This paper was converted on www.awesomepapers.org from LaTeX by an anonymous user.
Want to know more? Visit the Converter page.

Signature of Collapsars as Sources for High-energy Neutrinos and rr-process Nuclei

Gang Guo [email protected] School of Mathematics and Physics, China University of Geosciences, Wuhan 430074, China    Yong-Zhong Qian [email protected] School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA    Meng-Ru Wu [email protected] Institute of Physics, Academia Sinica, Taipei, 11529, Taiwan Institute of Astronomy and Astrophysics, Academia Sinica, Taipei, 10617, Taiwan
Abstract

If collapsars are sources for both high-energy (HE) neutrinos and rr-process nuclei, the profuse low-energy antineutrinos from β\beta-decay of the newly-synthesized nuclei can annihilate the HE neutrinos. Considering HE neutrinos produced at internal shocks induced by intermittent mildly-magnetized jets, we show that such annihilation suppresses the overall HE neutrino spectrum at 300\gtrsim 300 TeV and produces a corresponding flavor composition of (Fνe+ν¯e:Fνμ+ν¯μ:Fντ+ν¯τ)(1:10:1)(F_{\nu_{e}+\bar{\nu}_{e}}:F_{\nu_{\mu}+\bar{\nu}_{\mu}}:F_{\nu_{\tau}+\bar{\nu}_{\tau}})_{\star}\approx(1:10:1) at source. We find that the emergent HE neutrino flux can well fit the diffuse flux observed at IceCube if contributions from all similar sources are taken into account. Our results highlight the unique role of HE neutrinos in supporting collapsars as sources for rr-process nuclei, and can be tested by detection of HE neutrinos from individual sources and accurate measurement of the diffuse HE neutrino flux spectrum and flavor composition.

I Introduction

Collapsars produced by the collapse of massive stars into black holes have long been considered a leading candidate for powering Type Ibc supernovae and long gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) of both the bright and low-luminosity (LLGRBs) varieties Woosley (1993); MacFadyen and Woosley (1999); Woosley and Bloom (2006); Campana et al. (2006); Hjorth and Bloom (2012); Kumar and Zhang (2014a). Shocks associated with the propagation of the collapsar jet through the stellar envelope and/or the black-hole accretion disk wind were also proposed as candidate sites for producing \sim TeV–PeV high energy (HE) neutrinos Mészáros and Waxman (2001); Razzaque et al. (2003, 2004); Ando and Beacom (2005); Razzaque et al. (2005); Horiuchi and Ando (2008); Enberg et al. (2009); Bartos et al. (2012); Murase and Ioka (2013); Fraija (2014); Xiao and Dai (2014); Bhattacharya et al. (2015); Varela et al. (2015); Tamborra and Ando (2016); Senno et al. (2016, 2018); Denton and Tamborra (2018a, b); He et al. (2018); Chang et al. (2022); Guarini et al. (2023). These neutrinos may contribute significantly to the diffuse flux detected by IceCube, whose astrophysical origin remains unknown despite recent reports of potential association of several events with a blazar Aartsen et al. (2018a, b), three tidal disruption events Stein et al. (2021); Reusch et al. (2022); van Velzen et al. (2021), and an active galaxy Abbasi et al. (2022a).

The ground-breaking multi-messenger observations of GW170817 linked binary neutron star mergers (BNSMs) to both short GRBs and the production of heavy elements beyond iron via the rapid neutron-capture process (rr-process) Abbott et al. (2017a, b); Kasen et al. (2017); Drout et al. (2017); Cowperthwaite et al. (2017); Villar et al. (2017); Shibata et al. (2017); Metzger (2020); Watson et al. (2019). The astrophysical environments of BNSMs and collapsars are rather similar in that both host accretion disks and the associated jets, thereby producing GRBs and potentially HE neutrinos. Interestingly, Ref. Siegel et al. (2019) showed that the physical conditions of disk outflows in collapsars resemble those of outflows in BNSMs, and proposed that collapsars are a likely or even the dominant site for producing rr-process nuclei. This proposal remains hotly debated and requires further theoretical and observational efforts to clarify Siegel (2019); Macias and Ramirez-Ruiz (2019); Bartos and Marka (2019); Miller et al. (2020); Fujibayashi et al. (2020); Brauer et al. (2021); Fraser and Schönrich (2022); Barnes and Metzger (2022); Just et al. (2022); Fujibayashi et al. (2022); Anand et al. (2023).

In this work, we investigate for the first time a novel connection between HE neutrinos and rr-process nucleosynthesis in collapsars. Unstable neutron-rich heavy nuclei are produced by rapid neutron capture during the rr-process. Their β\beta decay produces ν¯e\bar{\nu}_{e} with energy EL4E_{L}\sim 4 MeV on a timescale of 1\sim 1 s everywhere inside the outflow that expands with a typical velocity vej(0.05v_{\rm ej}\sim(0.050.3)c0.3)c (see Fig. 1). Following flavor oscillations, these low energy (LE) antineutrinos can annihilate HE neutrinos of the corresponding flavor produced by shocks at radius RR. Efficient annihilation via the ZZ-resonance requires s=2EHEL(1cosθ)mZ2s=2E_{H}E_{L}(1-\cos\theta)\sim m_{Z}^{2}, where θ𝒪(1)\theta\sim\mathcal{O}(1) is the intersection angle and mZm_{Z} is the ZZ mass. Therefore, the HE neutrino flux at EH𝒪(100E_{H}\gtrsim\mathcal{O}(100–1000) TeV is expected to be affected. As we will show, such annihilation can leave clear imprints on the energy spectrum and flavor composition of the emergent HE neutrinos.

Refer to caption
Figure 1: Sketch of production of HE neutrinos (with energy EHE_{H}) and their annihilation with LE antineutrinos (with energy ELE_{L}) from β\beta-decay of rr-process nuclei in a collapsar.
Table 1: Proper values of magnetic field Bd(u)B_{d(u)}, proton number density np,d(u)n_{p,d(u)}, and photon temperature Tγ,d(u)T_{\gamma,d(u)} in the shocked (downstream) and unshocked (upstream) jets.
Bd(u),8B_{d(u),8} np,d(u),19n_{p,d(u),19} Tγ,d(u),keVT_{\gamma,d(u),{\rm keV}}
downstream 8.2(ϵB,dLiso,52)1/2/(Ris,10Γ2)8.2(\epsilon_{B,d}L_{{\rm iso},52})^{1/2}/(R_{{\rm is},10}\Gamma_{2}) 1.8Liso,52(1ϵe,dϵB,d)Ris,102Γ221.8L_{\rm iso,52}(1-\epsilon_{e,d}-\epsilon_{B,d})R_{\rm is,10}^{-2}\Gamma_{2}^{-2} 3.7(ϵe,dLiso,52)1/4Ris,101/2Γ21/23.7(\epsilon_{e,d}L_{\rm iso,52})^{1/4}R_{\rm is,10}^{-1/2}\Gamma_{2}^{-1/2}
upstream Bd,8/ξB_{d,8}/\xi np,d,19/ξn_{p,d,19}/\xi Tγ,d,keV(ϵe,u/ϵe,d)1/4(Γ/Γr)1/2T_{\gamma,d,{\rm keV}}(\epsilon_{e,u}/\epsilon_{e,d})^{1/4}(\Gamma/\Gamma_{r})^{1/2}

II Antineutrinos from β\beta-decay

The β\beta-decay of the newly-synthesized rr-process nuclei not only produces a profuse ν¯e\bar{\nu}_{e} flux, but also provides a dominant source of energy to heat the associated ejecta Metzger et al. (2010). We estimate the ν¯e\bar{\nu}_{e} emission using the power generated by β\beta-decay. In our benchmark study, we simply assume that the ejecta expands with a constant velocity vejv_{\rm ej}, forming a steady spherical “wind” with a constant mass outflow rate M˙\dot{M} (see Appendix A). As the ejecta expands, the power generated by β\beta-decay per unit mass stays almost constant for a period of Tr\sim T_{r} when the rr-process produces neutron-rich nuclei far from stability. After neutron capture ceases, that power approximately follows a power-law decline. We take ϵ˙ν¯e,0η(t)\dot{\epsilon}_{\bar{\nu}_{e},0}\eta(t) as the part of the power per unit mass that is carried away by ν¯e\bar{\nu}_{e}, where ϵ˙ν¯e,0\dot{\epsilon}_{\bar{\nu}_{e},0} sets the magnitude and η(t)\eta(t) characterizes the time evolution with η(0)1\eta(0)\approx 1. From numerical calculations, η(t)\eta(t) can be fitted as Rosswog et al. (2014)

η(t)[121πarctan(tTr0.11s)]1.3.\displaystyle\eta(t)\approx\left[\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{\pi}\arctan\left(\frac{t-T_{r}}{0.11~{}\rm s}\right)\right]^{1.3}. (1)

Ignoring nuclear shell effects and Coulomb correction, we simply take the ν¯e\bar{\nu}_{e} spectrum to be E2(QE)2\propto E^{2}(Q-E)^{2} with QQ being the QQ-value. The energy-differential emission rate of ν¯e\bar{\nu}_{e} per unit mass (i.e., emissivity) at radius r=vejtr=v_{\rm ej}t can be estimated as

jν¯e(E,r)\displaystyle j_{\bar{\nu}_{e}}(E,r) =ϵ˙ν¯e,0η(r/vej)EL[15(2ELE)2E216EL5],\displaystyle=\frac{\dot{\epsilon}_{\bar{\nu}_{e},0}\eta(r/v_{\rm ej})}{\langle E_{L}\rangle}\left[\frac{15(2\langle E_{L}\rangle-E)^{2}E^{2}}{16\langle E_{L}\rangle^{5}}\right], (2)

where the term in the brackets is the approximate normalized ν¯e\bar{\nu}_{e} spectrum with an average energy of EL=Q/2=4\langle E_{L}\rangle=Q/2=4 MeV. Note that both ϵ˙ν¯e,0\dot{\epsilon}_{\bar{\nu}_{e},0} and TrT_{r} depend on the electron fraction YeY_{e} of the ejecta Rosswog et al. (2014). Assuming a typical value of Ye=0.2Y_{e}=0.2 for collapsar outflows and guided by the power used in Ref. Wu et al. (2019), we take ϵ˙ν¯e,0=5×1018\dot{\epsilon}_{\bar{\nu}_{e},0}=5\times 10^{18} erg/g/s and Tr=0.4T_{r}=0.4 s.

The ν¯e\bar{\nu}_{e} emission is approximately isotropic. Referring to Fig. 1, we estimate the ν¯e\bar{\nu}_{e} intensity (in units of cm-2 s-1 MeV-1 sr-1) at radius RR and angle θ\theta by integrating the emissivity along the path length ll:

Iν¯e(E,R,θ)\displaystyle I_{\bar{\nu}_{e}}(E,R,\theta) =ρ(r)jν¯e(E,r)4π𝑑l\displaystyle=\int\frac{\rho(r)j_{\bar{\nu}_{e}}(E,r)}{4\pi}dl
=RM˙16π2vejjν¯e(E,r)sinθr2sin2(θ+θ)𝑑θ,\displaystyle=\frac{R\dot{M}}{16\pi^{2}v_{\rm ej}}\int\frac{j_{\bar{\nu}_{e}}(E,r)\sin\theta}{r^{2}\sin^{2}(\theta+\theta^{\prime})}d\theta^{\prime}, (3)

where ρ(r)=M˙/(4πr2vej)\rho(r)=\dot{M}/(4\pi r^{2}v_{\rm ej}) is the mass density of the ejecta at radius rr, and rr is a function of RR, θ\theta, and θ\theta^{\prime}. Unless noted otherwise, we take M˙=0.02M/s\dot{M}=0.02\,M_{\odot}/{\rm s} Hayakawa and Maeda (2018); Fujibayashi et al. (2022) and vej=0.05cv_{\rm ej}=0.05c MacFadyen and Woosley (1999); Miller et al. (2020). The corresponding total number density of LE ν¯e\bar{\nu}_{e} at R1010R\sim 10^{10} cm is 1023cm3\sim 10^{23}~{}{\rm cm}^{-3}.

Following production, the LE ν¯e\bar{\nu}_{e} undergo flavor oscillations prior to interacting with the HE neutrinos. The oscillation scenario depends on the matter densities at the ν¯e\bar{\nu}_{e} emission site and the interaction site. We consider three sets of probabilities Pν¯αP_{\bar{\nu}_{\alpha}} for the initial ν¯e\bar{\nu}_{e} to be a ν¯α\bar{\nu}_{\alpha} at the interaction site: (Pν¯e,Pν¯μ,Pν¯τ)(0.55,0.18,0.27)(P_{\bar{\nu}_{e}},P_{\bar{\nu}_{\mu}},P_{\bar{\nu}_{\tau}})\approx(0.55,0.18,0.27) (pure vacuum oscillations), (0.675,0.095,0.23)(0.675,0.095,0.23) (NH), and (0.022,0.545,0.433)(0.022,0.545,0.433) (IH). The latter two sets assume adiabatic flavor evolution following emission at high densities for normal (NH) and inverted (IH) neutrino mass hierarchy, respectively (see Appendix B).

Refer to caption
Figure 2: HE neutrino spectra including annihilation with LE antineutrinos (solid curves) or not (dashed curves). Vacuum oscillations of LE antineutrinos are assumed. The benchmark case with Liso=1053L_{\rm iso}=10^{53} erg/s is shown in the left (νe+νμ+ντ\nu_{e}+\nu_{\mu}+\nu_{\tau} and ν¯e+ν¯μ+ν¯τ\bar{\nu}_{e}+\bar{\nu}_{\mu}+\bar{\nu}_{\tau}) and middle (να+ν¯α\nu_{\alpha}+\bar{\nu}_{\alpha} with α=e,μ,τ\alpha=e,\mu,\tau) panels. Cases of Liso=1050L_{\rm iso}=10^{50}105310^{53} erg/s are shown in the right panel (all flavors). The inset shows the ratios of all-flavor spectra without annihilation to those with annihilation.

III High-energy neutrino production

Relativistic jets in collapsars induce shocks that can accelerate electrons and protons. The accelerated electrons can produce γ\gamma-rays or X-rays through synchrotron radiation or inverse Compton scattering, thereby making bright GRBs, while the HE protons can collide with photons or stellar matter to make π±\pi^{\pm} and K±K^{\pm}, thereby producing HE neutrinos through meson decays. Shocks emerging at different sites during jet propagation lead to different scenarios for HE neutrino production Waxman and Bahcall (1997, 2000); Li et al. (2002); Guetta et al. (2004); Murase and Nagataki (2006); Murase et al. (2006); Murase (2007); Hummer et al. (2012); Zhang and Kumar (2013); Liu and Wang (2013); Bustamante et al. (2015); Nir et al. (2016); Biehl et al. (2018); Guo et al. (2020); Kimura (2022). To demonstrate the effects of LE antineutrinos from β\beta-decay, we focus on HE neutrinos produced during jet propagation deep inside the progenitors of collapsars. Specifically, we consider proton acceleration at internal shocks before jet collimation Mészáros and Waxman (2001); Murase and Ioka (2013).

Ref. Murase and Ioka (2013) emphasized that shocks inside stars are likely mediated by radiation and in contrast to collisionless shocks Levinson and Bromberg (2008); Katz et al. (2010), may not support efficient particle acceleration and HE neutrino production. It was shown later, however, that if the jets are mildly magnetized, a strong collisionless subshock may occur within the radiation-mediated shock (RMS) Beloborodov (2017); Lundman and Beloborodov (2019) to allow particle acceleration at, e.g., mildly relativistic internal shocks Crumley et al. (2019). Indeed, using relativistic magnetohydrodynamic simulations of magnetized jets from BNSMs, Ref. Gottlieb and Globus (2021) found that subshocks can emerge at small radii and produce HE neutrinos at internal shocks, collimation shocks, and shock breakout.

Interestingly, a mild magnetization is also essential to avoid heavy baryon loading of the jets from mixing with the cocoon material Gottlieb et al. (2020, 2021); Gottlieb and Globus (2021). With negligible jet-cocoon mixing, the jet Lorentz factor could grow almost linearly with radius due to adiabatic expansion (see, e.g., Piran (2004); Meszaros (2006); Kumar and Zhang (2014b)) and reach 100\gtrsim 100 deep inside the star Mizuta and Aloy (2009); Gottlieb et al. (2021). Internal shocks caused by collisions of slow and rapid jets can occur at RisΓs2cδt=3×109Γs,12δt3R_{\rm is}\approx\Gamma_{s}^{2}c\delta t=3\times 10^{9}\Gamma^{2}_{s,1}\delta t_{-3} cm, where Γs\Gamma_{s} is the typical Lorentz factor of the slow jets and δt\delta t is the variability timescale. Here and below, Ax=A/10xA_{x}=A/10^{x}, where AA, if dimensional, is in cgs units. We assume that the typical Lorentz factor Γr\Gamma_{r} of the unshocked rapid jets is twice the Lorentz factor Γ\Gamma of the shocked jet. The relative Lorentz factor between the two is ΓrelΓr/(2Γ)+Γ/(2Γr)=1.25\Gamma_{\rm rel}\approx\Gamma_{r}/(2\Gamma)+\Gamma/(2\Gamma_{r})=1.25, consistent with the mildly relativistic shock.

In our scenario, a strong collisionless subshock forms within the internal RMS to facilitate particle acceleration. This scenario requires σuBu2/(4πρuc2)0.01\sigma_{u}\equiv B_{u}^{2}/(4\pi\rho_{u}c^{2})\gtrsim 0.01 Beloborodov (2017); Lundman and Beloborodov (2019), where BuB_{u} and ρu\rho_{u} are the proper magnetic field and mass density, respectively, of the unshocked upstream region. Due to shock compression, the magnetic field is amplified to Bd=ξBuB_{d}=\xi B_{u} in the shocked downstream region with the compression ratio ξ5\xi\sim 5 for Γrel1.25\Gamma_{\rm rel}\approx 1.25 Beloborodov (2017). Because HE neutrino flux would be strongly suppressed by synchrotron cooling of π±\pi^{\pm} and K±K^{\pm} in the enhanced magnetic field BdB_{d}, we focus on HE neutrino production via pppp and pγp\gamma reactions in the upstream region (i.e., the unshocked jet), which was barely discussed in previous literature. For radiation-dominated jets at launching, the initial jet temperature is 1.3Liso,521/4\sim 1.3L^{1/4}_{\rm iso,52} MeV at r=107r=10^{7} cm Kumar and Zhang (2014a). The jets expand adiabatically and the temperature decreases as r1r^{-1}. At r=109r=10^{9}101010^{10} cm, the jet temperature remains a few keV, corresponding to a thermal energy fraction ϵe,u0.1\epsilon_{e,u}\gtrsim 0.1. Proper values of magnetic field, proton number density, and photon temperature in the shocked and unshocked jets are given in Table 1.

Protons can be accelerated to high energies by crossing the shock fronts repeatedly. During this process, protons have significant probabilities to escape from both the upstream and downstream regions, resulting in a power-law spectrum Bell (1978). Recent simulations of mildly relativistic shocks showed that the accelerated protons in the upstream region are much more abundant than those in the downstream region (see Figs. 7 and 8 of Crumley et al. (2019)). To obtain a conservative estimate of the maximal proton energy Ep,maxE_{p,{\rm max}}, we compare the timescales of shock acceleration and different cooling processes for protons in the shocked jet (see Appendix C). For all the parameter sets adopted in this work, the Ep,maxE_{p,{\rm max}} computed in the rest frame of the shocked jet is always sufficient to make PeV neutrinos (Eν0.05ΓEpE_{\nu}\sim 0.05\Gamma E_{p} from pppp and pγp\gamma reactions).

We take the (unnormalized) spectrum of the accelerated protons to be ϕp(Ep)=Ep2exp(Ep/Ep,max)\phi_{p}(E_{p})=E_{p}^{-2}\exp(-E_{p}/E_{p,\rm max}), and use PYTHIA 8.3 Bierlich et al. (2022) and SOPHIA Mucke et al. (2000) for pppp and pγp\gamma reactions, respectively, to obtain the π±\pi^{\pm} and K±K^{\pm} yields at different centre-of-mass energies. Because the shocked jet is only mildly relativistic relative to the rapid jet (Γrel=1.25\Gamma_{\rm rel}=1.25), we ignore the Lorentz transformation for EpE_{p} and ϕp(Ep)\phi_{p}(E_{p}) in our calculations. We include cooling of π±\pi^{\pm} and K±K^{\pm} due to synchrotron radiation, inverse Compton scattering, e±e^{\pm} pair production on photons (π±/K±+γπ±/K±+e++e\pi^{\pm}/K^{\pm}+\gamma\to\pi^{\pm}/K^{\pm}+e^{+}+e^{-}), hadronic scattering, and adiabatic expansion (see Appendix C).

In our benchmark study, we take Ris=3×109R_{\rm is}=3\times 10^{9} cm, Liso=1053L_{\rm iso}=10^{53} erg/s, Γr=2Γ90Liso,490.18472\Gamma_{r}=2\Gamma\approx 90L^{0.18}_{\rm iso,49}\approx 472 Yi et al. (2017), σd=ξσu2ϵB,d=0.25\sigma_{d}=\xi\sigma_{u}\approx 2\epsilon_{B,d}=0.25, ξ=5\xi=5, ϵe,d=0.5\epsilon_{e,d}=0.5, and ϵe,u=0.3\epsilon_{e,u}=0.3 (see Table 1). The corresponding Ep,maxE_{p,{\rm max}} is 106\approx 10^{6} GeV, and we take Ep,min=100E_{p,{\rm min}}=100 GeV without affecting the results. We find that e±e^{\pm} production on photons and synchrotron radiation dominate the cooling of π±\pi^{\pm} and K±K^{\pm} (see Appendix C). The benchmark HE neutrino spectra are shown in Fig. 2. The competition between pppp and pγp\gamma reactions depends on the effective threshold for meson production and the number density of targets. The pppp reaction dominates at low proton energies and produces almost equal neutrino and antineutrino fluxes at E30E\lesssim 30 TeV (left panel) due to equal production of π+(K+)\pi^{+}\,(K^{+}) and π(K)\pi^{-}\,(K^{-}). Once the proton energy exceeds the effective threshold for the pγp\gamma reaction, this reaction dominates due to the much larger number density of thermal photons and gives rise to higher fluxes of neutrinos than antineutrinos (left panel) due to dominant production of π+(K+)\pi^{+}\,(K^{+}) over π(K)\pi^{-}\,(K^{-}) and stronger synchrotron cooling of μ±\mu^{\pm}. The latter effect also suppresses production of νe\nu_{e} and ν¯e\bar{\nu}_{e} from μ±\mu^{\pm} decay compared to that of νμ\nu_{\mu} and ν¯μ\bar{\nu}_{\mu} from π±(K±)\pi^{\pm}\,(K^{\pm}) decay (middle panel).

To cover a wide range of GRB luminosities, we compare the all-flavor neutrino spectra in the right panel of Fig. 2 using Liso=1050L_{\rm iso}=10^{50}105310^{53} erg/s with other parameters unchanged. The variations with increasing LisoL_{\rm iso} are caused by the boost of neutrino energy due to a larger Lorentz factor and by more efficient cooling of charged mesons at relatively low energies due to a larger photon density or BuB_{u}. For Liso=1053L_{\rm iso}=10^{53}  erg/s, cooling by pair production and synchrotron radiation suppresses neutrino production from π±\pi^{\pm} decay so much that K±K^{\pm} decay produces half of the neutrinos at 100 TeV.

IV Annihilation of High-Energy neutrinos with Low-Energy antineutrinos

Simulations show that the nonrelativistic radioactive outflows occur within a few seconds of jet launching and last for a time comparable to the jet duration Just et al. (2022); Fujibayashi et al. (2022). Therefore, most of the HE neutrinos produced at Ris109R_{\rm is}\sim 10^{9}101010^{10} cm can meet the LE antineutrinos from the radioactive outflows. The resulting annihilation takes \lesssim 1 s, which is significantly shorter than the outflow duration. We use a one-dimensional Monte Carlo code to simulate the propagation of HE neutrinos in the LE antineutrino background and the accompanying processes, which include ναν¯α\nu_{\alpha}\bar{\nu}_{\alpha} annihilation and decays of the produced π±\pi^{\pm} and K±K^{\pm}. Note that we also include the annihilation of the regenerated HE να\nu_{\alpha} from the earlier annihilation processes. The radial step ΔR\Delta R to the next interaction point for an HE να\nu_{\alpha} with energy EHE_{H} at radius RR is determined by τα(EH,R,ΔR)=lnλ\tau_{\alpha}(E_{H},R,\Delta R)=-\ln\lambda, where τα\tau_{\alpha} is the optical depth due to ναν¯α\nu_{\alpha}\bar{\nu}_{\alpha} annihilation and λ\lambda is a random number between 0 and 1. The relevant cross section σναν¯α(s)\sigma_{\nu_{\alpha}\bar{\nu}_{\alpha}}(s) peaks at s=mZ2s=m_{Z}^{2}, and we use PYTHIA 8.3 Bierlich et al. (2022) to track the final products for all ss values.

Assuming vacuum oscillations of LE antineutrinos prior to annihilation, we show the spectra of HE neutrinos following annihilation in Fig. 2. The ZZ-resonance starts to occur at E300E\sim 300 TeV. Beyond this energy, the HE neutrino flux drops but the HE antineutrino flux slightly increases due to production from ZZ decay (left panel). HE neutrinos at these energies are mostly νμ\nu_{\mu}, which are annihilated by the LE ν¯μ\bar{\nu}_{\mu} (middle panel). Strikingly, the νe\nu_{e} and ν¯e\bar{\nu}_{e} regenerated from such annihilation are even more abundant than those produced without annihilation. Consequently, the flux of νe+ν¯e\nu_{e}+\bar{\nu}_{e} is very similar to that of the regenerated ντ+ν¯τ\nu_{\tau}+\bar{\nu}_{\tau} at E300E\gtrsim 300 TeV following annihilation (middle panel). The above effects produce a unique flavor composition of (Fνe+ν¯e:Fνμ+ν¯μ:Fντ+ν¯τ)(1:10:1)(F_{\nu_{e}+\bar{\nu}_{e}}:F_{\nu_{\mu}+\bar{\nu}_{\mu}}:F_{\nu_{\tau}+\bar{\nu}_{\tau}})_{\star}\approx(1:10:1) for E300E\gtrsim 300 TeV at source, which corresponds to a normalized composition of (0.21:0.42:0.37)\approx(0.21:0.42:0.37) at Earth following vacuum oscillations. The corresponding all-flavor spectrum with the suppression due to annihilation is shown in the right panel of Fig. 2 for different values of LisoL_{\rm iso}. With an optical depth of 3–8 for νμν¯μ\nu_{\mu}\bar{\nu}_{\mu} annihilation for EH0.4E_{H}\sim 0.4–1 PeV, the suppression factor can be as high as 3–3.5 (see the inset in the right panel of Fig. 2).

V Diffuse neutrino flux

Although prompt HE neutrinos associated with bright GRBs are tightly constrained by IceCube Abbasi et al. (2012); Aartsen et al. (2015, 2016, 2017); Abbasi et al. (2022b), subleading contributions of precursor neutrinos from jet propagation inside stellar matter still remain possible. The most recent analyses showed that precursor neutrinos preceding the prompt γ\gamma-rays by tens of seconds are limited to 10\lesssim 10% of the diffuse flux at E=100E=100 TeV (see Fig. 7 of Abbasi et al. (2022b)). On the other hand, LLGRBs, whose rate is 10\sim 10 times higher than that of classical GRBs Soderberg et al. (2006); Liang et al. (2007); Nakar (2015), could be caused by a shock breakout driven by a relativistic jet propagating into an extended envelope Campana et al. (2006). They may have a common collapsar origin and host jets with similar luminosities inside stars to those for bright GRBs Nakar (2015); Senno et al. (2016). Note that, in the shock breakout scenario, the observed γ\gamma-ray luminosities of LLGRBs (Lγ,llgrbobs1046L_{\gamma,\rm llgrb}^{\rm obs}\sim 10^{46}104810^{48} erg/s) are much lower than those of bright GRBs because the emission for LLGRBs spans a longer duration (ΔTγ,llgrb103\Delta T_{\gamma,\rm llgrb}\sim 10^{3}10410^{4} s) as determined by the large shock breakout radius and is over a wider opening angle (θllgrb1\theta_{\rm llgrb}\sim 1 rad). Considering the duration correction, the beam factor correction, and a baryon loading factor fp10f_{p}\sim 10, the true luminosity of LLGRB jets initially launched inside stars could be LisoLγ,llgrbobsfpΔTγ,llgrbΔTengθllgrb2θj21051L_{\rm iso}\sim L_{\gamma,\rm llgrb}^{\rm obs}f_{p}\frac{\Delta T_{\gamma,\rm llgrb}}{\Delta T_{\rm eng}}\frac{\theta^{2}_{\rm llgrb}}{\theta^{2}_{\rm j}}\sim 10^{51}105310^{53} erg/s, where ΔTeng10\Delta T_{\rm eng}\sim 10–100 s is the central engine duration and θj0.1\theta_{\rm j}\sim 0.1 rad is the initial jet opening angle at launch. As HE neutrinos are produced deep inside stars in our work, LLGRBs and bright GRBs are similar sources for HE neutrinos, except that they have different occurrence rates. Further, choked collapsar jets could be even more common than bright GRBs and LLGRBs if the central engine is not active for too long Sobacchi et al. (2017). To incorporate contributions from all similar sources, we introduce the parameter ff_{\star} as the ratio of the total rate of collapsars with mildly-magnetized jets to that of bright GRBs.

The unnormalized HE neutrino spectrum from a single source is shown in Fig. 2. To obtain the diffuse neutrino flux from all similar sources over cosmic history, we multiply the unnormalized spectrum by the following factor Murase and Ioka (2013)

c4πH0fzfn˙GRBfcrEisoln(Ep,max/Ep,min)1GeVcm2s1sr1\displaystyle\frac{c}{4\pi H_{0}}\frac{f_{z}f_{\star}\dot{n}_{\rm GRB}f_{\rm cr}E_{\rm iso}}{\ln(E_{p,\rm max}/E_{p,\rm min})}\frac{1}{{\rm GeV}\ {\rm cm}^{-2}\ {\rm s}^{-1}\ {\rm sr}^{-1}}
7×109(fzfn˙GRBGpc3yr1)fcrEiso,53,\displaystyle\sim 7\times 10^{-9}\left(\frac{f_{z}f_{\star}\dot{n}_{\rm GRB}}{\rm Gpc^{-3}~{}yr^{-1}}\right)f_{\rm cr}E_{\rm iso,53}, (4)

where fz3f_{z}\sim 3 accounts for evolution of source population and neutrino energy with redshift zz Waxman and Bahcall (1999), n˙GRB1\dot{n}_{\rm GRB}\sim 1 Gpc-3 yr-1 is the rate of bright GRBs per unit volume, EisoE_{\rm iso} is the total isotropic energy of jets, and fcrf_{\rm cr} is the fraction of jet energy converted into HE protons. Taking f=10f_{\star}=10, fcrEiso,531f_{\rm cr}E_{\rm iso,53}\sim 1, and assuming that contributions from sources at z1z\sim 1 dominate, we compare the all-flavor E2Fν(E)E^{2}F_{\nu}(E) from our model to the IceCube data Aartsen et al. (2020) in Fig. 3. It can be seen that LLGRBs and choked jets with collapsar origin may explain the observed TeV–PeV flux at IceCube. More interestingly, the spectrum with suppression at E100E\gtrsim 100–200 TeV due to annihilation (and redshift) leads to better agreement with data than that without annihilation. Results using M˙=0.01\dot{M}=0.01 and 0.05M0.05~{}M_{\odot}/s are also shown for comparison. Note that spherical winds and vacuum oscillations of LE antineutrinos are assumed for our benchmark study. The annihilation effect could be similar or even enhanced for asymmetric winds while it will be reduced for the NH oscillation scenario with a smaller Pν¯μP_{\bar{\nu}_{\mu}} (see Appendices A and B). We find that annihilation is significant under a range of assumptions (see Fig. 3). Our model, however, cannot account for the PeV events detected at IceCube despite the production of a small bump above 1\sim 1 PeV associated with a minimum in the timescale for cooling of K±K^{\pm} by pair production (see Fig. 6 in Appendix C). Another source is required for these events Chen et al. (2015); Palladino et al. (2017); Chianese et al. (2017); Denton and Tamborra (2018b); Riabtsev and Troitsky (2023).

Refer to caption
Figure 3: All-flavor diffuse neutrino flux spectra from our collapsar model with and without annihilation compared to IceCube data Aartsen et al. (2020). Contributions from jets with Liso,53=1L_{\rm iso,53}=1 at redshift z=1z=1 are assumed to dominate. Results for different values of m˙M˙/(M/s)\dot{m}\equiv\dot{M}/(M_{\odot}\rm/s), asymmetric winds confined to θ=[0,45]\theta^{\prime}=[0^{\circ},45^{\circ}] and [30,45][30^{\circ},45^{\circ}], and the NH oscillation scenario for LE antineutrinos are also shown.

VI Summary and discussion

Considering collapsars as sources for both HE neutrinos and rr-process nuclei, we have investigated a novel effect on HE neutrinos caused by their annihilation with LE antineutrinos from the β\beta-decay of rr-process nuclei. Assuming typical jet parameters, we have also discussed production of HE neutrinos at internal subshocks induced by mildly-magnetized jets deep inside collapsars. Bright GRBs, LLGRBs, and choked GRBs may have common origin in collapsars, and contributions to the diffuse HE neutrino flux are expected to be dominated by the latter two. Our collapsar model suggests that these sources can well account for the observed flux at IceCube, especially when annihilation with LE antineutrinos from β\beta-decay of rr-process nuclei is included. Specifically, an excess at 10–100 TeV and potentially, a deficit at 0.1–1 PeV can be explained consistently for the IceCube events without overproducing the diffuse γ\gamma-ray background (see e.g., Murase et al. (2016, 2020); Capanema et al. (2020); Fang et al. (2022)).

A critical test of our HE neutrino production model is detection of precursor HE neutrinos (with a lead time of 10\sim 1010310^{3} s) from nearby LLGRBs or bright GRBs. For an LLGRB at 100 Mpc with canonical parameters, IceCube-Gen2 can detect 10\sim 10 cascade events within 10–100 s if the jets are mildly magnetized. This short emission would also favor the speculation that LLGRBs host very similar jets to those in bright GRBs. Our model predicts a flavor composition at Earth close to that in the so-called muon-damped scenario at 10 TeV to 1 PeV, which can be distinguished from those in the standard pion and neutron decay scenarios Ackermann (2017); Aartsen et al. (2021); Song et al. (2021) by precise measurements. The expected spectrum decays as EγE^{-\gamma} at energies below 100\sim 100 TeV with γ0.5\gamma\sim 0.5–1, followed by a steepening above 100100–200 TeV due to the annihilation effect. Anticipating 10 years of data at IceCube-Gen2, we find that a spectral steepening with Δγ>1\Delta\gamma>1 for our scenario can be observed at 95% CL (see Appendix D). In contrast, no clear break is expected without annihilation. The above neutrino signatures together with the rr-process imprints in collapsar lightcurves can provide important support of collapsars as sources for both HE neutrinos and rr-process nuclei.

We have made several simplifications in this initial study. Future improvements include detailed modeling of LE antineutrino emission, spatial and temporal variations of rr-process production in collapsars, and self-consistent collapsar simulations for HE neutrino production. Finally, the same annihilation effect should occur in BNSMs that host short GRBs and the rr-process, and can in principle be tested with a future nearby event.

Acknowledgements.
We thank Brian Metzger and Daniel Siegel for useful discussions. We are also grateful to the anonymous referees for their constructive comments. This work was supported in part by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (12205258) and the Natural Science Foundation of Shandong Province, China [ZR2022JQ04 (G.G.)], the US Department of Energy [DE-FG02-87ER40328 (Y.Z.Q.)], and the National Science and Technology Council (No. 110-2112-M-001-050, 111-2628-M-001-003-MY4), the Academia Sinica (No. AS-CDA-109-M11), and the Physics Division of the National Center for Theoretical Sciences, Taiwan (M.R.W.).

Appendix A Geometry of disk winds

We have assumed in the main text that the disk winds are spherically symmetric. These winds could be non-spherical and be channelled into a certain range of angles off the jet axis. For example, Ref. MacFadyen and Woosley (1999) found that θ\theta^{\prime} (see Fig. 1 of the main text) could range from 10\sim 10^{\circ} to 40\sim 40^{\circ}, while Ref. Siegel et al. (2019) assumed 30θ4530^{\circ}\leq\theta^{\prime}\leq 45^{\circ}. A collimated wind was also considered in Ref. Hayakawa and Maeda (2018) with θ30\theta^{\prime}\leq 30^{\circ}. Approximating asymmetric winds as “isotropic” winds confined to θ=[θmin,θmax]\theta^{\prime}=[\theta^{\prime}_{\rm min},\theta^{\prime}_{\rm max}], we have shown the results in Fig. 3 of the main text. For winds confined within [0,45][0^{\circ},45^{\circ}], the LE neutrino intensity is enhanced by a factor of 33 compared to the spherical case; while for θ=[30,45]\theta^{\prime}=[30^{\circ},45^{\circ}], the intensity and the annihilation effect are close to the spherical case.

Appendix B Oscillation scenarios for LE antineutrinos

Oscillations of LE antineutrinos prior to interaction with HE neutrinos depend on the local densities at the ν¯e\bar{\nu}_{e} emission site and the interaction site. We consider annihilation inside the jets where the typical density is far below 1 g/cm3. The wind density at the ν¯e\bar{\nu}_{e} emission site is ρM˙/(4πr2vej)103\rho\sim\dot{M}/(4\pi r^{2}v_{\rm ej})\sim 10^{3} g/cm3 at r109r\sim 10^{9} cm assuming M˙0.01M\dot{M}\sim 0.01M_{\odot}/s and vej0.05cv_{\rm ej}\sim 0.05c. On the other hand, the density at the emission site could be dominated by stellar matter and can reach 106\sim 10^{6} g/cm3 at 10910^{9} cm, although stellar matter may be blown away by the jets and/or disk winds. The relevant density could also be low if ν¯e\bar{\nu}_{e} are emitted at larger radii. Given these complexities and uncertainties, we consider the extreme cases where ν¯e\bar{\nu}_{e} are emitted at very high and very low densities, respectively.

The ν¯e\bar{\nu}_{e}, if emitted at densities of 104\gg 10^{4} g/cm3, almost coincides with the effective mass eigenstate in matter ν¯1m\bar{\nu}_{1m} or ν¯3m\bar{\nu}_{3m} for normal (NH) or inverted (IH) neutrino mass hierarchy, respectively. For adiabatic evolution during propagation, the emitted ν¯e\bar{\nu}_{e} becomes the vacuum mass eigenstate ν¯1\bar{\nu}_{1} (NH) or ν¯3\bar{\nu}_{3} (IH) at very low densities for the interaction site. The probability Pν¯αP_{\bar{\nu}_{\alpha}} to be a ν¯α\bar{\nu}_{\alpha} at the interaction site is (Pν¯e,Pν¯μ,Pν¯τ)(0.675,0.095,0.23)(P_{\bar{\nu}_{e}},P_{\bar{\nu}_{\mu}},P_{\bar{\nu}_{\tau}})\approx(0.675,0.095,0.23) (NH) or (0.022, 0.545, 0.433) (IH) with the mixing parameters from Ref. Workman et al. (2022). If ν¯e\bar{\nu}_{e} are emitted at very low densities, (Pν¯e,Pν¯μ,Pν¯τ)(0.55,0.18,0.27)(P_{\bar{\nu}_{e}},P_{\bar{\nu}_{\mu}},P_{\bar{\nu}_{\tau}})\approx(0.55,0.18,0.27) as expected from pure vacuum oscillations. As HE neutrinos are mainly νμ\nu_{\mu} in our model, the flux of LE ν¯μ\bar{\nu}_{\mu} is the most relevant for annihilation. The NH and IH scenarios are the most pessimistic and optimistic, respectively. For ν¯e\bar{\nu}_{e} emitted at intermediate densities, Pν¯μP_{\bar{\nu}_{\mu}} ranges from 0.095 to 0.545. Compared to pure vacuum oscillations, the NH scenario reduces the LE ν¯μ\bar{\nu}_{\mu} flux by a factor of 2\sim 2. As shown in Fig. 3 of the main text, the NH scenario with m˙=0.02\dot{m}=0.02 gives rise to a similar annihilation effect to that for pure vacuum oscillations with m˙=0.01\dot{m}=0.01.

Appendix C Timescales for acceleration and cooling

Figure 4 shows the timescales for proton acceleration and cooling in the rest frame of the shocked jet. The acceleration timescale is approximated by Ep/(eBdc)E_{p}/(eB_{d}c). The cooling timescale due to pγp\gamma reactions is given by

tpγ1(Ep)=\displaystyle t^{-1}_{p\gamma}(E_{p})= c𝑑ϵd(cosθpγ2)\displaystyle c\int d\epsilon d\Big{(}{\cos\theta_{p\gamma}\over 2}\Big{)}
×κ(ϵ~)σpγ(ϵ~)dn(ϵ)dϵ(1cosθpγ),\displaystyle\times\kappa(\tilde{\epsilon})\sigma_{p\gamma}(\tilde{\epsilon}){dn(\epsilon)\over d\epsilon}(1-\cos\theta_{p\gamma}), (5)

where θpγ\theta_{p\gamma} is the intersection angle, dn(ϵ)/dϵdn(\epsilon)/d\epsilon is the differential density of thermal photons, ϵ~\tilde{\epsilon} is the photon energy in the rest frame of the proton, and κ\kappa and σpγ\sigma_{p\gamma} are the inelasticity and cross section, for which we take the expressions from Guo et al. (2020). The cooling timescale due to the Bethe-Heitler (BH) process can be obtained similarly and we use the inelasticity and cross section from Chodorowski et al. (1992). For the cooling timescales due to pppp scattering, synchrotron radiation, inverse Compton (IC) scattering, and adiabatic expansion, we use the expressions given in Ref. Razzaque et al. (2005). For the parameters chosen, the maximal proton energy achieved in the comoving frame of the shocked jet is about 10610^{6} GeV.

Refer to caption
Figure 4: Timescales for shock acceleration of protons and their cooling by various processes in the rest frame of the shocked jet. We have taken Liso=1053L_{\rm iso}=10^{53} erg/s and the benchmark values for the other parameters.

To avoid strong synchrotron cooling of mesons, we consider π±\pi^{\pm} and K±K^{\pm} production via pppp and pγp\gamma reactions in the unshocked rapid jet. Figure 5 shows the timescales for π±\pi^{\pm} cooling by various processes. Synchrotron radiation, e±e^{\pm} pair production on photons, π±p\pi^{\pm}p collision, and adiabatic cooling are calculated similarly to the case of protons. For π±γ\pi^{\pm}\gamma process, we use the cross sections for IC scattering and multi-meson production (dominated by γ+π±π0+π±\gamma+\pi^{\pm}\to\pi^{0}+\pi^{\pm} at low energy) from Kaiser and Friedrich (2008). Pair production is studied similarly to that for protons using the cross section and inelasticity from Chodorowski et al. (1992). Note that the expressions in Chodorowski et al. (1992) apply equally to proton and charged mesons, as they were derived for pair production in a Coulomb field Maximon (1968). As the observed neutrino energy EobΓrEπ/4E_{\rm ob}\sim\Gamma_{r}E_{\pi}/4, both pair production and synchrotron radiation are relevant for determining the HE neutrino fluxes at 0.1E10.1\lesssim E\lesssim 1 PeV. Cooling timescales for K±K^{\pm} have been estimated similarly to those for π±\pi^{\pm} (see Fig. 6) except that K±γK^{\pm}\gamma multi-meson production and IC are ignored compared to pair production and synchrotron radiation.

Refer to caption
Figure 5: Timescales for π±\pi^{\pm} decay and their cooling by various processes in the rest frame of the unshocked rapid jet. We have taken Liso=1053L_{\rm iso}=10^{53} erg/s and the benchmark values for the other parameters.
Refer to caption
Figure 6: Timescales for K±K^{\pm} decay and their cooling by various processes in the rest frame of the unshocked rapid jet. We have taken Liso=1053L_{\rm iso}=10^{53} erg/s and the benchmark values for the other parameters.

Appendix D Detecting spectral steepening with IceCube-Gen2

With a much better energy resolution, the cascade events at IceCube-Gen2 can be used to explore the potential of observing a spectral break in the HE neutrino flux Abbasi et al. (2021); Kochocki (2023). Lacking the detailed detector response of IceCube-Gen2, we carry out a relatively crude study. The only information we rely on is the cascade effective area of IceCube-Gen2 from Aartsen et al. (2021), which is about 1 order of magnitude larger than that of IceCube. Note that for the cascade effective area given, the astrophysical HE neutrinos are typically assumed to be distributed isotropically in sky and equally among all flavors. Processes producing cascade events include neutral-current (NC) reactions of all flavors, charged-current (CC) reactions of νe+ν¯e\nu_{e}+\bar{\nu}_{e}, and part (with a probability of 83\sim 83%) of the CC reactions of ντ+ν¯τ\nu_{\tau}+\bar{\nu}_{\tau}. The effective areas for the CC and NC reactions of HE neutrinos at a given zenith angle θz\theta_{z} can be obtained with consideration of Earth absorption. The deposited energy EdE_{d} in the detector depends on the neutrino energy EE and the interaction type, and we follow the expressions [Eqs. (B16-B23)] given in Ref. Palomares-Ruiz et al. (2015) to calculate EdE_{d}. When generating the EdE_{d} distribution, we also consider an energy resolution of 10%. The expected spectrum of EdE_{d} can then be obtained for any given astrophysical neutrino flux.

As the atmospheric muon background will be strongly suppressed by veto Ackermann (2017); Aartsen et al. (2020, 2021); Kochocki (2023), we only consider the background from atmospheric neutrinos, using the fluxes from the MCEq tool Fedynitch et al. (2015). The expected EdE_{d} spectrum for this background is calculated similarly to that for astrophysical neutrinos. The veto can also be used to suppress the atmospheric neutrino background Ackermann (2017); Aartsen et al. (2021); Kochocki (2023); Aartsen et al. (2020), and we take an overall suppression factor of 1/31/3 for cosθz0.2\cos\theta_{z}\geq 0.2 (see e.g., Fig. 4.10 of Niederhausen (2018)).

Refer to caption
Figure 7: Sensitivity for measuring the break energy EbE_{b} and the spectral index change δγ\delta\gamma at 95% CL with 10 years of IceCube-Gen2 data. The ×\times symbol represents the best-fit point with χ2(Eb,δγ)=χmin2\chi^{2}(E_{b},\delta\gamma)=\chi^{2}_{\rm min}.

Based on Fig. 3 of the main text, we simply model our astrophysical HE neutrino flux with a broken power-law at 10TeVE50010~{}{\rm TeV}\leq E\leq 500 TeV:

E2Fν=A×{(E/100TeV)γ,E<Eb,(Eb/100TeV)γ(E/Eb)γδγ,E>Eb.E^{2}F_{\nu}=A\times\begin{cases}({E/100~{}\rm TeV})^{-\gamma},&E<E_{b},\\ ({E_{b}/100~{}\rm TeV})^{-\gamma}({E/E_{b}})^{-\gamma-\delta\gamma},&E>E_{b}.\end{cases} (6)

We generate the so-called Asimov dataset assuming A0=2×108GeVcm2s2sr1A_{0}=2\times 10^{-8}~{}\rm GeV~{}cm^{-2}~{}s^{-2}~{}sr^{-1}, Eb0=150E_{b0}=150 TeV, γ0=0.5\gamma_{0}=0.5, and δγ0=2.5\delta\gamma_{0}=2.5. We take 30 equal-size bins for EdE_{d} between 10 TeV and 500 TeV on logarithmic scale, and 10 equal-size bins for cosθz=[1,1]\cos\theta_{z}=[-1,1]. The χ2\chi^{2} function is defined as

χ2(Eb,δγ)=min{A,γ,α}[2i,j(nijlnμijμij)],\displaystyle\chi^{2}(E_{b},\delta\gamma)=\min_{\{A,\gamma,\alpha\}}\Big{[}-2\sum_{i,j}(n_{ij}\ln{\mu_{ij}}-\mu_{ij})\Big{]}, (7)

where nijn_{ij} is the event number of the Asimov dataset in the iith EdE_{d}-bin and the jjth cosθ\cos\theta-bin, and μij(A,Eb,γ,δγ,α)\mu_{ij}(A,E_{b},\gamma,\delta\gamma,\alpha) is the expected event number with α\alpha being the relative uncertainty of the atmospheric neutrino background. Note that nij=μij(A0,Eb0,γ0,δγ0,0)n_{ij}=\mu_{ij}(A_{0},E_{b0},\gamma_{0},\delta\gamma_{0},0). As suggested by Eq. (7), the parameters AA, γ\gamma, and α\alpha are allowed to vary freely to minimize the χ2\chi^{2} function for a given combination of EbE_{b} and δγ\delta\gamma.

The EbE_{b}-δγ\delta\gamma contour in Fig. 7 shows the sensitivity for measuring the spectral break with 10 years of IceCube-Gen2 data. This contour corresponds to χ2(Eb,δγ)χmin25.99\chi^{2}(E_{b},\delta\gamma)-\chi^{2}_{\rm min}\approx 5.99 (95% CL). We see that a steepening of the spectrum with δγ>1\delta\gamma>1 at 100TeVEb240100~{}{\rm TeV}\lesssim E_{b}\lesssim 240 TeV can be measured.

References