Search for a diffuse flux of astrophysical muon neutrinos with the IceCube 59-string configuration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A search for high-energy neutrinos was performed using data collected by the IceCube Neutrino Observatory from May 2009 to May 2010, when the array was running in its 59-string configuration. The data sample was optimized to contain muon neutrino induced events with a background contamination of atmospheric muons of less than 1%. These data, which are dominated by atmospheric neutrinos, are analyzed with a global likelihood fit to search for possible contributions of prompt atmospheric and astrophysical neutrinos, neither of which have yet been identified. Such signals are expected to follow a harder energy spectrum than conventional atmospheric neutrinos. In addition, the zenith angle distribution differs for astrophysical and atmospheric signals. A global fit of the reconstructed energies and directions of observed events is performed, including possible neutrino flux contributions for an astrophysical signal and atmospheric backgrounds as well as systematic uncertainties of the experiment and theoretical predictions. The best fit yields an astrophysical signal flux for ${\ensuremath{\nu}}_{\ensuremath{\mu}}+{\overline{\ensuremath{\nu}}}_{\ensuremath{\mu}}$ of ${E}^{2}\ifmmode\cdot\else\textperiodcentered\fi{}\mathrm{\ensuremath{\Phi}}(E)=0.25\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}{10}^{\ensuremath{-}8}\text{ }\text{ }\mathrm{GeV}\text{ }{\mathrm{cm}}^{\ensuremath{-}2}\text{ }{\mathrm{s}}^{\ensuremath{-}1}\text{ }{\mathrm{sr}}^{\ensuremath{-}1}$, and a zero prompt component. Although the sensitivity of this analysis for astrophysical neutrinos surpasses the Waxman and Bahcall upper bound, the experimental limit at 90% confidence level is a factor of 1.5 above at a flux of ${E}^{2}\ifmmode\cdot\else\textperiodcentered\fi{}\mathrm{\ensuremath{\Phi}}(E)=1.44\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}{10}^{\ensuremath{-}8}\text{ }\text{ }\mathrm{GeV}\text{ }{\mathrm{cm}}^{\ensuremath{-}2}\text{ }{\mathrm{s}}^{\ensuremath{-}1}\text{ }{\mathrm{sr}}^{\ensuremath{-}1}$.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".