Λ hypernuclea r spectroscop y at Jefferson Lab The 3 rd Korea-Japan on Nuclear and Hadron Physics at J-PARC, at Inha University in Korea 2014/3/20 – 2014/3/21 Graduate school of Science, Tohoku Univ. Toshiyuki Gogami

Contents

Spectroscopic experiment by the (e,e’K + ) reaction p n γ*γ* Λ K+K+ e-e- e + p ➝ e’ + K + + Λ target nucleus ~ 1990’s The (K -,π - ), (π +,K + ) reactions Energy resolution ~ a few MeV n  Λ e’-Spectrometer K + -Spectrometer p e’ p K+ Missing Mass M HY 2000~ The (e,e’K + ) reaction Energy resolution sub-MeV p  Λ High intensity (~10 14 Hz) Small emittance (2 μm ・ mrad) Small energy spread (ΔE/E < )

Spectroscopic experiment by the (e,e’K + ) reaction p n γ*γ* Λ K+K+ e-e- e + p ➝ e’ + K + + Λ target nucleus ~ 1990’s The (K -,π - ), (π +,K + ) reactions Energy resolution ~ a few MeV n  Λ e’-Spectrometer K + -Spectrometer p e’ p K+ Missing Mass M HY 2000~ The (e,e’K + ) reaction Energy resolution sub-MeV p  Λ High intensity (~10 14 Hz) Small emittance (2 μm ・ mrad) Small energy spread (ΔE/E < )

Physics motivation for JLab E05-115

7 Λ He hyprenucleus +

CSB interaction test in A=7 iso-triplet comparison Counts B Λ [MeV] H.Tamura et al., PRL 84, 5963 (2000)

CSB interaction test in A=7 iso-triplet comparison S.N.Nakamura et al., PRL 110, (2013)

7 Λ He in JLab E S.N.Nakamura et al., PRL 110, (2013) JLab E Small systematic error Observation of the excited state

Experimental setup Pre-chicane beam line Δp/p ~ 2 × θ e’ = 6.5 ± 5.0 [degree] θ K = 5.7 ± 4.6 [degree]

Experimental setup

Contents

Absolute energy scale calibration with Λ and Σ 0 Missing mass Backward transfer matrix

Absolute energy scale calibration with Λ and Σ 0 Missing mass Backward transfer matrix Tune ITERATION

Λ, Σ 0 comparison 4 MeV (FWHM) 1.6 MeV (FWHM) ~ 0.5 MeV (FWHM) for 12 Λ B

Λ, Σ 0 comparison 4 MeV (FWHM) 1.6 MeV (FWHM) ~ 0.5 MeV (FWHM) for 12 Λ B

Systematic error estimation for binding energy ( TOSCA + Geant4 )

Systematic error estimation for binding energy Realistic  S/N  Yields  Energy straggling in target  Beam raster  Spectrometer acceptance  Detector resolution

Systematic error estimation for binding energy Realistic  S/N  Yields  Energy straggling in target  Beam raster  Spectrometer acceptance  Detector resolution

Systematic error estimation for binding energy Realistic  S/N  Yields  Energy straggling in target  Beam raster  Spectrometer acceptance  Detector resolution

Contents

Definition of differential cross section

12 C(e,e’K + ) 12 Λ B spectrum

(FWHM: 0.5 MeV)

12 Λ C and 12 Λ B comparison (FWHM: 0.5 MeV) H.Hotch et al., PRC64, (2001) (FWHM: 1.4 MeV) D.J.Millener, NPA691, 93 (2001) T.Motoba et al., PTP suppl. 185, 224 (2012) A.Matsumura, Doctor’s thesis (2009) JLab E KEK E369 JLab E Calc. ① ① ② ③ ③ ② (π +,K + ) reaction

12 Λ B comparison Experime nt θ γK Lab [degree]-B Λ [MeV]Cross section [nb/sr]Extracted value from Motoba-san’s prediction E ± 0.02 ± sys. error97.8 ± 3.6 ± E ± 0.01 ± ± 4.2 (+ 38 – 31)85 E ± ± 17 ± Emulsion ± 0.06N/A- Experim ent θ γK Lab [degree]-B Λ [MeV]Cross section [nb/sr]Extracted value from Motoba-san’s prediction E ± 0.03 ± sys. error84.1 ± 3.3 ± E ± 0.01 ± ± 4.0 ±3596 E ± 0.16N/A-

Results for 7 Li(e,e’K + ) 7 Λ He (FWHM: 1.3 MeV)

Results of 7 Λ He S.N.Nakamura et al., PRL 110, (2013)

Results of 7 Λ He S.N.Nakamura et al., PRL 110, (2013) E Λ (3/2 +,5/2 + ) [MeV] E.Hiyama et al., PRC 80, (2009) 1.70 M.Sotona et al., PTP 117 (1994) 1.79

Summary

Outlook Systematic error Fitting to the histogram 52 Λ V

Backup

12 C(e,e’K + ) 12 Λ B spectrum Virtual photon flux Efficiencies Acceptance

Λ binding energy for 12 C(e,e’K + ) 12 Λ B Peak- B Λ [MeV]N[nb/sr] (FWHM: 500 keV) Click to see previous results

12 Λ B comparison Experime nt θ γK Lab [degree]-B Λ [MeV]Cross section [nb/sr]Extracted value from Motoba-san’s prediction E ± 0.02 ± sys. error97.8 ± 3.6 ± E ± 0.01 ± ± 4.2 (+ 38 – 31)85 E ± ± 17 ± Emulsion ± 0.06N/A Experim ent θ γK Lab [degree]-B Λ [MeV]Cross section [nb/sr]Extracted value from Motoba-san’s prediction E ± 0.03 ± sys. error84.1 ± 3.3 ± E ± 0.01 ± ± 4.0 ±3596 E ± 0.16N/A

10 B(e,e’K + ) 10 Λ Be spectrum Virtual photon flux Efficiencies Acceptance

Λ binding energy for 10 B(e,e’K + ) 10 Λ Be Peak- B Λ [MeV]N[nb/sr] (1)T.Cantiwell et al., NPA236 (1974) (2)M.Juric et al., NPB52 (1973) 1-30 (FWHM: 780 keV)

Λ binding energy for 10 B(e,e’K + ) 10 Λ Be (FWHM: 780 keV) without CSB with CSB Hiyama’s calc. Motoba’s calc. Peak- B Λ [MeV]N[nb/sr]

7 Li(e,e’K + ) 7 Λ He spectrum Virtual photon flux Efficiencies Acceptance

Missing mass spectra  9 Be(e,e’K + ) 9 Λ Li  52 Cr(e,e’K + ) 52 Λ V

9 Be(e,e’K + ) 9 Λ Li spectrum Virtual photon flux Efficiencies Acceptance

9 Be(e,e’K + ) 9 Λ Li spectrum

M.Sotona and S.Frullani, PTP supplement No.117 (1994)

9 Be(e,e’K + ) 9 Λ Li spectrum rough comparison J.J.LeRose et al., NPA804(2008) F.Cusanno et al., NPA835(2010) Hall-A Hall-C

Missing mass spectrum of 52 Cr (e,e’K + ) 52 Λ V Accidental background sΛ (?)sΛ (?)

Missing mass spectrum of 52 Cr (e,e’K + ) 52 Λ V Accidental background

Missing mass spectrum of 52 Cr (e,e’K + ) 52 Λ V Accidental background

Summary and Outlook Summary Status of spectra Outlook Blind analysis  systematic error for binding energy D’s thesis

Energy scale calibration x, x’, y, RP p, x’, Target Missing mass Inverse transfer matrix p : Λ, Σ 0 and 12 Λ B-s xp and yp : Λ and Σ 0 LOOP Tune ITERATION Matrix selection Widths of Λ, Σ 0, 12 Λ B-s Matrix selection Widths of Λ, Σ 0, 12 Λ B-s Create new ROOT files Next LOOP

Li Virtual photon flux Efficiencies Acceptance

Λ binding energy for 7 Li(e,e’K + ) 7 Λ He (FWHM: 1300 keV) without CSB with CSB Hiyama’s calc. Peak- B Λ [MeV]N[nb/sr] 1 2 S.N.Nakamura et al., PRL 110, (2013)

Λ binding energy for 7 Li(e,e’K + ) 7 Λ He (331 mg/cm2) (FWHM: 1300 keV) without CSB with CSB Hiyama’s calc. Peak- B Λ [MeV]N[nb/sr] 1 2

Motivation for the blind analysis K + momentum e’ momentum Tuning Linearity Systematic error E e =2.344 GeV

Flow chart of blind analysis Compare Blind

Systematic error for binding energy With distorted matricesWith optimized matrices

Experimental setup Data summary

CSB interaction test in A=7 iso-triplet comparison

S.N.Nakamura et al., PRL 110, (2013)

Data summary Target ([mg/cm 2 ])Hypernucleus Hyperon Nominal beam current [A] Run time [h]Total incident charge [C] (Number of incident e - ) CH 2 (450)Λ, Σ 0, 12 Λ B2.039 H 2 O (500)Λ, Σ 0, 12 Λ N Li (208) 7 Λ He Be (188) 9 Λ Li B (56) 10 Λ Be C (88) 12 Λ B20, Cr (154) 52 Λ V7.5230

Data summary