More material for P5 Milind Diwan for the Homestake neutrino detector group 3/1/2008.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Sergio Palomares-Ruiz June 22, 2005 Super-NO A Based on O. Mena, SPR and S. Pascoli hep-ph/ a long-baseline neutrino experiment with two off-axis.

Advertisements

Precision Neutrino Oscillation Measurements & the Neutrino Factory Scoping Study for a Future Accelerator Neutrino Complex – Discussion Meeting Steve Geer,

Expected Sensitivity of the NO A  Disappearance Analysis Kirk Bays (Caltech) for the NO A Collaboration April 14, 2013 APS DPF Denver Kirk Bays, APS DPF.

6/6/2003Jonathan Link, Columbia U. NuFact03 Future Measurement of sin 2 2  13 at Nuclear Reactors Jonathan Link Columbia University June 6, 2003 ′03.

A long-baseline experiment with the IHEP neutrino beam Y. Efremenko detector Presented by.

Neutrino Oscillation Physics at a Neutrino Factory Rob Edgecock RAL/CERN-AB.

T2K neutrino experiment at JPARC Approved since 2003, first beam in April Priorities : 1. search for, and measurement of,   e appearance  sin.

Sinergia strategy meeting of Swiss neutrino groups Mark A. Rayner – Université de Genève 10 th July 2014, Bern Hyper-Kamiokande 1 – 2 km detector Hyper-Kamiokande.

Gary Feldman P5 Meeting 21 February The NO A Experiment P5 Meeting SLAC 21 February 2008 Gary Feldman.

Neutrino physics: experiments and infrastructure Anselmo Cervera Villanueva Université de Genève Orsay, 31/01/06.

Off-axis Simulations Peter Litchfield, Minnesota  What has been simulated?  Will the experiment work?  Can we choose a technology based on simulations?

F Axis Off Axis Physics Potential Cambridge Off-Axis Meeting 12 January 2004 Gary Feldman.

PLAN Morning Talk – Long Base Line Neutrino Oscillations – 1) Beam line & brief description of detector 2) Neutrino interaction signal Afternoon talk –

NuMI Offaxis Near Detector and Backgrounds Stanley Wojcicki Stanford University Cambridge Offaxis workshop January 12, 2004.

Background Understanding and Suppression in Very Long Baseline Neutrino Oscillation Experiments with Water Cherenkov Detector Chiaki Yanagisawa Stony Brook.

Neutrino Study Group Dec 21, 2001 Brookhaven Neutrino Super-BeamStephen Kahn Page 1 Horn and Solenoid Capture Systems for a BNL Neutrino Superbeam Steve.

T2K experiment at J-PARC Epiphany 2010D. Kiełczewska1 For T2K Collaboration Danuta Kiełczewska Warsaw University & Sołtan Institute for Nuclear Studies.

Alain Blondel Neutrino Factory scenarios I will endeavour to address some principle design issues related to the physics use of high intensity muon beams.

February 19, 2001Neutrino Beams from BNL to Homestake Stephen Kahn Page 1 A Super-Neutrino Beam From BNL to Homestake Steve Kahn

Expected Sensitivity of the NO A  Disappearance Analysis Kirk Bays (Caltech) for the NO A Collaboration April 14, 2013 APS DPF Denver Kirk Bays, APS DPF.

Minnesota Simulations Dan Hennessy, Peter Litchfield, Leon Mualem  Improvements to the Minnesota analysis  Comparison with the Stanford analysis  Optimisation.

1 PHYSICS IN THE NuMI BEAM with a ~10 kiloton LARTPC prototype ASH RIVER or SOUDAN J.Schneps PRELIMINARY,UNFINISHED, & ROUGH Sept. 27, 2007.

The Earth Matter Effect in the T2KK Experiment Ken-ichi Senda Grad. Univ. for Adv. Studies.

Douglas Michael California Institute of Technology NuFACT 03 June 5, 2003 What’s a Super Beam? The Physics Some of the common features Specific Proposals.

Long Baseline Experiments at Fermilab Maury Goodman.

Future Neutrino Physics Mitch Soderberg Fermilab Institutional Review June 6-9, 2011.

Dec. 13, 2001Yoshihisa OBAYASHI, Neutrino and Anti-Neutrino Cross Sections and CP Phase Measurement Yoshihisa OBAYASHI (KEK-IPNS) NuInt01,

Karsten M. Heeger US Reactor  13 Meeting, March 15, 2004 Comparison of Reactor Sites and  13 Experiments Karsten Heeger LBNL.

Fermilab, May, 2003 Takaaki Kajita, ICRR, U. Tokyo ・ Introduction ・ JHF-Kamioka neutrino project -overview- ・ Physics in phase-I ・ Phase-II ・ Summary Outline.

The NOvA Experiment Ji Liu On behalf of the NOvA collaboration College of William and Mary APS April Meeting April 1, 2012.

Bruno Pontecorvo Pontecorvo Prize is very special for us: All the important works done by Super- Kamiokande point back to Bruno Pontecorvo – 1957 First.

JHF-Kamioka Neutrino Oscillation Experiment using JHF 50 GeV PS Y.Itow ICRR,Univ.of Tokyo Jul27,2002 Jul27,2002 ICHEP02 Amsterdam Introduction Facility.

Alain Blondel. AIDA-Neutrino meeting AIDA Neutrino detector studies 1. News from the neutrino scene 2. Beam requirements for AIDA 3. Discuss.

Long Baseline Neutrino Beams and Large Detectors Nicholas P. Samios Istanbul, Turkey October 27, 2008.

Yoshihisa OBAYASHI, Oct. Neutrino Oscillation Experiment between JHF – Super-Kamiokande Yoshihisa OBAYASHI (Kamioka Observatory, ICRR)

NuMI Off-Axis Experiment Alfons Weber University of Oxford & Rutherford Appleton Laboratory EPS2003, Aachen July 19, 2003.

Unofficial* summary of the Long Baseline Neutrino Experiment (LBNE) physics workshop Seattle, Aug 9 to Aug 11 David Webber August 24, 2010 *Many studies/plots.

Degeneracy and strategies of LBL Osamu Yasuda Tokyo Metropolitan University NuFACT04 workshop July 28, 2004 at Osaka Univ.

Search for Electron Neutrino Appearance in MINOS Mhair Orchanian California Institute of Technology On behalf of the MINOS Collaboration DPF 2011 Meeting.

Neutrino Oscillations at Homestake from Chlorine to the Megadetector Ancient Origins of the Question ~1860 Darwin publishes “On The Origin of Species”-

Road Map of Neutrino Physics in Japan Largely my personal view Don’t take too seriously K. Nakamura KEK NuFact04 July 30, 2004.

NUFACT’06 Summary of working group 1 Neutrino Oscillations Experiments Mark Messier Indiana University August 30, 2006.

July 30, 2004S. Kahn1 Very Long Baseline experiment with a Super Neutrino Beam Brookhaven National Laboratory Presented to the NuFact04, Osaka University.

Al Mueller - BNL RHIC Neutrinos: The Era of Long Baselines Large Detectors Intense Beams Nicholas P. Samios Columbia University, NYC October 23, 2009.

Low Z Detector Simulations

2 July 2002 S. Kahn BNL Homestake Long Baseline1 A Super-Neutrino Beam from BNL to Homestake Steve Kahn For the BNL-Homestake Collaboration Presented at.

CP phase and mass hierarchy Ken-ichi Senda Graduate University for Advanced Studies (SOKENDAI) &KEK This talk is based on K. Hagiwara, N. Okamura, KS PLB.

An experiment to measure   with the CNGS beam off axis and a deep underwater Cherenkov detector in the Gulf of Taranto CNGS.

1 Study of physics impacts of putting a far detector in Korea with GLoBES - work in progress - Eun-Ju Jeon Seoul National University Nov. 18, 2005 International.

NUMI NUMI/MINOS Status J. Musser for the MINOS Collatoration 2002 FNAL Users Meeting.

September 10, 2002M. Fechner1 Energy reconstruction in quasi elastic events unfolding physics and detector effects M. Fechner, Ecole Normale Supérieure.

BNL neutrino beam. Optimization and simulations Milind Diwan June 10.

PAC questions and Simulations Peter Litchfield, August 27 th Extent to which MIPP/MINER A can help estimate far detector backgrounds by extrapolation.

Gina Rameika Future Long Baseline Study Intro to the Meeting September 16-17,2006 Fermilab.

MIND Systematic Errors EuroNu Meeting, RAL 18 January 2010 Paul Soler.

Hiroyuki Sekiya ICHEP2012 Jul 5 The Hyper-Kamiokande Experiment -Neutrino Physics Potentials- ICHEP2012 July Hiroyuki Sekiya ICRR,

NEAR DETECTOR SPECTRA AND FAR NEAR RATIOS Amit Bashyal August 4, 2015 University of Texas at Arlington 1.

Science Requirements and Instrumentation for Future Neutrino Experiments Gina Rameika, Fermilab Instrumentation Frontier Community Planning January 9 –

T2K Experiment Results & Prospects Alfons Weber University of Oxford & STFC/RAL For the T2K Collaboration.

MINOS/NOvA and Future LBNOE Alfons Weber University of Oxford STFC/RAL NExT Neutrino Meeting, Southampton 4-May-2011.

Precision Measurement of Muon Neutrino Disappearance with T2K Alex Himmel Duke University for the The T2K Collaboration 37 th International Conference.

Epiphany06 Alain Blondel A revealing comparison: A detailed comparison of the capability of observing CP violation was performed by P. Huber (+M. Mezzetto.

New Results from MINOS Matthew Strait University of Minnesota for the MINOS collaboration Phenomenology 2010 Symposium 11 May 2010.

The XXII International Conference on Neutrino Physics and Astrophysics in Santa Fe, New Mexico, June 13-19, 2006 The T2K 2KM Water Cherenkov Detector M.

IPHC-IN2P3/CNRS Strasbourg

J. Musser for the MINOS Collatoration 2002 FNAL Users Meeting

Report of the T2KK Workshop

T2KK sensitivity as a function of L and Dm2

Gary Feldman P5 Meeting 21 February

Fermilab Proton Beams: Program Perspectives Greg Bock Fermilab Science and Engineering at Henderson-DUSEL Capstone Workshop Stony Brook May 5,

Presentation transcript:

More material for P5 Milind Diwan for the Homestake neutrino detector group 3/1/2008

Comments All rates calculated with full GEANT simulation with same computer code by same person. Later checked by others and compared to MINOS data rate. Code is GNuMI. For NuMI/Homestake the simulation geometry is modified. Everything is documented in the Study. For NuMI/Homestake the design is not final and not completely optimized. Assume 25% accuracy. Only as examples, we have chosen to calculate the sensitivities with two scenarios: a beam using A) 60 GeV protons at 0 deg angle. B) 120 GeV protons with a 0.5 deg off-axis angle. 1 yr ~ 2 × 10 ⁷ sec for all FNAL neutrino running.

Beam line length There is adequate space for a decay tunnel of 627 m We are using decay tunnel of 380 m in simulations. For details Ref: Dixon Bogert

type Homestake with 100kT NOvA with 15 kT Numu CC no osc Numu CC with osc Nue CC sin²2θ ₁₃ = Raw event rates 1 MW for 3 yrs at 120 GeV With120 GeV 0.5 deg beam. Ref: Tables IV and VI in study. Same osc parameters With120 GeV medium energy tune.

Near detector There will be a near detector for the NuMI/Homestake beam line. There are many choices: as an example, the HiRESMnu (Ref: Misra) design is costed to be ~$13M. This cost should be part of the beam line cost. A 1 ton liquid argon TPC is also a possibility. Several of the proponents are experts at this analysis from other experiments. We assert that a high resolution near detector is far more than adequate for our purposes. The event rate will be ~1/ton/10µsec pulse. This can be handled by any modern system.

Near detector With no near detector ~10% error on background has been achieved by many experiments going back to the 1980s. This is sufficient for mass hierarchy determination with 100kT. The goal of achieving 5% uncertainty on the background is achievable with a high resolution near detector such as the HiRESMnu or a 1 ton LAr TPC. This improves sensitivity to CPV with 100kT. The systematic requirement is easier in an experiment where a precise oscillatory shape in energy is expected. This is impossible in a narrow band beam. Systematics of an off axis beam is difficult due to the difficulty in locating the near detector such that it samples the same beam.

Spectra with 100 kT detector and 1 MW beam from FNAL sin²2θ ₁₃ = 0.04, 100kT, 1300 km, ~ 1 MW 120 GeV (0.5deg) 3yrs neutrinos, 3yrs antineutrinos NormalReversed Total rate of CC neutrino events ~18k/MW/yr noosc/raw evts nu antinu

Mass hierarchy sensitivity NOvA (18kT) Homestak e 100kT 95 % C.L. ref:NuFact normal hierarchy only 0.11 The homestake project is almost an order of magnitude better for mass hierarchy determination for same running

Mass hierarchy sensitivity NOvA (18kT) Homestak e 100kT 95 % C.L. ref:NuFact reverse hierarchy only The homestake project is almost an order of magnitude better for mass hierarchy determination for same running

Sensitivity to Sin²2θ ₁₃ NOvA (18kT) Homestak e 100kT 3 sigma ref:NuFact

Value of sin²2θ ₁₃ for 50% coverage in CP phase Homestake 100kT NOvA 18kT Mass hierarchy sin²2θ ₁₃ Running conditions: 120 GeV, 1 MW for 3 yrs nu and 3yrs antinu The homestake project is almost an order of magnitude better for mass hierarchy determination for same running

Measurement of CP with 100kT water Cherenkov at Homestake There are no ambiguities for each of these test cases with test points at the X The Homestake project can lead to early CP violation indications.

Credits This is a partial list of young people who have worked on the very long baseline project since There are many papers and detailed calculations. Christine Lewis(Columbia) Jordan Heim (Purdue) Bob Davis (Colorado) Brett Viren(Stonybrook/BNL) Mark Dierckxsens (UChicago, BNL) Mary Bishai (BNL) Fanny Dufour (Boston University) P. T. Le (StonyBrook) Patrick Huber (Wisconsin) Danny Marfatia (Kansas) Robert Zwaska (FNAL) In addition, credit goes to Chiaki Yanagisawa(StonyBrook) Ed Kearns(Boston U) and SuperK collaboration for help with simulations. Many others who participated in the FNAL/BNL study Undergraduates

Conclusion NOvA has only a 50% chance of getting information on the mass hierarchy for large values of sin²2θ ₁₃ near the current bound. This capability could diminish very quickly as the bound improves. The Homestake 100kT water Cherenkov detector gives 100% guarantee for the mass hierarchy for small sin²2θ ₁₃. The statistics are large, and the effect is large. The Homestake 100 kT water Cherenkov detector is the first step towards a program with ≥300 kT fiducial mass for high precision CP violation and nucleon decay and neutrino astrophysics.