1.

Write a brief introduction on neutrinos with a focus on current

experiments like T2K, DUNE etc. and why is it important to scourge more
about these particles.
2. Talking about the importance of neutrinos will bring my project work
into context, as we use neutrino nucleon interactions through SPP
channel to span the axial form factor of the nucleon in addition to the
vector form factor. In this section, I will also introduce the MK Model
which is one of the phenomenological models to describe SPP
interaction and is an improvement to the RS model in that it considers
the charged lepton mass correction and non-resonant interactions. The
output of this model are differential cross-section, integrated cross-
section and value for the free parameters. Also spend some words on
talking about the CC and NC channels that the MK Model covers.
3. Now convolve the MK Model into our project. The main plot of our
project is the modelling of neutrino interaction with nucleons and we
take a specific dive into the SPP channel (it has the largest cross-section).
The foundation of neutrino-nucleus interaction models are neutrino-
nucleon reaction processes like the ones described by the MK Model.
4. The initial part of our project involved getting accustomed to ROOT and
grasping a few fundamental concepts involving particle physics through
understanding the code, making plots etc. Must note that we are
working at an energy regime below 2.0 GeV and our primary focus is the
delta resonance (although models for neutrino generation like NEUT
used by T2K experiment requires all resonances up to 2.0 GeV be used).
5. The first task involved comparing the MK Model prediction for SPP
differential cross section against the equivalent obtained data from ANL
for a proton + neutrino interaction. There was a splendid match
between data and model for this. This is a 4D cross-section, but most of
the neutrino experiments provide us with a 1D cross-section (i.e., an
integrated cross-section) so finding the model’s predicted integrated
cross-section would be more beneficial in order to compare with a
vaster range of datasets.
6. We do not know the exact form of the form factor as the strong
interactions inside the nucleons contaminate information about the
neutrinos, and this model predicts a Q^2 dependence for the form
factor. The task also involved extracting values for the free-parameters
through chi-squared minimization. For now, we are only dealing with the
 original MK Model where it only has 2 form-factors – a vector part
(dipole form factor with no free parameters) and the axial part (dipole
form factor with 2 free parameters viz. C50 and MAR). Our initial job was
fitting the free parameters against ANL and BNL cross-section data and
also compared the MK Model prediction with these free parameters
against the data points.
7. Now that we managed to get the free parameters from the data, we also
had to make an estimate on their error. As is quintessential in physics,
we throw a Gaussian at 68% confidence interval, and the errors on the
parameters are known through the covariance matrix, and if data points
at least pass through all the error bars, then the model is definitely a
good replicator of SPP! NB – We decided to plot cross section for both W
= 2 GeV and W < 1.4 GeV to compare if MK Model’s decision to focus on
just the delta resonance is sufficient to picture SPP (this greatly simplifies
the overall picture of the physics involved) and we saw that this
simplification is quite valid.

8. We made a similar comparison for neutrino + neutron channel too and

once again found that just focusing on the delta resonance is good
enough. Apart from this, we also did sort of a computational
investigation into choosing the most efficient and accurate minimizer to
 use to extract our free parameters. There will be a very short section
dedicated to this part as it was just part of the process to set us up for
our actual task.
9. This section is where our tasks were split (these essentially form 2 sides
of the same coin) wherein I use one of the 2 postulated approaches to
get a good result on the axial part of the form factor. The approach I use
is to apply conservation laws like CVC and PCAC to constrain the free
parameters with the ultimate goal of the task is to check how much
PCAC is violated by the MK Model (both for the original as well as the
novel MK Model with more free parameters for the form-factor). This
will be done by comparing the new model with SAID pion scattering
data. Another thing to understand from the task that I will add is the
extent of freedom each free parameter has and if the error on the free
parameters is not too wide, varying the parameters won’t monumentally
change the cross-section and this simplifies our job.
10. But before indulging too much into the dynamics of the task, I will
spend a considerable amount of the section explaining the theory of CVC
and PCAC and also put in a novel approach to deriving the conservation
laws. Important to emphasize the maximal violation of parity by weak
interactions leading to an exact V – A structure for the weak current.
11. The last section will be about implications of the work that has been
done thus far and what potential improvements can be made and what
the future holds for neutrinos in general, and this particular field of
study of neutrino-nucleon interactions as well.
12. Give acknowledgement to necessary people and provide declaration of
authenticity of my work, and finally add references.
13. I am just confused about whether I should structure my
report as per the timeline (idea 1) or introduce the theory,
then the method, and then the results and discussion (idea 2).