The MICE collaboration

1
Future Neutrino beams and muon collider Physics
case and prospectives Towards a world-wide
design study
see also Ken Peachs presentation in future
accelerator session
mother link http//muonstoragerings.cern.ch
ECFA/CERN studies of a European Neutrino Factory
Complex' CERN 2004-002 ECFA/04/230 and Physics
with a MMW proton driver (MMW workshop)
CERN-SPSC-2004-024
2
The discovery of neutrino masses opens our first
window beyond the standard model It allows to
address fundamental issues lepton number
violation family ordering Leptonic CP-violation
and offers guidance on physics at HE scales,
origin of neutrino masses see-saw, origin of
mixing patterns leptogenesis and baryon asymmetry
of the universe. Many of these issues will not
be addressed by the High Energy (LHC, ILC, VLHC)
investigation They justify a dedicated and
coordinated effort
3
evolution of sin22?13
observation and study of CP violation requires
-- all accelerator neutrinos -- high precision
in neutrino vs antineutrino normalization --
redundancy. probably out of reach of these
experiments ? need to go further
4

• An ambitious neutrino programme is a distinct
  possibility,
• but it must be well prepared to have a good
  proposal in time for the big decision period in
  2010 (Funding window 2011-2020)
• 2. Two avenues have been identified as promising
• a) SuperBeam Beta-Beam Megaton detector
  (SBBBMD)
• b) Neutrino Factory (NuFact) magnetic detector
  (40kton)
• The physics abilities of the neutrino factory are
  (much) superior
• in particular for flux normalisation
• but..  what is the realistic time scale? 
• 3. (Hardware) cost estimate of a neutrino factory
  1B detectors.
• This needs to be verifed and ascertained on a
  localized scenario (CERN, RAL) and accounting.
• The cost of a (BBSBMD) is not very different,
  though perhaps lower, but more uncertain.
• Cost/physics performance/feasibility comparison
  needed

5
CERN-SPL-based Neutrino SUPERBEAM
400 MeV n m Neutrinos small contamination from
ne (no K at 3 GeV!)
target!
Fréjus underground lab.
A large underground water Cherenkov (400 kton)
UNO/HyperK or/and a large L.Arg detector. also
proton decay search, supernovae events solar and
atmospheric neutrinos. Performance similar to
J-PARC II There is a window of opportunity for
digging the cavern starting in 2009 (safety
tunnel in Frejus)
6
CERN b-beam baseline scenario
SPL
target!
Decay ring B 5 T Lss 2500 m
SPS
Decay Ring
ISOL target Ion source
ECR
Cyclotrons, linac or FFAG
Stacking!
Rapid cycling synchrotron
PS
Also K-capture Monoenergetic
neutrinos of Emax600MeV
Same detectors as Superbeam !
7
INO 7000 km (Magic distance)
8
systematics .
degeneracies
correlations
approval date
b-beam SPL3.5 SBMton
Lindner et al
NB plot at end 2004 newer plot should come out
of NUFACT05 and scoping study T2K and NOvA plots
are regularly updated.
9
(No Transcript)
10
The Beta-beam accelerator study is funded within
EURISOL DESIGN STUDY and this is making
impressive progress. (it is still a very new
concept however)
The Neutrino Factory and Superbeam design study
(with RAL as home institute) was prepared for a
EU DS call in 2004 (sub march 2005) which never
took place. It turned out to be too far-fetched
to substitute an I3 proposal to this. In the
process the need to include detector RD was
identified.
Meanwhile
Optimization of the neutrino factory in the US
has led to cost reduction by 40
The target experiment nTOF11 is now approved at
CERN, scheduled to run in 2007
The MICE experiment is now approved at RAL
(recognized as CERN RE11) and scheduled to run
in 2007
There is a funded UK neutrino factory
collaboration
There is a proposal for an electron-model FFAG
experiment
11
Design study

• Design study will take place in two phases
• Scoping study understand what are the most
  important parameters
• of the facility to be studied, what are the
  critical tests to be performed,
• and how to organize it. Assemble the team.
• 2. Design study proceed to the design study and
  associated RD experiments,
• with the aim to deliver a CDR that a laboratory
  can chose as its next project.

It will be WORLD WIDE 1. It is likely that
there will be no more than one Megaton detector
and/or one Neutrino Factory in the world so we
better agree on what we want. 2. Expertise on
Neutrino Factory is limited world wide (mostly in
US) 3. Resources e.g. at CERN are also very
limited 4. International community meets
regularly at NUFACT meetings and is engaged in
common projects (RD experiments) Muon cooling
exp. MICE at RAL, Target Experiment nTOF11 at CERN
12
Collaborators of the scoping study --
ECFA/BENE working groups (incl. CERN) (funded by
CARE) -- Japanese Neutrino Factory
Collaboration -- US Neutrino Factory and Muon
collider Collaboration -- UK Neutrino Factory
Collaboration (also part of BENE) -- others (e.g.
India INO collaboration, Canada, China, Corea
...)
objectives Evaluate the physics case for a
second-generation super-beam, a beta-beam
facility and the Neutrino Factory and to present
a critical comparison of their performance
Evaluate the various options for the accelerator
complex with a view to defining a baseline set of
parameters for the sub-systems that can be taken
forward in a subsequent conceptual-design
phase Evaluate the options for the neutrino
detection systems with a view to defining a
baseline set of detection systems to be taken
forward in a subsequent conceptual-design phase.
13
Physics compare performance of various options
on equal footing of parameters and
conventions and agreed standards of resolutions,
simulation etc. identify tools needed to do so
(e.g. Globes upgraded) propose  best values 
of baselines, beam energies etc..
Yorikiyo Nagashima
Detectors (NEW!) Water Cherenkov
(1000kton) Magnetized Iron Calorimeter
(50kton) Low Z scintillator (100 kton) Liquid
Argon TPC (100 kton) magnet? Hybrid Emulsion (4
kton) Near detectors (and instrumentation)
( SB,BB NF )
Alain Blondel
coordination Peter Dornan wise men Ken
Peach Vittorio Palladino Steve Geer Yoshitaka Kuno
Accelerator -- proton driver (energy, time
structure and consequences) -- target and capture
(chose target and capture system) -- phase
rotation and cooling -- acceleration and
storage evaluate economic interplays and
risks include a measure of costing and safety
assessment
Michael Zisman
14
Time scales
NUFACT05 (Sunday 26 June 2005) launch of
scoping study fall 2005 ISS report0 next
meeting 22-24 september at CERN January 2006 in
Japan, April in EU (BENE) August in US.
NUFACT06 (summer 2006) discussion of results
of scoping study September 2006 ISS report
2007 full design study proposal 2010
conclusions of Design Study CDR
(first beams ca. 2016 (SB) 2020 (BB,NF))


NB This matches well the time scales set up at
CERN participation of CERN is highly desirable
to ensure that the choices remain
CERN-compatible.
15
SPARES
16
From neutrino factory to Higgs collider
More cooling sE/E reduction
Separate m m- , add transfer lines
Upgrade to 57.5 GeV
mm- ? h (115)
Muon collider a small. but dfficult ring
17
Combination of beta beam with low energy super
beam
Unique to CERN need few 100 GeV accelerator (PS
SPS will do!) experience in radioactive beams
at ISOLDE many unknowns what is the duty factor
that can be achieved? (needs lt 10-3 ) combines
CP and T violation tests ?e ? ?m (?)
(T) ?m ? ?e (p) (CP) ?e ? ?m (?-)
(T) ?m ? ?e (p-)

• Can this work???? theoretical studies now on beta
  beam
• design study together with EURISOL
• SPL target and horn RD

18
SuperbeamBetabeam option

• What is the importance of the superbeam in this
  scheme?
• T violation?
• increased sensitivity?
• have a (known) source of muon neutrinos for
  reference?
• 2. At which neutrino energy can one begin to use
  the event energy distribution?
• Fermi motion and resolution issues.
• What is the impact of muon Cherenkov
  threshold?
• What is the best distance from the source? What
  is the effect of changing the
• beta-beam and superbeam energy? (event rates,
  backgrounds, ability to use dN/dE? )
• Should energy remain adjustable after the
  distance choice?
• 4, what is the relationship between beta-beam
  energy vs intensity?
• 5. What is really the cost of the detector?
• what PM coverage is needed as function of energy
  and distance.

NB superbeam requires 4 MW proton driver,
beta-beam claim to be able to live with 200 kW!
19

• Questions for Neutrino Factory experiments
• Do we REALLY NEED TWO far locations at two
  different distances?
• 3000 km ? 1st osc. max at 6 GeV and 2d max at 2
  GeV. Muon momentum cut at 4 GeV cuts 2d max
  info. Can this be improved?
• Can we eliminate all degenracies by combination
  of energy distribution and analysis of different
  channels (tau, muon, electron, both signs, NC)
  
• what are the systematics on flux control? (CERN
  YR claims 10-3)
• 5. optimal muon ENERGY? Cost of study II was
  1500M 400ME/20

20
4. issues to be solved -- include superbeam in
the study? capture with horns (compatible)
vs solenoid (not) -- proton energy vs
repetition rate of the complex -- monobunching
(CERN) or polybunching (US)? -- muon
acceleration Linac, RLAs, FFAG? -- cooling vs
accelerator aperture? -- detectors Magnetic
detector(segmentation?) vs liquid argon and vs
tau detector? feasible size? cost vs performance?
locations? Impacts on desired intensity and
energy of the muon beam synergies with
(SBBBMT) detectors?
21
We are working towards a World Design Study
with an emphasis on cost reduction.
COST
21
Why we are optimistic
In the previous design ¾ of the cost came from
these 3 equally expensive sub-systems.New
design has similar performance to Study 2
performance and keeps both m and m- ! (RF phase
rotation)
NUFACT 2004 cost can be reduced by at least 1/3
proton driver 1 B MAYBE
the Neutrino Factory is not so far in the future
after all.
S. Geer
22
Where will this get us
X 5
0.10
130
2.50
50
10
Mezzetto
comparison of reach in the oscillations right
to left present limit from the CHOOZ experiment,
expected sensitivity from the MINOS experiment,
CNGS (OPERAICARUS) 0.75 MW JHF to super
Kamiokande with an off-axis narrow-band beam,
Superbeam 4 MW CERN-SPL to a 400 kton water
Cerenkov in Fréjus (J-PARC phase II
similar) from a Neutrino Factory with 40 kton
large magnetic detector.
23
! asymmetry is a few and requires excellent
flux normalization (neutrino fact., beta beam
or off axis beam with not-too-near near
detector)
T asymmetry for sin ? 1
neutrino factory
JHFII-HK
JHFI-SK
NOTE This is at first maximum! Sensitivity at
low values of q13 is better for short baselines,
sensitivity at large values of q13 may be better
for longer baselines (2d max or 3d max.) This
would desserve a more careful analysis!
10
30
0.10
0.30
90
24
3 sigma sensitivity of various options
Superbeam only Beta-beam only Betabeam
superbeam
NUFACT