More HVeVR2

SuperCDMS Public Documentation

HVeV Run 2

Results


Topic


Last Updated


Comments/Download


Laser Spectrum 60V

Data

March 27st, 2020

Cumulative laser calibration spectrum with cuts applied with 60 V data

Laser calibration data for all 60 V data. The data are plotted in three cases: (1) after the corrections and the calibration; (2) after the livetime cuts; (3) the data quality cuts.

 

png, pdf

DM Search Data 100V

Data

March 27st, 2020

Dark-matter-search spectrum with 100 V data

Dark-matter-search spectrum with the 100 V data. The data are plotted in three cases: (1) after the corrections and the calibration; (2) after the livetime cuts; (3) the data quality cuts.

 

png, pdf

DM Search Data 60V

Data

March 27st, 2020

Dark-matter-search spectrum with 60 V data

Dark-matter-search spectrum with the 60 V data. The data are plotted in three cases: (1) after the corrections and the calibration; (2) after the livetime cuts; (3) the data quality cuts.

 

png, pdf

Partition Data 100V

Data

February 21st, 2020

Partition distribution as a function of the energy for the dark-matter-search data

Partition as a function of the energy. Positive (negative) values of partition indicate that the event occurred closer to the inner (outer) channel

 

png, pdf

HVeVR2 Limit

Limits

February 21st, 2020

Dark matter electron-recoil limit with FDM=1 for the 100 V data

Dark matter electron-recoil FDM=1 Poisson limits with the 90% unblinded 100 V (blue) and 60 V (black) data with Fano factor. The uncertainty band represents the minimum and maximum values from the different assumptions of Fano factor in the ionization model (F = 1e-4, 0.3), as well as from the systematic uncertainties propagated in the limit calculation. The references for this plot can be found at the bottom of this page.

 

png, pdf
png, pdf

HVeVR2 Limit

Limits

February 21st, 2020

Dark matter electron-recoil limit with FDM ∝ 1/q2 for the 100 V data

Dark matter electron-recoil FDM ∝ 1/q2 Poisson limits with the 90% unblinded 100 V (blue) and 60 V (black) data with Fano factor. The uncertainty band represents the minimum and maximum values from the different assumptions of Fano factor in the ionization model (F = 1e-4, 0.3), as well as from the systematic uncertainties propagated in the limit calculation. The references for this plot can be found at the bottom of this page.

 

png, pdf
png, pdf

HVeVR2 Limit DPA

Limits

February 21st, 2020

Dark matter dark photon absorption limit for the 100 V data

Dark photon absorption Poisson limits with the 90% unblinded 100 V (blue) and 60 V (black) data with Fano factor. The uncertainty band represents the minimum and maximum values from the different assumptions of Fano factor in the ionization model (F = 1e-4, 0.3), as well as from the systematic uncertainties propagated in the limit calculation. The divergence of the 60V and 100V limit at high mass is because the 6th eh peak for the 60 V is out of the region of interest, and so limits are only calculated with the 5th peak. The references for this plot can be found at the bottom of this page.

 

png, pdf
png, pdf

HVeVR2 Limit ALP

Limits

February 21st, 2020

Dark matter axion-like particle limit for the 100 V data

Axion-like particle Poisson limits with the 90% unblinded 100 V (blue) and 60 V (black) data with Fano factor. The uncertainty band represents the minimum and maximum values from the different assumptions of Fano factor in the ionization model (F = 1e-4, 0.3), as well as from the systematic uncertainties propagated in the limit calculation. The divergence of the 60V and 100V limit at high mass is because the 6th eh peak for the 60 V is out of the region of interest, and so limits are only calculated with the 5th peak. The references for this plot can be found at the bottom of this page.

 

png, pdf
png, pdf

HVeVR2 Pexsec

Limits

February 21st, 2020

Absorption cross section

Real part of the complex conductivity, s1, as a function of photon energy for Si. The nominal curve follows the method used in Ref. [Y. Hochberg et al. Phys. Rev. D, 95:023013, 2017]. The upper and lower curves were determined using data from an extensive literature search, and applying analytic temperature reductions to estimate the photoelectric absorption cross section at the operating temperature of the detector. The references for this plot can be found at the bottom of this page.

 

png, pdf

HVeVR2 Photon Impact

Modeling

February 21st, 2020

Impact ionization model for the HVeV Run 2 detector.

Energy spectrum shape obtained from the modelization of impact ionization with a photon signal.

 

png, pdf

HVeVR2 Photon Trapping Fraction

Modeling

February 21st, 2020

png, pdf

Trapping model for the HVeV Run 2 detector.

Energy spectrum shape obtained from the modelization of trapping with a photon signal.

 

png, pdf

Energy Model

Modeling

February 21st, 2020

Fit of the laser data with the trapping and impact ionization model

Top panel: Fit of the laser data with the trapping and impact ionization model. Bottom panel: Residuals between the data and the fit.

 

png, pdf

HVeVR2 R1

Data

November 30th, 2020

Comparison between the HVeV Run 1 data and the HVeV Run 2 data.

This plot shows the comparison between the two spectra acquired during HVeV Run 1 and Run 2. The two histograms have the same binning to present the different structures. An additional point is added on top of each electron-hole pair in order to highlight the event rate contained in a 3 σ window around the peak (corresponding to the counts in the peak). Each point has a 3 σ uncertainty on the number of counts. The black curve represents the electron-recoil dark matter model with FDM ∝ 1/q2 with a mass of 1 GeV/c2 for an impact ionization of 2 % and for a trapping of 11 %. The uncertainty considers a trapping varing in the range 0 - 15 %.

 

png, pdf
png, pdf