Daya Bay Reactor Neutrino Experiment
Daya Bay
- Location
- Guangdong, China
- Type
- Liquid scintillator
- Status
- Completed · 2011–2020
- Known for
- Measuring the mixing angle θ₁₃ (2012)
Background. By 2011, two of the three angles governing neutrino oscillation were well measured, but the third, θ₁₃, remained unknown and might have been zero. Its size matters enormously: only a non-zero θ₁₃ leaves room for charge-parity violation in the lepton sector. Nuclear reactors are intense, well-understood sources of electron antineutrinos, making them ideal for the search (see reactor neutrinos).
Objective. Daya Bay aimed to measure θ₁₃ by tracking how many reactor antineutrinos disappear over short baselines, where the oscillation driven by θ₁₃ reaches its first dip.
Method. Eight gadolinium-doped liquid-scintillator detectors were deployed in near and far underground halls surrounding six powerful reactor cores. By comparing the antineutrino rate and energy spectrum measured at about 360 m with those at roughly 1.6 km, the collaboration cancelled most systematic uncertainties about the reactors themselves. The far detectors should see fewer antineutrinos than a simple extrapolation predicts, and the size of that deficit fixes the angle. You can explore the physics with the oscillation calculator.
Results. In 2012 Daya Bay reported a clearly non-zero θ₁₃ at 5.2σ, with sin²2θ₁₃ near 0.092 — a comfortably large value, soon confirmed by the RENO experiment in South Korea. The measurement was unusually clean for a parameter many had feared would be vanishingly small.
Significance. A sizeable θ₁₃ opened the experimental hunt for leptonic CP violation and shaped the design of the next generation of experiments — DUNE, Hyper-Kamiokande, and JUNO — which now pursue the neutrino mass ordering and the CP-violating phase.
Frequently asked questions
What did Daya Bay measure?
Why does theta-13 matter?
References
- 1.F. P. An et al. (Daya Bay Collaboration), Observation of Electron-Antineutrino Disappearance at Daya Bay, Phys. Rev. Lett. (2012). DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.171803.