The MICE collaboration

1
Neutrino Factory (and the International Scoping
Study (ISS))
mother link http//muonstoragerings.cern.ch (see
NUFACT05)
and http//www.hep.ph.ic.ac.uk/iss/
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
Kayser -- EPS05
Accelerator neutrinos are CENTRAL to the future
program.
3
(No Transcript)
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
• 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
• Cost/physics performance/feasibility comparison
  needed

5
-- Neutrino Factory --CERN layout
1016p/s
1.2 1014 m/s 1.2 1021 m/yr
_
0.9 1021 m/yr
m ? e ne nm
3 1020 ne/yr 3 1020 nm/yr
oscillates ne ? nm interacts giving m- WRONG
SIGN MUON
interacts giving m
6
Neutrino fluxes m -gt e ne nm
nm/n e ratio reversed by switching m/ m- ne nm
spectra are different No high energy tail.
Very well known flux (aim is 10-3) - absolute
flux measured from muon current or by nm e- -gt
m- ne in near expt. -- in race track or
triangle ring, muon polarization precesses and
averages out (-gt calib of energy, energy
spread) -- EsE calibration from muon spin
precession -- angular divergence small effect
if q lt 0.2/g, can be monitored similar comments
can be made for beta-beam, but not for
superbeam.
m polarization controls ne flux m -Xgt ne in
forward direction
7
Detector
Cervera et al

• studies so far
• Iron calorimeter
• Magnetized
• Charge discrimination
• B 1 T
• Fiducial mass 40 kT
• cut at 5 GeV muon.

old scheme!
Also L Arg detector magnetized ICARUS Wrong
sign muons, electrons, taus and NC evts -gt
Bueno et al
Events for 1 year 2 1020 muon decays
nm signal (sin2 q130.01)
nm CC
ne CC
Baseline
732 Km
1.1 x 105
CF ne signal at J-PARC 40
3.5 x 107
5.9 x 107
1.0 x 105
3500 Km
2.4 x 106
1.2 x 106
8
Studies and plots made so far have been based on
this study by Anselmo Cervera, which is
optimized for the sensitivity to very low q13.
Clearly cuts should be relaxed for large values
of q13.
9
systematics .
degeneracies
correlations
approval date
NOvA PD
(g100, 130km)
Lindner et al
newer plot should come out of scoping study
 correlations  are sensitive to assuptions on
the solar and atmospheric parameters what will
they be?
10
Three family oscillations look at nm ?ne
oscillation
Mezzetto
L p/2.54 E/dm2
l p/2.54 E/Dm2
11
CP violation
P(ne?nm) - P(ne?nm)
sind sin (Dm212 L/4E) sin q12
ACP a
sinq13 solar term
P(ne?nm) P(ne?nm)
need large values of sin q12, Dm212 (LMA) but
not large sin2q13 need APPEARANCE
P(ne?ne) is time reversal symmetric (reactor ns
do not work) can be large (30) for suppressed
channel (one small angle vs two large) at
wavelength at which solar atmospheric and
for ne??? , ?t asymmetry is opposite for
ne??? and ne??t
P(ne?nm) A2S2 2 A S sin d
P(ne?nm) A2S2 - 2 A S sin d

12
! 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
Maximum Asymmetry
NOTEs 1. sensitivity is more or less independent
of q13 down to max. asymmetry point 2. This is
at first maximum! Sensitivity at low values of
q13 is better for short baselines, sensitivity
at large values of q13 is better for longer
baselines (2d max or 3d max.) 3.sign of
asymmetry changes with max. number.
error arbitrary scale
6
10
30
0.10
0.30
90
13
Towards a comparison of performances on equal
footing
CP violation example
P(ne?nm) - P(ne?nm)
sind sin (Dm212 L/4E) sin q12
ACP a
sinq13 solar term
P(ne?nm) P(ne?nm)
Near detector should give ne diff.
cross-sectionflux BUTneed to know nm and nm
diff. cross-section and detection efficiency
with small (relative) systematic errors.
interchange role of ne and nm for
superbeam in case of beta-beam one will need a
superbeam at the same energy. Will it be possible
to measure the required cross sections with the
required accuracy at low energies with a WBB?
What is the role of the difference in mass
between electron and muons? how well can we
predict it? In case of sub-GeV superbeam alone
how can one deal with this?
14
ds/dn O(e,e), nEe-EeEnegy transfer
(GeV)Ee700-1200 MeV
Zeller
Blue Fermi-gas Green SP Red SPFSI
These are for electron beam. errors are 5-10
but what happens when a muon mass is involved?
QE
D
15

• A discussion is necessary to establish reasonable
  systematic errors
• in measuring the CP or T asymmetry
• this discussion should include the following
  questions
• what kind of near detector will be needed?
• 2. how does one measure the cross-sectioneffici
  ency of the appearance
• channel in a beam with only one flavor?
  (superbeam or beta-beam alone)
• my guess these issues will be quite serious at
  low energies (E few mm )
• and gradually become easier at high Energies.
• Neutrino factory provides all channels in the
  same beam line/detector

16
CP asymmetries and matter effect compare ne???
to ne??? probabilities
m is prop. to matter density, positive for
neutrinos, negative for antineutrinos
HUGE effect for distance around 6000 km!!
Resonance around 12 GeV when
Dm223 cos2q13 ? m 0
17
CP violation (ctd)

• Matter effect must be subtracted. One believes
  this can be done with uncertainty
• of order 2. This is potential systematic error
  for large values of sin22?13!
• However the energy shape of matter effect and CP
  violation are different
• It is important to subtract in bins of measured
  energy.
• knowledge of spectrum is essential here!
• low threshold is crucial since matter effect is
  reduced at low E
• while CP asymmetry changes sign from 1st (6
  GeV_at_300km) to 2d max (2 GeV_at_3000km)

40 kton L M D 50 GeV nufact 5 yrs 1021m /yr In
fact, 20-30 GeV Is enough! Best distance is
2500-3500 km
De Rujula, Gavela, Hernandez
18
NB This works just as well
INO 7000 km (Magic distance)
19
4MW, 1 Mton upgrade of T2K
By 2010 we must know how much these facilities
cost and how long they would take to build.
assume 2 flux error in T2K vs. 5 matter eff.
error on nufact and 5 GeV muon thres.
NUFACT with thick magnetized Iron detector in
two locations 7000km and 3000 km
20
20
Oscillation parameters can be extracted using
energy distributions
Simulated distributions for a 10kt LAr
detectorat L 7400 km from a 30 GeV nu-factory
with1021 m decays.
Events
Bueno, Campanelli, Rubbia hep-ph/00050007
X2 (m stored and m- stored)
Note ne ? nt is specially important (Ambiguity
resolution Unitarity test) Gomez-Cadenas et
al.
EVIS (GeV)
21
Silver
A. Donini et al
channel at neutrino factory
High energy neutrinos at NuFact allow observation
of ne??t (wrong sign muons with missing energy
and P?). UNIQUE Liquid Argon or OPERA-like
detector at 732 or 3000 km (better) Since the
sind dependence has opposite sign with the wrong
sign muons, this solves ambiguities that will
invariably appear if only wrong sign muons are
used.
d
q13
associating taus to muons (no efficencies, but
only OPERA mass) studies on-going
equal event number curves muon vs taus
ambiguities with only wrong sign muons (3500 km)
22
e.g. Rigolin, Donini, Meloni
23
Wrong sign muons alone
Wrong sign muons and taus
Wrong sign muons and taus previous exp.
24
red vs blue different baselines
red vs blue muons and taus
dashed vs line different energy bin (most
powerful is around matter resonance _at_ 12 GeV)
25
Conclusion Neutrino Factory has many handles on
the problem (muon sign Gold Silver
different baselines binning in energy)
thanks to high energy! "It could in
principle solve many of the clones for q13 down
to 10 The most difficult one is the octant clone
which will require a dedicated analysis"
(Rigolin)
26
TARGET DATE 2010
2010 will be a time of major decisions in
particle physics LHC will be completed first
results will appear ILC ? first results
from MINOS, OPERA double-CHOOZ might be
available. T2K will be starting and very
rapidly dominating! It will be time for the
next step in neutrino physics!
Barry Barish, CERN SPC sept05
27
evolution of sin22?13 sensitivity
Mezzetto
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
28
4MW, 1 Mton upgrade of T2K
By 2010 we must know how much these facilities
cost and how long they would take to build.
assume 2 flux error in T2K vs. 5 matter eff.
error on nufact and 5 GeV muon thres.
NUFACT with thick magnetized Iron detector in
two locations 7000km and 3000 km
2010
29
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.
• For design study we intend to request EU funding
  probable date spring 2007

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
30
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
...)
400-500 persons
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.
31
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..
Detectors (NEW!) 1. Water Cherenkov
(1000kton) 2. Magnetic sampling detector
(100kton) 3. Liquid Argon TPC (100
kton) magnetized Liquid Argon TPC (15kton) 4.
Hybrid Emulsion (4 kton) 5. Near detectors (and
instrumentation) ( SB,BB or NF )
Yorikiyo Nagashima
Alain Blondel
coordination Peter Dornan wise men Ken
Peach Vittorio Palladino(BENE) 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
32
Time scales
NUFACT05 26 June 2005 launch of scoping
study CERN 22-24 September 2005 first meeting
KEK 23-25 January 2006, RAL 27-29 April 2006
(BENE) (2-6 may meeting on the future of CERN
in DESY-Zeuthen) UC Irvine 21-23 August 2006
(just before NUFACT06) NUFACT06 (summer 2006)
discussion of results of scoping study September
2006 ISS report 2007 full design study proposal
submission to EU as design study. 2010
conclusions of Design Study CDR

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. This effort is similar to and
synergetic with the PAF and POFPA working groups
at CERN.
NNBB we will try to have an available report at
each ISS meeting.
33
Progress

• The performance plots shown earlier mostly based
  on 2000-2002 ECFA study.
• Much progress has been gathered since then.
• accelerator performance
• study II-a (2004) use of RF phase rotation leads
  to capture of both mu and mu-
• global improvement by factor 4.8 (also reduction
  of cost to 1G from 1.6)
• at 4MW on target, collect 9.6 1020 muon decays of
  one sign at a time in a 107 s year
• in a racetrack geometry
• in triangle geometry each straight gets 2/3 of
  this number.
• 2. detector performance
• . proposal (Nelson) of a 90 kton (was 40kton)
  detector with 4 times better granularity.
• Expect threshold for muons to 1.5 GeV for
  similar sign resolution. Cost estimate.
• Electron ID? Tau detection?

34
PROGRESS
3.Accelerator RD A. Target experiment nTOF11
MERIT is approved at CERN (Data taking 2007)
B. MICE experiment approved at RAL C. PRISM
experiment (low energy muon FFAG) is approved at
Osaka D. 2004 study re-evaluated cost of NUFACT
35

• Some Highlights of the first Scoping Study
  meeting
• CERN 22-24 september 2005
• see transparencies at
• http//dpnc.unige.ch/users/blondel/ISSatCERN.htm
• register at http//www.hep.ph.ic.ac.uk/iss/
• first presentation of the preliminary study for
  the Fréjus
• underground laboratory
• presentation of  feasible  90 kton fine-grained
  magnetized iron
• calorimeter for 200M (same cost basis as NOvA)
• first observation of tracks in the magnetized
  liquid argon prototype
• presentation of upgraded performance estimate for
  the neutrino factory
• 1021 muon decays per year per direction!

36
Megaton Water Cherenkov (J.-E. Campagne)
HV, electronics, etc..!
the largest single cavern is 4XSK.
need to add cost of electronics, cavern and
water treatment ? 1G do we need so many
tubes? ? RD for photodetectors!!! Japan-France
collaboration collaboration with
industry (Photonis)
37
(No Transcript)
38
Jeff Nelson
alternatively could simply add a large magnet to
a NOvA-like design! (cost?)
39
10 liters prototype liquid argon TPC has been
tested in 0.5 T at ETHZ
A. Rubbia
40
COST
USA, Europe, Japan have each their scheme for
Nu-Fact. Only one has been costed, US 'study
II' and estimated (2001) 2B. The aim of the RD
is also to understand if one could reduce cost in
half.
detector MINOS 10 about 300 M or M
Neutrino Factory CAN be done..but it is too
expensive as is. Aim of RD ascertain
challenges can be met cut cost in half.
41
We are working towards a World Design Study
with an emphasis on cost reduction.
COST
41
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 gtthe
Neutrino Factory is not so far in the future
after all
S. Geer
42
Total Yield of ? and ?-
protons on heavy target (good for pi-)
(-30)
Yields (on a tantalum rod) using MARS15 and
GEANT4. Better to include the acceptance of the
next part of the front end ?
43
Phase Rotator Transmission (MARS15)
The discontinuity between 3-5 GeV is suspicious
as it corresponds to change of model in
MARS (there is no real physics reason) HARP data
will be available end 2005-early 2006 at 3
GeV/c(2.2 GeV), 5 GeV/c (4.15 GeV), 8 GeV/c
(7.1 GeV)
Doubled lines give some idea of stat. errors
Optimum moves down because higher energies
produce pions with momenta too high for capture
optimum 5-10 GeV. Within 30 of optimum 4-40 GeV
44
Conclusions

• The Neutrino Factory remains the most powerful
  tool imagined so far
• to study neutrino oscillations
• Unique High energy ne??? and ne??t
  transitions
• at large q13 has the precision
• at small q13 has the sensitivity
• Much progress can be envisaged in performance wrt
  early studies.
• 2. The complex offers many other possibilities
  (muons!)
• 3. It is a step towards muon colliders
• 4. There are good hopes to reduce the cost
  significantly thus making it
• an excellent option for CERN in the years
  2011-2020
• 5. Regional and International RD on components
  and RD experiments
• are being performed by an enthusiastic and
  motivated community
• International scoping study underway.
• 6. Opportunities exist in Europe and CERN

45
Conclusions
7. need to understand the best synergy between a
neutrino programme and the LHC lumi upgrade.
8. I would consider that re-instating a
neutrino factory development team at CERN to be a
high priority for the 2006-2010 period! 9.
there is quite a variety of detectors and
experimental (near and far) areas to design,
which are well fit to CERNs Experimental teams
compentence.
46
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!
47

• 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