXiv
[116]

Measurement of the B8 solar neutrino flux using the full SNO+ water phase dataset

A. Allega et al. “Measurement of the B8 solar neutrino flux using the full SNO+ water phase dataset.”Phys. Rev. D,110(12), 2024, p. 122003.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.110. 122003. arXiv: 2407.17595[hep-ex]

2024 doi arXiv
[117]

Search for proton decay via p→e+η and p→µ+η with a 0.37 Mton- year exposure of Super-Kamiokande

N. Taniuchi et al. “Search for proton decay via p→e+η and p→µ+η with a 0.37 Mton- year exposure of Super-Kamiokande.”Phys. Rev. D,110(11), 2024, p. 112011.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.110.112011. arXiv: 2409.19633[hep-ex]

2024 doi arXiv
[118]

Updated MiniBooNE neutrino oscillation results with increased data and new background studies

A. A. Aguilar-Arevalo et al. “Updated MiniBooNE neutrino oscillation results with increased data and new background studies.”Phys. Rev. D,103(5), 2021, p. 052002. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.103.052002. arXiv: 2006.16883[hep-ex]

2021 doi arXiv
[120]

Event-by-event direction reconstruction of solar neutrinos in a high light-yield liquid scintillator

A. Allega et al. “Event-by-event direction reconstruction of solar neutrinos in a high light-yield liquid scintillator.”Phys. Rev. D,109, 7, Apr. 2024, p. 072002.doi: 10.1103/ PhysRevD.109.072002.url: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevD.109.072002

2024 doi
[121]

Fluorescence emission of the JUNO liquid scintillator

M. Beretta et al. “Fluorescence emission of the JUNO liquid scintillator.”JINST, 20(05), 2025, P05009.doi: 10.1088/1748-0221/20/05/P05009. arXiv: 2501.09988 [physics.ins-det]

2025 doi arXiv
[122]

Measurements of liquid scintillator properties for the Borexino detector

F. Elisei et al. “Measurements of liquid scintillator properties for the Borexino detector.” Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A,400, 1997, pp. 53–68.doi: 10.1016/S0168-9002(97)00933-9

1997 doi
[123]

The Borexino detector at the Laboratori Nazionali del Gran Sasso

G. Alimonti et al. “The Borexino detector at the Laboratori Nazionali del Gran Sasso.” Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A,600, 2009, pp. 568–593.doi: 10.1016/j.nima.2008.11.076. arXiv: 0806.2400[physics.ins-det]

2009 doi arXiv
[124]

Characterization of two SiPM arrays from Hamamatsu and Onsemi for liquid argon detector

T. A. Wang, C. Guo, X. H. Liang, L. Wang, M. Y. Guan, C. G. Yang, J. C. Liu, and F. Y. Lin. “Characterization of two SiPM arrays from Hamamatsu and Onsemi for liquid argon detector.”Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A,1053, 2023, p. 168359.doi: 10.1016/j.nima.2023.168359. arXiv: 2210.15970...

2023 doi
[125]

Study of Silicon Photomultiplier Performance at Different Temperatures

N. Anfimov, D. Fedoseev, A. Rybnikov, A. Selyunin, S. Sokolov, and A. Sotnikov. “Study of Silicon Photomultiplier Performance at Different Temperatures.”Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A,997, 2021, p. 165162.doi: 10.1016/j.nima.2021.165162. arXiv: 2005.10665[physics.ins-det]

2021 doi
[126]

Characterization of New Silicon Photomultipliers with Low Dark Noise at Low Temperature

K. Ozaki, S. Kazama, M. Yamashita, Y. Itow, and S. Moriyama. “Characterization of New Silicon Photomultipliers with Low Dark Noise at Low Temperature.”JINST, 16(03), 2021, P03014.doi: 10.1088/1748-0221/16/03/P03014. arXiv: 2007.13537 [physics.ins-det]

2021 doi arXiv
[127]

Nuclear data sheets for A = 57

R. L. Auble. “Nuclear data sheets for A = 57.”Nucl. Data Sheets,20, 1977, pp. 327–371. doi: 10.1016/S0090-3752(77)80011-2

1977 doi
[128]

Position Reconstruction in the DEAP-3600 Dark Matter Search Experiment

P. Adhikari et al. “Position Reconstruction in the DEAP-3600 Dark Matter Search Experiment.”JINST,20, Mar. 2025, P07012.doi: 10.1088/1748-0221/20/07/P07012. arXiv: 2503.10383[physics.ins-det]

2025 doi
[129]

Low energy event reconstruction in IceCube DeepCore

R. Abbasi et al. “Low energy event reconstruction in IceCube DeepCore.”Eur. Phys. J. C,82(9), 2022, p. 807.doi: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-022-10721-2. arXiv: 2203.02303 [hep-ex]

2022 doi
[130]

Optical calibration of the SNO+ detector in the water phase with deployed sources

M. R. Anderson et al. “Optical calibration of the SNO+ detector in the water phase with deployed sources.”JINST,16(10), 2021, P10021.doi: 10.1088/1748-0221/16/10/ P10021. arXiv: 2106.03951[physics.ins-det]

2021 doi arXiv
[131]

Graph Neural Networks for low-energy event classification & recon- struction in IceCube

R. Abbasi et al. “Graph Neural Networks for low-energy event classification & recon- struction in IceCube.”JINST,17(11), 2022, P11003.doi: 10.1088/1748-0221/17/11/ P11003. arXiv: 2209.03042[hep-ex]

2022 doi
[132]

GraphNeT: Graph neural networks for neutrino telescope event reconstruction

A. Søgaard et al. “GraphNeT: Graph neural networks for neutrino telescope event reconstruction.”J. Open Source Softw.,8(85), 2023, p. 4971.doi: 10.21105/joss.04971. arXiv: 2210.12194[astro-ph.IM]

2023 doi arXiv
[133]

IceCube – Neutrinos in Deep Ice: The top 3 solutions from the public Kaggle competition

H. Bukhari, D. Chakraborty, P. Eller, T. Ito, M. V. Shugaev, and R. Ørsøe. “IceCube – Neutrinos in Deep Ice: The top 3 solutions from the public Kaggle competition.” Eur. Phys. J. C,84(6), 2024, p. 646.doi: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-12977-2. arXiv: 2310.15674[astro-ph.HE]

2024 doi arXiv
[134]

Attention Is All You Need

A. Vaswani, N. Shazeer, N. Parmar, J. Uszkoreit, L. Jones, A. N. Gomez, Ł. Kaiser, and I. Polosukhin. “Attention Is All You Need.”Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems,30, 2017.url: https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper/2017/file/ 3f5ee243547dee91fbd053c1c4a845aa-Paper.pdf

2017
[135]

A survey of loss functions for semantic segmentation

S. Jadon. “A survey of loss functions for semantic segmentation.” In:2020 IEEE Con- ference on Computational Intelligence in Bioinformatics and Computational Biology (CIBCB). 2020, pp. 1–7.doi: 10.1109/CIBCB48159.2020.9277638

2020 doi
[136]

D. P. Kingma and J. Ba.Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization. Dec. 2014. arXiv: 1412.6980[cs.LG]

2014 arXiv
[137]

On Coherence in Bragg-Primakoff Axion Photoconversion

A. T. Thompson. “On Coherence in Bragg-Primakoff Axion Photoconversion.” PhD thesis. Texas A-M, 2023. arXiv: 2309.01767[hep-ph]. 147

2023 arXiv
[138]

Thompson and W.-C

A. Thompson and W.-C. Huang.athompson-git/alplib: alpha. Version v0.1.0-alpha. 2023.doi: 10.5281/zenodo.8419293.url: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8419293

2023 doi
[139]

AXION BREMSSTRAHLUNG BY AN ELECTRON BEAM

Y.-S. Tsai. “AXION BREMSSTRAHLUNG BY AN ELECTRON BEAM.”Phys. Rev. D,34, 1986. Ed. by S. C. Loken, p. 1326.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.34.1326

1986 doi
[140]

SIREN: An open-source neutrino injection toolkit

A. Schneider, N. W. Kamp, and A. Y. Wen. “SIREN: An open-source neutrino injection toolkit.”Comput. Phys. Commun.,316, 2025, p. 109799.doi: 10.1016/j.cpc.2025. 109799. arXiv: 2406.01745[hep-ex]

2025 doi arXiv
[141]

Pulse-shape discrimination against low-energy Ar-39 beta de- cays in liquid argon with 4.5 tonne-years of DEAP-3600 data

P. Adhikari et al. “Pulse-shape discrimination against low-energy Ar-39 beta de- cays in liquid argon with 4.5 tonne-years of DEAP-3600 data.”Eur. Phys. J. C, 81(9), 2021, p. 823.doi: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-09514-w. arXiv: 2103.12202 [physics.ins-det]

2021 doi arXiv
[142]

The liquid argon technology for neutrino and astroparticle detectors

G. Fiorillo. “The liquid argon technology for neutrino and astroparticle detectors.” Nuclear Physics B - Proceedings Supplements,150, 2006. Proceedings of the 9th Topical Seminar on Innovative Particle and Radiation Detectors, pp. 372–376.issn: 0920-5632.doi: https://doi.org/1...

2006 doi
[143]

LArGe: active background suppression using argon scintillation for the Gerda0 νββ -experiment

M. Agostini et al. “LArGe: active background suppression using argon scintillation for the Gerda0 νββ -experiment.”Eur. Phys. J. C,75(10), 2015, p. 506.doi: 10.1140/ epjc/s10052-015-3681-5. arXiv: 1501.05762[physics.ins-det]

2015 arXiv
[144]

DarkSide-20k: A 20 tonne two-phase LAr TPC for direct dark matter detection at LNGS

C. E. Aalseth et al. “DarkSide-20k: A 20 tonne two-phase LAr TPC for direct dark matter detection at LNGS.”Eur. Phys. J. Plus,133, 2018, p. 131.doi: 10.1140/epjp/ i2018-11973-4. arXiv: 1707.08145[physics.ins-det]

2018 doi arXiv
[145]

Probing MeV to 90 GeV axion-like particles with LEP and LHC

J. Jaeckel and M. Spannowsky. “Probing MeV to 90 GeV axion-like particles with LEP and LHC.”Physics Letters B,753, 2016, pp. 482–487.issn: 0370-2693.doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2015.12.037.url: https://www.sciencedirect.com/ science/article/pii/S0370269315009855

2016 doi
[146]

LIMITS ON THE MASS OF LIGHT (PSEUDO)SCALAR PARTICLES FROM BETHE-HEITLER e+e- andµ+µ−PAIR PRODUCTION IN A PROTON-IRON BEAM DUMP EXPERIMENT

J. BLÜMLEIN et al. “LIMITS ON THE MASS OF LIGHT (PSEUDO)SCALAR PARTICLES FROM BETHE-HEITLER e+e- andµ+µ−PAIR PRODUCTION IN A PROTON-IRON BEAM DUMP EXPERIMENT.”International Journal of Modern Physics A,07(16), 1992, pp. 3835–3849.doi: 10.1142/S0217751X9200171X. eprint: https://...

1992 doi
[147]

Need for purely laboratory-based axionlike particle searches

J. Jaeckel, E. Massó, J. Redondo, A. Ringwald, and F. Takahashi. “Need for purely laboratory-based axionlike particle searches.”Phys. Rev. D,75, 1, Jan. 2007, p. 013004. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.75.013004.url: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevD. 75.013004

2007 doi
[148]

Chameleon Fields: Awaiting Surprises for Tests of Gravity in Space

J. Khoury and A. Weltman. “Chameleon Fields: Awaiting Surprises for Tests of Gravity in Space.”Phys. Rev. Lett.,93, 17, Oct. 2004, p. 171104.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett. 93.171104.url: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.171104. 148

2004 doi
[149]

Compatibility of Cast Search with Axionlike Interpretation of PVLAS Results

E. Massó and J. Redondo. “Compatibility of Cast Search with Axionlike Interpretation of PVLAS Results.”Phys. Rev. Lett.,97, 15, Oct. 2006, p. 151802.doi: 10.1103/ PhysRevLett.97.151802.url: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.97. 151802

2006 doi
[150]

Light Scalars Coupled to Photons and Non-Newtonian Forces

A. Dupays, E. Massó, J. Redondo, and C. Rizzo. “Light Scalars Coupled to Photons and Non-Newtonian Forces.”Phys. Rev. Lett.,98, 13, Mar. 2007, p. 131802.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.98.131802.url: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett. 98.131802

2007 doi
[151]

Reconciling the CAST and PVLAS Results

R. N. Mohapatra and S. Nasri. “Reconciling the CAST and PVLAS Results.”Phys. Rev. Lett.,98, 5, Jan. 2007, p. 050402.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.98.050402.url: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.98.050402

2007 doi
[152]

Compatibility of the Chameleon-Field Model with Fifth-Force Experiments, Cosmology, and PVLAS and CAST Results

P. Brax, C. van de Bruck, and A.-C. Davis. “Compatibility of the Chameleon-Field Model with Fifth-Force Experiments, Cosmology, and PVLAS and CAST Results.” Phys. Rev. Lett.,99, 12, Sept. 2007, p. 121103.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.99.121103. url: https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103...

2007 doi
[153]

Exploring the robustness of stellar cooling constraints on light particles

W. DeRocco, P. W. Graham, and S. Rajendran. “Exploring the robustness of stellar cooling constraints on light particles.”Phys. Rev. D,102(7), 2020, p. 075015.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.102.075015. arXiv: 2006.15112[hep-ph]

2020 doi arXiv
[154]

Evading astrophysical constraints on axion-like particles

E. Massó and J. Redondo. “Evading astrophysical constraints on axion-like particles.” Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics,2005(09), Sept. 2005, p. 015.doi: 10. 1088/1475-7516/2005/09/015.url: https://doi.org/10.1088/1475-7516/2005/09/015

2005 doi
[155]

DeepUndergroundNeutrinoExperiment(DUNE),FarDetectorTechnical Design Report, Volume II: DUNE Physics

B.Abietal.“DeepUndergroundNeutrinoExperiment(DUNE),FarDetectorTechnical Design Report, Volume II: DUNE Physics.” Feb. 2020.doi: 10.2172/1599307. arXiv: 2002.03005[hep-ex]

2020 doi
[156]

Neutral-current neutrino cross section and expected supernova signals for 40Ar from a three-fold increase in the magnetic dipole strength

W. Tornow, A. P. Tonchev, S. W. Finch, Krishichayan, X. B. Wang, A. C. Hayes, H. G. D. Yeomans, and D. A. Newmark. “Neutral-current neutrino cross section and expected supernova signals for 40Ar from a three-fold increase in the magnetic dipole strength.”Phys. Lett. B,835, 202...

2022 doi
[157]

THEIA: an advanced optical neutrino detector

M. Askins et al. “THEIA: an advanced optical neutrino detector.”Eur. Phys. J. C,80(5), 2020, p. 416.doi: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-020-7977-8. arXiv: 1911.03501 [physics.ins-det]

2020 doi arXiv
[158]

Performance of Large Area Picosecond Photo-Detectors (LAPPDT M)

A. V. Lyashenko et al. “Performance of Large Area Picosecond Photo-Detectors (LAPPDT M).”Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A,958, 2020. Ed. by M. Krammer, T. Bergauer, M. Dragicevic, M. Friedl, M. Jeitler, J. Schieck, and C. Schwanda, p. 162834.doi: 10.1016/j.nima.2019.162834. arXiv: 1909....

2020 doi
[159]

Cherenkov and Scintillation Light Separation Using Wavelength in LAB Based Liquid Scintillator

T. Kaptanoglu, M. Luo, and J. Klein. “Cherenkov and Scintillation Light Separation Using Wavelength in LAB Based Liquid Scintillator.”JINST,14(05), 2019, T05001. doi: 10.1088/1748-0221/14/05/T05001. arXiv: 1811.11587[physics.ins-det]. 149

2019 doi arXiv
[160]

A new water-based liquid scintillator and potential applications

M. Yeh, S. Hans, W. Beriguete, R. Rosero, L. Hu, R. L. Hahn, M. V. Diwan, D. E. Jaffe, S. H. Kettell, and L. Littenberg. “A new water-based liquid scintillator and potential applications.”Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A,660, 2011, pp. 51–56.doi: 10.1016/j. nima.2011.08.040

2011 doi
[161]

CharacterizationandModelingofaWater-basedLiquidScintillator

L.J.Bignelletal.“CharacterizationandModelingofaWater-basedLiquidScintillator.” JINST,10(12), 2015, P12009.doi: 10.1088/1748-0221/10/12/P12009. arXiv: 1508.07029[physics.ins-det]

2015 doi arXiv
[162]

Cherenkov and Scintillation Light Separation in Organic Liquid Scintillators

J. Caravaca, F. B. Descamps, B. J. Land, M. Yeh, and G. D. Orebi Gann. “Cherenkov and Scintillation Light Separation in Organic Liquid Scintillators.”Eur. Phys. J. C, 77(12), 2017, p. 811.doi: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-5380-x. arXiv: 1610.02011 [physics.ins-det]

2017 doi arXiv
[163]

Experiment to demonstrate separation of Cherenkov and scintillation signals

J. Caravaca, F. B. Descamps, B. J. Land, J. Wallig, M. Yeh, and G. D. Orebi Gann. “Experiment to demonstrate separation of Cherenkov and scintillation signals.”Phys. Rev. C,95(5), 2017, p. 055801.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevC.95.055801. arXiv: 1610.02029 [physics.ins-det]

2017 doi arXiv
[164]

DeepUndergroundNeutrinoExperiment(DUNE),FarDetectorTechnical Design Report, Volume III: DUNE Far Detector Technical Coordination

B.Abietal.“DeepUndergroundNeutrinoExperiment(DUNE),FarDetectorTechnical Design Report, Volume III: DUNE Far Detector Technical Coordination.”JINST, 15(08), 2020, T08009.doi: 10.1088/1748-0221/15/08/T08009. arXiv: 2002.03008 [physics.ins-det]

2020 doi
[165]

LArSoft: A Software Package for Liquid Argon Time Projection Drift Chambers

E. D. Church. “LArSoft: A Software Package for Liquid Argon Time Projection Drift Chambers.” Nov. 2013. arXiv: 1311.6774[physics.ins-det]. 150

2013 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed July 9, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

First Event-by-Event Identification of Cherenkov Ra- diation from Sub-Mev Particles in Liquid Argon

A. A. Aguilar-Arevalo et al. “First Event-by-Event Identification of Cherenkov Ra- diation from Sub-Mev Particles in Liquid Argon.”Phys. Rev. Lett.,135(17), 2025, p. 171804.doi: 10.1103/bklh-w3dn. arXiv: 2507.08886[physics.ins-det]

work page doi:10.1103/bklh-w3dn 2025

[2] [2]

Measurement of the liquid argon scintillation pulse shape using differentiable simulation in the coherent CAPTAIN-Mills experiment

A. A. Aguilar-Arevalo et al. “Measurement of the liquid argon scintillation pulse shape using differentiable simulation in the coherent CAPTAIN-Mills experiment.” Phys. Rev. D,112(7), 2025, p. 072010.doi: 10.1103/34mf-z6l9. arXiv: 2507.08887 [physics.ins-det]

work page doi:10.1103/34mf-z6l9 2025

[3] [3]

Sensitivity to Supernovae Average $\nu_x$ Temperature with Neutral Current Interactions in DUNE

D. A. Newmark and A. Schneider. “Sensitivity to supernovae averageνx temperature with neutral current interactions in DUNE.”Phys. Rev. D,108(4), 2023, p. 043005. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.108.043005. arXiv: 2304.00035[hep-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.108.043005 2023

[4] [4]

First Dark Matter Search Results From Coherent CAPTAIN-Mills

A. A. Aguilar-Arevalo et al. “First dark matter search results from Coherent CAPTAIN- Mills.”Phys. Rev. D,106(1), 2022, p. 012001.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.106.012001. arXiv: 2105.14020[hep-ex]

work page Pith review arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.106.012001 2022

[5] [5]

First Leptophobic Dark Matter Search from Coherent CAPTAIN-Mills

A.A.Aguilar-Arevaloetal.“FirstLeptophobicDarkMatterSearchfromtheCoherent–CAPTAIN- Mills Liquid Argon Detector.”Phys. Rev. Lett.,129(2), 2022, p. 021801.doi: 10.1103/ PhysRevLett.129.021801. arXiv: 2109.14146[hep-ex]

work page Pith review arXiv 2022

[6] [6]

Prospects for detecting axionlike particles at the Coherent CAPTAIN-Mills experiment

A. A. Aguilar-Arevalo et al. “Prospects for detecting axionlike particles at the Coherent CAPTAIN-Mills experiment.”Phys. Rev. D,107(9), 2023, p. 095036.doi: 10.1103/ PhysRevD.107.095036. arXiv: 2112.09979[hep-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2023

[7] [7]

Testing Meson Portal Dark Sector Solutions to the MiniBooNE Anomaly at CCM

A. A. Aguilar-Arevalo et al. “Testing meson portal dark sector solutions to the MiniBooNE anomaly at the Coherent CAPTAIN Mills experiment.”Phys. Rev. D, 109(9), 2024. [Addendum: Phys.Rev.D 111, 035030 (2025)], p. 095017.doi: 10.1103/ PhysRevD.109.095017. arXiv: 2309.02599[hep-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2024

[8] [8]

Mesonium and anti-mesonium

B. Pontecorvo. “Mesonium and anti-mesonium.”Sov. Phys. JETP,6, 1957. [Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 33, 549 (1957)], p. 429

work page 1957