SNO Review & Comparisons NOW 2004 12 September 2004 Mark Chen Queen’s University & The Canadian Institute for Advanced Research.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The SNO+ Experiment: Overview and Status
Advertisements

Neutrinos Louvain, February 2005 Alan Martin Arguably the most fascinating of the elementary particles. Certainly they take us beyond the Standard Model.
Neutrino emission =0.27 MeV E=0.39,0.86 MeV =6.74 MeV ppI loss: ~2% ppII loss: 4% note: /Q= 0.27/26.73 = 1% ppIII loss: 28% Total loss: 2.3%
DMSAG 14/8/06 Mark Boulay Towards Dark Matter with DEAP at SNOLAB Mark Boulay Canada Research Chair in Particle Astrophysics Queen’s University DEAP-1:
Takaaki Kajita ICRR, Univ. of Tokyo Nufact05, Frascati, June 2005.
G. Sullivan - Princeton - Mar 2002 What Have We Learned from Super-K? –Before Super-K –SK-I ( ) Atmospheric Solar –SNO & SK-I Active solar –SK.
Results and Future Challenges of the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory Neil McCauley University of Pennsylvania WIN 2005 : Delphi, Greece. 7 th June 2005.
Evidence of Neutrino Oscillation from SNO Chun Shing Jason Pun Department of Physics The University of Hong Kong Presented at the HKU Neutrino Workshop.
Zone convective 2e - +4p 4 He+2 e  MeV coeur zone radiative 500'000 km (70% 1 H, 28% 4 He,...) e L= m. Le soleil.
Prospects for 7 Be Solar Neutrino Detection with KamLAND Stanford University Department of Physics Kazumi Ishii.
Queen’s University, Kingston, ON, Canada
SNOLAB Workshop IV, Sudbury, August 2005 C.J. Virtue HALO - a Helium and Lead Observatory Outline Overview Motivation / Physics SNEWS Signal and.
21-25 January 2002 WIN 2002 Colin Okada, LBNL for the SNO Collaboration What Else Can SNO Do? Muons and Atmospheric Neutrinos Supernovae Anti-Neutrinos.
No s is good s Sheffield Physoc 21/04/2005 Jeanne Wilson A historical introduction to neutrinoless double beta decay.
The neutrons detection involves the use of gadolinium which has the largest thermal neutron capture cross section ever observed. The neutron capture on.
Neutrino emission =0.27 MeV E=0.39,0.86 MeV =6.74 MeV ppI loss: ~2% ppII loss: 4% note: /Q= 0.27/26.73 = 1% ppIII loss: 28% Total loss: 2.3%
Neutrino Physics - Lecture 4 Steve Elliott LANL Staff Member UNM Adjunct Professor ,
Results and Prospects for SNO
The Importance of Low-Energy Solar Neutrino Experiments Thomas Bowles Los Alamos National Laboratory Markov Symposium Institute for Nuclear Research 5/13/05.
Atmospheric Neutrino Oscillations in Soudan 2
手 手 羅 S N O 手 持 火 炬 的 火 炬 的 火 炬 的 手 手 手 俄 羅 羅 R E L O A D E D 手 持 火 炬 的 Results fromthe Salt Phase of the SNO Experiment Results from the Salt Phase of.
SNO+ Mark Chen Queen’s University Neutrino Geophysics, Honolulu, Hawaii December 15, 2005.
Status of the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory (SNO) Alan Poon for the SNO Collaboration Institute for Nuclear and Particle Astrophysics Lawrence Berkeley.
NDM03, June Mark Boulay for SNO Mark Boulay For the SNO Collaboration Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos NM, 87544, USA Present Status and.
Solar Neutrinos Perspectives and Objectives Mark Chen Queen’s University and Canadian Institute for Advanced Research (CIFAR)
Welcome to SNOLAB And to the Neutrino Geoscience Conference Art McDonald Queen’s University, Kingston Director, SNO Institute (+)
Double Beta Decay in SNO+ Huaizhang Deng University of Pennsylvania.
Results (and Expectations) from SNO, the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory Richard L. Hahn PRC-US Workshop Beijing, June 2006 * Research sponsored by the Office.
SNO II: Salt Strikes Back Joseph A. Formaggio University of Washington NuFACT’03 Update from the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory.
Latest SNO Results from Salt-Phase Data and Current NCD-Phase Status Melin Huang ● Introduction ● Results of Salt Phase (Phase II) ● Status of NCD Phase.
Solar neutrino measurement at Super Kamiokande ICHEP'04 ICRR K.Ishihara for SK collaboration Super Kamiokande detector Result from SK-I Status of SK-II.
Results from Sudbury Neutrino Observatory Huaizhang Deng University of Pennsylvania.
Neutrino Physics from SNO Aksel Hallin University of Alberta Erice, 2009.
The Sudbury Neutrino Observatory First Results and Implications Nick Jelley (University of Oxford) for the SNO Collaboration October 18th, 2001 CERN.
Karsten M. Heeger Les Houches, June 19, 2001 Sudbury Neutrino Observatory Results from the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory Karsten M. Heeger For the SNO Collaboration.
Michael Smy UC Irvine Solar and Atmospheric Neutrinos 8 th International Workshop on Neutrino Factories, Superbeams & Betabeams Irvine, California, August.
Methods and problems in low energy neutrino experiments (solar, reactors, geo-) I G. Ranucci ISAPP 2011 International School on Astroparticle physics THE.
SNO Liquid Scintillator Project NOW September 2004 Mark Chen Queen’s University & The Canadian Institute for Advanced Research.
SNO and the new SNOLAB SNO: Heavy Water Phase Complete Status of SNOLAB Future experiments at SNOLAB: (Dark Matter, Double beta, Solar, geo-, supernova.
Measuring the Neutral Current Event Rate in SNO Using 3 He(n,p)t All Neutron Backgrounds (Estimates) Photodisintegration Background U in D 2 O(20.0 fg/g)160.
Solar neutrino results from Super-Kamiokande Satoru Yamada for the Super-Kamiokande collaboration Institute of cosmic ray research, University of Tokyo.
New Results from the Salt Phase of SNO Kathryn Miknaitis Center for Experimental Nuclear Physics and Astrophysics, Univ. of Washington For the Sudbury.
The Sudbury Neutrino Observatory. Neil McCauley University of Pennsylvania NuFact th July 2004.
Data Processing for the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory Aksel Hallin Queen’s, October 2006.
Masatoshi Koshiba Raymond Davis Jr. The Nobel Prize in Physics 2002 "for pioneering contributions to astrophysics, in particular for the detection of cosmic.
Nd double beta decay search with SNO+ K. Zuber, on behalf of the SNO+ collaboration.
Search for Sterile Neutrino Oscillations with MiniBooNE
J. Dunmore, University of Oxford NDM03, 10 June 2003 Event Isotropy in the Salt Phase of SNO Jessica Dunmore University of Oxford NDM03, Nara - 10 June.
Solar Neutrino Observations at the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory (SNO) Alan Poon † Institute for Nuclear and Particle Astrophysics Lawrence Berkeley National.
00 Cooler CSB Direct or Extra Photons in d+d  0 Andrew Bacher for the CSB Cooler Collaboration ECT Trento, June 2005.
Results of the NEMO-3 experiment (Summer 2009) Outline   The  decay  The NEMO-3 experiment  Measurement of the backgrounds   and  results.
1 Where do we find SNO in April? Hamish Robertson Kubodera Festschrift April, 2004.
Medium baseline neutrino oscillation searches Andrew Bazarko, Princeton University Les Houches, 20 June 2001 LSND: MeVdecay at rest MeVdecay in flight.
By Matthew Kauer First Year Report – 15 June 07 Measurement of 2b2ν Half-Life of Zr96 and Lightguide Studies for SuperNEMO Calorimeter Matthew Kauer UCL.
P Spring 2002 L18Richard Kass The Solar Neutrino Problem M&S Since 1968 R.Davis and collaborators have been measuring the cross section of:
Solar Neutrinos By Wendi Wampler. What are Neutrinos? Neutrinos are chargeless, nearly massless particles Neutrinos are chargeless, nearly massless particles.
Solar Neutrino Results from SNO
Supernova Relic Neutrinos (SRN) are a diffuse neutrino signal from all past supernovae that has never been detected. Motivation SRN measurement enables.
5th June 2003, NuFact03 Kengo Nakamura1 Solar neutrino results, KamLAND & prospects Solar Neutrino History Solar.
SNO + SNO+ Steve Biller, Oxford University.  total SSM June 2001 (indirect) April 2002 (direct) (unconstrained CC spectrum) Sept 2003 (salt - unconstrained)
1 Double Beta Decay of 150 Nd in the NEMO 3 Experiment Nasim Fatemi-Ghomi (On behalf of the NEMO 3 collaboration) The University of Manchester IOP HEPP.
News from the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory Simon JM Peeters July 2007 o SNO overview o Results phases I & II o hep neutrinos and DSNB o Update on the III.
Results and Prospects with the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory Neutrinos and SNO Phase III Results Low Threshold Analysis Future (maybe) Josh Klein University.
Report (2) on JPARC/MLF-12B025 Gd(n,  ) experiment TIT, Jan.13, 2014 For MLF-12B025 Collaboration (Okayama and JAEA): Outline 1.Motivation.
First Results from Phase II of the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory Joshua R. Klein University of Texas at Austin  Solar Neutrinos  Review of Phase I Solar.
Simulation for DayaBay Detectors
Neutron backgrounds in KamLAND
Status of Neutron flux Analysis in KIMS experiment
Sudbury Neutrino Observatory
Davide Franco for the Borexino Collaboration Milano University & INFN
Presentation transcript:

SNO Review & Comparisons NOW September 2004 Mark Chen Queen’s University & The Canadian Institute for Advanced Research

The SNO Collaboration T. Kutter, C.W. Nally, S.M. Oser, C.E. Waltham University of British Columbia J. Boger, R.L. Hahn, R. Lange, M. Yeh Brookhaven National Laboratory A. Bellerive, X. Dai, F. Dalnoki-Veress, R.S. Dosanjh, D.R. Grant, C.K. Hargrove, R.J. Hemingway, I. Levine, C. Mifflin, E. Rollin, O. Simard, D. Sinclair, N. Starinsky, G. Tesic, D. Waller Carleton University P. Jagam, H. Labranche, J. Law, I.T. Lawson, B.G. Nickel, R.W. Ollerhead, J.J. Simpson University of Guelph J. Farine, F. Fleurot, E.D. Hallman, S. Luoma, M.H. Schwendener, R. Tafirout, C.J. Virtue Laurentian University Y.D. Chan, X. Chen, K.M. Heeger, K.T. Lesko, A.D. Marino, E.B. Norman, C.E. Okada, A.W.P. Poon, S.S.E. Rosendahl, R.G. Stokstad Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory M.G. Boulay, T.J. Bowles, S.J. Brice, M.R. Dragowsky, S.R. Elliott, M.M. Fowler, A.S. Hamer, J. Heise, A. Hime, G.G. Miller, R.G. Van de Water, J.B. Wilhelmy, J.M. Wouters Los Alamos National Laboratory S.D. Biller, M.G. Bowler, B.T. Cleveland, G. Doucas, J.A. Dunmore, H. Fergani, K. Frame, N.A. Jelley, S. Majerus, G. McGregor, S.J.M. Peeters, C.J. Sims, M. Thorman, H. Wan Chan Tseung, N. West, J.R. Wilson, K. Zuber Oxford University E.W. Beier, M. Dunford, W.J. Heintzelman, C.C.M. Kyba, N. McCauley, V.L. Rusu, R. Van Berg University of Pennsylvania S.N. Ahmed, M. Chen, F.A. Duncan, E.D. Earle, B.G. Fulsom, H.C. Evans, G.T. Ewan, K. Graham, A.L. Hallin, W.B. Handler, P.J. Harvey, M.S. Kos, A.V. Krumins, J.R. Leslie, R. MacLellan, H.B. Mak, J. Maneira, A.B. McDonald, B.A. Moffat, A.J. Noble, C.V. Ouellet, B.C. Robertson, P. Skensved, M. Thomas, Y.Takeuchi Queen’s University D.L. Wark Rutherford Laboratory and University of Sussex R.L. Helmer TRIUMF A.E. Anthony, J.C. Hall, J.R. Klein University of Texas at Austin T.V. Bullard, G.A. Cox, P.J. Doe, C.A. Duba, J.A. Formaggio, N. Gagnon, R. Hazama, M.A. Howe, S. McGee, K.K.S. Miknaitis, N.S. Oblath, J.L. Orrell, R.G.H. Robertson, M.W.E. Smith, L.C. Stonehill, B.L. Wall, J.F. Wilkerson University of Washington

1000 tonnes D 2 O 12 m diameter Acrylic Vessel 18 m diameter support structure; 9500 PMTs (~60% photocathode coverage) 1700 tonnes inner shielding H 2 O 5300 tonnes outer shielding H 2 O Urylon liner radon seal depth: 2092 m (~6010 m.w.e.) ~70 muons/day Sudbury Neutrino Observatory

Neutrino Reactions in SNO - Q = MeV - good measurement of e energy spectrum - some directional info  (1 – 1/3 cos  ) - e only - Q = 2.22 MeV - measures total 8 B flux from the Sun - equal cross section for all active flavors NC xx    npd ES    e−e− e−e− x - low statistics - mainly sensitive to e, some  and  - strong directional sensitivity CC e−e− ppd  e x

SNO Neutral Current Trilogy Pure D 2 O Nov 99 – May 01 n  d  t   (E  = 6.25 MeV) good CC PRL 87, (2001) PRL 89, (2002) PRL 89, (2002) “D 2 O Archival Long Paper” in progress Salt Jul 01 – Sep 03 n  35 Cl  36 Cl   (E  = 8.6 MeV) enhanced NC and event isotropy PRL 92, (2004) “Long Salt Paper” soon to be submitted 3 He Counters Fall 04 – Dec 06 n  3 He  t  p proportional counters  = 5330 b event-by-event separation “First NCD Paper” in the future

Physics Motivation Event-by-event separation. Measure NC and CC in separate data streams. Different systematic uncertainties than neutron capture on NaCl. 3 He array removes neutrons from CC, calibrates remainder. CC spectral shape. Detection Principle 2 H + x  p + n + x MeV (NC) 3 He + n  p + 3 H MeV 40 Strings on 1-m grid 398 m total active length x n NCD PMT SNO Phase III: 3 He Detectors 3 He Proportional Counters (“NC Detectors”)

Structure of this Talk – Comparison of Phases signals backgrounds energy and optics flux spectral shape day-night analysis oscillation analysis

Čerenkov Detection PMT Measurements -position -charge -time Reconstructed Event -event vertex -event direction -energy-isotropy

Signal Extraction Pure D 2 O signal PDFs –energy –R 3 (radius) –cos  Sun Monte Carlo maximum likelihood fit with background amplitudes fixed

energy R3R3 cos  Sun statistical signal separation – extended maximum likelihood  14 event isotropy use R 3, cos  Sun,  14 perform signal extraction w/o any spectral shape assumptions Signal Extraction Salt Phase

higher capture cross section higher energy release many gammas n 36 Cl * 35 Cl 36 Cl  3H3H 2 H+n 35 Cl+n 6.3 MeV 8.6 MeV  = b  = 44 b NaCl Neutron Detection

35 Cl(n,  ) 36 Cl  = ± T e ≥ 5.5 MeV and R  ≤ 550 cm 2 H(n,  ) 3 H  = ± T e ≥ 5.0 MeV and R  ≤ 550 cm Neutron Capture Efficiency 2 tonnes of NaCl added to 1000 tonnes heavy water 252 Cf fission neutron source

Simulated Neutron Event in D 2 O neutron events in pure D 2 O look very similar to single electrons

Simulated Neutron Event in Salt neutron events in salt are more isotropic

Čerenkov Light and  14 ) 43 o e − (v > c/n) hollow cone of emitted photons energy & direction  ij       sum over all pairs of PMT hits

Monte Carlo Signal Separation

Neutron Signals from the First NCD data taken on the J3 string (first 9.5 m long NCD) with the AmBe source on 12/02/03 at 22:38 EST bin 135 is about 764 keV total number of neutrons in the peak roughly matches Monte Carlo prediction

Comparison of Phases signals backgrounds energy and optics flux spectral shape day-night analysis oscillation analysis

Sources of Background  + d → p + n, from 214 Bi (U chain), 208 Tl (Th chain) cosmic rays: neutrons, spallation products atmospheric neutrinos, reactors, CNO electron capture fission (U, Cf) ( ,n) reactions 24 Na activation (neck, calibration, recirculation, muons) AV events focus is on neutron backgrounds to the NC

Pure D 2 O Water Assays targets for D 2 O represent a 5% background from  + d  n + p targets are set to reduce  -  events reconstructing inside 6 m

Salt Phase Water Assays bottom of vessel 2/3 way up top of vessel MnO x HTiO MnO x HTiO salted D 2 O radioactivity should produce 0.72 ± 0.24 neutrons per day pure D 2 O radioactivity was estimated at 1.0 ± 0.2 neutrons per day the SSM rate of NC events would produce 13.1 neutrons per day

New Salt Phase Background 24 Na activation neutrons activate 23 NaCl…salty D 2 O can be activated outside the detector and brought in by circulation 24 Na 24 Mg 2.75 MeV 1.37 MeV  + d → p + n NC background and low-energy  ’s t 1/2 = hr

External 24 Na Introduced The NaCl brine in the underground buffer tank was activated by neutrons from the rock wall. We observed the decay of 24 Na after the brine is injected in the SNO detector. Salt Injected on May 28, Na Background t 1/2 =14.95 hrs

External Neutrons light water  ’s photodisintegrate deuteron radon daughters deposited on the acrylic vessel during construction 210 Pb has t 1/2 = 22 years feeds 210 Po which alpha decays ( ,n) on 13 C, 17 O, 18 O neutrons originate from the AV pure D2O phasesalt phase estimated from radioassays, 27 ± 8 events subtracted was not considered fit both

Fitting External Neutron Backgrounds  =(R [cm]/600) 3 improved separation of internal and external background neutrons efficient neutron capture on Cl

SourceNumber of Events deuteron photodisintegration H( ,  )pn 2.8 ± ,18 O( ,n) 1.4 ± 0.9 fission, atmospheric ’s 23.0 ± 7.2 terrestrial and reactor ’s 2.3 ± 0.8 neutrons from rock <1 24 Na activation 8.4 ± 2.3 neutrons from CNO ’s 0.3 ± 0.3 total internal neutron background ± 25 internal  (fission, atmospheric ) 5.2 ± N decays< 2.5 (68% CL) external-source neutrons (from fit) 84.5 ± 34 Čerenkov events from PMT  -  <14.7 (68% CL) “AV events”< 5.4 (68% CL) Salt Phase Backgrounds Table −25.5

NCD Backgrounds: Pulse Shape  track  wire De-logged current Time (microseconds) current preamplifiers digitize pulse shapes for particle identification

Comparison of Phases signals backgrounds energy and optics flux spectral shape day-night analysis oscillation analysis

manipulator positioning accuracy: ~2 cm laserball moved throughout detector (in two planes) extract optical parameters (D 2 O attenuation, PMT angular response, H 2 O attenuation) at various wavelengths B. Moffat with dye laser and laserball Optical Calibrations

16 N Calibration Source internally triggered used for: energy scale energy drift detector radial response energy resolution vertex resolution angular resolution M. Boulay with 16 N source O 16 N 7.13 s −− 26% 68% 5% 1%

Detector Energy Drift

Monitoring Detector Optics D 2 O attenuation increasing water chemistry analyses reveal increasing Mn and organics consistent with light absorption feature at ~420 nm

Salt Energy Scale Drift energy scale drift agrees with MC prediction coming from slight increase in D 2 O photon absorption over time…

Desalination started 09/09/2003 pass #1 completed 09/14/2003…100x reduction reverse osmosis

Pass #1 Stratification salt probe conductivity measurement purified D 2 O floats salt interface remained solid throughout operation salt water more dense probe z position [cm]

Na and Impurities Removed feed permeate LimitFeedPermeate Mn <2 ppb ~15 ppb ~0.1 ppb Cr <1 ppb ~0.6 ppb ~0.04 ppb Fe <1.5 ppb <10 ppb <1.5 ppb Ni <20 ppb <0.8 ppb <0.08 ppb Cu <40 ppb <3 ppb <1 ppb TOC<10 ppb ~20 ppb ~3-4 ppb

Optics Restored – Confirmation! −1.8% per year due to D 2 O attenuation desalination pass #1 Mn and/or TOC light absorption removed! salt phase energy drift

Optics Destroyed! in NCD Phase example of a current NCD phase optics calibration occupancy map from laserball source in the centre of the detector working now to understand the detector (PMT’s and NCD’s)

Comparison of Phases signals backgrounds energy and optics flux spectral shape day-night analysis oscillation analysis

CC ES NC #EVENTS SNO Pure D 2 O Results (2002) 1 st paper threshold days neutron background: 78 primarily  + d → p + n Čerenkov background: − −12

 e = 1.76(stat.)(syst.) × 10 6 cm −2 s −1   = 3.41(stat.)(syst.) × 10 6 cm −2 s −1 Constrained Shape Fluxes   cc ( e ) = 1.76 (stat.) (syst.) × 10 6 cm −2 s −1   es ( x ) = 2.39 (stat.) (syst.) × 10 6 cm −2 s −1   nc ( x ) = 5.09 (stat.) (syst.) × 10 6 cm −2 s −1 E threshold > 5 MeV * *E >2.2 MeV − − − − − − − − − −0.45 more than just e coming from the Sun!

CC ES NC #EVENTS Salt Phase neutrino live-days Energy Spectra Light Isotropy Radial Sun-angle dist.

SNO Salt Fluxes shape of 8 B spectrum in CC and ES not constrained: standard (Ortiz et al.) shape of 8 B spectrum in CC and ES:   cc ( e ) = 1.76 (stat.) (syst.) × 10 6 cm −2 s −1   es ( x ) = 2.39 (stat.) (syst.) × 10 6 cm −2 s −1   nc ( x ) = 5.09 (stat.) (syst.) × 10 6 cm −2 s − − − − − − −0.43 compare with pure D 2 O

internal neutrons energy scale resolution radial accuracy angular resolution isotropy mean isotropy width radial E bias Čerenkov bkds “AV” events neutron capture total Uncertainties in Fluxes (%)

Total Active 8 B Fluxes in units of Bahcall, Pinsonneault, Basu 2001 SSM, 5.05 x 10 6 cm −2 s −1 BPB01 SSM1.00 Junghans et al. nucl-ex/ ± 0.16 BP04 SSM1.15 ± 0.26 SNO D 2 O (constrained) 1.01 ± 0.13 SNO D 2 O (unconstrained) 1.27 ± 0.33 SNO Salt (unconstrained) 1.03 ± −0.16 new S 17 results are consistent with SSM and with each other uncertainty in total flux reduced in the new salt result, even while constraints were relaxed

Next Salt Paper: Fluxes days to days, increased statistics improved systematics determinations (does not mean all systematics have become smaller!)

NCD Phase: Fluxes D 2 O unconstrained D 2 O constrained Salt unconstrained 3 He NC,CC ~0 CC,ES ~-0.2 ES,NC ~0 good statistics CC, NC break correlations smaller systematic uncertainties

Comparison of Phases signals backgrounds energy and optics flux spectral shape day-night analysis oscillation analysis

Pure D 2 O Energy Spectrum  m 2 = 8 × 10 −5 eV tan 2  Day Spectrum CC+NC+ES would be worse with salt

Salt Extracted CC Spectral Shape CC Spectral Shape recoil electron total energy [MeV] rate/SSM  m 2 = 8 × 10 −5 eV 2 tan 2 

Salt CC Spectral Systematics bin-bin statistical correlations from likelihood extraction and for various systematics determined most systematics are small for the integrated CC flux measurement…but, not necessarily small in each spectral bin energy dependence and biases investigated and understood to be presented soon in the upcoming paper

NCD Phase Spectra 3 He counters “soak up” the neutrons will allow a cleaner look at low energy CC events will still be some neutron captures by deuterons in the heavy water; these can be calibrated and subtracted using the NCD neutron count rate

Comparison of Phases signals backgrounds energy and optics flux spectral shape day-night analysis oscillation analysis

Pure D 2 O Day-Night Spectra night − day define asymmetry: A = 2 (N – D) (N + D)  A cc = 14.0 ± −1.4  A nc = −20.4 ± −2.5  e = 7.0 ± −1.2 night rate: 9.79 ± 0.24 d −1 day rate: 9.23 ± 0.27 d −1

Can SNO Observe Day-Night Effect? tan 2  3.3 % Bahcall, Gonzalez-Garcia, Peña-Garay +5.7 − % +1.1 − % in CC

Comparison of Phases signals backgrounds energy and optics flux spectral shape day-night analysis oscillation analysis

Oscillations Analysis: Before SNO before SNO Fogli, Lisi, Montanino Palazzo after SNO Pure D 2 O SNO Collaboration this figure updated and upgraded

Oscillation Analysis: Global Solar Before Salt After Salt --90% --95% --99% %

Oscillation Analysis Before LMA LOW pre-salt solarsolar plus KamLAND Bahcall, Gonzalez- Garcia, Peña-Garay LMA-I LMA-II

Oscillation Analysis After Salt −90% −95% −99% −99.73% LMA-I only at > 99% CL solarsolar plus KamLAND global solar finds only LMA

Salt PRL Fluxes + New KamLAND including KamLAND Neutrino 2004 results log-log plot in tan 2 

Synopsis of SNO Salt Results oscillation parameters, 2-D joint 1  boundary marginalized 1-D 1  errors LMA-I favored at >99% C.L. maximal mixing rejected at 5.4  sin 2  12 = 0.29 ± 0.04 next salt paper oscillation analysis will include salt day-night, CC spectral shape…

Global Solar NCD Projection with and w/o KamLAND SNO will constrain the mixing angle... lin-lin plot in tan 2 

Comparison of Phases signals backgrounds energy and optics flux spectral shape day-night analysis oscillation analysis

Summary commissioning Pure D 2 O Salt Pure D 2 O and desalination 3 He Counters NOW added 2 ton of NaCl pure D 2 O phase discovers active solar neutrino flavors that are not e salt phase moves to precision determination of oscillation parameters; flux determination has no spectral constraint (thus can use it rigorously for more than just the null hypothesis test) NCDs installed and about to begin production data taking; final SNO configuration offers CC and NC event-by-event separation, for improved precision and cleaner spectral shape examination

fin