Precision measurement of reactor antineutrino oscillation at kilometer-scale baselines by Daya Bay

We present a new determination of the smallest neutrino mixing angle ${\theta}_{13}$ and the mass-squared difference ${\Delta}{\rm m}^{2}_{32}$ using a final sample of $5.55 \times 10^{6}$ inverse beta-decay (IBD) candidates with the final-state neutron captured on gadolinium. This sample was selected from the complete data set obtained by the Daya Bay reactor neutrino experiment in 3158 days of operation. Compared to the previous Daya Bay results, selection of IBD candidates has been optimized, energy calibration refined, and treatment of backgrounds further improved. The resulting oscillation parameters are ${\rm sin}^{2}2{\theta}_{13} = 0.0851 \pm 0.0024$, ${\Delta}{\rm m}^{2}_{32} = (2.466 \pm 0.060) \times 10^{-3}{\rm eV}^{2}$ for the normal mass ordering or ${\Delta}{\rm m}^{2}_{32} = -(2.571 \pm 0.060) \times 10^{-3} {\rm eV}^{2}$ for the inverted mass ordering.Comment: 7 pages, 3 figures, 1 table, 10 supplementary file

Radioactivity control strategy for the JUNO detector

602siopenJUNO is a massive liquid scintillator detector with a primary scientific goal of determining the neutrino mass ordering by studying the oscillated anti-neutrino flux coming from two nuclear power plants at 53 km distance. The expected signal anti-neutrino interaction rate is only 60 counts per day (cpd), therefore a careful control of the background sources due to radioactivity is critical. In particular, natural radioactivity present in all materials and in the environment represents a serious issue that could impair the sensitivity of the experiment if appropriate countermeasures were not foreseen. In this paper we discuss the background reduction strategies undertaken by the JUNO collaboration to reduce at minimum the impact of natural radioactivity. We describe our efforts for an optimized experimental design, a careful material screening and accurate detector production handling, and a constant control of the expected results through a meticulous Monte Carlo simulation program. We show that all these actions should allow us to keep the background count rate safely below the target value of 10 Hz (i.e. ∼1 cpd accidental background) in the default fiducial volume, above an energy threshold of 0.7 MeV. [Figure not available: see fulltext.]openAbusleme A.; Adam T.; Ahmad S.; Ahmed R.; Aiello S.; Akram M.; An F.; An Q.; Andronico G.; Anfimov N.; Antonelli V.; Antoshkina T.; Asavapibhop B.; de Andre J.P.A.M.; Auguste D.; Babic A.; Baldini W.; Barresi A.; Basilico D.; Baussan E.; Bellato M.; Bergnoli A.; Birkenfeld T.; Blin S.; Blum D.; Blyth S.; Bolshakova A.; Bongrand M.; Bordereau C.; Breton D.; Brigatti A.; Brugnera R.; Bruno R.; Budano A.; Buscemi M.; Busto J.; Butorov I.; Cabrera A.; Cai H.; Cai X.; Cai Y.; Cai Z.; Cammi A.; Campeny A.; Cao C.; Cao G.; Cao J.; Caruso R.; Cerna C.; Chang J.; Chang Y.; Chen P.; Chen P.-A.; Chen S.; Chen X.; Chen Y.-W.; Chen Y.; Chen Y.; Chen Z.; Cheng J.; Cheng Y.; Chetverikov A.; Chiesa D.; Chimenti P.; Chukanov A.; Claverie G.; Clementi C.; Clerbaux B.; Conforti Di Lorenzo S.; Corti D.; Cremonesi O.; Dal Corso F.; Dalager O.; De La Taille C.; Deng J.; Deng Z.; Deng Z.; Depnering W.; Diaz M.; Ding X.; Ding Y.; Dirgantara B.; Dmitrievsky S.; Dohnal T.; Dolzhikov D.; Donchenko G.; Dong J.; Doroshkevich E.; Dracos M.; Druillole F.; Du S.; Dusini S.; Dvorak M.; Enqvist T.; Enzmann H.; Fabbri A.; Fajt L.; Fan D.; Fan L.; Fang J.; Fang W.; Fargetta M.; Fedoseev D.; Fekete V.; Feng L.-C.; Feng Q.; Ford R.; Formozov A.; Fournier A.; Gan H.; Gao F.; Garfagnini A.; Giammarchi M.; Giaz A.; Giudice N.; Gonchar M.; Gong G.; Gong H.; Gornushkin Y.; Gottel A.; Grassi M.; Grewing C.; Gromov V.; Gu M.; Gu X.; Gu Y.; Guan M.; Guardone N.; Gul M.; Guo C.; Guo J.; Guo W.; Guo X.; Guo Y.; Hackspacher P.; Hagner C.; Han R.; Han Y.; Hassan M.S.; He M.; He W.; Heinz T.; Hellmuth P.; Heng Y.; Herrera R.; Hor Y.K.; Hou S.; Hsiung Y.; Hu B.-Z.; Hu H.; Hu J.; Hu J.; Hu S.; Hu T.; Hu Z.; Huang C.; Huang G.; Huang H.; Huang W.; Huang X.; Huang X.; Huang Y.; Hui J.; Huo L.; Huo W.; Huss C.; Hussain S.; Ioannisian A.; Isocrate R.; Jelmini B.; Jen K.-L.; Jeria I.; Ji X.; Ji X.; Jia H.; Jia J.; Jian S.; Jiang D.; Jiang X.; Jin R.; Jing X.; Jollet C.; Joutsenvaara J.; Jungthawan S.; Kalousis L.; Kampmann P.; Kang L.; Karaparambil R.; Kazarian N.; Khan W.; Khosonthongkee K.; Korablev D.; Kouzakov K.; Krasnoperov A.; Kruth A.; Kutovskiy N.; Kuusiniemi P.; Lachenmaier T.; Landini C.; Leblanc S.; Lebrin V.; Lefevre F.; Lei R.; Leitner R.; Leung J.; Li D.; Li F.; Li F.; Li H.; Li H.; Li J.; Li M.; Li M.; Li N.; Li N.; Li Q.; Li R.; Li S.; Li T.; Li W.; Li W.; Li X.; Li X.; Li X.; Li Y.; Li Y.; Li Z.; Li Z.; Li Z.; Liang H.; Liang H.; Liao J.; Liebau D.; Limphirat A.; Limpijumnong S.; Lin G.-L.; Lin S.; Lin T.; Ling J.; Lippi I.; Liu F.; Liu H.; Liu H.; Liu H.; Liu H.; Liu H.; Liu J.; Liu J.; Liu M.; Liu Q.; Liu Q.; Liu R.; Liu S.; Liu S.; Liu S.; Liu X.; Liu X.; Liu Y.; Liu Y.; Lokhov A.; Lombardi P.; Lombardo C.; Loo K.; Lu C.; Lu H.; Lu J.; Lu J.; Lu S.; Lu X.; Lubsandorzhiev B.; Lubsandorzhiev S.; Ludhova L.; Luo F.; Luo G.; Luo P.; Luo S.; Luo W.; Lyashuk V.; Ma B.; Ma Q.; Ma S.; Ma X.; Ma X.; Maalmi J.; Malyshkin Y.; Mantovani F.; Manzali F.; Mao X.; Mao Y.; Mari S.M.; Marini F.; Marium S.; Martellini C.; Martin-Chassard G.; Martini A.; Mayer M.; Mayilyan D.; Mednieks I.; Meng Y.; Meregaglia A.; Meroni E.; Meyhofer D.; Mezzetto M.; Miller J.; Miramonti L.; Montini P.; Montuschi M.; Muller A.; Nastasi M.; Naumov D.V.; Naumova E.; Navas-Nicolas D.; Nemchenok I.; Nguyen Thi M.T.; Ning F.; Ning Z.; Nunokawa H.; Oberauer L.; Ochoa-Ricoux J.P.; Olshevskiy A.; Orestano D.; Ortica F.; Othegraven R.; Pan H.-R.; Paoloni A.; Parmeggiano S.; Pei Y.; Pelliccia N.; Peng A.; Peng H.; Perrot F.; Petitjean P.-A.; Petrucci F.; Pilarczyk O.; Pineres Rico L.F.; Popov A.; Poussot P.; Pratumwan W.; Previtali E.; Qi F.; Qi M.; Qian S.; Qian X.; Qian Z.; Qiao H.; Qin Z.; Qiu S.; Rajput M.U.; Ranucci G.; Raper N.; Re A.; Rebber H.; Rebii A.; Ren B.; Ren J.; Ricci B.; Robens M.; Roche M.; Rodphai N.; Romani A.; Roskovec B.; Roth C.; Ruan X.; Ruan X.; Rujirawat S.; Rybnikov A.; Sadovsky A.; Saggese P.; Sanfilippo S.; Sangka A.; Sanguansak N.; Sawangwit U.; Sawatzki J.; Sawy F.; Schever M.; Schwab C.; Schweizer K.; Selyunin A.; Serafini A.; Settanta G.; Settimo M.; Shao Z.; Sharov V.; Shaydurova A.; Shi J.; Shi Y.; Shutov V.; Sidorenkov A.; Simkovic F.; Sirignano C.; Siripak J.; Sisti M.; Slupecki M.; Smirnov M.; Smirnov O.; Sogo-Bezerra T.; Sokolov S.; Songwadhana J.; Soonthornthum B.; Sotnikov A.; Sramek O.; Sreethawong W.; Stahl A.; Stanco L.; Stankevich K.; Stefanik D.; Steiger H.; Steinmann J.; Sterr T.; Stock M.R.; Strati V.; Studenikin A.; Sun S.; Sun X.; Sun Y.; Sun Y.; Suwonjandee N.; Szelezniak M.; Tang J.; Tang Q.; Tang Q.; Tang X.; Tietzsch A.; Tkachev I.; Tmej T.; Treskov K.; Triossi A.; Troni G.; Trzaska W.; Tuve C.; Ushakov N.; van den Boom J.; van Waasen S.; Vanroyen G.; Vassilopoulos N.; Vedin V.; Verde G.; Vialkov M.; Viaud B.; Vollbrecht M.C.; Volpe C.; Vorobel V.; Voronin D.; Votano L.; Walker P.; Wang C.; Wang C.-H.; Wang E.; Wang G.; Wang J.; Wang J.; Wang K.; Wang L.; Wang M.; Wang M.; Wang M.; Wang R.; Wang S.; Wang W.; Wang W.; Wang W.; Wang X.; Wang X.; Wang Y.; Wang Y.; Wang Y.; Wang Y.; Wang Y.; Wang Y.; Wang Y.; Wang Z.; Wang Z.; Wang Z.; Wang Z.; Waqas M.; Watcharangkool A.; Wei L.; Wei W.; Wei W.; Wei Y.; Wen L.; Wiebusch C.; Wong S.C.-F.; Wonsak B.; Wu D.; Wu F.; Wu Q.; Wu Z.; Wurm M.; Wurtz J.; Wysotzki C.; Xi Y.; Xia D.; Xie X.; Xie Y.; Xie Z.; Xing Z.; Xu B.; Xu C.; Xu D.; Xu F.; Xu H.; Xu J.; Xu J.; Xu M.; Xu Y.; Xu Y.; Yan B.; Yan T.; Yan W.; Yan X.; Yan Y.; Yang A.; Yang C.; Yang C.; Yang H.; Yang J.; Yang L.; Yang X.; Yang Y.; Yang Y.; Yao H.; Yasin Z.; Ye J.; Ye M.; Ye Z.; Yegin U.; Yermia F.; Yi P.; Yin N.; Yin X.; You Z.; Yu B.; Yu C.; Yu C.; Yu H.; Yu M.; Yu X.; Yu Z.; Yu Z.; Yuan C.; Yuan Y.; Yuan Z.; Yuan Z.; Yue B.; Zafar N.; Zambanini A.; Zavadskyi V.; Zeng S.; Zeng T.; Zeng Y.; Zhan L.; Zhang A.; Zhang F.; Zhang G.; Zhang H.; Zhang H.; Zhang J.; Zhang J.; Zhang J.; Zhang J.; Zhang J.; Zhang P.; Zhang Q.; Zhang S.; Zhang S.; Zhang T.; Zhang X.; Zhang X.; Zhang X.; Zhang Y.; Zhang Y.; Zhang Y.; Zhang Y.; Zhang Y.; Zhang Y.; Zhang Z.; Zhang Z.; Zhao F.; Zhao J.; Zhao R.; Zhao S.; Zhao T.; Zheng D.; Zheng H.; Zheng M.; Zheng Y.; Zhong W.; Zhou J.; Zhou L.; Zhou N.; Zhou S.; Zhou T.; Zhou X.; Zhu J.; Zhu K.; Zhu K.; Zhu Z.; Zhuang B.; Zhuang H.; Zong L.; Zou J.Abusleme, A.; Adam, T.; Ahmad, S.; Ahmed, R.; Aiello, S.; Akram, M.; An, F.; An, Q.; Andronico, G.; Anfimov, N.; Antonelli, V.; Antoshkina, T.; Asavapibhop, B.; de Andre, J. P. A. M.; Auguste, D.; Babic, A.; Baldini, W.; Barresi, A.; Basilico, D.; Baussan, E.; Bellato, M.; Bergnoli, A.; Birkenfeld, T.; Blin, S.; Blum, D.; Blyth, S.; Bolshakova, A.; Bongrand, M.; Bordereau, C.; Breton, D.; Brigatti, A.; Brugnera, R.; Bruno, R.; Budano, A.; Buscemi, M.; Busto, J.; Butorov, I.; Cabrera, A.; Cai, H.; Cai, X.; Cai, Y.; Cai, Z.; Cammi, A.; Campeny, A.; Cao, C.; Cao, G.; Cao, J.; Caruso, R.; Cerna, C.; Chang, J.; Chang, Y.; Chen, P.; Chen, P. -A.; Chen, S.; Chen, X.; Chen, Y. -W.; Chen, Y.; Chen, Y.; Chen, Z.; Cheng, J.; Cheng, Y.; Chetverikov, A.; Chiesa, D.; Chimenti, P.; Chukanov, A.; Claverie, G.; Clementi, C.; Clerbaux, B.; Conforti Di Lorenzo, S.; Corti, D.; Cremonesi, O.; Dal Corso, F.; Dalager, O.; De La Taille, C.; Deng, J.; Deng, Z.; Deng, Z.; Depnering, W.; Diaz, M.; Ding, X.; Ding, Y.; Dirgantara, B.; Dmitrievsky, S.; Dohnal, T.; Dolzhikov, D.; Donchenko, G.; Dong, J.; Doroshkevich, E.; Dracos, M.; Druillole, F.; Du, S.; Dusini, S.; Dvorak, M.; Enqvist, T.; Enzmann, H.; Fabbri, A.; Fajt, L.; Fan, D.; Fan, L.; Fang, J.; Fang, W.; Fargetta, M.; Fedoseev, D.; Fekete, V.; Feng, L. -C.; Feng, Q.; Ford, R.; Formozov, A.; Fournier, A.; Gan, H.; Gao, F.; Garfagnini, A.; Giammarchi, M.; Giaz, A.; Giudice, N.; Gonchar, M.; Gong, G.; Gong, H.; Gornushkin, Y.; Gottel, A.; Grassi, M.; Grewing, C.; Gromov, V.; Gu, M.; Gu, X.; Gu, Y.; Guan, M.; Guardone, N.; Gul, M.; Guo, C.; Guo, J.; Guo, W.; Guo, X.; Guo, Y.; Hackspacher, P.; Hagner, C.; Han, R.; Han, Y.; Hassan, M. S.; He, M.; He, W.; Heinz, T.; Hellmuth, P.; Heng, Y.; Herrera, R.; Hor, Y. K.; Hou, S.; Hsiung, Y.; Hu, B. -Z.; Hu, H.; Hu, J.; Hu, J.; Hu, S.; Hu, T.; Hu, Z.; Huang, C.; Huang, G.; Huang, H.; Huang, W.; Huang, X.; Huang, X.; Huang, Y.; Hui, J.; Huo, L.; Huo, W.; Huss, C.; Hussain, S.; Ioannisian, A.; Isocrate, R.; Jelmini, B.; Jen, K. -L.; Jeria, I.; Ji, X.; Ji, X.; Jia, H.; Jia, J.; Jian, S.; Jiang, D.; Jiang, X.; Jin, R.; Jing, X.; Jollet, C.; Joutsenvaara, J.; Jungthawan, S.; Kalousis, L.; Kampmann, P.; Kang, L.; Karaparambil, R.; Kazarian, N.; Khan, W.; Khosonthongkee, K.; Korablev, D.; Kouzakov, K.; Krasnoperov, A.; Kruth, A.; Kutovskiy, N.; Kuusiniemi, P.; Lachenmaier, T.; Landini, C.; Leblanc, S.; Lebrin, V.; Lefevre, F.; Lei, R.; Leitner, R.; Leung, J.; Li, D.; Li, F.; Li, F.; Li, H.; Li, H.; Li, J.; Li, M.; Li, M.; Li, N.; Li, N.; Li, Q.; Li, R.; Li, S.; Li, T.; Li, W.; Li, W.; Li, X.; Li, X.; Li, X.; Li, Y.; Li, Y.; Li, Z.; Li, Z.; Li, Z.; Liang, H.; Liang, H.; Liao, J.; Liebau, D.; Limphirat, A.; Limpijumnong, S.; Lin, G. -L.; Lin, S.; Lin, T.; Ling, J.; Lippi, I.; Liu, F.; Liu, H.; Liu, H.; Liu, H.; Liu, H.; Liu, H.; Liu, J.; Liu, J.; Liu, M.; Liu, Q.; Liu, Q.; Liu, R.; Liu, S.; Liu, S.; Liu, S.; Liu, X.; Liu, X.; Liu, Y.; Liu, Y.; Lokhov, A.; Lombardi, P.; Lombardo, C.; Loo, K.; Lu, C.; Lu, H.; Lu, J.; Lu, J.; Lu, S.; Lu, X.; Lubsandorzhiev, B.; Lubsandorzhiev, S.; Ludhova, L.; Luo, F.; Luo, G.; Luo, P.; Luo, S.; Luo, W.; Lyashuk, V.; Ma, B.; Ma, Q.; Ma, S.; Ma, X.; Ma, X.; Maalmi, J.; Malyshkin, Y.; Mantovani, F.; Manzali, F.; Mao, X.; Mao, Y.; Mari, S. M.; Marini, F.; Marium, S.; Martellini, C.; Martin-Chassard, G.; Martini, A.; Mayer, M.; Mayilyan, D.; Mednieks, I.; Meng, Y.; Meregaglia, A.; Meroni, E.; Meyhofer, D.; Mezzetto, M.; Miller, J.; Miramonti, L.; Montini, P.; Montuschi, M.; Muller, A.; Nastasi, M.; Naumov, D. V.; Naumova, E.; Navas-Nicolas, D.; Nemchenok, I.; Nguyen Thi, M. T.; Ning, F.; Ning, Z.; Nunokawa, H.; Oberauer, L.; Ochoa-Ricoux, J. P.; Olshevskiy, A.; Orestano, D.; Ortica, F.; Othegraven, R.; Pan, H. -R.; Paoloni, A.; Parmeggiano, S.; Pei, Y.; Pelliccia, N.; Peng, A.; Peng, H.; Perrot, F.; Petitjean, P. -A.; Petrucci, F.; Pilarczyk, O.; Pineres Rico, L. F.; Popov, A.; Poussot, P.; Pratumwan, W.; Previtali, E.; Qi, F.; Qi, M.; Qian, S.; Qian, X.; Qian, Z.; Qiao, H.; Qin, Z.; Qiu, S.; Rajput, M. U.; Ranucci, G.; Raper, N.; Re, A.; Rebber, H.; Rebii, A.; Ren, B.; Ren, J.; Ricci, B.; Robens, M.; Roche, M.; Rodphai, N.; Romani, A.; Roskovec, B.; Roth, C.; Ruan, X.; Ruan, X.; Rujirawat, S.; Rybnikov, A.; Sadovsky, A.; Saggese, P.; Sanfilippo, S.; Sangka, A.; Sanguansak, N.; Sawangwit, U.; Sawatzki, J.; Sawy, F.; Schever, M.; Schwab, C.; Schweizer, K.; Selyunin, A.; Serafini, A.; Settanta, G.; Settimo, M.; Shao, Z.; Sharov, V.; Shaydurova, A.; Shi, J.; Shi, Y.; Shutov, V.; Sidorenkov, A.; Simkovic, F.; Sirignano, C.; Siripak, J.; Sisti, M.; Slupecki, M.; Smirnov, M.; Smirnov, O.; Sogo-Bezerra, T.; Sokolov, S.; Songwadhana, J.; Soonthornthum, B.; Sotnikov, A.; Sramek, O.; Sreethawong, W.; Stahl, A.; Stanco, L.; Stankevich, K.; Stefanik, D.; Steiger, H.; Steinmann, J.; Sterr, T.; Stock, M. R.; Strati, V.; Studenikin, A.; Sun, S.; Sun, X.; Sun, Y.; Sun, Y.; Suwonjandee, N.; Szelezniak, M.; Tang, J.; Tang, Q.; Tang, Q.; Tang, X.; Tietzsch, A.; Tkachev, I.; Tmej, T.; Treskov, K.; Triossi, A.; Troni, G.; Trzaska, W.; Tuve, C.; Ushakov, N.; van den Boom, J.; van Waasen, S.; Vanroyen, G.; Vassilopoulos, N.; Vedin, V.; Verde, G.; Vialkov, M.; Viaud, B.; Vollbrecht, M. C.; Volpe, C.; Vorobel, V.; Voronin, D.; Votano, L.; Walker, P.; Wang, C.; Wang, C. -H.; Wang, E.; Wang, G.; Wang, J.; Wang, J.; Wang, K.; Wang, L.; Wang, M.; Wang, M.; Wang, M.; Wang, R.; Wang, S.; Wang, W.; Wang, W.; Wang, W.; Wang, X.; Wang, X.; Wang, Y.; Wang, Y.; Wang, Y.; Wang, Y.; Wang, Y.; Wang, Y.; Wang, Y.; Wang, Z.; Wang, Z.; Wang, Z.; Wang, Z.; Waqas, M.; Watcharangkool, A.; Wei, L.; Wei, W.; Wei, W.; Wei, Y.; Wen, L.; Wiebusch, C.; Wong, S. C. -F.; Wonsak, B.; Wu, D.; Wu, F.; Wu, Q.; Wu, Z.; Wurm, M.; Wurtz, J.; Wysotzki, C.; Xi, Y.; Xia, D.; Xie, X.; Xie, Y.; Xie, Z.; Xing, Z.; Xu, B.; Xu, C.; Xu, D.; Xu, F.; Xu, H.; Xu, J.; Xu, J.; Xu, M.; Xu, Y.; Xu, Y.; Yan, B.; Yan, T.; Yan, W.; Yan, X.; Yan, Y.; Yang, A.; Yang, C.; Yang, C.; Yang, H.; Yang, J.; Yang, L.; Yang, X.; Yang, Y.; Yang, Y.; Yao, H.; Yasin, Z.; Ye, J.; Ye, M.; Ye, Z.; Yegin, U.; Yermia, F.; Yi, P.; Yin, N.; Yin, X.; You, Z.; Yu, B.; Yu, C.; Yu, C.; Yu, H.; Yu, M.; Yu, X.; Yu, Z.; Yu, Z.; Yuan, C.; Yuan, Y.; Yuan, Z.; Yuan, Z.; Yue, B.; Zafar, N.; Zambanini, A.; Zavadskyi, V.; Zeng, S.; Zeng, T.; Zeng, Y.; Zhan, L.; Zhang, A.; Zhang, F.; Zhang, G.; Zhang, H.; Zhang, H.; Zhang, J.; Zhang, J.; Zhang, J.; Zhang, J.; Zhang, J.; Zhang, P.; Zhang, Q.; Zhang, S.; Zhang, S.; Zhang, T.; Zhang, X.; Zhang, X.; Zhang, X.; Zhang, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Zhang, Z.; Zhang, Z.; Zhao, F.; Zhao, J.; Zhao, R.; Zhao, S.; Zhao, T.; Zheng, D.; Zheng, H.; Zheng, M.; Zheng, Y.; Zhong, W.; Zhou, J.; Zhou, L.; Zhou, N.; Zhou, S.; Zhou, T.; Zhou, X.; Zhu, J.; Zhu, K.; Zhu, K.; Zhu, Z.; Zhuang, B.; Zhuang, H.; Zong, L.; Zou, J

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition)

In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. For example, a key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process versus those that measure fl ux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process including the amount and rate of cargo sequestered and degraded). In particular, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation must be differentiated from stimuli that increase autophagic activity, defi ned as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (inmost higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium ) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the fi eld understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. It is worth emphasizing here that lysosomal digestion is a stage of autophagy and evaluating its competence is a crucial part of the evaluation of autophagic flux, or complete autophagy. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. Along these lines, because of the potential for pleiotropic effects due to blocking autophagy through genetic manipulation it is imperative to delete or knock down more than one autophagy-related gene. In addition, some individual Atg proteins, or groups of proteins, are involved in other cellular pathways so not all Atg proteins can be used as a specific marker for an autophagic process. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular autophagy assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field

Single hadron response measurement and calorimeter jet energy scale uncertainty with the ATLAS detector at the LHC

The uncertainty on the calorimeter energy response to jets of particles is derived for the ATLAS experiment at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC). First, the calorimeter response to single isolated charged hadrons is measured and compared to the Monte Carlo simulation using proton-proton collisions at centre-of-mass energies of sqrt(s) = 900 GeV and 7 TeV collected during 2009 and 2010. Then, using the decay of K_s and Lambda particles, the calorimeter response to specific types of particles (positively and negatively charged pions, protons, and anti-protons) is measured and compared to the Monte Carlo predictions. Finally, the jet energy scale uncertainty is determined by propagating the response uncertainty for single charged and neutral particles to jets. The response uncertainty is 2-5% for central isolated hadrons and 1-3% for the final calorimeter jet energy scale.Comment: 24 pages plus author list (36 pages total), 23 figures, 1 table, submitted to European Physical Journal

Measurement of the flavour composition of dijet events in pp collisions at root s=7 TeV with the ATLAS detector

This paper describes a measurement of the flavour composition of dijet events produced in pp collisions at √s=7 TeV using the ATLAS detector. The measurement uses the full 2010 data sample, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 39 pb−1. Six possible combinations of light, charm and bottom jets are identified in the dijet events, where the jet flavour is defined by the presence of bottom, charm or solely light flavour hadrons in the jet. Kinematic variables, based on the properties of displaced decay vertices and optimised for jet flavour identification, are used in a multidimensional template fit to measure the fractions of these dijet flavour states as functions of the leading jet transverse momentum in the range 40 GeV to 500 GeV and jet rapidity |y|<2.1. The fit results agree with the predictions of leading- and next-to-leading-order calculations, with the exception of the dijet fraction composed of bottom and light flavour jets, which is underestimated by all models at large transverse jet momenta. The ability to identify jets containing two b-hadrons, originating from e.g. gluon splitting, is demonstrated. The difference between bottom jet production rates in leading and subleading jets is consistent with the next-to-leading-order predictions

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)1.

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field

Observation of associated near-side and away-side long-range correlations in √sNN=5.02 TeV proton-lead collisions with the ATLAS detector

Two-particle correlations in relative azimuthal angle (Δϕ) and pseudorapidity (Δη) are measured in √sNN=5.02  TeV p+Pb collisions using the ATLAS detector at the LHC. The measurements are performed using approximately 1  μb-1 of data as a function of transverse momentum (pT) and the transverse energy (ΣETPb) summed over 3.1<η<4.9 in the direction of the Pb beam. The correlation function, constructed from charged particles, exhibits a long-range (2<|Δη|<5) “near-side” (Δϕ∼0) correlation that grows rapidly with increasing ΣETPb. A long-range “away-side” (Δϕ∼π) correlation, obtained by subtracting the expected contributions from recoiling dijets and other sources estimated using events with small ΣETPb, is found to match the near-side correlation in magnitude, shape (in Δη and Δϕ) and ΣETPb dependence. The resultant Δϕ correlation is approximately symmetric about π/2, and is consistent with a dominant cos⁡2Δϕ modulation for all ΣETPb ranges and particle pT

Jet size dependence of single jet suppression in lead-lead collisions at sqrt(s(NN)) = 2.76 TeV with the ATLAS detector at the LHC

Measurements of inclusive jet suppression in heavy ion collisions at the LHC provide direct sensitivity to the physics of jet quenching. In a sample of lead-lead collisions at sqrt(s) = 2.76 TeV corresponding to an integrated luminosity of approximately 7 inverse microbarns, ATLAS has measured jets with a calorimeter over the pseudorapidity interval |eta| < 2.1 and over the transverse momentum range 38 < pT < 210 GeV. Jets were reconstructed using the anti-kt algorithm with values for the distance parameter that determines the nominal jet radius of R = 0.2, 0.3, 0.4 and 0.5. The centrality dependence of the jet yield is characterized by the jet "central-to-peripheral ratio," Rcp. Jet production is found to be suppressed by approximately a factor of two in the 10% most central collisions relative to peripheral collisions. Rcp varies smoothly with centrality as characterized by the number of participating nucleons. The observed suppression is only weakly dependent on jet radius and transverse momentum. These results provide the first direct measurement of inclusive jet suppression in heavy ion collisions and complement previous measurements of dijet transverse energy imbalance at the LHC.Comment: 15 pages plus author list (30 pages total), 8 figures, 2 tables, submitted to Physics Letters B. All figures including auxiliary figures are available at http://atlas.web.cern.ch/Atlas/GROUPS/PHYSICS/PAPERS/HION-2011-02

Search for direct production of charginos and neutralinos in events with three leptons and missing transverse momentum in √s = 7 TeV pp collisions with the ATLAS detector

A search for the direct production of charginos and neutralinos in final states with three electrons or muons and missing transverse momentum is presented. The analysis is based on 4.7 fb−1 of proton–proton collision data delivered by the Large Hadron Collider and recorded with the ATLAS detector. Observations are consistent with Standard Model expectations in three signal regions that are either depleted or enriched in Z-boson decays. Upper limits at 95% confidence level are set in R-parity conserving phenomenological minimal supersymmetric models and in simplified models, significantly extending previous results