Snowmass 2021 LoI: Neutrino-induced Shallow- and Deep-Inelastic Scattering
L. Alvarez-Ruso, A. M. Ankowski, M. Sajjad Athar, C. Bronner, L. Cremonesi, K. Duffy, S. Dytman, A. Friedland, A. P. Furmanski, K. Gallmeister, S. Gardiner, W. T. Giele, N. Jachowicz, H. Haider, M. Kabirnezhad, T. Katori, A. S. Kronfeld, S. W. Li, J.G. Morfín, U. Mosel, M. Muether, A. Norrick, J. Paley, V. Pandey, R. Petti, L. Pickering, B. J. Ramson, M. H. Reno, T. Sato, J.T. Sobczyk, J. Wolcott, C. Wret, T. Yang
aa r X i v : . [ h e p - e x ] S e p Snowmass 2021 LoI:Neutrino-induced Shallow- and Deep-Inelastic Scattering
L. Alvarez-Ruso, A. M. Ankowski, M. Sajjad Athar, C. Bronner, L. Cremonesi, K. Duffy, S. Dytman, A. Friedland, A. P. Furmanski, K. Gallmeister, S. Gardiner, W. T. Giele, N. Jachowicz, H. Haider, M. Kabirnezhad, T. Katori, A. S. Kronfeld, S. W. Li, J.G. Morf´ın, U. Mosel, M. Muether, A. Norrick, J. Paley, V. Pandey, R. Petti, L. Pickering, B. J. Ramson, M. H. Reno, T. Sato, J.T. Sobczyk, J. Wolcott, C. Wret, and T. Yang Instituto de F´ısica Corpuscular (IFIC), Centro Mixto Universidad de Valencia-CSIC,Institutos de Investigaci´on de Paterna, Apartado 22085, 46071 Valencia, Spain SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, Stanford University, Menlo Park, CA 94025, USA AMU Campus, Aligarh, Uttar Pradesh 202001, India Kamioka Observatory, Institute for Cosmic Ray Research,University of Tokyo, Kamioka, Gifu, Japan Queen Mary University of London, London E1 4NS, UK Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Batavia, IL 60510, USA University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, 15260, USA University of Minnesota, Twin Cities, Minneapolis, MN, 55455, USA Institut f¨ur Theoretische Physik, Goethe-Universit¨at Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany Department of Physics and Astronomy, Ghent University, B-9000 Gent, Belgium University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3RH, United Kingdom King’s College London, London WC2R 2LS, UK Institut f¨ur Theoretische Physik, Universit¨at Giessen, Giessen, Germany Wichita State University, Wichita, KS 67260, USA Department of Physics, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA Department of Physics and Astronomy,University of South Carolina, Columbia SC 29208, USA Department of Physics and Astronomy,Michigan State University, East Lansing MI 48824, USA Department of Physics and Astronomy,University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, 52242, USA Department of Physics, Osaka University, Osaka 560-0043, Japan Institute of Theoretical Physics, Wroc law University, 50-204 Wroc law, Poland Department of Physics and Astronomy,Tufts University, Medford, MA, 02155, USA Department of Physics and Astronomy,University of Rochester, Rochester, New York, 14627, USA
NF Topical Groups: (check all that apply (cid:3) / (cid:4) ) (cid:4) (NF1) Neutrino oscillations (cid:3) (NF2) Sterile neutrinos (cid:3) (NF3) Beyond the Standard Model (cid:3) (NF4) Neutrinos from natural sources (cid:3) (NF5) Neutrino properties (cid:4) (NF6) Neutrino cross sections (cid:3) (NF7) Applications (cid:4) (TF11) Theory of neutrino physics (cid:3) (NF9) Artificial neutrino sources (cid:4) (NF10) Neutrino detectors (cid:4) (Other) CompF2 (Theoretical Calculations and Simulation) Contact Information:
Teppei Katori, [email protected]
Introduction — In ν/ν interactions with nucleons and nuclei Shallow Inelastic Scattering (SIS)refers to processes, dominated by non-resonant contributions, in the kinematic region where Q issmall and the invariant mass of the hadronic system, W , is above pion production threshold. As W increases above the baryon-resonance dominated region, non-resonant meson production begins toplay a significant role. In addition, as Q grows, one approaches the onset of the DIS region. Theextremely rich science of this complex region, poorly understood both theoretically and experimen-tally [1–3], encompasses the transition from interactions described in terms of hadronic degrees offreedom to interactions with quarks and gluons described by perturbative QCD. Neutrino-nucleusexperiments cannot distinguish mesons from these contributing processes, thus the experimentaldefinition of SIS is the inclusive sum of these processes in the higher W region bordering DIS. Sincea large fraction of events in NOvA [4] and DUNE [5], and in atmospheric neutrino measurements atIceCube-Upgrade [6], KM3NeT [7], Super- and Hyper-Kamiokande [8, 9], are from this SIS region,there is a definite need to improve our knowledge of this physics. Inelastic processes — Neutrino-nucleon inelastic scattering predominantly leads to single pion( πN ) but also to γN , ππN , ηN , ρN , KN , ¯ KN KY , ... final states. Close to threshold, elemen-tary amplitudes are constrained by the approximate chiral symmetry of QCD [10–13]. Away fromthreshold, most of these reactions are dominated by baryon resonances, albeit with sizable contribu-tion from non-resonant amplitudes and their interference with the resonant counterpart. This is thecase for the ∆(1232)-dominated single pion production [10], for which extensions to higher invariantmasses within the Regge approach have also been developed [14–16]. The Rein-Sehgal model [17] isan outdated model for inelastic processes which, nevertheless, is still widely used in event generators[18]. The dynamical coupled channel (DCC) approach [19–21] is consistently constrained using eN and πN vast amount of data to predict not only weak single but also double pion production andother meson-baryon final states up to W of about 2.2 GeV. Indeed, thanks to flavor symmetries andthe partial conservation of the axial current (PCAC), electron- and meson-nucleon scattering providevery valuable input for the description of inelastic processes but the axial current remains largelyunconstrained. The Giessen BUU model [22] relies on the MAID analysis [23] of electron-nucleonpion production and PCAC to constrain elementary amplitudes, and on transport theory to modelthe evolution of the final state to describe exclusive channels in neutrino-nucleus inelastic scattering. Quark-Hadron Duality — The transition from resonant/non-resonant production to DIS ismarked by increasing W , which in turn with growing Q , naturally evolves into scattering off thequark in the nucleon that can be described by perturbative QCD. On the way to this QCD-describedscattering region there is a significant contribution from the non-perturbative QCD regime. This is avery complex kinematic transition region, encompassing interactions that can be described in termsof hadrons as well as quarks, that should be well-described by the application of quark-hadron dual-ity [24] where baryonic resonant and non-resonant processes behave on average like DIS in similar Q and W regions. Although duality has been demonstrated with electromagnetic induced processes,it has neither been well studied theoretically nor are there experimental results in the weak sector.More experimental and theoretical studies are required to understand this intriguing region [1]. DIS in the Nuclear Environment — The investigation of DIS within the nucleus in the electro-magnetic sector revealed that nuclear effects modify structure functions and consequently nuclearparton distribution functions (nPDFs) are different than nucleon PDFs. Theory has indicated hownuclear effects could modify nucleon structure functions to yield nuclear structure functions [25–27]while phenomenological global fits have directly yielded “effective” nuclear PDFs [28, 29]. “Effec-tive” since, within the nuclear environment, scattering could be occurring with more than a singlehadron that need not even be a nucleon. More recent investigations of neutrino-nucleus scatteringhave suggested that the resultant nPDFs could be different from those derived from electromagneticscattering [30–33]. These differences need to be further explored.
Hadronization — Hadronization is not described by a fundamental theory, but based on phe-nomenological models. At low W ( W . W increases (from W of 2 to 3 GeV), the hadronic system becomes too complex to use custommodels, and the generators rely on the models built for colliders [42–44]. Although these modelscould be successfully built to simulate hadronization in high-energy collider experiments, these W values at the SIS region is lower than the validity range of the models; additional developmentswould be therefore needed. Path forward
Current and future oscillation experiments need a better understanding and realistic modeling ofneutrino-nucleus SIS scattering. To meet this challenge, we need coordinated work by both nuclearphysics and particle physics communities; in theory, experiment, and simulation. Such a commitmentis beneficial to both communities to achieve broader scientific goals in multidisciplinary topics.
Theoretical challenges — Realistic theoretical modeling of SIS scattering should provide accuratepredictions of neutrino-nucleus interactions, as well as meaningful theoretical uncertainties. Thiscan only be achieved if existing and future neutrino scattering data on nucleons and nuclei butalso electron and pion-nucleon scattering data are systematically incorporated both as input and formodel validation. In the resonance-dominated region, one also aims at a description in terms of well-defined final states where resonant and non-resonant terms and their interferences are consistentlytreated. In the transition from SIS to DIS, differences between Monte Carlo generators often yieldinconsistent predictions, as shown graphically in, e.g., [1] and by Bronner in [3]. The pioneeringPDF-based approach of Bodek-Yang [45–48] and more phenomenological, theory-guided structurefunction approaches that do not rely on a parton decomposition (see, e.g., [49, 50]), merit study inview of the availability of more recent PDFs, studies of target mass and higher twist corrections,and next-to-next-to-leader order [51–53] perturbative treatments of DIS [31].
Experimental challenges — We identify especially three categories to improve our knowledge.
Neutrino-hydrogen/deuteron scattering experiments — Even if electron- and meson-nucleon scat-tering data provide a priceless input to model neutrino interactions on nucleons [19, 54], the proper-ties of the axial current at finite Q remain largely unknown and experimentally unconstrained. Forexample, most axial form factors are not directly measured. Although lattice QCD may be able topartially fill this gap [55], we need modern neutrino-hydrogen and/or neutrino-deuteron scatteringexperiment to directly measure unknown form factors (see ν -H/D LoI [56]). Electron-nucleus scattering experiments — Modern neutrino-nucleus models adapt electron-nucleus ones for the vector interaction, adding an axial interaction poorly constrained by neutrino-nucleon data. Precision measurements of electron-nucleus scattering in the entire phase space rele-vant for neutrino oscillation experiments are very valuable for nuclear model validation [57]. Recentelectron scattering measurements [58–60] on various targets (including Ar) indicate serious discrep-ancies in the generator models beyond the quasielastic peak [57]. Coverage must be extended intothe SIS kinematic region, including information on the final-state mesons and nucleons [61–63].
Neutrino-nucleus scattering experiments — Neutrino oscillation experiments such as MiniBooNE,T2K, NOvA, and MINERvA have published cross-section data mainly for CH n and H O targetsin QE region. Limited data on heavier targets (Ar, Fe, Pb) and higher energy processes are alsoavailable [32, 33, 41, 64–69]. These data offer an opportunity to test nuclear dependent DIS models inneutrinos. The SBN program (MicroBooNE, SBND, ICARUS) [70] and ArgonCube [5] can provideAr cross-section data relevant for the SIS region. More extensive experimental studies focusing onmeson final states in a broad kinematic range can test our understanding of the neutrino SIS physicsas well as FSIs [71].
Generator challenges — With the lack of a coherent picture of the SIS region, the models presentlyused in generators are either smoothed descriptions of inclusive data or often inconsistent mixturesof models [72]. Recently, a fairly complete group of generator experts started a new initiative toimprove structural issues [73]. The present task to develop a consistent and accurate SIS model is avery interesting and challenging physics problem that requires proficiency in both nuclear physics andparticle physics. One of the sources of the present inconsistency is the different framing in differentsub-fields. A more complete picture is needed to achieve a coherent model. (see ν -generator LoI [74]) [1] M. Sajjad Athar and Jorge G. Morfin. Neutrino(Antineutrino)-Nucleus Interactions in the Shallow- andDeep-Inelastic Scattering Regions. arXiv:2006.08603, April 2020.[2] L. Alvarez-Ruso et al. NuSTEC White Paper: Status and challenges of neutrino–nucleus scattering. Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. , 100:1–68, 2018.[3] C. Andreopoulos et al. Summary of the NuSTEC Workshop on Shallow- and Deep-Inelastic Scattering.In
NuSTEC Workshop on Shallow- and Deep-Inelastic Scattering , 7 2019.[4] M.A. Acero et al. First Measurement of Neutrino Oscillation Parameters using Neutrinos and Antineu-trinos by NOvA.
Phys. Rev. Lett. , 123(15):151803, 2019.[5] Babak Abi et al. Deep Underground Neutrino Experiment (DUNE), Far Detector Technical DesignReport, Volume I Introduction to DUNE. 2 2020. arXiv:2002.02967.[6] Wing Yan Ma. Physics Potential of the IceCube Upgrade.
J. Phys. Conf. Ser. , 1468(1):012169, 2020.[7] S. Adrian-Martinez et al. Letter of intent for KM3NeT 2.0.
J. Phys. G , 43(8):084001, 2016.[8] Y. Fukuda et al. The Super-Kamiokande detector.
Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A , 501:418–462, 2003.[9] K. Abe et al. Hyper-Kamiokande Design Report. 5 2018. arXiv:1805.04163.[10] E. Hernandez, J. Nieves, and M. Valverde. Weak Pion Production off the Nucleon.
Phys. Rev. D ,76:033005, 2007.[11] M. Rafi Alam, I. Ruiz Simo, M. Sajjad Athar, and M.J. Vicente Vacas. Weak Kaon Production off theNucleon.
Phys.Rev. , D82:033001, 2010.[12] M. Rafi Alam, I. Ruiz Simo, M. Sajjad Athar, and M.J. Vicente Vacas. ¯ ν induced ¯ K production off thenucleon. Phys.Rev. , D85:013014, 2012.[13] De-Liang Yao, Luis Alvarez-Ruso, Astrid N. Hiller Blin, and M. J. Vicente Vacas. Weak pion productionoff the nucleon in covariant chiral perturbation theory.
Phys. Rev. D , 98(7):076004, 2018.[14] R. Gonz´alez-Jim´enez, N. Jachowicz, K. Niewczas, J. Nys, V. Pandey, T. Van Cuyck, and N. Van Dessel.Electroweak single-pion production off the nucleon: from threshold to high invariant masses.
Phys. Rev.D , 95(11):113007, 2017.[15] R. Gonz´alez-Jim´enez, K. Niewczas, and N. Jachowicz. Pion production within the hybrid relativisticplane wave impulse approximation model at MiniBooNE and MINERvA kinematics.
Phys. Rev. D ,97(1):013004, 2018.[16] A. Nikolakopoulos, R. Gonz´alez-Jim´enez, K. Niewczas, J. Sobczyk, and N. Jachowicz. Modelingneutrino-induced charged pion production on water at T2K kinematics.
Phys. Rev. D , 97(9):093008,2018.[17] Dieter Rein and Lalit M. Sehgal. Neutrino Excitation of Baryon Resonances and Single Pion Production.
Annals Phys. , 133:79–153, 1981.[18] M. Kabirnezhad. Single pion production in neutrino-nucleon Interactions.
Phys. Rev. D , 97(1):013002,2018.[19] S.X. Nakamura, H. Kamano, and T. Sato. Dynamical coupled-channels model for neutrino-inducedmeson productions in resonance region.
Phys. Rev. D , 92(7):074024, 2015.[20] H. Kamano, S.X. Nakamura, T. S. H. Lee, and T. Sato. Nucleon resonances within a dynamicalcoupled-channels model of πN and γN reactions. Phys. Rev. C , 88(3):035209, 2013.[21] H. Kamano, S.X. Nakamura, T.S.H. Lee, and T. Sato. Isospin decomposition of γN → N ∗ transitionswithin a dynamical coupled-channels model. Phys. Rev. C , 94(1):015201, 2016.[22] O. Buss, T. Gaitanos, K. Gallmeister, H. van Hees, M. Kaskulov, O. Lalakulich, A.B. Larionov, T. Leit-ner, J. Weil, and U. Mosel. Transport-theoretical Description of Nuclear Reactions.
Phys. Rept. ,512:1–124, 2012.[23] D. Drechsel, S.S. Kamalov, and L. Tiator. Unitary Isobar Model - MAID2007.
Eur. Phys. J. A , 34:69–97,2007.[24] Elliott D. Bloom and Frederick J. Gilman. Scaling, Duality, and the Behavior of Resonances in Inelasticelectron-Proton Scattering.
Phys. Rev. Lett. , 25:1140, 1970.[25] Sergey A. Kulagin and R. Petti. Neutrino inelastic scattering off nuclei.
Phys. Rev. D , 76:094023, 2007.[26] Sergey A. Kulagin and R. Petti. Global study of nuclear structure functions.
Nucl. Phys. A , 765:126–187,2006.[27] S.A. Kulagin and R. Petti. Nuclear parton distributions and the Drell-Yan process.
Phys. Rev. C ,90(4):045204, 2014.[28] I. Schienbein, J. Y. Yu, K. Kovarik, C. Keppel, J. G. Morfin, F. Olness, and J. F. Owens. PDF NuclearCorrections for Charged and Neutral Current Processes.
Phys. Rev. , D80:094004, 2009.[29] K. Kovarik, I. Schienbein, F.I. Olness, J.Y. Yu, C. Keppel, J.G. Morfin, J.F. Owens, and T. Stavreva.Nuclear Corrections in Neutrino-Nucleus DIS and Their Compatibility with Global NPDF Analyses.
Phys. Rev. Lett. , 106:122301, 2011.[30] H. Haider, F. Zaidi, M. Sajjad Athar, S. K. Singh, and I. Ruiz Simo. Nuclear medium effects in F EM A ( x, Q ) and F Weak A ( x, Q ) structure functions. Nucl. Phys. , A955:58–78, 2016.[31] F. Zaidi, H. Haider, M. Sajjad Athar, S. K. Singh, and I. Ruiz Simo. Weak structure functions in ν l − N and ν l − A scattering with nonperturbative and higher order perturbative QCD effects. Phys. Rev. ,D101(3):033001, 2020.[32] B.G. Tice et al. Measurement of Ratios of ν µ Charged-Current Cross Sections on C, Fe, and Pb to CHat Neutrino Energies 2-20 GeV.
Phys. Rev. Lett. , 112(23):231801, 2014.[33] J. Mousseau et al. Measurement of Partonic Nuclear Effects in Deep-Inelastic Neutrino Scattering usingMINERvA.
Phys. Rev. D , 93(7):071101, 2016.[34] Z. Koba, H.B. Nielsen, and P. Olesen. Scaling of multiplicity distributions in high energy hadroncollisions.
Nuclear Physics B , 40:317 – 334, 1972.[35] T. Yang, C. Andreopoulos, H. Gallagher, K. Hoffmann, and P. Kehayias. A Hadronization Model forFew-GeV Neutrino Interactions.
Eur. Phys. J. C , 63:1–10, 2009.[36] C. Bronner and M. Hartz. Tuning of the charged hadrons multiplicities for deep inelastic interactionsin neut.
JPS Conf. Proc , 12, 2016.[37] Konstantin S. Kuzmin and Vadim A. Naumov. Mean charged multiplicities in charged-current neutrinoscattering on hydrogen and deuterium.
Phys. Rev. C , 88:065501, Dec 2013.[38] Teppei Katori and Shivesh Mandalia. PYTHIA hadronization process tuning in the GENIE neutrinointeraction generator.
J. Phys. G , 42(11):115004, 2015.[39] Artem Chukanov and Roberto Petti. Study of Fragmentation Parameters in Deep Inelastic ScatteringNeutrino Interactions.
JPS Conf. Proc. , 12:010026, 2016.[40] C. Adams et al. Comparison of ν µ -Ar multiplicity distributions observed by MicroBooNE to GENIEmodel predictions. Eur. Phys. J. C , 79(3):248, 2019.[41] A. Hiramoto et al. First measurement of ν µ and ν µ charged-current inclusive interactions on waterusing a nuclear emulsion detector. 8 2020. arXiv:2008.03895.[42] Torbjorn Sjostrand, Stephen Mrenna, and Peter Z. Skands. PYTHIA 6.4 Physics and Manual. JHEP ,05:026, 2006.[43] G. Corcella, I.G. Knowles, G. Marchesini, S. Moretti, K. Odagiri, P. Richardson, M.H. Seymour, andB.R. Webber. HERWIG 6: An Event generator for hadron emission reactions with interfering gluons(including supersymmetric processes).
JHEP , 01:010, 2001.[44] T. Gleisberg, Stefan. Hoeche, F. Krauss, M. Schonherr, S. Schumann, F. Siegert, and J. Winter. Eventgeneration with SHERPA 1.1.
JHEP , 02:007, 2009.[45] Un-Ki Yang and A. Bodek. Parton distributions, d/u , and higher twist effects at high x.
Phys. Rev.Lett. , 82:2467–2470, 1999.[46] A Bodek and U.K. Yang. Higher twist, xi(omega) scaling, and effective LO PDFs for lepton scatteringin the few GeV region.
J. Phys. G , 29:1899–1906, 2003.[47] Arie Bodek, Inkyu Park, and Un-ki Yang. Improved low Q**2 model for neutrino and electron nucleoncross sections in few GeV region.
Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl. , 139:113–118, 2005.[48] Arie Bodek and Un-ki Yang. Axial and Vector Structure Functions for Electron- and Neutrino- NucleonScattering Cross Sections at all Q using Effective Leading order Parton Distribution Functions. 112010. arXiv:1011.6592.[49] A. Capella, A. Kaidalov, C. Merino, and J. Tran Thanh Van. Structure functions and low x physics. Phys. Lett. B , 337:358–366, 1994.[50] M.H. Reno. Electromagnetic structure functions and neutrino nucleon scattering.
Phys. Rev. D ,74:033001, 2006.[51] J.A.M. Vermaseren, A. Vogt, and S. Moch. The Third-order QCD corrections to deep-inelastic scatteringby photon exchange.
Nucl. Phys. B , 724:3–182, 2005.[52] S. Moch, J.A.M. Vermaseren, and A. Vogt. The Longitudinal structure function at the third order.
Phys. Lett. B , 606:123–129, 2005.[53] S. Moch, J.A.M. Vermaseren, and A. Vogt. Third-order QCD corrections to the charged-current struc-ture function F(3).
Nucl. Phys. B , 813:220–258, 2009.[54] M. Kabirnezhad. MK single pion production model. 6 2020. arXiv:2006.13765.[55] Vincenzo Cirigliano, Zohreh Davoudi, Tanmoy Bhattacharya, Taku Izubuchi, Phiala E. Shanahan,Sergey Syritsyn, and Michael L. Wagman. The Role of Lattice QCD in Searches for Violations ofFundamental Symmetries and Signals for New Physics.
Eur. Phys. J. A , 55(11):197, 2019.[56] R. Hill, T. Junk, et al. Snowmass 2021 LoI: Neutrino Scattering Measurements on Hydrogen andDeuterium .
SNOWMASS2021 , 2020.[57] Artur M. Ankowski and Alexander Friedland. Assessing the accuracy of the GENIE event generatorwith electron-scattering data. arXiv:2006.11944 (to appear in Phys. Rev. D), 2020. [58] H. Dai et al. First Measurement of the Ti( e, e ′ )X Cross Section at Jefferson Lab. Phys. Rev. C ,98:014617, 2018.[59] H. Dai et al. First measurement of the Ar( e, e ′ ) X cross section at Jefferson Laboratory. Phys. Rev. C ,99:054608, 2019.[60] Adi Ashkenazi. Connections between neutrino and electron scattering, 2020.https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3959538.[61] F. Hauenstein et al. Electrons for Neutrinos: Addressing Critical Neutrino-Nucleus Issues. A Proposalto Jefferson Lab PAC 45, 2017.[62] A. Ashkenazi et al. Electrons for Neutrinos: Addressing Critical Neutrino-Nucleus Issues. A Run GroupProposal Resubmission to Jefferson Lab PAC 46, 2018.[63] Artur M. Ankowski, Alexander Friedland, Shirley Weishi Li, Omar Moreno, Philip Schuster, NataliaToro, and Nhan Tran. Lepton-Nucleus Cross Section Measurements for DUNE with the LDMX Detector.
Phys. Rev. D , 101(5):053004, 2020.[64] M. Betancourt et al. Direct Measurement of Nuclear Dependence of Charged Current QuasielasticlikeNeutrino Interactions Using MINER ν A. Phys. Rev. Lett. , 119(8):082001, 2017.[65] K. Abe et al. Measurement of the muon neutrino inclusive charged-current cross section in the energyrange of 1–3 GeV with the T2K INGRID detector.
Phys. Rev. D , 93(7):072002, 2016.[66] P. Adamson et al. Measurement of single π production by coherent neutral-current ν Fe interactionsin the MINOS Near Detector.
Phys. Rev. D , 94(7):072006, 2016.[67] Q. Wu et al. A Precise measurement of the muon neutrino-nucleon inclusive charged current cross-section off an isoscalar target in the energy range 2.5 ¡ E(nu) ¡ 40-GeV by NOMAD.
Phys. Lett. B ,660:19–25, 2008.[68] P. Adamson et al. Neutrino and Antineutrino Inclusive Charged-current Cross Section Measurementswith the MINOS Near Detector.
Phys. Rev. D , 81:072002, 2010.[69] V Lyubushkin et al. A Study of quasi-elastic muon neutrino and antineutrino scattering in the NOMADexperiment.
Eur. Phys. J. C , 63:355–381, 2009.[70] M. Antonello et al. A Proposal for a Three Detector Short-Baseline Neutrino Oscillation Program inthe Fermilab Booster Neutrino Beam. 3 2015. arXiv:1503.01520.[71] P. Stowell et al. Tuning the genie pion production model with minerva data.
Phys. Rev. D , 100:072005,Oct 2019.[72] Ulrich Mosel. Neutrino event generators: foundation, status and future.
J. Phys. G , 46(11):113001,2019.[73] Josh Barrow et al. Summary of Workshop on Common Neutrino Event Generator Tools. 8 2020.arXiv:2008.06566.[74] S. Gardiner et al. Snowmass 2021 LoI: Neutrino Event Generators.