Mohamad-Ziad Charif - Antares
Mohamad-Ziad Charif - Antares Mohamad-Ziad Charif - Antares
annihilation channel W + W − the optimized cut is slightly better than 176 or 200GeV, this behavior is purely a random behavior, and if we change the χ 2 cut, wefind a cut that is larger than 176 GeV and smaller than 100 GeV WIMP mass.These values when compared to those obtained in the 2007-2008 analysis (figure5.23) we see a slight tightening of the cuts. This is due for two reasons, oneis the more specialized run-by-run MC. The second reason is because the 12-lines detector has better angular resolution than the 5-lines detector, the 2007-2008 analysis had larger contribution of the 5-lines detector compared 2007-2010analysis.Figure 6.9: Comparison of the estimated background in the direction of the Sunfrom scrambled data and one dark matter model (200 GeV b + b − ).A cut of χ 2
Figure 6.10: Comparison of the optimized ∆(Ψ ◦ ) cut as a function of the WIMPmass and the annihilation channel .Figure 6.11: Sensitivity to neutrino flux coming from dark matter annihilationinside the Sun as a function of WIMP mass and the annihilation channel.119
- Page 70 and 71: Figure 4.4: Average neutrino events
- Page 72 and 73: 2. All hits on the same floor are m
- Page 74 and 75: 4.2.1 Neutrino simulationFigure 4.6
- Page 76 and 77: • Multiplicity range of the muon
- Page 78 and 79: Chapter 5Dark Matter search in the
- Page 80 and 81: Figure 5.2: Annihilation spectrum f
- Page 82 and 83: Livetime(days) 5 Lines 9 Lines 10 L
- Page 84 and 85: Figure 5.4: Monte Carlo Truth distr
- Page 86 and 87: Figure 5.7: Tchi2 distribution for
- Page 88 and 89: Figure 5.9: Tchi2 distribution for
- Page 90 and 91: Figure 5.11: Sun’s position taken
- Page 92 and 93: Figure 5.13: Comparison between the
- Page 94 and 95: Figure 5.15: Estimation of the back
- Page 96 and 97: Figure 5.16: Mean angle between the
- Page 98 and 99: Figure 5.18: A comparison of the di
- Page 100 and 101: a look at figure 5.22 we find a cle
- Page 102 and 103: The resulting optimized sensitiviti
- Page 104 and 105: Figure 5.26: A comparison plot of t
- Page 106 and 107: dΦ µdE ν= dΦ νdE νP earth ρN
- Page 108 and 109: Figure 5.31: Limits on the muon flu
- Page 110 and 111: Chapter 6Dark Matter search in the
- Page 112 and 113: Figure 6.1: . True Position of the
- Page 114 and 115: Figure 6.3: Comparison of the three
- Page 116 and 117: For BBFit all variables mentioned i
- Page 118 and 119: Figure 6.6: The distribution of χ
- Page 122 and 123: lowering the total contribution of
- Page 124 and 125: 6.4.2 BBFit Single-line analysisThe
- Page 126 and 127: Figure 6.15: Comparison between the
- Page 128 and 129: Figure 6.17: Comparison of Nhit dis
- Page 130 and 131: Figure 6.19: The estimation of the
- Page 132 and 133: Figure 6.21: Comparison of the opti
- Page 134 and 135: Figure 6.23: Comparison of sensitiv
- Page 136 and 137: Figure 6.25: Estimation of our back
- Page 138 and 139: Figure 6.28: Comparison of the mult
- Page 140 and 141: Figure 6.29: Comparison of the Λ d
- Page 142 and 143: Figure 6.31: Comparison of the cos(
- Page 144 and 145: Figure 6.34: Comparison of the esti
- Page 146 and 147: The optimal Λ cut for all dark mat
- Page 148 and 149: Figure 6.40: Sensitivity to neutrin
- Page 150 and 151: 6.7 Comparison with 2007-2008 analy
- Page 152 and 153: mass of 200 GeV and a cross-section
- Page 154 and 155: Chapter 7ConclusionsThe limits pres
- Page 156 and 157: Bibliography[1] Volders, L. M. J. S
- Page 158 and 159: [22] S. Burles et al., “Big bang
- Page 160 and 161: [46] G. Debrassi, S. Heinemeyer, W.
- Page 162 and 163: [74] C. Hettlage, K. Mannheim, and
- Page 164: [102] D. Heck and J. Knapp, “Fors
Figure 6.10: Comparison of the optimized ∆(Ψ ◦ ) cut as a function of the WIMPmass and the annihilation channel .Figure 6.11: Sensitivity to neutrino flux coming from dark matter annihilationinside the Sun as a function of WIMP mass and the annihilation channel.119
Change language