1 / 22

Experiments to detect q 13

Experiments to detect q 13. M.Apollonio Universita’ di Trieste e INFN. Layout of the talk. q 13 and motivations to its measurement Chooz limit Appearance and disappearance experiments Accelerators (A) Nuclear Reactors (R) (A) Approved projects (Phase I) Phase II Phase III (R)

henry
Télécharger la présentation

Experiments to detect q 13

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Experiments to detect q13 M.Apollonio Universita’ di Trieste e INFN IFAE 2004, Torino

  2. Layout of the talk • q13 and motivations to its measurement • Chooz limit • Appearance and disappearance experiments • Accelerators (A) • Nuclear Reactors (R) • (A) • Approved projects (Phase I) • Phase II • Phase III • (R) • Double-Chooz and similar IFAE 2004, Torino

  3. q13 • Scenario: MiniBoone disfavouring LSND • “standard picture” • 2 Dm2ij (Dm212, Dm223) indipendent • 3 mixing angles (q12, q23, q13) • 1 CP phase • Mixing Matrix PMNS • 1-2 solar mixing • 2-3 atmospheric mixing • 1-3 o e3 mixing: q13 describes oscillations ne at the atmospheric frequency • dCP introduces CP violation effects Current experimental results: • Dm223 ~ 2x10-3 eV2 • Dm212 ~ 7x10-5 eV2 • Dm223 >>Dm212 • q12~35o • q23~45o IFAE 2004, Torino

  4. Why measuring q13? • The least known among the parameters in PMNS • Coupled to eid (Ue3) • q13>0would allow to access d • CP violation in the lepton sector IFAE 2004, Torino

  5. What do we know about q13 today? • q13 must be small (maybe null) • The best limit up to date comes from the reactor experiment CHOOZ: • q13 < 10o-17o • (1.3x10-3<Dm232<3x10-3) [J.Bouchez, NO-VE 2003] [CHOOZ coll., Eur.Phys.J.C27(2003),331-374] IFAE 2004, Torino

  6. 3 families scenario:appearance experiments Accelerators NB: P sensitive to d (correlated with q13) • a should be considered • sign(Dm213) is present in A [P.Migliozzi, F.Terranova arXiv:hep-ph/0302274] IFAE 2004, Torino

  7. Accelerators • general concept: conventional beam • Broad band (BBB) • Narrow band (NBB) • Super Beam (SB) • Off-Axis Beam (OA) • b-Beam (bB) • Neutrino Factory (NF) IFAE 2004, Torino

  8. Main backgrounds: • Initial ne contamination in the beam • p0 production (NC) • Near/Far detection (A) General concept Production & focusing oscillation decay (had+m stop) target detection (m,e,t) p nm ne p,K nm m- e- CC nm(>99%) ne nm e- m- ne(<1%) IFAE 2004, Torino

  9. (A)-SB • It is a conventional proton beam whose power is of the order of MW • Produces nm (nm) • Proton-driver: technically feasible • PB: target • Sol.: R&D Proposed rotating tantalum target ring IFAE 2004, Torino

  10. q Decay Pipe Horns Target (A)-OA • Detector laying out of the main beam axis • Kinematics  n beam energy almost independent from Ep • Monochromatic  suppresses the high energy tails • You pay it in terms of flux • Examples: En at 2 different energy scales for Ep at several OA angles IFAE 2004, Torino

  11. (A)b-Beams[P.Zucchelli, Phys.Lett. B532:166,2002] • Original solution: radioactive ions with short lifetime • acceleration • storage • decay • Es.: b- (6He) ne, b+ (18Ne)  ne IFAE 2004, Torino

  12. (A)-NF IFAE 2004, Torino

  13. Experiment Power (MW) E (GeV) L (km) detector Sens to q13 Starting date MINOS 0.4 3 730 Calorimeter 5o 2005 Phase I: use an existing facility and approved projects (q13>5o) OPERA 0.17 20 732 Emulsion 7o 2006 Phase I ICARUS 0.17 20 732 L-Ar 5o 2006 NuMI-OA 0.4 2 700/900 Fine grained calorimeter[20kT] 2.5o 2008 ? Phase II: go for 1st generation of Super-Beams (q13>2.5o) Phase II T2K (OA) 0.8 0.7 295 WC (SuperK) [20kT] 2.3o 2009 T2K-II (OA) 4.0 0.7 295 WC (HyperK) [500kT] 1o 2020 ? Phase III: 2nd generation of Super-Beams (q13>1o) [Phase IV: Neutrino Factories see relevant talk] Phase III SPL-SB 4.0 0.27 130 WC/L-Ar [500kT] 1o ~2015 b-Beam 0.2 0.3-0.6 130 WC/L-Ar [500kT] 0.5o 2018 ? (A) Experiments[J.Bouchez, NO-VE 2003] IFAE 2004, Torino

  14. (A) Experiments (cont’d) • Requirements for Super-Beams (nmne appearance case) • Beam side: • Low ne contamination • Good knowledge of ne/nm • Good understanding of the beam (near to far) • Detector side: • Good e- efficiency • Good p0 rejection • Good understanding of bkg IFAE 2004, Torino

  15. ~1 Which energy? • Low or high? • Focalisation of neutrinos ~g2~E2 • Solid angle factor @ L ~1/g2~1/E2 • s(n) ~g~E • p flux ~1/g~1/E • The 0th order approximation cannot help that much in the choice • Other considerations mandatory IFAE 2004, Torino

  16. WC technique gives a good p0 (NC) vs e- separation (2-ring vs 1-ring) Less ne (below K threshold) Fermi momentum  poor E resolution No matter effects Better use fine grained detectors or L-Ar TPC Need good p0 rejection More ne bkg Better resolution in E Matter effects can arise  sign(Dm213) Low (E<1GeV) or High (E>1GeV) ?[choice related to bkg considered] intrinsic ne contamination and p0 mimicking e- caveat: stay below t threshold IFAE 2004, Torino

  17. Underground or not? • In principle not: just a matter of choosing the right (low) duty cycle [phase II, 20 kton] • BUT it is a must if your detector is “multi-purpose” (e.g. searching for other effects like proton decay) [phase III, 500 kton] IFAE 2004, Torino

  18. Near/Far • Best way to determine ne bkg: measure it at a near location (before oscillation) • Try to ensure equality of conditions between near and far detectors: i.e. same beam, same target nuclei (cross sections and p0 production do depend on nuclei) • Near detector sufficiently far from the source  point-like assumption (~ 2 km) • If you go closer then the source is not point-like anymore • Near detector able to understand the different n interactions (QE/non-QE) • Ideally TWO near detectors (~300 m, ~2 km): • One giving a clear clue about n interactions • The other as much as identical to the FAR detector IFAE 2004, Torino

  19. Beam Near(~2km) Far(700km) N F Beam V-Near(300m) Near(~2km) Far(700km) N1 VN F N2 Near/Far (cont’d): strategies for beam understanding • Cheap solution: • N sees a point-like source • F and N use the same detection technique (1/L2 law) • Good for discovery though it does not allow a precise measurement of q13 • “Pricey” solution: • VN N1: similar detection techniques allowing beam understanding • N1  N2: different in s(n) and detector performances  can be compared • F and N2 using the same detection technique • Should be optimal for high statistics phase III where you want to reduce systematics (less dramatic for phase II) IFAE 2004, Torino

  20. 800 CC νμ　/ year Eπ vs. Eν 2200 CC νμ　/ year OA1° 50 kton Water Cherenkov 0.0゜ OA2° 1.0゜ OA3° 1.5゜ 2.0゜ 3.0゜ 5.0゜ Max. osc. energy for 3×10-3eV2 T2K [I/II] • OA: q~2o, JHF-PS(50 GeV p) SK[I]  HK[II] • Maximize the potential discovery (on-peak)  d,q13,sign(Dm132) • L~295 km, <E>~0.76GeV  on peak • |A|~5x10-2 matter effects negligible • Phase I: use SK detector (20 kton) • Phase II: go for a more ambitious device  HK (500 kton) IFAE 2004, Torino

  21. p p Muon detector n Water Cherenkov detector Fine grained scintillater detector 8m 0m 140m 280m 2 km 295 km ν μ ν ν beam 8m 15.2m 5m Total mass : 1000ton Fid. Mass : 100ton IFAE 2004, Torino

  22. OAB (2degree) nm Signal for non-zero θ13 in JHF-SK (νμ→νe) BG (NC π0 ….) 0.2% m-decay ne SK-90%CL allowed K-decay SuperKamiokande • Water Cerenkov detector • Sub-GeV  good p0/el. separation • q13: 2.5o sensitivity after 5 yrs of data taking T. Kajita, Fermilab – May 2003 IFAE 2004, Torino

More Related